THE NEW
SCHAFF‑HERZOG
ENCYCLOPEDIA
OF
RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE
Editor‑in‑Chief
SAMUEL MACAULEY JACKSON, D.D., LL.D.
Editor‑in‑Chitf
of
Supplementary Volumes
LEFFERTS A. LOETSCHER, Ph.D., D.D.
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF CHURCH HISTORY
PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
BAKER BOOK HOUSE
GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN

THE NEW
SCHAFF‑HERZOG ENCYCLOPEDIA
OF
RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE
EDITED BY
SAMUEL MACAULEY JACKSON, D.D., LL.D.
(Editor‑in‑ Chief )
WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF
CHARLES	COLEBROOK SHERMAN
	[VOLUMES I‑VI]

AND
GEORGE WILLIAM GILMORE, M.A.
(Associate Editors)
AND THE FOLLOWING DEPARTMENT EDITORS
CLARENCE AUGUSTINE BECKWITH, D.D.
(Department of Systematic Theology)
HENRY RING CARROLL, LL.D.
(Department of Dlinor Denominations)
JAMES FRANCIS DRISCOLL, D.D.
(Department of Liturgics and Religious Orders)
JAMES FREDERIC 11IcCURDY, PH.D., LL.D.
(Department of the Old Testament)

HENRY SYLVESTER NASH, D.D.
(Department of the New Testament)

ALBERT HENRY NEWMAN, D.D., LL.D.
(Department of Church History)
FRANK HORACE VIZETELLY, F.S.A.
(Department of Pronunciation and Typography)
VOLUME VI
INNOCENTS ‑ LIUDGER
BAKER BOOK HOUSE
GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN
1953

EXCLUSIVE AMERICAN PUBLICATION RIGHTS
SECURED BY BAKER BOOK HOUSE FROM FUNK AND WAGNALLS
PHOTOLITHOPRINT£D BY CUSHING _ MALLOY, WC.
ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN, UNITED STATES OF AMER, GA
1953

EDITORS
SAMUEL BIACAULEY JACKSON, D.D., LL.D.
(EDITOR‑IN‑CHIEF.)
Professor of Church History, New York University.
ASSOCIATE EDITORS
CHARLES COLEBROOK SHERMAN ~ GEORGE WILLIAM GILMORE, M.A.
	Editor in Biblical Criticism and Theology on "The New	New York, Formerly Professor of Biblical History and
	International Encyclopedia," New York.	Lecturer on Comparative Religion, Bangor Theological
		Seminary.
DEPARTMENT EDITORS, VOLUME VI
CLARENCE AUGUSTINE BECKWITH, D.D.
(Department of Systematic Theology.)
Professor of Systematic Theology, Chicago Theological
Seminary.
HENRY BINGE CARROLL, LL.D.
(Department of Minor Denominations.)
Secretary of Executive Committee of the Western Section for the Fourth Ecumenical Methodist Conference.
JAMES FRANCIS DRISCOLL, D.D.
(Department of Liturgics and Religious Orders.)
President of St. Joseph's Seminary, Yonkers, N. Y.
JAMES FREDERICK BZeCURDY, Ph.D.,
	LL.D.
(Department of the Old Testament.)
Professor of Oriental Languages, University College,
Toronto.
HENRY SYLVESTER NASH, D.D.
(Department of the New Testament.)
Professor of the Literature and Interpretation of the New
Testament, Episcopal Theological School, Cambridge, Mass.
ALBERT HENRY NEWMAN, D.D., LL.D.
(Department of Church History.)
Professor of Church History, Baylor Theological Seminary
(Baylor University), Waco, Tea.
FRANK HORACE VIZETELLY, F.B.A.
(Department of Pronunciation and Typography.)
Managing Editor of the STANDARD DICTIONARY, etc.,
New York City.
CONTRIBUTORS AND COLLABORATORS, VOLUME VI
HANG ACHELIB, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Theology. University of Halls.

WILHELM ALTMANN, Ph.D.,
Director of the Deutsche Musiksammlung, Berlin.
FRANKLIN CARL ARNOLD,
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of Breslau.
BENJAMIN WISNER BACON, D.D.,
LL.D., Litt.D.,
Professor of New Testament Exegesis, Yale Divinity School.

FERENCZ B8L0(iH,
Professor of Church History, Reformed Theological Aca
demy, Debreczin, Hungary.
t3E0RCiE JAMES BAYLES, Ph.D.,
Writer on Civil Church Law.
CLARENCE AUGUSTINE BECKWITH,
D.D.,
Professor of Systematic Theology. Chicago Theological
Seminary.
JOHANNES BELBHEIM (t),
Late Pastor Emeritus, Christiania, Norway.

RUDOLF BENDIgEN (t),
Late Diaconus in Grimma, Saxony.
EARL BENRATH, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of KSnigsberg.

IMMANUEL GUSTAV ADOLF BENZIN
GER, Ph.D., Th.Lic.,
German Orientalist and Vice‑Consul for Holland in Jeru
salem.
CARL BERTHEAU, Th.D.,
Pastor of St. Michael's, Hamburg.
33BENHARD BESS, Th.Lic.,
Librarian, University of Halls.

EDWIN MUNBELL BLISS, D.D.,
Author of Books on Missions, Washington, D. C.

EMIL BLOESCH (t), Th.D.,
Late Professor of Theology, Bern.

CONTRIBUTORS AND COLLABORATORS, VOLUME VI
HEINRICH BOEHMER, Ph.D.,Th.Lic.,
Professor of Church History, University of Bonn.

AMY GASTON CHARLES AUGUSTE
BONET‑MAURY, D.D., LL.D.,
Professor of Church History, Independent School of
Divinity, Paris.

GOTTLIEB NATHANAEL BONWETSCH,
Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of Gottingen.
FRIEDRICH BOSSE, Ph.D., Th.Lic.,
Auxiliary Librarian, University Library, Marburg.

GUSTAV BOSSERT, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Retired Pastor, Stuttgart.

ALBERT BRACKMANN, Ph.D.,
Professor of History, University of Marburg.
FRIEDRICH HEINRICH BRANDES,
Th.D.,
Reformed Minister and Chaplain at Bisckeburg,
Schaumburg‑Lippe.
EDUARD BRAT$E (t), Ph.D, Th.D.,
Late Professor of Church History, University of Breslau.
FRANTS PEDER WILLIAM BUHL,
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Oriental Languages, University of Copenhagen.
EARL BURGER (t), Th.D.,
Late Supreme Consistorlal Councilor, Munich.

KARL VON BURG (t), Th.D.,
Late Supreme Councilor in Stuttgart.

HEINRICH CAL AMINUS,
Superintendent at Elberfeld.
OTIS CARP, D.D.,
Professor of Homiletics and Practical Sociology, Doshisha
Theological School, Kyoto, Japan.
JACQUES EUGENE CHOISy, Th.D.,
Pastor in Geneva.
PAUL CHRIST (t), Th.D.,
Late Professor of Systematic and Practical Theology,
University of Zurich.
EMILIO COMBA (t), D.D.,
Late Professor of Historical Theology and Homiletics,
Waldensian College, Florence, Italy.
HENRY COWAN, D.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of Aberdeen,
Scotland.
AUGUST HERMANN CREMER (t), Th.D.,
Late Professor of Systematic Theology, University of
Greifswald.
FRIEDRICH WILHELM CUNO (t),
Th.Lic.,
Late Pastor at Eddigehausen, Hanover.
THOMAS WITTON DAVIES, Ph.D., D.D.,
Professor of Semitic Languages. University College of
North Wales, Bangor.
SAMUEL MARTIN DEUTSCH, Th.D..
Professor of Church History, University of Berlin.
ERNST DON DOBSCHVETZ, Th.D.,
Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of
Strasburg.
LEONHARD ERNST DORN,
First Preacher at Nbrdlingen, Bavaria.

PAUL GOTTFRIED DREWS, Th.D.,
Professor of Practical Theology, University of Halle.

JAMES FRANCIS DRISCOLL, D.D.,
President of St. Joseph's Seminary, Yonkers, New York.
EMIL EGLI (t), Th.D.,
Late Professor of Church History, University of Zurich.
LUDWIG ALFRED ERICHSON (t),
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Late Preacher at St. Thomas', Strasburg, Germany.

RUDOLF EUCHEN, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Philosophy, University of Jena.
GUSTAV WILHELM FRANK (t), Th.D.,
Late Professor of Dogmatics, Symbolics, and Christian
Ethics, University of Vienna.
ALBERT FREYBE (t), Ph.D., Th.D.,
Emeritus Gymnasial Professor, Parchim, Mecklenburg.

ALBERT FREYSTEDT (t), Th.Lic.,
Late Pastor in Cologne.
EMIL ALBERT FRIEDBERG,
Th.D., Dr.Jur.,
Professor of Ecclesiastical, Public, and German Law, Uni
versity of Leipsic.
I	HEINRICH GELZER (t), Ph.D.,
I Late Professor of Classical Philology and Ancient History,
University of Jena.
JOHANNES ABRAHAM GERTH VAN
WIJS (t), Th.D.,
Late Reformed Church Clergyman at The Hague, Holland.
CHRISTIAN GEYER, Ph.D.,
First Preacher at St. Sebald's, Nuremberg, Germany.
GEORGE WILLIAM GILMORE, M.A.,
Former Professor of Biblical History and Lecturer on
Comparative Religion, Bangor Theological Seminary.
EARL GOEBEL (t), Ph.D.,
Late Consistorial Councilor in Posen, Prussia.

LEOPOLD KARL GOETZ, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Philosophy in the Roman Catholic Theological
Faculty, University of Bonn.
WALTER GOETZ, Ph.D.,
Professor of History UniveISlty of Tjjbi(lgen,

WILHELM GOETZ, Ph.D.,
Honorary Professor of Geography, Technical High School,
and Professor, Military Academy, Munich.
JOHANNES FRIEDRICH GOTTSCHICK (t),
Th.D.,
Late Professor of New Testament Exegesis, Ethics, and
Practical Theology, Evangelical Theological Faculty,
University of Tiibingen.
CASPER RENE GREGORY, Ph.D., Th.D.,
D.D., LL.D., Dr.Jur.,
Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of Leipsic.

GEORG GRUETZMACHER, Ph.D., Th.Lic.,

Extraordinary Professor of Church History, University of
Heidelberg.
PETER REINHOLD GRUNDEMANN,
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Pastor in Mom, near Belzig, Prussia.

CONTRIBUTORS AND COLLABORATORS, VOLUME VI
HERMANN (iUTHE, Th.D.,
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of Leipsic.

WILHELM HADORN, Th.Lic.,
Pastor in Bern and Lecturer on New Testament Exegesis,
University of Bern.
ELOF HALLER,
Gymnasial Professor, Veneraborg, Sweden.
ADOLF HARNACK, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Dr.Jur., N.D.,
General Director of the Royal Library, Berlin.
ALBERT HAUCK, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of Leipsic, Editor
in‑Chief of the Hauck‑Herzog Reaiencyklopadie.
HERMAN HAUPT, Ph.D.,
Professor, and Director of the University Library, Giessen.

AUGUST WILHELM HEALER (t),
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Late Professor of Church History, University of Tiibingen.

EARL FRIEDB.ICH HEMAN,
~Ph.D., Th.Lic.,
Professor of Philosophy, University of Basel.
LUDWIG THEODOR EDGAR HENNECRE,
Ph.D., Th.Lic.,
Pastor in Betheln, Hanover.
HERMANN HERING, Th.D.,
Professor of Philosophy of, Religion and Homiletics, Uni
versity of Halle.
PAUL HINBCHIZTB (t), Th.D., Dr.Jur.,
Late Professor of Ecclesiastical Law, University of Berlin.

	GEORGE HODGES, D.D., D.C.L.,
Dean of The Episcopal Theological School, Cambridge,
		Mass.
FERDINAND HOERBCHELMANN (t),
Th.D.,
Late Professor of Practical Theology, University of Dorpat.

RUDOLF HUGO HOFMANN,
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Homiletics and Liturgies, University of Leipsic.

Ot3WALD HOLDER‑EGGFER, Ph.D.,
Professor at Berlin and Director for the Publication of the
MonuOermanue )<isWrica.
gARL ROLL, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of Berlin.
ERNST IDELER,
Pastor at Ahrendorf, near Potsdam.
LUDWIG HEINRICH IHMEL6, Th.D.,
Professor of Dogmatics, University of Leipsic.
SIMON ISSLEIB, Ph.D.,
Professor Emeritus, University of Bonn.
GEORGE THOMAS JACKSON, M.D.,
Professor of Dermatology, College of Physicians and Sur
geons, Columbia University, New York City.
JOSEPH JACOBS, Litt.D.,
Professor of English Literature and Rhetoric, Jewish
Theological Seminary, New York City.
ADOLF HERMANN HEINRICH SAMP
HAUSEN (t), Th.D.,
Late Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of
Bonn.
FERDINAND FRIEDRICH WILHELM
gATTEN8U8CH, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Dogmatics, University of Have.

EMIL FRIEDRICH B.AVTZ8CH,
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of Halle.

PETER GUSTAV SAWERAU, Th.D.,
Consiatorial Councilor, Professor of Practical Theology, and
University Preacher, University of Breslau.

WILHELM JULIUS ADOLPH SEIL,
Pastor in Herzogswalde, near Dresden.

JAMES ANDERSON KELSO, Ph.D., D.D.,
Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Literature and
President, Western Theological Seminary, Pittsburg,.Pa.
HANG KESSLER, Th.D.,
Supreme Consistorial Councilor, Berlin.
HUGO WILHELM PAUL KLEINERT,
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and Practical The
ology, University of Berlin.

HEINRICH AUGUST BLOBTERMANN,
Th.D.,
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of Kiel.
KARL AUGUST SLUEPFEL (t), Ph.D.,
Late Head Librarian, University of Tiibineen.

RUDOLF SOEG'FEL (t), Th.D., Ph.D.,
Late Court Preacher, Berlin.

CHRIBTOPH FRIEDRICH ADOLF KOLB,
Th.D.,
Prelate and Court Preacher, Ludwigaburg.

THEODOR FRIEDRICH HERMANN
SOLDE, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of Erlangen.

RICHARD BRAETBCHMAR (t), Th.D.,
Late Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of
Marburg.
HERMANN GUSTAV EDUARD
KRUEGER, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of Giessen.

JOHANNES WILHELM gUNZE,
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Systematic and Practical Theology, University
of Greifswald.
EQGEN LACHENMANN,
City Pastor, Leonberg, Wtlrttemberg.

RICHARD LAU%MANN (t),
Late Diaconus in Stuttgart.
WILLIAM LEE (t), D.D.,
Late Professor of Church History, University of Glasgow.
KARL LUDWIG LEIMBACH (t),
Ph.D., Th.Lic.,
Late Provincial Councilor for Schools, Hanover, Germany.

EDUARD LEMPP, Ph.D.,
Chief Inspector of the Royal Orphan Asylum, Stuttgart.
FRIEDRICH RE7NHARD LIP$ItTt3,
Ph.D., Th.Lic.,
Privat‑docent in Symbolics, University of Jena.

CONTRIBUTORS AND COLLABORATORS, VOLUME VI
GEORG LOE$CHE, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, ,Evangelical Theological
Faculty, lenna.
FRIEDRICH ARMIN LOOPS, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of Halle.
JOHANN LO$ERTH, Ph.D.,
Professor of History, University of Graz.
WILHELM PHILIPP FRIEDRICH
FERDINAND LOTZ, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of Er
langen.
JAMES FREDERICK MeCURDY,
Ph.D., LL.D.,
Professor of Oriental Languages, University College,
Toronto.
HERMANN MALLET (t),
Late Pastor in Bremen.
PHILIPP MEYER, Th.D.,
Supreme Consistorial Councilor, Hanover.
CARL THEODOR MIRBT, Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of Marburg.
ERNST FRIEDRICH EARL MUELLER,
Th.D.,
Professor of Reformed Theology, University of Erlangen.
GEORG MUELLER, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Inspector of Schools, Leipsic.
JOSEPH THEODOR MUELLER, Th.D.,
Keeper of the Archives in Herrnhut.
NIKOLAUS MUELLER, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Christian Archeology, University of Berlin.
HENRY SYLVESTER NASH, D.D.,
Professor of the Literature and Interpretation of the New
Testament, Episcopal Theological School, Cambridge,
Mass.
03EMISTOF EBERHARD NESTLE,
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor in the Theological Seminary, Maulbronn,
W urttemberg.
ALBERT HENRY NEWMAN,
D.D., LL.D.,
Professor of Church History: Baylor Theological Seminary
(Baylor University), Waco, Texas.
FREDERIK KRISTIAN NIELSEN (t),
D.D.,
Late Bishop of Aarhus, Denmark.
CONRAD VON ORELLI, Ph.D., Th.D
Professor of
ligion, University of Basel.
CARL PFENDER,
Pastor of St. Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church, Paris.
ERWIN PREDgOHEN, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Pastor at Hirschhorn‑on‑the‑Neckar, Germany.
ERNEST CUSHING RICHARDSON , Ph.D.,
Librarian, Princeton University.
GEORG CHRISTIAN RIET$CHEL, Th.D.,
University Preacher and Professor of Practical Theology,
University of Leipsic.
SIEGFRIED RIET$CHEL, Dr.Jur.,
Professor of Law, University of Tiibingen.
.,
Old Testament Exegesis and History of Re‑
BERNHARD RICi(iENBACH (t), D.D.,
Late Pastor in Basel.
EARL ROENNEgE, Th.Lic.,
Superintendent in Gommern, Saxony.
ROBERT WILLIAM ROGERS,
'	Ph.D., LL.D.,
Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Exegesis, Drew
Theological Seminary, Madison, New Jersey.

HENDRIX CORNELIS ROGGE (t), Ph.D.)
Late Professor of History, University of Haarlem.
ARNOLD RUECICi,
Pastor at Birmensdorf and Lecturer at the University of
'	Zurich.
CARL VICTOR RY$$EL (t), Ph.D., Th.D.,
Late Professor of Theology, University of Zurich.
KARL $CHAAR$CHMIDT,
Honorary Professor, University of Bonn.

DAVID SCHLEY SCHAFF, D.D.,

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

PHILIPP SCHAFF (t), D.D., LL.D.,
Late Professor of Church History, Union Theological Sem‑
inary, New York and Editor of the Original SCHAFF
HERZOG ENCYCLOPR'DIM
CHRI$TOPH CiOTTLOB VON $CHEVRL
(t), Ph.D., Th.D.,
Late Professor in Nuremberg.
REINHOLD SCHMID, Th.Lic.,
Pastor in Oberholzheim, Wurttemberg.

HEINRICH SCHMIDT (t), Ph.D,., Th.D.,
Late Professor of Theology, University of Erlangen.

gARL SCHMIDT, Th.D.,
Provost at Goldberg, Mecklenburg.
WOLDEMAR QOTTLOB $CHMIDT (t),
D.D.,
Late Professor of Theology, University of Leipsic.
CARL WILHELM $CHOELL (f),
Ph.D., D.D.,
Late Pastor of the Savoy Church, London.
THEODOR FRIEDRICH SCHOTT (t),
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Late Librarian and Professor of Theology, University of
Stuttgart.
EMIL $CHUERER, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of Gbt
tingen.
JOHANN FRIEDRICH RITTER VON
SCHULTE (t), Dr.Jur.,

Professor of Law, University of Bonn.
GUSTAV vON 0GHULTHE66.$RQHDPla,

Th.D.,
Professor cf Systematic Theology, University of Zurich.

VICTOR SCHULTZE, Th.D.,
Professor of Church History and Christian Archeology,
University of Greifswald.
OTTO BEE33ASS , Ph.D.,
Educator, Leipsic, Germany.
REINHOLD $EEgERa., Th.D.,
Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Berlin.

CONTRIBUTORS AND COLLABORATORS, VOLUME VI
EMIL SEHLING, Dr.Jur.,
Professor of Ecclesiastical and Commercial Law, University
of Erlangen.
ERNST SELLIN, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and Archeology.
Evangelical Theological Faculty, Vienna.
CHRISTIAgN SEPP (t), Th.D.,
Late Mennonite Preacher, Leyden.
FRIEDRICH ANTON EMIL SIEFFERT,
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Dogmatics and New Testament Exegesis,
University of Bonn.
ERNEST GOTTLIE33 SIHLER, Ph.D.,
Professor of Latin, New York University.
PHILIPP FRIEDRICH ADOLPH THEODOR SPAETH, D.D., LL.D.,
Professor in the Lutheran Theological Seminary, Mt. Airy,
Philadelphia.
	EMIL ELIAS	STEINMEYER, Ph.D.,
Professor of German Language and Literature, University
		of Erlangen.
HERaCANN LEBERECHT STRACg,
Ph.D., Th.D.,
Extraordinary Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and
Semitic Languages, University of Berlin.
KARL THIEME, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Dogmatics, University of Leipsic.
PAUL TSCHACgERT, Ph.D., Th.D.,
Professor of Church History, University of G6ttingen.
JOHANN GERHARD WILHELM
UHLHORN ( fi), Th.D.,
Late Abbot of Lokkum, Germany.
HORACE GRANT UNDERWOOD, D.D.,
Author and Missionary, Seoul, Korea.

SIETB,E DOUWES VAN VEEN, Th.D.,
Professor of Church History and Christian Archeology.
University of Utrecht.

WILHELM VOLCg (t), Ph.D., Th.D.,
Late Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of
Rostock.
BENJAMIN BRECBINRIDGE WAR
FIELD, D.D., LL.D.,
Professor of Didactic and Polemical Theology, Princeton
Theological Seminary.

FRIEDRICH WILHELHI HERMANN
WASSERSCHLEBEN (t), Ph.D.,
Late Professor of Theology in Giessen.

EDWARD ELIHU WHITFIELD, N.A.,
Plymouth Brother, Retired Public Schoolmaster.

LEIGHTON WILLIAMS, D.D.,
Pastor of the Amity Baptist Church, New York.

JOSEPH DAWSON WILSON, D.D.,
Professor of Ecclesiastical History in the Reformed Episco
pal Seminary, Philadelphia, Pa.

FRANZ THEODOR BITTER VON ZAHN,
Th.D., Litt.D:,
Professor of New Testament Introduction, University of
Erlangen.
HEINRICH ZIEGLER,
Pastor Emeritus in Jena.
OTTO ZOECBLER ( f ), Ph.D., Th.D.,
Late Professor of Church History and Apologetics, Univer
sity of Greifswald.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL APPENDIX‑YOLS. I‑VI
The following list of books is supplementary to the bibliographies given at the end of the articles
contained in volumes I.‑VI., and brings the literature down to November, 1909. In this list each title
entry i$ printed in capital letters.
APOCRYPHA: B. Pick, The Apocryphal Ads, Chicago, 1909.
ARABIA: U. Chauvin, Bibliographie des ouvragea Arabea ou relatifs aux Arnbes publiea dens l'Europe chrttienne de 1810 d 1886. XI. Mahomet, Leip$ic; 1909.
ARCHITECTURE: E. H. Day, Gothic Architecture in England, Oxford, 1909.
I. B. S. Holborn, An Introduction to the Architectures of European Religions, Edinburgh, 1909.
ARMENIA: L. Arpee, The Armenian Awakening, Chicago, 1909.
ATONEMENT: W. L. Walker, The Gospel of Reconciliation or Atonement, Edinburgh, 1909.
BIBLE TEXT: J. Drummond, The Transmission of the Text of the New Testament, London, 1909.
E. Kautaeh, Die Evangelienzitate des Origens, Leip$ic, 1909.
W. O. E. Oesterley, Our Bible Text; some Recently discovered Bible Documents, London, 1909.
BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION: F. Egger, Absolute OdeT relative Wahrheit der heiligen Schrift 8 Dogmatiach‑kritiache Unterauchung einer neuen Theorie, Brixen, 1909.
A. S. Geden, Outlines of Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, London, 1909.
E. Jaequier, Histoire des livres du Nouveau Testament, 4 vole., Paris, 1904‑1909.
A. S. Peaks, A Critical Introduction to the New Testament, London, 1909.
T. Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament (Erg. transl. under the direction . . of . W, Jacobus, assisted by C. S, Thayer), 3 vole., Edinburgh, 1909.
BIBLICAL THEOLOGY: W. T. Adeney, The New Testament Doctrine of Christ, Edinburgh, 1909.
J. Stalker, The Ethic of Jesus according to the ,Synoptic Gospels, London, 1909.
G. Westphal, Jahwes yPohnstatten nach den Anschauungen der alter Hebraer, Giessen, 1908.
BONAVENTURA: E. Lutz, Die PayehoTogie Bona.,entunas, Miin$ter, 199.
BOWNE, B. P.: Studies in Christianity, Boston, 1909.
BROOKS, P.: In Heavenly Heretics, by L. P. Powell, ew York, 1909.
BUSHNELL, H.: In Heavenly Heretics, by L. P. Powell, New York, 1909.
CATENeF,; O. Lang, Die Catene des Yatieanua Gr. 72 zum ersten Korinlherbrief, Leipeie, 1909.
CHALLONER, R.: E. H. Burton, The Life and Times of Bishop Challoner (1691‑1781), 2 vole., New York, 1909.
CHANNING, W. E.: In Heavenly Heretics, by L, P. Powell, New York, 1909.
CHINA: J. Rose, The Original Religion of China, Edinburgh, 1909.
W. A. Tatehell, Medical Missions in China in Connection with the Wesleyan Methodist Church, London, 1909.
J. Webster, The Revival in Manchuria, Lon$on, 1909.
CHRISTIAN SOCIALISM: C. B. Thompson, The Churches and the Wage Earners, London, 1909.
W. Rau$ehenbuaeh, Christianity and the Social Crisis, New York, 1907.
CHRISTMAS: F. Keppel, Christmas in M2; the Nativity as depicted by Artiste in the 16th and 16th Centuries, New York, 1909.
H. W. Mabie, The Book of Christmas, New York, 1909.
CHURCH HISTORY: H. M. Gwatkin, Early Church. History to A. D. 313, 2 vols., London, 1909.
L. Ragg, The Church of the Apostles, New York, 1909.
CHURCH, R. W.: D. C. Lathbury, Dean Church, London, 1909.
COMPARATIVE RELIGION: G. FOUCarE, La M46thOdC comparative dana l'hiatoire des Religions, Pane, 1909.
S. Reinaeh, Orpheus, Hiatflire G,%&ale do reZ2g2011,3, P9,PiA, 1909; Eng. banal., Orpheus, London, 1909.
COVENANTERB: A. Smellie, Men of the Covenant, London, 1903, 7th ed., 1909.
CREATION: D. L. Holbrook, Panorama of Creation, Philadelphia, 1909.
E. O. James, God's Eight Days of Creation, London, 1909.
DENNEY, J.: Jesus and the Gospel, New York, 1909.
DISCIPLES OP CHRIST: J. H. Garrison The Story of a Century. A brief historical Sketch and Exposition of the Religious Movement inaugurated by Thomas and Alexander Campbell, St. Lows, 1909.
Dons, M.: Footsteps in the Path of Life, New York, 1909.
DRUIDS: W. F. Tamblyn, in Am. Hist. Rev., Oct., 1909, pp. 216 (gathers scattered references).
EDWARD, J., THE ELDER: In Heavenly Heretics, by L. P. owell, New York, 1909.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL APPENDIX‑VOLUMES I‑VI
ETHICS: R. L. Ottley, Christian Ideas and Ideals, London, 1909.
H. H. Seullard, Early Christian Ethics in the West, London, 1909.
EVERETT, C. C.: Theism and the Christian Faith,, New York, 1909.
FAITH‑. W. R. Inge, Faith, London, 1909.
FICHTE, J. G.: A biographical introduction, by E. Ritchie, is prefixed to the Vocation of Man, Chicago, 1906.
FINDLAY, G. G.: Fellowship in the Life Eternal, New York, 1909.
FORSYTH, P. T.: The Crueiality of the Cross, New York, 1909.
FRANCE: J. W. Thompson, The Wars of Religion in France, 1559‑76, Chicago, 1909.
FRANCIS OF ASSISI: A. Goffin, Saint Frangois d'Assise dons la legends et dons fart primitifs italiens, Brussels, 1909.
FRENCH REVOLUTION: P. de La Gorce, Histoire religieuse de la revolution frangaise, Paris, 1909.
GALILEE: E. W, G. Masterman, Studies in Galilee, Chicago, 1909.
GARDINER, S.: In Typical English Churchmen, by J. Gairdner, London, 1909.
GEIL, W. E.: The Great Wall of China, New York, 1909.
GERHARDT, P.: Two new eda. of the poems are by W. Nelle, Hamburg, 1907, and W. Tiimpel, Giitersloh, 1907.
GLADDEN, W.: Recollections of Washington Gladden, Boston, 1909.
GOD:	J. Warsehauer, Problems of Immanence.
	Studies critical and constructive, London, 1909.
GOSPELS: V. H. Stanton, The Go speis as Historical
	Documents, part Z, The Sgnoptie Gospels,
	London, 1909.
HAMMURABI: Hammurabis Gesetz, Germ. trans]., by J. Kohler and A. Ungnad, Leipsic, 1909.
HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: S. Dibble, A History of the Sandwich Islands, Cleveland, 1909.
HEBREW LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE: J. W. Rothatein, Grundziige den hebraischen Rhythmus and seiner Formenbildung nebst lyrischen Texten mit kritischen Kommentar, Leipsic, 1909.
HELLENISM: W. Otto, Priester and Tempel im hellenistischen Aegypten, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1908.
HERBERT, G.: Add to bibliograp , English Works newly arranged . . . by ~ H. Palmer, 3 vols., Boston, 1905.
HERRMANN, J. G. W.: English tranal. of Der Verkehr, with title Communion of the Christian with God, London, 1895, New York, 1907.
HEXATEUCH: J. Skinner, Genesis, Edinburgh and New York, 1909.
HOLY SPIRIT: H. B. Swete, The Holy ,Spirit in the New Testament. A Study in primitive Christian Teaching, London, 1909.
HOME MISSIONS: A. F. Beard, A Crusade of Brotherhood; a History of the American Missionary Association, Boston, 1909.
H. P. Douglass, Christian Reconstruction in the South, Boston, 1909.
HOMILETICS: F. r. Cartor, Preaching, London, 1909.
HUGUENOTS: See France, above.
HULSEAN LECTURES: J. N. Flgg16, The Gospel and Human Needs. Being the Hulsean Lectures for 1908‑09, London, 1909.
HYMNOLOGY: Eveline W. Brainerd, Great Hymns of the Middle Ages, New York, 1909.
IDEALISM: C. Werner, Aristote et l'idealisme pZatonicien, Paris, 1909.
W. R. B. Gibson, God with us. A Study in Religious Idealism, New York, 1909.
IMMORTALITY: C. Lombroso, After Death.‑Whatt Boston, 1909.
INDIA: Linguistic Survey o India. V., 3. TibetoBurman Family. Part 1. General Introduction, Specimens of the Tibetan Dialects, the Himalayan Dialects, and the North Assam Group, comp. and ed. by G. A. Grieraon, Calcutta, 1909.
INSCRIPTIONS: C. Wesaely, Studien zur Palaeographic and Papyruskunde, vol. viii., Leipsic, 1908.
M. H. Pognon, Inscriptions sEmitiques de la Syrie, de la Mesopotamie, Paris, 1908.
G. Moller, Hieratische Palaographie, Leipsic, 1909.
M. von Oppenheim, Inschriften aus Sy~r z, Mesopta mien and Kleinasien, gesammelt auf der Forschungsreise des Jahres 1899, Leipsic, 1909.
INSPIRATION AND REVELATION: Revelation and Inspiration, London, 1909.
T. H. Sprott, Modern Study of the Old Testament and Inspiration, London, 1909.
INVESTITURE: E. Bernheim, Quellen xur Geschiehte den Investiturstreites, Leipsic, 1907.
J. Drehmann, Papst Leo IX and die Simonie. Ein Beitrag zur Untersuchung der Vorgeschichte den Investiturstreites, Leipsic, 1908.
A. Seharnagl, Der Begriff der Investitur in den Quellen and der Literatur den Investiturstreites, Stuttgart, 1908.
IRENAEUO: P. B auzart, Essai sur la theologie d'Irenee. Etudes d'histoire den dogmes, Paris, 1908.
ISAIAH: G. H. Box, The Book of Isaiah, London, 1908.
F. Feldmann, Der Knecht Gotten in Isaias Kap. 40‑55, Freiburg, 1907.
E. Sellin, Das Ratsel den deuterojesjanischen Buches, Leipsic, 1908.
ISRAEL, HISTORY OF: A. M. Hyamaon, A History of the Jews in England, London, 1908.
C. H. H. Wright, Light from Egyptian Papyri, on Jewish History before Christ, London, 1908.
A. Alt, Israel and Aegypten, Leipsic, 1909.
A. Buehler, The Political and Social Leaders of the Jewish Community of Sepphoris in the Second and Third Centuries, London, 1909.
W. Caspari, Aufkommen and Krise den israelitisehen Konigtums enter David, Berlin, 1909.
T. K Cheyne, The Decline and Fall of the Kingdom of Judah, London, 1908.
S. Funk, Die Juden in Babylonien 200‑500, Vol. ii., Berlin, 1908.
S. Oppenheim, The Early History of the Jews in New York, 1667‑166,x, in Publications of the American Jewish. Historical Society, New York, 1909.
S.	Poznanaki, The Karaite Literary Opponents
	of Saadiah Gaon, London, 1908.
S. Schechter, Some Aspects of Rabbinic Theology, London, 1909.
N. Slouaehz, Judeo‑Berberes. Recherches sur les origines den juifs et du judaisme en Afrique, Paris, 1909.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL APPENDIX‑VOLUMES I‑VI
JACOB	(JAMES) of VITRY: Jacob von Yitry, Leben and Werke, in Beitrdge zur Kulturgeschichte des Mittelalters and der Renaissance, ed. W Goetz, Leipsic, 1909.
JAINISM: Hem Chandra Suri, Yogosastram, in Sanskrit, ed. Muni Maharaya Sri Dharmavigay, vol. i., part 1, Calcutta, 1907.
JAMES, EPISTLE OF: J. Belzer , Die Epistel der Neil Jakobus, Freiburg, 1909.
JAPAN: M. Steichen, The Christian Daimyos: A Century of Religious and Political History in Japan (15.x,9‑1650), Tokyo, 1909.
N. G. Munro, Prehistoric Japan, London, 1908.
JEREMIAH: Commentary of R. Tobia B. Elieser on Echah. Edited for the ,first time from the MSS. at Cambridge, Oxford, and Munich, by A. W. Greenup, Hebrew Text, London, 1909.
C. H. Cornill Das Buch Jeremia erklCirt, Leipsic, 1905.
M. Lohr Die Klagelieder des Jeremias iibersetzt and erkl6rt, Freiburg, 1908.
JERUSALEM: C. R. Conder, The City of Jerusalem, London, 1909.
D~ S. Margoliouth, Cairo, Jerusalem and Damascus; three chief Cities of the Egyptian Sultans, New York, 1908.
C. Mommert, Der Teich Bethesda zu Jerusalem and das Jerusalem des Pilgers von Bordeaux, Leipsic, 1907.
BIOGRAPHICAL ADDENDA
JESUITS: P. T. Venturi, Stories dells Compagnia di Gesu in Italic; vol. i., La vita religiosa in Italic durante la prima eta dell' ordine, con appendice di documenti inediti, Milan, 1909.
JOB: Book of Job ; Introduction by G. K. Chesterton, New fork, 1909.
JOHN THE APOSTLE; R. Law, The Tests of Life: a Study of the First Epistle of St. John (Kerr Lectures for 1909), New York, 1909.
JOHN BAPTIST: N. Heim, Johannes. Der Yorlaufer des Herrn, each Bibel, Geschichte and Tradition dargestellt, Regensburg, 1908.
JosErxus: J. Frey, Der slavische Josephusbericht fiber die urchristliche Geschichte nebst seiner Parallelen kritisch untersucht, Leipsic, 1908.
KERLE, J: E. F. L. Wood, John Keble, in Leaders of the Church, 1800‑1900, series ed. G. W. E. Russell, Oxford, 1909.
KINGS, Booxs OF: F. A. Hem% Die Chronologie der beiden Konigsbiicher, Munster, 1909.
LEE, J.: W. H. Meredith, Life of Jesse Lee, New York, 1909.
LEFROY, W.: H. Leeds, Life of Dean Lefroy, London, 1909.
LITURGICS: C. G. C. F. Atchley, The Ambrosian Liturgy done into English, London, 1909.
G. Rietschel, Lehrbuch der Liturgik, vol. ii., Die Kasualien, Berlin, 1909.
BASSERMANN, H. G.: d. In Samaden (70 m. S.S.e.	CASALI DEL DRAGO, G. B.: d. at Rome Mar. 17,
	of St. Gall), Switzerland, Aug. 30, 1909.		1908.
BEL.SxEIT'I, J.: d. at Christiania July 15, 1909.	HARE W. H.: d. at Atlantic City, N. J., Oct. 23,
BOExMER E.: d. at Lichtental (a suburb of Baden)		1909.
	Mar. 1, 1906.	MADSEN, P.: elected bishop of Zealand, 1909.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviations in common use or self‑evident are not included here. For additional information concerning the works listed, see vol. i., pp. viii.‑xx., and the appropriate articles in the body of the work.
ANF .......
ASM ........
Asayr.......
A. T........
Auga. Con...
A V.
AZ..
ADB . . . . . . . , , I Allgemeine deutsche Biographic, Leipsic,
		1875 sqq., vol. 531 1907
	Ado 	adveraus, against'
AJP .. . . . . . . . . . ~ American Journal of Philology, Baltimore, 1880 sqq.
AJT . . . . . . . . . . ~ Ana" Journal of Theology. Chicago, 1897 eqq.
AKR. .. . . . . . , , I Aviv fur katholiachea Kirchenrecht, Innsbruck, 1857‑81, Mainz, 1872 eqq.
Archiv far Litteratur‑ and Kirchenge‑
ALKG .. . . . . . . . ~	achichte lea Mittelaltera, Freiburg, 1885
	aqq.
Am. . . . . . . . . . . . . American
AMA.. . . . . . . , , 1Abhandlunpen der Miinchener Akadem%e,
Munich, 1783 sqq. . . Ante‑Nicene Fathers, American edition by A. Cleveland Coxe, 8 vole. and index, Buffalo, 1887; vol. ix., ed. Allan Menzies, New York, 1897
Apoc .. . . . . . . . . . . Apocrypha, apocryphal
Apol . . . . . . . . . . . . Apologia, Apology
	Arab 	Arabic
Aran . . . . . . . . . . . Aramaic
	art 	article
	Art. 3chmal 	. ..Sehmalknld Articles
		Ada eanctorum. ed. J, Rolland and others,
	ASB .		~ Antwerp, 1843sq q.
		Ada eanciorum ordinia S. Benedicti, ed.
		J. Mabillon, 9 vole., Paris, 1668‑1701
....Assyrian
. . . .Altea Testament, " Old Testament "
....Augsburg Confession
. . . . Authorized Version (of the English Bible)
.ALlgemeine Zeitung, Augsburg, TObingen,
	Stuttgart. and Tiibingen, 1798 sqq.
Baldwin,	~ J.	M. Bald in, Dictionary of Philosophy
		and Psychology, 3 vole. m 4, New York,
		1901‑05
Bayle,	t The Dictionary Historical and Critical of
	Dictionary. . , , ~	Mr. Peter Boyle, 2d ed., 5 vole., London,
		1734‑38.
Benzinger, . ~ I. Benzinger, Hebraiache Archtidogie, 2d
Archaolopie,	ed., Freiburg, 1907
BFBS .. .. .. .. . . .British and Foreign Bible Society
Bingham, ~ J. Bingham, Origi»ea eccleaiaatica!, 10
	Originea .		vole., London, 1708‑22; new ed., Ox
		ford, 1855
		(M. Bouquet, Recusil lea hiaforiena lea
Bouquet, Recueih( Gaulea et de la France, continued by
		( various hands, 23 vole., Paris, 1738‑76
		Ar Bower, History of the Popes
	Bower, Popes 	. . to 1768, continued by S. H. CPO.
		3 vole., Philadelphia, 1845‑47
		Baptist Quarterly Review, Philadelphia,
	BQR .	1867 aqq.
	BRG	..	...	. .See JaffS
Cant . .. .. . . . . . . . Canticles, Song of Solomon
cap . . . . . . . . . . . . . caput, " chapter "
Ceillier, Auteura ~ E, Ceillier, Hiatoire lea auteura aacr~a et
	aacr€e . . . . , , , , ecdeaiaetiquea, 16 vole. in 17, Paris,
				1858‑69
	Chron .				Chronicon. " Chronicle "
I Chron. , . . . . . . . . I Chronicles
II Chron . . . . . . . . II Chronicles
				Co inacriptionum Grwcarum, Berlin,
	CIG .				aqq.
				C znacriplionum Latinareem, Berlin,
	CIL .				~ aqq.
CIS . . .. .. .. . . . ~ Corpus inacriptionum Semiticarum, Paris,
				1881 aqq.
	cod 			codex
	cod. D				cadex Beza;
	cod. Theod				codex Theodoaianus
Col . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Epistle to the Colossians
	col., cola 			column, columns
Conj . . . . . . . . . . . . Conjeeaianea, " Confessions,,
I Cor .. . . . . . . . . . . First Epistle to the Corinthians
	TI Cor .	...		Second Epistle to the Corinthians
	COT 		See Schrader
CQR .. . . . . . . . . , ~ The Church Quarterly Review, London, 1875 sqq.
DB .........
DCA.......
DCB .......
		Corpus reformatorum, begun at Halle,
	CR . 	1834, vol. lxxxix., Berlin and Leipaic,
		1905 sqq.
		(M. Creighton, A History of the Papacy
Creighton,	1 from the Great Schism to the Sack of
Papacy . . . . . . ~	Rome, new ed., 6 vole., New York and
	London, 1897
Corpus scnptorum Christianarum orienla‑
. .. . ~	dium, ed J. B. Chabot, I Guidi, and
	others, Paris and Leipsic, 1903 eqq
CSEL . . .. .. . . . ~ Corpus acriptorum eccleaiaeticarum Latinorum, Vienna, 1867 sqq.
CSHB.. . . . . . . . C°~° 8criptorum hiatond Byzantince, 49 vole. Bonn, 1828‑78
Carrier, Religious ~ C. W. furrier, History of Religious Orders, Orders . . . . . . . I New York, 1898
	D .		Deuteronomiat
DACL . . . . . . . . . (F~ Cabrol Dietionnaire d'archeologie chrttienne et de liturgic, Paris, 1903 aqq.
Dan.. . . . . . . . . . . . Daniel
J. Hastings, Dictionary ~ the Bible, 4 vole. and extra vol., dinburgh and New York, 1898‑1904
W. Smith and S. Cheetham, Dictionary ojChristian Antiquities, 2 vole., London, 1875‑80
. . . 1W. Smith and H. Wace. Dictionary of
				Christian Biography, 4 vole., Boston,
				1877‑87
				J. Hastings, J. A. $elbie, and J. C. Lambert,
	DCG	. . . 	...	A Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, 2
				vole., Edinburgh and New York, 1908
				1908.
Dent . . . . . . . . . . . . Deuteronomy
De vir, ill . . . . . . . .De viria illuaMbua
	DGQ .		See Wattenbach
		( L. Stephen and S. Lee, Dictionary of
	DNB 	National Biography, 63 vote and
		[ supplement 3 vole., London, 1885‑1901
Driver, Intro duo‑~ S• R.. Driver, Introduction to te Literature
		of the Old Testament, 5th ed., New
	lion	york.1894
	E		Elohist
		T. K. Cheyne and J. S. Black, Encydo
	EB .	=‑York, Bibtica, 4 vole., London and
		1899‑1903
Eccl .. . . . . . . . . . . . Ecdeaia, ' Curch "; ecdeaiaaticus, " ec‑
		clesiastical "
	Eccles 	Ecclesiastes
Ecclus . . . . . . . . . . Eeclesiastieue
ed . . . . . . . . . . . . . .edition; edidit, " edited by "
Eph . . . . . . . . . . . . Epistle to the Epheaians
Epiat . . .	. . . Epiatola, EpiatoL,," Epistle "" Epistles "
Ersch and ~Gru_ ~ J. S. Er	and ,T. G. Gruber, Allgemeine
	ber, Encyklo	Eneyklop6die der Wiasenachaften and
	p6die, . . . . . . . Kiinate, Leipaie, 1818 eqy
	E. V		English versions (of the Bible)
Ex .. . . . . . . . . . . . . Exodus
	Ezek 	Ezekiel
	ssec		fsaciculua
	Fr 	.French
	Friedrich, KD	•I J• Friedrich, K%rchenpeachichte Deutach
		landa. 2 vole., Bamberg, 1867‑69
	Gal 	Epistle to the Galatians
Gams, Series JP' B. Gams, Series epiacoporum eedeai&, epiacoporum . . Cicre, Regensburg, 1873, and supplement, 1886
Gee and Hardy, ~ H'1~ ~~ive of EngdiahaChvrch History, Documents
	Documents . . . London, 1896
	Gen .		Geneais
	Germ 	German
GGA . . . , . . . _ , _ ~ Gotlingiache Celehrle Anzeigen, Gottingen, 1824 sqq.
Gibbon, Dedine~E~ Gibbon, History of the Decline and
	and Fall 	Pall of the Roman Empire, ed. J. B,
		Bury, 7 vole., London, 1896‑1900
Gk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Greek,
C. Groea, The Sources and Literature of Gross, Sources. . ~ Engtiah History . , , to L¢86, London,
		1900
	Hab .		Habakkuk

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Har
cdxa .........
Harnack, Dogma
Harnaek, IAttera‑
Hauek, KD ..
Haddan and f A•.W. Haddan and W. Stubbs, Councils
	Stubbs, Coup‑ l and Ecclesiastical Documents Relating
	ciZa. , . . . . . . , , ~ to Great Britain and Ireland, 3 vole.,
		Oxford, 1889‑78
		Refers to patristic works on heresies or
		heretics, Tertullian a De prmcrlptione,
	H2r .	the Pros haireseia of ~nmus, the
		~~Panarion of Epiphanies, etc.
	H~
rduin, Con‑ ) J. l	~arduin Conciliorum coZlectio regia
maxima, 12 vole., Paris, 1715
A. Harnack, History of Dogma , , from the 3d German edition, 7 vole., ~Boeton, 1895‑1900
j A. Harnack, Geachichte der altchriatlichen Latteratur bin Eueebiua, 2 vole, in 3, Leipsic, 1893‑1904
j A. I;suck, Kirchengeechic7ate Deutachlands, vol. i., Ixipsic, 1904; vol. ii., 1900 Vol. iii., 1908; vol. w.. 1903
RealencykLop(tdie fur proteatantiache The‑
Hauck‑Heraog, ~ olopie and Kirche, founded by J. J.
	RE	Herzog, 3d ed. by A. Hauck, Leipaic,
		1896‑‑1909
Heb .. . . . . . . . . . . , Epistle to the Hebrews
Hebr . . . . . . . . . . . . Hebrew
Hefele,Concilien‑~ C• J. van Hefele Conciliertgeachichte, continued by J. ~Iergenro'ther vole. i.‑vi., viii. ix., Freiburg, 1883‑93
Heimbucher Or‑ M, Heimbucher Die Orden and Kongre‑
den oral Icon‑	pationen der katholiaehen Kirche, 2d ed.
prepatiorun. . .	3 vole., Paderborn, 1907
	Helyot, Ordrea	P	Helyot Hiatoira den ordrea monaa‑
	monaatiquea	,	tqaea, relipieux et militairea 8 vole.,
			Paris, 1714‑19; new ed., 1839‑42
Henderson, Doe‑ E. F. Hendereon, Select Historical Docu‑
umenta . . . . . ~ menta onI the Middle Apes, London, 1892
Hist .. . . . . . . . . . . . History, d~iatoire, hiatAria
Hint. sect . . . . . . . I Hiatorta eccZeaiastim, ecdeaie. .. Church History "
Hom . . . . . . . . . . . . Homilia, homiLiai, •' homily, homilies "
Hos .. . . . . . . . . . . . Hosea
	Isa 	Isaiah
	Ital 	Italian
	J		Jahvist (Yahwiat)
	JA 	Journal Aaiati~gue Paris. 1822 s4 .
Jacobus, 	• . ~ A Standard Bible Dictionary, ed. ~. W Ja‑
Dictionary. .	cobus,	. E. E. Nourse	. and A C.
		Zenos, New York and London, 1909.
	Jaff~, BRG	P• Jaffd, Bibliotheca rerum Germani
		carum, 8 vole., Berlin, 1864‑73
	. .,. 	~ P. JaffdRegents pontiftcum Romanorum
i . ad annum 1188 Berlin, 1851; , 2d ed., I,eipaic, 1881‑88
Journal of the American Oriental Society, . New Haven, 1849 sqq
j Journal of Biblical Literature and Exegeair, fast apgeared as Journal of the Society of Btblical Literature and Exegesis, Middletown, 1882‑88, then Boston, 1890 aqq
!The Jewish Encyclopedia, 12 vole., New
1, York, 1901‑06'
The combined narrative of the Jahviat
JE ..... .. . . .. . ~ (yahwist) and Elohist
Jer .. . . . . . . . . . . . . Jeremiah
Josephus, Ant . . J Flaviua Joaephus, " Antiquities of the
I Jews "'
Joaephus, Apiore . Flavius Josephus, " Against Apion "
Josephus, Life. . . Life of Flaviua Josephus
Joaephus, War. . . Flavius Josephus, " The Jewish War "
	Josh 	Joshua
	JPT 	~'I°hrbiicher fiir proteatantiache Theolopie, ,
		Leipsic, 1875 sqq
JQR . . . . . . . , , . ~ The Jewish Quarterly Review, London, 1888 s44.
JRAS. .. .. . ... ~'I°urnal of the Royal Asiatic Society, London, 1834 sqq.
JTS . . . . . . . . , , ~ Journal of Theological Studies, London, . 1899 sqq.
Julian, Hym‑ J J. Julian, A Dictionary of Hymnolopy,nology, . . . . . . . 1 revised edition, London, 1907
JWT . . . . . • . • . , ~ Jaarboeken voor Wetenachappelijke TheoZopie, Utrecht, 1845 sqq.
KA T . . . . . . . . . . . See Schrader'
	XB .	See Schrader
	KD 	, See Friedrich, Hauck, Rettberg
		Wetter and Welts's Kirchenlezikon, 2d
	KL . . . 	. . . . . , , ed., by J. Hergenrbther and F. Kaulen,
		12 vole., Freiburg, 1882‑1903
		G. Kriiger, History of Early Christian
Kriiger, History~ Literature in the First Three Centuries,
New York, 1897
K. Krumbacher, Geachichte der byzantiniachen Litteratur, 2d ed., Munich, 1897
. `~ P'am
	Labbe,	Sacrorum conciliorum nova et
Labbe, Concilia	y1iaaima collectio,	31 vole., Florence
	and Venice, 1759‑98
JAOS ........
JBL ...........
JE ..........
Krumbacher,
	Geachichte, ,
Lam . . . . . . . . . . . . Lamentations
Lanigan, Ecc1. ~ J• Lanigan, Ecclesiastical History of IreHiat . . . . . , . , land to the 13th Century, 4 vole., Dub‑
		lin, 1829
	Lat .		Latin, Latiniaed
Leg . . . . . . . . . . . . Lepea, legum
Lev . . . . . . . . . . . . Leviticua
Lichtenberger, ~ F• Lichtenberger, EncydopMie den aciESR . . . . . . . , ences rdigieuaea, 13 vole., Paris, 18771882
Lorenz, DGQ ..G'n°	G	~;Ze°mMittelalter, 3d edBerln7
	LXX 	........		The Septuagint
	I Mace 		T Maccabees
	TI Mace 		TI Maccabees
Mai, Nova cot‑ ~ A. Mai, Scriptorum veterum nova cd‑
dectio ... . . . . . Zectio~ 10 vole., Rome, 1825‑38
Mat . . . . . . . . . . . . . Malachi
Mann, Popes . . . ~ R' C. Mann, Lives of the Popes in the Early Midle Axes, London, 1902 eqq.
	G. D. Manai, .S'anctorum conciL%orum
Martel, Concilia. cdleclio nova, 31 vole., Florence and
			Venice, 1728
	Matt 	....		Matthew
			Monuments Germanize histories, ed. G. H.
			Perta and others, Hanover and Ber
			lin, 1828 eqq Te following abbrevia
			tions are used for the sections and
			subsections Of this work: Ant., Antiqui
			tatea, ' Antiquities "; Auct. ant., Auo
			tares antiquiasimi, " Oldest Writers ";
			Chron. mina Chronica minors, " Lesser
			Chronicles ' ; Dip, Diplomats, Di
			plomas) Documents "; Epiat„ Epia
			tda.•, ' Letters ' ; Geat. Pont. Ram.,
			Geata pontificum Romanorum " Deeds
			of the Popes of Rome "• leg., I,egea,
			' Laws"; Lib. de life, Libelli de )its
			enter regnum et aaurdotium saculorum
			xi. et xii, conacripti, " Books concerning
MGH . . . . . . . , ,	the Strife between the Civil and Eccle
eiastical Authorities in the Eleventh
and Twelfth Centuries	Nee., Ne
crologia Germanic, " l~ecrology of
Germany ; Poet. I,at,	aroi Car.,
Poets Lalini a'vi Cardini, " Latin
Poets of the Caroline Time "• Poet.
Lat. mod , awi, Poets Latini medii ceva,
	Latin Poets of the Middle Ages
Script.. Scriptorea, Writers • Scr6pt.
rer. Germ.. Scriptorea rerum Oermani
carum~ " Writers on German $ub
jects';Script. rer. Lanpob., Scriptorea
rerum La.npobardicarum et Italicarum,
" Writers on Lombard and Italian
Subjects"; Script. rer. Merov. 3crip‑
torea rerum Merovirepicarum, " Writers
	Mic .	1Micah Merovingian Subjects "
• . ~ H. H. Milman, History of Latin Chris‑
Milman Latin	tianity, Inducting that of the Popes to
Christianity	Nicholas 'V., 8 vole., London,
		1880‑61
	C. Mirbt, Quellen zur Geachiehte den Papat
Mirbt, QuelZen~ 		lama and den riimischen Katholicfamua,
		Tiibingen, 1901
	MPG 	J~ P. Migne, Patrdogica curaua complehus,
			aeries Greece 162 vole., Paris, 1837‑66
			J‑ P. Migne, Patrdopicc tarsus con;pletua
	MPL .	........	~ series Latirue, 221 vole., Paris, 1844‑84
	MS., MSS 	Manuscript, Manuscripts
Muratori, Scrip‑ ~ L. A. Muratori, Rerum Italicarum scrip.
	tares. . 	. . . . .	tares, 28 vole., 1723‑51
			Neuea Archiv der Ceaellachaft )sir,
			ttltere
	NA . . . . . . . . . ~ deutsche Ceachichtakunde, $anover,
			1878 sqq,
Nah . . . . . . . . . . . . Nahum
n.d. . . . . . . . . . . . . no date of publication
Neander, Chris‑ S A• Neander, General History of the Chris
	tian Church.. ~ fian Religion and Church, 6 vole., and
		index, Boston, 1872‑81
	Neh .	Nehemiah
Niceron, bfe‑(R. P. Niceron Mcsmoirea pour aervir h
	moirea . . . . . . . fhiatoire den ~hommes illualres . ., 43
	vole., Paris 1729‑45 	•
NKZ . . . . . . . . . ~ Neue kirchtiche Zeifachrift, Leipsie, 1890
Nowaek, Arche‑ ~ W94 Nowack, Lehrbuch der hebrliiachen
ologie .... . . . . Archiidogie, 2 vole., Freibur6l 1$81
Il.p. . . . . . . . . . . . . no pace of publication
	The Nicene and Post‑Nicene Fathers, let
NPNF ... . . . . . , series, 14 vole., New York, 1887‑92; 2d
		series, 14 vole., New York, 1890‑1900
N. T.. . . . . . , , , , ~ New Testament, Novum Teatamenlum
		Nouveau Testament, Neues Testament
Num . . . . . . . , , , , , , Numbers
	Ob .	Obadiah

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
	O. $. B	. . . . . . . ~ Ord' M'M Benedict" "' Order of $t.
		Benedict "
	O. T		Old Testament
	OTJC .		$ee Smith
	P		Prieetly document
		L. Psator, The His tosgthe Popes fro‑
Pastor, Popes. . . ~ ate Close of the M	Agee, 8 vole.,
		London,1891‑1908
	PEA 	. . . . . . j Pastes eccl°°ia Anplieana•., ed. J. A. Giles,
		34 vole., London, 1838‑48
	PEF .Palestine Exploration Fund
	I Pet 	. . . 	First Epistle of Peter
	If Pet .			$econd~pistle of Peter
			B. Plating, Lives of the Popes from . . .
Plating, Popes.. ~	Gregory VIZ. to . . . Paul 1 ., 2 vole.,
	London, n.d.
Puny, HisE. nat...Plin , Historic ftaturalis
Potthset. II'eD‑j A. )~ottlw~ dt ~ ~ieto ~~s
	~a~' ~ ~ ' ' ' ' ' 	werke, Berlin, 1898
	prov 		Proverbs
	Ps .			Pealme
	PSBA. 	. . .) Proceedings of die Society of Biblical
		I Archeology, London, 1880 eqq.
	v	9q.v	. 	. (qua;) vole, ' which we '
	...............	.actor
Ranks, Popes. . . { L. von Ranks. History of the Popes. 3 vole., London, 1908
	RDM .		Revua du deux mondes, Paris, 1831 sqq.
	RE		See Hauck‑Herzog
Reich, Docu‑ ~ E. Reich, Select Documents Illustrating Me‑
	menta .	. diaoal and Modern History, London, 1905
	REJ .	Revue dew etudes 7uivea, Paris, 1880 sqq.
Rettberg, KD. . , i F. W. Rettberg, KwchengescAiehle Deutec/o‑
			lands 2 vole., GSttingen, 1848‑48
	Rev 	..........		Book of Revelation
	RHR . . . . . ~ Revue de 1'Aistoirs des rdigiona. Paris,
1880 q.
(E. C. Ric ardson, Alphabetical Sub 7set InJIl dex and Index Encyclopaedia to Periodscal Articles on Religion, 1890‑89, New York 1907.
A. L. 1'tichter, Lehrbuch dew katlvoliuhen and evanpdiachen Kirchenrechta, 8th ed. by W. Kahl, Leipaic, 1888
( E. Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, oston 1841, and Later
	Later Re‑~ Biblical Researches in Palestine, 3d ed.
	searches	.....	of the whole, 3 vole	1887
Robinson, Euro‑ J. H. Robinson, Reading& in ,European peon History. . ~ fliesory, 2 vole., Boston, 1904‑08
It	obinaon and J. H. Robinson, and C. A. eard, Devdop
	Beard, Modern meat of Modem Europe, 2 vole., Boston,
	Europe 	1907
	R,om		..	.Epistle to the Romans
RSE .. . . . . . . . . . ~ Revue des sciences ecdlaiaatiques, Arras.
			1860‑74, Amiens, 1875 sqq.
	RTP 		~ Revue de ihloloDie et de philoaophie,
			Lausanne, 1873 ,
	R. V			Revised Version (of the English Bible)
	saw .			e2cu(um. ' century "
	I Sam . 	..	.I Samuel
	II Sam . . . . . .II Samuel
SBA . . . . . . . . , , ISitzunpabd•ichte der Berliner Akademie,
Berlin, 1882 sqq.
F. Max Miiller and others, The Sawed
6BE . . . ... .. . ~ Books o/ the East, Oxfor, 1879 aqq.,
		vol. xlviii., 1904
		Sacred Books of the Ofd Testament (" Rain
	SBOT .	bow Bible ), Leipaic, London, and
		Baltimore, 1894 sqq.
Schaff, Christian ~ p' Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Church . . . . . . . vole. i, iv., n., vii., New York, 1882‑92, vol. v.. Part 1, by D. S. Schaff, 1907
Schaff, Creeds. . I p' Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom,
	3 vole., New York, 1877‑84
E. Schrader, Cuneiform Inscriptions and
Schrader, COT. .	th" Old Testament, 2 vole., London,
		E. Schrader, Die Keilinaekriften and daa
		Alts Testament. 2 vole., Berlin, 1902‑03
		E. Schrader, KeilinechrajUiche BiMioNek,
		8 vole., Berlin, 1889‑1901
		'E. Scharer, Geschichte dew j>ldischen
		Volkea im ZeitatterJesuChristi, 4th ad.,
		3 vole. Leipaic,1902 eqq.; Eng. trans]., 5
		vole., Kew York, 1891
	Script .		Scriptorea, ' writers 11
Scrivener,	F. H. A. Scrivener, Introduction toNewTes
	Introduction . . { 	lament Criticism, 4th ed., Londoy, 1894
	Sent .		SsntenUa•. "Sentences '•
	$. J. . . . 		. . .Societaa Jean, Society of Jesus "
	SMA . . 	. . . . . . ISia~u b~ ~ 6 8~ ~MQ nchener Aka‑
Smith, Kinship.. I W Early Arabia, Kinship and 031 Marriage in
Richardson, En‑
cyclopaedia...
Richter, KirrJun‑
rech6 .........
Robinson, Re‑
searches , and
Schrader, KAT
Schrader, KB.
$ehOrer.
Geschirhte. . .
Smith, OTJC. . .;W' R,. Smith, The Ofd Testament in the Jewish Church, London, 1892
Smith, Prophets.. f Wt he R$~ ~h&rysun 89s' . W
Smith, Rd. of ~ W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites,
	3em .		London, 1894
	$. P. C. H. . . 	. (Society for the Promotion of Christian
		Knowledge
$. P. G.. . . . . . , , ~ $°ciety for the Propagation of the Gospel
			in Foreign Parts
	aq	eqq		and followsng
Strom . . . . . . . . . . ..Stromata. ' Miecelhuvee "
	e.v			sub voce, or sub verbo
$wete, Introduo‑ ~ H. B. $wete, Introduction W the Old Tes
	tion .... . . . . . . lament in Greek, London, 1900
	WS 	Syriac
	i 	Trinitarian Bible Soci t
Thatch	0. J, Thatcher and eW H. McNeal, A
	MeNeal,3oweei		Source Book for MtdiaWal History.
	Book... . . . . . . 1 		New York, 1905
	I These 	First Epistle to the Thessalonians
	II Them .		$e~tTi7daehrslt Amsterdam and
Leyden,
ThT . .. .. . . . The~mBen, 1887 sqq.
Tillemont, M& ~ L: $• le Nain de Tillemont, Mlnwirea eccZtaiaatiquea des six premiere moaru ...."" aiLdes,. 18 vole., Paris, 1893‑1712
I Tim .. . .... .. .. .FSret Epistle to Timothy
	II Tim .		$econd Epistle to Timothy
Theofopiacher Jahreabericht, Leipeio, 1882‑
TJB ... . . . . . . . . ~	1887. Freiburg, 1888. Brunswick. 1859
	1897, Berlin, 1898 sqq.
Theofogiachca Litteraturbfatt, Bonn, 1888
	TLZ .		T =gisd. Lr• LeiPsi0.
1878 sqq.
Tob. . . . . . . . . . .. . . Tobit
	TQ	. . . . ~ Theol°D°"cha Quart°Z"ch'ift, Ttibingen,
1819eq q.
J. A. Robineon Texts and Studies,
	TS 	Cambridge, 1891 eqq~
		Transactions of the 3oeiety of Biblical
	TSBA . 	~ ArchooloDy London, 1872aqq.
		Theolopische Studisn and KriRiJcen, Ham
		burg, 1828 sqq.
		Teats and Unterauchungen cur Geachrochte
		der aitchriaUichen Litteratur, ed. O, von
		Gebhardt end A. Harnack, Leipeio,
		1882 sqq.
	TZT		;T0inger Zeitachriff tilt Theodopie, Tu
		bingen 1838‑40
Ugolini, Theaau‑ J B. Ugolinus, Thesaurus anliqfsitatum 'rum, 34 vols., Venice, 1744‑‑69
VT	Vatua Testamentum, Vieux Testament, "Old
	. T
Testament
Wattenbaeh,	W• Wattenbaeh, Deutschland& Geechichts
	en, 5th ed., 2 vole., Berlin, 1885;
	DGQ . 	. 	~ ed1893‑94
Wellhaueen, '	) J. Wellhsusen, Reate arabischen Heiden
	Heidentum . . . . ~ soma Berlin, 1887
Wellhauaen.	J• Wellhsusen, PrafeDomena our Cesehichle
	laraeLa, 8th ed., Berlin, 1905, Eng.
	prolegomena	tmnal	Edinburgh, 1885
		Zeifachrift fur AaayrioLopie, Leipaie,
	ZA .	1886_.88 Berlin, 1889 aqq.
Zahn, Einlei‑ ~ T, Zahn, Einleitunp in dae Neus Testa_
""'	rnent, 3d ed., Leipeic, 1907
		T. Zahn, Geachichte des neuteatamenh
		lichen Kanone, 2 vole., Leipaie. 1888‑92
		ZeitacArift far die altteatamentliche V'is
		aenachaft Giessen, 1881 sqq.
		Zeitachrift f urdeutachsa Alterthum and deut
		ache Literatur Berlin, 1878 sqq.
		f Zeitachrift der n`eutachen morpenitindiachen
		I Grselfachrs t, Leipeic, 1847 sqq.
		I Zig~riJt ~iir deutsche Pkilolopie, Halls,
		Zeitachr~tq•dra deufachcn PalUetina‑Very
		I sine. LeiPsic, 1878 eqq .
.			Zechnriah
.			Zephaniah
		Zeetachrijt flit die hiatoriache Theolopit,
	ZHT .	pubhshed successively at Leipaic,
		Hamburg and Gotha, 1832‑75
	ZRG .	~Zdtsehrift fur Kirehcnearhichte. Goths,
		1878 sqq.
		Zeitachrift ‑far Kirchenrteht, Berlin, Tii‑
	ZKR 	.......	..	bingen. Freiburg, 1881eg~q
ZKT ..... . . . . . . ~ Zeitachrift far kathoiiache Tluolopit, Innsbruck, 1$77 sqq.
Zsitaeh t far ksrehliche 1Viasenechaft and
ZKW. ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' kirchdichea Leben. Leipsie, 1880‑89
	ZNTW . 	~ ZdtschriJt flit die neuteatamenUiehe Wis.
		aenachafl, Giessen, 1900 sqq.
	ZPK	,; ZiltehriJt fur Proteatantiamua and Kireke,
		Erlangen, 1838‑78
		Zeitachrift far u>ieaenschalUiche Theolopie.
	ZtVT	Jena, 1858‑60, Halls, 1881‑87, Leipsic,
		1868 sqq.
TLB ..........
TSK ...........
TU............
Zahn, Kanon ....
ZATW ......... ZDAL.........
ZDMG.........
ZDP........... ZDPV.........
Zech ..........
Zeph..........

SYSTEM OF TRANSLITERATION
The following system of transliteration has been used for Hebrew:
bt _ ' or omitted at the	t = z	y =
	beginning of a word.	n = h	13 = p
2 =b	b=~
D=phorp
3=bhorb	,=y
t =g	~=k
I =ghorg	~=khork
		1=r
1=d	5=1	~=s
1=dhord	n=m
L~'r = sli
1=h	~=n
n=t
1=w	p=s
TI = th or t

The vowels are transcribed by a, e, i, o, u, without attempt to indicate quantity or quality. Arabic and other Semitic languages are transliterated according to the same system as Hebrew. Greek is written with Roman characters, the common equivalents being used.
KEY TO PRONUNCIATION
When the pronunciation is self‑evident the titles are not respelled; when by mere division and accentuation it can be shown sufficiently clearly the titles have been divided into syllables, and the accented syllables indicated.
a as in sofa a rr of arm
" at
" fare e rr rr pen'
'` fate i " " tin
q " " machine p rr rr obey a " " no
	e as	in	not
	8 "	"	nor
	u "	"	full3
	r' if		rule
	13 91	f'	but
	117 " "		burn
	ai " "		pine
	au "	"	out
	Bl " " 		oil
iu '• " few
1 In accented syllables only; fn unaccented syllables it approximates the sound of a 1n over. beneath it, Indicates the sound of n as fn ink. Nasal n (as in lrrenc6 words) is rendered n.
' In German and French names G approaimatea the sound of a In dune.
iu	as in duration
c = k " " cat
ch	" " church
ew = qu as in queen
(th) cc rr the f r* cc lanc3r
g (hard) " " 90
g	u rr loch (Scotch)
hw (rah)	" •` ruby
	" " jaw
The letter n, with a dot

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE
	INNOCENTS, FEAST OF THE HOLY: A church
festival in honor of the children slain by Herod in
Bethlehem (Matt. ii. 1(i‑18). They were very early
regarded as Christian martyrs, as Irengeus, Ter
tullian, Cyprian, and many later authors speak of
them in that way. At what time the festival be
came commonly celebrated is not known. In the
fifth century the holy innocents were commemorated
in connection with the adoration of the Magi at
the feast of Epiphany. The Carthaginian calendar,
edited by Mabillon from a manuscript of the
seventh century, has the entry opposite Dec. 28
" (the day) of the holy children slain by Herod."
This day is still kept by the Roman Catholic and
Protestant Episcopal churches, but the Greek
Church observes Dec. 29. In course of time the
feast received an octave. 	(A. HAUCK.)
1n the Saturnalia (IL, 4, 11) of Macrobius, the Roman writer in the fifth century, is this anecdote: "When he (Augustus) heard that among the boys whom in Syria Herod, the king of the Jews, had ordered to be killed there were infants of two years and under, he exclaimed: ' I had rather be a pig of Herod's than a son."' As the Saturnalia contains many anecdotes which carry with them indubitable evidence of being of contemporary origin, there is no reason for supposing that this one was the creation of a time subsequent to Augustus, but every probability that it, too, was contemporary, and so is an incidental, undesigned, but striking witness to the truthfulness of the Gospel story. E. G. S1aLEa.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bingham, Oripinea, XX., vii. 12; J. C. W. Auguati, Denkwi7rdigksiten, i. 304 .eqq., Leipeic, 1817: P. Gueranger, L'AanEs liturgiqae, i. 388 eqq., Paris, 1880; W. E. Addis and T. Arnold, Catholic Dictionary, pp. 487488, London, 1903; G. Wissowa, Analecta Macrobiana, is Hermea, xvi. 499 eqq.

INQUISITION.
	I.	In the Older Church.
II. The Inquisition in the Middle Ages.
		Organisation and Competence (§ 1).
		Relation to the Secular Powers (¢ 2).
		In Italy (¢ 3).
		France (14).
		Spain (¢ b).
		Germany, the Netherlands, and England (¢ 8).
111. The Inquisition and the Counter‑Reformation. The Reformation Suppressed m Italy (¢ 1). In Spain and the Netherlands (; 2).
I. In the Older Church: The Inquisition (Inquisitio htereticta pravitatis) or the " Holy Office " (Sanctum officium) is the name of the spiritual court VI.‑1
of the Roman Catholic Church for the detection and punishment of those whose opinions differ from the doctrines of the Church. It was a comparatively late outgrowth of ancient ecclesiastical discipline. " In the primitive Church there was no arrangement that could have borne even a remote resemblance to the Inquisition. . . The whole instinct and the prevailing cast of thought of Christendom in the first four centuries was opposed to compulsion in religious affairs." (J. J. I. von DtSllinger, Kleinere Schriften, p. 295, Stuttgart, 1890.) The institution of " elder for repentance " (see PENITENTIARY), which occurs in the third century, bears quite a different character, as the very name denotes. Of course deviations in the sphere of Christian doctrine were combated, but hardly with other than spiritual weapons; and this practise continued until Theodosius (d. 395), before a Christian emperor found it advisable to impose an ultimate death penalty on (Manichean) heresy. Chrysostom repudiated such action: " It is not right to put a heretic to death, since an implacable war would be brought into the world " (Hom. xlvi. on Matt. xiii. 24‑30); and still in the neighborhood of 450 the church historian Socrates characterized persecution for heresy as foreign to the orthodox Church. Nevertheless, in the meantime Augustine, in his conflict with the Donatiste, had set up the contrary doctrine in the West and had recommended compulsion as well as penalties against heretics (Epist. xciii., clxxalv.), though he did not approve the death penalty. Six centuries more passed before the theory of religious compulsion and of the violent extirpation of heresy came to have universal validity, although Pope Leo I. (Epiat. xv., ad Turrthium) had approved it in the fifth century. This long season of comparative tolerance is the more impressive in view of the circumstance that in Italy under East Gothic and Lombard rule, Catholics and Ariana lived whole centuries in close proximity, or even together (as in Ravenna). The impulse to more severe methods came from the decision that the numerous remnants of paganism must be finally rooted out; and certain measures in this direction were devised by the Carolingian legislation (Cdpitukriu. Carob, Magni of 769 and 813). The beginnings of episcopal inquisition are thus to be sought in the synodal courts for investigations with reference to heresy (see SYNODAL COURTS; and cf. P. Hinsehius, Katholieehes Kirclaenrecht, v. 427, Berlin, 1895).

Zaquieition	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	g
II. The Inquisition is the Middle Ages: By the terms of their negotiations at Verona in 1184, Pope
Lucius III, and Emperor Frederick r., Organi‑ Barbaroasa converted the episcopal inzation and quisition into a universal institution, Competence. to be unconditionally supported by the
temporal power. This was the period when a new and dangerous doctrine, commingling Christian and pagan elements in the manner of the ancient Gnostic speculations, diffused itself by way of the East, and lent its aid to popular religious antagonism that was constantly inflamed by the conditions of the worldly fashioned hierarchy (manifested by the Patarenes, Arnold of Brescia, the Waldenses, and others).* By 1179, the followers of the new doctrine had become so numerous, especially in southern France (see NEw MwivicaEAxa) that Alexander III. urged the plan of suppressing them forcibly. Innocent III. (d. 1216) organized a systematic religious war against them; and among the agencies everywhere employed were the episcopal inquisitions, with their modes of operation guaranteed by the agreement at Verona and the ready support of all temporal tribunals. However, this form of the Inquisition appeared even to Honorius III. (d. 1227) subject to obstruction, and not swift or comprehensive enough in its workings, for want of centralization. He and his successor, Gregory IX., grasped the entire procedure in a single hand, thus creating the new form of papal inquisition, which now received the specific name of Sanctum officiurra in distinction from the episcopal office. The moat exact information as to this institution is furnished by Eymerich's Direclorium. The officers are accountable directly to the pope. It is not the bishop who stands at their head, but the grand inquisitor, who is reinforced with notaries, conaultors on the judicial side, servants and attendants of every sort (e.g., jailers) on the practical side. In the Venetian Republic, each case was tried with a supplementary attendance of three " learned in heresy," who safeguarded the interests of the State. The new institution was accorded important privileges, in fact, full power in the ecclesiastical province; the officers, being commissioned by the pope directly, were independent of the bishops, and, protected by high prerogatives, were inviolable and immune. All their privileges were newly confirmed to them in 1458 by the bull Injunctum reobia, and again in 1570 by the constitution Sacrosanctce Romance ecclesice. After the Dominican order had arisen in the thirteenth century, and its adherents had shown themselves exceptionally qualified, the office was transferred to them especially, though not to the exclusion of members of other orders. The inquisitors' official powers were great, including sentence of excommunication and interdict, suspension of those under suspicion, and adjudication of all aorta of Exemption (q.v.). The trial pr0‑

* There is no evidence that Arnold of Brescia or the Waldeases commingled pagan elements with Christian. On the contrary, they combated with the utmost decision the pagan elements that had been incorporated in the doctrines and practise of the dominant Church They appear to have been Absolutely free from Manichean or Gnostic tendencies.
s.a.x.
ceedinga were held either in special court rooms or in the official diocesan court. For the trial in its different stages, for the imposition of the penalty, and the like, the moat exact prescriptions are extant, and these were continually supplemented as occasion demanded. But for all the exceedingly detailed form of procedure, much was left to the inquisitor's discretion. The new papal tribunal encroached in various ways upon the sphere of the episcopal inquisition, and conflicts of jurisdiction arose, which the popes did not always find it easy to adjust, because, in any case, the episcopal inquisition was not to be abrogated. Nevertheless, in a critical case, the higher authority was lodged in the inquisitor, and his executive scope was more extended than that of the episcopal officials. Charges of heresy against bishops, and even nuncios, were subject to the papal inquisitors.
The unconditional support of the secular arm was invoked for the papal inquisition by virtue of the Veronese agreement (though this
a. Rela‑ was not properly made for that end).
tics to the The secular arm was " executor," or Secular " minister " of the inquisition. The
	Powers.	popes constantly strove to get the co
		operation of the secular powers em
bodied in state laws, municipal statutes, and the like.
To this end Innocent IV., in the bull Ad ezstirParcda,
conceded to the State a portion of the property to
be confiscated; and the State in return assumed
the odium and burden of inflicting the penalty,
even to capital execution, if need were. The first
instance of an execution under imputation of heresy
was supplied in 385 by the usurper Maximus (see
PafaCILLIAN)‑an event by no means approved by
Augustine. While the Veronese agreement left the
question open, King Peter of Aragon, as early as
1197, threatened the death penalty against heretics
who did not submit to the decree of expulsion; and
in the course of the thirteenth century this threat was
enforced in the widest terms. Even the Emperor
Frederick IL, " free‑thinking " man though he was
reputed to be, decreed the death penalty for Lom,
hardy in 1224; for Sicily in 1230; and, with Greg
ory IX., for Rome in 1231. The sentence itself was
determined, as might be expected, by the ecclesi
astical (papal) court; whereupon the execution was
committed to the temporal authorities. Hence it
is possible for certain apologists of the Roman
Church to urge that the Church of Rome has never
shed blood (cf. Die Selbetbiographie dee Cardinals
Bellormina, ed. J. J. I. von D6llinger and F. H.
Reusch, pp. 233 sqq., Bonn, 188?).
This new form of the Inquisition was now made effective with iron strictness in Italy, France, the Netherlands, and England. In Italy,
g. In Italy. which, especially in the north and central regions, was honeycombed with heresy, the situation was managed by Innocent III. At Viterbo, for example, proceedings were instituted with unexampled severity against the Paterenes in
1207 (cf. Muratori, Rerum Italioarum acriptorea, iii., 1, Milan 1723). The civil strife that was stirred up led repeatedly‑as at Viterbo in 1265, in Parma, 1277‑to the expulsion of the inquisitors; they were even slain, as Peter Martyr at Verona in

3	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Inquisition
1245, who thus became the saint of the Inquisition. " But this occasioned frightful vengeance . . . If the complaints became too loud, a pope did indeed now and then serve a note of reproof on the inquisitor; but it does not appear that so much as one pope wished to lop the institution's rankest outcrops" (D&llinger, ut sup.). For the detailed procedure, cf. Lea, vol. ii., chap. iv. A special arrangement prevailed at Venice in the interest of the State, but a milder policy in this case was exceptional. Moreover, the pope appointed the inquisitor whom the Senate classed as an officer of the State by granting him a " provision " or salary; and the extent of his influence on the " learned in heresy " depended entirely on the Roman Curia's influence over the Senate itself.
In France the Inquisition's most appalling operation began in the thirteenth century (see NEw
MANICHEANa, IL; INNOCENT III.), ;. France. and did not reach an end with the
annihilation of the Albigenses. The people endured the yoke with extreme reluctance; in 1242 a desperately goaded multitude assailed the inquisitors in the territory of Avignon. (Those then slain were canonized by Pius IX. in Sept., 1866; and he did the same thing, in the year following, for the atrocious Spanish inquisitor, Pedro Arbues.) The attitude of the French kings to the Inquisition shows various phases. Louis IX. (Saint Louis) promulgated a mandate in 1228 which binds the temporal sovereignty to unconditional collaboration with the Inquisition; on the other hand, Philip the Fair decreed, in 1290, that due circumspection should be observed in the matter of arresting alleged heretics. The violent reactions of the tortured people and various royal edicts had at last their effect; and in time the complete revolution brought forth by the Great Schism and the growing independence of the French nation made an end of the Inquisition in France sooner than in other lands.
Meanwhile the Inquisition in Spain blossomed out with peculiar fulness. It is, to be sure, an error to
ascribe to it, with Hefele (Cardinal g. Spain. Ximenez, Tiibingen, 1844) and Ranks,
the character of a royal court of justice; for, as the Jesuits Grisar and Orti y Lars, prove, it is altogether ecclesiastical, having only certain special state privileges and a certain influence being allowed the king in the choice of inquisitors. It developed from the thirteenth century, on the background of persecution of Moors and Jews. Prior to the sixteenth century, its principal operation was against the Maranoa or alleged converts from Judaism to Christianity. The inquisitorgeneral, Tomes de Torquemada (q.v.), appointed by Pope Sixtus IV., outdid all precedents in the way of executions and confiscationa; it was under him, in Saragossa, that Arbuea came to his bloody end. To say naught of the fact that the national character was favorable to it, the Spanish Inquisition underwent a peculiar development on three aides: in the first place, it had a royally acknowledged head in the inquisitor‑general; in the second place, under the inquisitor‑general, the Conaejo de la supreme acted uniformly for all Spain, with
assistance from the state authorities; in the third place, while the king's influence on the tribunal was undoubtedly large, it was never exerted against the interests of the Church‑on the contrary, the presence of the king or of his representative at the autos do f6 imparted to these the quality of great spectacles authorized by the State, almost popular festivals. It is impossible to estimate the number of the victims. Llorente's data are questioned, and may be disregarded. However, from the Inquisitor Paramo's treatise De origins et progresau inquisitionis (Madrid, 1598), p. 140, it appeafs that in forty years (1480‑1520), at Seville, 4,000 were burned, and 30,000 " penitents " were sentenced to various penalties.
In Germany, Conrad of Marburg (q.v.) was to bring the institution to its flower. But the wrath
of the people slew him and his assistant, 6. Ger‑ Droso, just as their activity began to many, the ripen (1233). Hence in Germany the
Nether‑ Inquisition, for the moat part, failed lands, and to attain to thoroughgoing activity.
England. Nevertheless, until the fifteenth cen‑
tury a good many instances of separate procedures occur. The acts collected by Fr6d6ricq show what was ordained for Germany and the Netherlands in common. This author gives the directions of Gregory IX., addressed to the bishops, in 1233, to the effect that they shall catch the " little foxes "‑that is, the heretics ostensibly converted; while a whole series of similar ordinances ensues to the time of the bull Summia desiderantes in 1484, by the terms of which the special activity of the Inquisition was directed against Witchcraft (q.v.). It was furthermore directed against the " Waldenses " along the Rhine, in Bava:ia and Austria, in Bohemia, and as far as the mark of Brandenburg and Pomerania, as well as against sects of every kind in the Netherlands. It had waged a fearful war of extermination in North Germany, in the district of Bremen, 1233, against the Stedingi (q.v.). From the exact information in FrAd6ricq's work, it appears that the extent of the bloody doings at Antwerp, Brussels, Ghent, Utrecht, and other cities was greater than previously known. During the period before the Reformation, England was less affected by the Inquisition. It first became active against the Lollards (q.v.). In 1401 Henry IV. had parliament confirm the statute De hordico eomburendo.
III. The Inquisition and the Counter‑Reformation: In 1542 Cardinal Caraffa, subsequently Pope Paul
IV., reorganized the Roman Inquisir. The lion after the pattern of the Spanish.
Reforms‑ He himself assumed the direction of
lion Sup‑ the Holy Office created by the bull
pressed Licet ab initio. The executive pro‑
is Italy. cedure was to be centralized at Rome,
primarily for all Italy; and the outcome was to be guaranteed by uniform, ruthless, and swift operation. The new organization, having at its disposal the entire influence of the Roman Curia over every state of Italy, by the time of Plus V. had made an end of the Reformation in that country (see ITALY, THE REFORMATION IN); its advocates were either incarcerated or killed, or

Inquisition
Inscriptions	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
4
driven to flight, while literary products were nought out and destroyed, save insignificant remnants. As an example of the Inquisition's operation in Italy, its actions against " Lutherans " or other heretics in Venice may be enumerated: in the sixteenth century, according to the seta still preserved in the state archives, there were 803 trials for "Lutheranism"; five for "Calvinism"; thirty‑five for Anabaptism; forty‑three for relapse of converts into Judaism; sixty‑five for blasphemous speeches; 148 for sorcery; forty‑five for contempt of religion (that is, of ecclesiastical ceremonies, etc.); and more of the sort. Later these figures notably vanish. Branches of the new Roman office were organized in all other cities of Italy, Naples excepted. Rome, however, continued the center; and how numerous the trials conducted at that place must have been appears from the circumstance that the single protocol‑book accessible records during the three years 15647 no fewer than 111 sentences, all involving severe punishment, some the death penalty, and some
imprisonment for life.	j
As in Italy, so in Spain, the reformatory movement of the sixteenth century fell a prey to the
Inquisition (see SPAIN, REBORMA‑
2. In Spain TION MOVEMENTS OF SIXTEENTH CENaad the TURY IN). At Seville and Valladolid
Nether‑ the movement was crushed and obliteriands. ated in the course of four autos da fE,
1559 and 1560 (cf. E. Schafer, Setrilla and Valladolid, die evantgeliachenGemeinden Spaniena ire Reforntationszeitalter, Halls, 1903); and the Inquisition still flourished in all the land until 1700; socording to Llorente, 782 more autos occurred under the first Bourbons (1700‑46), wherein 14,000 persona were subjected to heavier or lighter penalties. Indeed, Ferdinand VII, restored the Inquisition along with the Restoration in 1814; but it was finally set aside in 1834. The Inquisition persisted long also in Portugal, where it was mainly directed against the Jews; it came to an end there in 1826. In the imperial Netherlands, the Inquisition effectively combated the Reformation in the sixteenth century. From Brussels as a center, it was so actively conducted, or supported, from 1522 downward by the officials of Charles V., then by the two stadtholder princesses, that by 1530 its goal seemed achieved. The spirit, however, it could not subdue, and it raged afresh under Philip IL, and anticipated the cruel deeds of Alva. When eventually the north provinces conquered their religious and political freedom, the Inquisition had annihilated the Reformation in the south provinces. Its activity was also carried into the Spanish possessions in America, and into the East Indies by the Portuguese.
The Congregatio sanctae Romartae et univertralis inquiaitionia is still maintained by the Curia; and the estimate which Rome puts on the institution appeared in 1887 in the canonization of Pedro Arbuea, and in 1889 in the constitution Apoatolicae, which threatens penalty for every infraction of the Inquisition's activity. Not one of all the regulations which define its action and determine its aims has
been repealed.	K. BENRATH.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: In the first rank as a source is the Dirac. torium of Eymerich written at Avignon as a manual of procedure in 1378, edited by Pogue, Rome, 1580, cf. P. H. DeniBe in Archiv far Litteratur‑ and Kirchengeachirhte, 1885, 0.10. The Liter eententiarum inquiaitiania Tholoearus is reproduced as an addition to P, van Limborch, Historic; Iraquiaitionia, Amsterdam, 1892, Eg. travel., London, 1731, often abbreviated and republished in England and America. The Practices Irequiait4onia of Bernard Guidonia, W C• Dousia, appeared Paris, 1888. The beat collection of sources for the Netherlands is gathered in P. Frdddricq, Corpus doctsmentorum luquiaitionia, 2 voles., The Hague, 1889‑'98• Early material on Spain and Italy respectively is included in J. A. Llorente, HisEoria critics de la lnquiaacion de Eapesiia, 10 vole„ Madrid, 1822, abridged Eng. tranal., Hist. Of the Inquisition of Spain from the Time of the Establishment to the Reign of Ferdinand VIL, London, 1828, and in E. C. Combs, I uoatri Proteatanti, Vol. ii., Florence, 1897. An index to some aourcee,ie found in Catalogue of es Collection of Manuscripts jormerly belonging to the Holy Ojftce , , , in the Canary Islands, 14991893, 2 vole., Edinburgh, 1903.
On the general history of the Inquisition the best work is H. C. Lea Hist. of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages, revised ad., 3 vole., New York, 1908‑07. Consult further: J. Marsollier, Hist. de t'inquiaition dLe eon origins, Cologne, 1893; W. H. Rule, Hist. of the Inquisition in Every Country where its Tribunal& have been Established, London, 1874; Ord y Lam, La Inquiaizion, Madrid, 1877; J. Havet, L H6rEaie et le brae a&utier, Paris, 1881; A. Henner, BebtrJige cur Organisation der p2ipatlichen Ketzerperichte, Leipaie, 1890; J. Hanson, Zaubermeaea, Inquisition and Hexenprozcae im Mittslaltcr, Munich, 1900; P. von Hoensbroech, Dan Papatlum ins aocia4kuLturellen Wirkaamkeit, vol. i., Leipaic 1900• C. V. Langlois, L'Inquiaition d'apr9a des travaux rEcenla, Paris, 1902; E. Sch6fer, Beilrdps our Oeachichte . . der Inquisition, 3 vole., Giiteraloh, 1902;
C. Dousia, L'Inquiaition, so aoripinea, as proeQdure, Paris, 1908; E. Vacandaxd L'Inquiaition; . , is pouvoir coer‑
eit4/ de l'igtiae ib. 1908 Eng. travel, Critical and Hiatoriral Study of the Coercive Power of the Church, London, 1908; T, de Caunona, Lea Atbigeoie et d'inquiaition, tea Vaudois et 1'inquiaition, 2 vols., Paris, 1907; Schaff, Christian Church, v. 1, pp. 515 eqq ; the literature under NEw MANICHEANa and in general the treatises on Church history.
For the institution in France, consult: C. Molinier, L'Inquieition done Is midi de la France, Paris, 1881; W. Eemein, Hint. . • . de la procddure inquiaitoire, ib. 1882; L. Tenon, Hiat. de l'inquiaition en France, ib. 1893; T. de Cauzona, Hint. de 1'inquirition en France; Vol. i., Lea Originea, Paris, 1908. For Germany consult: H. Haupt, IValdeneerthum and Inquisition im aiid‑datlichen Deutachland, Freiburg, 1890; P. Flade, Dan rsmiache Inquiaitioraa_ roerfaArea in Deutschland, Berlin, 1902. For the Netherlands: W. Moll, Kerkgeachdedenis van Nederland, ii., chap, 18, Utrecht 1889; J. G. de Hoop‑Bcheffer, Geechialenia der Kerkharvorming in Nederland, Amsterdam, 1873; P. Claeseena L'Inquiaition dana lee Pays‑Bas, Turnhout, 1888; P. Fr,6dtrieq, Geachiedenia der Inquiaitie in de Nedardanden, 2 voles., Ghent, 1892‑97; J. Frederiche, Two Verhandelinpert over de Inquiaitie in de Nederlandeta, The Hague, 1897 For Italy: L. Wine, A Glance at flee Italian Inquisition, London, 1885; L. Amabile, It Santo Officio dells Inquiaizione in Napoli, 2 voles., Citta di Castello, 1892. For Spain: H. C. Lea The Inquisition in Spain, 4 vole., New York, 1908‑07; idem, The Inquisition in the
Spanish Dependenies, ib. 1908; idem, Chapters from the Hint. of Spain connected wills the Inquisition, Philadelphia, 1890; I;. de Molt!nes, Toryuemada et l'inquiaition, Paris, 1897; C. J. von Hefele, Life and Times of Cardinal X imenaz, London, 1885. For South America: B. V. Mackenna,
Francesco Moyen; or, the Inquisition as it was in America, London, 1888. J. T. Medina has written a number of volumes in Spanish, on the Inquisition in Lima, Santiago, 1887; in Chile, 3 vole., ib. 1890; in Cartagena, ib. 1899; in De la Plats, ib 1899; in the Philippines, ib. 1899; and in Mexico, ib. 1905.
IftSABATATI (SABOTIERS): A name given to
the Waldenses (q.v.) from their sabots, marked with a painted cross, or from the sandals tied crosswise.

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Inquisition
	Insori,Dtious
INSCRIPTIONS.
I. Egyptian Inscriptions.
Forms and Character (¢ 1).
Number, Age, and Contents (¢ 2).
The Rosette Stone and Decipherment (¢ 3).
Illustration of the Bible (¢ 4). II. Cuneiform Inscriptions.
The Name; Area Covered by the Script (¢ 1).
Discoveries; Decipherment of Persian (¢ 2).
Decipherment of Babylonian‑Assyrian (¢ 3).
Origin and Character of the Script (¢ 4).
III. Christian Inscriptions.
	I. Egyptian Inscriptions: The inscriptions of
Egypt are no new discovery. The term most
		used to describe the characters em
	°rms ployed in the inscriptions, " hiero
Character. glyphics°" is of Greek origin (hieros
		" sacred "‑f‑ glyphei.n, " to carve") and
bears witness both to early knowledge of the exist
ence of the writing and to the conception at that
time that the priestly class was its executor. In
more modern usage the term is not confined to the
Egyptian inscriptions, but is used generally of any
kind of picture‑writing. The inscriptions on the
monuments of Egypt are in the main in a picture
writing, the individual signs of which are representa
tions of objects or actions more or less convention
alized. This detailed representation passed by the
method of abbreviation into a shorter form called
the hieratic script, and by the extension of this
process to a still shorter form, the demotic. But
in only the very late period of Egyptian history
was either the hieratic or demotic form employed
upon the monuments, though both were used on
papyri from an early age. While originally the
signs stood for the objects they pictured, at a very
early stage they came to have phonetic quality,
and from this to the development of an alphabet
the steps were rapid and easy. While this process
was going on, the signs were given values associated
with those already customary and also others
disconnected from the original connotation. The
alphabet was of twenty‑one letters (some authori
ties say twenty‑two, others twenty‑four), all conso
nants, though some of the letters were employed to
indicate vowel sounds, as in the Semitic languages.
The signs became also signs of syllables as well as
of single letters, and, still further, signs of words or
ideographs. In all, the number of symbols known
from the monuments is slightly under 1,400. Since
some of these symbols might express several ideas,
it became necessary to use certain signs as deter
minatives to fix the meaning of the group in which
they occurred, thus to remove ambiguity. The
signs composing a word or idea are, grouped in
quadrangular form, though the order of grouping
is not invariable, being either perpendicular or
horizontal, according to the shape of the com
ponents, the exigencies of the space at disposal
or the artistic taste of the scribe. The groups were
arranged in columns or in lines, according to the
material used and the space and form available for
the inscription. The writing runs either (prefer
ably) from right to left or the reverse when arranged
horizontally, or from above downward when it is
in columns.
1.	Ancient Christian Inscriptions.
	Methods of Writing (¢ 1).
	Languages Employed (¢ 2).
	Contents (¢ 3).
	Value of the Material (¢ 4).
2. Medieval and Later Inscriptions.
3.	History of Epigraphy.
	The Early Period (¢ I).
	The Nineteenth Century (§ 2).
The area within which these inscriptions are found embraces the whole of the Nile valley as far as Nubia, parts of the peninsula of Sinai, 2. Number, and locations in Syria and Palestine.
Ass, and
	Contents.	Records begin with the second dy
		nasty; during the fourth, fifth and
sixth dynasties they become numerous, though
largely centralized around Memphis; then they
become fewer until with the eleventh dynasty they
again grow abundant and spread out over a wide
area, continuing numerous till the fourteenth dy
nasty. Of the Hykaos kings few remains are found.
With the seventeenth dynasty inscriptions once
more become abundant and continue so, with ex
ceptions in some dynasties or single reigns, till
down into Roman times. The inscriptions were
placed on the walls of temples, on steles and monu
ments set up within the temple courts, on obelisks,
and in tombs both of the Pharaohs and of the nobil
ity and the wealthier classes, and on gems, tinge,
and scarabs. Since the temples of the earlier period
have vanished, it follows that the inscriptions of
those times have for the moat part perished. Yet
while some of the earliest monuments were des
troyed at a very early date, it sometimes occurs
that the record which they bore wee copied on a
more perishable material which has survived. A
matter which often causes embarrassment to the
decipherer is that it was the known habit of some
Pharaohs, as in the case of Ramesea IL, to remove
the royal name in the cartouche of the original
Pharaoh who ordered the inscription, and to in
scribe their own in its place, thus claiming the
deeds originally assigned to another and dislocating
the order of history. The earliest inscriptions come
from massive masonry tombs, where often little
more than names, titles, and, sometimes, the legal
provisions for maintenance of the tomb are pre
served. Later, in addition to these bare statements,
the lists of titles are extended to include something
of the career of the deceased. Finally they contain
records of achievement‑whether of Pharaohs,
generals, or administrators‑‑of the occasion which
the record commemorates, and may even include
the royal patent for the work of which the inscrip
tion speaks. But, in general, a vagueness charac
terizes the content of the inscriptions and makes
them illusive and difficult, not only in themselves
but also in the historical mater to which they refer.

Thus, in a story of conquest, the foe is often referred to not by name or country, but is described by some derogatory epithet: again, the events narrated
were often contemporary and matters of general knowledge; it therefore did not seem to the maker

Inscriptions	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	g
necessary to give specific details, so that the identification of the events is often doubtful or impossible. Not seldom, the inscriptions are mere laudations of the Pharaoh, or, again, are hymns in praise of him. Others are records of building enterprises, giving the personal history of the ruler or administrator. Decrees of administration appear. In private tombs records of filial performance in the maintenance of the tomb occur, and there are also found interesting accounts referring to wars or enterprises otherwise unknown. The longest inscriptions are the Pyramid texts of the Pharaohs of the fifth and sixth dynasties, discovered in 1880, dealing largely with matters religious, including magic. The Palermo Stone is one of the most noted monuments‑a fragment of a stele containing a record of pre‑dynastic kings, continuing to the middle of the fifth dynasty, and giving brief royal annals. The various erections at Karnak afforded apace for voluminous inscriptions, to some of which reference must be made later.
Since the fifteenth century attempts were made to decipher the Egyptian hieroglyphics, though without success till the early part of the 3. The Ro‑ nineteenth century. But meanwhile a setta Stone foundation was laid for a broader and and Deci‑
pherment. sounderappreciation	gypn phermeat.	arche‑
	ology bhe work done on Coptic
	since the time of Athanasius Kircher, who published
	the first Coptic grammar (Rome, 1643‑44). The
	epoch‑making work of Champollion (see below) was
	in no small part due to his mastery of Coptic. But
	all attempts to read the hieroglyphics were complete
	failures until the key was furnished by the Rosette
	Stone. This is a slab of black granite, three feet
	nine inches by two feet four and a half inches and
	eleven inches thick, bearing an inscription in hiero
	glyphic and demotic Egyptian and in Greek. It
	was found in 1799 by M. Bouasard, a French mili
	tary officer, at Fort St. Julien, near Rosette, on the
	Rosette branch of the Nile (40 m. n.e. of Alexan
	dria), was taken to England after the fall of Alex
	andria, and was presented to the British Museum
	by George III. (1801). The upper portion and the
	lower right‑hand corner are broken away. It con
	tains a decree of the Egyptian priests in honor of
	Ptolemy V. Epiphanes (205‑181 B.C.), and its date is
	Mar. 277, 195 B.C. It bears 100 lines of text, fourteen
	of hieroglyphic (about half of the original), thirty
	two of demotic, and fifty‑four of Greek (the ends
	of some of the lines broken off). Its significance is
	not in its contents, but in the fact that it proved
	to be the key to the decipherment of the hiero
	glyphic and demotic writing, and consequently
	opened up nearly all that is known of and through
Egyptian texts.	The results gained through the
	decipherment of this text were checked and con
	firmed by the trilingual stele of Canopus found by
	Lepsius at Tanis in 1866, containing a similar decree
	of the year 238 B.C., in honor of Ptolemy III.
Euergetes I. (247‑222 B.C.).	Yet the process of
	decipherment was somewhat tedious. Sylvestre de
	Sacy (1802) detected several groups in the demotic
	text which corresponded to the Greek forms of
	the names Ptolemy, Berenice, and Alexander. The
	Swede J. D. Akerblad (1802) obtained the phonetic
values of most of the demotic characters in the proper names and used the Coptic to determine the meaning of several words. Thomas Young (1814), an English scientist, determined the meanings of several groups of demotic characters and established four alphabetical hieroglyphic characters. Jean Franco?s Champollion put the crown upon all these efforts by reading from a bilingual obelisk in Philae, in hieroglyphic and Greek, the names of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, deciphering the names of Greek and Roman rulers, making out all the characters, discovering ideograms and determinatives, gaining insight into the phonetic system, and discerning the relations of the three kinds of script. He made a statement of his discoveries and expounded his system to the Acaddmie des Inscriptions, Sept. 22, 1822. Karl Richard Lepsiua worked on the lines of Champollion and corrected some mistakes, but proved the general soundness of Champollion's conclusions against the captious and envious criticism of several German writers. The science of Egyptology has been advanced by many later scholars, such as to name only a few, Emmanuel de Rougd, Augusts Mariette, Paul Pierret, Jacques de Morgan and Gaston Maspero in France, Heinrich Brugsch, Alfred Wiedemann, Georg Ebers, Adolf Erman and Georg Steindorff in Germany, John Gardner Wilkinson, Samuel Birch, Peter le Page Renouf, Edward Naville, Ernest Alfred Thompson, Wallis Budge, and William Matthew Flindera‑Petrie in England, W. Max Muller and James Henry Breasted in the United States.
The scantiness of illustration of Biblical history afforded by the Egyptian monuments as compared with the abundance gained from the
4. Ulna‑ Assyro‑Babylonian records has been
	tration of	to man a cause of rest disap
		pointment. The explanation of this
scantiness is, however, not hard to discover. One
reason is the vagueness of Egyptian records (see
above). Another, which is on the surface, is that
after the Hebrews settled in Palestine contact of
Egypt with Palestine was occasional and not
always of such a character as to dispose the monu
ment‑makers to speak of it‑they recorded only
victories, not failures or defeats. That mention of
the Hebrews who had broken away fro;n Egyptian
control would appear in the inscriptions was hardly
to be expected, nor that pre‑Mosaic Israel would
be differentiated from the numerous nomads of
Semitic stock who occasionally sought refuge in
the Nile land. Accordingly, apart from that general
illustration of manners of living which is a conse
quence of a sort of commonality of life in the East,
little of specific detail need be looked for from the
Egyptian inscriptions either corroborating or con
tradicting Biblical statements, especially if, accord
ing to the view now generally accepted, the He
brews were very few in numbers. What little specific
illustration there is takes on either a geographical
or ethnological character. The first comes through
the mention of places conquered in Palestine by the
Pharaohs. Thothmea III. (eighteenth dynasty),
who made fifteen expeditions into Syria and Pales
tine has recorded in the temple of Amon at Karnak,
on the wall of the southern pylon and on the north‑

7	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Inscriptions
ern wall at the western end of the temple, a list of places in that region the submission of which he ', claims to have received (cf. Records of the Past, ' new aeries, v. 29‑53, for the list of names). Noteworthy and productive of a vast amount of discussion are the names Yakob‑el and Yoaep‑el, which seem to represent an early form of the names Jacob and Joseph. The real significance of these names, paralleled from the cuneiform inscriptions, is as yet under debate, but eponymous derivation seems to be favored. The geography is also illuminated by the lists of Seti I. and Rameaes II. (nineteenth dynasty), the tatter's inscriptions on the Rameaseum at Thebes and at Karnak, and by that of Rameses III. at Medinet Haba.
Shishak I. (twenty‑second dynasty) also furnished on the south wall of the great temple at Karnak a list of geographical names in which there are 156 cartouches, not all legible (cf. W. M. Miiller, Amen and Europa, Leipsie, 1893, pp. 166 aqq.).
		The monuments of Seti L, Ramesea II. and IV.,
and Meneptah contain references which are thought
	by the advanced school to bear on pre‑Mosaic
	history. That the Aperiu (cf. Heb. `Ibhri,, "He
	brew " and the Habiri, of the Amarna Tablets, q.v.)
were Hebrews is not yet assured, though it is
	possible. Seti I. and Rameaes II. speak of an Aseru
or Asoru in western Galilee in the region assigned
to the tribe Asher in the Hebrew records (Judges
v. 17, cf. i. 32). Of this alternative explanations
are given: the Asheritea were a Canaanitic tribe
	absorbed later into the Hebrew confederation
	(which would go with the assumed eponymous de
	rivation of the name and with the Biblical so
	count of descent from a concubine) or the He
	brews who settled in the region took the name
	of the country (W. M. Miiller, ut sup. pp. 236‑239).
	On a stele of Meneptah discovered in 1895 occurs
	the only known mention of Israel on the Egyptian
	monuments (in the form 1‑ai^r‑'Z) as a people whom
	Meneptah had reduced. This mention is compli
	cated by the fact that Meneptah is now quite
	generally regarded as the Pharaoh of the Exodus;
	how, then, could Israel be in Palestine during his
	reign? Accordingly many commentators are dis
	posed to see in the Israel of Meneptah's inscription
	a part of the Hebrews settled in Palestine who did
	not go down into Egypt and gave their name to
	the confederation in later times; these commen
	tators regard as confirmation of this the occurrence
	of Yakob‑el and Yoaep‑el (ut sup.). Light on the
	Exodus of the Hebrews comes not from the hiero
	glyphic, but from a combination of a Greco‑Ro
	man inscription with the identification of Succoth
	and Pithom through indications in the Coptic
	version of the Old Testament and through indica
	tions in Greek writers (see Ecyrr). While the
	bearing of Egyptian inscriptions on Hebrew history
	and ethnology is thus vague and indecisive, if it
	has any value at all it is in the way of strengthen
	ing the case of the newer school of constructive
	history. 	GEO. W. GILMORE.
II. Cuneiform Inscriptions: Cuneiform, from the Latin cuneue, " wedge," was first applied in the year 1700 by Thomas Hyde, professor of Hebrew in the University of Oxford. In that day Hyde was
acquainted only with some rude copies of Assyrian characters, and with some equally rude copies of
Sassanian and Pahnyrene inscriptions, 1. The concerning which he argued that they Name; Area were not letters, nor intended for Covered 'by letters, but were mere ornament. the script. Later investigation has shown that the cuneiform method of writing is one of the oldest known to man and one of the most widely diffused, and that it sufficed for more than five thousand years to express the ideas of nearly a score of peoples, among whom were some of the greatest culture races of antiquity. It was invented by the pre‑Semitic Sumerian inhabitants of Babylonia, was adopted by their conquerors, the Semitic Babylonians, sad thence carried to Assyria. It was besides diffused among all the neighboring peoples and came into use as far east as Elam and as far west as Egypt (see Aninxrre TABLETS).
The first modern observer of cuneiform characters was Pietro dells Valle, about 1618 A.D., who copied
from the ruins of Persepolis in Persia 2. Discover‑ a few characters in random but fairly
ies; Deci‑
pherment accurate fashion. The material thus of Persianpherment provided was too scantY to stimulate . pany earnest effort at decipherment. The first opportunity afforded European scholars for study of the cuneiform was given in 1774 by Carsten Niebuhr, a Dane, father of the famous Roman historian, who had copied at Persepolis a number of small inscriptions, grouped in threes upon the remains of the palaces of the Achamenian kings. Previous travelers had expressed the opinion that three languages were represented in these Persepolis texts, and later study has shown the three languages to be Persian, Suaian, and AasyroBabylonian. The task of decipherment was rendered difficult by the fact that no bilingual inscription was found in which a known language occurred.
'	The method of decipherment was to be archeological rather than philological, and the process was necessarily slow and insecure. The first efforts in decipherment of the Persian inscriptions‑the simplest in each group of three‑‑put forth by Friedrich Christian Karl Heinrich Miinter and Olaf Tychsen seemed to show that these texts contained only forty‑two signs, which were therefore mainly alphabetic with some syllabic values, but only a few correct values for the signs were determined. The first decipherment of an entire text was made by George Frederick Grotefend, who was almost continuously engaged upon decipherment from 1802 until 1844. The facts with which he began were that these texts came from Persepolis, and that the ruins there were the remains of palaces erected by Cyrus, Darius, and Xerxes. He assumed, consequently, that each text began with the name of a king, and his success was achieved by comparison of two inscriptions, which Grotefend finally translated as follows: " I. Darius, the mighty king,
I	king of kings . . . son of Hystaspea. II. Xerxes, the mighty king, king of kings . . son of Darius, the king." This result was small in itself, but it afforded the clue for the decipherment of several languages, besides the three found at Persepolis. At the same time that Grotefend was engaged in

Inscriptions
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
this task, Major (afterward Sir) Henry Rawlinaon was trying to reach a solution and in the same way. Quite independently of Grotefend he worked out some of the sign values, and, when later provided with Grotefend's results, far surpassed him in the power to translate Persian inscriptions. He discovered the great rock‑cut inscription of Darius at Behiatun in Persia, which he copied, laboriously and successfully deciphered, and published in an English translation, nearly complete, in the year 1846.
The decipherment of Persian was followed by determined attempt to solve the far more difficult
problem of the Asayro‑Babylonian cub. Decipher. neiform script, in which the third in‑
meat of scri tion in these
Babylonian. written. The first gtouatemth~ was
Assyrian. Grotefend, who identified the names of the kings, but was unable to go much further. Isidor Loewenstein secured the correct meanings of the signs for " king," " great" and the sign for the plural. He first suggested that Assyrian belonged to the Semitic family and was therefore related to Hebrew, Arabic and Aramean. Far more successful was the Rev. Edward Hincka (q.v.), who, in two papers during 1846 and a third in 1847, determined most of the numerals, assigned correct values to a number of signs, and seemed on the very verge of being able to read a whole text. His rigidly scientific spirit, however, restrained him from such an endeavor, and he worked steadily on with the patient solution of one difficulty at a time. When the immense mass of cuneiform documents which Emil Botta had discovered at Nineveh reached Paris, the hope of deciphering Assyrian increased because of the accession of material, but diminished when Botta pointed out the great difficulty of the problem. He made little effort to decipher or translate, but collated all the inscriptions which they contained and made lists of all the signs which he found, differentiating 642 separate signs. This great number proved that the Assyrian cuneiform script was not alphabetic; some of the characters must be syllabic, some must be ideographs and represent a word or an idea. Botta's discoveries were carried further by Edward Hincka. In a paper read before the Irish Academy on June 25, 1849, he showed that there was a sign for RA, another for RI, and yet another for RU. He proved the sign for AR, and presumably also for IR and UR, though he did not fully define the last two. This represented a great advance in the study of the problem. Rawlinson soon dared to do what Hincks would not, and ventured to translate the great Behistun text. There was needed then only the minute study of the characters until the entire syllabic system with its polyphones and ideographs should yield up its secrets. To this not only Rawiinson, but in even greater degree Hincka, contributed, and also the distinguished French Aseyriologiat, Jules Oppert. Contemporaneously with the decipherment of Assyrian went forward the decipherment of the Susian, or second language of the groups of three found at Persepolis. In this work the chief leaders were Niels Ludwig WesterBased, Hincka, Fdlicien Caignart de Saulcy, and
8
Archibald Henry Sayce. When Persian, Susian, and Assyrian (or Babylonian) had been deciphered, the foundations of the new science of Aesyriology had been laid.
The cuneiform method of writing originated among the Sumerians, the earliest known inhabi‑
4. Origin fasts of Babylonia. When the Semites
and Char‑
acter	entered the land they found in posaes‑
	acter of aeon a round‑headed people, of small
the Script. stature and with black hair, whose
		origin and racial connections are un
known. A small though learned company of
scholars has maintained that the supposed Sume
riana had no existence, and that their script, civiliza
tion and religion were all originated by Semites.
This view has lost support, and can hardly be
longer regarded as seriously disputing the current
view as stated above. The cuneiform characters
were originally a form of picture‑writing. At first
the pictures represented natural objects; they then
became associated with certain words, and were
used phonetically to represent the sound of the
words without the meaning. In very early times,
these rude pictures were scratched on any material
that came to hand. Later stone was used for per
manent records. But as stone is scarce in Baby
onia, the easily worked clay took its place, and
the straight lines made by a single pressure on the
stylus tended to become wedges. The pictures
therefore lost their original character and gradually
became groups of wedges which were so thoroughly
conventionalized that it is now impossible to deter
mine their origin save in a very few cases. Even
to the Assyrians themselves the original form of but
very few characters was known, though a few
tablets still preserved (of. TSBA, vi. 454 and Cunei
form Tents from Babylonian Tablets in British
Museum, part v., London, 1898) show that the
Assyrians retained a consciousness of the pictorial
origin of their script. The Assyrians never devel
oped a consonantal alphabet. They had only a
syllabary, with separate signs for the vowels a, i
or e, and u. The syllabic signs consisted, in the
first instance, of a separate sign for each conso
nant with each separate vowel, thus, ab, ib, ub, ba,
bi, bu, ag, ig, ug, ga, gi, gu, the former serving also
for ap, ip, up, etc. In addition to these simple
syllables, the script had a large number of com‑
pound signs, such as bal, bit, kak, may, kun,	etc.
There were also very many ideograms, a sign being
used as the symbol for a whole idea; thus there
was a single sign for ilu, "god," belu, "lord " a lu
	p
"son," duppxc, "tablet," umu, "day." Difficulties are further increased by the fact that many signs are polyphonous; a single sign may have several
syllabic values, and besides may stand se an ideogram for several ideas. The difficulties were somewhat lessened by the use of signs called deter‑
minatives placed before a word to show the class
to which it belonged. 	ROBERT W, ROGERS.
III. Christian Inscriptions: By Christian inscriptions in this article are meant non‑literary writings executed or provided by Christians which have some relation to the Christian religion. Christian epigraphy is concerned with inscriptions carved, scratched, painted, or stamped on various materials,

9	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Inscriptions
such as stone, metal, clay, ivory, and wood, intended to designate the source or purpose of an object, and also with documents which, on account of general or permanent interest, are inscribed on durable material, usually stone or metal. This comparatively new science has hitherto devoted its attention chiefly to the days of the early Church, but it is hoped that more attention will be paid to the collection and study of medieval and later inscriptions which are in danger of perishing with the lapse of time.
1. Ancient Christian Inscriptions: (1) Letters and figures. The workmen who made the earliest 1. Methods Christian inscriptions adopted the let‑
' of	tere a°d numeral system of their pre‑
	W~g, decessors, which was already old, and
	continued its development steadily,
	except in cases of deliberate archaism. Thus by
	degrees new forms arose, more slowly in some places
than in others, and usually later in the provinces
than in Rome. At the date of the earliest Christian
	inscriptions, there were three principal types of
characters: one used for carving on atone or metal,
one for painting on walls or woodwork, which corre
	sponded to that inscribed on parchment or papyrus,
	and the vulgar or cursive script, which was either
	impressed on soft material such as wax, fresh clay,
or plaster, or scratched on a hard surface, especially
walls (the so‑called graffito).	These three types
were not always sharply distinguished, and Christian
	epigraphy shows examples that can with difficulty
	be assigned to any of the three class, and others
	in which the forma appear in a confused mixture
	sometimes even one half of a letter being in monu
	mental and the other half in painter's script. The
	most important class of letters, in the Christian as in
	the older pagan inscriptions, is the capitals, in
	cluding the largest number of symbols for letters
	and numbers. Besides these there were the uncial
	forma, developed from the capitals by the rounding
	off of sharp angles, and the cursive form, which
	sought for speed in writing by using as few separate
	strokes as possible. This last form occurs among
	the dated inscriptions in Rome as early as 291.
	(2) Ligatures. In the formation of words the letters
	are sometimes separate, sometimes two or more are
	united into a single symbol. These ligatures were
	originally peculiar to coins, where the limited space
	made them useful, and then were adopted in in
	scriptions. The rule for reading them was that
	each element entering into their composition was
	to be read only once. From the ligatures developed
	the monogrammatic signs, which continued even
	in the Middle Ages to be employed for imperial
signatures and the like.	(3) Abbreviations. The
	words may be either written in full or abbreviated,
	sometimes to a single letter. The omission of letters
	is indicated by strokes or projections above, below,
	or beside the letters, or by periods and other signs
following them.	Connected with these signs are
	the strokes frequently, though not invariably,
	placed over numbers to distinguish them from
	ordinary letters. (4) Punctuation. A large number
	of various punctuation‑marks were used. The com
	monest is the period, usually written, not on the
	line, but half‑way up the letters; its shape is
generally round or approximately so; sometimes
it is represented by a small circle, and less often by
two sides of a triangle in various positions. Out of
this latter form developed leaves, somewhat like
ivy‑leaves, which used to be considered as intended
for pierced hearts, and thus as signs of martyrdom.
Occasionally the Greek cross, or even the Chi Rho,
is used as a punctuation‑mark. It was the rule in
the classical period to place punctuation‑marks
only within lines, not at the end, but in many
Christian monuments this rule is not observed;
indeed, in many the entire system of punctuation
is irregular, points being placed even in the middle
of words though this is to be distinguished from
" syllabic punctuation," where the syllables were
divided to facilitate reading. (5) Direction of the
writing. Writing from right to left had become
very rare among the Greeks and Romans at the
date of the earliest Christian inscriptions, and only
a few instances of it occur among them. While
no certain example of the ancient boustrophedon
form is known, there are a number which are read
downward, and arrangements still less usual exist,
dictated sometimes by the shape of the apace at
command, but in other cases probably by nothing
more than a love of singularity.
The great majority of extant early Christian inscriptions are in Latin, Greek coming next. Even
in the West there is a considerable 2' Lan‑ number of Greek inscriptions, generally
guages
Employed. for or by people who were not Greeks,
but Romans. This phenomenon finds a parallel in the fact that the earliest Christian literature was in Greek, even when the authors lived in the West. The parallel, however, must not be pressed too far, since they were educated men, while moat of those to whom the inscriptions are due belonged to the lower classes. The number of Greek inscriptions, even in Rome, is to be explained by the fact that in the primitive Church Greek was the official language. All the third‑century popes who are buried in the catacombs of St. Calixtus have Greek inscriptions, while Cornelius, whose grave is in his family burying‑ground, has a Latin one. The mixture of Greek and Latin in a number of inscriptions is probably due less to defective education than to an instinctive opposition in people's minds to the use of a language which was really foreign to them. An interesting light is thus thrown upon the final struggle of the two languages in the West, beginning while Greek was still the ecclesiastical tongue. After the second century Greek inscriptions and those showing a mixture of Greek and Latin become increasingly rare, and Pope Damasus uses nothing but Latin. The linguistic qualities of the inscriptions deserve careful study as giving an insight which cannot be obtained from literature into the speech of the common people. While departures from classical orthography are to be attributed partly to ignorance
or carelessness, this is not so much the case with
the vocabulary and the grammar, which in many of the later Latin inscriptions clearly show the
transition to the Romance languages. The inscriptions are, like the pagan ones, either in prose or in verse, prose inscriptions being the more numerous,

Inscriptions	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	10
especially in the earlier period. The Hebrew language, except in the case of amulets, which are rather Jewish‑pagan than Christian, is very rare; only one Christian inscription in that language has thus far been discovered in Rome.
(1) To inscriptions in the narrower sense belong honorific inscriptions and a large class of eulogies
3. Con‑ of saints and martyrs, especially those
	tents.	of Damasus. Partly to this class and
		partly to the dedicatory belong nu
merous inscriptions on public buildings, especially
churches and parts of churches, such as altars and
ambones. But the largest class is composed of
funeral inscriptions, on tablets, gravestones, or
sarcophagi. Those on stone are usually carved or
scratched, sometimes painted in addition, most
often in red. Relatively few occur with the painted
script, which was more often used on tiles, in red,
black, and occasionally white. The wooden tablets
which in Egypt Christians and non‑Christians alike
placed near the mummies of the departed are usu
ally inscribed with a dark ink, or painted. Other
methods are occasionally employed, such as the
frequent use of mosaic in North Africa and Spain.
An equally great diversity is visible in the style
of the inscriptions, though a careful study reveals
a more or less regular development of definite
formulas. In many cases the influence of the cus
tom and taste of the period or locality is discern
ible, others show traces of a conscious adherence
to ancient tradition. Thus the phrase Dis Mansbus,
so frequently used on pagan tombs to dedicate them
to the manes of the deceased, occurs in no less than
134 cases of undoubted Christian inscriptions‑not,
of course, with the old meaning, but merely as a
traditional formula; and the same is true of the
phrases domes aeterna, aeternalis, perpetua. for the
grave. Belonging also to the class of inscriptions
in the narrower sense are the large number of those
on objects of domestic use; but their infinite
variety makes it impossible to enter upon a detailed
discussion of them. (2) Of inscriptions in the
broader sense (documents) the moat numerous in
the primitive Christian period are attestations of
the purchase of a grave or agreements between the
relatives of the deceased and the fossores or other
church officials. These are sometimes exceedingly
explicit, giving the names of witnesses, the purchase
price, and the location of the grave. Documents
expressing a gift in the giver's name become fre
quent in the Middle Ages, but examples are not
lacking toward the end of the early period. Another
class of inscriptions gives the fasts, calendars, cycles,
or lists of saints; of this kind one of the most
famous is the Easter cycle on the base of the statue I
of Hippolytus. Under this general head also come
the graffiti, or inscriptions scratched upon the walls
of the Catacombs.
Christian inscriptions, especially those of the early Church, deserve careful attention by students of history. While not a single original
4. Valve manuscript of this
	of the	period is extant,
	and a succession of copyists has intro
	duced a variety of difficulties into the
text of literary works, the inscriptions are practically
in their original shape. It has therefore long been
admitted, in theory at least, that inscriptions deserve the first place among the sources for the history of their period. Again, the literature of a period is practically all the work of learned or at least well‑educated men, and gives only a secondhand account of the thoughts and feelings of the populace; while the inscriptions, the majority of which come from the lower classes, present these directly and faithfully, at least in religious and ethical matters. Much valuable historical material is found in them which would have been almost or quite unknown from the literary sources. Thus the schism of Heraclius in Rome is known solely from an inscription in the catacomb of St. Calixtus, and knowledge of an African schismatic community and its head, Trigarius, is confined to the notice of another inscription. The history of the planting and earliest growth of the Church in Gaul as told by the historians is fragmentary, and a complete idea of it can be gained only from inscriptions. Until recently almost nothing was known of the history of Christianity on the islands of the lEgean in the second century; but it is now possible, on the basis of inscriptions lately discovered, not only to show the existence of Christianity there, but even to determine its nature, a mixture of Christian, Jewish, and pagan elements. A list of the writings of Hippolytus can be made complete only by the help of the inscription on the back of his statue. The frequent use of Scripture in inscriptions gives not only valuable indications of the manner in which it was employed in the early Church, but also useful points of departure for textual criticism. Not a few particulars of the marriage system are gained in the same way, especially as to the legal age, remarriage, and the marriage of clerics. The inscriptions are a more trustworthy authority for early Christian nomenclature than the manuscripts; and of course the customs connected with death and burial may be much more fully known in this way.
2. Medieval and Later inscriptions: In the present state of inadequate investigation of this class of inscriptions it is impossible to give final conclusions as to their types of characters, language, and content. It may perhaps suffice to give some provisional observations on the results for a single countryGermany. The history of the characters employed is divided into three main periods. Speaking generally, the type known as majuscule prevailed until the fourteenth century, though with many variations. As early as the tenth century it took on the Roman form; in the eleventh and twelfth it was influenced by Romanic art, and adapted Gothic principles to its own use in the period of the letter's dominance. But the Gothic majuscule gradually gave way to the Gothic minuscule, which was the prevailing form from 1350 to 1500. In the sixteenth century, the character used in inscriptions (apart from conscious archaisms) began to be assimilated to the type of ordinary writing. As to numbers the Roman numerals were regularly used until the fourteenth century, when the Arabic began to be common, without ever wholly excluding the older type. Ligatures are frequent in the Middle Ages, especially when the Gothic minuseules

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Inscriptions
showed the tendency to do away as far as possible with spaces between the letters; but they become less usual from the sixteenth century on. Abbreviations also were very common in the Middle Ages, but later become much less usual. Punctuation was not systematic until comparatively modern times; in the Middle Ages the commonest marks were dots half‑way up the letters, though crosses and other signs are occasionally used. The language employed until late in the Middle Ages was almost always Latin‑seldom the vernacular, and still less often Greek or Hebrew. The Latin continued to be used on the tombs of scholars and in similar I places until modern times; and the Renaissance brought in the use of Greek, especially in the sixteenth century. Medieval inscriptions, like the ancient, show many peculiarities in spelling, vocabulary and grammar.
S. History of Epigraphy: The first demonstrable collection of inscriptions is assigned to various dates within the period from 550 to 839;
1. The but a number of collections resulted
Early	from the Carolingian Renaissance,
Period. headed by the Codex Einsidlenais, the unknown author of which flourished in the eighth or early in the ninth century. These collections included both Christian and non‑Christian specimens, and were made largely for the purpose of instruction in writing Latin verse. A period of inaction
followed, closed by the revival of classical.' at the Renaitssance.	Cola Rienzi and Gi©vAaani
Dondi in the fourteenth, Ciriacode'Pizzicolli inAhe
fifteenth, and in the sixteenth century Felice Pelio
iano, Giovanni Marcanuova, Johannes Jucundus,
and Petrua Sabinua were the principal collectors.
	Much new material was discovered in the sixteenth
	century, especially in the Roman catacombs, opened
in 1578 by Antonio Bosio.	The leading investi
	gators of this century were Aldus Manutiua the
	younger and Martin Smetius, while Melanchthon
	did not a little for the study, writing the introduc
	tion to the Inscriptiones aacrosanctae vetustatis of his
	friends Apian and Amantius (Ingolstadt, 1534),
	besides making independent researches of his own.
	The already published and newly discovered ma
	terial was put together by Grater, Scaliger, and
	Velser in their ZnscriPtionea antiquae totius orbis
	Romani (Heidelberg, 1602‑03). More Christian
	material would have been included in Giovanni
	Battista Doni's InBCri.Ptiones antiquae if he had
	lived to complete its publication, but as edited by
	Gori and others (Florence, 1?31) a large part of
	this was neglected. Bosio also died (1629) before
	publishing the results of his labors, but they fell
	into better hands and appeared as Roma sotterrnneo
	(Rome, 1632). A supplement to Grater's collection
	was published by Reineaiua, a Leipsic physician
	(Leipsic, 1682), while Spon, Mabillon, and Mont
	faucon were not only working at home, but under
	taking journeys outside of France for the purpose
	of collecting inscriptions. The eighteenth century
	did less for Christian epigraphy in the way of large
	general collections than in that of local publications
	and monographs, particularly by ouch Italian schol
	ars as Muratori, Maffei, Zaccaria, Gori, Rivaute Is
Ricolvi, and De Vita.
From the Carolingian period down into the eighteenth century Christian epigraphy was as a science far behind classical epigraphy.
2. The But the nineteenth century has quite Nineteenth
cen	a different story to tell.Christian
	' inscriptions are now collected with the
same care and thoroughness as the classical, a result
due in the first instance to the initiative especially
of August BSekh and Theodor Mommaen; and
	they found in Giovanni Battiata de Rossi a master
who elevated the study of them from a mere
dilettante amusement to a serious science. After
Gaetano Marini had published, in 1785, his Iscrizioni
antiche dells ville a de' Palazzi Albani, and ten years
	later Gli atti a monumenti de' fratelli Arvali, scholars
	looked forward eagerly to the publication of his
	great collection of Christian inscriptions, which
now fills thirty‑one volumes in the Vatican library.
	But he died in 1815, and none of it saw the light
	until, in 1831, Angelo Mai published one of the four
	volumes planned by him (Nova collectio, v.), having
	in some places condensed the manuscript, and in
	some enlarged it from his collection. But no great
	loss to the science was involved in the failure of
	the others to appear, since (apart from other defects)
	his classification by subjects had now been finally
discredited by B6ckh.	The German scholar, in
	sisting on geographical arrangement, persuaded the
	Berlin Academy of Sciences to take up the gigantic
	task of uniting in one all the Greek inscriptions.
	In the great Corpus inscriptionum Graecarum (Ber
	lin, 1825 sqq.) some scattered Christian inscriptions
	appeared in the first three volumes, but the main
	body of them was united in the second part of
	Vol. IV., under the editorship of Adolf Kirchhoff.
	In the revised form of this great work, the parts of
	especial value for Christian inscriptions are that
including Italy, Sicily, Gaul, Spain, Britain, and
Germany (ed. Kaibel, 1890), and that on the
islands of the tEgean (ed. Hiller de Gaertringen,
1895‑98). A complete Corpus inscriPtionum Grae
carom christianarum is hoped for from the French
School at Athens, under the direction of Laurent
and Cumont. Even more than Bockh accomplished
for Greek epigraphy, Mommsen did for Latin.
While he was not the first to conceive the idea of a
Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum, in his memorial
(1847) on its plan and scope he laid down the
proper lines for its execution and carried out a
great part of the work himself, the rest being done
by his friends and scholars. An account of new
discoveries made since the appearance of the various
volumes is given in the Ephf';$ g'aphiCa,1872
sqq. Until the Corpus inscrz.'plionum Latina7 um is
complete, it will still be necessary to make use of
the older collections (which, indeed, will always have a value for their notes and illustrations) as well as of the works of the greatest authority in this subject west of the Vosges, Edmond Le Blant: Inscriptions chretiennes de la Gaule (Paris, 1856‑65); Nouveau reeueil des inscriptions ckretiennea de kt Gaule (1892). Long before De Rosai was requested by the Berlin Academy of Sciences to take part in the Corpus inscriptionum Lcctinutruny (from 1854 until his death he was one of the editors of vol. vi. on the Latin inscriptions of Rome), he had planned

Inscriptions Inspiration
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
and begun preparations for a collection of the early Christian inscriptions of the city. The results appeared in the Inscriptionea christiartae urbia Romae septimo saeculo antitlttiores (vol. i., Rome, 1861, vol. ii., part 1, 1888). The first volume contains the dated inscriptions, a preface which reviews the epigraphy of the past and lays down his own scheme, and extensive prolegomena, dealing especially with early Christian chronology. The first part of the second volume reproduces the manuscript collections from the so‑called parchments of Scaliger down to Petrua Sabinus with admirable critical sureness and insight. Another work of like interest is the Museo epigrafico cristiano Pio‑Lateranense (1877), containing photographic reproductions of the specimens in the lapidary gallery at the Lateran, together with noteworthy essays on various cognate subjects. Numerous other contributions to Christian epigraphy are contained in his Roma sotterranea cristiana (3 vole., 1864‑77), in the Bollettino d'archeologio criatiana. (1863 sqq.), and Musaici dells ehiese di Rome, 18721900. Although De Rossi's enterprises were too great for accomplishment in even the longest and busiest life, they have not been allowed to drop. The continuation of the Inscriptiones has been placed in the hands of his old friend and faithful collaborator, Giuseppe Gatti; the (Nuovo) Bollettino has, since 1895, been edited first by De Rossi's brother Michele Stefano and his personal pupils, Stevenson, Armellini, and Marucchi, to whom have been, added, since the death of the first three, G. Bonavenia, P. Croatarosa, G. Gatti, R. Kantzler, and J. Wilpert. The completion of the Roma sotterranea, beginning with a fourth volume on the cemetery of Domitilla, has been undertaken by Marucchi, Wilpert, Gatti, Crostarosa, and Kantzler. For the medieval and later periods there is no single work which can be placed by the side of the Corpus inscriptionum Graecarum and Latirtarum.
(NIKOLAUS MtTLLER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On T., besides the literature under Egypt,
much of which is pertinent, consult: J. Diimichen, Hia
tortache Inachriften aZtagyptiacher Denkmttler, Leipsic, 1887
1889; idem, Alefigyptischt Tempelinachriften, ib. 1888; P.
Is	P. Renouf, Egyptian Phonology, London, 1889; E.
Revillout, Coura de langue dZmotique, Paris, 1883; C. Abel,
Zur Geachichte der Hieroglyphenachreft, Leipsic, 1890;
Aegyptiache Inechriften sue den kdniglichen Muaeen su
Berlin, 2 parts, Berlin, 1901‑05; G. Karlberg, Den ldnga
	. inakrijtten i Ramses Ill.'s tempel i Medinet‑Habu,
Upsala, 1903 C. R. Honey, The Egyptian Hieroglyph,
Boscombe, 1904; R. Weill, Recueil den inscriptions du
Sinai, Paris, 1904; and especially numerous papers in
PSBA and TSBA in the Memoirs of the Egypt Explora
tion Fund, in ZDMG JA, Zeitachrift far ttgyptiache Sprache
and Allerhumakunde, and the Revue igyptologique. On
the Rosette Stone consult H. Brugach, Die Inachrift von
Rosette, Berlin, 1850; F. Chabas, L'Inaeripiion AiEro
glyphique de Rosetta, Paris, 1867; S. Sharpe,, The Rosetta
V9 ne in Hieroglyphics and Greek, London, 1871; J. J. e0s., Der demotieche Tell der . . . Inachrift von Rosette aberaetzt, Freiburg, 1902; E. A. T. W. Budge, The Decrees of Memphis and Canopus, 3 vole., London, 1904, On the Meneptah inscription consult $piegelberg, Sitzunpaberichte der Berliner Akademie 1898, pp, 593 aqq.; G. $teindorff, in ZATW 1898, pp. 330 sqq.; A. Wiedemann, in Mus&n, 1898, pp, 1‑19. On the relation of the inscriptions to the Bible the most sober and scientific discussion is by $. R. Driver in Authority and Archaeology, Sacred and Profane, ed. D. G. Hogarth, London, 1899.
II. A great deal of the literature under AaSYRIA; Bwsx‑
r.oxrw bears on the inscriptions, and some of the principal collections are named there. Consult further: R. E, Brtinnow Classified List of AZl Simple and Compound Cuneiform Ideographs, Leyden, 1889‑97; P. T. Dangin Recherchea our l'oripine de L'Ecriture cuniriforme Paris, 1898‑99; F. Delitsaeh, Die Entetehung den lilteaten Schriftayatema ader der Uraprunp der Ktilachriftzeichen Leipsic, 1898‑98; P. Toaeanne, Lea Sipnea aum6riena dEriv6a, Paris, 1905; A. V. W. Jackson Persia Peat and Present, New York, 1908; H. Pognon Inscriptions aL•mitiquea de la Eyrie, de la Mesopotamia, et de la rEpion de Mesaoul, Paris, 1907; A. H. $eyee, The Archaeology of the Cuneiform Inscriptions, New York, 1907. On the decipherment: R. W. Rogers, History of Babylonia and Assyria, vol. i., New York, 1900; A. J. Booth, The Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions, London, 1902; L. Mesaereehmidt, Die Entzifferunp der Keilinachrift, Berlin, 1903 C. Foseey, Manual d'aseyriolopie, vol. i., Paris, 1904. TII. The moat important literature is named in the text.
A most useful article will be found in DCA, i., 841‑882, which includes a list of the abbreviations occurring most frequently in the inscriptions and the way they are to be read. Further consult: E. Is Blant, Manual d'ipipraphie ehritienne d'apri‑e lea marbrea de la Gauls, Paris, 1889; idem, L'Epigraphie chritienne en Gauls et dens 1'Ajrique romaine, ib. 1890; J. McCaul, Christian Epigraphs of the First Six Centuries London, 1889; G. Petrie, Christian Inscriptions in the Irish Language, ed. M. Stokes, Dublin, 1870 sqq.; J. A. Martigny, Dictionnaire des antiqu%tte ehrttiennea, pp, 357 eqq., Paris, 1877; F. X. Kraus, Rome eotterranea pp 431 aqq, Freiburg, 1879; idem, ReaY Encykloptidie der chriatlicAen AltertAfimer, ii. 39 eqq., ib.
1888; V. Schultze, Die Katakamben pp. 233 eqq., Leipsic, 1882; H. Otte, Handbuch der kirchlichen Kuna:_ArchB. ologie des deutchen Mittelaltera, i., 395 eqq., ib. 18$3; J. .lt. Allen, Christian Symbolism ix Great Britain and Ireland before the 15th Century, London, 1888; E. Hiibner, liisdriptionta Hiapaniae CAriatianae, 2 vole., Berlin, 1900;
~H,kddan and Stubbs, Councils (for inscriptions in Great ~:$rixain) and the literature under CEMETERIES, particularly that on the Catacombs given there.
INSPIRATION.
Jewish Doctrine (¢ 1).
Early Christian Doctrine (¢ 2). The Scholastic Period (§ 3).
The Reformation (§ 4).
Poet‑Reformation Development (§ 5). Modern Development (§ 8).
The Bible and Inspiration (§ 7).
Nature and Method of Inspiration (§ 8). The Theory of Plenary Inspiration (§ 9). The Theory of Partial Inspiration (¢ 10). Criteria of Inspiration (¢ 11).
Modern Tendencies and Development (§ 12).
In theological language, inspiration signifies the operation of the Holy Spirit upon the writers of the Bible, by which the Bible becomes the expression of the will of God binding upon us, or the Word of God. The term originated from the Vulgate version of 11 Tim. iii. 16, Omnis scripture divinitus inapirata. The Greek word theoprteustos‑of which it is at least doubtful whether ditrinitus inspirata is an accurate translation‑belongs only to Hellenistic and Christian Greek, and may have been coined by Paul. Other post‑classical uses of it show that it signifies " filled with the Spirit of God" or " breathing out the Spirit of God," from which it follows that the Scripture so designated has come into being under the operation of the Spirit. The preference of the Greek commentators for the meaning expressed by divinitus inspirata would have less importance if it were not explicable by the prevalent view, for which the corresponding term was thought to be found in II Tim. iii. 16, which was more or less an inheritance from Alexandrian Judaism or from paganism.

18	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	In
Ineoriptionsrationspi
The church doctrine‑‑or rather the oldest views held in the Church, since it is inaccurate to speak of any distinct church doctrine on the
x. Jewish point, either before or since the Refor‑
Doctrine. oration, outside of the single statement that the Scripture is inspired, without saying how it is inspired‑is much closer to the Alexandrian or pagan view than to that of Jewish theology. Both Talmudic and Alexandrian Judaism agreed in attributing unique authority to the Old Testament. The Talmud claims an immediate divine origin for the " Law," asserting that God wrote it with his own hand, or dictated it to Moses as his amanuensis. A secondary revelation is contained in the " Prophets " (from Joshua on, including Psalms, Canticles, Job, Ecclesiastes, Ezra), as Kabbalah, or tradition as distinguished from the Law. In the case of the prophets, their personality is not so absorbed by the Spirit of God as to render them mere unconscious organs. The medieval Jewish theologians were the first to attribute a special kind of inspiration to the Hagiographa, as written by the spirit of holiness, while the prophetical books were written by the spirit of prophecy. Jewish antiquity knows nothing of such a distinction; and Matt. xxii. 43 shows that the origin of these books too was referred to the Spirit of God. That the personality of the authors was still more prominent. in them than in the prophets may be inferred from their place in the canon, as well as from various expressions which put them, in relation to the Law, in the lowest place. Alexandrian Judaism took a different view. It is true that Josephus maintains that the Spirit was absent from the second Temple, and designates the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus as the end of canonical authorship; but he, as well as Philo and the author of Wisdom (vii. 27), believes none the less in a continuance and diffusion of the prophetic gift. Upon this theory rest the legend of the origin of the Septuagint and the acceptance of the Apocrypha. Thus, while apparently broader and freer than Talmudic Judaism, the Alexandrian school represents a doctrine of inspiration which is really much more strict. All the Old‑Testament writers are prophets; but with the prophetic illumination human consciousness ceases. The prophet is merely an organ of God, who speaks through him; he knows nothing of what he is doing, and has no will of his own. He is in a state of ecstasy, even when he writes down what he has been commissioned to reveal. This condition Philo believes that he can describe from his own experience. There is an ecstasy mentioned in the Bible, but it is not this kind of ecstasy, nor is it the normal vehicle of inspiration, but something extraordinary; and the communication of the message to others does not take place in this state, with the possible exception of an involuntary prophecy like that of Balsam [but cf. II Kings iii. 15‑19, and see ECSTASY]. The Biblical conception of ecstasy is that of a state in which supernatural revelations are imparted to men who, in their natural state, are incapable of perceiving them ‑either by divinely exhibited symbols, as in Acts x. 10; Jer. i. 11 13, or by the communication of supernatural realities and images of future
events, as in Num. xxiv. 3, 4, xxii. 31; II Kings vi. 1?; cf. II Cor. xii. 1 sqq.; Rev. i.10. In this state the percipient is either " in the Spirit," i.e., the limitar tions of his ordinary sensuous perceptions fall away altogether, or they are momentarily removed without the cessation of sensuous perception, and supernatural appearances present themselves in conjunction with those of ordinary life, as in Luke i. 11. In no case does the state seem to be one of which no memory is afterward preserved; the ecstasy is not (according to Augustine on Ps. Lxvii.) a " mental alienation," but a " mental separation from physical sensation so that whatever is revealed is revealed to the spirit." The theory of Philo, or the Hellenistic theory, thus originated neither in the Old Testament nor in strictly Jewish theology outside of it, but much more directly in paganism. Philo's conception can not be put down wholly to the account of his Platonizing tendency, but contains other elements, possibly borrowed from Oriental religions. Still, it is in the main the general Greek conception of enthousiasmos, of the mania of the manteis (" prophet " or " diviner "), akin to the Platonic view of the source of artistic production and of prophecy.
The same pagan conception is encountered once more in the first definite expressions from Christian
writers as to the nature and method z. Early of inspiration. In the Apostolic
Christian Fathers is found merely a simple ex‑
Doctrine. pression of the fact of inspiration in
the way in which they cite the Old Testament. But the second‑century apologists emphasize the divine origin of the knowledge contained in Holy Scripture, and unquestionably teach an inspiration which is not merely mechanical, but mantic. In order to understand this, it must be remembered that these men, brought up in paganism, got at the same time their first impression of Christian truth and of the divine origin of the primary revelation and so of the Scriptures. The more Christianity claimed to be not the result of a logical process of thought, but a revelation made under the operation of the Spirit of God, the easier it was for them to apply to it the Greek conception of the origin of such knowledge; and the process was further facilitated by the respect paid to the Sibylline prophecies (see SIBYLLINE BOOKS). If this last fact be taken in connection with the prominent place which prophecy holds in Scripture, the importance which the apologists attached to prophecy can be understood, and that it was natural for them to refer all ancient prophecy to the working of the Spirit of God. There was no need of an acquaintance with Philo (of whom Justin speaks with great respect) to lead to this view, which finally found its most definite representation in Montanism. The apposition of the Church to Montanism was responsible for the fact that the doctrine of ecstasy as the form of inspiration found
no continued recognition in the ChUfCh, vi~CllV of Alexandria placed ecstasy among the marks of
false prophets, and from Origen on, the doctors of
the Church rejected the conception of prophecy which originated in paganism. In direct opposition to Montanism, the unconscious action of the

Inspiration
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
prophet was denied. This led to the other extreme; it placed the revelation of the Old Testament on the same level with that of the New, and so finally resulted in the not indeed mantic, but mechanical, doctrine of inspiration held by the older Protestant theologians. The attempts at a truer theory found in Irenaeus' distinction between prophetic and apostolic inspiration (III., xi. 4), and his notion of a development in the history of God's redeeming work (IV., ix. 3), bore no fruit. The doctrine of the Fathers recognized both the unrestricted operation of the Holy Ghost upon the minds and wills of Scriptural authors and at the same time their own independent activity, to which more than mere form and style was attributed; but they seem to have made no attempt to frame a theory as to the manner in which these two were combined. Thus, e.g., Augustine, who says in one place that the Evangelists wrote " as each remembered, in accordance with his native powers, either briefly or at greater length " (De consenau eaangelistarum, ii. 12), in another compares the apostles to hands that wrote down what the head, Christ, dictated (ib., i. 35). Among the Fathers Origen went most deeply into the question. What he says about it agrees closely with his theory that inspiration is an elevation of the mind and an opening of the inner ear to the truth‑a higher degree of the illumination bestowed upon all pious believers. That so little use was made of Origen's suggestions was not a consequence of their connection with other parts of his system, or of the suspicion which was cast upon his orthodoxy, but rather of the fact that (when the epoch of the apologists was past and Montaniam was conquered) there was little practical interest in these questions. In the controversies which distracted the Church the authority and the divine origin of the Scriptures were not called in question. With the issue of these conflicts and the strengthening of the Church's organization, the Church took its plate by the side of the Scriptures as a coordinate authority, and even at times more than that, so that Augustine could say (Adv. Mauichceos, v.), " I would not believe the Gospel against the authority of the Catholic Church." The acceptance of a continuous inspiration, expressed especially in the decisions of councils, gave rise to the theory of a twofold source of knowledge, as to which only a standard of judgment in matters of fact was required, not a decision as to the manner of inspiration. The emphasis laid by the school of Antioch on the human side of the Scriptures was not important enough, in view of the simultaneous recognition of their authority, to call forth much discussion as to inspiration itself. Even the bold assertions of Theodore of Mopsuestia that the Book of Job was a poem originating on heathen soil, that Canticles contained a tedious epithalamium, that Solomon (in Proverbs and Ecclesiastes) had the logos gnaseas, " the gift of wisdom," but not the logos aophias, " the prophetic gift," did not touch the general theory of inspiration, but only raised the question whether all parts of the Scriptures had the same measure of (prophetic) inspiration; and the only result was the condemnation of these propositions by the Council of Constantinople.
By a natural process, the operation of the Holy Ghost occupied an increasingly prominent place, and the independent personality of the writers was less and less considered. When Agobard of Lyons dwelt upon the external signs of this independence, and remarked that the sacred writers had not always observed the strict rules of grammar, the Abbot Fridugis of Tours (q.v.) went so far as to assert that the Holy Spirit had formed " even the very verbal expressions in the mouth of the Apostles." And Agobard did not think of limiting the operation of the Spirit; he preferred to explain the phenomenon by a condescension on the part of the Holy Spirit to human weakness.
No deeper interest in the question was displayed by scholasticism, which discussed it, indeed, with
its accustomed minuteness in connec‑
3. The lion with the rest of the system, but Scholastic showed no sense of its importance in
	Period.	relation to revelation. Here and there,
		as from Anselm and Thomas Aquinas,
it received more serious consideration. The latter
treats the subject under the head of gratiae gratis
datae, or charismata, distinguishing between the
gift of knowledge and the gift of the word, without
which the gift of knowledge would be useless to
others. To express the right word, the Holy Ghost
makes use of the tongue of men " as of an instru
ment, but he himself perfecta the inner working."
The blessing is sometimes diminished by the fault
of the hearer, sometimes by that of the speaker.
The operation of the Holy Ghost thus does no
violence to the independence of the agent. The
authority of the Scriptures was not questioned,
but the impulse to use and to investigate them
was not yet awakened. Mysticism had a deep
feeling for the divine power of the Word and a clear
understanding of the operation of the Holy Ghost.
A belief in the continuance of the gift left the Scrip
tural inspiration not so radically different, in spite
of its admitted precedence, from experiences which
were possible to others; and so, even while its
authority was firmly maintained, there was a cer
tain indifference to its unique character. The
assertion of Abelard, based upon Gal. ii. 11 sqq.,
that the prophets and apostles were not infallible,
was employed with some hesitation by him; but
when Renaissance scholarship pointed to defects
in detail as results of the human limitations of the
Scriptural writers, neither the Church nor scholars
thought of the authority of the Bible as any less
assured.
Never since the apostolic age had so admirable a use been made of its pages, and never had its
authority been so decidedly upheld as
;. The in the Reformation period; but for this
Reforms‑ very reason there was little speculation lion. on the way in which it had come to be. No one disputed its authority; the only question was as to the manner of its use. This explains the fact that among the Reformers and their immediate successors the old conception of inspiration is still found without any further discussion of the mutual relations of the two factors in the formation of the Scriptures, and without any attempt to define the limits within which inspira‑

16	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Inspiration
tics is attributed to them. As to the relation between the divine and human factors, Luther is equally certain that the Holy Ghost is the original author, and that the writers are to be known by their human characteristics and have put their own hearts into their work. Theoretically his teaching on this point is not to be distinguished from the traditional conception. For Calvin, too, the Bible is to be reverenced; the Holy Ghost is its author, though sometimes " he uses a rough and unpolished style." But this does not prevent Calvin from recognizing inaccuracies and seeing, with Luther, the expression of the human minds of the writers. Chemnitz is the first Lutheran theologian to attempt a systematic doctrine on the subject; but he is arguing against those who equally acknowledge the authority of the Bible, and the question of the nature and method of inspiration is not for him an urgent one. Selnecker includes inspiration under the head of revelation, and defines it as " a secret inbreathing by which the holy patriarchs and prophets were divinely taught many things "; but he places this process in unmistakable analogy with the indwelling and operation of the Spirit in other believers. Gerhard's full discussion of Scripture in general contains no more precise definition. But the more earnest these authors become in attempting to confirm the authority of the Bible, the less often are met concessions like those of Bugenhagen, that the Evangelists wrote " what to them seemed best," and that errors of the Septuagint passed over into the text of the New Testament.
When it became necessary to argue not only against Rome, but against syncretism, and Calixtus,
in approximation to Roman Catholic g. Post‑ theologians, distinguished between inReformation spiration in the strict sense, in regard
Develop‑ to the essential truths of salvation,
	meat.	and a directio divine in regard to those
		things " which came by sensation or
were otherwise known" for which no revelation but
only guidance was needed, the time had come for
a more rigid definition, for an assurance against the
dangers which seemed to threaten the Bible among
the very men who claimed to deduce their belief
from it. Calovius was the founder of the new doc
trine intended to serve this purpose. According to
him, inspiration is the form of revelation. Nothing
can be in the Scriptures " which was not to the
writers divinely suggested and inspired." The doc
trine was pushed to its extreme consequences by
the Buxtorfs, who asserted the inspiration of even
the Hebrew vowels, and by Voet, who made the
same claim for the punctuation. All this was
absolutely new. If the idea of ecstasy had been
included, it might have seemed a revival of the
mantic theory of Philo and the old apologists;
but the lack of this conception made the process
purely mechanical, not only without analogy, but
in direct contradiction to the other operations of
the Holy Spirit. The self‑preparation of the writers,
required on the ecstatic theory, was no longer
necessary; nor was there any place for the personal
witness which the apostles claim to give. The
logical consequences of the doctrine were not,
indeed, drawn by its supporters, but they are none
the less inevitable. Against this hard and fast theory the freer view of the Roman Catholic theologians (such as Bellarmine, Canus, and Simon) was less effective than it might have been on account of their tendency to subordinate Scripture to the Church; and little more followed the maintenance of a less rigid theory by the Arminiana and some French and German Calvinists. The first marked influence was exerted by Pietism, with its personal experience of the workings of the Spirit, in which it was joined by some kindred souls among the English dissenters, such as Baxter and Doddridge. By degrees the official theology of Protestantism took a freer attitude, and the human factor in inspiration assumed a new prominence.
The modern development of the doctrine may be traced partly from Schleiermacher and partly from
the school of Bengel. The former 6. Modern emphasized the special spirit of the
Develop‑ Scriptures, of which rationalism had meat. altogether lost eight; but this spirit
was to him not the Spirit of God, independent of humanity, but his own conception of the term " Holy Spirit "‑the common spirit of the Christian Church, the source of all its spiritual gifts and good works, as of all its processes of thought. Even the apocryphal writings are inspired, in so far as they show any trace of connection with the life of this spirit. The Old Testament, on the other hand, as the product not of the Christian but of the Jewish spirit, shares neither the dignity nor the inspiration of the New. The main emphasis is laid upon the human writers, who, by reason of their relation to Christ, are the authorized original witnesses to Christian truth. Schleiermacher's doctrine of inspiration is thus both formally and materially the exact opposite of the doctrine developed by the seventeenth‑century theologians. It represents, however, a distinct and permanent progress, in the qualification of inspiration according to the period of history in which it appears, in the value placed upon the human factor for the attestation and communication of divine truth, in the proper placing of inspiration in the uniform and yet manifold working of the Holy Spirit, and of the literary work produced under its influence in the total of the authors' official activity. The first of these points, the relation of inspiration to history, is the one in which Schleiermacher'a services were the most important. This is a point of departure for the modern development of the doctrine of inspiration, as represented by Rothe and Hofmann‑though the connection is not always directly with SchleieN macher, but partially through the school of Bengel, whose most useful result is that formulated in 1793 by Menken in these words: " The Bible is no dogmatic treatise . . . it is much rather a historical, harmonious whole. All that it teaches, it teaches either immediately in history, or upon a basis of history, with its foundation and its interpretation in history." Space forbids to trace here the gradual development through the writings of individual modern authors who have handled this subject. As a rule they have renounced the theory of the direct operation of the Holy Spirit on the creation of the Scriptural books. They have replaced the

Inspiration	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	ig
old idea of inspiration, on the ground of its mantic content, apparently derived from a pagan source, by one which treats the Scriptures as venerable primitive documents; their value is decided by a historical judgment, which requires scientific investigation for its full validity. This limitation is balanced in some degree by the position given to the substance of the Bible, to the revelation of which it constitutes documentary evidence. Faith in this revelation is required in order to form a complete and perfect judgment of the Bible. The revelation works through the written word, though not as if this word were a direct product of the spirit of revelation. The written word is influenced by the ideas of the various periods, by defective conceptions, and by limited intelligence. It is the province of theological investigation to decide how far these influences have extended, in order to be able to designate the authoritative content or the permanent constituents of the revelation. It may not unnaturally be asked whether a purely documentary value will sufficiently explain the peculiar power and significance of the Scriptures in the history of the Church. From this point of view, Lipaius felt obliged to distinguish between the documentary character of the Bible, as the collection, officially made by the historical judgment of the Christian Church, of the records of its primitive spirit, and its religious significance 'resting on inspiration. According to this view, the Scripture is inspired because it is the historic record of the revelation in Christ, and at the same time the original witness of the salutary working of that revelation in the hearts of the first disciples, in which regard it is a product of the spirit of that revelation. That which is a permanent standard in it is not its outer form, on account of changing theological conceptions, but its inner content‑that which remains after these outworn conceptions have been subtracted, as well as what may be referred to the personal limitations of its writers. It is imperative to separate the form from the content.
The attempt to explain the peculiar character of the Bible leads sooner or later to inspiration‑i.e.,
to the belief that it owes this peculiar y. The character to the operation of .the Spirit
Bible and of God upon its origin. It would be
Inspiration. easy, but unjustifiable, to deny inspiration on the assumption that this must necessarily mean mantic inspiration. In order to understand the manner of the operation of the Holy Spirit, it must be known what Scripture says of this operation on its own origin; and to understand !,his again, the meaning of Paul's question in Gal. iii. 2 must be apprehended. There is nothing to justify drawing a sharp dividing‑line between the indwelling of the Holy Ghost and his special operation upon the origin of Scripture. And some other answer .to the question as to the true nature of the Bible than that it is merely a record of revelation is obligatory. From this point Kfihler proceeds, and makes possible a successful attempt to answer the question as to the nature and value of the Bible and the nature and manner of inspiration. According to him, the Bible (primarily the New Testament, the Old only in conjunction with it) is the record
of the fundamental Gospel of Christ and of salvation in him. In it exists the memorial of the primitive Christian assurance of salvation, intended to promote the salvation of the reader or hearer. This definition includes both the purpose and the content of the Bible, whereas that which regards it as merely a record of revelation neglects its immediate purpose, and moreover requires the formation of a historical judgment, for which not every one is competent. No such equipment is required
I	in order to know that the New Testament is primarily the record of the fundamental Gospel of Christ, or that it bears the same witness of him as that with which Christianity began its conquering progress through the world. Whether men are willing to accept this salvation, so attested, is another question; but this Gospel is the Christian proclamation, in regard to which man must take one aide or the other. This is the point so strongly insisted on by Frank, that every witness of Christ and of God's redeeming will is credible only in the measure in which it is in harmony with or confirmed by the Scriptures. These have the power in a special way to create obligation and to make him guilty before God who rejects their message. This power, this authority, is independent of the recognition of them, and through it they show themselves to be in a unique measure filled with the Spirit of God. It is this connection between the Holy Ghost and the witness of the Bible to which (in harmony with the Scriptural expressions themselves) is given the name of inspiration. It is this operation of the Spirit that Paul means when he says (I Cor. ii. 13) that he speaks " not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth," and to which Christ himself refers when he tells his disciples (John xvi. 13) of the Spirit of truth that shall guide them " into all truth "‑an operation which does not exclude, but empowers, the action of those who are to be the witnesses of the truth.
If the fact of inspiration is admitted in the sense of a special operation of the Holy Spirit on the origin of the Scriptures, on the ground
& Nature of their unique significance as the priand mart' record of the fundamental preaeh‑
Method of ing of Christ, and their unique power
Inspiration. to impose obligation, the neat question which arises concerns the nature and method of this inspiration. To answer this, the first thing to notice is what this message tells‑the redeeming acts of God in behalf of man, summed up and realized in Christ before the eye. It is with this that the entire Bible has to do. Its content is a history of the relations which have existed, or are to exist, between God and man, of the origin and execution of the plan of salvation. From this special connection between the Bible and the revelation of the redemption, faith easily perceives that its writers stand themselves in a special relation to the Holy Spirit. But of what nature this relation is can be determined only from the course of the history contained in their works, since it is a historical relation. Now, the relation varies with the period of history. The distinction between the Oldand New‑Testament revelation is that between

17	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	IasDirstioa
distance from God and nearness to him. In the earlier part, even when God enters into relations with those whom he chooses as witnesses of his redeeming purpose, he still speaks from without the world that they know. Thus in the Old Testament an expression is found which is foreign to the New, to designate his communications with his witnesses. This communication with the prophets is constantly designated by the expression " the word of Yahweh was upon," and the reception of this word by " he saw (Heb. hazah) the word of Yahweh " (Isa. ii. 1; Mic. i. 1; Amos i. 1). This distance between God and man is only rarely bridged, at special moments, and the immediate subjective perception of the word of God can only take place in an extraordinary manner. In the New Testament, on the other hand, the word of God, the expression of his saving will, has entered the world in Christ (Rom. x. 5‑8; Titus i. 3; Acts x. 36, xiii. 26). To perceive and acknowledge the reveler tion now made, there is no need of special endowment, as in the case of the prophets; all that is required is the believing attitude toward Christ (Matt. xi. 25, xvi. 17). Those who are first called to look into the mystery of the love of God revealed in Christ are therewith called and qualified to be witnesses to him (Matt. x. 27; John xv. 15). This witness is conditioned by the objective revelation and redemption, taking place in Christ and entering the personal life by the indwelling of the Spirit. But it is not the same thing to participate in this salvation and to be called to witness it. The latter is a special mission, though not one confined to the apostles who were chosen as the first witnesses. Their assistants and the generation to whom they testified were also witnesses; and as such, from the special importance of their position in regard to all subsequent generations, they needed special assistance of the Spirit (I Cor. ii. 10 sqq.). The prerequisite is their own experience of salvation‑the first experience of salvation ever given to man; but inspiration, in addition to this, is the special preparation for the bearing of testimony of a fundamental kind. It is their grace of office, their charisma, which empowers them, irrespective of their individual imperfections, to testify for all generations of the facts of salvation and their significance. In contrast with this condition, the inspiration of the Old Testament was temporarily, one might almost say accidentally, connected with the personality of those who received it, and not always given to those whose moral and religious nature qualified them for its reception (Num. xxu.xxiv.; Jonah; cf. John xi. 49‑52). Compared with the New Testament, it is leas free. The apostolic witnesses have the Spirit of God for the spirit of their own personal lives, which makes it possible for them to be independent witnesses, not mere organs of God's activity. Another thing fOllOWB from the peculiar character of their inspiration as a permanent qualification. When Paul makes a distinction between what he says by commandment and his own opinion (see CONa1LIA EVANpLLICA), he does not mean to make a distinction between inspired and uninspired words; and accordingly
he commends what he says with perfect
	VL‑2	confidence I
to the judgment of his readers (I Cor. x. 15, xi. 13; II Cor. iv. 2). And the inspiration of the witnesses being permanent, they can speak of things which do not pertain to salvation (as in II Tim. iv. 13) without the inspiration ceasing.
One more characteristic point of the manner of inspiration must be mentioned. The qualification of witnesses includes the presentation of historical events; but that which the Spirit of God here effects, whether in the Old or in the New Testament, is the understanding of history, not the knowledge of it. The latter is to be obtained in the ordinary way of life, by the witnessing of events or their collection from written or oral tradition. This explains certain phenomena. in sacred history which resemble those of all other historical writingdiscrepancies in minor details or in chronological order and the like. The question is not how such errors are possible in the inspired word of God, but how far the equipment named inspiration is meant to extend. The knowledge of and witness to the purest eternal truth is not only not inconsistent with human limitations, but stands out all the more strikingly when they are admitted. Inspiration is not the abolition of independent human personality, but rather a reenforcement of it; it is
I	not condescension to human weakness, but a hallow
	ing or transformation of it, that the human person‑
~	ality may take its part in the divine work. There is nothing in it foreign to Christian experience or to knowledge of the other operations of the Holy
I Spirit. It takes its own place in the system of the
charismata, the gifts of grace operative in the
I Church of God. 	(H. CxEMxat.)
i Views of inspiration may be grouped in two general classes‑those of plenary or verbal inspiration, and those of partial inspiration.
9. The Advocates of plenary inspiration hold
Theory of that the writers of Scripture had the
Plenary immediate influence of the Spirit to
Inspiration, such an extent that they could not err in any point; every statement is accurate and infallible, whether " religious, scientific, historical, or geographical" (Charles Hodge, Thedogy, i. 163; cf. F. L. Patton, Inspiration, p. 92). Besides Hodge and Patton, Gauasen, Shedd, Given, and others represent this view. It is admitted, however, that there may be errors in the Scriptures as we now possess them and infallibility is asserted ~ " only for the original autographic text " (A. A. t, Hodge and B. B. Warfield in the Presbyterian i Review, ii., 1881, p. 245). This class of views has in its favor (1) the difficulty of conceiving how the thought could have been suggested by the Spirit without the language; and (2) the support it gives
to the authority of the Scriptures as a system of
truth and a guide of action. On the other hand,
the following objectiOUB are urged; ~1~ I~ 6 bard
on this general theory to account for the individual
peculiarities of the writers. The style of goes differs from that of Isaiah , that of John from that of Paul, although the same Spirit suggested the ]_aguage of each. It is urged, however, that the Spirit accommodated himself to the pec,liarities of the writers. (2) There are differences of statement in the Scriptures concerning the ,game facts (cf.

Inspiration
Inspired, The
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Gen. zxxiii. 18‑19. with Acts vii. 18; Num. aav. 9 with I Cor. a. 8). (3) The theory makes it hard to explain the divergences in the Gospels (cf. the four forms in which the superscription on the cross is given and Matt, viii. 25‑27 with Mark iv. 39‑41). (4) It is difficult on this theory to understand why the New‑Testament writers usually quote the Septuagint translation, and not the original Hebrew of the Old Testament. In many cases the divergence from the Hebrew teat is great (cf. Acts xv. 18‑17, other passages of the Acts, and many passages of the Epistle to the Hebrews, which always quotes from the Septuagint). (5) The autographs of the sacred writers are lost, and the variations in the copies which have been preserved seem to be inconsistent with this theory; for, if a literal inspiration were necessary for the Church, God (so we should expect) would have provided for the errorless preservation of the original teat. Moreover, the great mass of Christians has to depend upon translations for none of which infallible accuracy is claimed.
The theory of partial inspiration is, that the writers of Scripture enjoyed the influence of the
Spirit to such an extent, that it is the
:o. The Word, and contains the Will, of God
Theory of (Luther, Calvin, Baxter, Doddridge, Partial Wm. Lowth, Baumgarten, Neander, Inspiration. Thofuck, Stier, Lange, Hare, Afford,
Van Oosterzee, Plumptre, F. W. Farrar, Dorner, and others). It admits mistakes, or the possibility of mistakes, in historical and geographical statements, but denies error in matters of faith or morals. In favor of this view it may be said: (1) that it lays stress upon the sense of Scripture as a revelation of God's will, and leaves room for the full play of human agency in the composition. (2) It helps to understand the divergences in the socounts of our Lord's life, and the inconsistencies in historical statement of different parts of the Bible. (3) It is more in accord with the method of the Spirit's working in general. The apostles were not perfect in their conduct and judgment as rulers and teachers of the Church (Acts xv. 39, axiii. 3; Gal. ii. 12; I Cor. aiii. 12; Phil. iii. 12). (4) It removes a hindrance out of the way of many who would gladly believe the Bible to contain the word of God, if it were not necessary to give their assent to all its historical statements. Many can believe the discourses of our Lord in John (xii. sqq.) to be divine who can not so regard the list of the dukes of Edom (Gen. aaxvi. 15‑43), or all the tables of the Books of Chronicles. (5) This view makes the absence of an absolutely pure teat intelligible.
The present canon does not necessarily measure the extent of inspiration. Both must be determined
by the same process, upon the basis
::. Crite‑ of the contents of the books, the state‑
ria of meats of their authors, their relation Inspiration. to Christ (in the New Testament), and the judgment of the Church. A book belonging to the present canon may not be inspired. Seven books of the New Testament were disputed in the Church of the first four centuries (see CANON ox SCRIPTURE). The Roman Catholic canon of the
Old Testament includes the Apocrypha, which are rejected by Protestants. Luther doubted the inspiration of Esther and held an unfavorable view of the Epistle of James and the Apocalypse. Calvin expressed doubts about II Peter. The Bible is an organism; and the inspiration of the whole is not necessarily affected if inspiration be denied to one part. The question of the inspiration of the Gospel of John, for example, may be independent of the proof that the Books of Chronicles are inspired. The sufficient witness of the heavenly origin of the Scriptures is their inherent excellences, as in the case of the person of Christ. The unity of the book,
unfolding a single purpose; its elevated tone; the faultless character of Christ; the nature of the facts revealed of God, the soul, and the future‑all stamp it as a work of more than ordinary human genius or insight. This testimony is, for most minds, the strongest of all. It is the testimony of the Holy Spirit in experience. D. S. ScaeFP.
The history of the doctrine of inspiration in Great Britain and America has followed the general for‑
tunes of the same doctrine on the Cones. Modem tinent, as indicated above; that is, it Tendencies has oscillated between an interpretasad Devel‑ tion which found its principle in a pro‑
opments. ponderating influence of the Spirit of
God and a recognition in the human consciousness of a larger degree of free ethical action.
In Great Britain and America the Calvinistic interest has declared for the first of the views referred to. In more recent times attention and interest have shifted to other aspects of this question. A distinction between Revelation (q.v.) and inspiration has been made, in which revelation stands for the objective side or content of the divine will or truth, inspiration for the subjective condition is which that will becomes known. Evolution has made men familiar with a law of development according to which the consciousness is in part determined by previous stages of thought and will. Comparative Religion (q.v.) has revealed phenomena of a similar character to Hebrew and Christian inspiration in the ethnic faiths, sad a study of these has aided in a better apprehension of this fact. The history of the Christian religion with its earlier roots in the Hebrew religious life has made possible s truly historical interpretation of the rise and progress of the apprehension of God as revealed in Jesus Christ. The new study of psychology has shown the nature and place of inspiration is the consciousness of the sacred writers and speakers an ultimate certainty and enthusiasm which gave to their message much of its authority and power. Biblical criticism has provided a broad basis of incontestable facts which have had to be reckoned with, sad have thus forced here and there a fresh investigation of the whole question from an inductive point of view. Inspiration is seen to be an essential affair of per‑
sonality and is therefore ethical, with conditions of its appearance which lie deep in character as well
as in native endowment. Finally, the teats of inspiration are moral and spiritual‑the degree to which the message of the speaker or writer answers to the ethical and religious needs of advancing
human life.	C. A. Bacxwira.

18	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Inspiration
Inspired, The
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the history of the doctrine consult: G. '' F. N. $onatag, DocCrina inapirationia, ejua4us ratio, hittorda et uaw popularia, Heidelberg, 1809; G. F. N. Credner. Ds Librmum N. T. inspirations quid afatusrint Ckriatiani ante aasculum tertium medium, vol. i., Jena, 1828; idem, Beitr9pe cur Einhitunp in die bibliachert Schriften, i 1‑91, Rape, 1832; A. G. Rudelbach, in Zeitecl<riJt j4r Lutheriache Theologit and Kirche, i. 1‑80, ii. 1‑88, iv. 1‑40; F. A. Tholuek, in Deutsche Zeitachrijt jitr chriatlichs Wissenschaft, 1850, pp. 18‑18, 42‑44; J. Delitaach, De inapiratioru acripWrum quid atatuerint pabea apoatolici, Leipeie, 1872; K. F. A. Kahnie, Dopmatik, i. 288, Leipaic, 1874; K. R. Hagenbaeh, History of Christian Doctrine, i. 75, llb, ii. 14, 20, 168, iii. 55, 82, 314, Edinburgh, 1880‑81; B. F. Weateott, Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, London, 1888; W. Rohnert, Was lehrt Luther von der Inspiration der Heilipen Sc>ui.Jtf Leipaic, 1890; A. Zbllig. Did lnapiralaonakhrs den Origens, Freiburg, 1902; and in general the works on the History of Dogma.
From the standpoint of dogmatics the subject is diecueaed in all the great treatises on that subject. The following may be taken as representative of the treatment is the " Systems of Theology": F. D. E. $chleiermacher, §¢ 12R‑132, Berlin, 1821; A. D. C. Tweaten, i., ¢ 23, Hamburg, 1828; C. I. Nitaeth, $¢ 37 sqq., Bonn, 1844, Eng. tranel., Edinburgh. 1849; T. Dwight, New York, 1848; C. G. Finney, ib. 1851; R. Rothe, pp. 121 sqq., Goths, 1883; H. Marteneen, Edinburgh, 1888; J. T. Beck, §§ 88‑101, Stuttgart, 1870; F. H. R. Frank, System der chrisUichen Gewiaahcit, ii., §§ 43‑99, Erlangen, 1873; idem, System der clrriatlichen Wahrheit, ii., ¢ 43, ib. 1885; C. Hodge, 3 vole., New York, 1873; H. Voigt, FundamentaldopnwEak, § 21, Goths, 1874; J. J. van Ooateraee, 2 vole., London, 1878; I. A. Dormer, Glaubenalehre, ¢§ b7‑69, Berlin, 1879, Eng. transl., 4 vole., Edinburgh, 1880‑82: W. B. Pope, New York, 1880; F. A. Philippi, i. 204 sqq., GQteraloh, 1881; A. E. Biedermann, $§ 179 sqq., Berlin, 1884‑85; A. R. Strong, Rochester, 1888; W. G, T. Shedd, New York, 1888‑94; 8. Buell, ib. 1890; E. V. Gerhart, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ib. 1891; R. B. Smith, ib., 1890; J. Miley, London, 1892; M. A. Kiihler, Wiasenschaft der chriatlichen Lehre, pp. 448 sqq., Leipeie, 1893; R. A. Lipsiue, $§ 198 sqq., Brunswick, 1893; L. F. Stearns, New York, 1893: J. Bovon, 2 vole., Lausanne, 1895‑98; H. Rawink, 4 vole.. Kampe, 1895‑1901; R. V. Forster, Nashville, 1898; N. Burwaeh, 2 vole., London. 1900; A. Bouvier, Paris, 1903; H. E. Jacobs, Summary of the Christian Faith, Philadelphia, 1905; A. R. Strong, Systematic Theology, i. 198‑242, Philadelphia, 1907; F. J. Hall, Dogmatic Theology, vol. ii., New York, 1908.
Special treatises on the subject are: R. Baxter, Catechieinp of Families, London, 1883; R. Simon, T1Y1ttE de 1'inapiratson den livrea sacrEs, Paris, 1887; w. Lowth, Vindication of the Old and Nets Testaments, Oxford 1892; P. Doddridga, The Inspiration of the New Testament, in vol. iv. of his Works, Leeds, 1802; J. J. Griesbach, Stricturarum in locum de theopneuatia Librorum aaerorum parts i ‑v., Jena, 1784‑88; J. D. Morell, Phil. qf Religion, chaps. v., vi., New York, 1849; E. Henderson, Divine Inspiration, London, 1852; F. de Rougemont, Christ et ate tlmoina: , rJullalion et inspiration, 2 vole., Paris, 1856; C. A. Row, The Nature and Extent of Divine Inspiration, London,
1884; L. Gauaeen, Th6opneuatit, Paris 1882, Eng. trans]., London, 1888; C. Wordsworth, O» the Inspiration of Holy Scripture, ib. 1887; F. L. Patton, The Inspiration of the Scriptures, Philadelphia, 1889; E. Elliott, Inspiration of as Holy Scriptures, Edinburgh, 1877; . E. Atwell, The Pauline Theory of Inspiration, London, 1878 H. Schultz, Die SteZlunp des chriatlichen Gdaubena sur Aeiliyrn Srhrijt, Brauneberg, 1877; E. M. Goulbura, On as ln‑
apiration . . of the Holy scriptures, London 1878; W. R. Browns, Inspiration of the New Testament, ib. 1880: J. J. Given, Truth Of Scripture in connection with Revelation, Inspiration, and the Canon, Edinburgh, 1881; J. G. W. Herrmann, Die Bedeutung der InapirationadeArt, galls, 1882; G. T. Ladd, The Doctrine of Holy Scripture, New York, 1883; F, W. Farrar, J. Cairns, sad others, Inapira_ lion: a Clerical ,Symposium London 1884; R, Watts, The Rule of Faith and as Docby,ntoj Inspiration, ib..1R85; A. Cave, The Inspiration q/ the Old Testament, ib. 1888; C. A. Briggs, TI'hither, New S'ork 1889; A, Ritaehl. LtAre con der Rechtjertipunp and t'eraohnung, ii. 9 sqq., Bonn,
1889; W. K&Iling, Prolegomena sur lehrt yore der TAto_
pneuatit, Breslau, 189p; idem, Die Le1,re yore der Thtop_
asuelie, ib. 1891; C. A. Briggs, Lt. J.. Evens, H. P. Smith, Inspiration and Inerrancy, Edinburgh, 1891; E, Haupt, Die Bedeutunp der heilipert Sehrijt, Bielefeld. 1891; W. $anday, The Oracles of God, London, 1891; idem, Inspiration, ib. 1898; F. J. $hsrr, The Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, London, 1891; J. Clifford, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, ib. 1892; W. F. Gees. Die Inspiration der Belden der Bibel. Bawl, 1892; W. Lee, Inspiration of Holy Scripture, New York, 1892; J. DeWitt, What is lnapirationf ih. 1893: J. Denney, Studies in Theology, London, 1895; M. A. KAhler, Unser Streit um die BibeZ, Leipeio, 1895; M. von Nathueiue, Ueber die Inspiration der Iuiligen Schrijt, Stuttgart, 1895; H. Cremer, Glaube, Schrift, and Wigs GrAchichte, GOtersloh, 1898; G. $. Barrett, The Bible and its Inspiration, London, 1897; P. Geanrich, Der KampJ um die Schrift in der dtutsrluvanpetisehen Kirehe des 18, JaArhunderta, Berlin, 1898 (contains a rich bibliography of the German literature on the subject); C. Chauvin. Die Inspiration der htiiipen Schrijt each der Lehrt der Tradition, Regensburg, 1899; O. P. Zanecchis, Divine inspiratio aacrarum ecripturarum, Rome, 1898; M. Arnold, Literature and Dogma, London. 1902: A. Loiey, L'Etvangi(s et 1'Ipliae, Paris, 1902, Eng. trsnal., New York, 1904; H. H. Kuyper, Evolutie as revslatis, Amsterdam, 1903; J. E. McFsdyen, O. T. Criticism and the Christian Church, pp. 288‑312, New York, 1903: J. A. Robinson, Some Thoughts on Inspiration, London, 1905; R. F. Horton, Inspiration and the Bible, ib. 1908; C. Peach, De inspirations 8acrae seripturae, Freiburg, 1908; J. M. Gibson, Inspiration and Authority of Holy Scripture, London, 1908; DB, i, 298299, ii. 475‑478; DCG, i. 831‑83b; Farrar, in Biblical Educator, vole, i.‑ii.
INSPIRED, THE: The name given to a sect which originated in Germany about 1700. It was formed from the large number of Separatists who already existed there, and was animated by the impulse given by the new prophets of the Camisards (q.v.) i in the Cwennea. The sectaries took their name from the fact that they recognized a continuous divine inspiration in certain individuals, whom i they regarded as instruments of the Holy Spirit, to whose teachings they professed obedience as to inspiration.
After the forcible suppression of the Protestants in the Cszvennes, some of the principal leaders and
prophets, such as lie Marion, Durande Appearance Fage, Jean Cavalier, and Jean Allut,
in England fled to England and Scotland in 1708
	Sad	(gee FRENCH PROPHETS), which they
Germany. soon left for the Netherlands, uttering
in both countries impassioned denunciations of France and the papacy. When their prophecies were not fulfilled, they were excluded from the French Reformed community in London and from the Church of England as well, so that they had no recourse but to found a sect of their
I	own. Allut and Marion accordingly went, in 1711, to the Netherlands and Germany, seeking support primarily among the numerous colonies of French Protestants there, from whom, however, they gained little sympathy. They had more success with the Pietists and Separatists of northwestern Germany, to whose craving for apocalyptic revelations and fanatical enthusiasm they were able to appeal. They laid their first foundations at Halls in 1713 and at Berlin in 1714, and held a love‑feast at Halls in the letter year. At first they found some support among the clergy, but when the gift of inspiration began to spread among the " awakened " of German birth, including in Halls the eighteen‑year‑old daughter of a servant of Francke, and in Berlin

Inspired, The Interim
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
a tailor who later became insane, the whole movement was regarded with suspicion, if not with contempt. Three brothers named Pott, until then students at Halle, who had become " awakened," migrated with their fanatical mother to the Wetterau in 1714, and there built up an inspirational community, chiefly composed of Swabiana and Franconiana. As in the case of the prophets of the Cwennes, so here inspired utterances were preceded by remarkable physical phenomena, such as a burning around the heart, shortness of breath, and various convulsive movements of the head and limbs. These conditions were followed by a state of unconscious ecstasy, and during this time the message was received. This, as a rule, was immediately given out, either by pantomimic gestures or, more frequently, in brief phrases of a Scriptural character, spoken in an unnaturally loud voice. The content of these messages, usually delivered in the first person as in the name of God, resembled the warnings and promises of the Hebrew prophets, and dealt with the necessity of repentance, conversion, and practical Christianity, frequently being remarkable revelations of the lives of the persons to whom they were addressed.
Under the influence of these phenomena societies arose which, after 1716, called themselves " the True
Inspired," in contrast with the free or German false inspired who rejected all organiza‑
Societies. tion and discipline. The enthusiasm of
the movement spread not only among the Separatists of the Wetterau and Wittgenstein, but throughout Western Germany (especially Wiirttemberg, the Palatinate, and Alsace) and Switzerland, and even extended into Northern and Eastern Germany, as far as Saxony and Bohemia. The call and the preparation for missionary journeys among the unbelievers were given in solemn love‑feasts, prefaced by preliminary exercises for days beforehand, and characterized by fervent devotion. It was naturally difficult to maintain this devotion at such a high level, even when it was nourished by trial and persecution; and many of the " vessels " quickly ceased to give forth their messages. Those who remained true formed a constitution at Budingen in 1716, according to which ten communities were founded in that neighborhood, some of which remained in existence almost until the middle of the nineteenth century, while others grew up in Wiirttembeig, Swabia, and Switzerland. Each community had a president and .two associate elders, who regulated all its affairs, especially the care of the poor and the maintenance of discipline, and held occasional conferences with the heads of other communities. There was no special teaching office, but all adults were expected to take their part in free public prayer at the meetings (daily or at least twice on Sunday), at which many hymns were sung, while the readings were chosen either from the Bible or from the fifty written or printed discourses of the " vessels," unless a " vessel " was present and delivered a new homily, prepared especially for the occasion. The dogmatic belief of the inspired agreed in general with that of the Evangelical Church at large, though, like other Separatists, they rejected all communion with it
(as in baptism and the Lord's Supper). Their praotical principles were those of the mystics Schwenckfeld, Bohme, Weigel, and Hoburg. They regarded marriage with special disfavor, though they tolerated it for a time.
By 1719 all the " other vessels " had ceased to testify, and Johann Friedrich Rock, as the last of them, became, with Eberhard Ludwig
	Johann	Gruber (a clergyman; b. 1665; d. 1728),
	Friedrich	the head of the communities. Rock was
	Rock,	born at Oberwalden, near Goppingen,
		Wurttemberg, in 1678. He came of a
family of preachers and was himself a harnesamaker
by trade. He had an inclination to mysticism, was
seized with " inspiration " about 1707, and there
after worked for the cause with self‑sacrificing zeal
until his death in 1749. He had some gifts of
preaching and riming, and seems to have been a
man of true piety notwithstanding his aberrations.
With the emigration of many Separatists to Ger
mantown, Pa., after 1725, and with the rise of the
Herrnhut movement after 1730, his task became
increasingly difficult. Particularly painful to him
were his controversies with Count Zinzendorf, who
had originally stood in close relations with Rock
and his colleagues, but had gradually approached
more nearly to the Established Church after 1732,
and two years later had definitely broken with
Rock on the ground of his rejection of the sacra
ments. Between 1740 and 1748 Rock was engaged
in bitter controversy with another former friend,
Johann Kaiser; a follower of Bohme, Molinos,
and Mme. Guyon, who had founded a phila
delphian society at Stuttgart in 1710, and after
its decay had established an inspirational com
munity in 1717. This controversy forms the
source of the clearest and most important state
ments regarding the nature of the inspirational
movement.
The death of Rock marked the beginning of a period of steady decline, so that it is surprising to find a recrudescence of these societies,
Revival unvitalized by preaching or sacraments after r8so (celebration of the Lord's Supper seems and Emi‑ to have been first resumed after 1820), gration to after a complete quiescence of sixty or America. seventy years. With the revival of devotion in the established Churches, however, the gift of inspiration appeared once more among the " awakened " Separatists, and (according to the testimony of eye‑witnesses) in the same manner as among the Camisarda or in the Wetterau. Under the influence of three new " vessels "Michael Krausert of Strasburg; Barbara Heinemann (after marriage, Barbara Landmann) of Leilersweiler in Alsace, a peasant girl, unable to read or write; and Christian Metz, a joiner‑the communities in Alsace, the Palatinate, and the Wetterau, which were almost extinct, were reorganized between 1816 and 1821 on the old constitution of Gruber, but the repressive measures of the Prussian and Hessian governments caused them to emigrate in 1842‑46, about 800 strong, to Ebenezer, near Buffalo, N. Y., where they soon had a flourishing communistic settlement numbering between 1,500 and 2,000 souls. , In 1854 part of this community

21	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Inspired, The
Interim
migrated to Amana,	Iowa. See COMMUNISM,
IL, 3. 	(A. HEGLERt.) K. HOLL.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A very comprehensive treatment of the subject has been given by iaf. Gobel, in ZHT, 1854, 1855, 1857, upon which subsequent discussions are based. Consult further: M. G5be1, Geschichte des chriatlichen Lebena, iii. 128 sqq., Coblenz, 1860; A. Ritschl, Geachichte des Pietismua, ii. 366 sqq., iii. 265 aqq., Bonn, 1880‑88; K. I(nortz, Die wahre Inapirationagerneirute in Iowa, 1.eipsic, 1896; W. Hadorn, Die Inspirierten des 18. rahrhunderts, in Schweizeriache theolngiache Zeitachrift, 1900, pp. 184 sqq.; and the literature under (`OH71fUYI9M, IL, 3, On Rock, consult ADB, xxxviii. 735.
INSTALLATION: Generally, the ceremonial act by which a person ordained and appointed is formally put into possession of an ecclesiastical dignity or benefice. In the English Church the term is applied specially to the office of a canon or prebendary (i.e., the act of placing him in his stall) or to the enthronization of a bishop.
INSTITUTE OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN. See ENGLISH LADIES.
INSTITUTION: In canon law, the final, act by which a person elected by the chapter, or nominated by the government, is appointed by the proper authority to an ecclesiastical benefice, more especially a bishopric.
INTENTION. See SACRAMENT, § 4.
INTERCESSION. See MEDIATOR.
INTERDICT: The prohibition of public worship and of the administration of the sacraments (interdictum officiorum ditrinorum), as an ecclesiastical penalty. An interdictum locale applies to a definite place or district, an interdictttm personale to definite persons. The former is the more frequent, especially the interdictttm gerterale, which the medieval popes pronounced against whole countries in their conflicts with secular rulers. Instances of the use of the interdict may be found as early as the time of Gregory of Tours; but not till the eleventh century did it become a regular part of ecclesiastical law, and only gradually did it assume the character of a definite institution with fixed limitations which it bears in the Corpus jun's canonici. The total interdict forbade public worship, the administration of the sacraments, and Christian burial. Mitigations gradually came in; in 1173 Alexander III. allowed the baptism of infants and the absolution of the dying; in 1208 Innocent III. added confirmation and preaching, absolution under certain conditions, the private burial of clerics, the recitation of the canonical hours, and low masses in convents of regulars, extending this last privilege a year later to bishops. These concessions were granted on condition that no excommunicated or personally interdicted persons be present, that the doors be closed, and that no bells be rung. Boniface VIII., who also allowed baptism and confirmation of adults, permitted public worship with open doors and ringing of bells at Christmas, Easter, Pentecost, and the Assumption; .Martin V. and Eugenius IV. extended this privilege to the whole octave of Corpus Christi, and Leo X. to that of the Conception. Special exemptions were granted to the Franciscans and other religious orders; but Clement V. and the Council of Trent insisted on their observance of the
interdict. A local interdict was last proclaimed
by Paul V. in 1606, against the republic of Venice.
It is no longer considered a practical part of church
discipline, but the right to impose it is theoretically
maintained. Both personal and local interdicts
may occur as " censures of broad application." The
right to impose them is held to be inherent in
the pope, councils, bishops (regularly with their
chapters, sometimes without them), and in special
cases the chapters themselves; monastic superiors
may also impose personal interdicts upon their sub
jects. Interdicts may terminate of themselves if
a condition has been expressed; otherwise they are
removed by the person who imposed them, his
successor, delegate, or superior. Only a bishop
can absolve from a local interdict " of broad
application" ; but any approved confessor may
remove a particular personal interdict. This form
of penalty does not occur in Protestant ecclesias
tical law. 	(C. T. G. VON ScHEURLt.)
BIHLIOGRIPHY: Bingham, Originea, 7CVL, iii. 7; L. Ferraris,
	PrarnpGz bibliotheca canonica, s.v. " Inderdictum," 11 vole.,
	Venice, 1782‑94; A. L. Richter, Lehrbuch des . . Kirch
	enrechta, ed. W. Kahl, pp. 783 sqq., Leipsie, 1886; E.
	Friedberg, Lehrbaich des . . . Kirchenrechta, pp. 274 sqq.,
	ib. 1895; P. Hinsehius, Daa Kirchenrecht . . . in Deutach
	Zand, v. 19 sqq., Berlin, 1895; Neander, Christian Church,
	iii. 355‑356, 454, iv. 181 et passim; E. B. Krehbiel, The
	Interdict, its History and its Operation, Washington, 1909.
INTERIM: The name of three provisional and temporary arrangements between the Protestants of Germany and the Roman Catholic Church in the time of the Reformation, intended to be valid only for the interval pending a final settlement of religious differences by a general council (whence the name, from Lat. interim, " meanwhile ").
;<. The Regensburg Interim: The outcome of the Conference of Regensburg in 1541. See REGENBBURG, CONFERENCE OF. .
z. The Augsburg Interim: Adopted at the diet at Augsburg June 30, 1548. After the Schmalkald War, Charles V. thought of reestablishing religious unity in Germany; and at the diet in session in Augsburg in 1547 it was agreed that a provisional arrangement should be made until the Council of Trent had completed its work. In Feb., 1548, Charles chose a commission from both communions to devise an arrangement; this commission could not reach an agreement, and several states proposed that the matter be turned over to the theologians. Consequently, at the command of the emperor, Julius Pflug, bishop of Naumburg, Michael Helding, suffragan bishop of Mainz, and Johann Agricola, court preacher to the elector of Brandenburg, prepared a draft, which was then revised by certain Spanish monks and was secretly submitted by the emperor to the Protestant electors and prominent Roman Catholics of the empire. In twenty‑six articles it treated of man before and after the fall (i.‑ii.), of redemption through Christ (iii.), of justification (iv.‑vi.), of love and good works (vii.), of forgiveness of sins (viii.), of the Church (ix.‑xii.), of bishops (xiii.), of the sacraments (xiv.‑xxi.), of the sacrifice of the mass (xxii.), of the saints (xxiii.), of the commemoration of the dead (xxiv.), of the communion at the mass (xxv.), and of the cere‑

Interim	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	'.i2
Iateryolwtiom
monies of the sacraments (xxvi.). Although the views of the Protestants were taken into account in a general way, the document revealed the old Church with its faith and worship. In the belief that the Interim applied to all imperial estates, the electors of Brandenburg and the Palatinate approved it. After a long opposition Elector Maurice of Saxony and Margrave Hans of Kiiatrin promised not to protest openly if all imperial estates should approve and accept it. The Roman Catholics, however, were not willing to make any concessions. On May 15, 1548, Charles assembled the imperial estates and demanded their submission. He admonished the Protestants to return to the old faith or to live in accordance with the Interim, while the Roman Catholics were to remain faithful to the ordinances of their Church. Elector Maurice, Margrave Hans, and their adherents were greatly angered because only the Protestants were to be compelled to accept the Interim, but in accordance with their promise they did not protest. On June 30, 1548, the Interim became imperial law. In South Germany the emperor succeeded in introducing it in some cities and territories by force, but in the rest of Germany his orders were not carried out. In the Palatinate, Brandenburg, Saxony, Weimar, Hesse, Mecklenburg, Pomerania, and other states, as well as in the North German cities, there arose vehement opposition, of which Magdeburg became the center, headed by men like Flaciua, Amadorf, and Callus, while Agricola and Melanchthon were inclined to compromise.
3. The Leipsic Interim: Adopted by the Saxon diet at Leipsic Dec., 1548. After his return from the diet at Augsburg, Maurice of Saxony assembled his prominent councilors and theologians at Meissen to disease the imperial Interim. He was resolutely bent upon adhering to the Evangelical doctrine, but was anxious to have a frank and definite statement of what might be accepted and what must be rejected on the ground of Scripture. After a careful and conscientious examination, the theologians flatly rejected the entire Augsburg document. After a royal and imperial admonition to introduce it in Saxony, a new discussion took place in Torgau Oct. 18, 1548. The electoral councilors laid before the theologians a list of the points which in their estimation were acceptable and might lead to a new church order. Melanchthon agreed with moat of the points. Deliberations were continued in Altzella Nov. 19‑22, and, under stress of the news of the emperor's forcible measures in South Germany, an interim was drawn up which, in the doctrine of justification and in other points, upheld the Protestant doctrine, while it conceded as "Adiaphora " (q.v.) such things as extreme unction, the mass, lights, vestments, vessels, image®, fasts and festivals, and the like. Maurice and Joachim of Brandenburg came to an agreement and put in writing what they would accept. The Saxon diet met in Leipaic on Dec. 21 and accepted the Altzella, resolutions; the bishops of Naumburg and Meissen, however, refused to concur, because in their opinion it was reserved to the emperor alone to make changes in the (Augsburg) Interim. The ultimate outcome was that things remained as before.
	At the diet at Augsburg in 1550‑51 the majority
of the estates advocated the continuation of the
Council of Trent and urged the emperor to compel
Protestants to accept the Interim. When the im
perial invitation to the council arrived in Dresden,
Maurice began negotiations with the Protestant
estates concerning a general agreement. In Dessau
Melanchthon with Prince George of Anhalt drew up
the so‑called Saxon Confession, which was approved
by Maurice, Hans of Kilatrin, the dukes of Mecklen
burg and Pomerania, and others. It was proposed
that certain Saxon theologians should go to Trent
under safe protection and defend the pure doctrine.
In Jan., 1552, Melanchthon, with two others, started
on the journey and got as far as Augsburg; but in
March they were called back because the war against
the emperor began. The expedition of Maurice to
South Germany occasioned the suspension of the
Council of Trent. The Treaty of Passau annihilated
the Interim and led to the Religious Peace of Auga
burg (q.v.) . 	(S. IBaLEIB.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. Beutel, Ueber den Ursprunp du Aupaburper Interims, Dresden, 1888; G. P. Fisher, The ReJormation, pp. 186‑214, New York, 1873; A. von Dru$'el, BrieJe and Akten zur Guchidrte du 1B. Jahrhunderta, iii. 42 eqq, Munich, 1882; C. Beard, The Reformation, pp. 109, 243 210, London, 1883; F. von Beaold, Geachichte der deut'chen won. pp. 806‑808, Berlin, 1890; 8. Ianleib, in Ntuea Archiv Jilr a6chaiacht Guchichte, xiii, 188 eqq., xv. 193 nqq, Dresden, 1892‑94; idem, Morifa von Sachsen, pp. 189‑213, Leipaie,1907; W. Walker, The ReJor~tiou. PP. 207‑ZOB, 218. New York, 1900; J. Babington, The Reformation, Pp.. 113‑114, London, 1901; Cambridge Modern History, The Reformation, pp. 284‑288, New York, 1904.
INTERMEDIATE STATE: A term designating both the period and the condition of the soul between death and the final judgment. The intermediate state is an aspect of the doctrine of Hades (q.v.). It has assumed many forms. (1) The early doctrine; which in general has continued to be the common view, that the dead remain in a condition of privation until the resurrection‑the righteous happier (martyrs going at once to Paradise), the wicked more miserable, than while on earth (Ire. neeus, Haer. v. 31; Tertullian, " On the Soul," IV.). (2) Purgatory, the condition of those who depart this life in faith, yet are still liable to punitive sufferings for venial sins and who are purged before their entrance into heaven; such may be " helped " by the suffrages of the faithful, but principally by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar " (Council of Trent, Sera. xxv.; see PURGATORY). (3) The limbo of the Fathers is the abode of Old‑Testament saints to whom after his death Christ preached the Gospel
(Thomas Aquinas, Summa, qu. 69, art. 4; Dente, Ditine Comedy, Inferno, Canto iv.; W. E. Addis and T. Arnold, Catholic Dictionary, pp, 584‑585, London, 1903). (4) .The limbo of infants is the

region to which unbaptized infants are consigned after death, to remain forever in a state of PP1Yar
tion, without suffering and also without 6pplneaa,
a doctrine based on the universal necessity of

baptism for the remission of the guilt of original sin (Thomas Aquinas, ut sup., qu. 89,. art. 8' Bee INFANT SALVATION; LIMHUS). (5) The sleep of souls, based on such passages as Acts vii. 80, xiii. 38; 1 Cor. xv. 8, 18, 20, 51; 1 These. iv. 13‑15. Between

28	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Interim
		Interpolations
death and the second coming of Christ all souls
are is a dreamless sleep (thus oblivious of the lapse
of time and without moral change) from which they
are simultaneously awakened for the judgment.
This view was opposed in the early Church (of.
Eusebius, Hint. eccl. VI., awii.). Calvin wrote in
refutation of it Psycho;Oannychia (1534), directed
against the Anabaptists. Richard Whately pre
sented it with great force and sympathy as an
alternative belief, in his work Ors the Future State
(London, 1829). It is an article of faith among
the several branches of Adventists (q.v.). (6)
Preservation of the spiritual element of both the
saved and the unsaved during the middle state,
when by a creative act of God soul and body are
reunited before the judgment. This element of the
personality exists in various degrees of conscious
ness, knowledge, and enjoyment, some sloping,
some learning, some as demons on earth, some
imprisoned in the abyss or suffering in Hades for
life's sins, some being evangelised. In the interval
between death and the resurrection the Gospel may
be accepted or finally refused by those who have
not known it here below (Edward White, Life in
Christ, chap. xai., London, 1878). (7) A relatively
bodiless condition in which the pious dead are in a
state of privation, to be described as inwardness and
spirituality and progressive development, of deepest
retirement, and of withdrawal into self, and at the
same time of communion with Christ (cf. H. L.
Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 1276, Edinburgh,
1868; J. J. van Oosterzee, Christian Dogmatics,
I ealii., London, 1870; I. A. Dorner, System of
Christian Doctrine, iv. 212, Edinburgh, 1880‑82).
(8) As to the unbelieving dead, who have not de
cisively rejected the Gospel, the intermediate state
opens the door of repentance and spiritual life
(9e8 EBCBATOLO(iY; PROBATION, FUTURE).
		C. A. BEC%WiT$.
B:arroaawra:: The literature of the subject is well covered
	under ESCRATOLOGY; HADER; and PROBATION, FUTURE
	(99.v.). Consult further: V. U. Maywhalen. The Inter
	mediate State, London, 1858; H. M. Luekock, The Inter
	mediate Stale between )cath and Judgment, ib., 1890; T. H.
	Stockwell, editor, our Dead: Where are They? A Sym
	posium, ib., 1890; A. Willismeon The Intermediate State,
	ib., 1891; G. $. Barrett, The Intermediate State; the Lost
	Things. ib., 1898• C. H. H. Wright, intermediate State and
	Prayer for the Dead, ib. 1900; G. T. Feehner, Little Book
	01 Life alms' Death, oston, 1904; $. C. Gayford, Life altar
Death, shape. ii‑iii.. Milwaukee, 1909.
	INTERPOLATIONS Ilk THE NEW TESTA
MENT: In its rigorous sense, an interpolation is
an insertion in a text or document with the object
of obtaining backing or authority for the interpo
lator's opinion or project. This is the ordinary
dictionary sense of the group of words, " inter
		polation, interpolate, interpolator."
	Definition. This is also the meaning resigned to the
		word by legal usage, according to which
an interpolation is an insertion within a will or deed,
or a molding of its text to an end distinct from the
original end and aim of the text itself. The same
sense is assigned to the word by diplomacy, where
an interpolation is a tampering with the teat of a
public document by one party to it, in order to gain
an advantage over the other party. Thus " inter
polation " seems to imply, first, a fined teat and,
secondly, a conscious or deliberate purpose to alter or twist the meaning and intention of a text, the interpolator's aim being to slip his meaning under cover of a mind having greater authority or higher standing than his own, so securing for his own opinion or judgment a market‑value above its intrinsic worth. For example, a Christian student of the second century inserted in the text of Josephus (Ant. XVIIL, iii. 3) the well‑known passage regarding Jesus. His object was to make Josephus a witness to Christ. This is an interpolation in the rigorous sense.
It is doubtful, however, whether the word in this sense can be safely and correctly applied to any part of the field of text‑variation in the New Tes‑
tament. At least, if used at all, it Strict Sense must be used with caution. The con‑
Inapplic‑ ditions of thought have materially st‑
able to Hew tered since the word came into use.
Testament. In the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries, when for the first time Christians began to be seriously disturbed by textvariation (the life and work of Brian Walton and of Johann Albrecht Bengel (q.v.] yield examples), the standing view of the New Testament has regarded it as an inerrant book or collection of books written by inspired individuals. This conception seemed to involve a belief that the text, once for all delivered in apostolic autographs, should have been closed against change. It was this conception which gave rise to the furious controversies in England (nineteenth century) over the " three witnesses " passage (I John v. 7). Both the conservative and the anticonservative forces of Christendom gave the idea of interpolation great vogue. The currency of the idea depended therefore on a body of related ideas. But those ideas have been modified in order to bring them into agreement with widening and deepening knowledge of the apostolic age. Neither of the two conditions presupposed by the rigorous.definition of the term interpolation can be placed within the period when the New‑Testament literature was coming to the light. The conception of the inspired text as an apostolic autograph, finished, like a modern book, at the time of publication, has broken down under the pressure of historical truth. Regarding the Gospels, it is known (see GOSPEI$) that the author of a single Gospel was quite as much corporate as individual. The text remained plastic for a considerable period. The " Gospel " was not thought of as a book, but as a lildng word, a spiritual climax, a majestic conviction. So long as this conception had sway, the gospel‑teat lay open to the formative and molding forces of the Christian consciousness. It was not till deep in the see.. and century that this situation altogether passed away. When that happened, when the Gospel came to be thought of as a book, the text became fixed and rigid. The Church's theory of inspiration and the zeal of scholars and theologians endowed the text with powers of resistance sufficient to withstand the ceaseless tendency to mold it by interpretation.
So then the possibility of text‑molding continued deep into the second century. The last twelve

Interpolations
Investiture	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	`.i4
verses of St. Mark's Gospel are a case in point. The conclusion of the Gospel somehow fell into con‑
fusion, was torn off, or lost. A reverEssmples ent scholar, probably in the first half from the of the second century, wrote in the Gospels. present conclusion, taking his materials from Matthew and Luke. The doxology to the Lord's Prayer in one form of the Matthean text (Matt. v. 13) is another example. The Prayer was soon takexi into the corporate worship of Jewish Christians. Designed by Jesus not so much for a specific prayer as to show the framework and perspective of prayer, it needed the ascription to qualify it for liturgical uses. The Christians who made the addition had no thought of doing injury to Christ's authority or tampering with his meaning. They rather supposed that they were asserting his authority and publishing his mind. Consequently, the second of the conditions stated above, a deliberate purpose to alter the text, is wholly lacking. Both conditions therefore being absent, doubt regarding the correctness and propriety of the term in the New‑Testament field appears to be well founded, so far as t4e Gospels are concerned. The phenomena of interpolation, under the pressure of recent discoveries, are converted in large measure into one element of a much larger and more vital problem, namely the part played by Christian interpretation of the person of Christ in bringing the Logia, the saving words of Jesus, into their present text. One example will serve, the text of our Lord's teaching about divorce (Matt. v. 32, xix. 9; Mark x. 9 aqq.; Luke xvi. 18). A strong, if not a decisive, body of scholarly opinion, renders it probable that the permission of divorce on the ground of fornication or adultery was no part of our Lord's teaching. Mark and Luke are silent. Furthermore, this exception to his prohibition of divorce seems to run counter to his methods as an inspirer of constructive morality. Except in this one instance, he deals with the supreme ideals in their perfection of spiritual and moral beauty. Therefore it seems probable that the Matthean text is a molded form of the original Jogion, and that the change took place as the result of debates between Jewish Christians and Jews over the interpretation of Deut. xxiv. 1. But no scholar would think of applying the word " interpolation " to the process.
The same process goes on in the New‑Testament text outside the Gospels. Harnack and others have recently affirmed that " things strangled " (Acts xv. 29) was never a part of the original Lucan text, but was read in by later Christians.
Further This is problematical. But there is
	Examples.	little that is problematical regarding
		the present text of Eph, iii. 5. St.
Paul wrote the letter to the Ephesiana (see PeuL).
He did not write and could not have written " as
it was revealed to his holy apostles," These words
show the handiwork of the Pauliniat editor of the
Pauline letters. It is, however, quite a different
affair to say that the editor was an interpolator.
Indeed, the use of the term seems to involve a view
of the origin and growth of the New‑Testament
Scriptures which is decisively contradicted by a ,
large and growing body of facts. It would be, for example, a serious misnomer to call John viii. 53ix. 11 (the woman taken in adultery) an interpolation. That it is no part of the Johannine text is now agreed on all hands. Yet there are strong grounds for believing the story to be a piece of genuine and trustworthy tradition. Some day, when the Churches have recovered their self‑possession, this fragment may find itself printed along with other extra‑canonical sayings of Jesus as an appendix to the New Testament. Again, John v. 3‑4 (the account of the angel stirring the waters) can not justly be called an interpolation. No conscious, deliberate intention to tamper with the text is here in question. The variant is found within a class of phenomena which belong to the history of the conflict between the text and the margin. How natural, how irresistible even the conflict is, may be illustrated by the history of the greatest hymns and their use in the churches (cf. Julian, Hymnology, s.v. " Rock of Ages " or " Nearer, my God, to Thee "). When once a noble hymn has been taken to the heart of the living Church it begins to pay taxes for its right to rule. Similarly, sane historical views of the sacred text help to realize the immense pressure brought to bear on a book like the Bible incessantly employed and appealed to by canonist and theologian, by the preacher and the pastor and the saint, and to prevent wonder at the irrepressible conflict, under certain conditions, between the text and the margin. The case which seems to come nearest to the requirements of rigorous definition is I John vii. 6‑8a (the " three heavenly witnesses "). The authority against it is overwhelming, and its entrance into the Greek text is illuminating. Erasmus omitted it in the first edition of his Greek Testament (1516). A great outcry was raised, and Erasmus offered to insert the reading if a single Greek manuscript containing it could be found. One was found, later study of which made probable that its text for I John had been achieved by a translation, at a very late period, out of Latin into Greek. But Erasmus kept his word, and the reading appeared in his second edition. It became a part of the commercial text of the New Testament and passed into the so‑called textus receptus of 1633.
HENRY S. NABH.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The subject is generally dealt with in works on the textual criticism of the N. T., and much of the literature named under Bears Tsar (ii. 112‑113 of this
work) contains matter upon it, particularly the works Of Coplnger and Kenyon named there; works on the general
introduction to the N. T. also disease the subject (see BIBLICAL INTRODBCrION). Special mention may be made of B. F. Westeott and F. J. A. Hort, N. T, in the Original Greek, i. 571 eqq., ii. 325 eqq., New York 1882; P. Schaff, Companion to the Greek Testament and the English Versions, pp. 183 aqq., 420 eqq., ib. 1883; F. H. A.
Scrivener, Plain introduction to the criticism of the New Testament, i. 7‑9 ii. 249 321 eqq., London, 1894; C. A. Briggs, General Introduction to the Studg of Holy Scripture, chap, x. New iYork, 1899; C. R. Gregory, Canon and Text of the N. T.. PP. 508 sqq., ib. 1907.
INTERSTITIA: The intervals supposed to elapse, according to Roman Catholic canon law, between the times of a man's receiving the different orders. The principle that there should be such intervals is expressly laid down in the thirteenth canon of

25	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Interpolations
Investiture
the Council of Sardica (343). It was observed in regard to the minor orders as long as they had distinct functions, but this ceased when they became mere formal steps to the higher. The Council of Trent endeavored to restore their former actual significance, and prescribed the observance of the interstitia for them, unless the bishop should judge it better to proceed otherwise. At the present day it is customary in many places to confer the tonsure and all the minor orders on the same day. It was also decreed at Trent that a year should elapse between the minor and major orders, and between each of the latter, unless necessity or the general good required the time to be shortened, and that two major orders should never be conferred on the same day. In reference to the bishop's dispensing power, moreover, the Congregation of the Council has positively forbidden the conferring of the minor orders and the subdiaconate at the same time.
(F. W. H. WA8BER8CHLEBENt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Thomaeain, Vetua et nova eeclesia diaciPlina, T., ii. 3.5‑36; P. Hinachius, Dae Kirchenrecht . in Deutschland, i. 112‑113, Berlin, 1889; G. Philips, Kirchenrecht, i. 848 eqq., Regensburg, 1881; A. L. Richter, ed. W. Kahl, Lehrbuch den . . . Kirehenreehta, p. 384, Leipaic, 1886; E. Friedberg, Lehrbuch den Kirchenrechta, p. 139, ib. 1895.
INTINCTION. See EasmERN CHBRCH, III., ¢ 5.
INTRODUCTION TO THE BIBLE. See BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION.
INTROIT: The name given in the Latin Church to the anthem at the beginning of the communion service. It usually consists of an antiphon, a verse (or more) from a psalm or other portion of Scripture, and the Gloria Patri (see LITURGICB, III., ¢ 2). It differs considerably in the different rites in name, contents, and the time of its performance. Numerous forms exist, the Pian Missal alone containing 159. The origin is debated, some' ascribing it to Pope Celeatine (423 A.D.; cf. Liber Pontificalis, ed. Mommaen in MGH, Gent. poet. Rom., i. 94, 1898), and others to Gregory the Great.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Ducheane, Christian Worship, pp. 118‑
117, 183, 190, 439, London, 1904; DCA, i. 885‑‑887.
INVENTION OF THE CROSS. See Cxoae, INVENTION (OR FINDING) OF THE.
	INVESTITURE: In ecclesiastical language, the
ceremony of inducting an abbot or bishop into his
office. The subject is interesting mainly in connec
		tion with a long controversy between
	The the papacy and secular rulers over the
	Earlier right of investiture, which constitutes
	Practise. an important chapter of medieval his
		tory. Even before the fall of the
Roman Empire there are evidences of imperial in
fluence upon the nomination of bishops, going in
some cases as far as direct nomination. In the
Frankish kingdoms both the Merovingian and Caro
lingian rulers repeatedly named the bishops in their
territories; and even when the election was made
by the clergy and people, they either designated
the acceptable candidate beforehand, or claimed
the right to confirm the election. The influence of
the secular power was still more distinctly felt in
the case of abbeys erected after the Roman period;
the idea of the jurisdiction of a landowner, rained
to a higher power in the case of abbeys on royal
land, brought it to pass that royal nomination of
the abbots was the rule, election by the chapter the
exception. To these powers the Othos and the
Franconian dynasty held fast. The acquisition by
bishops and abbots of large territories and extensive
political rights, which reached its height in the
tenth and eleventh centuries, created a spiritual
aristocracy not less important than the secular,
which it was necessary for the kings to keep in hand
by retaining the decisive voice in the filling of the
offices‑a claim which was not then felt to involve
any invasion of the essential rights of the Church.
In older times the nomination and confirmation had
been made by a royal edict; but under the later
Carolingians, whether an election had taken place
or not, the actual installation was made by a solemn
and formal ceremony, including the giving of the
sovereign's hand and the taking of an oath by the
candidate. After Otho I. the most usual form was
the giving to the new bishop or abbot of his pre
decessor's pastoral staff, to which Henry III. added
the delivery of the episcopal ring. The whole
ceremony resembled the investiture of a temporal
vassal; and since it conveyed not only spiritual,
but temporal, jurisdiction, it began in the eleventh
century to be designated by the term investitura.
	The first determined opposition to the system
came from the ecclesiastical reformers of the elev
		enth century. It was directed prima
	The rily against aimoniaca,l bargains, but
	Contest in soon went further. Cardinal Humbert,
	Germany. in his treatise Adversus simoniacos
		(1057‑58), came out decisively against
lay investiture. In 1059 and 1063 two Roman
synods condemned the bestowal of the minor
ecclesiastical offices by laymen; in 1060 synods at
Vienne and Tours took the same position in regard
to bishoprics and abbeys; and in 1068 the filling
of the see of Milan gave occasion for these principles
to be put into practise. But the first actual clash
came when Gregory VIL, in the Lent synod of
1075, directly denied the right of the German king
to grant investiture, and enforced his denial so
vigorously that Henry IV. was obliged to take up
the challenge by the attempt to depose Gregory
at the Synod of Worms in 1076, thus opening a
struggle which lasted for forty‑six years. Gregory
and his successors maintained their position. The
Roman synod of 1080 laid down positive regale;
tiona, based upon primitive Christian practise, for
the election of bishops by the clergy and people,
giving the pope a deciding voice as to the validity
of the election. Victor III., Urban IL, and Paschal
II. reiterated the same views, but had no better
success than Gregory in enforcing them against
Henry IV. and V. The ultimate solution of the
difficulty was prepared rather by the literary dis
cussions, in which a gradual perception appeared
of the distinction between the spiritual office and
the secular rights. This opened the way to attempts
at accommodation. After some failures, efforts led
in 1122 to the Concordat of Worms between Henry
V. and Caliatua IL, which ended the struggle and
formed the basis of the later practise until the

I nvestiture adture	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
$8
downfall of the German empire (for provisions see	monareh%quea de la France . , , (887‑1180), ii. 88 eqq
CONCORDATS AND DELIMITING BULLS, L). Ep18‑	ib. 1891; P. Viollet, Hiat, des institutions politiques es
copaland abbat181 elections were to be conducted	°d" sinistratiroea de la France,ii.317 eqqParis, 1898.
	For England: E. A. Freeman, Reign of William Rufus,
in Italy and Burgundy without any royal laterfer‑	London, 1882; M, Schmitz, Dar enplische Invetihaatnit;
end, in Germany in the presence of the king, and	Innsbruck 1884 w. Hunt, The English Church , .
	with provision for his advisory assistance in con‑	(597‑1066), London, 1899; W R	W Stephens, The
						English Church . . . (IABB‑it78), pp 119‑131 et passim,
tested elections. The agreement was not an sin‑			ib. 1901; J. Drehmann, papal Leo. I%. and die Bimonis.
qualified victory for either aide, but the papacy in			Beitrag zur Unaer8uchuno do yorpesehichte des Inroaatitur
the end profited moat by it. After the contested			8treita• Leipeic, 1908. Consult also w E Addis, Catholic
						Dictionary, PD. 497‑498, London 1903; KL, vi. 844‑883•
imperial election of 1198 (see INNOCENT III.), the			and the literature under the articles on the popes named
influence of the emperor on elections rapidly de‑			in the text and under ANSELM,
clined, while that of the popes, especially under			IONA: An island of the Inner Hebrides, off the
the skilful management of Innocent Ill., increased		west coast of Scotland, separated from the Rose of
in the same proportion.			Mull by Ions Sound. It forma a part of Argyllshire,
	In France during the eleventh century much the		and lies from 35 to 40 miles to the westward of
same conditions existed as in Germany; but when		Oban, from which it is reached by steamer. The
		the conflict arose it was not made so		name should be Ioua, the form with n having arisen
	France.	much a question of principle or con‑		from a mistaken reading of u. In Irish it occurs as
		ducted with so much bitterness. The		1‑CoLumcille, " the Island of Columba." The pop
French bishops had not so much secular power,		ular name at present is Eechohtimrcl le. The island
nor did they to the same extent constitute $ spiritual	is about three and a half miles long from northeast
aristocracy.	Again, the king claimed to invest		to southwest, and from a mile to a mile and a half
only a part of the bishops and abbots, while the		in breadth. It is rocky and sandy, with boggy
majority were nominated and installed by the great		hollows between the hills, the highest of which
vassals. Speaking generally, the right of nomina‑		rises to 330 feet. Its area is estimated at from
lion was abolished by the beginning of the twelfth		1,600 to 2,000 acres, leas than half of it arable, and
century, and free election became the rule; but		not more than a third actually under cultivation.
until the end of the century, and even longer, the		The pastures on the aides of the knolls and ravines
kings and some of the local magnates still main‑		support a few hundred sheep and a smaller number
tained the right of permitting and of confirming		of cattle. The population in 1901 was 213, engaged
the election, and the kings and some great nobles		in agriculture and fishing.
still conferred secular rights and claimed the rev‑			Ions owes its fame to its association with Columba
enues of these temporalities during a vacancy.		and the monastery founded there by him in 563.
	The reforming party had less success in England.		The Irish annals state that the island was given to
Under the Anglo‑Saxon and Danish kings the ap‑		him by his kinsman, Conall, king of the Dalriad
		pointment to bishoprics and the great	Scots. Belle, however, says he received it from the
	England. abbeys was in the king's hands; the		Picts as a result of his successful missionary labor
		Normans introduced investiture and		among them. Bede's statement is the more prob
the oath of allegiance. The prohibition of lay in‑		able, but possibly both accounts are true, as Ions
vestiture by Gregory VII. was inoperative here.		was debatable ground between the Scots and the
It was not until Anaehn, in 1101, came back to		Picts. For Columba's work there and the earlier
England a confirmed Gregorian and refused the		history of the monastery, see the articles COLUMBA;
oath of allegiance that there was any real investiture	CELTIC CHURCH IN BRITAIN AND IRELANDS ADAA(
controveray there. It ended in 1107 by the king's		NAN. The island was repeatedly ravaged by the
renouncing the formality of investiture with ring		Danes during the ninth and tenth centuries; on
and staff, but retaining the oath of allegiance and		one of these occasions (806) sixty‑eight monks
the other rights of his predecessors. In spite of		suffered martyrdom. The ruined buildings were
Stephen's promise that bishops and abbots should		restored again and again with remarkable perti
be canonically elected, the assent of the English		nacity. Between 814 and 831 the monastery was
kings continued the decisive factor. The English		rebuilt with stone and a shrine was erected to St.
clergy did not win the right of absolutely free elec‑		Columba. In 878 the shrine and relics were taken
lion even at a later period, while Innocent III. (q.v.)	to Ireland. Queen Margaret rebuilt the monastery
forced King John to allow the papacy to share the		between 1059 and 1093. A Benedictine abbey and
royal influence.	(SIEGFRIED RIETBCHEL.)		nunnery were established in the island in 1203. The
BIBLIOGRAPHY: For Germany consult: F. A. Staudenmaier,	remains still existing date mostly from the twelfth
	GQachichee der BiechoJewahte„, Mains, 1830; H. Gerdes ,		and thirteenth centuries although the chapel of
	Die BisehoJruwhlen in Deutschland, GtSttingen, 1878; P.		St. Oran 0
	Hinachius, Kirehsnrecht, ii, s3p aqq, Berlin, 1878; F.				( dh7Ytin May be of the time of Queen
	Franaien, Der deatache Epiecopat , , , loss‑e	gek'UuRnegdner	Margaret. It is of red granite, and has as its west.
	burg, Is79‑so; R. Reese, Die ataaterechuichc Itr,,A'Uoic3h9e‑SM	der	ern doorway a Norman arch with beak‑headed orna
	BiecheJe aurounas sins tratieas unterlV'riedricht. Gsttin,Ien,		went, and stands in the Reilig Odhrain, the ancient
	188b‑ C. Mirbt, Die Publiriatik im Zeatalter prays,‑s y!;„		burial‑ la0e of the Ippn~) ~,~ al~o ~~ L
	PP. 483 sqq	Leipeic. 1894; E. Friedberg, Kircht;	P Ill,
lo. 312 eqq„ ib. Is9b; C. Willing, Zur a";" des 6n the burial

aareite' Li	‑Plate of the Scottish and Pictish
	egnita, 1898. A. Hauek, KD vo1*done* iiikings till the time of Malcolm III, (d. 1093), as well
For France: A. Cauc6ie, La puQetle des invsetituree 	as of Certain English, Irish, and Norwegian kings.

tea dioc?aea de LiEys et de Cambrai Lo	1890‑91; P. Imbsrt de la Tour, Lee L~tect;oa, ~sco~ . , u.‑North of this cemetery are the remains of the
rii. aitctu, Paris, 1891; A. Luchaire, Hint, tree institution's thirteenth‑century Benedictine abbey. In conneo‑

27	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Investiture
		Ireland
tion with the cloisters is a Norman arcade of some
what older date. The Church of St. Mary, com
monly called the Cathedral, dates probably from the
thirteenth century. It is built of red granite, in
cruciform shape, with nave, transept, and choir,
and has a central tower seventy‑five feet in height.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Besides the authorities mentioned under
CoLVMaw, Cut.nsES, especially Peeves (1857). pp. 334' '
389, 413r133, consult: L. Maclean, A. Historical Account of Ions, Edinburgh. 1833; C. A. and J. C. Buekleee, The Cathedral or Abbey Church of Ions, London, 1886 (drawings with descriptive letterpress and an account of the early Celtic Church and the mission of 8t. Columba by A. Ewing, Bishop of Ions and the Isles); the Duke of Argyll, Iona, London, 1870; J. Drummond, Sculptured Monuments in Iona and the West Highlands, Edinburgh, 1881; J. Healy, Inaula $anctorum, pp. 291‑383, Dublin, 1890; W. Bright, Chapters of Early English Church History, passim, Oxford, 1897; A. Macmillan, lone, its History and Antiquities. London, 1898.
IRELAND.
L The Roman Catholic Church. II. The Church of Ireland. III. Other Protestant Bodies IV. History.
Ireland, a large island west of Great Britain, and since 1801 an integral part of the United Kingdom, has an area of 31,790 square miles, and a population (1901) of 4,458,775. It is divided into four provinces: Ulster in the north, Leinater in the east, Munster in the south, and Connaught in the west. The census report of 19,01 includes statistics of 309 religious professions, the moat important of which are Roman Catholics, 3,308,881; Church of Ireland, 581,089; Presbyterians, 443,278; Methodists, 82; 008; Congregationalists or Independents, 10,142; Unitarians, 8,094; Baptists, 7,082; Reformed Presbyterians, 8,532; Jews, 3,898; " Brethren," 3,742; United Free Church of Scotland, 3,147; Friends, 2,731; and " Christians," 2,831.
L The Roman Catholic Church: The organisation of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland is as follows: archbishopric of Armagh (corresponding to Ulster; founded 455), with the suffragan bishoprics of Ardagh (before 458; united to Clonmacnoise 1729, which was founded before 549), Clogher (506), Derry (1158), Down (499; united to Connor 1442, which was founded 1174), Dromore (c. 510), Kilmore (1136), Meath (520), and Raphoe (885); archbishopric of Dublin (corresponding to Leinster; before 618; raised to archbishopric 1152; united to Glendalough 1215), with the suffrsgan bishoprics of Ferns (before 632), Kildare (before 519; later united to Leighlin, which was founded 828), and Oesory (538); archbishopric of Cashel (corresponding to Munster, before 458; raised to archbishopric 1152; united to Emly 1582, which was founded before 527), with the suffragan bishoprics of Cloyne (before 604; united to Ross 1430, but separated from it 1849), Cork (808), Kerry and Aghadoe (before 1075), Killaloe (c. 840), Limerick (1108); Roes (before 1172), Waterford (1098; united to Lismore 1383, which was founded 833); and archbishopric of Tuam (corresponding to Connaught, 540 raised to archbishopric 1152; united to Enachdune 1484, which was founded in the seventh century; united to Majo 1578, which was founded 88b), with the auffragan bishoprics of Achonry (before 1152), Clonfert (558), Elphin (c. 450), Galway (1831; later
united to Kilmacduagh and Kilfenora, which were founded before 620), and Killala (sixth century). The above dates are taken from P. B. Gams, Series Epiacoporum Eedeaiae Ceatlwlioae (Regeneburg, 1872), and in many eases are too early. Authorities differ considerably.
The Roman Catholics maintain 2,420 churches with 3,543 priests, 97 monasteries and 270 nunneries. The elementary schools are for the moat part entrusted to the Christian Brethren; each diocese has a seminary for boys; there are besides colleges at Thurlea, Waterford, Kilkenny, and Carlow. At Maynooth is situated the College of St. Patrick, and in Dublin, University College. The Catholic University of Ireland consists at present of colleges at Dublin, Maynooth, Blaekrock, Carlow, and Clonliffe.
II. The Church of Ireland: This body, before 1871 the established church in Ireland, has two archbishoprics, Armagh, corresponding in a rough way to Ulster and Connaught, and Dublin, corresponding to Leinater and Munster. There are thirteen bishoprics, including the archbishoprics. At the census of 1901 there were 1,817 clergy. The head university for the Church of Ireland is Trinity College, Dublin (founded 1591); there is also Queen's University (founded 1850), with three colleges at Belfast, Cork, and Galway, which are each under the government of a dean. These colleges also have foundations for the Presbyterians and the Wesleyan Methodists. The property of the church is administered by the representative body, consisting of the archbishops and bishops, thirteen clerical and twenty‑six lay representatives, also thirteen cooptated members, who can be either clergy or laymen. In their care are all the churches, together with the churchyards, and also the schoolhouses. They also take charge of the payment of all the officials and servants of the church. The government of the church is entrusted to the general synod, which is compered of three classes, the bishops, the clergy, and the laity, which form two houses, the house of bishops, thirteen in number, and the house of representatives, with 208 clerical and 418 lay members. The representatives are chosen every three years. The synod meets yearly in Dublin, but extraordinary meetings may be summoned. Each diocese has also its own synod, which meets at least once a year. These synods are also chosen every three years. The church is divided into parishes, every church with a clergyman and registered vestrymen counting as a pariah. Every diocesan synod chooses two clergymen and one layman, who, with the bishop, form a committee of patronage. Each pariah on its aide names every three years three parochial nominators. When a vacancy occurs in a pastorate the two aforesaid bodies meet together and form a board of nominators, who elect the new incumbent. When a bishopric becomes vacant the archbishop of the province calls together the synod of the diocese, who vote by ballot for a successor. The bishop of the diocese appoints the dean, the canons, the deacons, and the other officers of the cathedral.
i The collegiate and cathedral church of St. Patrick in Dublin was made the national cathedral (May,

Ireland
Irenaeus
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
1872), and stands in the same relation to all the dioceses. There are two kinds of spiritual courtB of justice, the diocesan courts, and the court of the general synod. A diocesan court consists of the bishop, the chancellor, who is appointed for life, and two members of the synod, one from the clergy and one from the laity. These men choose for five years three clerical and three lay co‑members. The, court of the general synod consists of one of the archbishops, who alternate with each other, one bishop, and three lay judges. Three additional members are chosen from the general synod. The constitutions and canons of the church are like those of the Church of England.
III. Other Protestant Bodies: The Presbyterians are found chiefly in Ulster, about ninety‑six per cent. of them being in that province. The largest body, the Presbyterian Church of Ireland, numbers 36 presbyteries, 647 ministers, and 569 congregations with 106,342 communicants. In the Sunday Schools there are 8,354 teachers and 97,647 scholars. The church administers two theological colleges, with fourteen professors. The Baptist Union of Ireland numbered, in 1908, 2,980 members, and had 39 churches and 40 chapels. The Wesleyan Methodist Church gave as the number of their members in 1907, 28,826; they had 133 stations in ten districts. See articles on the separate denominations.
IV. History For the early history of the church in Ireland 900 CELTIC CHURCH IN BRITAIN AND IRELAND. At the time of the Reformation, during the reign of Henry VIII., an attempt wag made to correct some of the abuses of the church in Ireland, but the Reformation did not meet with much popular favor, owing in a large measure to fear that only the English language could be used in church. Through the reigns of Henry VIII., Edward VI., and Elizabeth various attempts were made to introduce the English liturgy, and the government proceeded with great severity against the Roman Catholics. Under Mary there was a reaction in favor of the Roman Catholics. At the accession of James I. the Roman Catholics, thinking that he favored them, tried to expel the Protestants from the island. The king, however, suppressed the attempts, confiscating the estates of many Roman Catholics, especially in Ulster, and Settling Scotch Presbyterians in their place. During the Civil War and the Commonwealth, as also during the reign of Charles L, there were many rebellions and consequent suppressions of the Roman Catholics in Ireland. At the Revolution the Roman Catholics were filled with hope, and many Protestants had to flee the country. William Ill., however, finally completed the conquest of Ireland, and from that epoch until recent times the Roman Catholics were discriminated against in many ways. Gradually, however, the restrictions against them have been removed. Just a9 the Roman Catholics were discriminated against, so the Protestant Church, as the state church, was granted many favors. These have been done away with from time to time, and at last, July 26, 1868, the Irish Church Act was passed, taking effect Jan. 1, 1871. This act disestablished the church and die‑
solved its union with the Church of England. Compensation was made for all vested interests, including even the annual grants for the Roman Catholic college at Maynooth and the Regium Donum granted to the Presbyterians by James I.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: For the early history see CErIrIC CHURCH IN BarrAIN AND IRELAND and the literature given there. For recent data consult the Irish Clergy List (annual); The Irish Catholic Directory (annual); and the Year Books of the English bodies which carry on work in Ireland. Consult further: H. 9eddall, The Church of Ireland, Dublin, 1888• J. T. Ball Fingal and its Churches Dublin, 1888; idem The Reformed Church of Ireland, London, 1890; R. Walsh, Fingal and its Churches, Dublin, 1888; T. Olden, The Church of Ireland London, 1892; M. J. F. McCarthy, Rome in Ireland ib. 1904• M. O'Riordan, Catholicity and Progress in Ireland, Dublin 1905• M. J. F. McCarthy, Priests and People in Ireland, London, 1908.
IRELAND, JOHN: Church of England, dean of Westminster; b. at Ashburton (20 m. n.e. of Plymouth), England, Sept. 8, 1761; d. at Westminster Sept. 2, 1842. He studied at the free grammar‑school of Ashburton, and at Oriel College, Oxford (B.A., 1783; M.A., 1810; B. D. and D.D., 1810). After serving a small curacy near Ashburton for a short period, he traveled on the continent as private tutor; was vicar of Croydon, and reader and chaplain to the earl of Liverpool, 1793‑1816; held a prebend in Westminster Abbey, 1802; became Subdean as well as theological lecturer, 1806; and dean, 1816. He was rector at Islip in Oxfordshire, and dean of the Order of the Bath, 1816‑35. Acquiring considerable wealth, he used it with great generosity, founding scholarships at Oxford and prizes at Westminster School, and furthering free education. He held the crown at the coronations of George IV, and William IV. He left sums for a new church at Westminster, and for a new professorship at Oxford. He was the author of Five Discourses, containing certain Arguments for and against the Reception of Christianity by the ancient Jews and Greeks (London, 1796); Paganism and Christianity Compared, in a Course of Lectures to the King's Scholars at Westminster, in the Years 1806‑07‑08 (1809); and The Plague of Marseilles in . . . 17,0 (1834).
IRENAEUS.
Life (§ 1).	His Theology and Polity
His PrincipalLitetarywork, 	(§ 4),
	"AgainetHereaiea" (§ 2).	His Position as a Practical
Other writings (§ 3).	Churchman (§ 5).
	Irenaeue, bishop of Lyons, is the most important
witness to ecclesiastical tradition before Eu9ebius.
		He came originally from Asia Minor,
><. Life, which was connected in ____~ ..w,q

	with the Church of Gaul, and died
after 190. Little that is certain is known about him
until 177, in which year the imprisoned confessors
of Lyons chose him a9 the bearer of a letter to
Eleutherus of Rome concerning the Montani9t con‑
troversy. If the fact that the confessors call him
not only their brother, but their " companion," is
partly a remini9cense of Rev. i. 9, it still seems
probable that he did not wholly escape the persecu
tion; and it may have been a design to save his
valuable life that inspired the choice of him to go
to Rome. He had probably then been a presbyter
of the church at Lyons for several years, Rinse

99
immediately after his return he was chosen bishop, to succeed Pothinus, who had perished in the persecution. In this capacity he wrote his principal work about 185, and sent a letter about 190 to Victor of Rome, who had broken off communion with the churches of Asia Minor over the Quartodeciman controversy, as well as to other bishops. There is no further definite knowledge of his later years. Jerome is the first to mention him as a martyr, and then only incidentally, and not improbably on the basis of the expression quoted above from the letter of the confessors. Hippolytus, Tertullian, Eusebius, and other writers who would have been likely to mention the fact of his martyrdom, say nothing about it. There has been a prolonged controversy, which is still unsettled, as to the date of his birth and the length of his life. While Bodwell, Grebe, and more recently Zahn have put his birth near the beginning of the second century, Massuet, Lipsius, Ziegler, and Harnack have attempted to fix it near the middle. It moat be remembered that the date of the death of Polyearp is now practically settled for 155. The principal data may be briefly summarized as follows: If Irenaeus became bishop in 177, he must have been at least forty, and was therefore probably born before 137 rather than after. His implication (V., axx. 3) that the Apocalypse was written " almost in his own lifetime " is, all things considered, irreconcilable with the theory that he was born forty or fifty years after the probable date of its composition (before the death of Domitian in 96). Again, in his letter to Florinus (Eusebius, Hist. eccl., V., xx. 5), he speaks of having seen him at Smyrna in the emperor's train when he himself was still but a boy. Now, for various reasons, this emperor must have been Hadrian, who visited Asia Minor in 123 and 129, in the latter of which years the meeting must have taken place. All that Irenaeus tells of his recollections of Polycarp at this period shows that he must have been at least twelve or fifteen, and thus was probably born about 115. He implies distinctly that his intercourse with and instruction by Polyca,rp lasted for a number of years, very likely from about 129 to 150; and the same conclusion follows from what he tells of the teaching received in Asia Minor from certain disciples of the apostles. After all necessary sifting has been applied to the passages referring to this, there remain two (IV., xxvii. 1‑32 and V., xxxiii. 3, 4) which can be understood only as asserting that he had this oral instruction from more than one of such disciples and when he was of an age to take it in and be deeply impressed by it. Neither he nor any tradition mentions the reaching of an unusually great age by any member of this group except Polycarp; if the others died considerably earlier, say before 145, he moat before that date have been of an age to profit by their teaching. Finally, in an appendix to the Martynum polycarpi (found in a manuscript at Moscow), which is almost certainly written by the Pionius (q.v.) who was the author of s Vita Polycarpi before 400, the statement is found, based upon Irenaeus's own works, that he was teaching m Rome at the time of the death of Polycarp, and that a voice like a trumpet told him,
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Ireland
I:enseor
at the very hour, of the decease of his master in Smyrna. Whatever may be thought of this last assertion, there is no reason to doubt the general statement; and the account which he himself gives of Polyca,rp's visit to Rome in 154 evidently comes from one who was there himself at the time. The chronological results indicated above may thus be taken as fairly established.
It is impossible to assign all of Irenaeus's multifarious literary activity to the different periods of his life as long as so much of his work
s. His is lost. His principal work is the
Principal	" Refutation and Subversion of knowl‑
Literary	edge Falsely so Called," generally re‑
work,	ferred to as " Against Heresies." It
" Against consists of five books, and is preserved
	Heresies."	in its entirety only in a Latin version,
		the date of which requires further in
vestigation; there is sufficient evidence that the
original was still extant in the sixteenth and seven
teenth centuries. There are, however, long extracts
in the original Greek in Epiphanius, numerous
taller quotations in other writers, and consider
able portions incorporated without acknowledg
ment in the " Refutation " of Hippolytus. The
occasion of the work was given by the official posi
tion of Irenaeua at Lyons. Some disciples of
Marcus, who himself belonged to the school of
Valentinus, had come into the RhBne country, and
the Church of that region was troubled by the wri
tings of Florinus, the Roman presbyter who had em
braced the Valentinian teachings. The immediate
cause of the work was the request of a friend and
j	colleague at a distance for precise information about
	these same teachings and help in refuting them.
I	The work was not originally intended to be so large;
I	but it grew under his hand. Even in its present
i	extent, it does not fully carry out the plan promised;
	and Grebe's hypothesis that the complete work is
	not extant is not without foundation, especially
	since the present conclusion of v. 32 is wanting in
i	some Latin manuscripts. With great clearness of
~	thought and expression, Irenaeua takes no trouble
	m the main outline to keep within the narrow
	bounds of a preconceived plan, but allows himself
	to be carried swiftly forward by the current of his
	thought. There is no attempt at literary art; the
	subject is everything to him. Although he is pre
	pared to find a wide circle of readers he writes in
	the first instance for his brother in the faith. The
	latter was chiefly concerned with the teaching of
	Valentinus, and it is this which accordingly occupies
	the leading place, both in the exposition and the
	refutation. Others, however, are touched on and
	traced back to their sources as far a6 Sj)flOll Map
	and the doctrines of Valentinus can not be contro
	verted without at least incidental discussion of the
	contemporary one of Marcion. For his facts he
	depends not only upon his personal intercourse with
	disciples of Valentinus, but also upon their writings,
	which he sometimes quotes verbally, but more often
	summarizes freely. He is acquainted with the older
	church treatises against heresy, but is dissatisfied
	with their insufficient knowledge of the Valentinian
	position; in his treatment of other heresies, he may
have borrowed from these treatises to some extent,

Ir•n••u•	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	80
as he quotes incidentally from Justin's treatise against Marcion and from a polemical poem directed against Marcus.
Of a considerable number of other works of Irenaeue what is known is gathered from scattered
citations in Eueebiua and others. They 3. Other may be briefly enumerated as follows:
Writings. (1) An admonition to Florinus "On
the Divine Sovereignty, or God not the Author of Evil," written when Florinua was still in the communion of the Church, for he is warned that his teachings are irreconcilable with its doctrine, and that " not even heretics outside the Church have ventured to assert such things." (2) A " Treatise on the Ogdoad," occasioned by Florinus, but not addressed to him. The loan of this work is specially regrettable, since Irenaeus seems in it to have dwelt in detail on his relation to the first post‑apostolic generation. (3) An epistle to a certain Blastus in Rome " On Schism." According to the pseudoTertullian this man was a Quartodeaiman, according to Pacian a Greek by birth and a Montanist. (4) Among, or connected with, the letters which Ironaeua wrote to various bishops at the time of the paschal controversy may be placed that which, according to a Syriac fragment, " he wrote to an Alexandrian, showing that it was right to celebrate the feast of the Resurrection on Sunday." (5) The letter to Victor of Rome concerning this same controversy. (6) A letter " On Faith " to Demetrius, a deacon of Vienne. (7) According to Eusebius (v. 26), an apology, addressed to the Greeks, " On Knowledge." (8) A treatise, mentioned in Eusebius, Hiat. eccl., V. xxvi., dedicated to a certain Marcianus, possibly the author of the MarMtrium Polycarpi, on the apostolic preaching. [This work, which is of the nature of a dogmatic discussion of the apostolic teaching, and is quite an extensive work, has been discovered in Armenian translation in the Church of the Mother of God in Eriwan, and edited with German translation by Ter‑Mekerttachian and Ter‑Minasaiantz in T U, xxxi. 1 (1907). The manuscript dates from the second half of the thirteenth century, and contains about two‑thirds of the entire work. From what language the translation was made is not clear, but Syriac is indicated.] (9) A book of various discourses. (10) Oecumeniua gives an extract from a work in which Irenaeus is supposed to relate the martyrdom of Sanctus and Blandina. Allowing for a confusion of Blandina and Biblias, this agrees with the letter of the church of Lyons on the martyrdoms of 177, of which he may well have been the author, though Eusebius (V., aiv.‑xix. 25) did not think it necessary to mention the fact. (11) A treatise against the theory that matter is eternal. The exposition of Canticles, of which a Syriac fragment exists, is of doubtful authenticity, while the four fragments published in 1715 by Pfaff, chancellor of TUbingen, have been finally shown by Harnack to be forgeries of Pfaff's. It is not known whether Irenaeus carried out his intention (expressed Ill., ail. 12) of writing a special treatise against Marcion.
The extent and variety of the interests of which s glimpse has been given renders it impossible to
attempt here a complete exposition of the theology
and church polity of Irenseus. It is unfortunate
		that, outside of scanty fragments, only
	4• His a single polemical work of his is
	Theology extant, and that for the moat part
sad Polity, not in the original. Here he appears
		as a stout defender of church doctrine
against Gnosticism. If he is compared with the
other members of the school to which he belonged,
with Papise or with Polyca,rp, the manner appears
striking in which he combines with firm adhesion
to the faith of these simple men a remarkable
accessibility to the most varied elements of culture
that were within his reach. He makes no parade
of secular learning; he declines to be a teacher of
" barbaric philosophy " like other apologists from
Aristides to Clement; but he surpasses them all in
soundness of judgment, acuteness of perception, and
clearness of exposition. In fact, he is the first writer
of the poet‑apostolic period who deserves the title
of a theologian. In pure theology he stands far
above Athanasius and Cyril, and can be compared
only with Origen and Augustine. The balanced
security of his attitude is remarkable. When the
Phrygian peasants disturbed first the scans of his
early years, and then the whole Church with their
fanatical prophecies and their preaching of s gloomy
penance, he did not lose his head. In union with
the Church of Lyons and its imprisoned confessors,
he warned Eleutherua of Rome not to condemn
without examination a religious movement which
linked itself to the age of the apostles by valuable
inheritances. When the Alogi, in opposition to
Montanism, attempted to banish from the Church
all prophecy, and the Apocalypse with it, he took
a firm stand against them; but he did not become
a Montaniat. Again, in his judgment of the pagan
polity, he did not desert the line marked out by
Christ himself and by Paul, and followed (as he
points out) by John in the Apocalypse. The Ro
man Empire is to him no more Antichrist than the
world and the flesh necessarily belong to the devil.
	As a practical churchman he was no less admirable
than as a theologian. His sermons ate lost; but
		that a collection of them should have
	g. His been in existence 150 years after his
	Position death is enough to show that he de
	ns a serves a prominent place in the history
	Practical of homiletics. He learned Celtic in
	Church‑ order to speak to the heathen about
	man. Lyons, and thus has a place also in the
		history of missionary effort. His devo
tion to the immediate duties of his restricted and
outlying diocese did not prevent him from having
much at heart the welfare of the Church at large,
from feeling at home in Rome or Ephesus. His
evident love for the ancient Church of his native
home did not blind him to the special significance
and vocation of the Church at Rome, based upon
the position and history of the city. In the paschal
controversy he deflected the traditional ewlem of
the Church of his boyhood, because he caw that
the Western practise was more appropriate to the
essential center‑point of the Easter celebration;
but he stood out firmly against over‑emphasizing
such differences, and against the combined ignorance

gi	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Xronaime
	and assumption of Pope Victor. The unity of the
	Church, for whose sake he prizes the tradition car
	ried on by the episcopal succession in the great
	apostolic churches, is according to him perfectly
	consistent with large freedom and diversity in
	ecclesiastical customs and with mutual independence
	of the autonomous bodies which compose the uni
	versal Church. After the perversion of doctrine ~I
	by the Gnostics, he saw the greatest peril to this
	unity in a rigidity that strove for constrained uni
	formity, whether it manifested itself in the refusal
	of the Quartodeciman Blastus to yield in Rome to
	the prevalent custom is regard to Easter, or in the
	attitude of the Roman bishop, with whom he never
	theless agreed. Polemical theologian though he was,
	he yet verified his name (Irenaeus, " Peaceful ") by
	seeking the peace of the Church amid all his con
	troversies. His actual influence upon the develop
	ment of the Church was greater than that of perhaps
	any other teacher of the first three centuries. He
	did much to protect it, first against the dissolution
	threatened by the Valentinian speculations, which
	came in largely under the cover of external con
	formity; then against provincial narrow‑minded
	ness and ignorant fanaticism; and finally against
	the ambition of the Roman nee to grasp at a despotic
	universal monarchy. 	(T. ZAHN.)
131BLIGGRAPHT: The beet modern edition of the Works of irensus is by W. Wigan Harvey, 2 vole., Cambridge, 1877, sad perhaps the neat beat is by A. 8tieren, 2 vola., Leipaic, 18b.9. The editio yrincepa is by Erasmus, Basel, 1528 (often reprinted, contains the Lat. version of the Adv. Aaer.). Succeeding editions were by N. Gsllseiue, Paris. 1570 (the first edition with the fragments of the Greek); F. Fe‑dent, Cologne, 1598 and later; J. E. Grebe, Oxford, 1702 (one of the best); the Benedictine‑edition of R. Maeeuet, Paris, 1712 and Venice, 1734 (also esoeedingly good). Vol. iii. of the Oxyrhyneue Papyri by Grenfell and Hunt issued by the Egypt Exploration Fund for 1902‑‑03 contains fragments, on which cf. E. Nestle is the Munich Allpsmeine Zeitunp, no. 249. Note also Eiaspideixin tou apoetdou kerupmatoa, in armeniacher Version entdaekt, ed. K. TervMekerttschian and E. TerMinaeeisnta, in TU, zzsi (1907; cf. § 3, no. 8 shove).
On the life of Irenaew and various phases of his activities and works consult: the introductions to the various editions of his works; DCB, iii. 2b3‑279 (elaborate and well worth consulting); H. Dodwell, Dissertationu in Irtnaeum, Oxford, 1889; J. Alexander, The Primitive Doctrine of Christ's Divinity, London, 1727; E. Burton Testimoniu of the Ante‑Nieane Fatlura to the Divinity of Christ, pp. 88‑111, Oxford. 1828; J. Beaver, Life and Writings of St. Ire‑8, London, 1841; L. Duncker, Du heitipen Irendua Christolopia, Gsttingen, 1843; K. Grain, Din ehristliche Kirdls an der BeAwstts des irendiadurt Zeitalters, Leipaie, 1880; H. Ziegler, Des Irendw Lehre van de, Autoritdt der ScArift, der Tradition and der KircAs, Berlin, 1868; idem, IrenBus der BisehoJ roan Lyon, ib. 1871; R. A. Lipsiue, Die Zeit den Irendw and die Entetehunp der altkatAotiachen Kirehe, Munich, 1872; H. L. Mansel, Gnostic Heresies, London, 1875; J. B. Lightfoot, in ContemporaryReoiew, Aug., 1878; A. Gilloud, S. IrenEs et son tempo, Lyon, 1878; C. J. H. Ropes, in Bi6lsotAeca Saga, Apr., 1877 (deals with the nationality of Irenaeua); E. Montet, La Llqende d'IrenEe, Geneva, 1880; C. E. Freppel, S. Irente et 1'Eloyuencs ehrltienne daps la Gains, Paris, 1888; F. W. Farrar, Lives of tire Fathers, i. 87‑93, New York, 1889; J. Werner, Der Pautiniamw den Iren6w, in TU, vi. 2, 1889; J. Kunse, Dis OotteslsArs den Irendw Leipaia, 1891; Idem, Ds hia<oriae pnostieiami Jontibus, ib. 1894; T. Zahn, Forsehunpen sw Ouchichte den Xanone, iv. 247‑2R3, ib. 1891; A. Camerlyaek, S. Iranle et Is canon du N. T., Paris; 1898; A. Harnaek, Die Pfajj'eehen Irendw Fragmenee, in TU, rc. 3, 1900; idem, Litteralur, consult the Index (very full); idmrt, Dogma, passim, consult the Index; Ceillier, Autewa sea&, i. 495‑b19 ii. 537, b43‑544; Neander. Christian Church, i. 878‑882 et passim; t3cha(f, Christian Church,
ii. 746 eqq.; Moeller, Christian Church, i. 106, 158, 199 eqq.; sad the Church histories of the period.
IRE1fA&US, CHRISTOPH: Follower of Matthias Flaciua (q.v.); b. at Schweidnitz (31 m. s.w. of Breslau), Silesia, c. 1522; d, probably at Buchenbach (between Hall and Rothenburg‑on‑the‑Tauber), Wiirttemberg, c. 1595. From May, 1544, he studied at Wittenberg, where he was enrolled as Chriatofferus Harem. After being rector of schools at Bernburg (1545‑47) and Ascheraleben, he became M. A. at Wittenberg, Feb. 14, 1549. Late in 1552 he became deacon and was ordained by Bugenhagen. In 1559 he became archdeacon, and began his very extensive activity as theological author about this time. In the spring of 1582 he was called as pastor to Eisleben. Here, as a strict Lutheran, he was highly esteemed by the counts of Manafeld and the congregation, and became acquainted with the followers of Flaciua. In 1568 John William of Saxony called him to be court preacher, first in Coburg, then in Weimar. Ireniius utilized this appointment to obtain positions for the Flaciana at the university, in the Church, and in the chancery, and advocated the doctrine of Flaciua at the Altenburg Colloquy, Oct. 21, 1568‑Mar. 9,1569. Marlin, Chemnitz, and Jakob Andrew triad in vain to win him from Flacius. When the Evangelical princes complained of the Flaciana in 1570, IrenSua was transferred as superintendent to Neuatadt‑on‑the‑Orla, but persisted in his usual way, and when menaced with an investigation, escaped to Mansfield in 1572. His old friends did not stand by him, and Archbishop ~ Sigiamund of Magdeburg now intervened. IreriBUa I eluded his soldiers, Dee. 31, 1574, and thenceforth traversed Germany as an " exile for Christ." I Though seven times banished before 1590, he coal tinued striving with unbroken courage, and above I all opposed the Formula of concord, its authors, subscribers, and defenders. In 1575 he was expelled from his native town, whereupon he sojourned in Hesse and along the Lower Rhine. In 1579 he was I at Frankfort, and finally found refuge with Eberhard I of Stetten at Buchenbach. Count Wolfgang of Hohenlohe constrained him to a colloquy with I Andrea, at Langenburg, Aug. 8, 1581, and then I insisted upon his withdrawal from Buchenbach. At I the close of 1582, he obtained a call to the Lower ~ Austrian Church at Horn, but on Aug. 12, 1585, , the Flaciana one and all were notified of their diecharge. Irenliua returned to Buchenbach, and occupied himself with literary work. He was a noble, talented, and learned man, but a classic example of the rabies theologorurrt which converts a single article of Christian faith into a central dogma, as he did with the doctrine of Flacius on original sin. His best strength was spent in vituperation and railing, and, in his inequity of judgment he was even carried into falsehood, so that his best book,
Der Spiegel den elvigen Lebesza (1572), loser thereby
in value. 	G, BO88ERT.
BIBLIOaRAPRT: B. RHUpaCh, Epaf1(/ajNthai OCat6tTEiCA, raft Preebyterolopia Awtriaca pp 89‑73, and NacAbap, ZmiaJaake Zupabe, p. 43, 3 vols., Hamburg, 1741‑44 (the best biography, containing also a useful bibliography); J. G. Leuckfeld, Nut. Spanpen6erpewia, pp. 37‑38, Quedlinburg, 1718; W . Preger, Matthias plod. Illyriew and seine Zeit, 2 vole., Erlangen, 1859‑81; ZHT, xix (1850), 3 eqq., 218 eqq.; ADB, xiv. b82.

Irene
Irving
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
as
IRENE: Byzantine empress; b. at Athens 752; d. in Lesbos Aug. 9, 803. In 769 she married Leo, afterward Leo IV., and, upon his death in 780, she became regent during the minority of Constantine VI. The first years of her regency were marked by disastrous wars against the Arabians, to whom she was forced to pay annual tribute. In the iconoclastic controversies of the time (see IMAGES AND IMAGE‑WORSHIP, IL) she had secretly been favorable to images even during Leo's lifetime, and after his death she set herself to reverse the iconoclastic legislation of Constantine V. Accordingly, having gained control of the Eastern Church by judicious appointments to bishoprics, she called the seventh ecumenical council to meet at Constantinople in 786. Owing to the iconoclastic zeal of the soldiers here the council was transferred to Nicaea in 787, and image‑worship was then reestablished without opposition (see NIC&A, COUNCILS OF). In 790 the government was wrested from Irene by her son, Constantine VI., but by 792 she was again in power, ruling conjointly with Constantine. After five years of secret warfare between mother and son, Irene finally gained the upper hand and had Conetantine blinded and thrown into a dungeon in 797. Her own extravagant reign came to an end in 802, when she was overthrown by Nicephorus and banished to the Isle of Lesbos. Here she earned a meager living by spinning. At the time of her fall she was negotiating a marriage with Charlemagne, with a view to uniting the Eastern with the Western Empire. Her services in the interest of imageworahip won her the position of a saint in the Greek Church. Her day is Aug. 15.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gibbon, Decline and Fall, v. 191‑192; ICL, vi. 873; Krumbacher Geachichte, pp. 9, g84‑865, 1074; Ceilher, Auteure aaaEa, zii. 135J138, :iii. 819, 628.
IRIOft, PAUL: German Evangelical Synod; b. near Marthasville, Mo., Oct. 28, 1860. He was educated at Blackburn University, Carlinville, Ill. (1873‑75), Washington University, St. Louis, Mo. (1875‑76), Elmhurst College, Elmhurst, Ill. (A.B., 1879), and Missouri College, near Marthasville, Mo. (1882). In 1882 he was ordained to the ministry, and after being assistant pastor of St. John's Evangelical Church, Michigan City, Ind., from March to June, 1882, and of Bethel Evangelical Church, Freedom Township, Mich., from June to Nov., 1882, then full pastor, and is now pastor of St. John's, Michigan City, Ind. From 1888 to 1895 he was secretary of the Michigan district of his denomination, of which he is, theologically, an orthodox member, and in 1890 was the official oempiler of the census for the Evangelical Synod. He has also been president of the Michigan district of the German Evangelical Synod since 1895.

IRISH ARTICLES: The Thirty‑nine Articles of the Church of England were not introduced in Ireland till the time of Charles I. In their place a shorter collection of eleven articles was published in 1566 by authority of the deputy and the archbishops and bishops. At the first convocation of the Irish Episcopal Church (1613‑15) a series of 104 articles was adopted and approved by the deputy is 1615, which was probably composed by James
Ussher, then at the head of the theological faculty in Dublin (afterward archbishop of Armagh). They are important as proving the decided Calvinism of the Irish Church at that time, and still more so as the connecting link between the Thirty‑nine Articles and the Westminster Confession, and as the chief source of the latter, " as is evident from the general order, the headings of chapters and subdivisions, and the almost literal agreement of language in the statement of several of the moat important doctrines." By a decree of the convocation, the teaching of any doctrine contrary to these articles was forbidden. But the Irish convocation of 1635, under the lead of the Earl of Strafford, lord‑lieutenant of Ireland, and his chaplain, John Bramhall, formally adopted the Thirty‑nine Articles, and quietly ignored the others. Archbishop Ussher required subscription to both. Eventually, however, the Irish articles were lost eight of, and no mention was made of them, when, in the beginning of the nineteenth century, the United Church of England and Ireland was organized.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: P. Schaff, Creeds Of C1irP.8lend01H, 1. 862‑8B5,
iii. b26‑544 New York, 1877• T. Olden, The Church of
Ireland, 323‑324, 342‑34, 3b2‑354, Lonon, 1892.
IRISH SISTERS OF CHARITY. See ENGLISH LADIES.
IRREGULARITY: In canon law, a defect or impediment which excludes a person otherwise qualified from due reception or exercise of holy orders. Canonista divide these into two classes, irregularities through defect and through fault. Under the former come (I) those through natal defects, affecting all who are not born of a legitimate or at least a putative marriage, and removable by subsequent legitimation or by taking monastic vows. (2) Through bodily defects, affecting those whom illness or mutilation has rendered incapable of performing sacred functions, or of performing them without lowering the dignity of the office or giving offense to the people. (3) Through defects in age, when the canonical age (q.v.) has not been attained. (4) Through defects in knowledge, when the requisite knowledge for the order in question is lacking. (5) Through defects of faith, affecting neophytes and those not yet confirmed, who are presumably insufficiently established in the faith. (6) Through sacramental defects, arising from certain conditions in regard to a previous marriage of the candidate. (7) Ex dejectu perfectas lenitcstis, attaching to those
who (though in a lawful way) have contributed
I~	to the death or maiming of a fellow‑man, such as
	soldiers, criminal judges, prosecutors, jurymen, or
witnesses, but not physicians and surgeons. (8) Through defects in reputation. (9) Through defects in the matter of liberty, preventing the ordination of slaves without their masters' consent, married
men without that of their wives, or guardians and trustees before release from their obligations. Irregularity through faults occurs as a consequence
of criminal acts publicly known or proved before a court or of certain misdeeds, even if not known; the latter include the killing or maiming of another
person, heresy, apostasy, abuse of the sacraments of baptism or orders; and the same effect is pro‑

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
88
duced by what is technically known as constructive bigamy, the marriage (if consummated) with any woman not a virgin, which, though not forbidden by ordinary law, is yet considered ~a sufficient declension from the ideal of marriage (cf. Lev. xaci. 13, 14) to disqualify a man for ordination. In case a man has been ordained in spite of his irregularity, his orders are valid, but he is not permitted to exercise them. Dispensation from irregularity can be granted as a rule by the pope alone‑‑only in some
exceptional cases by the bishop.	i
(P. HINBCHIffat.) I
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bingham. 0ripinea. IV., iii.‑vii.: L. Thomas‑ I sin, Vetua et nova eccleaiae diaciptina, TL, i. 82‑83, 3 vole.,
Paris, 1728; F. E. a BoenninRhaueen, Tradahia 7uridico‑ I canonicua de irrepuZari.tatibua, part iii.. Monster, 1887: P. Hineohius, Daa Kirchenrecht . . . in DeutachlaawT, i. 7 eq4.. Berlin. 1889; E. Friedberg, Lehrbuch des . . . K%rehearechta, pp. 134 eqq., Leipeic, 1895.
IRVING, EDWARD: Scotch Presbyterian, usually regarded as the founder of the Catholic Apostolic
Church (q.v.), whose members are Life is popularly known as Irvingites; b. at Scotland. Anna,n (15 m. e.s.e. of Dumfries),
Dumfriesshire, Aug. 4, 1792; d. in Glasgow Dec. 7, 1834. At thirteen he was sent to the University of Edinburgh, and at seventeen he became a teacher of mathematics in the school at Haddington. A year later he took charge of a new academy at Kirkcaldy, but still kept up his theological studies and a more or less regular attendance on the university lectures. It was at this period that he made the acquaintance of Thomas Carlyle (the author, to be distinguished from a later apostle of the same name), who has left the moat vivid picture of his development. In 1815 he passed his theological examinations and received a license to preach from the presbytery of Kirkcaldy. After three years, not very successful as a preacher, and weary of teaching, he went back to Edinburgh and occupied himself with linguistic and scientific studies. He was seriously thinking of going as a missionary to Persia when, in Oct., 1819, the position was offered him of assistant to Dr. Chalmera at St. John's, Glasgow. Overshadowed by Chalmers, and unpopular with the majority of the congregation, he was glad to exchange this position in 1822 for that of minister of the small congregation in London connected with a Scotch asylum in. Hatton Garden. He received ordination at the hands of the presbytery of Annan, and took his leave of Glasgow in a remarkable sermon which called for a complete revision of the methods of Christian preaching.
In London he at once made an impression, which was partly due to his striking appearance; he was
over six feet tall, his pale face framed Success in in dark locks which fell almost to his
London. shoulders. No one could hear him
without being conscious of a powerful and dominating personality. His flowery, rhetorical style soon attracted a large circle of hearers, for which the little church was too small. A new one was built in Regent Square, and for a time he was the fashionable preacher of London. He appealed especially to the educated classes; and it was to them that he spoke in his first published work, VL‑3
Irene
Irving
For the Oracles of God, Four Orations. For Judgment to Came, an Argument in Nine Parts (London, 1823). The attention attracted by his writings increased his popularity, and at the same time heightened his self‑consciousness; he felt himself called to be the prophet of his people, and scornfully rejected the well‑meant warnings of many members of the Evangelical party.
The upheaval of the French Revolution had aroused in England a strong tendency to apocalyp‑
	tic and millenarian thought, which
joins	found expression in numerous writings.
Drum‑	Among those moat strongly impressed
mond's	by this thought was Henry Drummond
Circle.	(q.v.), a rich banker who had gathered
	around him $ circle of like‑minded
friends, devoted to gaining general recognition for
their apocalyptic views. Irving adopted the singular
exegesis and the whole train of thought of Drum
mond's circle, which opened to him an entirely new
field as a preacher of repentance. In a long dis
course, later printed with enlargements (Babylon
and Infidelity Foredoomed of God, Glasgow, 1828),
preached at the anniversary of the Continental
Society in 1825, he developed these thoughts and
foretold the second coming of the Lord for the year
1864. Next he published, with an introduction of
200 pages, a recasting of a work published pseu
donymously in 1818 by Lacunza, a Spanish ex‑Jesuit,
under the title The Coming of Meaaiah in Glory and
Majesty (London, 1827). Meantime a regular
" school of the prophets " had gathered around him,
who, from the end of 1826, met annually at Drum
mond's country‑seat of Albury, near Guildford.
From 1829 to 1833 they published a periodical,
The Morning Watch, a Journal of Prophecy.
A sectarian tendency soon developed. Irving had been saying from 1824 on that since the fivefold
I	office of apostles, prophets, evangelists,
I Rise of	pastors, and teachers had disappeared
Irvingites. from the Church, the Holy Ghost had
deserted it. Irving thus showed an increasing tendency to depart from the principles of Scotch Presbyterianism. He now denied predestination; following the High‑church teaching of Hooker, he felt himself a priest and required his people so to regard him; and toward the end of 1827 he gave utterance to Christological views which were regarded as the grossest heresy, speaking of the " sinful substance" of the body of Christ. In defense of his view, he wrote a long rhetorical treatise on the Incarnation which forma the third and fourth parts of his Sermons, Lectures, and Occasional Discourses (3 vols., London, 1828). This attitude, combined with his apocalyptic vagaries, damaged his position in London. About this time a union of prayer was formed t0 Ch a new out
pouring of the Holy Spirit, and Irving's assistant, Alexander Scott, expressed the hope that the special charismata of the primitive Church might once more be bestowed in answer to these supplications. Fresh excitement was aroused by two preachingtours of Irving's through Scotland in 1828 and 1829, and in Mar., 1830, occurred the phenomena elsewhere detailed (see CexHOLIC APOaTOLIC C808CH), which were taken as a fulfilment of these hopes.

Irvine Isaacs
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
At least a commission from London, of which the lawyer Cardale was the most prominent member, accepted them as the expected renewal of the primitive gifts, and a confirmation of the whole trend of apocalyptic preaching. Similar phenomena now occurred at gatherings in Cardale's house; prophecy and speaking with tongues became more and more frequent. Irvine attempted for a time to keep these manifestations separate from the church services proper, while he welcomed them and made use of the messages thus delivered, and looked to the revival of the offices already recognized as essential. But revelation succeeded revelation, and presently Irvine could no longer hold back the growing enthusiasm. In Oct., 1831, it took possession of his church, amid scenes of great excitement. When Irvine was summoned, in 1830, before the general presbytery of the Scotch churches in London to answer for his Christological views, and denied their jurisdiction, appealing to the general synod in Scotland, his own presbytery had stood by him. But now it accused him of violation of the liturgical ordinances in allowing women, and men who were not properly ordained ministers, to speak in his church. Sentence of deposition was pronounced on May 2, 1832. Four days later Irvine began independent services in a hall with about 800 communicants, and in October he removed to a remodeled studio in Newman Street, leaving behind him the last remnants of the old Presbyterian order.
Though Irvine was the " angel " of the Church, the voices of the prophets left him little hearing.
Cardale, Drummond, and the prophet Irvine Taplin took the lead of the movement Superseded, and the new organization proceeded
rapidly. New functionaries were created as the Spirit bade, on the analogy of NewTestament indications, and presently there were six other congregations in London, forming, with Irvine's, the counterpart of the seven churches of the Apocalypse. Irvine accepted the whole development in faith, although he had conceived the apostolic office as something different, which should not interfere with the independence of himself as the " angel." But he had lost control of the movement, and those who now led it lost no opportunity of humiliating the man to whose personality they had owed so much. When the sentence of deposition was confirmed by the presbytery of Annan, and then by the Scottish general synod, and he returned to London strong in the consciousness of his call by God to the office of angel and pastor of the church, he was not allowed to baptize a child, but was told to wait until, on the bidding of the prophets, he should be again ordained by an apostle. His health was now failing, and his physician ordered him, in the autumn of 1834, to winter in the south. He went, however, to Scotland, where the prophets had promised him great success in the power of the Spirit, and died in Glasgow, where he is buried in the crypt of the cathedral.
(T. KOLDE.)
BIHLIOORAP$Y; Irvine's Collected W,.itinpa were edited by his nephew, G. Carlyle 5 vols., London, 1864‑65. Besides the. literature under CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC Cacaca, eapecially the biography by Mrs. Oliphant, and Carlyle's Reminiscences, consult D. Brown, Personal Reminiscences
84
of, Edward Irvine, in Expositor, 1887; C. K. Paul, is
Biographical Sketches London, 1883; W. A. Smith, " Shepherd " Smith, the Univeraaliet, London, 1892.

IRVIPGITES. See CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH; and IRVING, EDWARD.
ISAAC (Hebr. yizlutk, more rarely yiahak, °` the laugher "; LXX, lanak, Vulg. Isaac): the son of Abraham and Sarah, who served as an object for testing his father's faith and .obedience. He was born (according to P) in Abraham's hundredth year and in Sarah's ninetieth. Gen. xxi. 6 (ET)‑cf. xvii. 17 (P), xviii. 12 eqq. (J)‑brings the name into connection with his birth. Abraham's obedience was shown in the circumcision of the boy eight days after his birth (Gen. xxi. 4, P), and in his readiness to sacrifice, at God's command, this son for whom he had so ardently longed (chap. xxii.). Isaac in this submitted to the will of his father, just as he did later in his marriage with Rebekah, although he was then forty years old. Few details are given in regard to the remainder of Isaac's life, and he appears as a rather weak copy of his father. He manifested a lesser fondness for journeying, since his travels were confined to the southern portion of the land, the Negeb, and the neighboring
territory. In this desolate region, the well Lahai‑roi (Gen. xxiv. 62; the modern Muna,ilah), Gerar, the Philistine city (xxvi. 1; the modern Jerar), the valley of Gerar (xxvi. 17), Beersheba (xxvi. 23), and finally Hebron (xxxv. 27), are places where he sojourned for a time. When at Gerar, according to
Gen. xxvi. 7 sqq., he had an experience with King Abimelech similar to his father's (Gen. xx. 1 eqq., E, xii. 10 eqq., J). The similarity of the three accounts does not necessarily imply that they are variations of the same incident; but borrowings and substitutions may have taken place in oral tradition.
Isaac was characterized, as contrasted with Abraham, by a certain advance in civilization. In Gerar he devoted himself both to the raising of flocks and herds and to agriculture. His food was game and his drink was wine, while Abraham obtained the latter only from some other prince. Isaac appeared
always as pacifically inclined, yielding to his envious neighbors when they disputed with him the possession of wells, and yet he enjoyed a singular respect on the part of strangers, who considered it desirable to be on friendly footing with the " blessed of the Lord " (Gen. xxvi. 28 aqq.). The principal significance of Isaac is that he carried over the divine
blessing of the covenant from Abraham to Jacob, the ancestor of Israel. After his wife had been for a long time barren (Gen. xxv. 21), twin children of very different characters, Esau and Jacob, were granted to him in answer to his prayer. Although the father clung to the elder, when old and blind he was forced by the stratagem of his wife to bestow upon his younger son, Jacob , the blessing which had been bequeathed to him by Abraham (Gen. xxvi. 3 sqq., 24). Isaac showed little independence either at home or abroad, in place of which his submission to the decrees of the Almighty gave him his position between Abraham the faithful and Jacob, the champion of the faith. In this trio Isaac

36	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Irvin s
		lessee
represents that pious fidelity which guards the
inherited blessing, more occupied with its preserva
tion than with any idea of further gain. For later
Jews he appears as " the chief of the bound and
tortured " (Midraeh to Esther), that is, the proto
type of martyrs.
	The Story of Isaac is made up from the three
Pentateuchal sources, which agree essentially in
their narratives and guarantee the historical charac
ter of Isaac's personality. His name does not yield
to the explanation that it belonged to a divinity
or a tribe, the significance " he laughs " being in
appropriate to both.
	The designation of God as " the fear of Isaac "
(Gen. xxxi. 42, 53) is peculiar. Since this " fear "
was sworn by, it must mean " divinity," corre
sponding to the Greek sebas in the sense of sebasma,
" an object of awe or reverence."
	(C. VON ORELLL)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Bernstein, Uraprung der Sa9en von
	Abraham, lsaak and Jakob, Berlin, 1871; J. Popper,
	Uraprung lea Monotheiarnua, pp. 261 aqq., ib. 1879; J. B.
	biozley, Ruling Ideas in Party Ages, chaps, ii.‑iii., New
	York, 1879; E. C. A. Riehm, Hsndwiirterbuch lea bibliachen
	Altertuma, pp. 791‑792, Leipsic. 1893; G. B. Gray, Studies
	in Hebrew Proper Names, p. 214, London, 1896; G. Mas
	pero, Struggle of the Nations, p. 68, ib. 1898; DB, ii. 483
	485; EB, ii. 2174‑2179 (stimulating); JE, vi. 61(i‑818.
	Consult also the appropriate sections in works on the
history of Israel and the commentaries on Genesis.
	ISAAC OF ANTIOCH: The name of a writer
	(perhaps of several writers) of the early Syrian
	Church. Jacob of Edessa (cf. W. Wright, Catalogue
	of the Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum,
	ii. 60304, London, 1871) distinguishes .three of
the name, two whom he calls orthodox and a third
	whom he styles a Chalcedonian heretic. The first
	was a disciple of Ephraem, and went to Rome in
	the time of Arcadius; on his return he was kept
	for some time in.prison in Constantinople, and later
	became presbyter of Amida. The second, presbyter of
	Edeasa, went to Antioch in the time of the Emperor
	Zeno and the patriarch Peter the Fuller (see Jlor‑o
	PHYSITEB, §§ 4 sqq.), and preached against the
	Nestorians, taking his text from a parrot which lie
	had heard screech the trisagion with the addition
	" crucified for us." The third, also from Edessa,
	was orthodox in the time of Bishop Paul (512 sqq.),
	but Nestorian under Asclepius (522 sqq.). Genna
	dius knows of two writers of the name. The second
	(De vir. ill., lxvi.), presbyter of Antioch, lived to
	an advanced age and wrote much, including an
	elegy on the fall of Antioch (459); he died under
	Leo and Majorian (between 459 and 4G1). Zacharias
	Rhetor (ed. K. Ahrens am G. Kriiger, Leipsic,
	1889, p. *20) mentions " Isaac, the teacher of Syria,"
	with Dada in the time of Arcadius and Theodosius.
	Dionysius of Telmahre knows of poems by Isaac on
	the capture of Rome by the Goths (410) and the
	secular games of 404. Johannes bar Shushan (d.
	1073), who collected the writings of Isaac, calls him
	a disciple of Ephraem's disciple, Zenobius. There
	is an edition of his works (incomplete) by G. Bickell
	(2 vols., Giessen, 1873‑77); thirty‑seven produc
	tions out of about two hundred are given, including
	a poem of not less than 2,136 lines on the parrot
	and the trisagion, and another of 1,928 lines on
repentance. A volume of Isaac's homilies has been published by P. Bedjan (Paris, 1903).
E. NESTLE.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. S. Asaemani, BiLZiothees orientalie, i. 207304, Rome, 1719; P. Zingerle, in TQ, Iii (1870). 92‑114; G. Cardahi, Liber thesauri de ante Poetics Syrorum, pp. 2125, Rome, 1875; W. Wright, Short Hiat. of Syriac Literature, pp. b1‑54, London, 1894; R. Duval, Litlera&ure ayriaque, pp. 340‑341, Paris. 1900; DCB, iii. 295‑29G.
	ISAAC OF NINEVEH: Bishop of Nineveh in the
seventh century. He was made bishop by the
patriarch George (660‑G80), in succession to Moses,
but retired after five months, and died, almost
blind from much study, in the monastery of Rabban
Shabor. One of his works exists in Syriac, Arabic,
and Ethiopic, and also in a Greek translation by
two monks, Patricius and Abraham, of the mon
astery of Mar Saba, southeast of Jerusalem, and
published by Nicephoru$ (Leipsic, 1770; in MPG.
1xRxvi. 799‑888). A Latin translation under the
title Isaac Syrus, Tiber de corttemvtu mundi in fifty
three chapters is in the Bibliothecd magna (Cologne,
1618, VI., ii. 688; Gallandi, Babliothera, xii. 3).
Another work entitled " Letter to the Holy Father
Simon in the Wonderful Mountain " is published in
Greek in Mai's Nova Bibliotheca, Vol. viii., part 3
(Rome, 1871), pp. 15G‑188; it is interesting for its
information about Malpat of Edessa, the originator
of the Messalians, and the knowledge it shows of
apocalyptic literature. 	E. NESTLE.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The earlier literature, viz., J. S. Asaemani, Bibliotheca orienlalie, i. 44, Rome, 1719; W. Wright, Short Iliat, of Syriac Literature, London, 1894; and J. B. Chabot, De S. Isaaci Ninivitae vita, aaiptia et daetrina, Paris, 1892, is to be corrected by Jtauadenah, hegue de Ba§!rah, le livre de la chaelete, ed. J. B. Chabot, Rome 1898, cf. J. B. Chabot in Revue aemitique, 1898, p. 254. Consult also: DCB, iii. 291‑292; W. Wright, Catalogue of Syriac AfSS., ii. 569‑581, London, 1870‑72.
ISAAC BEN SHESHET BARFAT: Spanish Jewish talmudist; b. at Valencia in 1326; d. at Algiers in 1408. He studied at Barcelona, where he also began his life‑work, early gaining a reputation as a talmudist and being called upon for legal opinions. When fifty he became rabbi, removed later to Saragossa, and thence to Valencia. In 1391, in consequence of persecution of the Jews, he fled, going to Algiers, where he was made rabbi. He was the author of 41? " responsa " which have been highly valued by competent authorities, published as She 'slot u‑Teshlebot (Constantinople, 15467); and possibly of an unpublished commentary on the Pentateuch.
i BIBLIOGRAPHY'. JE, vi.631‑632.
ISAACS, ABRAM SAMUEL: Jewish rabbi; b. I~ in New York City Aug. 30, 1852. He was educated i at New York University (B.A., 1871) and the i University of Breslau (1878), and since 1886 has i been connected with New York University, where he has been professor of Hebrew (1886‑94) and German (since 1887). He was also preacher to the East 86th Street Synagogue, New York City, in 1886‑87, and since 1896 has been rabbi of B'nai
Jeshurun Congregation Paterson, N. J. He was editor of The Jewish Messenger from 1878 to 1903, and has written, Life and Writings of Moses Chaim Luxzatto (New York 1878) and Stories from the Rabbis (New York, 1894).

Isaiah	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	gg
ISAIAH.
I.	The Prophet and his Times. Reports concerning Isaiah (¢ 1). Chronology of the Period (¢ 2). External Events (¢ 3), Relation of Events to Faith (¢ 4). Ideals Underlying Prophecies ( f b). Iaaiah'e Life and Character (§ 8).
11.	The Book of Isaiah.
1. Its Place in the Canon.
2. The Text.
I. The Prophet and His Times: The name rendered ~` Isaiah " in English has in the Hebrew two forms, Yeaha'yah, and Yeaha'yahu, the latter in his book, II Kings xviii.‑xxi., and I Chron. xxv. 3, 15, xxvi. 25, II Chron. xxvi. 22, xsxii. 32, the former in I Chron. iii. 21; Neh. xi. 7. In the Septuagint it varies greatly, taking the forms lesiaa, lesaias, Idaeas, Hesaias, Isaias, Oaaiaa. The derivations and meanings given are quite varied.
	Outside the book called by his name and II Kings
xviii.‑xxi., Isaiah the prophet is mentioned only
		twice in the Bible. II Chron, xavi. 22
I. Reports states that the acts of Uzziah of Judah
Concerning were written down by Isaiah the
		prophet, the son of Amoz. The
method of citation here deviates from the usual
formula, so that either incompleteness or defacement
of the text is suspected, while the Septuagint lacks
the phrase " son of Amoz " and has further varia
tions. The passage adds nothing to knowledge of
the prophet gained elsewhere. It has been taken,
in connection with Isa. i. 1, as ground for the con
jecture that the prophet lived through the entire
reigns of the four kings mentioned, and that Iea. vi.
tells of a renewed call of the prophet after a period
of quietness. This is favored by the position of
chap. vi., and modern students are inclined to
attribute chgps, i.‑v. wholly or in part to the early
years of Uzziah. II Chron. xxaii. 32 speaks of a
record in the " Vision of Isaiah " of the deeds of
Hezekiah which is in the Book of Kings. The Sep
tuagint, Vulgate, and Targum place an " and "
before " in the book," thus mentioning two sources.
It is to be noticed that " Vision of Isaiah " was the
title of the canonical Book of Isaiah (Isa. i. 1).
The passage was early taken as indicating an inde
pendent " Vision of Isaiah," and an apocryphal
book of that character was cited by Origen, and is
perhaps the "Martyrdom (or Ascension) of Isaiah "
known in the Ethiopic (see PBEUDEPIGItAPHA, OLD
TESTAMENT, II. 34), dealing with the martyrdom
of Isaiah under Manasseh. This tradition of a
martyrdom appears also in the Gemara (Yeiiamot
49b) as drawn from " an early genealogical record "
and due to a condemnation of certain utter
ances of the prophet. Another tradition connects
the death of Isaiah with his condemnation of the
act of Manasseh recorded in II Kings xxi. 7, and
brings into relation with this event the passage
Isa. bzvi. 1 eqq., and a prediction of the coming
of Nebuchadrezzar to destroy the temple. This
aroused the wrath of Manasseh, who ordered the
prophet to be brought and slain. Isaiah fled and
Its Condition (§ 1).
Causes and Kinds of Errors (¢ 2).
3. Authorship.
Prophetic Authorship in General (§ 1).
Interrelations of i.‑xxxv, and xl. Ixvi (5 2).
Authorship substantially Issianic (5 3).
Iesianio Authorship of xzviii. zxxv (¢ 4),
Chapters ii.‑xii (¢ b). Chapters xiii.‑xzvii (¢ 6). Results of the Investigation (§ 7).
III.	The Critical View.
	The Problem (§ I).
	Structure of the Book (§2).
	Results of Criticism (¢ 3).
	Analysis of Iea. i.‑xxxix (§ 4).
	Analysis of Iaa. xl.‑lavi (§ 5).
	Conclusion (§ 8).
took refuge in the heart of a tree, which closed about him and hid him. But his pursuers sawed through the tree until the blood of the prophet flowed forth as water. The passages II Kings xxi. 16, xxiv. 3‑4 are brought into relation with this tradition and the event is said to have occurred on Tammuz 17, corresponding to July 6, given in the Roman Catholic calendar (cf. ASB, July, ii. 250 aqq.; A. Kloatermann, Das Datum des Martyrium Jesaias im rbmiaehen Kaleredar, in TSK, 1880, pp. 536 sqq.). The one tradition of value seems to be that which places his death in the reign of Manasseh.
This tradition may be brought into connection
with the title of the book by way of defining the period of activity of the prophet. To 2. Chronol‑ the period of the four kings mentioned
ogy of the .
	riod,	m the title may be added an undefined
		but short period under Manasseh, and
Isa. vi. 1 is often taken as indicating the entry of
Isaiah upon prophetic work in the last year of
Uzziah. Supposing that he was then twenty years
old, his age at the accession of Manasseh would be
eighty‑one; thus: the destruction of Jerusalem was
in 586 B.C., the, eleventh year of Zedekiah; then,
according to the reckoning of the Book of Kings,
Manasseh began to reign in 696 B.C., Hezekiah in
725 B.C., Ahaz in 741 B.C., Jotham in 757 B.C.,
I and the death of Uzziah would fall in 758 B.C. [or 757]; the siege of Samaria under Shahnaneser began in the fourth year of Hezekiah, 722 B.C., and its capture by Sargon in Hezekiah's sixth year, 720 B.C. If it is assumed, as is most probable, that the sign on the dial of Ahaz is to be connected with the eclipse of Mar. 14, 711 B.C. (F. K. Ginzel, Spezieller Kanora der Sonrten‑ and Mond, fi‑rtaternisse, Berlin, 1899), visible in Jerusalem, then the foregoing statements in general and the assignment of the year 711 B.C. for the healing of Hezekiah tally with astronomical data. Therefore the embassy from Merodach‑baladan (Isa. xxxix. 1) would fall at the earliest in 711 B.C., and Hezekiah's determination to throw off Assyrian overlordship would
fall in 710 B.C. The Ptolemaic Canon allows to a Mardokempados twelve years as king of Babylon, and to his conqueror, Sargon, five years; then the last year of Mardokempados is the thirty‑eighth of
the era of Nabonasear, and the first year of Sargon is 709 B.C. Then that the " king of Babylon," Merodach‑baladan (Isa. xxxix. 1), is not an indefinite usurper of that name, but that the Mardokempados of the Ptolemaic Canon is the Merodach‑baladan of
the Assyrian inscriptions does not imply error either in that he is called " eon of Yakin " in the

37	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Canon or that he is called " son of Baladan " in Isa. xxxix. The former is accounted for by his capital being at Bit Yakin or Dur Yakin, evidently taken as named for an eponymous ancestor, and the latter may have arisen from a like connection with a supposed ancestor mentioned in the second element of his own name. Thus the Assyrian data harmonize with the foregoing calculations. According to contract tablets adduced by G. Smith (Assyrian Eponym Canon, London, 1875, pp. 86‑.87), Sargon's fourteenth year fell in the eponymate of Samashupahir, and his fifteenth year as king of Assyria is stated to have been his third as king of Babylon; his thirteenth year over Assyria was therefore his first over Babylon, i.e., 709 B.C., and his reign over Assyria began 722‑721 B.C.; Sargon's seventeenth and last regnal year was 705 B.C., and the first of his successor, Sennacherib, was 704 B.C. The Eponym Canon and the Ptolemaic Canon give assistance from this point on. From Assyrian records it is clear that the regnal year of Sargon began in the middle of an eponymate. The discrepancy between the Biblical date of 720 B.C. and the apparent Assyrian of 722 B.C. is explained partly by confusion between the beginning of the eponymous year and the regnal year of the king, and partly by a transposition occurring in the Canon lists. Concerning the relation of Shalmaneser to his predecessor, Tiglath‑Pileaer, nothing can be said, as the Canons fail here. But if the first regnal year of Sennacherib fell in the last part of the eponymate of Nabudinipua and the first part of the tatter's successor's, Sennacherib can not have made an expedition to the West in Hezekiah's fourteenth year (Isa,. xxxvi. 1), which expedition he states that he made in his own third year, when he shut Hezekiah up " like a bird in a cage " (Schrader, KA T, p. 293). If it be assumed that Sennacherib's full regnal year is meant, it might fall in 702‑701 B.C., and with this would agree the supposition that the surely erroneous dating in Hezekiah's fourteenth year of Isa. xxxvi. 1 is due to a previous mention of his twenty‑fourth year. So that in 702 B.C., according to the Assyrian basis, began the Assyrian subjection of Judah and Hezekiah.
Then Isaiah's activity as a prophet would fall between 758 and 690 B.C. at the latest, a period of singular moment. The Assyrians, in
S. Enter‑ their conquest of Syria and Palestine,
nal laid a basis for further conquests in
Events. the northwest and southwest, hindered, however, by the danger from the Medea and other peoples in their rear. By the movements which went on about them, the Jews were brought into contact with world politics, and in the Book of Isaiah the fortunes of distant and neighboring peoples receive larger notice than had been customary. The northern kingdom fell from the high estate it achieved under Jeroboam II. after a career in which the moat contradictory state policies had been pursued. It had become identified with an attempt to unite Syria, Israel, and Judah against Assyria, in which the refusal of Judah had led to an attempt to set aside the Davidic dynasty in Judah. Uzziah had thought to strengthen his own kingdom by securing his boundaries with fortresses and by heap‑
ing up the means and materials of war to furnish material guaranties for the faith of the Jews in the security of the city of Yahweh and of the dynasty. Ahaz preferred to depend upon the clemency of the Assyrian king. Hezekiah rejected this means of quiet, and put his trust in Yahweh without using human means.
The lessons of the period for the pious of Israel and of all times are that Yahweh reaches the ends
corresponding to his being through 4. Relation the history of his people and of the
°f	world. It does not follow that he
Events repudiates his
to Faith. 	people or his promises
to their fathers, nor yet that he makes the foundation of his kingdom dependent upon the hegemony of any earthly state where his worship should be conducted. While he permitted the Davidic kingdom to fall apart and Jerusalem to become the capital of the smaller division, allowed Israel's land to receive a new population, and the Davidic king to become a vassal of Assyria, while he brought to nought Sennacherib's plans against Jerusalem, the purpose seemed to be to purify the faith of the people that his might and will should ordain healing or destruction. The Israelites had supposed God's interests bound up with those of his people in his land and its institutions. But they had to learn through discipline that the people to whom his promises came and to whom they applied was a people which corresponded in its essence to his own sanctity and were not dependent upon mere fleshly hopes. It contravened past experience that he who had promised to be the savior of his people should permit them to be beaten and subdued, while to tyrants whose purpose he hated he had given the victory. The kingdom of Jeroboam, founded on cunning and force, was no better than other kingdoms; nor was the kingdom of Judah, with its externals of sacrifice, that to which he had made his promises. Of course, the conquerors, who thanked themselves and their gods for the victory, were even less fitted to be his servants. The destruction of the foe at the pinnacle of his greatness and the restoration of his people were to reveal the fulfilment of his promises, no more to be endangered by the rule of sin.
Yet Yahweh had not given over his land, destroyed his people, laid in ruins the house of David
and Jerusalem, burned up the world and 6. Ideals destroyed mankind in order to create
Underly‑
ing	a new earth. Rather the idea was
that symbolized bY the plant world Prophecies. where the dying vegetation promises new life by its seeds and its shoots. So in the dying Israel there was an imperishable remainders which was to survive destruction and to live again in unassailable dominion, to be menaced neither by sin nor the anger of God. The people which had been destroyed was to be awakened to new life, and the house of David was to rise to renewed kingly power in the son of a young woman. But this was to take form neither in nation, state, nor race. The germ can be considered only as an invisible church known only to Yahweh. And since in Israel the prophet of Yahweh is he who learns the will of Yahweh in the conditions of things and

Isaiah	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	as
translates the dark sayings of God as uttered in the events of history, so the people gathered by the prophet's word and unified by it is the indestructible Zion, the enduring remainder of Israel which makes the prophet's teachings the ground of its inner life. The prophet is the medium of this new life. His conduct in life, his hope in sorrow, are the prefigurement and pledge of that which is destined for the community.
Such a person does Isaiah appear in the testimony, direct and indirect, which his book carries. Outside of the reports of his life already con‑
e. Isaiah's aidered, it may be gathered that he was
Life sad
Character. a citizen of Jerusalem; that he had several children, one of whom, a son, must have been born in Jotham'a reign (vii. 3), and another during the Syrian‑Ephraimitic war (viii. 1 sqq.); that he regarded wife, children, and the events of family life as living pictures and true signs of the prophecies he uttered; that he looked back upon the hour of consecration pictured in chap. vi. as pivotal, and as conditioning his inner life (viii. 11 eqq.). Since his care and hopes were so different from those which public life offered, he deemed it his duty to implant in continuing security in the heart of a receptive circle, for use in the future, the divine knowledge which had come to him.
In chap, vii., in the midst of the Syrian‑Ephraimitic crisis, Isaiah sought in vain to direct the policy of the Davidic house away from dependence upon Assyria to trust in Yahweh, and in chap. viii. testified that the waters of Shiloah were sufficient to withstand the turbulence of Rezin and Pekah, and they did not need the addition of the flood of Assyrian might, which would overflow the land it was designed to protect. Later Isaiah again sought to stem the course of public events among his people by glowing predictions of positive success. Such a case is presented in the reign of Hezekiah when the foe was drawn away from Jerusalem and the danger to the city was averted by the catastrophe which befell the enemy.
II. The Book of Isaiah.‑1. Its Place in the Canon: In the Hebrew Bible Isaiah stands first in the division of the so‑called later prophets and precedes Jeremiah and Ezekiel evidently upon the ground of priority in history, but in the Septuagint it is preceded by the book of the Minor Prophets (cf. Jerome, Ad Paulinum, Prologue galeatus). The Hebrew order is confirmed by the treatment in Ecclus, xlviii. 22‑xlix. 10. The Talmudic tract Baba bathrn (col. xiv., col. 2) makes Jeremiah follow Kings and puts Isaiah between Ezekiel and the Twelve according to the principle which arranges books approximately in order of length. Reasons for this difference in order are variously given: Vitringa thought that the placing of Jeremiah first was due to the tradition that Jeremiah had composed the Books of Kings; Lightfoot alleged apologetic interests which used the order in which Jeremiah stood first to show that Matt. xxvii. 9 was not in error, since the whole of the prophetic canon might then be called after the name of the first book; still others thought it might be due to the fact that after Jeremiah and Ezekiel had taken form, Isaiah had been changed or that it had taken form only
in the time of Cyrus. But these methods of reasoning are not conclusive.
8. The Text:. The variety of contents and style, the idealistic character of the oracles and the origi‑
nality of thought have from earliest 1. Its times made this book difficult to under‑
stand. Much read and often edited, it could not maintain its original form, and it became the object of an exegesis which sought to come to an understanding with the traditional text as an inviolable and sacred thing. The condition of the text in chaps, xl.‑bcvi. may be seen in Klostermann's commentary (Munich, 1893) of chaps. xxxvi.‑xxxix. in the same author's commentary on the parallel section in Kings (Munich, 1887) and in TSIf, 1884. And revision of the whole text of chaps. i.‑xxxv. is required before exegesis can be securely founded, an especially difficult task, for which the test of meter and artistic form, so often suggested, is of very little value. Indeed, changes of form by the prophet or his disciples are not excluded from consideration; for example, in the great picture of the judgment under the figure of. an earthquake in xxiv., at verse 7 there is the beginning of an alphabetical elegy in six‑lined strophes, the first two strophes of which are present and complete, while of the third only the first half is given. Similarly in xxiii. 16 only the beginning of a known song is cited, and this may explain the break at the end of xxiv. 12.
Not to be disregarded are the paraphrases of Jonathan, the fragments of tlquilas, Theodotion,
and Symmachus as they have come 2. Causes down with the marginal notes of the
and Hinds
of Errors. Hesspla and from the notes of Jerome.
These will at times serve to indicate the introduction of errors in later times. Thus, Jonathan indicates in viii. 14 the loss of " for you " after " he shall be," a conclusion supported not only by the Vulgate, but by the second person in the Septuagint. Doubled readings or translations in these texts are often a guide to the original text, since they point to a misreading or a misunderstanding of a reading to which such misunderstanding is a direct guide, as in xxxiii. 7, where " their valiant ones " was read by the translators in a double sense as the object of fear and as the subject, which led to further changes in the text of the verse. The Septuagint shows a similar doubled reading in ii. l6b through a mistake of the eye involving further changes in the text. Sometimes a doubled reading is merely a mistake in copying produced by itacism, as in viii. 23, codex 304. But a critical text of the Septuagint will show that sometimes the translator in deciphering his Hebrew exemplar has in a surprising manner gone wrong through too great confidence in his apprehension of the context. Such a case is presented in viii. 7~i. Examinations of the Septuagint make it perfectly clear that its present text is the result of a long period of correction of a text which sought to give the sense of the prophetical deliverancea without having a sure insight into the meaning and the form of the original. But the early text together with the corrections themselves and the differences between them often put the

89	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Ieaiah
student upon the track of a better Hebrew text than the one which has been transmitted. There is in mind here not only the 111 of xxix. 3 in the
Septuagint, which alone explains why Yahweh, who is beleaguering Ariel in verse 1, has made mention of the siege of Ariel by David in early times, but also the tdi agapetai aou of xgvi. 17. In this latter case the 11`t'~, which apparently lay before the translator, goes back to an original IVA
which belonged to verse 18 and marks 112V:‑.as superfluous, suggested indeed by the doubled G1a of Jonathan.
Such cases as this, which are frequent, are sufficient to enable the student to correct the errors and sometimes the gape which occur in the synagogue i test of the Hebrew. Again, the original of x. 11 i was doubtless originally " shall I not also do so to Samaria and her idols and to Jerusalem and her images." The present text seta the lot of Sam aria as a type and prophecy of the lot of Jerusalem, and pictures the fall of Samaria as a past event, which is the result of a redaction which changed the text of the prophet to square with a later historical situation. Mistakes of pointing are also to be noted, as when 1bD0 in i. 7 is thus pointed as a noun instead of iln6fd'I as a verb, or in x. 13 the waw in VOW and 't''ft1 is given the simple
ahewa instead of kametfi. Still worse is the pointing 1a1 for `111 in ix. 8, for which the Septuagint has
tharuatas, " death," which corresponds closely to the " pestilence " for which the proposed reading stands. Accentuation and vocalization are both astray in ix. 1, " in the former time," where for 11317 should be read (11)J1y5 and the words should
be joined with the clause which goes before. Part of the errors of text are due to the difficulties which underlay the consonantal form. This especially occurs in transferring an initial 7 to the end of the preceding word, but appears also in the lose of the letter in the middle or end of a word, as when C51410t for t115 hN`1N was given the form n5H'1m. A similar case occurs
in viii. 6, where the double reading J1NV'J 11N1V(b) came to be written lltittltV(D), and then was changed
into rite Iblft. Other changes are caused by the inclusion in the text of notes originally made in the margin, for a case of which cf. vii. 8‑9 with verse 4. With such enlargements of the text correspond also gape, which are the result of carelessness or chance, or which rest upon intended shortening of the reading or upon customary abbreviations. A case of the last is found in viii. 21, where " curse by their king and their God " should read " curse the house of their king and their God," where the letter beth, represented in the English by " by," is an abbreviation or a mistake for beth, " house." Between "for " and " head " in viii. 8 has fallen out the word xlo~t,
" I will take away." If, as in the last case cited, '~a word may fall out, so frequently from a word a letter may be missing, of which numerous examples might be cited. To these causes of change may be added exchanges of letters which either look or sound alike. Thus, in xi. 4, j?'1y demanded by the par‑
allelism appears as r1K, and in i. ?, xxv. 2, and xxix. 5, instead of a''Tt there appears b'1t. Intentional amendment appears in the change from the third person to the first in v. 3‑8, influenced by verse 2. Indeed, the riddles of interpretation in whole sections of Isaiah, such as‑the six deliverances of chaps. xxviii.‑xxxv., the section xxiv.‑xxvii., and their relation to other parts of the book require as a preliminary to their solution the amendment of the text, which is a preliminary to the work of the higher criticism and the determination of the time to which these sections belong.
S. Authorship: It is evident that a prophet who intervened in public affairs in crises so important,
whose experiences were so large, who, 1. Prophetio even in the quiet of private life, was Authorship unwearyingly diligent in instructing a is general. bid of disciples with a broad future in view, employed writing not only for the purpose of extending his personal activity beyond his immediate environment, as, for example, to the Israelites in exile, to the end that they might have his words of comfort in their original form, but that he had an outlook upon the more distant future. This must have been especially the case when the subject matter was issued at the joining‑point of the past and the future when old things were becoming new, when the utterances were needed as a means of recognizing God's work at the time and for the time. It must have been in such a spirit that the prophets wrote their books and unified their earlier utterances in written discourse. They were enabled in this way to supplement by adding historical notices and even to refer to the words of earlier prophets. Since, in the book ascribed to Isaiah, there exist in the first person recollections of the fifty‑second year of Uzziah, and in close connection with these and in similar style discourses which relate to affairs at least sixteen years later in the time of Ahaz, and inasmuch as these latter ~ approve themselves as Isaianic by their congruity with the activities and character of Isaiah as shown in chaps. xxxvi.‑xxxvii., and further, since in this book there appear whole series of addresses parallel in matter with the occasions of the time, and setting forth the same main idea, it is a fair presumption that Isaiah undertook a collection of his prophecies. The question is whether the present book contains only his sayings, or contains them in full, or in their original order. Until this is settled, it is of little use to quote what Sirach, Ambroaius, Jerome, Cyril, and others down to the present have said as to the worth of Isaiah from a Christian, ethical, or esthetic standpoint.
To judge of all this a thoroughly new workingover is required, a historical investigation, and for this there is no better and no other ~ atione of starting‑point than the section in chaps. i.‑zazv.andxxxwxxxixw a trustworthy narrative
	x1,_1=vi,	which has foundplacealsoin the Books
		of Kings (xviii. 13 aqq.). This narra
tive is interjected by the compiler of the book
between two well‑arranged collections of anonymous
addresses, the first of which have relation to the
Assyrian period and correspond to the contents of
chaps. xxxvi.‑xxxvii., while the second aeries has

Isai`h	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	40
relation to the Babylonian side and corresponds to chap. via. The second of the two series of addresses begins with a command to give comfort as the first closed with encouragement (w. 3 sqq.); the second comes to a close in an opposition of Edom and Zion (la. 1‑haii. 6) just as does the first (xxxiii. 13‑xw. 10). Since in both the general view of the Holy Land and Jerusalem is that of a desolate and depopulated region, to be repeopled by the return of the exiled, doubtless the editor meant to convey the idea that, of both parts, the Isaiah of xxxvi.‑mix. is the prophetic author. It is therefore unscientific arbitrariness, instead of setting apart chaps. xxviii.‑lavi, and employing chaps. viii.‑xxxia. as the key to xl.‑Lrvi., to break off after w.‑via, and to imagine oneself in a new region. He who reads xxxv. 3‑4 does not stumble at sl. 1; and only he who reads xxviii.xxxix. can understand slviii. 3‑11, and can regard the same prophet as basing a second prediction upon the fulfilment of the first. He can apply slii. 19 to the downfall of the northern kingdom, and aliii. 8‑10 to the deliverance from Sennacherib, and Ivi. 9‑Ivii. 21 to the end of the Isaianic times. Whoever dares to read the six addresses of anameless prophet in xxviii.‑xxxv. beginning with " Woe " and to regard them as Isaianic as a whole and to follow this out in such alleged exilic pieces as xxciv.xxzv. has no philosophical reason for the timidity with which he refuses to recognize xl.‑Ixvi. as also Isaianic. A hindrance to this has been the obviousness with which Cyrus is mentioned even by name, and the assurance with which the downfall of Babylon and the freeing of the Israelites is announced, predictions which the modern construction of all elements of the prophetic consciousness on the basis of our knowledge of his times seem to make impossible. But the Servant of Yahweh who is named Righteous is as concretely and definitely indicated as Cyrus and his relations to Babylon and Israel; and the hegemony of the restored Jerusalem and the repopulating of the Holy Land is more definitely portrayed than the downfall of Babylon. And, although the one fits better with Jesus of Nazareth, and the other with the Jerusalem of Herod's time, at least in externals, than with any other prophet or with the Jerusalem of any other time, yet the refusal is made so to relate the connections. If the enthusiastic utterances of a prophet work out into realization 500 years later, why could they not with reference to Cyrus? In fact, the book does not predict a coming victor to bear the name of Cyrus, but says of one who has come that he is the realization of predictions made long before for Jerusalem; the victory and success of Cyrus had been so directly indicated that it was evident that he could use his victory only. as Yahweh willed, and the honor was to come not to him, but to Yahweh and his people. Thus Yahweh had laid violent hands upon the prophet when he seized upon the Ise,ianie period in which to bring before the prophet's vision this picture of the future. Isaiah realized that the present conqueror had been predicted long before as called from. the East to carry out Yahweh's purposes of punishment, but
that he had been driven back when in wilfulness he had attempted to go farther than Yahweh's purposes had carried. Why, then, should he not foresee a second conqueror, coming from the East and more completely realizing God's designs, who, by the very misfortunes which he brought, should create the desire in the heathen world for Yahweh, the only healing God, who is to be found in the midst of his people (xlv. 14‑25) ? And why should he not foresee the prophet who should so complete the work of renovation as to bring about the regeneration of the community? And to what prophet could ouch a vision so appropriately have come as to Isaiah, a man who, in the midst of the moat untoward circumstances, could see around him the promise of a brilliant and righteous future?
	If this be true, a new exposition of chaps. sl.
	lavi. is required (the view‑point of which was indi
	cated in the Lutheriache Zeitschrif 1,1876)
S. Author‑ and a new investigation of the frameshin dub‑ work. But it will not do to resolve the
	Isaisnio9	section into a threefold arrangement,
		each part having nine chapters. As
the first part is introduced by xl. 1‑11, the second
part is prefaced by xlviii. 16‑22. The more natu
rally the investigation proceeds, the surer does it
become that al.‑lavi. does not as such proceed
from Isaiah, but that it arranges and works over
older prophecies. The tendency of modern criti
cism is to distinguish the " Servant of Yahweh
section" and a " Trito‑Ieaiah," and, indeed, as
many Isaiaha as differences in style suggest; yet
by retaining for them the name Isaiah this criticism
follows a correct instinct. The editor urges chaps.
xxxvi.‑xxxix. upon the reader as the key to the
meaning of both xl.‑Lwi. and xxviii.‑xxxv., and
as the vindication of these parts as Isaianic in
substance.
It appears from the book of Isaiah that at least from the thirteenth year of Hezekiah till after the 4. Isaisnio campaign of Sennacherib the prophet Authorship wielded a weighty and acknowledged of xxvW._ authority with king, court, and priests,
	o,	that he made predictions which were
		observably realized, that he assured
the continuance of Jerusalem and Judah beyond
the period of Assyrian stress and storm, while
Assyria was to become a possession of Babylon;
but besides this, it is clear that Hezekiah's resolu
tion to withstand the Assyrian demands rested upon
Isaiah's 'warnings and promises, and that the prophet
was the responsible guarantor of a seemingly im
possible fortunate issue. Indeed, xxxvii. 26 indi
cates a prediction by Isaiah of the Assyrian victories
before Sennacherib's appearance. Upon the verifi
cation of this word of Yahweh as the Lord of the
world was built the assurance that in the very
moment when Assyrian victories were made the
basis of belief that Yahweh was overcome the im
potence of the Assyrian against him would be made
manifest, and this dispensation would reveal deci
sively Yahweh's relation to Jerusalem and to the
Davidic house. In view of this, the six woes which
appear indissolubly woven together in chaps. xxviii.
xxxv. impress one as rendering exactly the historical
position of the Isaiah of chaps. xxxvi.‑xxxix. and

41	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
as belonging to the texture of thought which is there demonstrably that of Isaiah. It maybe asked I whether these were put together by the prophet or by one of his disciples out of his deliverarlcea. A doubt has been rained by the passage xxx. 8‑7, a piece which is related to the " burdens " of chaps. xxi.‑xxii.; but the interconnection of xxx. 6 with verse 8 indicates a continuity of thought. Moreover, chaps. xxxiii.‑xxxv. are inseparably bound together, as was long ago recognized by Ewald; the direction in xxxiv. 1 sqq. to all peoples to listen to the story of the coming judgment is parallel to that in xxxiii. 13 warning the nations to take to heart the judgment upon the Assyrian host. If they do this, they may be exempt from the general judgment to be executed upon the peoples hostile to Yahweh, which is to find its chief exemplification in the punishment of Idumea (xxxiv. 6). Yet when Ewald remarked that xxxv. must be regarded as Ieaianic, while of xxxiv. so much can not be cer‑ ' tainly affirmed, he was within the bounds of probability, since it is likely that the prophet here used earlier predictions. The passage xxgiv.‑mxcv. would never have been taken for exilic had not first the waste in xxav. been arbitrarily and unnaturally regarded as the desert between Babylon and Judea, and if, in the second place, the " book of Yahweh " of xxsiv. 16 had not been foolishly regarded as the book of our prophet. This book is indeed the book of the kingdom, in which the future world‑king Yahweh has entered the names of his peoples with their provinces (Pa. Ixxxvii.), a book that was known to Isaiah, (iv. 3); while the play of this pictorial representation of the depopulation of a land exactly corresponds to that in xxxiii. 23, in xxx. 32‑33, 23‑24, and to the taunting, enigmatical character which all these discourses show. If now chaps, axxiii.‑mav. belong together as a sixth discourse, Isaiah is the originator, and the present arrangement corresponds to his intention. Then the foreign elements, whether by another author or by himself from another occasion, can not be separated from the whole. It is a distortion to regard xxviii. 1‑f as an oracle concerning Samaria; rather is xxviii. the first of six oracles about Judah and Jerusalem, dating from the time before the fall of the northern kingdom as a state, and belonging with iv. 2 eqq., as the resemblance between that passage and xxviii. 5‑‑8 shows. It is true that here, as in ii.‑iv., the prophet has employed other oracles, either his own or those of another prophet; moreover, to remove xxviii. 1‑6 would leave what followed without a beginning and destroy the cycle of oracles. Accordingly the prophet and the editor of these six deliverances are essentially the same, while the relation is different from that in xl.‑Ixvi. But the editor put these passages before xxxvi.‑xxxix. as he put xl.‑lxvi. after them because of their formally and essentially similar situation. Isaiah could not publish this book without indicating his part in it; and it is possible that Isa. i. was the introduction to the book xxviii.‑xxtv. when Isaiah or his disciple published it as a monument of his activity in the brilliant prophetic period of Hezekiah for the following generation, and that the editor inserted
between i. and xxviii. the parts which have their own titles (ii. 1 and aiii. 1).
There is now in our possession an assured basis from which to consider and decide how far the two sections ii.‑xii. and xiii.‑xxvii., which
	a't rep' bear Isaiah's name, do so with justice.
		There is not only a large number of
		parallels with chaps. axviii.‑xxxix.,
but there is a remarkable agreement in situation,
in spite of the intermingling of varied fragments
anti complete sections. There crime out partic
ularly the ingratitude and obstinacy of Judah and
Jerusalem and the consequently necessary purging
by punishment (ii.‑iv.). It seems credible that
Isaiah himself arranged ii.‑iv.; and as he surely
wrote vi. and xii. as components of a connected
whole, all the individual parts of v.‑xii. are trace
able to him, though that interpolations have taken
place need not be denied. It is possible that these
last were, according to the custom of the times,
attributed to Isaiah, and that the editor had the
book in manuscript form before him in which the
individual pieces had been inserted unintelligently
among others which were then laid aside or put in
other connections, and that transpositions were
made which brought these parts into positions earlier
or later in the book than they originally occupied.
In the second part, which separates into the four " burdens " of xiii.‑xviii. and the six of xix.‑xxiii., there are certain guiding threads which
	B. Chap.	come both from i.‑xii. and from xxviii.
xiii,t~vii, xxxv. The " burden " of the beasts of
		the South in xxx. 6 eqq. finds its coun
terparts in the "burdens" of xix.‑xxiii.; and xxxiv.
1 eqq. agrees with xviii. 3. On the other hand, the
note of the leveling of the heights found in chap ii.
is repeated in xix. and xxiii., while the doing away of
the lordship of Jacob and of the remains of Damas
cus in xviii. 12 sqq. is anticipated in viii. 7‑10.
Indeed, chap. xviii. comes into connection with
both xi. 11 and Lzvi. 20‑21 in its thought of the
return of the Hebrews from distant lands. The
" burdens " are marked out from all other prophetic
oracles by the fact that they bear the impress of
having been delivered in the ecstatic state, and
besides this they deal with the immense or the
distant in time. They take on a different coloring
entirely from those prophecies which come out of
the prophet's own life or relate to the history of
the times. Thus it comes about that they are
separated from the other deliveranoes of the prophet
and appear as cycles of deliverances distinguished
by their tone. So their titles arise from a catch
word, or a subject, or a locality, or an emblem
some of which can be shown to rest upon mistakes
of the text (xxi. i). Under these circumstances it is necessary to ask whether they are arranged after
the literary ideas of the prophet Isaiah. It is re.. markable that the oracle on Philistia (xiv. 29 sqq.), the people on the western border, passes on in xv.xvi. to Moab and F.dom, on the east and southeast, and in xvii. 1 to Damascus and the Holy Land in
order to portray the extreme need in Israel and the overpowering revolution in the salvation of Jerusalem (xviii. 7). This corresponds to the way in which Am' reached the expression of the judg‑

Isaiah
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
42
ment upon Israel (Amos i.‑ii). In xv.‑xvi. Isaiah has so remodeled an old prophecy that it now has a relation to the foregoing " burden "; x. 5‑12 is specifically Isaianic, so that the arrangement of at least three of these " burdens " is his. But there is a clear connection of these with the oracle in xvii. 12‑xviii. 7, which shows a deliverance in Zion and the substitution of the government of a Davidic rule in place of that of the condemned tyrant of the peoples. This tyrant, the king of the satirical song in xiv. 4 sqq., is an ideal representation of the tyranny which is opposed to God, which subdues the world and oppresses God's people, but is cast into the depth of Hades. By his overthrow Yahweh frees the world of its incubus, and Zion becomes the refuge of the peoples under the Davidic dynasty. Similarly, the downfall of Babylon is pictured in xiii., and it is possible that in chap xix. the tyrant who oppresses the Egyptians is this same ideal tyrant by whose overthrow Egypt is to become a province of Canaan. The explanation of the position of xxi.‑xxii. between the entirely parallel " burdens " of xix.‑xx. and xxiii. is more difficult. In xxi. clearly the fate of heathen cities is determined by the decrees of Yahweh, for the execution of which the watchers are waiting. Chap. xxii. shows a contrast in the view of the valley of vision, where the watcher bewails the coming misfortune, while in the second part the expectations of Shebna for a quiet death fr3 honorable burial in a chosen place are predicted to be baseless. The two chapters seem to show the necessity of the purgation of sin through death, out of which resurrection is to come. But this is related to the portrayal in xxiv. The succeeding chapters seem to portray like processes through which alike Israel and the nations are to peas the particular judgments upon the nations which have been passed in review being generalized until there comes into view the salvation of the once rejected people, awakened into new life (xxvi. i‑19, cf. ix. 2). So that in the second half the ruling idea is the universal kingdom of Yahweh as it arises out of the judgment of the nations and the humiliation of human might and centers of power, the earthly representation of which is the throne and city of David rained to a glorious eminence.
The transmission and arrangement of this book demand of the reader that he view as the source of
7. Results its peculiar prophetic content and as
of the In‑
vestigation. its predictive subject the historically veetigation. known Isaiah, who orally and by writing sought to mold public opinion and reared up by esoteric instruction the followers and disciples (viii. 16 sqq., lix. 21) who were heirs of his prophecy to continue his testimony. These heirs of Isaianic prophecy received his testimony and made it fruitful partly by publishing in book form his oral and written testimony for " Judah and Jerusalem " (i. 1), and partly by reproducing in the circles of the faithful the esoteric instruction given them (xlviii. 16) and making it the basis and guide of their addresses. In order to preserve essentially and in completeness the testimony of Isaiah, these developments of Isaianic contents required later fixation in writing and union with the then existing book of Isaiah. Since the author
of the addition in Ixiii. 7‑Lyvi. 24, whose theodicy reproduces Isaianic declarations, looked back upon the destruction of the temple, and since the preacher of xli. 1 sqq. had seen the victorious march of Cyrus, the origin of the present book is later than 550 B.C. This method of treating the Isaianic deliverances, apart from other results, was worked out in abbreviations (as in ii.‑iv.), enrichment (as in the lyrics of the Deutero‑Isaiah), and reinterpretation (e.g., xiv. 5 sqq.). In view of these results fuller justice is done the book if its relation to the historical Isaiah is the guide to its exegesis than if the tradition regarding its authorship is disregarded and its authors are scattered along through the centuries. (AUGUST KLOSTERMANN.)
III. The Critical View: The Book of Isaiah in its present form is very generally regarded as possessing a certain unity of plan and purpose. The traditional view has from time immemorial discovered, in this unity, the pen of a single author,
Isaiah, the contemporary of Hezekiah,
1. The while recent critical scholarship main‑
Problem. twins that this writing was arranged
and edited by some unknown scribe or scribes, acting as diaskeuasts in the first quarter of the first century B.C. In a little over a quarter of a century, after Dbderlein (1775) in his commentary on Isaiah first threw serious doubt on the genuineness of Isa. xl.‑Lyvi., a fragmentary hypothesis of the origin of this prophetic work gradually gained in popularity. The latter view was first enunciated by Koppe in his notes to Bishop Lowth's work on Isaiah (1779,81). Koppe's theory, that the canonical Book of Isaiah was made up of eighty‑five fragments, never won general acceptance as it was strenuously opposed by the Iiebraist Gesenius and the commentator Hitzig. But a new form of the fragmentary hypothesis (see below, §§ 3 sqq.), differing materially from that of Koppe, has won many adherents among Biblical scholars since it vas brilliantly advocated by Duhm (1892), Cheyne (1895), and Marti (1900).
To understand fully the history of critical opinion, and especially its latest phases, one must note the structure of the book. All commentators, modern as well as ancient, have observed the threefold division into which the Book of Isaiah naturally falls: (1) i.‑xxxv., (2) xxxvi.‑xxxix., (3) zl.‑
Lyvi. The second of these groups,
2. 8truc_ giving an account of Isaiah's activity
ture of in the crisis produced by Sennacherib's
the Book. invasion, 701 B.C., was excerpted from
the Book of Kings. Chapters xxxvi.‑
xxxix. form the dividing line between the two main sections of the work. The passages on one side differ from those on the other in historical background, point of view, theological conceptions, diction and phraseology. The earlier chapters reflect the historical changes and movements of 740‑701 B.C.; the monarchs mentioned‑Hezekiah, Sargon
(xx. 1), Sennacherib (xxxvi., xxxvii. 17, 21, 37), and Merodach‑$aladan (xxxix. 1)‑are those of the eighth century. In the third section (xl.‑Lxvi.) Cyrus is in the flood tide of his victorious career
(xliv. 28, xlv. ; cf. xli. 2‑3, 25, etc.); the Assyrian has

43	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
disappeared from the stage of history, and in his stead Israel's oppressors are the Babylonians (xliii. 14, 25, xlvii. 1 aqq., xlviii. 14, 20). In the third section Jerusalem is described as lying in ruins and desolate (xliv. 26b, lviii. 12, 1u. 4, lxiu. 18, Lyiv. 10‑11), while in the first part she is still standing, the object of her enemies' attacks and the special ward of Jehovah (i.‑xxix. 1‑8, 36‑39). In addition to these distinguishing features, the two parts differ greatly in spirit; the latter is a book of consolation, the very first word being " comfort " (xl. 1), while the former is made up of threatening and judgment, the tone of arraignment struck in chap. i. appearing in one form or other clear through to chap. xxxv. While in this connection stress is not laid upon the fact that the phraseology is in striking contrast, as this frequently leads to a mechanical argument, the difference in diction may not be passed over lightly, as the careful reader notices the change even in the English version, while one accustomed to using Hebrew almost instinctively notes the passing from a piece of literature in a style " condensed, lapidary and plastic," to one that is clear and flowing. In chaps. i.mrxix. the emphasis is laid upon the majesty of Yahweh (ii. 10 sqq., 17, 19 aqq., x. 5 aqq., etc.), in xl.‑Lyvi. on his infinitude (xl. 12‑26‑x1i. 4, etc.), in the third section the personal Messiah is depicted as the righteous and suffering servant (xlii. 1‑4, xlix. 1‑6, 1. 4‑9, Iii. 13‑liii. 12) instead of the ideal king of the future (vii. 14, ix. 1‑6, xi. 1‑5).
Such differences as these were deemed valid grounds for dating Isa. xl.‑Lyvi. in the sixth century by almost every great commentator of the last century (Geaenius, Ewald, Knobel, Dillma,nn, Delitzsch in his last edition, Cheyne, Orelli,
	S. Results Duhm, G. A. Smith). Dillmann char
of 	acterized this view as " one of the sur‑
	Criticiem.	est results of modern literary investi
		gation." Since Delitzsch in the fourth
edition of his commentary (1889) went over to this
position, it may truthfully be said that no scientific
exegetical work has held to the traditional view of
the unity of the Book of Isaiah. In America the
assignment of Isa. xl.‑Lyvi. to the sixth century
was strenuously opposed in magazine articles by
Prof. W. H. Green of Princeton (Presbyterian and
Reformed Review, vol. iii.), but this school of theol
ogy has produced no work of exposition on the
prophecies of Isaiah since the appearance of that
commentary of first rank by J. A. Alexander (1846,
rev. ed. 1865). The argument from " the analogy
of prophecy " worked this complete revolution in
critical opinion. That a prophet primarily ad
dresses his contemporaries; that, however far he
may project himself into the future, his point of de
parture is his own age; that he paints the distant
scene of the remotest future in the colors of his
own day; that he plants his feet firmly upon the
events of his own time, before he attempts to scan
the distant horizon‑these are principles recog
nized as axiomatic by all interpreters of prophecy.
If they are correctly assumed, Isa. xl.‑lxvi. can
not be assigned to Isaiah, the son of Amoz. In
fact, the exilic background of these chapters has
been recognized by some of the most zealous de‑
fenders of the Isaianie authorship, but it has been attributed to " the prophet's ideal point of view"(Keil; cf. Hengatenberg).

	Having attained this rbeult, criticism did not
halt, for the argument from the analogy of proph
ecy will not leave the first part of the work intact
(chaps. i.‑xxxv.). As early as Eichhorn (1783) it
		was applied to this section, and re
	4. Anal‑ aulted in the denial of the genuineness
	y"° °f of a number of passages. (1) The
	_Isaia' oracle on the fall of Babylon (xiii. 1
	i~ ~_~ xiv. 23) was assigned to the Babylo
nian exile, because the Medea are mentioned as the
instruments of the destruction (xiii. 17), and Baby
lon is described as the supreme world power of that
age (xiii. 11, 19, xiv. 4‑5, 12 aqq., 16‑17). (2) In
the critical disposition of passages, xxi. 1‑10 is
naturally associated with xiii. 1‑xiv. 23, for in it
the prophet describes the fall of Babylon, and re
fers to Elam and Media (verse 2) in terms which
would be more natural to a prophet of the sixth
century than to Isaiah of the eighth. (3) With
these two sections just noted go chaps. xxxiv. and
xxxv. The latter is a beautiful lyric which is a
mosaic of phrases and imagery borrowed from Deu
tero‑Isaiah (the title provisionally assigned to the
author of part three); the former is assigned to the
exile, because of the bitter hatred and dire ven
geance against Edom which it breathes (xxxiv. 5
sqq., 8 sqq.; cf. Ps. cxxxvii. 7). (4) While, in re
gard to the section Isa. xxiv.‑xxvii. there is a gen
eral agreement that it is not the work of Isaiah, no
consensus of opinion has been reached as to the
age to which it should be assigned. Conservative
critics are inclined to be satisfied with placing it in
the days of the Persian empire. Dates, varying
from the reign of Darius Hystaspia (520185) to
that of Artaxerxes Ochus (359‑339), have been
given. Here the argument from Biblical theology
overshadows that based upon the analogy of proph
ecy. No explicit historical references occur; the
imagery is apocalyptic in character, which in itself
points to the age of the decay of prophecy. The
writer's ideas of the future life‑immortality, xxv.
8, and the resurrection, xxvi. 19‑‑are distinct ad
vances on those of Isaiah's age, but the traces of
Persian angelology commonly alleged are not so
evident. Critical opinion is divided about the age
of chap. xxiii. The only reason for denying the
Isaianic character of this passage is the occurrence
	of the phrase " Behold the land of the Chaldeans "
	(verse 13). The text is extremely uncertain and
	has led to emendations; instead of Chaldeans,
	Ewald suggested Canaanites, and Duhm offers Chit
	tim. It may justly be regarded as an Isaianic
	passage to be assigned either to 723 or to 701 B.C.
Such was the view of critical scholarship before
	the rise of the modern fragmentary hypothesis
	which has been advocated by Duhm and Marti in
their commentaries (1892, 1900), and by Cheyne
in his Introduction to the Book of Isaiah (1895).
These three exegetes leave only a very small part
of chaps. i.‑xxRix, to Isaiah, and Cheyne has tersely
enunciated the principles and results of this school
` It is too bold to maintain that we still have any
collection of Isaianic prophecies which in its prea‑

Iahbt sheth	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	44
eat form goes book to the period of the prophet " (EB, ii. 2194). Cheyne in his Introduction to the Book of Isaiah assigns only the following passages of i.‑xxxia. to Isaiah: i. b‑31, ii. 6‑21, iii. 1, 4‑5, 8‑9 (2‑3, 8‑7 may be Isaianic), 12‑15, 18‑17, 24, v. 1‑14, 17‑22, 23‑25b, 26‑29, vi. 1‑13, vii. 2‑8a, 9‑14, 18, 18‑20, viii. 1‑4, 5‑6, 7a, 8‑18, ix. 7‑12, 15‑x. 4, x. 5‑9, 13,‑14, 28‑32, xiv. 24‑27 (omit 256), 29‑32, xvi. 14, xvii. 1‑6, 9‑14, xviii. 1‑6, xx. 1, 3‑8, xxi. 16 sqq., xxii. 1‑5, 6‑9a, llb‑14, 15a, 16‑18, xxiii. 1‑2, 3(?), 4, 6‑12, 14, viii. 14, 7‑19, 21‑22, xaix. 1‑4a, 6, 9‑10, 13‑14, xxix. 15, xxx. 1‑7a, 8‑17b, xxxi. 1‑5a.
Before the advent of this fragmentary school, Isa. xl.‑lxvi. was looked upon as a literary unity, and was attributed to a single prophet, commonly termed the " Great Unknown of the Exile" or Deutero‑Iaaiah. This prophecy was regarded as
falling into three sections marked by
6. Aawl‑ the refrain alviii. 22, Ivii. 21 (Riick
	y°is °r	leash
ert Hitzig, and Delitzach). Ewald
	vi, first propounded a theory, the fore
		runner of the one now to be consid
ered. He maintained that Isa. xl.‑Ixvi. was a col
lection of " pamphlets or fly‑leaves which the
surging stream of time drew forth, one after an
other, from the prophet." The writer arranged
these pamphlets in two books, xl.‑xlviii., xlix.‑Ix.,
to which were added an epilogue, Ixi. i‑Ixiii. 6, and
an appendix, Lxiii. 7‑lxvi. 24. According to Ewald,
Deutero‑Isaiah borrowed xl. 1, 2, Iii. 13‑liii. 12,
Ivi. 9‑lvii. 11 from a prophet of Manasseh's reign,
and lvii. 1‑lix. 20 from a contemporary of Ezekiel.
Dillma,nn and his school have always stood for the
substantial unity of this section of the Book of
Isaiah (cf. Dilhnann's Kommenutr, ed. Kittel, Leip
sic, 1898). The earlier efforts to deny the unity of
Deutero‑Isaiah bore fruit in the commentary of
Duhm already mentioned. In this epoch‑making
book, Duhm maintained that Isa. xl.‑Lwi. is the
work of three different writers. (1) Deutero
Isaiah is reduced to xl, lv., and then one‑fourth of
its contents is subtracted as later additions. Deu
tero‑Isaiah is supposed to have written his work
about 540 B.C. in Lebanon or Phenicia. Duhm re
gards the following verses as later additions: xl.
5, 31b, xli. 5, xlii. 12, 15‑24, xliii. 20b, 21, x1iV. 9
20, 28b, xlv. 10, 13b, xlvi. 6,S,.xlvii. 3a, 14b, xlviii.
1 in part, 2, 4, 5b, ?b, 8b‑10, 16b‑19, 22, 1. 10, 11,
li. 11, 16, 18, Iii. 3‑6, liv. 15, 17b, Iv. 3a, 7. (2)
From chaps. xl.‑Iv. several passages, the so‑called
" Servant of Yahweh Songs " (xHi. 1‑4, xlix. 1‑6,
I. 4‑9, Iii. 13‑liii. 12), were esscinded and assigned
to a later date. Duhm takes pains to show that
these lyrics are dependent on Jeremiah, Job, and
Deutero‑Isaiah, although the last‑named does not
show any acquaintance with them. The Servant
of Yahweh Songs were read by Trito‑Isaiah, and
influenced Malachi; the literary connections thus
traced point to a member of the Jewish Church of
the first half of the fifth century B.C. as their
author. Marti differs from Duhm in regarding
these songs as an integral part of Deutero‑Isaiah.
(3) The closing section, chaps. Ivi.‑lxvi., is attrib
uted to a third writer, who is designated Trito
Isaiah. He writes in the same measure as Deutero‑
Isaiah, imitates his style, and agrees with him in proclaiming the future glory of Jerusalem. From the internal evidence, it is argued that he was a resident of Jerusalem, and wrote shortly before the mission of Nehemiah. It is to be noted that Cheyne analyzes this section, and regards it as a compilation from several sources.
Sanity and common sense suggest that the literary criticism of the fragmentists has overreached itself. The arguments from the analogy of prophecy and Biblical theology as applied by Cheyne,
Duhm, and Marti necessarily imply a e. Con‑ minute knowledge of history such as olusioa. we do not possess. While this is true,
	historical criticism has reached some
assured results. It has been proved that chaps.
xxxvi.‑xxxix, were excerpted from the Book of
Kings, and certain passages of chaps. i.‑xxxix. can
not have been written by Isaiah (see above). The
literary history of chaps. xl.‑Lxvi, is not' as simple
as it once was supposed to be. Of these chapters,
xl.‑lv. may confidently be assigned to Deutero
Isaiah, xl.‑xlviii, being written in the exile (c.
546), and xlia.‑lv. in Palestine shortly after the re
turn. The manner and date of origin of Ivii.‑Lyvi.
can not be determined with certainty; probably
they were written in the age of Ezra and Nehemiah,
and were the product of a school of writers rather
than of a single pen. 	JAMES A. KELSO.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the Life and Times of Isaiah the beet work is 8. It. Driver, Isaiah, his Lift and Times, London, 1893. Consult further: A. H. $eyce, Life and Times oJleniah Illustrated by Contemporary Monuments, ib. 1889; J. Meinhold, Jeaaia and seine Zeit, Freiburg, 1898; R. Sinker, Hezekiab and His Ape, ib. 1897; F. Kiiehler, Die Stellunp des Propheten Jesaia zum Politik seiner zeit, TObingen, 1908; DB, ii. 4135‑488; EB, ii. 2180‑2190; JE, vi. 835638; F. Wilke, Jesaja and Aeeur, Leipsic, 1905.
On the text consult A. Klostermann Deuterojesaja, Munich, 1893; T. Kv. Cheyne, Notes and Criticisms on the Hebrew Test of Isaiah London, 1888; idem Isaiah, in SBOT; idem, Critics BibLica, London, 1904; R. L. Ottley, Book of Isaiah according to she LXX., 2 vole., New York, 1904‑07; G. H. Box, The Baokojleaiah, London, 1908.
The two beat commentaries on the book ere by F. Delitzach, 2 vole., Leipsic, 1889, Eng. transl., 2 vole., London, 1891‑92 (conservative), and J. Skinner, in Cambridge Bible, 2 vole., Cambridge, 1898‑98 (critical). The book has been constantly the subject of comment, the moat noteworthy of which is contained in the works of C. Vitringa, 2 vole.. Basel, 1732; R. Lowth, London, 1778 and often (marked out new tines by introducing the subject of the poetry of the book); W. Geeeniue, 2 vole., Leipsic, 1821 (philological); F. Hitzig, Heidelberg, 1833; F. J. V. D. Maurer, Leipsic, 1835; E. Henderson, London, 1857; H. Ewald, Stuttgart, 1868, Eng. tranal., London, 187b‑80; K. A. Knobel, ed. L. Dieatel, Leipsic, 1872; J. A. Alexander, 2 vole., New York, 1875; W. Kay, in Bible Commentary, New York, 1875; B. Neteler, MGnater, 1878; F. W. Weber, NSrdlingen, 1876; 8. R. Driver and A. Neubauer, The 63d Chapter of Isaiah according to Jewish Interpreters, 2 vole., Oxford 1878‑77; A. 'le Hir, Paris, 1877; $. 9harpe, London, 1877; W. Urwiek, The Servant of Jehovah, le, Iii. Id‑liii. 18, Edinburgh, 1877; T. R. Birka, London 1878; A. Heiligatedt, Halls, 1878; K. W. E. N>lgelebach, Bielefeld, 1877 Eng. tranal., New York, 1878 (in Lange); F. Koatlin Berlin, 1879; J. W. Nutt, Commentary on Isaiah by Rabbi Eleazer of Beaugenci, with Notice of Mediaeval French end Spanish Exegesis, London, 1879; J. M. Rodwell, ib. 1881; T. K. Cheme, The Book of Isaiah Chronologically Arranged, London, 1884; Commentary, 2 vole., ib. 1881‑84; G. A. Smith, 2 vole., 1890; H. G. Mitchell, Isaiah i.‑xii., New York, 1897; A. Dillmann ed. R. Kittel, Leipsic, 1898; E. KSnig, The Exiles' Book of Consolation, Edinburgh 1899; A. Condamin, Paris, 1905.

46	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	I
On the subject of the " Servant " consult: J. Forbes, The Servant of the Lord in la. xl.‑lxvi., Edinburgh, 1870: M. Schian, Die F.bed‑Jahweh‑Lioder in Jea. ;0‑BB, Leipaic, 1894; K. Budde, Die aogerwnnten Ebed‑lahwe‑IAeder, Giessen, 1900; F. Gieaebreeht, Der Knecht Jahwes des Deuterojesaia, Kifnigaberg, 1902; H. Roy. Israel and die Welt in Jet. 40‑66, . . EbedJahwe‑Frapt, Leipsie, 1903; G. C. Workman, The Servant of Jehovah; or, the PaaaionProphecU of Scripture. London. 1907.
For Criticism and Introduction the moat thorough‑going
work is T. K. Cheyne, Introduction to the Book of Isaiah, London, 1895. Various questions and phases are discussed in: C. P. Caspari. Beitrage zur Einteitung in daa Bush Jeaaja, Berlin, 1848; LShr, Zur Frage fiber die Echtheit von Jesaiaa I,O‑‑BB, 3 parts, Berlin, 1878‑80; H. Krifger, Lo Theolopie d'Eanie 40‑‑88. Paris. 1881; J. Berth, Beitr&ge zur Erkhfrung des Jeaaja, Catlsruhe, 1885; H. Guthe, Dae Zukunftabild des Jeaaia, 1.oipsic, 1885; F. Gieaebrecht, BeilrHpe zur Jeaaia‑Kritik, Gottingen, 1890; J. Kennedy, A Popular Argument for the Unity of leaiah, London. 1891; J. Ley, Jea. 40‑88, Marburg, 1893; G. C. M. Douglas, Isaiah One and His Book One, London, 1895: D7. Briiekner, Kompoaition des . . . As. ,98‑53, Halls, 1897; J. Meinhold, Die laajaerzrihlungen Jea. 38‑39, GSttingen, 1898; A. Bertholet, Zu Jeea9a 63, Tiibingen, 1899; E. Littmann. User die Ablaaaunpazeit des Tritoieaaaa, Freiburg, 1899; E. Selim, Daa Rtttael des deutsrojeeajaniacAsn Buchea, Leipaic, 1908; Smith, Prophets; DB, ii. 485‑499; EB, ii. 2189‑2208; JR, vi. 838‑442; and the general works on Introduction to the Bible and to the O. T., and on O. T. Theology.

ISAIAH, MARTYRDOM OF. See PaEUbEFIGRAPHw, IV., 34.

ISENMANN (more correctly Iaenmenger or Eisenmenger), JOHANN: German reformer; b. at Schwabisch Hal),(35 m. n.e. of Stuttgart), Wiirttemberg, c. 1495; d, at the monastery of Anhausen on the Brenz (near Heidenheim, in Wiirttemberg, 20 m. n.n.e. of Ulm) Feb. 18, 1574. He studied at the University of Heidelberg in Apr., 1514, became dean of the classical faculty on Dec. 20, 1521; was called to Hall as pastor in the spring of 1524, and then wrought for twenty‑four years with Brenz for the Reformation in that place. The festival of Corpus Christi was abolished in 1524; at Christmas, 1525, the Lord's Supper was observed by Evangelical rite; and in 1526, an Evangelical liturgy was introduced. Isenmann took an eager part in the Syngramnla Suevicum in 1525 (see BRENZ, Jor;wxN, § 2). He became superintendent in 1542. At the beginning of 1546 he reformed the imperial town of Wimpfen. Heavy tribulation ensued from the Schmalkald War, with the emperor's triumphant entrance to Hall, Dec., 1546; and the situation grew still more dangerous during the Interim, which both Iaenmann and Brenz rejected. When the Spaniards came, the council had to dismiss Evangelical preachers. In July, 1549, Isenmann removed t0 Wiirttemberg, and became preacher at Urach. Soon afterward he became pastor at Tubingen, and general superintendent of the southwest district. He enjoyed the confidence of the new duke. In 1551 he went with Jakob Berlin (q.v.) to Langensalza and Leipsie to have the Wurttemberg Confession subscribed by Melanchthon and the theologians of Wittenberg and Leipsic. In the summer of 1557 he accompanied the duke to the diet at Frankfort, and collaborated in the great Apologia conjessimyis 1Firlembergicae, In 1558 he was appointed abbot at Anhausen, where he spent
the remainder of his life.	G. B09BERT.
BIHI,IOaRAPHY: 1.. M. Fischlin, Mamoria theoloporum WirEembergenaium, i. 53, Leipsie, 1710; J. Hartmann and C. Jilger, Johann Brew, 2 vole., Hamburg, 1840‑42; T. Preesel, Anecdote Brend%ana,.2 vole., Tilbingen, 1888; G. Bossert, bas Interim in Wi'crftemberg, Halls, 1895; ADB, xiv. 834.
ISHBOSHETH: According to II Sam. ii.‑iv. a son of Saul, whom his uncle, Abner, set on the throne of Israel at Mahanaim after the slaughter by the Philistines at Gilboa. In I Chron. viii. 33, ix. 39 he is called Eah‑baal (Hebr. Eahba'al, a contraction of Ishba'al, " man of the Lord," i.e., of Yahweh); when the use of the name "Baal" was shunned, and bosheth, " shame," substituted for it (see BAAL, § 5), the form Ishboaheth became common. That in the Hebrew text the original form was lahba'al is shown by the translations of Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, Itals,, and the Septuagint codex 93 Holmes. The original form remains in Chronicles probably because those books were read and copied less frequently than Samuel. The Chronicler names Iahboaheth fourth of the sons of Saul after Jonathan, Malchi‑shua and Abinadab. I Sam. xxxi. 2 does not name him, I Sam. xiv. 49 names Jonathan, Iahui, and Malchi‑ahua. The order here indicates that Ishbosheth was the youngest son of Saul, and that is the more probable since he was dependent upon Abner, since there is no mention of his wife or children, and since he is not named among Saul's sons who were in the battle with the Philistines. The age given him in II Sam. ii. 10 does not agree with the indications of the context, according to which David and Jonathan were not yet forty years old at the time of the battle of Gilboa; the item belongs to the later chronological insertions.
Abner, a cousin of Saul, after the battle of Gilboa sought to save for Israel as much as he might of Saul's achievements, and had Ishbosheth set up as king beyond the Jordan at Mahanaim, where he was recognized by Gilead, Asher, Jezreel, Ephraim, and Benjamin‑practically all Israel. Judah and the South had made David king there, though under tributary relations with the Philistines; and for his possessions west of the Jordan Ishbosheth was also a vassal of the Philistines. The strife which arose between Israel and Judah, the first indication of which is given in II Sam. ii. 12 aqq., was suffered
by the overlords, and continued with increasing success for David. Finally Abner took offense at the complaint of Iahbosheth because the former had married one of Saul's concubines, and told Iahbosheth that he would influence Israel to Ch0W
David king, a threat which he proceeded to fulfil. David thereupon demanded of Ishbosheth the
return of his former wife, Michal, thus forcing recog
nition of his relationship to Saul's household, the
way having been paved by negotiations between himself and Abner (II Sam. iii. 12 sqq.). At the defection of Abner Iahbosheth lost heart, and he was soon after assassinated by two of his military officers, who thought in this way to secure their own advancement. They carried his head to David; but being a member of the house of Saul, David at once punished the murder by the execution of the murderers.
This is the course of the Judaic narrative in 11

Ishmael
Isidore of Seville	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	48
Sam. ii.‑iv. Were‑the Ephraimitic account extant, possibly the coloring of the story might be somewhat changed. Two points in the story appear trustworthy: that David wished to be recognized as the son‑in‑law of Saul, and that he was innocent of the death of Ishbosheth. The length of Ishbosheth's reign was probably a little less than that of David in Hebron (II Sam. vi. b). (H. GUTHE.)
B113LIOGRAPHY: A. Kamphausen, in ZATW, vi (1888), 43‑97; the literature under Swnsur.L, BOOKS OF; and the pertinent sections of the works oiled under AHAB.
ISHMAEL (Hebr. Yishmn'el, "God hears"; LXX., Ismael): The son of Abraham by Hagar (q.v.), an Egyptian slave. He was born in the house of Abraham and was included in the covenant of circumcision (Gen. xvii. 25, P). Since, however, it was the will of God that Isaac should be the sole heir of the covenant blessings, the Lord commanded Abraham to accede to the demands of his wife Sarah that Ishmael be driven from the house. After this enforced flight, a divine revelation came to Hagar (Gen. xxi., E), as she was driven to despair for her son, who was dying of thirst in the " desert of Beersheba." That this vision is only another version of that recounted in chap. xvi. (Hupfeld, Dillmann and others) can not be maintained, since the details of the divine appearance are entirely different and there is also a difference between the chronology of P and that of E, the former (Gen. xvii. 25) making Ishmael at least fifteen years of age at the time, while E (Gen. xxi.) regards him as still a child of tender years (cf. the LXX. of xxi. 14 which says expressly: " and she placed the child upon her shoulder ").
The especial importance of Ishmael lies in the relation of his descendants to Israel. They were to have no claim on the promised inheritance of the people of God, but were destined to multiply and spread. These descendants are characterized by the words of the angel concerning the ancestor himself (Gen. xvi. 12) : " And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him," thus sketching with a few strokes the spirit and manner of life of the Bedouins. According to Gen. xvi. 12, they were to dwell farther to the eastward than their brothers, and is fact they had possession of the desert east of Palestine, occupying also the country to the south, from the Persian Gulf to the northeastern boundary of Egypt. They spread put over the whole of northern Arabia, and therefore their ethnic designation, Ishmaelites, is used generally for the tribes of northern Arabia, including also the Midianites. Twelve peoples of northern Arabia are derived from Ishmael in Gen. xxv. 12 sqq. (P), where the genealogy is more ethnographic than is usually the case in the histories of the patriarchs. Ishmael is, however, a primitive personal name which occurs in ancient Arabic inscriptions, and in this case the leader gave his name to the tribe, although all the groups of peoples which are brought into connection with him were not his actual'descendants. That Israel recognized its blood‑relationship with these tribes rests upon a correct tradition. The Mohammedan Arabs, who proudly reckon Ishmael among their ancestors, say that he and his mother were buried
in the Kaaba at Mecca (Abulfeda, Historic d»teislamica, ed. H. O. Fleischer, pp. 24 eqq., Leipsic, 1831; E. Pocock, Specimen historiae Arabum, pp. 6‑7, 177, 506‑507, Oxford, 1806; B. d' Herbelot, Bi6liotUque orientate, Maestrieht, 1776, e.w. " Hagar," " Ismael," " Ischak ").
(C. DON ORELLL)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Consult, besides the literature under ISAAC and ARABIA: A. H. Sayee, Higher Criticism and the Monuments, pp. 201‑202, London, 1894; T. P. Hughes, Dictionary of Islam, pp. 216‑220, ib. 1896; DB, ii. 502‑505; EB, ii. 2211‑2215; the appropriate sections in works on the history of Israel and the commentaries on Genesis.
	ISHTAR.	See AaHTORETH; ASSYRIA, VIL;
BABYLONIA, VIL, 2, § 7, 3, § 5.
ISIDORE MERCATOR: A fictitious person, the alleged author of the Pseudo‑Isidorian Decretals (q.v.). He was formerly erroneously identified with Isidore of Seville; hence the name Pseudo‑Isidore.
ISIDORE OF PELUSIUM: Egyptian abbot; b. at Alexandria, probably before 370; d. near Pelusium (135 m. e. of Alexandria) about 440. He was presbyter and abbot in a cloister at the east mouth of the Nile, not far from Pelusium. It can not be proved that he was a pupil of John Chrysoatom; but he was spiritually akin to him, and highly valued his writings. There are preserved more than 2,000 of his letters, mostly brief notes, but frequently of great length, which show him to have been a highly esteemed spiritual counselor, thoroughly aglow with holy earnestness; a very shepherd of souls, and a teacher versed in Scripture.
Isidore was an example of Greek monasticism in its noblest form. For him the practical philosophy of the disciples of Christ (i. 63 and elsewhere) throve only in withdrawal from the world, in voluntary poverty and abstinence. The soul could not discern God (i. 402) in the bustle of eve.,lday life; only in the utmost emancipation from worldly wants did it approach divine freedom (ii. 19). Yet asceticism and flight from the world did not alone suffice: the garland of all virtues must be woven in monasticism, the peculiar dangers of which, however, did not escape Isidore. But though retired from the world, he still took part in the need and perils of Christianity, supporting, exhorting, wherever he could reach with his written message. He appeared to great advantage in his attitude toward Cyril of Alexandria. While at one with him in dogmatic opposition to Nestorius, he still perceived Cyril's intriguing spirit, and warned him against blind passion (i. 310); frankly warning the emperor, too, against the disorder provoked by the interference of his courtiers in dogmatic affairs (i. 311). But when Cyril, content with the fact that Nestorius had been dropped by the Antiochians, allowed some dogmatic concessions to his opponents, he had to hear the admonition from Isidore that he should stand fast, and not himself become a heretic (i. 324). Isidore took to heart the dignity of the priesthood, and with great earnestness did he remind negligent ecclesiastics of their serious accountability. He thus very persistently rebuked Bishop Eusebius of Pelusium and his clergy, because they trafficked in priestly offices, suffered their congregations to decay, chose rather

47
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
to build sumptuous churches than to care for the poor, and caused offense by their scandalous behavior. In patriarchal fashion, moreover, he concerned himself with all manner of human needs, nor feared, in so doing, the great of this earth. He fervently exhorted the emperor to mildness and liberality (i. 35). For the weal of the town, he addressed himself to the civil authorities (ii. 25), and interceded with their masters in behalf of slaves who fled to him for protection. Of literary training himself, he granted that the Christian, like the bee, might suck honey from the teachings of the philosophers (ii. 3).
	Dogmatically orthodox, and a zealous opponent
of all heresies, he directed his attention especially
toward the doctrinal questions of weight for prac
tical Christianity (sin, freedom, grace). He was
of greater significance, however, as an exegete.
For him the Scriptural truth was the heavenly
treasure in earthen vessels. The expositor should
approach his task with devout conviction; dwelling
not upon separate words, but on the entire con
nection. Still he was given to many an arbitrary
allegory: particularly in his Christological views of
passages in the Old Testament. At the same time,
in the exposition of the Old Testament he would
not have the historical sense annulled by the mys
tical and prophetic; and he made attempts besides
at explanations of points of grammar and subject
matter. 	G. KRtYGER.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: An ed. of the Opera was published Paris, 1638, and in MPG, lxxviii. 103‑1048, 1647‑1674. Consult: ASB, Feb., i. 468‑473; J. Feealer, l natitutionea patrologiac, ed. B. Jungmann, ii. 2, pp. 128‑143, Innsbruck, 1896; DCB, iii. 315‑320; Tillemont, Mftoirea, xv. 97‑119, 847; C. A. Heumsnn, De laidori Pduaiotae, GSttingen, 1737; Fabrieius‑Ilarlea, Bibliotheca Graeca, x. 480‑494, Hamburg, 1807; H. A. Niemeyer, De laidori Pelusiotae, Halle, 1825, and MPG, lxxviii. 9‑102; P. B. Glilek, IaidordaPeluaiotae summa doctrinae moralia, Wiirzburg, 1848; L. Bober, De arts hermeneutics laidoria Pelvaiotae, Cracow, 1878; O. Bardenhewer, Patrolopie, pp. 353‑354, Freiburg, 1894; K L, vi. 964‑969.
ISIDORE OF SEVILLE: Isidore, archbishop of Seville and encyclopedist, was born about 560, the place unknown; d. at Seville, Spain,
	Life.	Apr. 4, 636. He was a scion of a dis
		tinguished Roman family which had
fled from Carthagena during the Gothic invasion,
and was educated, after the death of his parents,
by his brother Leander, whom he succeeded, ap
parently about 600, as archbishop of Seville. He
attended the synod held by King Gundemar in
610, and presided over those held by King Sisebut
at Seville in 619 and the famous Fourth Synod
of Toledo under Sisenand in 633 (see TOLEDO,
SYNODS OF).
Isidore's chief importance, however, was as an author, and his learning embraced the entire range possible in his age and country.
	His In‑	Neither originality nor independent in
fluence and vestigation, neither keen criticism nor
Importance. elegance of presentation could be ex
		pected from him, but his manifold
interest, reading, and diligence in collecting, ex
oerpting, and compiling from all departments of
theological and secular learning are unparalleled.
His position in history is determined primarily by
Ishmael
Isidore of Seville
two works, the Li6ri se»terltiarum, the first dogmatics of the Latin Church, sad the Etymologiae, the source of linguistic and practical knowledge for centuries, so that he became the schoolmaster of the Middle Ages. Gradually he became the national hero of the Spanish Church, and to him were attributed the Old Spanish or Mozarabic liturgy, the collection of Spanish canons upon which was based the forgery of the pseudo‑Isidore, and even the collection of the laws of the West Gothic kings. The Roman Catholic Church, despite the weakness of the bonds which then united Spain and Rome, holds that he was a pupil of Gregory the Great, that he was vicar‑apostolic in Spain, received the pallium, and took part in a Roman synod. Yet it is quite possible that he did not recognize the council of 553, and that he treated Justinian merely as a heretic who sought to overthrow the Chalcedonian Creed; while he did not mention the papacy in his ecclesiastical handbook, and he was even slightly heterodox in his views of the sacraments and grace.
The works of Isidore are thus enumerated according to a list by Braulio (in MPL, lxxxi. 15 sqq.),
which seems, in the main, to follow His chronological order: (1) Prooemitmtm
Writings. liter nuns, an introduction to the Bible,
consisting of a brief prologue on the canon in general and short tables of contents of the individual books. (2) De ortu et obitu patrum, or De vita et morte sanctorum utriusqece Teatamenti, short biographies of eighty‑five characters of the Bible, sixty‑four from the Old Testament and twenty‑one from the New. The authenticity of the work has been doubted, but without sufficient reason. (3) Officimwm libri duo; usually called De officiia ecclesiaaticis, written about 610, one of the most important works of Isidore for theology and ecclesiastical archeology. The first book, entitled De origirte officiorum, discusses the origin and the authors of ecclesiastical worship, while the second, De origins ministeriorum, is devoted to the duties of the orders of clergy and various estates in life. (4) De nmnint7ms Leo et evangeliorum l4ber, evidently identical with the Allegorise quaedam aanctae scrapturae of the manuscripts and editions, and containing an allegorical interpretation of 129 names and passages from the Old Testament and 121 from the New. The work is of great value for the art and literature of the Middle Ages. (5) De haeresibus liter, which is probably identical with the list of Jewish and Christian heresies given in the fourth
and fifth chapters of the eighth book of the Etymologiae. (6) Sententiarurri libri tree, the chief theological work of its author, and the first Latin compend of faith and morals, chiefly in excerpts from Augustine and Gregory the Great. The first book is dogmatic in content, and treats of such subjects as the qualities of God, the origin of evil, the soul, and Christ, the seven rules of eR8ge618, the difference between the Testaments, creeds, baptism, the sacrament, and eschatology (but with no mention of purgatory). The second and third books are ethical the former general and the latter special. The first discusses, among other subjects, the cardinal virtues, grace, election, conversion, back‑

Isidore of Seville
Israel, History of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	48
sliding, repentance, sin, conscience, virtue and vice. The last book discusses the estates of the Christian life, divine judgments, temptation, prayer, asceticism, temporal authorities, the brevity of human life, and similar topics. (7) Contra Judaeos libri duo, or De fine catholiea adveraua Judaeos, written at the request of his sister Florentine, and establishing the truth of the Christian religion from the prophecies of the Old Testament with special reference to the Jewish question in Spain. (8) Monasticae regulae liber, a system not differing essentially from the Benedictine rule, although in no way related to it. (9) Qvaestiottum in Vetua Teatamentum hbri duo, a mystical and allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament, consisting entirely of excerpts from Origen, Victorinus, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Fulgentius, Cassian, and especially from Gregory the Great. (10) De viria illustrt7rua sive de acriptort'bua ecclesiaaticis, a continuation of the works of Jerome and Gennadius. It contains the biographies of fourteen Spaniards and thirty‑two non‑Spaniards, but is written for the most part in a superficial manner and composed in great measure of excerpts (which are frequently incorrect) from Rufinus, Caesiodorus, and Victor of Tunnuna, or from the works of the authors whom Isidore discusses. (11) Chrotticorum a principio mundi uaque ad tempos auum liber, from the creation to the Emperor Heradius and King Siaebut (618), based on Julius Africanus, Eusebius‑Jerome, and Victor of Tunnuna, while its division according to the " six ages of the world " was taken from Augustine's City of God. The work is extant in two recensions, as well as in an abridgment forming the fifth chapter of the Etymologide. (12) Historic Gothorlcm, Vartdalorum et Suevorum, also in two redactions, and containing a brief, but valuable, account of these three peoples, especially of the Goths from the earliest times to the fifth year of King.Swintila (626). (13) Libri diferentiarum duo, the first an alphabetical list of synonymous or homonymous words with their meanings, and the second an elucidation of various concepts. (14) Synonymorum h3ri duo, or according to Ildefonaus, Libri lamentationum, a collection of words and phrases in the form of a dialogue between the sinful soul and comforting " reason," which points it to penance and the forgiveness of sins. (15) De naturd rerum, written at the request of King Sisebut and dedicated to him. In its fortyfive chapters it contains the moat noteworthy facts concerning the elements, the heavenly bodies, the weather, the divisions of the earth, and the like, the material being drawn in great part from Suetonius, Ambrose, the pseudo‑Clementine writings, and Augustine (16) De numeric Tiber, a mystic interpretation of the numbers from one to sixty and their significance in Scripture, nature, and history. The work is important for the history of the symbolism of figures. (17) Etymologiarum sine originum libri viginti, the culmination of all the works of its author, his other writings being either preparations or extensions of individual parts of this book. It formed the great encyclopedia of Isidore's period, and derived its name from the etymology prefixed to each article. The work is divided into twenty books treating of the following subjects: i. grammar; ii. rhetoric and
dialectics; iii. arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy; iv. medicine; v. jurisprudence and chronology, with a brief universal history; vi. Bible, inspiration, the canon, sacraments, liturgy, Easter, feasts, libraries, manuscripts, books, writing‑material, and the like; vii. a compead of theology, God, the Trinity, angels and men, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, clerks, and monks; viii. church and synagogue, religion and faith, heresy and schism, Jewish and Christian heretics, gentile philosophers, poets, sibyls, magicians, and gods; ix. various peoples and languages, offices and forma of government, marriages and relationships; x. Latin lexicon, with an explanation of about 500 words in alphabetical order; xi. mankind; xii. animals; aiii. the composition and motion of the world; xiv. divisions of the earth, lands, and mountains; xv. cities; xvi. earth and stone, gems and metals, weights and measures; xvii. agriculture, plants, and grain; xviii. war, weapons, games; six. ships, buildings, clothing, adornment; xx. food, drink, furniture, and agricultural implements. Isidore's chief sources were Cassiodorus, Boethiua, Varro, Solinus, Pliny, Hyginus, Servius, Lactantius, Tertullian, and especially the Prate of Suetoniua, but much was written from memory, thus accounting for many of the inaccuracies of the work. The Etymologiae remained the great work of reference for hundreds of years, and was practically copied by Rabanus in his encyclopedic De urtiverso (844), while it was profoundly admired by John of Salisbury in the twelfth century. ~ Compiler and plagiarist though he may have been, it has been well said that centuries would have remained in darkness if Isidore had not let his light shine.
In addition to the works already enumerated, Isidore is said to have written many smaller treatises, and others still have been ascribed to him, such as the Qttaeationea de Yeteri et Novo Teatamento and the De ordine creaturttrum, De ca7itemptu mundi, and an interpretation of the Song of Solomon. A number of Latin poems are ascribed to him, but with little warrant, and hymns to Agatha and other martyrs are included among the Mozarabic hymns. Several of his letters are still extant, and contain much of biographical and contemporary interest.

B113LIOGRAPHY: Lists of literature are (R' SCHMID.)
	given in C. U. J.
Chevalier, Sources histAriquea du nwysn~dge, p 1127 Paris,
1877 sqq.; J. E. B. Mayor, Bibliographical Clue to Latin
Literature, p. 212, London, 1875; Potthset, Weptasieer,
pp. 887‑889. The beat edition of his works is by F.
Arevali, 7 vole., Rome, 1797‑1803 reproduced in MPL,
lxxxi.‑laxxiv. Others are by bi. de Ls Bigne, Paris, 1580;
J. de Breul and J. Grial, Paris, 1801; by Grial and Gomez,
Madrid, 1778. Consult: N. Antonio, Bibtiotheca Hiepana
retua, ed. P. Bayer Madrid, 1788; J. C. F. Bdhr, liedcAiehk
der rsmiaehen Literatur, supplement, i. 111‑113 G'arlaruhe,
1838; C. E. Bourret, L' ‑Is chritienne de Seville. PP. b9‑
193, Paris, 1855; C. F. Montalembert, Lee Moines de
fouident, ii. 200‑218, b vole., Paris, 1880‑87, Eng, trans].,
i. 421‑424, Boston 1872; P. Gams, RirehenpeschidUt
Spaniene, ii. 2, pp. 102‑113, Regensburg, 1874; H. Hertz ‑
berg, Die Hiatorien and Chroniken des Isidorue van Seville,
Gtittingen, 1874; Wattenbaoh DCQ, i (188b), 81‑83,
i (1893). 84‑88: A. Ebert, (ieechichfe der Literatw du
Mittelaitere, i. b88‑802, Leipme, 1889; W. Smith, Diction.
cry of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, ii. 827
830, London, 1890; W. $. Teuffel, Clsachichts der rt~niarhen
Literatur, pp 1292‑129b, Leipeic, 1890; C. CaBal, San
leidcrn, Seville, 1897; Ceillier, Autaurs aaaJe, xi. 710‑728•

49	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	Isidore of Seville
Israel, History of
Neander, Chrfiatian Church, iii. 151‑153 et passim; Schaff, Christian Church, iv. 682‑889 et passim; KL, vi. 988‑976; DCB, iii. 305‑313. The first two volumes of the edition of his works by Arevali gather up the various accounts of the life and add critical comments.
ISIDORIAN DECRETALS. See PSEUDO‑ISIDORIAN DECRETALS.
I. Biblical History.
Primitive History
The Abrahamic History (¢ 2).
The Sojourn in Egypt (¢ 3).
The Exodus and the Giving of the
	Law (§ 4).
The Conquest of Cancan and the
	Judges (¢ b).
The United Kingdom (¢ 6).
The Divided Kingdom (¢ 7).
Judah to the Exile (§ 8).
The Exile (¢ 9).
The Persian Period (¢ 10).
The Greek Period (¢ 11).
The 1lfaccabean and Roman Periods
	(¢ 12),
ISIDORUS MERCATOR. See ISIDORE MZRCATOR.

ISgANDARUNAH. See PHENICIA, PHENICIAN6, L§2.
ISLAM. See MOHAMMED, MOHAMMEDANISM,
ISRAEL, HISTORY OF.
II. Post‑Biblical History.
1. General Survey.
2. The Early Period.
Conditions after the war; Jabneh (¢ 1).
The Last Insurrections (§ 2).
Rise of the Babylonian School 0 3).
The Two Talmudic Collections; The 4.
Msaorah (¢ 4),	b.
3. The Middle Period.
In the Orient and Italy (§ 1).
In Spain; Rise of Jewish Culture (¢ 2).
Jewish Scholars in Spain (¢ 3).
Temporal Situation in Spain to 1469 ($ 4).
I. Biblical History: Primitive history as set forth in Genesis takes the form of the history of families.
In Semitic nomadic life the family is 1' p~‑ the unit from which the tribe is eon‑
tive jived as developing. Consequently 'i History. the Hebrews regarded the nations of the world as the results of ramifications from a single stock. It is debated how far the history of families as given in Genesis is to be taken as historical, and how far the genealogical scheme depends upon observed ethnographic relationships. In the story of the different stocks, while in general little of personal life appears, the forms of the patriarchs stand out full of individuality, and the attempt is not successful to read the experiences attributed to them in certain situations and in individualistic form as the doings of a tribe or a people. Moreover, the sobriety and exactness of detail in these narratives is such as to differentiate them from the poetizing sagas in which folk‑lore celebrates the eponymous ancestors to whom the origins of the peoples are traced. It lies on the face of these narratives that they are only fragments of traditions which had for a long time been transmitted orally, and in the course of this transmission the lesser figures have dropped from the account and only the great personalities have remained. But the memory of such personalities as Abraham (q.v.), the father of the nation with whom is associated the migration from the Euphrates to Cancan, or Jacob (q.v.), who endured hard service in the Aramaic territory and earned the blessing of God as the father of a numerous progeny, or Joseph
(q.v.), through whose vicissitudes the settlement in Egypt was brought about, remained a permanent possession essentially constant in form. For the historicity of the person of Abraham it may be said that his history is not discordant with what Assyrian‑Babylonian history demands, and the story of Joseph is accordant with what is known of Egyp_ tian history.
In Genesis Abraham is the descendant and spirit. ual heir of Sheen. According to Gen. x. 21 sqq. he shares this descent with a group of nations, all of .
vL‑4
The Inquisition in Spain (¢ b). Jews in France (¢ B).
In England (¢ 7).
In Italy (¢ 8).
In Germany (¢ 9).
Revival of Meeaisniatn (¢ 10). Jews in Poland (§ 11).
The New Period. Jews in America Early Settlements (¢ 1). In the United States, 1800‑80 (¢ 2). Reform, Educational, sad Charit• able Movements 0 3).
The New Immigration Since 1880 (¢ 4).
The Press; General Conditions (¢ 5).
whom (except Elam and Lud) are related in lan
guage and blood to the Hebrews and are still known
	as Semites. In Gen. xiv. 13 Abraham
2. The Ab.	is called " the Hebrew," and according
rahamio to the Biblical representation the Iara‑
Hiatory. elites were in early times called Hebrews by other peoples, especially by the Egyptians. The connotation of this term Hebrew is narrower than that of Semite, but broader than that of Israelite, though its exact meaning is not established. It can hardly mean " those who dwell beyond the Jordan " (Stade and E. Meyer), but is better brought into relation with the river Euphrates and related to the Assyrian expression " across the river." The equating of the Hebrew form `Ibhrirra with the Egyptian `Apriu is questionable; more likely is the equivalency of the Hebrew form with the Habiri of the Amarna Tablets, though the signification of Habiri must not be restricted to the forefathers of the Hebrews. The existence of the Hebraic nomadic family life in Cancan was arduous, according to the concordant testimony of the sources. The people often had to change their dwelling‑places to secure pasturage. Still more difficult was their situation in times of famine, as when they had to transfer themselves to Egypt, at that time the granary of the region, and found themselves subject to oppression and placed under
disabilities (Gen. 7Ch 11), It was a ne"itp 0f
this kind which brought about the settlement of
the entire Jacob clan in Egypt, in the northwestern part known as Goshen, the later " Arab Dome district " about Phakusa, the present Saft el‑Henneh, a region not yet definitely marked out (E. Naville, Gosheix and the Shrine of Saft el Henneh, London, 1887). While little is known of the people lilll'llig
their stay there, the circumstances were so favorable that they developed into a nation which yet was not politically organized in national form, but lived under the patriarchal government of tribal sheiks. On the religious side much must have been borrowed
from the orderly state in which they were. While a part of the people followed pastoral occupations, another part settled down to agricultural life (Num.

Israel, History of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	60
xi. 5), and something of the industrial accomplishment of the Egyptians must have been acquired. That the Israelites showed a greater receptivity and productivity in respect to culture than their near relatives, the Edomites and Moabites, is due in part to their sojourn in Egypt. The pre‑Mosaic period was a preparation also for the theocratic and national cult of later times: The preaching of Moses must have had a basis in the knowledge of contemporary Hebrews; and the sources unitedly attribute to the patriarchs acquaintance with the God of the covenant, though he was called by other names. This God of the patriarchs was invisible, exalted, not bound to any one land, though he revealed himself in definite localities which were therefore holy, and was the possessor of heaven and earth (Gen. xiv. 19), dwelling in heaven and ruling th$ earth. The recollection clung that Abraham had been called from a relationship where idolatry was the rule (Josh. xxiv. 2, 14). The uniqueness of God was not theoretically developed, but was rather a practical monotheism which permitted to the Hebrews worship of him alone. The stone worship and totemiam some find in Genesis is discovered only through wilful exegesis and eisegesis. Even in the naive anthropomorphisms of Gen. xi., xviii.‑xix. there are evidences of an exalted conception of God. These religious ideas were not derived from Egypt, for they differ entirely from Egyptian conceptions, though that the Hebrews derived some things from the Egyptians is clear from Josh. axiv. 14; Ezek. xx. ? eqq., but that the calf worship had such an origin is improbable (see CALF, THE GOLDEN).
In the region granted them by the Egyptians, the Hebrew shepherds lived in relative independence
and grew strong. Into this situation S. The So. was injected the circumstance simply
journ is expressed in Ex. i. 8 as the rise of a
~~t' king who knew not Joseph. This is doubtless to be connected with the expulsion of the Hykaos from Egypt and the antiforeign sentiments of the new dynasty. The half‑nomads in the northeast were subjected to the corv€e and put to building fortresses and storehouses; and since this did not suffice to reduce their strength, the slaughter of the male children was ordered. Thus what had been a‑ welcome asylum became a place of slavery under the hardships of which the Hebrews groaned. Liberation from this situation is attributed by a unanimous tradition to Moses. The period of the oppression is with growing assurance asserted to be that of Rameses IL, whose name is connected with so many building‑enterprises and monuments. In that case his son and successor, Meneptah, was the Pharaoh of the Exodus (see EGYPT, L, 4, § 3). Apparently against this is an inscription of Meneptah telling of an expedition in which he has destroyed Syria and Israel (the latter for the only time found mentioned on Egyptian monuments). If the reference is to Israel, then Israel must already have been living in Canaan, and the Exodus must have taken place earlier. This agrees better with Hebrew tradition, which (I Kings vi. 1) reckoned 480 years between the Exodus and the building of Solomon's temple, which would place the Exodus
c. 1440 B.C., therefore in the time of Amenophis IL; and this agrees again with the statement of Manetho, who records the expulsion of the lepers under a king of this name. One circumstance, indeed, tells against this earlier date, viz., the frequent occurrence in the Pentateuch of the name Rameaea (Gen. alvii. 11; Ex. i. 11, xii. 37; Num, xiii. 3, 5). Further, against the late dating of the Exodus is the fact that the tribal name Asher appears in an inscription of Seti, father of Ramesea (c. 1350 B.C.), according to which that tribe must have had its residence in the neighborhood of Lebanon. The supposition that this tribe departed alone from Egypt is improbable.* According to Gen. xv. 13, 16, the sojourn in Egypt was to last 400 years or four generations. The Hebrew of Ex, xii. 40‑41 gives 430 years, but the Septuagint reads " which they sojourned in Egypt and the land of Canaan." The indication of the narrative of P is that 215 years were assigned to the Egyptian sojourn and 215 to the period between the settlement and David, which was the understanding of Josephus and of the synagogue. Along with this goes the fact that in the genealogies of Moses and Achan between Korah and Levi are mentioned only two steps, between Judah and Achan only three (Ex. vi. 20; Num. xxvi. 59, avi. l; Josh. vii. 1). But since in Gen. xv. even the Septuagint has the higher number, its reading in Ex. xii. 40 appears to be an emendation. With the longer period would agree the censuses of Num. i., xxvi., which involve a population of about 2,000,000 souls, and Num. id. 21. On the other hand, it is difficult to reconcile these high numbers with the long sojourn in the peninsula of Sinai [or to find room for so many people in the region. Therefore these numbers are now rejected, and scholars reduce the number of Israelites in the Exodus to a few thousands].
The Exodus under Moses was regarded by the
Israelites as the birth of the nation (for the route
		of the Exodus see RED SEA; WAN
4. The Exo‑ DERING IN THE WILDERNESS). The his
due and the toricity of the narrative of the Exodus
	the Law. (living of would suffer no harm if it were assumed
		that only the noblest part of the people,
to which the Joseph tribes belonged, took part in
the event, while the other tribes were already in
the peninsula; but for this supposition there is no
sure ground. To Moses, under direction of God,
were due both the Exodus and the covenant
between Yahweh and Israel; but they were essen
tially divine acts, and God became known by his
name Yahweh (see JEHOVAH; and YAHWEH). The
result was the cult and the conceptions of life which

* The text takes no account of the explanation by recent critics of the 8eti and Meneptah inscriptions. This is to the effect that the Hebrew tribes whose descent was traced to concubines of Jacob were those who, already settled in Canaan in prehistoric times, were absorbed at a oomparatively late period, to which fact is due the less honorable account of their origin. The tribes mentioned in the inscriptions were in that case not among the refugees in Egypt or the Hebrews of the Exodus, but had maintained their residence in Canaan, where they were assailed by $eti and Meneptah. This is supported by the legend of the substitution of the name Israel for Jacob, which is the eponymous method of accounting for a transfer of name from a
portion to the whole pcoplr.	G. W. G.

61	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	Israel, History of
became regnant in Israel. The resulting form of government has since the tune of Joaephus (Apion, ii. 16), been called a theocracy, the idea being that to God was assigned the authority for all rights and acts. Hence the law included not only regulations for civil and criminal processes, but also regulations governing sacrifices and festivals and purifications. From the time of the reception of the law the solidarity of the people was an accomplished fact, while at the same time the personality of deity was emphasized. The people had become a united religious community. It is self‑evident, therefore, that Moses set in order the coitus for this community, sanctioning or prohibiting customs then prevalent, those which were accepted then receiving new consecration. He appointed also a central sanctuary, without an image,‑the ark of the covenant with the celebrations centering about it, and in this centralization lay the only protection for the pure worship of Yahweh. The priests at the central sanctuary of later times were naturally the protectors of the Mosaic law, and while this law necessarily received modifications in the course of time, in general no law was known which did not go by the name of Moses. That there were relapses from observance of this law is not surprising. Equally sure is it that the law is not merely ideally referred to the desert period of Israel's life, but that it grew out of the leader's struggle with the people, whose rebellious and distrustful character so often manifested itself in the desert. The continuance of the desert sojourn is given as forty years by the concordant tradition and Amos v. 25. This period includes several smaller periods when the people settled about some spot, as at the mountain and at Kadesh. With this period of forty years agrees the fact that it was a new generation which undertook the conquest, different from that which had participated in the crossing of the Red Sea.
Moses was not among those who entered the promised land; only the East‑Jordanland, not in‑
cluded in the promises, did he see in 6. The Con‑ possession of the people. But to
quest of Joshua was divinely committed the Canaan and ask of leading the people across the the Judges. Jordan. Campaigns were accomplished in the north, then in the central portion at Shiloh the central sanctuary was established. Before his death Joshua called an assembly of the people at Shechem and there exhorted them to remain true to their God. For the relation of the narrative in the Book of Joshua to Judges i., see JOSHUA, Boox OF. When the land was parceled out among the tribes, when the Hebrews came to mingle with the earlier inhabitants and were no longer held together by a central authority, it could hardly be otherwise than that the political solidarity should be lost, that the tribal distinctions should emerge, and that the
tribes should enter into various the Canaanites. 	re]atjOshlps with
So, too, the religious unity was endangered through communications with the early settlers, while totally different conceptions of deity overlaid those which had been received at Sinai. It was easy to adopt into the Yahweh worship customs which in origin and meaning were heathen. This happened particularly at the high places. the
sanctuaries of the Canaanitea, which were adopted as places of sacrifice by the Hebrews (see HIGH PLACES). With this went relapse into the worship of the Baals and Aatartes, with their impure cults so opposed to that of Yahweh. The obliteration of the religious distinction between Hebrews and Canaanitea carried with it more or less of social and political dependence or amalgamation, especially where the Hebrews were in the minority. To this was perhaps due the loss of physical courage through which subjection to the inroads of the hordes of Midianites, Amalekites, Moabitea, Ammonites, and Philistines was brought about, relief from which was wrought by the inspired heroes who aroused the people to resistance. These heroes ‑the Judges‑were, above all, champions of freedom, but their strength and success lay in the fact that they recalled the people to trust and obedience given to the God of Moses and Joshua (see JUDGES). This is true of such of the Judges as Deborah, Gideon, Jephthah (qq.v.), while of Samson (q.v.) it moat be said that his significance was rather individual than national or tribal, and of others, such as Elon and Abdon, the influence was rather tribal or local than national. The result of this period was severance into tribal groups and loss of the sense of nationality.
This severance, due to the breaking of the covenant bond founded upon the relationship with Yah‑
weh, naturally led in turn to the dee. The mend for a firmer political union under United a national head in whom leadership
Kingdom. was more externally evident than under a pure theocracy. The tendency toward a monarchical form of government was manifested under Gideon, whose son, Abimelech, exercised a brief sway over a limited region. The founding of the kingdom is, however, inseparably connected with the name of Samuel (q.v.), the last of the Judges, who exercised also the functions of priest i and prophet. The immediate occasion of the establishment of the kingdom was the oppression by the Philistines. The hope of relief from this distress was realized under Saul (q.v.), who, however, soon regarded himself as sovereign and not as the representative of the sole king, Yahweh. This led to the announcement of his rejection through Samuel, followed quickly by his melancholia and his defeat and death at Gilboa. Before his death his successor had been chosen in the person of David (q.v,), son of Jesse, of Bethlehem of Judah, who had
achieved prominence as a leader in war and had i aroused Saul's jealousy, hatred, and persecution.
After the death of Saul, David was for seven and a half years king in Hebron over Judah, while Ishbosheth (q.v.) reigned in Mahanaim across the
Jordan over the northern tribes. After the YWItnt
death of Ishbosheth David bPeame king over the
united tribes, and fixed his residence finally in Jeru‑

salem, then newly captured. His leadership in war and peace brought the kingdom to its highest point of prosperity. His spiritual and religious significance was also great, characterized as it was by complete concord between king and prophet; and no less marked was his influence upon the coitus through his placing of the ark in the capital, through

Israel, History of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	52
his service to the ritual of song, as well as his zealous devotion to Yahweh. His son and quocensor, Solomon (q.v.), built in Jerusalem the temple, which became more and more the cultic center for the entire land, in spite of its temporary destruction. His reign, unlike that of his father's, was one of peace; yet the very fact that the land was unassailed by external foes, together with the jealousy of the northern tribes at being ruled by a Judahite, prepared the way for the division of the kingdom, which was supported by the prophetic leaders, swayed in part by Solomon's acquiescence in the practise of heathen rites introduced by the princesses whom he had made his wives.
After the death of Solomon the larger part of the nation revolted from the Davidic dynasty and set
7. The up the Ephraimite Jeroboam (q.v.)
Divided as king, while to Rehoboam (q.v.),
Kingdom. Solomon's son, only the southern part
remained true with the capital, to which adhered Judah, part of Benjamin, remains of Simeon, and Dan, and most of the Levites. A hostility began between the two kingdoms which resulted in mutual weakening and in consequent inability to resist external powers such as Syria and Assyria. The division was also religiously disastrous. In order to wean the people from Jerusalem and its sanctuary, Jeroboam set up golden calves (see CALF, THE GOLDEN) as images of Yahweh at Dan and Bethel and in this way reintroduced the principle of religious syncretism into the worship of Yahweh. Nevertheless the prophets remained a powerful agency in the Ephraimitic kingdom. Politically the situation there was lamentable. Dynasty succeeded dynasty in rapid succession, and the revolutionary principle was often in evidence in the further history. The dynasty of Jeroboam (q.v.) had but two generations, as had that of the next founded by the usurper Baasha (q.v.); Zimri (q.v.) reigned but seven days, and was overthrown by Omri (q.v.), whose name became so celebrated that in the Assyrian inscriptions Israel was long known as the " land of Omri." Omri made Samaria (q.v.) the permanent capital, and was succeeded by his son, Ahab (q.v.), a king successful in his external relations, but swayed at home by his consort, Jezebel (q.v.), whose unremitting efforts to subvert the Yahweh cult for that of Baal were opposed by Elijah (q.v.). The reigns of Ahab's sons, Ahaziah and Joram (qq.v.), brought the dynasty to an end. The period of the Omri dynasty was one of peace and alliance between the two kingdoms, cemented by marriage between the two houses in the persons of Athaliah, daughter of Jezebel, and Ahab and Joram (q.v.) of Judah. In the meantime the southern kingdom under Rehoboam had suffered severely under a campaign of Shishak of Egypt, but under his grandson, Asa (q.v.), and his great‑grandson, Jehoshaphat (q.v.), its prestige was recovered. The alliance between the two houses almost resulted in the extinction of the Davidic dynasty through the massacre by Athaliah, from which only Joash (q.v.) of the seed royal escaped. Under Joram, father of Joash, Edom, the one vassal people remaining to Judah from the united kingdom, had secured its independence.
In the northern kingdom judgment came upon the dynasty of Omri through Jehu (q.v.), who, with frightful slaughter, established a new dynasty in Samaria. Jehu and his son and successor, Jehoahaz (q.v.), were, however, vassals of the Syrians. Under Jehu's grandson, Joash (q.v.), this vassalage was broken and Judah was reduced to a tributary position under Amaziah (q.v.), son of Joash of Judah. Jeroboam II. (q.v.), the fourth of Jehu's dynasty, raised the kingdom to an unexampled height of prosperity, quickly lost under his successor, Zachariah (q.v.). Jeroboam reestablished the early bounds of the kingdom by bringing the Moabitea and part of the Syrian territory under Iaraelitic dominion. This was the period of the prophets Amos, Hoses, and Jonah the son of Amittai (qq.v.), who showed the contrast between the apparent prosperity and the internal decay of the kingdom. The Assyrians had been battering at Syria and had already come into close relations with Israel. Ahab had fought against Assyria at Karkar, Jehu had paid costly tribute in 842 B.C.; but Tigla,th‑Pileser III. (see AssYatw, VI., 3, § 9) had subjected to his power the country up to the Mediterranean coast; Jehu's dynasty ended with Zachariah, who was slain by Shallum, and he in turn was killed by Menahem (q.v.) after a reign of one month. Menahem reigned five years, a vassal of Tiglath‑Pileser; his son Pekahiah (q.v.) was slain by the usurper Pekah (q.v.), whose combination with Syria against Judah was aimed against Assyria, and led to the final catastrophe under his successor, Hoshea (q.v.). In Judah the calamity sustained under Amaziah was gradually forgotten during the long reign of Uzziah (q.v.), whose generalship secured the subjection of the Edomitea, Moabites, and Ammonites, while the northern kingdom declined. Whether the Azriyahu of Yaudi (" Judah ") mentioned in the inscriptions of TiglathPileser as at the head of an anti‑Assyrian combination is to be identified with this king or with the king of a North‑Syrian Yaudi is still debated. Uzziah directed well the inner fortunes of the state, patronizing agriculture and grazing. The Chronicler ascribes his leprosy to an invasion of priestly rights; in consequence of this disease his son Jotham (q.v.) ruled long as regent before he succeeded to the throne. In the time of Jotham's successor, Ahaz (q.v.), occurred the alliance of Israel and Syria against Judah, referred to above; and the situation was complicated by a hostile combination of Edomites and Philistines. But Ahaz was relieved by the successes of Tiglath‑Pileser, whose campaigns were directed against Judah's foes. The Assyrian beset Samaria, which Sargon finally took, carrying 27,000 of its inhabitants into captivity, leaving Judah to survive for 135 years.
The successor of Ahaz to the throne of Judah was Hezekiah (q.v.), a vassal of Assyria, but most restless in that relation, who was saved
8. Judah from the vengeance of Sennacherib in
tot he a wa regarded ae miraculous. His Exile. son, Manasseh (q.v.), was strongly disposed toward heathenism, persecuting the adherents of the Yahweh religion. This policy was continued under his son Ammon (q.v.), but reversed

58	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Israel, History of
under his second successor, Josiah (q.v.), who, with all earnestness, reintroduced the Mosaic faith and cultus. Josiah's untimely death, caused by his confronting the Egyptian Necho at Megiddo, was a most serious blow to the welfare of Judah. His son Jehoahaz (q.v.) was removed from the throne by Necho after the latter's return from the East three months later, and Jehoiakim, his elder brother, was put in his place. Jehoiakim (q.v.) became tributary to the Babylonians, but revolted after three years, an offense which was expiated after his death by his son, Jehoiachin (q.v.), whom, after a reign of three months, Nebuchadrezzar took prisoner and carried to Babylon with the noblest of the land. The Babylonians placed upon the throne a third son of Josiah, who assumed the name Zedekiah (q.v.); he, in the ninth year of his reign, conspired in alliance with the Pharaoh Hophra to throw off the Babylonian yoke, in this going counter to the advice of Jeremiah and Ezekiel and thereby challenging the might of the Euphrates kingdom. The Babylonians invested Jerusalem after defeating a force of Egyptians sent to break the siege, captured the city in 586 s.c., destroyed the temple and the city's defenses, visited with punishment the leaders of the people, and carried away into captivity all whose social rank exposed them to possibilities of leadership. Gedaliah (q.v.) was made governor and took up his residence in Mizpah, where the remnant of the people gathered about him, and where he soon became the victim of assassination. Many of the remaining people fled into Egypt, taking with them against his will the prophet Jeremiah. Jerusalem lay in ruins, large parts of the territory of Judea passed into the possession of the Edomitea, and the future and promise of Israel for the next fifty years was in the exiles in Babylon.
The exiles were settled in Babylonia along the Chebar in the neighborhood of Nippur (see BABY‑
9. The I'°NIA, IV., § 9), where they possessed
Ezile. their own houses and lands and a cer‑
tain degree of autonomy. The only basis for a history of the exilic period and the life of that time is in the books of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Deutero‑Isaiah, which last originated in the last third of the exile. Part of the people relapsed into idolatry. But for the rest, in their enforced abstinence from participation in the religious ordinances of the sanctuary, the spiritual significance of such observances as the Sabbath rest, and the ordinances regarding food and circumcision became deepened as being signs of their distinction as the people of God. The very nearness of heathenism repelled many of the Jews, as there was borne in upon them the fact that their own experiences were the expression of a long‑deferred judgment for this sin. There was also impressed upon the nation the idea of its mission in the world as s mediator between God and the nations.
About fifty years after the destruction of Jerusalem the Babylonian empire came into the hands of Cyrus. Babylon was taken in 539, and in that year the Jews received from the victor permission to return. Of this permission 42,360 males, with their families availed themselves under the leadership of Sheshbazzar‑Zerubbabel (the identity of Shesh‑
bazaar and Zerubbabel is still debated) and the high priest Joshua, and reached Jerusalem probably 10. The m 538. They settled in Jerusalem and Persian in the outlying cities, set up the altar period, of burnt offerings, and made preparations to rebuild the temple. Owing, however, to the opposition of the Samaritans, who placed all difficulties in the way, and to the necessity of securing means of subsistence, the reconstruction of the temple was deferred till the beginning of the reign of Darius, in the years 520‑516 s.c., and was accomplished then under the stimulus of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah. The report of the return in 538 has been seriously questioned, and the thesis advanced that Zerubbabel was never in exile, and that the temple was rebuilt by the Jews who had remained in Palestine; but these hypotheses are based on arbitrary constructions which fall on examination. For the period 516‑458 no reports have been transmitted, except that the narrative of the Book of Esther (q.v.) refers to the time of Xerxes. In 458 s.c. under Artaxerxes I. the condition of the colony at Jerusalem was miserable and the maintenance of its religious distinction endangered. Then the scribe Ezra (q.v.) led back to Judea a new company of exiles consisting of 1,500 males with their families. He was empowered by royal firman to put into practise the requirements of the Mosaic law, but entire success in this direction was attained only when, in 445‑444 s.c., Nehemiah (q.v.) came to his support, clothed with the authority of the governorship. Nehemiah reestablished the defenses of Jerusalem by having the walls of the city repaired, notwithstanding the opposition of the Samaritans, and then assisted Ezra in the purification of the community by causing the dismission of the heathen wives and requiring the observance of the entire Mosaic law. After a residence of twelve years Nehemiah returned to the Persian court, but in a later visit to Jerusalem found it necessary to employ stern measures for the preservation of the Mosaic institutions, expelling from the community a grandson of the high priest who had married a daughter of the Samaritan noble Sanballat (q.v.). According to Josephus (Ant. XI., ,viii. 2 sqq.), this priest, with the help of his father‑in‑law, established the sanctuary of the Samaritans on Mount Gerizim and Bet in order its priesthood; but Josephus confused these events with others which occurred in the time of Alexander the Great. Undoubtedly at that time the Samaritans received from the Jews the Pentateuch, which constitutes their Scriptures. Of the last ten years of the Persian period no trustworthy reports have come down. There are statements that Artaxerxes III. Ochus ordered a deportation of Jews to Hyrcania, on the south shore of the Caspian, because they were involved in a rebellion of Pheniciana and Cypriotes against the Persians. On this occasion the Persian General Bagoses pushed into the temple, and Josephua reports (Ant. XL, vii. 1) that he substituted Jesus (Joshua) as high priest for his brother John. The political impor‑
tance of the high priest originated in that period.
With the destruction of the Persian empire by Alexander the Great a new period began for Judea.

Israel, History of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	54
Alexander's attitude toward the Jews was friendly. But when, after the conqueror's death, his empire
ii. The was divided, Judea, lying between the Greek kingdoms of the contending Ptolemies
	period.	and the Seleucidae, was a continual
		sufferer by the conflict. At first
Judea came into the power of the Ptolemies.
Josephus reports that Ptolemy Lagos violated the
Sabbath, captured Jerusalem, and carried captive
to Egypt a large number of Jews from Jerusalem
and Galilee (Apion, i. 22; Ant. XII., i., XIII.,
xii. 4). Hecataeus says that later this Ptolemy was
so friendly toward the Jews that many of them of
their own accord went to Egypt and settled there,
particularly in Alexandria. Judea still remained
the object of strife between Syria and Egypt, and
came finally into the power of Syria under Anti
ochua III. the Great, by his victory over Scopus
near Paneas. Of Seleucus Philopator, son of
Antiochus the Great, it is reported that his general,
Heliodorus, entered the temple to plunder it and
was prevented by a miraculous vision. The quo
cession of Antiochua IV. Epiphanes to the throne
of Syria (175 B.C.) was of especial moment to the
Jews. During the changes which had befallen the
political possession of Palestine, Jewish independ
ence being entirely lost, the chief concern of the Jews
was their religious freedom. But contact with Greek
civilization and the attempts of the leaders to make
capital out of the quarrels of the overlords, as well
as the building up in the land of centers of Greek
life through settlement there of Greek colonies, intro
doted the spirit of Hellenism and caused the estab
lishment of a party among the Jews favorable to
Greek civilization, receiving therefore the support
of the overlords. Opposed to thin Hellenistic party
was the party of the Hasideans, committed to the
observance of the Mosaic ordinances, and to the
condemnation of Hellenism. Into the contest
between these two parties Antiochus Epiphanes
intruded by his brutal attack on the sanctuary,
168 B.C., as well as by his assault upon the religious
observances of the Jews and his edict against the
Sabbath and circumcision. His anger on account
of the failure of his expedition against Egypt he
vented in this way upon the Jews, and he thus
became the antetype of tTke New‑Testament Anti
christ. Severe persecution followed, in the course
of which many Jews abandoned their religion.
A turn in affairs was given in the year 187 B.C. in the resistance offered by the priest Mattathias
12. The of Modein, supported by his sons. Maocabean Rebellion against Syria broke out, led
sad Ro‑ by Judas, son of Mattathias, who won man Pe‑ many victories over Syrian troops, rinds. restored the service of the temple, and died a hero's death. The strife was carried on by the brothers of Judas, one of whom, Simon, gained the position of high priest and prince by choice of the people and recognition by the Syrians. Until the time of Simon's son, John Hyrcanus, the Maccabees and the Hasideana were of the same party and, indeed, bore the same name (see HABMONEANB). They were the predecessors of the Pharisees (see Pawaiear$ AND SADnUCEE$). John broke with the orthodox party and connected himself with the
Sadduceee. After his death his family became involved in quarrels over the succession and lost its preeminent position, and against his son Alexander Jannaeus (104‑7R B.C.) the Pharisees sought Syrian help. In the strife that ensued upon his death, caused by attempts to gain the succession, the Romans obtained entrance, and Pompey captured Jerusalem after a three months' siege. Herod, son of the Idumean Antipater, was made king by the Roman senate in 39 B.C., and established himself by the help of the Roman legions in 37 $.c. He sought to conciliate the Jews, particularly by his magnificent restoration of the temple. After the death of this talented but conscienceless tyrant, his kingdom was divided between his sons Archelaue, Antipas, and Philip. The first, to whom Judea had fallen, was soon deposed by the Romans (8 A.D.), and government by Roman procurators was instituted with capital at Caesarea. The procurators appointed by the Romans had no appreciation of Jewish characteristics, and constant ill‑feeling was aroused over religious matters. The best known of these officers is Pontius Pilate (28‑38 A.D.), whose conduct caused many conflicts with the people and whose unstable character is revealed in the story of the trial of Jesus (see PILATE, PONTIUS). The opposition between the suppressed theocratic consciousness of the Jews and the claims of the Caesars grew ever sharper until the final conflict. Open rupture was almost provoked in the year 40 A.D. by the order of Caligula to have his image set up in the temple, a crisis that was passed only by the intercession of Agrippa I, at Rome. To this end Agrippa was given the realm which had been Herod's, and his favor to the Jews appears in his attitude toward the Christians (see HEROD AND R(8 FAMILY). The situation of the Jews became more difficult under Felix and Featus, still harder under Albinos, and the rebellion came to a head under Gessius Florus. The Zealots seized the temple and fortified themselves there; Agrippa IL, who had succeeded to a lesser area of sovereignty than Agrippa I. controlled, did not suppress the insurrection. In a battle near Beth‑horon a Roman force was nearly annihilated. This victory inflamed the whole country. But the Romans began to press in, and under Vespasian they conquered Peraea in 68 A.D., while internal strife divided the Jews between the Zealots and the moderates. In the year 70, a few days before the Passover, Titus appeared before the walls of Jerusalem and assailed it from the north. In fourteen days the outer wall was taken, and, a few days after, the second, while the innermost and strongest afforded means of greater resistance. Famine seized the defenders, but in spite both of the mild proposals of Titus for the surrender of the city and his stern exhibitions of punishment that must ensue, the defense was maintained. The people still hoped for such deliverance from God as their history recorded as having occurred in earlier times. The temple was the last stronghold. When it was taken, Titus would have preserved it at the request of Joaephus, but his intention was frustrated by the unguarded act of a soldier who applied the torch. After the fall of Jerusalem, resistance was still offered at a few fortresses, such as Herodeum near Tekoa, Machaerus

55	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPiJDIA 	Israel, History o!
across the Jordan, and Masada, west of the Dead Sea. But from that time the Jews have had to live without country, sanctuary, and nationality.
C. VON ORF.LLI.
II. Post‑Biblical History.‑1. t+eaersl survey: With the fall of Jerusalem the Jewish nation lost the remains of its independence and all control over its external destiny, while it became dependent upon the peoples among whom it lived. It nevertheless had received such a development of spiritual, social, and religious life as had differentiated it from the other nations with which its lot was from that time cast and had made absorption into them an impossibility. Consequently the Jewish people has had for 1,900 years its own inner history, which has not been without influence upon the world at large. Externally and internally this history divides into three periods: (1) From the fall of Jerusalem to the Mohammedan conquest and the emergence of the Teutons; (2) to the French Revolution; (3) to the present. In the first of these periods the Jews built about themselves a spiritual wall within which they protected and developed their peculiar and individual bent. Abandoning all claims upon the outer world, they busied themselves with the production of the Talmud, the citadel of their spiritual life, the treasury of their thought, the basis of the physical and spiritual laws of their existence. When their individuality had thus been fixed in enduring form, they could without danger to their peculiar genius participate in the life of the nations of the world so far as this was permitted to them. In the second period this participation was very limited, confined chiefly to the exercise of the functions of commerce and of the privileges of middlemen between the Orient and Occident. They also exercised a decided influence upon culture and mediated between Greek learning and philosophy and the Arabic and between the Arabs and the West, and so contributed to learning of the scholastic type, produring a monistic type of thought best illustrated by Spinoza. With the French Revolution began the gradual emancipation of the Jews, in which they gained political equality with Christians, lost the quality of separativeneea, acquired eminence in the world of wealth and of letters, but at the expense of that intensity of religious life which had distinguished them through the centuries. Against this there came late in the nineteenth century a reaction which took the form of Zionism (q.v.), one of the purposes of which is the unification of the nation through the erection of a Jewish state in Palestine. The present century fords among the Jews a social excitement and a spiritual ferment such as it has not known since the destruction of Jerusalem.
2. The Early Period; The Jewish war left Judea a waste and its Jewish inhabitants despoiled. Vea‑
	l. Condi.	pasIan took the land as his personal
	tions attar	domain, from which he bestowed Ba
	the War;	tates upon his friends; he settled 800
	Jabneh.	veterans in the neighborhood of Jeru
		salem, and compelled those Jew, who
wished to remain in the country to purchase their
holdings from the conqueror. The Jews who had
previously been domiciled in other lands became
the real strength of those nations. They were in greatest force in Egypt, especially in Alexandria; but they were scattered elsewhere from India westward, and no considerable city was without its Jewish community and its synagogue. In Rome there were at least 8,000 Jews with their own quarter of the city; Jewish merchants followed the legions, while the Herodian family had a recognized place at court, and Jews under the empire had special exemption and position. With the destruction of Jerusalem the Jews had lost their unifying center. But by his flight to the camp of the Romans and his prediction to Vespasian of elevation to the throne, Rabbi Johanan ban Zakkai (cf. JE, vii. 214 eqq.) had gained the emperor's favor and a promise to grant any request the rabbi might make. The latter asked permission to establish a school of Jewish law, and when this was given, settled at Jabneh or Jamnia, a little city near the coast south of 3oppa. Under the care of the institution there erected came the settlement of many matters formerly in charge of the Sanhedrin, including the Jewish calendar. Hence arose the tradition that Rabbi Johanan transferred the Sanhedrin to Jabneh. While it had not been his purpose to create a new center of Judaism, the gathering of scholars there and the study of the law had this effect, and so made possible the continued survival of the Jewish spirit. Jews from abroad sent their sons for the study of the law, while the teachers gave their pronouncement upon matters of importance for all their coreligioniats. Here was developed the tradition of the law, as divided into Halacha and Haggada (see MtDaesH), out of which came a definite and characteristic set of views which stamps the Jewish learning with what may be called a Talmudic type as opposed to the Biblical type of post‑exilic and pre‑Christian Juda‑
ism. This is the third stage in the development of the Jewish spirit, the first being what may be termed
the pre‑Biblical. In this stage the four generations to the close of the Mishna are known as Tanaim, the five to the close of the Talmud as Amoraim, both classes influential upon all succeeding Judaism, guarding as they did Judaic orthodoxy. Among the Tanaim ~I two men were of eminent importance, Gamaliel the ~ younger (cf. JE, v. 560 sqq.), and Akiba (q.v.).
The first stood for the influence of Hillel's inter
pretation of the law, for the decision of legal matters
by a majority of authorities, and for Jabneh as the
continued center of official Judaism. Rabbi Akiba's
fame rests not merely upon his collection of the
Halachoth, but upon his new method of using the
literal and minute elements of Scripture as a basis
of legal formulas. Under Gamaliel the eatrRn(fe‑
ment cob""" JeW$ aqd %t19ns necarne final
and complete.
	Judaism meanwhile gained ever s stronger in
fluence, and proselytes of eminence in the heathen
		world adopted the Jewish religion.
	Iaeurreo‑ 2. The Last The aroused Dpinitjgn~e distrust, and
tfoas.	he had the Jewish law examined to
	discover whether it were a danger to
	the state. Under Trajan this distrust bees
	greater because of the practical aid given by Jews
	to the Parthiana, and victory over these was recog
	nized, even in inscriptions on coins, as a new victory

Israel, History of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	68
over the Jews. But the victory over the Jews of the Orient was fearfully avenged upon both Romans and Greeks in a rising of the Jews of the Occident. The imperial legions were exterminated, and in Cyprus alone 240,000 Greeks were said to have been slaughtered. Trajan called in the aid of his beat generals to suppress the insurrection, and severe vengeance was taken on the Jews of Mediterranean lands, while the beautiful synagogue in Alexandria was completely destroyed. But in Syria and Asia Minor a new revolt was raised, and the fanaticism of the Jewish spirit, fanned by the Messianic hope watered in Bar Kokba, made necessary the sending of Trajan's moat capable general, Julius Severus, from Britain to Palestine. This was the last important attempt of the Jews to establish a Messianic kingdom by forte of arms; thenceforth they looked for it to come only by special divine interposition. The site of Jerusalem was given to the plow, and in 134 a Roman colony, Aelia Capitolina, was founded to the north of the old city. Another revolt among the Jews was suppressed in 135. A poll tax was levied, and circumcision and observance of the Sabbath were forbidden. By these means the possibilities of political danger from the Jews were so thoroughly eliminated by the time of Antoninua Pius that he abolished the severe restrictions, and their renewal under Marcus Aurelius was caused not by political conditions, but by religious intolerance. The Jews themselves recognized that their political importance was a thing of the past and that all which remained was their community in matters of religion.
At the end of the second century the Sanhedrin lost its eminence, and the decisions of Rabbi Juda
8. Rise of ben Simon were recognized as suthori‑
tha Baby. tative. He established as finally decisive the Miahna of Rabbi Akiba,
	School.	while other collections were pronounced
		devoid of authority. At this time, it is
probable, the Miahna ceased to be oral and was
committed to writing. Since all national, political,
and judicial rights had ceased, the law had in part
only an ideal value as fashioning the inner life and
conceptions of Jews. With the compilation of the
Mishna Palestinian Judaism had exhausted itself,
and the scholastic center shifted to Babylon in the
Production of the Gemara or the Talmud proper by
the school of the Amoraim. What the Mishna is to
the Bible the Gemara is to the Mishna‑a, continuous
refinement of the law, binding Judaism within ever
tightening chains. The first Amoraim were Pales
tinians, the most eminent among them Rabbi Juda
the younger. He transferred the seat of the school
to Tiberias, where, under the favor of Alexander
Severus, something of splendor appeared. Relay
lions between Jews and Romans became not merely
friendly, but intimate, and laxity in following
Judaic practises was the natural result. During
this period Babylon was coming into greater sig
nificance for the Jews, and was even called " the
land of Israel." The head of the Babylonian Jews
was an officer under the Parthian government,
fourth in rank after the king, and a descendant of
the Davidic line. His power, however, was tem
poral, not as yet spiritual. Rabbi Abba Rab
brought the Mishna from Palestine and founded a school at Babylon which soon had 1,200 students. His friend Mar Samuel first enunciated the maxim which became authoritative for Jews‑" the law of the state is valid." During the reign of Alexander Severua the neo‑Persian kingdom of the Sassanidea was established, and this, in its zeal for Zoroastrianism, excluded Jews from office and introduced certain restrictions to be followed on Zoroastrian festivals. These restrictions did not continue long, and until Constantine's time the Jews had peace. Constantine's edict of toleration (312 A.D.) included the Jews also, but later his policy changed and proselyting was forbidden as well as the circumcision of slaves of Jews. In this Jews saw the approach of Messianic times, for it had long been said that " the Messiah will not come till the Roman empire is Christian." But Rabbi Hillel the younger declared that Israel had no Messiah to look forward to, for the prediction by the prophet of a mighty ruler had been fulfilled in Hezekiah; the head of the Babylonian school replied in the prayer " May God forgive Rabbi Hillel for holding this error." Under Conatantiue matters were still worse for the Jews, and many in the Roman empire emigrated to Persia. Constantine's laws were enforced with the addition that marriage between Jews and Christians was forbidden. Julian especially favored the Jews, and preparations were made for rebuilding the temple, which ceased, however, on his death.
About the year 400 A.D. Rabbi Aschi had the oral explanations, discussions, decisions and investiga4. The Two dons based on the Mishna collected in
	Talmudic	the Babylonian Talmud, which became
Collections: the chief source of spiritual instruction,
the 1llaeso‑ as much superior to the Mishna in the
		regard of scholastic Judaism as the
Mishna was to the Bible. Even till the present the
Talmud has been for millions of Jews the totality
of truth, wisdom, righteousness and holiness, and
study of it the certain way to eternal life, while to
study anything else is to a real Jew a sign of god
lessness. To a Jew instructed in the Talmud God
and his revelation as set forth therein are the first
and highest interests of life, thought, feeling and
action. Thus this collection became the wall which
hedged about all Jewish life, the influence which
controlled all Jewish thought and molded Jewish
conceptions for fifteen hundred years. It was the
obstacle, as well, to further development of Jewish
religion and life (see TALMUD). This great produc
tion came forth in the time when Rome was hard
pressed by the Germanic peoples and North Africa
became the booty of the Vandals. The mighty
world‑movements of the times served to arouse
once more the Messianic hopes of the Jews, ex
pressed in the saying that the Messiah would not
come till the eighty‑fifth Jubilee (4200 anno mundi,
440 A.D.), about. the time when the Vandals captured
the temple treasures at Rome and carried them to
Africa. As at. this time the old sacred treasures of
the Jews disappeared, the more precious became
the Talmud as the one sacred instrument remaining.
So in Palestine the Amoraim collected their tradi
tions in the Jerusalem Talmud, though it is not

57	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	Israel, History of
known where or by whom this was done. In the declining Roman empire the situation of the Jews was not favorable. Theodosius sought to protect them, though foiled by the opposition of Ambrose, sad his successors also tried to secure their peace. Under Theodosius IL, Cyril of Alexandria had the Jews expelled from the city and their possessions given to the rabble, while their synagogue in Antioch was sacked. Enmity between Jews and Christians became acute. Jerome's Hebrew teacher could attend his pupil only in secret. Palestinian Judaism meanwhile did not perish without leaving one more monument of exceeding value in the Massorah‑i.e., the addition of vowels, aeexntn, and marks of division or distinction to the consonantal text of the Old Testament, with annotations on the text. In 470 there began an official persecution of the Jews of Persia, and many were compelled to emigrate to India. Later, in Malabar they received privileges which are chronicled on a tablet still extant, inscribed in Hebrew and early Indian. The end of the period of the Amoraim fell at the close of the fifth century.
S. The Middle Period: For the Jews of the Byzantine empire this period began with the reign of Justinian, whose laws were the basis
1. In the of the treatment of the Jews during the Orient and
Italy. Middle Ages. Under his code Jewish testimony against a Christian was not received, a Christian might not become a proselyte to Judaism, Jews had to support highly paid city officials from whom they received no benefits or immunities, they might not celebrate their Passover before the Christian Easter, might read the Scriptures in the synagogue on the Sabbath only in Greek or Latin, while they were subjected at the hands of the rabble to frequent riots with all attendant evils. On the other hand, the Jews lost no opportunity for vengeance, which in turn excited new animosity. At this time the Jews of the Orient dropped out of history and those of the Occident became prominent, especially those of Spain. In Italy, under the great movements of the Germanic peoples, Jews suffered as did the Christians. During the Gothic rule the laws of Theodosius were in force; Jews controlled the slave‑trade and held Christians in slavery, and were largely autonomous besides disregarding the laws designed to protect Christians. Still, the highest authorities did all possible to profeet the Jews, and the efforts of the popes to this end were constant. Gregory the Great was especially kind to them, compelling indemnification for destroyed synagogues, but he forbade the holding of Christians as slaves, and wrote to several of the kings of his day to make an end of the trade in Christian slaves carried on by the Jews.
Of all the countries of Europe none was so favorable to the Jews as Spain. There the highest 8. In Products of Jewish industry, intellect pain; and skill were in evidence; in wealth,
Rise of honor, philosophy and poetry the days dawiah of the Jews in Spain still mark for them
	culture.	an epoch. On the other hand, in the
		reaction nowhere was the suffering so
great as there. Jewish settlements in the Spanish
peninsula were very ancient, made perhaps under
the Pheniciana; certainly after the destruction of
Jerusalem great numbers of Jews were sold into Spain, and Granada was so largely settled by them as to be called a Jewish state. Christianity also made early and great conquests there, and laws similar to those mentioned above were enacted to prevent holding of Christian slaves by Jews and proselyting by force. Later King Sisebut ordered all Jews to receive baptism or to give up their holdings of land, and many Jews complied, while many others migrated to France or Africa. The Jewish question came under discussion at the Synod of Toledo (633 A.D.). Isidore of Seville opposed forcible conversion of the Jews, but forbade that Christians should become Jews and prohibited intercourse between Jews and Christians. The situation changed from time to time. Under one king the Jews would enjoy religious liberty, and Jews who had nominally accepted Christianity were permitted to return to their old faith; under another the menace to the Church of so large a population of Jews was felt, and severe laws against them were put in force. Under King Egica a conspiracy of Spanish and African Jews with the Arabs to overthrow the Gothic kingdom was discovered, but too late; Jews and Arabs made common cause, and the Mohammedan conqueror, Tarik, brought the Gothic kingdom of Spain to an end in 711 A.D. The relations between Jews and Mohammedans was peculiar. Jews regarded Islam as a younger daughter of Judaism, as was Christianity, but they felt more closely related to Islam and never made common cause with Christians against Mohammedans. In Arabia they had made ineffective Constantine's efforts for the spread of Christianity. They had many important settlements there which were governed by Jewish princes, and they had a school of the law and possessed Talmudic learning. When Mohammed proclaimed his faith as that of Abraham, the Jews had faith in him and be called them " helpers." But differences arose, and Mohammed published parts of Sums against them in which he called them murderers of prophets and falsifiers of revelation. Then there came war with the Jewish tribe of the Banu‑Kainuka, and one of the two Jewish women whom the prophet brought back tried to poison him. After his death the strife between Mohammedans and Jews continued. In Spain the Jews opened the gates of Toledo to Tarik and took bloody vengeance upon the Christians, while they received many favors from the conquerors. In this period occurred the founding of the sect of the Karaites (q.v.) by Anan ben David (cf. JE, i. 553 sqq.), who, in Babylon and Palestine, opposed the Talmudic learning and would have the Old Testament alone authoritative. He was the first Jew to compose a commentary on the Pentateuch. In Palestine there was propounded also a Jewish mysticism and system of ascetics whose followers called themselves " men of faith," claimed
miraculous powers, and influenced all medieval Judaism. The Karaitea were opposed by SBadja of Egypt, who founded Jewish science and translated the Old Testament into Arabic. His Philosophic‑religious system is contained fully in his Emunoth wedeoth written in 943 A.D., in which he introduced Greek‑Christian philosophy to the Orient.

Israel, History of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	as
The tenth century saw the flowering of Jewish culture in Spain, especially at the court of Abdul‑
8. Jewish Rahman III. at Cordova. The first of scholars in the series of noted Jewish scholars was
	Spain.	Samuel Halevi ibn Nagdela (b. 993),
		rabbi, author and poet. Then came
Jona Marinus (Merwan ibn‑Gansch, 995‑1050),.
grammarian and exegete; Solomon ibn‑Gebirol,
who wrote in Arabic Mekor hayiyn, " The Fountain
of Life," a cosmogony which contained little espe
cially Jewish except a basis in the divine word of
power, being a syncretism of Neoplatoniem and
Aristotelianism. This was translated into Latin
100 years later and was much used by the School
men. Bahya ibn‑Pakuda wrote (1050‑80 A.D.; Cf.
JE, ii. 447 aqq.) a " Guide to Inner Duties " based
on Platonic asceticism. The celebrated Solomon
bar Isaac (cf. JE, a.324sqq.), known aeRashi (q.v.),
wrote his commentary in the first half of the eleventh
century. The greatest Jewish poet of all the cen
turies was Judah Halevi (1086‑1145; cf. JE, vii.
348 eqq.), who wrote the songs which have become
the national pride of Jews. He proclaimed the
sovereignty of Judaism and the preeminence of
Jews on the ground that from Adam down they
alone had preserved the gifts of grace and the
essence of manhood. Jews were between angels
and the highest rank of men; proselytes might par
take of the external blessings of Jews, but could
never reach the height of privilege which belonged
to the native Jew. Israel is God's servant upon
whom are laid the ills and hurts of mankind. The
destruction of Jerusalem was of divine purpose that
the earth might be leavened with the Jewish spirit.
Twenty years later Abraham ibn‑Daud (cf. JE, i.
101 sqq.) used Aristotelian philosophy to prove
Judaism the one system of truth and reason. Abra
ham ibn‑Ezra of Toledo (1088‑1187; cf. JE, vi.
520.eqq.) was a keen critic, though a superstitious
astrologer and alchemist. Most celebrated of all
was Moses ben Maimun, known beat as Maimonides
(1135‑1204; q.v.,, in whom the movement just
sketched reached its height. Soon after his death
arose not merely the banning by the rabble of
Maimonidea' writings, but hostility to all study of
philosophy. Jews divided themselves into followers
and opponents of Maimonidea, but until the time
of Spinoza the Jews did nothing further for phi
losophy.
While at first the Jews were favored under the Arabs of Spain, later they were forced either to 4. Tempo‑ accept Islam or to leave the country.
ral Situa‑ They then began to take the side of the
tion in Christians and assisted Alfonso X. in
Spain to the conquest of Seville, for which aerv‑
	1489.	ice they were given three mosques to
		use as synagogues. But in 1260 the
old laws of the Goths were revived and new restric
tions were imposed. On the other hand Christians
were not to dishonor synagogues, force baptism of
Jews, or employ legal measures against them on Jew
ish feast days.‑ Many of these laws remained a dead
letter. A little later the Dominican Raymond of
Peflaforte (see DOMINIC, SAINT, AND Tan DoMtrrrowN
ORDER, § 4) undertook his mission to the Jews.
At the instigation of Pope Clement IV., Jayme L.of
Spain ordered that all passages in the Talmud opposing Christianity should be erased. Under Alfonao X. of Castile began a golden age for the Jews, during which they appeared at court and gained riches and position. Under Don Pedro (13501369) even more favorable was their situation, but with his fall great reverses were experienced. Jews were forbidden to bear Spanish names and were compelled to wear a distinguishing mark; in order to make headway against Jewish usury, to Christians Jews were ordered to remit a third of their indebtedness. Disputations took place in which the systems of Christianity and Judaism were attacked and defended. Even Jews bewailed the greed and selfishness of men of their own nation who were is positions of wealth and power, and the voices of eminent Jewish scholars were raised against such men as impious and godless. In Seville in 1391 occurred the first popular rising against the Jews, suppressed only by royal troops. Three months later, in a new uprising, 4,000 Jews were slain, the wives and children sold to Mohammedans, and two synagogues converted into churches. Many Jews suffered themselves to be baptized, among them Samuel Abrabanel; in Cordova and Toledo also many Jews became nominal Christians. These became a great danger to the Church, preserving as they did in secret their fidelity to Judaism and the Talmud, and were more under suspicion and more hated than those who had remained faithful to their religion. Some, however, showed great sincerity and endeavored to convert their brethren, among whom may be named Solomon Levi of Burgos (1353‑1435; cf. JE, ix. b82563), who received ordination and, as Paul of Burgos, attained a high position, becoming bishop of Seville. Other zealous converts were Joshua Lorqui, whose Christian name was Geronimo of Santa F6, physician to Benedict XIII., and Vicente Ferrer, who even in the synagogues assailed Judaism. At this time an edict was issued assigning the Jews to special residence quarters, inhibiting certain trades, offices, and commerce with Christians, ordering a style of dress with the Jewish mark on it, and prohibiting the trimming of the beard and the carrying of weapons. Continued popular uprisings drove many of the Jews over to Christianity, while the synagogues were changed into churches. Benediet XIII. ordered a disputation which was held in Tortosa. It lasted fifteen months, and held siatyeight sessions, in which Joshua Lorqui disputed with sixteen of the foremost rabbis. As a result Benedict issued his bull forbidding the reading of the Talmud, while the scurrilous writings on the life of Jesus were proscribed, especially the Mar mar Jesu. A period of literary polemics between Jews and Christians ensued which lasted for fifty years. In 1442 Pope Eugenics IV. issued a bull to the bishops of Castile and Leon enforcing the old church laws against Jews, and King John IV. put forth an edict protecting them, which the territorial limitation of his authority made of little value. Almost no Jewish literature was produced, while the works of Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus, and William of Occam were translated into Hebrew. Cabalistic works continued to appear, and Jews

as
RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
Israel, History of
cultivated the healing art. In the second half of the fifteenth century the charge was again made that Jews murdered Christian children, and this calumny continued in spite of repeated failure to convict in the courts. The fact that Jewish converts to Christianity held many of the most lucrative offices caused numerous anti‑Jewish riots.
The turning‑point was the marriage (1469) of Isabella of Castile to Don Ferdinand of Aragon.
In 1480 the Inquisition was set. at work 6. The In‑ against the Jews, with whom the priaquisition ons were soon filled, and four days aft‑
er the setting up of the Holy Office six Jewish converts to Christianity were burned at the stake. Converts and all Spaniards were invited to betray converts suspected of secretly Judaizing, and a list of suspicious circumstances was published to aid in detecting the apostates. Between January and November, 1481, 298 of these supposedly false Jewish converts suffered death, while in the archbishopric of Cadiz in the same year 2,000 Jewish heretics were found. The proscribed who had already died were exhumed and their bones burned,while their property was confiscated. Sixtus IV. censured the proceedings of the inquisitors and disapproved the request of Ferdinand to have the tribunal set up in his other dominions. In 1482 Torquemada was made chief inquisitor, the Inquisition was released from restriction to legal forms and its sphere of influence extended to Aragon. Attempts were made against the highest dignitaries of Church and State if only they were of Jewish blood. At the court of Ferdinand Isaac Abrabanel was minister of finance, but in spite of his influence the edict was issued to exile all Jews from Castile, Aragon, Sicily, and Sardinia. To the number of 300,000 they fled into Portugal, Navarre, Italy, Morocco, and Turkey. The princes of Europe censured the regulations of Ferdinand, while the Sultan Bajazid remarked, " You call Ferdinand a clever king, who has impoverished his own land and made ours rich." In 1496 Emmanuel of Portugal issued an edict giving the Jews the alternative of baptism or exile. Many chose exile, thousands were baptized, while hundreds killed themselves and their families in order to escape enforced baptism.
In France Charlemagne favored the Jews because tuey were the only merchants in the realm. To the
embassy to Harun al‑Rashid he made e. Jews a Jew interpreter, and after the death
France. of the ambassador the interpreter
carried through the work of the mission. Under Louis the Pious, Jews held an important place at court, though opposed by Agobard of Lyons. At the Synod of Meaux the bishops reenacted the old ecclesiastical laws against the Jews, which Charles the Bald prevented from taking effect. Yet popular demonstrations were made against the Jews. In Toulouse it was the right of the count on Good Friday to administer to the chief of the Jewish community a box on the ear. The Jews secured immunity from this by paying a yearly tribute and in the same way elsewhere they purchased the good will of the powerful. Hugh Capet's death in 996 was charged again3t the Jews because Hugh's physician was a Jew. The crusades gave new
opportunities to despoil this people. The principal
colony was at Narbonne, consisting of 300 families,
among them that of the Hebrew grammarian Kim
chi; another great colony was at Montpellier. In the
twelfth century the story was told that Jews were
killing the children of Christians to use their blood
in the Passover. On the basis of this charge, King
Philip August, about the year 1180, mulcted the
Jews of his realm in 15,000 marks silver and de
	clared all debts to Jews void except such as paid
	him ono‑fifth of the entire amount. The possessions
	of Jews were regarded as the property of the barons,
	and nobles made sales of " property and Jews."
	At this time arose in France the Cabala (q.v.) with
	its mysticism, magic and theosophy, exercising in
	fluence not only upon Jewish, but upon Christian
	thought, and playing its part in exegesis of both
	Talmud and Bible. Its force is felt to the present,
	since the modern Chasidism of Russia and Galicia
	is the Cabala in its most recent form, and its essence
	reflects the spirit of Jewish thought. In the third
	crusade the Jews of various parts of France suffered
	as they had m the first and second, although Pope
	Gregory IX. declared that the Church desired
	neither their enforced conversion nor their destruc
	tion. But this pope committed to the bishop of
	Paris the question whether the Talmud reviled
	Christ and his mother and contained statements
	derogatory of Scripture and of God. The Talmud
	was condemned, and in 1244 twenty‑four wagon
	loads of copies of this work were burned in a square
	of the city. At this time the Jews themselves con
	demned and burned the writings of Maimonidea.
	In 1269 Louis IX. required all Jews to wear a badge
	of yellow on breast and back, and in 1306 Philip IV.
	ordered them driven from the kingdom, and their
	gold, silver, and jewels were forfeited to him, while
	only their clothes were left in their possession. In
	1360 they were allowed to return under favorable
	conditions, such as that permitting them to charge
	interest at eighty per cent., only to be driven out
~i	again under Charles VI. in 1394.
In England after the conquest by the Normans the Jews found themselves in fortunate circum‑
stances, and in London their dwellings 7. In were like royal palaces. These condi‑
Eneland. dons were first disturbed at the coronation of Richard in 1189, for when the Jews of the realm were about to bring their dues of homage, in popular uprisings in many of the cities numbers of them were slain, and some were burned in their houses. In York they intrenched thelp‑
selves in the fortress and, Wben hope of escape
was gone, set fire to it and perished in the flames. John Laeklsnd and Henry III. extorted from them more than 10,000,000 francs, and the latter encouraged efforts to convert them (see JEws, MISSION To THE). In 1275 parliament by statute interdicted the collection of usury, yet Jews might buy houses and lands and engage in commerce• In 1278 the circulation of counterfeit coin was attributed to the Jews and 293 were hanged. In 1290 Jews were banned, mortgages held by them canceled, and they were compelled to sell their property; 16000 left the country and were not permitted to return till the time of Cromwell, when individuals

7rrsel, History of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	gp
were permitted to settle there. Cromwell was looking for the Messianic kingdom in which he allotted a great part to the chosen race.
In Italy the Jews suffered no such hard fortune as in other lands, since the influence of the popes
a. in was there more effective, though re9, strictive measures were passed limiting their privileges. Under the Normana in Naples and Sicily Jews and Christians had equal privileges. The great centers of Jewish life in Italy were in the central and southern parts, not in the great Christian commercial cities of the north. In 1199 Innocent III. issued a Constitutio Judaeorum protecting the Jews, and this was confirmed by Gregory IX. in 1235. Innocent IV. issued a bull at the Council of Lyons of 1245 to the German and French princes, directed against the charge that Jews killed the children of Christians; he also commanded that the Talmud be protected if only it were found free from assault upon Christianity. When, in consequence of the Black Death, many Jews in South France, Spain, Savoy, on the Southern Rhine, and in Switzerland were tortured, murdered or burned, Clement VI. in a bull forbade the killing of them and the taking of their goods without due process of law, and also forcible baptism. In 1419 Martin V. issued a bull in favor of this people. But Eugenius IV. in 1442 put in force the old canonical limitations, and even intensified them, and in this course he was followed by Nicholas V. in 1447. The tatter's legate to the Synod of Bamberg, Nicholas of Cuss (q.v.), directed in Germany the execution of these regulations. During the Inquisition in Spain and after the exile of Jews from Spain and Portugal, many of them found refuge in the Papal States and Turkey. The popes of those times, Alexander VI., Julius IL, Leo X., and Clement VIL, had Jewish physicians, and the princes of the Church followed their example. Clement disapproved of forcible baptism of adult Jews, but encouraged the baptism of Jewish children if their parents consented. He also attempted to protect the Jews who had perforce received baptism in Spain but were persecuted as unfaithful. Paul III. was charged with being more kind to Jews than to Christians, and his benefits extended to the persecuted Jewish‑Christian converts of Portugal. In 1536 Charles V. obtained from Paul III. sanction of the Inquisition, but with limitations; and while following popes continued this course, it was rather regarded as an existing fact than as a legal institution, and Clement VIII. openly discountenanced it. When under Julius III. Cardinal Caraffa in 1542 made the Inquisition general throughout the Christian world and increased its rigor, in Italy attack upon the Talmud began; in 1553 the pope signed a decree of condemnation, and on the Jewish New Year's Day all copies in Rome were burned, while throughout Italy many thousand copies suffered the same fate. Under Marcellus II, the Jews were expelled from Rome in consequence of accusations of the murder of children, and Paul IL, a confirmed enemy of the Jews, laid $ tribute on the synagogues and enforced the old restrictions with additional enactments, while in many other ways he manifested his hostility. Against him Sultan Suleiman
acted in protection of the Jews of Ancona. During this period so many Jewish‑Christian converts entered the Franciscan and Jesuit orders that Paul IV. forbade the reception of Jews therein before the fourth generation. At this time the Sohar, the chief Cabalistic writing, was first printed by permission of the Inquisition. Pius IV. mitigated the hard conditions, and the Talmud, issued in censured form, was first printed at Basel, 1578•‑80. Pius V. again put in force the early restrictions with further limitations, and permitted the Jews to reside within the Papal States only at Rome and Ancona. Gregory XIII. ordered that Christian scholars acquainted with Hebrew preach to the Jews in their synagogues on feast days, and Jews were compelled to support the preachers. Clement VIII. withdrew in 1593 the decree of banishment and annulled the antiJewish regulations of his predecessors. Since then the popes have taken no official steps respecting the Jews with the exception of the declaration of Pius IX. in 1870 with respect to their conversion.
The Jews entered Germany with the Roman legions. Their presence at Cologne in the fourth century is demonstrable. Moat of
9. Ea (ier‑ them, however, passed on into France. many. According, to German law they had their own regulations and freedom in religion, but were without citizenship. They were dependent upon the emperor for protection, and paid a special tribute to him and to the princes. Their scholars they received from other lands. Henry II. drove them from Mainz, though they returned the next year. In Speyer they had their own quarter, protected by a wall. Forcible baptism was not allowed, in legal contests Jewish law prevailed, and the ordeal by fire and water was not applied to Jews. The first crusade in 1094 saw the first persecution of the Jews, and in Treves, Speyer, and Mainz many Jews perished. At the time of the second crusade the monk Rudolph preached against them from city to city, but they received some protection from Conrad IV. and from certain of the princes of the Church, while Bernard of Clairvaux rebuked Rudolph for his incitement to murder. For what protection the Jews received, however, they had to pay. The charges of murder were also occasions of extortion of money and of persecution. In spite of all thin, the Jews contributed to the culture of the country, especially in the Minnelieder. Under Frederick II. the canonical regulation against office‑holding by the Jews was enforced. Under Frederick I. of Austria the legal position of Jews was excellent, while Rudolph of Hapsburg contradicted the old charge of the murder of Christian children. Notwithstanding, popular uprisings against the Jews took place in many cities with all attendant atrocities. In 1298 the new charge of desecrating the host raised persecutions which spread over Germany and into Austria. Albrecht I. compelled many cities to pay damages and took the Jews under his protection. In the fourteenth century blame for the Black Death was laid upon them on the ground that they had poisoned wells and springs, and resulting uprisals of the population inflicted fearful sufferings upon the supposed authors of the scourge. In some cities the whole Jewish

81	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	Israel, History of
community was put to death at the stake, in others they burned themselves to death. While in many places the magistrates swore never to receive Jews back again for residence, the oath soon became a dead letter, and to Strasburg, Nuremberg, Vienna, Erfurt, Basel, Zurich, and Heilbronn the Jews returned by invitation. Campaigns against the Hussitea began always with assaults upon Jews. The Council of Basel occupied itself in its nineteenth sitting with this people, ordered the enforcement of the ecclesiastical regulations, and recommended the study of Hebrew and Aramaic to the universities in order better to carry on missions among them. At the instigation of a Jewish‑Christian convert named Pfefferkorn the Dominicans at Cologne began a campaign against the Talmud, and were opposed by Johann Reuchlin (q.v.), who believed that in the Talmud and the Cabala were to be found divine philosophy and the wisdom of the patriarchs. Against Reuchlin came Jakob van Hoogstraten (q.v.) with his composition on the " Destruction of the Cabala." In 1509 Pfefferkorn obtained an order from Emperor Maximilian to the Jews to deliver to the former all their anti‑Christian writings, and a second edict directed Hoogstraten, Reuchlin, a Jewish‑Christian named Viktor von Karben, and certain universities to pronounce upon the contents. Reuchlin adduced what he declared to be Christ's testimony to the Talmud as a witness for Christian verity. Reuchlin and Pfefferkorn engaged in a campaign of nicknames into which the archbishop of Mainz intruded, the humanists of Germany took the part of Reuchlin with an anti‑ecclesiastical bias, and Luther found therein one of his opportunities (see ErisTor,& Osscuaoauat VIRORUM). In several of his utterances he manifested favor to the Jews, though later he reversed his position and violently assailed them, so that the Reformation did not bring to them the relief they expected. But in 1544 Charles V. restored to the Jews their privileges and declared them not guilty of murdering Christian children for Passover purposes.
The suspicions and attacks under which the Jews after the twelfth century had suffered through‑
out Europe prevented expansion and 10. Revs‑ growth of spiritual life, and a further Val of Dies‑ hindrance was the opposition of the
aianiam. rabbis to the study of philosophy on the ground that it led to Christianity and heresy. Hence the Jews became superstitious and sank into the practise of magic and into religious fanaticism. Consequently the people came to look for Messianic deliverance, and under the pressure of constant reports of coming relief Shabbethai Zebi (b, in Smyrna in 1626) claimed to be the Messiah, put forth prophecies, and in the year 1666, reckoned by Jews as the year of the coming redemption, went to Jerusalem, while another Jew assumed the r81e of Elijah. The greatest expectations were aroused among his own people throughout Europe. Had Shabbethai possessed the qualities requisite for the carrying out of such a scheme, he would have caused the greatest movement of modern times among the Jews. But in 1666 the Turkish cadi sent him to the sultan at Constantinople, who put on him a white turban and a green mantle and made him, as
Mehemed Effendi, his doorkeeper, while the Jews of Europe were plunged into shame and chagrin. Among the more intelligent Jews this one experience killed all seeds of the Messianic hope. But the ignorant masses of the East still had expectations, and in 1720 in Galicia Jacob Frank (q.v.) claimed to be the reincarnated Shabbethai and gained a following which replaced the Talmud by the Sohar. The Chasidim of Russia and Poland, named from Juda Chasid, are the remainder of a movement similar to that inaugurated by Frank. Among them ecstasy is sought with the aid of stimulants, asceticism is practised, and the Sohar is regarded as of the highest value (see CHASIDIM, 2). Contemporaneous with these outbreaks of fanaticism and superstition were the life and momentous work of Baruch Spinoza (1632‑77), whose achievements prove that the inner genius of Judaism could not be destroyed by opposing external forces or by internal error, though indeed official Judaism sought to destroy by ban and actual attack the man who glorified this race.
In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries Poland became the chief center of Judaism. Since
11. Jews the fourteenth century that land had
	is	been the refuge of persecuted Jews
Poland. from the west of Europe, especially
from Germany. Consequently Russian and Polish Jews came to use a mixed dialect of which the foundation is German with Russian, Polish and Hebrew words mingled, and this dialect has produced a literature. Settlement of Jews from the East was made in quite early times. Gregory IX. urged King Andrew to exclude Jews and Mohammedans from office, and the synod of Ofen (1279) ordered Jews to wear a red wheel on the left breast. Casimir the Great renewed and extended in 1334 the favorable laws of a century earlier, requiring the accordant testimony of three Jews and three Christians to convict a Jew of the crime of murder of a Christian child; thirteen years later he limited the privileges accorded Jews. During a pestilence the Jews of the principal cities were attacked by the populace. Casimir IV. made the laws still more favorable, but Cardinal Olesnick permitted the monk Capistrano, " the scourge of the Jews," to preach against them, and Casimir had to withdraw his concessions. Sigiamund I. (1508‑48) protected the Jews. Meanwhile the study of the Talmud had
flourished under the care of German Jews in Poland,
and Joseph Caro produced the Shulhan Aruch,
which has remained the guide of life for Sews since,
while the Talmudic schools of the land became
celebrated in all Europe. Study of the Bible lan‑
guished, only one work of importance being issued,
the Hizxuk e‑naunah by Isaac Troki (cf. JE, aii.
285‑266), a keen polemic against the Gospels and
Christianity. During the eeyenteeath likntuly, the

Jews of Poland were ruled by their own rabbis, constituting a state within a state with an annual

synod. But under this regime and a narrowing of studies to matters of legal refinement, the character of the people had deteriorated, while the Polish impress stamped all European Judaism, except that of Spain, with the traits mist disliked by the European Peoples. Polish Jews became compro‑

Israel, History of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	82
mieed in an attempt to reduce to serfage the cosaecks of Ukraine, and many thousands perished, and a large number were killed in the Russian‑Swedish war under Charles X. It is said that 180,000 families perished, 1648‑16b8, and Polish Judaism lost its eminent position.
4. The New Period: By the end of the eighteenth century a general deterioration and rankness of religious life had conquered Judaism all over the world; if the people was to be saved, a rebirth was necessary for the whole people. The reformation of the inner spirit of Judaism began in Germany through Moses Mendelasohn (q.v.); the betterment of the external situation began with the emancipation of the Jews of France. The great elector, Frederick William, had settled fifty Jewish families from Vienna in Berlin, and to that place came Mendelasohn, and gave himself to educational and philosophical work. His reputation, recognized even by Christians, stimulated the younger Jews to care for larger interests, and study of the Talmud alone no longer satisfied. His translation of the Pentateuch into German, though necessarily printed in Hebrew type, had great influence, though use of it was forbidden by the rabbis. Following his lead, a generation of authors sprang up having the purpose to release the Jewish people and religion from the superstition and regard for mere ceremony into which they had fallen, to break the yoke of Talmudism, and substitute the Bible as the basis of life. In France in 1791 Jews were given the right of citizenship, though this was withdrawn in Alsace in 1808. In 1812, after six years of preparatory measures, Napoleon declared the Jews of the empire eligible to citizenship, though in the free cities of Germany this right had to be purchased, and it was afterward withdrawn. Progress toward the same end of freedom for the Jews was made in other European countries. In Germany most of the states took the religion under their protection. Many Jews became Christians, others set up reformed synagogues (as in Cassel and Hamburg). Yet in 1819 there broke out a new popular uprising against the Jews, in which life and property were destroyed. Against the reform tendency in Judaism and the movement toward Christianity arose an orthodox party fostering the early ideals. Jewish consciousness of its past and a new awakening of Jewish spirit was brought about by the Geschichte der Israelites (9 vole., 1820‑29) of I. M. Jost (q.v.), while works on Jewish history, poetry, and philosophy. and on the linguistics of the Hebrew tongue further stimulated the newly awakened interest. While Abraham Geiger (q.v.) had a leading part in this movement, the political support gained in France through the help given to Louis Philippe in 1830 by the Rothschilds furthered the cause. The spirit of liberalism spread, the literary activities of Heine, Borne, and Gabriel Riesser contributed to its growth and many Jews accepted Christianity. An event ih the East raised again the Jewish question in Europe. In Damascus, which reckoned among its 120,000 inhabitants 5,000 Jews, Father Tomaso, the guardian of the Capuchins, and his servants disappeared. Seven of the richest Jews were accused of murdering them, their houses were attacked and
destroyed in the effort to find the bodies, while the owners and other Jews were slain or arrested. The Jewish financial houses of Europe interested France, England and Austria in protecting the Jews, and an international court under Mohammed Ali of Egypt was established to investigate the case. The general result was a unification of feeling among the Jews of Europe, and this was extended to the East by the establishment there of schools to raise the level of knowledge among the Jews of the Orient. A specially important movement was the founding of the Alliance Isra€lite Universelle at Paris under the leadership of Adolphe Cr€mieux, who had been a guiding spirit during the entire course of events. The result of the revolutionary movements of 1848 in Paris, Vienna, Berlin, Italy, and elsewhere was the triumph of liberalism with the advancement of the Jews as an inevitable consequence. A reaction occurred, beginning in 1870, and antisemitism expressed itself, especially in Germany, in attacks upon the Jewish quarters, while this feeling and its consequent riots and legal limitations spread into Russia, Rumania, Austria, and France. The consequence of the feeling of insecurity thus awakened among Jews was the establishment in Vienna by Theodor Herzl of the Zionist movement, the object of which is the founding of a Jewish state in Palestine in which all persecuted Jews may find a secure refuge. (F. HEbfAN.)
6. Jews in America. After the expulsion of Jews from Spain in 1492, and from Portugal in 1497, a considerable number of them nominally adopted Christianity but retained their Jewish creed and practises in secret. Colum‑
1. Early bus, on his first voyage, was accom‑
settle‑
	ments.	parried by several of these 11laranos,
		or secret Jews; many Maranos visited
or settled in Spanish or Portuguese America, and,
when their creed was discovered, became victims
of the Inquisition. By their wide connection with
the Spanish Jews who had settled in Holland and
the Levant, they contributed to international trade
across the Atlantic. Owing to a natural sympathy
with Holland, those of Brazil took the part of the
Dutch in the conflict between Holland and Portu
gal for the possession of that country, and when the
Dutch were expelled from Pernambuco and Rio
Janeiro in 1654 a considerable number of Jews left
with them and went to the West India Islands.
Some twenty‑three of these emigrated to New York
in the summer of that year, and obtained a footing
there through the influence of the Dutch West
India Company, among the founders and members
of which were a number of Amsterdam Jews. Four
years later fifteen Jewish families arrived at New
port, R. L, and established a congregation there,
under the direction of Aaron Lopez, one of the
leading merchants of the country, about 1650. It
is possible that Jews had appeared even earlier in
Maryland; but the first of importance there was
Jacob Lum.broso, a physician of distinction. These
places and Philadelphia, Savannah, and Charles
ton constituted the chief seats of Jewish settlement
in the latter half of the seventeenth and the first
part of the eighteenth century; the settlers were
mostly of the Sephardic, or Spanish branch of the

83	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Israel, History of
Jewish people, though occasionally a few English Jews were found among them. Toward the close of the colonial period Jews had spread to Lancaster, Philadelphia, and Leicester, Mass., and the majority of them took the revolutionary aide in the struggle with England, some of them fighting in the ranks, twenty‑four of whom held commissions. Robert Morris was helped to finance the Revolution by the aid of Haym Salomon.
It has been calculated that at the beginning of the nineteenth century there were about 2,000 Jews in the United States, of whom 800 were in
Charleston, 500 in New York, 150 in 2. In the Philadelphia, and the remainder acat‑
United fired, Their numbers were soon in‑
8tates,
1800‑	crew by migrations from England
1880.	and Germany, the latter chiefly after
the failure of the Liberal movement in 1848. These were among the first of Austin's colonists in Texas in 1821, and the cities of Waco and Castroville still testify to the important position held in early Texas by Jacob de Cordova, who laid out the former, and Henry Castro, who founded the latter. The Jews also helped in the earlier development of California, Solomon Heydenfeld being chief justice of that state up to 1857, while among the pioneers in the commerce of that state Jews were numbered. The period from 1848 to 1880 marked the immigration of German Jews who had taken part in the liberal movements in Germany in 1848 and had come to America to escape the reaction which followed it. These to the number of not less than 7,000 showed their devotion to their adopted country by taking part on both sides of the fraternal strife of the Civil War. Meanwhile, Jews had been in various directions establishing their positions as American citizens and claiming the rights thereof. Even in the early days of the eighteenth century several of the colonies passed laws permitting Jews to become naturalized without the oath on " the true faith of a Christian " still demanded in the mother country. The English act of 1740 permitted this throughout the colonies. In Maryland between 1776 and 1825 the political disabilities of the Jews were entirely removed, mainly by the activity of Jacob I. Cohen and Solomon Etting. The Board of Delegates of American Israelites had been formed for activity where religious discrimination was brought against Americana on account of their creed as Jews. Several American Jews in this early period served abroad as diplomatic agents of the United States.
Internally, movements for reform in the ritual took place among American Jews as among their European brethren, the first being at Charleston as
early as 1825, but the chief movements 3. Reform, in this direction came with the migra‑
Educa‑	tion of German Jews in 184$. Under
tChartiab a the leadership of Rabbis David Ein‑
8ove. horn and Iesac Mayer Wise, a wave of meats. reform spread throughout American
Jewry, though a large number of the older established congregations still retained the older and more orthodox ritual. Two colleges were founded by the opposite parties to train ministers,
the Maimpnidea College at Philadelphia, founded in 1887, ~y lase Lesser, the leader of the more conservative Jews, and the Hebrew Union College in 1875 in Cincinnati, O., by Isaac Mayer Wine, who had likewise established the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, which combined the ministers of the more radical direction and unified the reform ritual by a standard " Union Prayer Book." A more extreme development of the reform position was founded by Felix Adler (q.v.) in New York in 1883, and is known as the Ethical Culture movement (see ETHICAL CULTURE, SOCIETIES P'OR). Among the most characteristic features of American Jewry during the period from 1848 to 1880 are the many fraternal organizations which combined educational, charitable and benefit features and served as Jewish centers in small communities where no congregations or synagogues existed. Most congregations had established some charitable features, but few specially philanthropic institutions were found necessary. The first Jewish hospital, Mount Sinai, was founded is 1852 in New York, and the first orphan asylum in 1855 at New Orleans, under the auspices of Judah Touro.
In 1880 it was reckoned that there were about 250,000 Jews in the United States, of whom 75,000 were in New York, 18,000 in San Francisco, 12,000
in Philadelphia, 10,000 in Chicago,
4. The 8,000 in Cincinnati, 8,000 in St. Louis,
New	and the rest scattered. In the follow‑
	Immigra‑ ing year commenced extensive migra
tion since 1880. 	dons from Russia, due to the massar
erea and persecutions which began then and have continued down to the present. It is estimated that at least 1,250,000 Jews have entered the United States since 1881, two‑thirds of them from Russia. With the advent of this huge and increasing stream of immigrants, mostly ill provided with means of livelihood, a total change came over the spirit of American Israel. The older Jewish inhabitants hastened to form institutions to assist their persecuted brethren in, settling in the land of liberty. Baron de Hirsch placed a sum of two and one‑half millions of dollars at the disposal of an American committee in 1890 for the special purpose of providing for the new arrivals; this fund has founded agricultural colonies and industrial schools. In New York the Educational Alliance has been established to instruct the newcomers in the English language and in their duties as prospective American citizens. Hospitals, orphan asylums, and homes for the aged have been established in all the great Jewish centers, and nail form methods of treatment have been developed under the auspices of the National Conference of Jewish Charities organized in Cincinnati in 1899, which numbers over fifty philanthropic organizations throughout the country. The various charitable bodies have been federated in Philadelphia, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Chicago, Boston, Detroit, Kansas City and Cleveland, and it is reckoned that these bodies, together with the chief Jewish institutions of New York distribute five millions of dollars annually for relief, industrial training and other philanthropic objects. More recently the Russian Jews, who have prospered remarkably, have eetab‑

Israel, History of Italy
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
lished independent institutions to care for their poorer brethren. The majority of the newcomers are of the orthodox wing of Judaism, so that whereas before the " eighties " the majority of American Jews were probably attached to reform congregations, at least five‑sixths of the 1,200 congregations now in the United States are of the more conservative section. In order to supply these with rabbis, the Jewish Theological Seminary of America was established by Sabato Morais in New York in 1895, and was reorganized in 1902 under the presidency of Solomon Schechter (q.v.). This institution has now one of the largest Hebrew libraries in the world.
Jews have their own press, the first periodical being The Jew in New York 1823‑25, the next im‑
portant one being The Occident, Phila6. The delphia, edited by Isaac Lesser, 1843‑
Press; 1869. The more important weeklies
General am American Israelite of Cincinnati,
tionaCondi‑ established in 1854; Jewish Messen‑
.
ger, New York, 1857‑1902; The American Hebrew, New York, 1879; Jewish Exponent, Philadelphia, 1887; Reform Advocate, Chicago, 1891, and Jewish Comment, Baltimore, 1895. The newcomers have also founded a press of their own in Yiddish, a dialect of archaic German printed in Hebrew characters. The chief paper is the Jewish Daily News of New York. The Jewish Publication Society of America, founded in 1889, issues works adapted for popular reading, its most memorable publications being Graetz's History of the Jews, Israel Zangwill's Children. of the Ghetto, and Schechter's Studies in Judaism. American Judaism has not hitherto produced any important contributions to Jewish learning, though the Jewish Encyclopedia, in twelve volumes (New York, 1900‑06) summarizes for the first time the results of the Jewish scholarship of Europe and is being translated into Hebrew and Russian. Owing to the large increase in the number of American Jews, the government has of recent years taken action to protest against the persecutions in Europe which lead to such burdens being cast upon America by the illiberal and persecuting action of despotic governments. Meetings of protest have been held throughout the country against Russian tyranny in 1881, 1893, and after the Kishineff massacres in 1903, when a fund of over one million dollars was collected in America by a Jewish relief committee. In order to take continuous action in such cases an American Jewish Committee was formed in 1906 of representative Jews throughout the country. Jews have taken part in the.higher activities of American life in numbers far beyond their numerical proportions. They have had eminent representalives among the officers of the army and navy, in the United States Senate, in the learned professions, among artists and inventors, and in literature. Altogether, the Jews of the United States have perhaps the most fortunate and influential position of any Jews throughout the world. They number nearly two millions (half of them in New York), about one‑sixth of the whole number of Jews, and they show exceptional capacity to enter into the
democratic life of America.	JOSEPH JACOBS.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the general history abundant literature, touching the various phases, will be found cited under ARAB; ARCHEOLOGY, BIBLICAL; BIBLICAL THEOLOGY; ILIDDI91TIOx; CABALA; TALMUD; Dloxxsx. Supplementing these lists of literature the reader may consult: W. D. Morrison, Jews under Roman Rule. London, 1890; W. H. Koaters, WiderherateUung laraela, Heidelberg, 1895; J. P. Peters, The Early Hebrew Story, New York, 1904; J. C. Todd, Politics and Religion in Ancient Israel, ib. 1904: M. Friedliinder, Die relipisaen Bewepungen ianerhalb des Judentuma im Zeitaller Jeau, Berlin, 1905; R. L. Ottley, Religion in Israel, London, 1905; W. E. Addis, Hebrew Religion to the Establishment of Judaism, Ib. 1908; B. Baentaeh, Altorientaliacher and iaraelitiaeher Monothdamua, Tilbingen, 1908; A. Lods, La Croyanoe h la vie future et Is tulle du morta dens fantiquite iaraElite, 2 vole., Paris, 1908; E. Meyer, Die laraeliten and ihre Nachbarathmme, Halls, 1908; K. Marti, Die Religion du A. T., TObingen, 1908, Fng. tranal., London, 1907; W. Bousaet, Die Religion du Judentuma in neuteatamenUichen Zeitalter. Gettingen, 1907 ; T. K. Cheyne, Traditions and Beliefs of Ancient Israel, London, 1907: idem, Decline and Fall of the Kingdom of Judah, ib. 1907; F. Stithelin, Problems den iaraeEitiachen Guchichte, Basel, 1907; P. Wendland, Die heUeniatich‑romische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zu Judentum, TGbingen, 1907; S. A. Cook, The Religion of Ancient Palestine inthe 2d Millennium, B.C., Edinburgh. 1908; J. B. D. Eerdmana, AltteatamenUiche Studsen, IL, Die Vorpeachichta larada, Giessen, 1908: W. Fairweather, The Background of theGoapela: or, Judaism Between the Old and the New Testaments, Edinburgh, 1908; P. Goodman, The Synagogue and the Church, London, 1908: C. H. H. Wright, Light From Egyptian Papyri on Jewish Hint. Before Christ, ib., 1908; M. Lehr, Daa Weib in Jahwe‑Religion and Kult, Leipaic, 1908.
For post‑Biblical history, individual and general, the beet thesaurus is the JE, which has taken a fully authoritative position on matters Jewish. On various phases consult: M. J. Jost, Geachichte des Judentuma and semen Seklen, 3 vols., Leipsie, 1857‑59; A. Neubauer and M. Stern, Hebrtiiache $erichte fiber Xe Juaenverfolpungen wtlhrend den Kreuzzfige, Berlin, 1892; H. J. M. Coudenhove, Daa Weaen des Antiaemitiamua, Berlin, 1901; H. Graetz, Volkatfimliche Geachichte den Juden, 3 vole., Leipaie, 1905; E. N. Adler, Jews in Many Lands, Philadelphia, 1905; S. Funk, Die Juden in Babylonien X00‑600. Berlin, 1902; M. Fresco, His(. et diWratura juivea pays par pays, Paris, 1905; M. C. Peters, The Jew as m Patriot, New York, 1902; D. Philipeon, The Reform Movement in Judaism, London, 1907; G. F. Abbott, Israel in Europe, New York, 1907; M. Harris, Hint. of the Medieval Jews from the Moslem Conquest of Spain M the Discovery of America, ib. 1907.
For Judaism in different lands consult: On England: J. Picciotto, Sketches of Anplo‑Jewish History, London, 1870; J. Jacobs, The Jews of Angevin England, ib. 1893 (s collection of sources); L. Wolf, Manasseh ben Israel's Mission to . . . Cromwell, ib. 1901; Select Pleas, Starra, and Other Records from the Rolls of the Exchequer of the Jews, 1880‑1294, ib. 1902; Calendar of the Plea Rolls of the Exchequer of the Jews, ed. J. M. Rigg, vol, i., 1218‑1272, 16.1906; Celebration of the 860th Anniversary 5f the Whitehall Conference, ib. 1905; A. M. Hyameon, A Hial. of the Jews
in England, London, 1908. On France: J. Aronius, Reguten zur Guchichte den Juden im frnnkiachen and deutachen Reiche aria rum . . 1E78, Berlin, 1887‑1902; X. Gsanos, Laude our la condition des Juifa ease fancven droit Jranyaia, Angers, 1897; 8. Kahn, Notice our lea IaraeZitea de Nimes, 87.t‑1808, Ntmes, 1901; H. Lucien‑Brun, La Condition des Juifa en Franca depuia 1789, Paris, 1901. On Germany and Austria: J. Aronius, ut sup.; M. Friedliinder, Materialen zur Geechichte den Juden in Bohmen, Briinn, 1888; E. Nuebling, Die Judenpemeinden du Mittelaltera, Ulm, 1898; J. E. Scherer, Die Rechtaverhtiltnaeae den Juden in den deutach‑8aterreichiachen Ldredern, Leipsie, 1901; G. Liebe, Dag Judentum in den deutachen Verpanpenheit, Jena, 1903. On Rumania: E. Sincerus, Lea Juife en Roumanie depu%a Is traitk de Berlin, London, 1901; B. Lasers, Lea Juifa en Roumanie, Paris, 1902; I. L ahovarie, The Jewish Question in Roumania, ib., 1903. On Russia and Poland: M. Devitt, The Story of Anti‑Semitic Persecutions in Russia, London, 1903; S. Spinner, Etwas fiber den Stand den CuZtur bei den Jfulen in Poles in IB. Jahrhundert. Vienna, 1903. On Spain and Portugal: E. H. Lindo. Hint. of the Jews of Spain and Portugal, London, 1848; F. D.

RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
Moaeatta, Jews of Spain and Portugal and flee Inquisition, ib. 1877; A. Pulido Fernandez, Espaltolea Bin podia y la razaSefardi, Madrid, 1905. On the United States: I. Markena, Hebrews in America, 1885; Judaism at the World's Parliament of Religions, Cincinnati, 1894; C. S. Bernheimer, The Russian Jew in te United States, Philadelphia, 1905; The Two Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of the Jews in the United States: Addressee at Carnegie Halt, Thanksgiving Day, 1906. New York, 1905. B. A. Elzas, The Jews of South Carding, Philadelphia, 1908; and the publications of the Jewish Historical Society. On other lands: G. Meynie, L'Alperie juive„ Paris, 1887; D. Cazea, Hiat, des IaraElitea de Tuniaie, ib. 1888; G. Corneilhan, Le Judaiame en Egypte et en Syria, ib. 1889; L. Burieu, Las Juife atpiriens, ib. 1902; A. Steinberg, Studixn zur Geachichte der Juden in der Schweiz, Zurich, 1902; J. H. Lord, The Jews of India arid the Far East, Bombay, 1906; J. Chalom, Les IaraRitea de to Tuniaie, Paris, 1908.
On post‑Biblical literature consult: M. Steinachneider, Die arabiache Literatur der Juden, Frankfort, 1902; J. Guttmann, Die Scholastic des 13. Jahrhunderta in ihren Beziehungen zum Judentum, Breslau, 1902; H, Brody and K. Albrecht, The New‑Hebrew School of Poets of the Spanish‑Arabian Epoch, Leipaic. 1906; T. Abrahams, A Short Hiat, of Jewish Literature from the Fall of the Temple, London, 1906; D. Neumark, Geachichte der jitdiachen Philosophic des Mittelaltera, vol. i., Berlin, 1907; Nathaniel ibn al‑Fayyumi, The Buatan alukul, ed. and transl. from a unique MS . . . . by D. Levine, New York, 1908.
ITALA. See BIBLE VExslorra, A, IL, 1.
ITALY.
I. The Roman Catholic Church.
Modern Status in the State (§ 1). Position of the Pope (§ 2).
Organization (§ 3).
The Old Catholics ($ 4). IL Protestant Bodies.
The waldenaian Church (§ 1).
The Evangelical Italian Church (§ 2).
Foreign Missionary Congregations and Churches (§ 3). Benevolent Institutions (§ 4).
Bible and Tract Societies (§ 5). Periodicals (§ 8).
The present kingdom of Italy, comprising besides
the main peninsula the islands of Sicily and Sardinia, and a number of smaller islands, was formed in Mar., 1861, The total area is 110,659 square miles; population (1901), 32,475,253, of whom 31,539,863 (99.7 per cent.) are Roman Catholics, 65,595 Protestants (including 20,538 foreigners), and 35,617 Jews. The capital is Rome. Religious liberty prevails, and adherents of all faiths enjoy equal civil and political rights.
I. The Roman Catholic Church: Until 1848 the Roman Catholic clergy, including the religious
orders, occupied an exceptional posit. modern lion in Italy. They were exempt from
status in taxation and from temporal jurisdic‑
tion, and had the public educational and charitable institutions entirely in their hands. The kingdom of Sardinia took the lead in bringing about the new order. By law of Aug. 25, 1848, the Jesuits were excluded, as also the Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and a law of Mar. 1, 1850, placed all ecclesiastical institutions of a beneficent character under state supervision. Other statutes put an end to exemption from temporal jurisdiction and taxation, forbade religious institutions to receive gifts without royal sanction, and levied an annual tax on the receipts of the " dead hand " (se
MORTMAIN). BY the law of Ma
religious orders in Sardinia not engaged tng' teaching, or nursing the sick were d
Israel, History of Italy
and their property alienated by the State. On the basis of this law 274 monasteries, with 3,733 monks, and sixty‑one convents, with 1,756 inmates, were closed, and 2,722 Chapters and private benefices were disestablished. In 1861 the same principles were carried out in Umbria, in the Marches, and in Naples. These principles were applied to the entire kingdom of Italy by the laws of July 7, 1866, Aug. 15, 1867, and June 19, 1873. The property thus acquired by the State was formed into an ecclesiastical fund (Foruto per a cztlto) for the support of religious worship and public education, and for the payment of pensions to monks and nuns of closed monasteries. Since the suppressed orders might continue to exist as private associations, there are still about 40,000 monks in Italy. Up to June 30, 1898, 44,376 ecclesiastical foundations had come into the possession of the State. The annual income from this property is about 33,000,000 lire. All chapels and churches used for public worship are exempt from confiscation, as also episcopal residences, together with the official buildings connected with them, clerical seminaries, and such cloisters as were turned over to the provinces or communes for public purposes, educational or charitable. All the Roman Catholic theological faculties in the seventeen state universities were abolished by law in 1873.
The temporal power of the pope was quietly brought to an end Sept. 20, 1870, but on May 13,
1871, a law was passed guaranteeing 2. Position his independence, and making his per‑
of the son sacred and inviolable, like that of pope. the king. The honors of sovereignty are due to him, and he is allowed to keep a bodyguard. The State grants him annually a pension of 3,225,000 lire, which, however, he has hitherto declined to receive; and the palaces of the Vatican and the Lateran, and the villa, of Cartel Gandolfo (near Albano), with their libraries and collections, are declared to be the property of the holy see, inalienable, free of taxation, and exempted from expropriation. The Italian Government furthermore guarantees the freedom and independence of the conclave, and of all ecclesiastical officers in the execution of their official functions. In the city of Rome, all seminaries, academies, and colleges for the education of the clergy remain under the special authority of the pope; and the State has renounced its right of appointment and nomination to the higher ecclesiastical benefices. No Italian
bishop is compelled to take the oath to the king,
and no royal ptacet is neceasalV tQ ~~ C~ e
a purely ' ~ 	V 	ACGu~,1~J
P 	eeeleslastleal act. Meanwhile the pope
resides in the Vatican, keeping a court of about 1,800 Persons, and maintaining the Curia (q.v.) for the government of the Roman Catholic Church at large. Foreign countries represented at the Vatican are: Austria‑Hungary, Bavaria, Belgium, Bolivia,

Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Monaco, Nicaragua, Peru, Portugal, Prussia, Russia, San Domingo, and Spain.
e	The Roman Catholic Church in Italy numbers 49 arch‑
Y 29, 1855, &11	bishoprics, 221 bishoprics, and some 23 000 parishes.Hier ‑
in	archically, the Church in Italy is dipid~ into (1) the diocese
preach‑	of Rome, with the six suburban cardinal‑bishoprics of A1‑
VL‑5
>	isaolved	bano. Frascati, Ostia‑Velletri~ Paleetrina. Porto, and Sabin.;

Italy, the Reformation is
(2) exempt bishoprics and archbishoprics, i.e., those that are immediately under the pope; and (3) metropolitan bishoprics, with their suffragan bishoprics. The exempt archbishopric; and bishoprics are as follows: in Liguria,
S. Organi‑ the bishopric of Luni‑Sarzana; in Venice, the
	zation.	archbishopric of Udine; in the former Papal
		States, the archbishoprics of Camerino, Ferrara,
Perugia, and Spoleto, and the bishoprics of Aquapendente,
Alatri, Amelia, Anagni, Ancona, Aaeoli, Assisi, Bagnorea,
Citta di Castello, Citta dells Pieve, Civita Castellana, Corneto,
Fabriano, Fano, Ferentino, Foligno, Gubbio. Jesi, Monte
fiascone, Narni, Nocera, Norcia, Orvieto, Osimo, Poggio
Mirteto, Recanati, Rieti, Segni, Sutri‑Nepi, Terni, Terracina,
Tivoli, Todi, Treja, Veroli, and Viterbo; in Tuscany, the
archbishopric of Lucca, and the bishoprics of Arezzo, Cortona,
Montalcino, and Montepulciano; in Emilia, the bishoprics
of Borgo San Donnino, Parma, and Piacenza; in the province
of Naples, the archbishoprics of Amalfi, Aquila, Cosenza
Gaeta, and Roasano, and the bishoprics of Aquino, Aversa,
Cava‑Sarno, Foggia, Gravina, San Marco, Marsi. Melfi,
Mileto, Molfetta, bfonopoli, Narda, Penne‑Atri, Teramo,
Trivento, Troja, and Sulmona; in Sicily, the archbishopric
of Catania, and the bishopric of Acireale. The metropolitan
seats with their suffragans are: Acerenza‑Maters (suffragans:
Anglona‑Turai, Potenza, Tricarico, Venosa); Bari‑Canosa
(Conversano, Ruvo‑Bitonto); Benevent (Alife, Ariano,
Aacoli‑Cerignola, Avellino, Bojano, Bovino, Larino, Lucera,
San Severo, Sant' Agata de' Goti, Telese, Termoli); Bologna
(Fsenza, Imola); Brindisi (Ostuni); Cagliari (Galtelli‑Nuovo,
Iglesias, Ogliastra); Capua (Cajazzo, Calvi‑Teano Caserta,
IserniarVenafro, 3essa); Chieti (Vasto); Conza‑Campagna
(Lacedonis, Muro, Sant' Angelo de' Lombardi); Fermo
(MaceratarTolentino, Montalto, Ripatransone, San 3everino);
Florence (San Sepolcro, Colle, Resole, Modigliana, Piatoja
Prato, San Miniato); Genoa (Albenga, Bobbio, Brugnato,
Savona‑Noli, Tortona, Ventimiglia); Lanciano (Ortons);
Manfredonia (Vieati); Messina (Lipari, Nicosia, Patti);
Milan (Bergamo, Brescia, Como, Crema, Cremona, Lodi,
Mantua, Pavia); Modena (Carpi, Guastalla, Massa di Carrara,
Reggio Emilia); Monreale (Caltanisetta, Girgenti); Naples
(Accra, Ischia, Nola, Pozzuoli); Oristano (Ales‑Terralba);
Otranto (Gallipoli, Lecoe, Ugento); Palermo (Cefalu, Maz
aara, Trapani); Pisa (Livorno, Peacia, Pontremoli, Volterra);
Ravenna (Bertinoro, Cervix, Cesena, Comacchio, Forli,
Rimini, Sarsina); Reggio di Calabria (Bova, Cassano, Catsn
saro, Cotrone. Gerace, Nicsstro, Nicotera, Oppido, Squillace);
Salerno‑Acerno (Capaccio‑Vallo, Diano, hfarsico, Noceradei
Pagani, Nuaco, Policastro); Santa Severina (Cariati); Sassari
(Alghero, Ampurias, Biaarchio, Boss); Siena (Chiuai,
Grosseto, Massa Diarittima, Savana^Pitigliano); Syracuse
(Caltagirone, Noto, Piazza); Sorrent (Castellamare); Taranto
(Castellaneta, Oria); Turin (Acqui, Alba, Aosta, Asti, Cuneo,
Fossano, Ivrea, Mondovi, Pinerolo, 8aluzzo, Susa); Tram
(Andria, Bisoeglie); Urbino (Cagli, Fosaombrone, 1lionte
feltro, Pesaro, Sinigaglia, Urbania‑Sant' Angelo in Vado);
Venice (Adria, Belluno, Ceneda, Chioggia, Concordia, Padua,
Treviso, Verona, Vicenza); and Vercelli (Aleseandria dells
Paglia, Biella, Casale, Novara, Vigevano). There are also
eleven abbeys and prelatures without dioceses, viz.‑ Alta,
mura, Monte Cassino, Monte Oliveto Maggiore, Monte Ver
gine, Nonantola, Santa Lucia del Mela, San Martino al Monte
Cimino, San Paolo fuori le Mura di Roma, Sanetisaima
Trinita dells Cave dei Tirreni, S4, Vicenzo ed Anastasio alle
tre Fontane (near Rome), and Subiaco. There are Unist
Greek congregations in Naples, Messina, and Barletta.
The Old Catholics in Italy number about 1,000. They have a bishop, and less than a dozen ministers.
4. The	Their largest parishes are Arrone in
old	the province of Perugia; Dovadola,
	Catholics.	in the province of Florence; Sant'
		Angelo de' Lombardi, in the province
of Avellino; and San Remo, in the Riviera di
Ponente. The sect was founded in Italy by Count
Enrico de Campello (q.v.).
II. Protestant Bodies: The Protestant cause in Italy is represented by the old and celebrated Church of the Waldenses (q.v.); by the Evangelical Italian Church; and by congregations of Baptists, Wesleyana, and (American) Methodists.
When religious liberty was established in the
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
kingdom of Sardinia by the decree of Feb. 17, 1848, the Waldenses (q.v.) in Italy had eighteen ministers
and fifteen congregations, all in the 1. TheWal‑ piedmont region. The congregations
denaiaa of Pinerolo and Turin were established
Church. later. The number of Waldenses in Piedmont and the adjacent valleys is about 13,000. In 1898 the Waldensian College, established at Torre Pellice in 1835, was placed upon an equal footing with similar state institutions. It has about a dozen teachers and about 100 pupils. The Waldenses also maintain high schools, orphan asylums, and a hospital. Their theological school, founded at Torre Pellice in 1835, was removed to Florence in 1860. The Waldensians, by sixty years of missionary activity, have now established new congregations throughout Italy, some fifty in number, with as many more mission stations, comprehending about 6,000 communicants. The affairs of the entire Church are administered by a board of five members, elected by the synod, which meets yearly at Torre Pellice, in September. Since 1861 the mission field, with the new congregations, has been administered by an Evangelization Committee of eight members, also elected by the synod. The Church maintains elementary and Sunday schools, and employs some two dozen colporteura for the distribution of Bibles and evangelical writings.
The Evangelical Italian Church was founded at Milan, in 1870, by twenty‑three separate congrega‑
tions that had been formed here and 2. The there independently of the Waldensian
Evangelical
Italian evangelization. To show clearly its
Church. separation from the papacy and the
Roman hierarchy this church called itself the " Free Italian Church." [Its most eminent leader was the eloquent Gavazzi.] A general convention in 1870 adopted eight fundamental articles of faith, and the next assembly at Florence in 1871 adopted a constitution of twenty‑one articles. By
~	royal decree of July 2, 1891, this church was recognized by the Italian government as a juristic person, under the name " Evangelical Italian Church " (Chiesa Evangelica Italidna), the name by which it has since then been known. The affairs of the church are in the hands of an Evangelization Committee, composed of five members elected by the general convention, which meets annually at Florence: The entire church is divided into ten districts, viz., Piedmont, Liguria, Lombardy, Venice, Emilia, Tuscany, Rome, Naples, Apulia, and Sicily. These embrace, all together, some forty congregations, forty‑five stations, and about 2,000 communicants. The church maintains elementary and Sunday schools, and a theological school at Florence. The church also employs a number of colporteurs for the sale of Bibles and evangelical works. In connection with the Evangelical Italian Church may be mentioned the Free Christian Church, which resembles the Plymouth Brethren. [The Evangelical Italian Church and the Free Christian Church are now for the most part allied with the Waldensians and the Methodists.]
The English Wesleyans, who have been represented in Italy since 1861, have in their northern district twenty‑five churches and stations, and in

87
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
‑Italy
Italy, the Reformation in
their southern district twenty‑five churches and
stations, numbering all together some 2,000 com
	municants. They maintain elemen
S. Foreign	tart' schools, and an orphan asylum
Missionary	at Intro. The Methodist Episcopal
Congrega‑
tions and	Church (of America,) began missionary
Churches.	work in Italy in 18'73. It now num
	bers twelve churches, forty mission sta
tions, and about 1,500 communicants. It has day
and evening schools employing upward of forty
teachers, and also a theological school at Rome.
The United	Baptists, American and English, have
been in Italy since 1870 and 1871. All together,
they have eighty‑one stations, some forty ministers,
flue colporteurs, and about 1,500 communicants.
[George B.	Taylor (d. at Rome in 1906) was for
forty years	at the head of the American Baptist
Mission.] An independent missionary work is car
ried on by the Englishman Clarks in Spezia,
Arcola, Belluno, Levanto, Marola, Pordenone, and
Seren.
There are English churches in Florence, Genoa, Milan, Naples, Rome, and Venice, American Protestant churches in Florence and Rome, and Scotch Presbyterian churches in Genoa, Naples, Rome, and Venice. The Germans in Italy have formed a number of congregations at various places. They ', maintain schools in Florence, Genoa, Messina, Milan, Naples, Palermo, and Rome, and hospitals in Florence, Genoa, Milan, Naples, and Rome. Since 1880 the German ministers in Italy have had their annual conference.
Perhaps the most flourishing Evangelical congregation in Italy is the Evangelical Military Association in Rome, which was founded by L. Capellini
(d. 1898).
Of other educational and charitable institutions
under Evangelical control may be mentioned the
high schools for girls in Florence and 4. Benevo‑ Naples; the Anglo‑American Institute lent Insti‑ at Rome; the elementary schools of
lotions. Miss Carruthers at Pisa, S. Michele
degli Scalzi, and Cisanello di Ghezzano; Dr. CO‑
mandi's orphan asylum for boys at Florence; the
Feretti orphan asylum for girls at Florence; the
Could Institute at Rome, an educational institution for boys and girls; the work‑school for women at Turin; the Boyce Memorial Home at Vallecrosia, an asylum for orphans, both boys and girls; and the Evangelical Rescue‑Mission of Mrs. Hammond in Venice.
There a:e three Bible societies working in Italy,viz., the Italian Bible Society, which was founded in Rome
in 1871, the British and Foreign Bible a. Bible Society, and the National Bible Society
Societiesand Tract of Scotland, Since 1860 the British . and Foreign Bible Society has distributed in Italy more than 3,000,000 Bibles and Nets Testaments. The Italian Tract Society, founded
at Florence in 1855, has a printing‑p,Stal31)shment at Florence and salesrooms in a dozen Italian cities. To this tract society the entire Protestant Church in Italy is indebted for the great bulk of its polemical and educational literature. This society also publishes L'Itctlia Evartgelica, an illustrated family weekly; L Amico dei faytciulli, an illustrated
monthly for children; and L'Amico di casa, a popular calendar (annual edition, 35,000). Of less importance is the Baptist Tract Society in Turin.
Other Evangelical periodicals are La Rivista Christians, a scholarly monthly; Le Temoan, the weekly organ of the French‑speaking
e. Perlodi‑ Waldenaians; La Luce, a Waldensian
	oats.	weekly; It Christiano, the monthly
		organ of the Free Christian Church;
La Civiltd Evsngelica, a monthly published by the
Wesleyana; IL Piccolo Messagglere, the monthly of
the Evangelical Italian Church; L' Evangelists, a
weekly issued by the Methodists; Il Testimonio, a
Baptist monthly; and Il Labaro, a monthly pub
lished by the Old Catholics. (K. RONNEgE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The official Roman Catholic record is given in the annual, Gerarchia cattolica. More general works are: C.. Hemana, Catholic Italy, 2 vols., Florence, 1881; J. H. Eager, Romaniam in its Home, Philadelphia, 1899; A. Robertson, The Roman Catholic Church in Italy. London, 1903. On the Old Catholic movement in general consult: A. M. Searth, Start' of the Old Catholic and Kindred MoroemenEa, London, 1889; C. J. Loyson, Catholic Reform, ib. 1874; F. hfeyriek, The Old Catholic Aloxement, ib. 1877. On Protestantism in general consult: R. Baud, Sketches of Protestantism in Italy, Boston, 1847; J. A. Wylie, The Awakening of Italy, London, 1888; H. H. Farrell, Italy Struggling into Light, Cincinnati, 1880; J. Stoughton, Footprints of Italian Reformers, London, 1881; J. w. Brown, An Italian Campaign, ib. 1890 (the Evangelical movement 1845‑1387); E. Gebhardt, L'Italie mystique, Paris, 1890; A. R. Pennington, The Church in Italy, London, 1895; G. B. Taylor, Italy and the Italians, Phi1edelphis, 1898. On the Free Churches consult the Reports of the General Assembly, usually published under the titles Yerbali delta . . . Assembles Generate delta Chien Criatiane in Italia; The Free Christian Church in Italy, Evangelization Report, Florence, 1874. For the Waldenses see the literature under w1LDEN8ES.
ITALY, THE REFORMATION IN.
Two Periods (¢ 1).
Venice (f 21.
Naples (¢ 3).
The Inquisition in Naples (¢ 4).
In South and Central Italy (¢ 5).
The Later Period in Venice
(¢ s).
Italian Reformation writings (¢ 7).
	This article is concerned with the REfOrITlaG1011
in Italy only in its general features. Its more im
		portant characters are treated in sep
	><. Two crate articles (see CARACCIOLI, GAL,
	Periods. EAZZO; CURIONE, CELLO SECUNDO;
		MORATA, OLIhIPIA; OCHINO, BERNAR
DINO; PALEARIO, AONIO; RENEE OF FRANCE;
SPIERA, FRANCESCO; VALDEH; VERGERIO, PIETRO
PAOLO; VERMILILI, PIETRO MARTIRE). The first
noteworthy traces of the Reformation in Italy
appear in the north, at Venice, but the culmina
tion was reached in the south, at Naples, The
first and rising period lies between 1520, when writings of the German Reformation are first known to have crossed the Alps, and 1540 or 1541, the year marking the death of Vald6s, who wrought (~
elect circle at faplesl ag the ut g~?On
	6 g Y intellec‑
tool and ~['lglillll o~ the Italian Reformers. Almost
simultaneously with the breaking‑up of the Evan‑

gelical circle at Naples, there set in (1542) the deliberate and systematic reaction instigated from Rome; the bull of p'c I);L, Licet ab initio (see
INQUISITION IL, § 1), by the terms of which the Inquisition was organized after the Spanish model, and extended over all Italy (Naples excepted), is

Italy, the Reformation in
the storm signal. With unremitting activity until about 1570, this tribunal, personally directed by the popes, utilizing the entire political influence of the Curia, accomplished its work by driving a number of the chief advocates of reform to flight, by dungeon and fire and water, and smothered the movement. What still remained in the way of Evangelical tendencies during the later years of this second period had become divested of all efforts at internal church reform and stands in deliberate, most trenchant, opposition to Rome, falling in with certain radical tendencies which manifested themselves in Germany, but particularly in the Netherlands, where the leaders of a conservative Evangelical reformation steadily resisted them with force.
In Venice down to 1527 there is no evidence of repressive measures beyond repeated burning of
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
reformatory writings of German origin; z. Venice. but toward the close of 1530 the papal nuncio, Caraffa (later Paul IV.), interposed against the " heretics " with greater strictness, and even sentenced a Franciscan, Girolamo Galateo (b. in Venice, 1490), to death without obtaining confirmation for the act from the Senate. They kept him in prison seven years, then set him free, but in 1540 arrested him again, and, broken by his earlier sufferings, he died in the year following. His " Apology," dedicated to the Senate, printed at Bologna in 1541, outlines a noteworthy plan of internal church reform, which betrays the influence of German doctrines, and on the question of free will, the sacraments, the veneration of saints, and other points is truly Biblical. In a report which Caraffa prepared for the Curia (printed in Riviata Cristiana, Florence, 1878), two other leading heretics are mentioned. Bartolomeo Fonzio was a Venetian, incurred suspension from the priestly office in 1529, escaped to Germany, and was present at Augsburg in 1530. He was in correspondence with Butzer in 1531. It was probably Fonzio, despite his subsequent denial, who translated Luther's tract An den chrestlichen Adel into Italian (cf. ZKG, iv., 1880, pp. 467 aqq.). Later he was again active in Italy, and in 1558 was arrested in Gittadella, not far from Venice; he was sentenced to death and drowned, for forty‑four " erroneous doctrines," extracted from his writings. When Caraffa prepared his report, mentioned above, in 1532, there lived also at Venice the Florentine fugitive, Antonio Bruccioli, who rendered the movement of the Reformation great service by elucidating and printing Biblical writings in the Italian language. He was under suspicion, and so continued; and notwithstanding occasional retraction, he was repeatedly brought to trial. He died in prison in 1566. As in his case, so with others, such as Fra Baldo Lupetino of Albona in Istria, and Baldassare Altieri, of Aquila in Neapolitan territory, their religious development and its sequel belong both to the first and the second period of Italian Reformation history.
Meanwhile the reforming doctrine had found its real and vital center in Italy, in the circle of Juan de Vald6s at Naples. The biographer of Caraffa (Caraceioli, Vita di Papa Paolo IV.. M5. in British
Museum) with good reason declares that Naples was the" neat of heresy "; but the tradition is false
that would have it that the Lutheran 3. Naples. belief was carried thither by German soldiers after the sack of Rome in 1527. From about 1536 onwards company is found thereacholars of Vald6s, himself devoted to the fundamental doctrines of the German Reformation and influenced by mysticism‑which includes the most important vehicles of the Italian Reformation: Bernardino Ochino, Pietro Martire Vermigli, Pietro Carnesacchi, Benedetto di Mantua (reviser of the little book " Of the Benefit of Christ's Death," probably by A. Palerio (q.v.); Eng. tranal., London, reprint, 1855, also in W. M. Blackburn, Aonio Palerio, Philadelphia, 1866), Mario Galeata, Francesco d'Alvise of Caserta, Giovanni Bugio, Galeazzo Caraccioli, Marcantonio Flaminio, and others, who partly, it is true, never went beyond the attempt at a reform from within the Church. The central article about which all converge in the matter of doctrine is the tenet of justification by faith. Furthermore, it was immaterial to a Vald6s what the external structure of the Church might be, provided it did not abridge this religious condition. He was far from intending to raise the standard of revolt against church institutions, and he was no organizer; his teachings found their way beyond the circumference whose center was marked by his ideal‑pure character, illumined with profound piety ‑only by the accident that his writings were preserved as dear legacies by his friends. The chief service in this regard was rendered by the noblest of his pupils, Giulia Gonzaga, duchess of Traetto (820 VALDEB).
Among the pupils of Vald6s who did not exceed the boundary of a reform attempted from within
the Church was Marcantonio Flaminio q. The of Imola, highly endowed as a poet
Inquisition it was he who gave to the book " Of in Naples. the Benefit of Christ's Death" the form under which, according to the testimony of Vergerio, it became circulated through the land in more than forty thousand copies, though today not a single library of Italy has one impression from that period. The first blows of the reaction, when it was introduced in 1542 through the reorganization of the Inquisition at Rome (see INQUISITION), struck the two most eminent members of the circle surrounding Valdds, Ochino and Vermigli. Ochino was suspended from the preaching office; and he escaped, by flight, a summons to appear at Rome to give an account of himself. At the same time, Vermigli, who had risen to high rank in the order of the Augustinian canons, took to flight, whence he despatched to his doctrinal associates a testimonial of evangelistic faith in the guise of his Semplice dichiaragione sopra i dodici articoli dells Jede cristiarta. Presently the reaction directed its attention to a third member of the Neapolitan circle; viz., Pietro Carnesecchi (b. in Florence 1508), who had held high stations under the Curia. After he had avoided the Inquisition during a sojourn of many years abroad and in Venice, he was brought to trial by Pope Paul IV., and escaped for the time.
I after having been summoned twice, through the

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
pope's death, and the destruction of the documentary charges against Carnesecchi, on occasion of the storm upon the Inquisition's building in 1559. Pius V. retrieved the matter and Carnesecchi, whose correspondence with Giulia Gonzaga formed the basis of a second trial, was executed with other " heretics " on Oct. 1, 1567. Among the victims of the Inquisition, not a few were of Neapolitan origin; and they all belonged to the very great numbers whom the viceroy's complacency delivered, year in, year out, to the Curia, though the Spanish Inquisition was not allowed to operate in the kingdom proper, and an attempt to introduce it in 1547 had been frustrated by a sanguinary insurrection of the populace. The viceroy's complacent disposition was also proved at the death of Giulia Gonzaga in 1566, when he seized her correspondence and despatched it to Rome. By his long years of superintending the Inquisition Pius V. acquired the most exact acquaintance with the situation, and he renewed and intensified the tribunal's activity so that he won the name of Fra Michele dell' Inquisizione. A storm of persecution covered all parts of Italy in the years of his pontificate (15661572). Concerning the victims only defective information remains, but it put an end to vhe reforming movement.
With reference to the additional victims apprehended in the south, some information is given in
Luigi Amabile's Il canto ogixio dells
5. In inquisizione in Napoli (2 vols., Citt&
South and di Castello, 1892). Nothing short of Central wholesale murder was perpetrated in
Italy.	that quarter in 1560 and 1561 upon the
Evangelical inhabitants of San Sisto and La Guardia. Moreover, the Holy Office's barge plied regularly back and forth between Naples and Ostia, incessantly bringing new " suspects " before the tribunal. The numbers of emigrants‑or rather fugitives‑for the faith from Sicily and the kingdom continually increased‑so far, at least, as this item can be checked at Geneva, where many sought refuge (ef. J. Galiffe, Le Refuge italien de Genfwe, Geneva, 1881). For southern and central Italy, some acceptable information is furnished by a protocol‑book of the Roman Inquisition for the years 1564‑‑67, which contains the sentences decreed against heretics during that period (cf. Reviata CristircnQ, 1879‑80). How matters looked and fared in the Roman Inquisition's prison is reported by the, younger Camerarius, who was himself under arrest there, in 1565, whose Relatio very was printed by J. G. Sehelhorn (De vital fads ac meritis Philippi Camerarii, Nuremburg, 1749). Camerariua was confined in the upper story, " where one is in the bakeoven ; others were below, " in so damp a hole that it is past understanding how men can exist in that grave." Frequently monks carne in to make attempts at conversion, Dominicans for the most part, once Petrus Canisius, the Jesuit. Among their fellow captives were spies. Camerarius and his fellow countryman peter Rieter, were liberated through the rigorous intercession of Emperor Maximili:zn II. to whom appeal had been made
On June 23 1566 there
of twenty‑thr
Italy, the Reformation in
the most part, had been sentenced to perpetual
confinement, or to the rigor of the galleys. After
that, sentence was pronounced upon the Neapolitan
nobleman, Pompeo de' Monti, who was beheaded
near the bridge of Sant' Angelo, on July 4, 1566.
Still other victims who were executed in Rome are
named in the roll of Italian Reformation martyrs;
three of them so early as under Julius III., Fanmo
of Faenza, Domenico of Bassano, and the Augustin
ian Giuliano; later, two others, Giovanni Buzio
(also named Mollio), of Montalcino, and an unknown
of Perugia; under Paul IV., the noble youth Pom
ponio Algieri of Nola was burned, and how many
at that time were still confronted with a similar fate may be inferred from the fact that on the death of this pope in 1559, when the people's rage broke open the prison doors, no fewer than seventy heretics were set free.
Better information exists as to what occurred
from the beginning of the energetic reaction at Venice and in its dominion, than with
6. The reference to events and the scope of
Later	repression in southern and central
Period in Italy. At Venice, the outcome of the
Italy.	movement was connected with the
general political situation, and the senate, from the time of the downfall of the Protestant party in Germany through the Schmalkald War, waived whatever considerations it had previously conceded to their wishes, and showed itself much more amenable to the Curia than was formerly the case. Meantime a new religious movement had sprung up in Venice. In 1550, Julius III. affirmed that 1,000 Venetians might be counted as belonging to the Anabaptist sect. A new group thus comes to the light, inasmuch as the earlier advocates of the Reformation belonged not to the radical, but to the conservative Reformation, as espoused by Luther. Both currents are in collateral progress from the middle of the century, and both command eminent names; but the attitude of mutual antagonism on the part of their champions contributed even more than the brute force of their common foe to nullify the movement itself. Among advocates of the conservative Reformation are to be named
men such as Pietro Speziali (in CAW& arid
FfariCCSCO Splera (q.v.). Now, too, the previously mentioned Fra Baldo 2upetino was seized by his fate; and only for a little while longer could Baldassare Altieri of A,4uila, who had been in correspondence with Luther, Bullinger, and others, still work in the wake of the Schcnalkald party's defeat after he was compelled to leave Venice in 1549. A transition to the steadily growing Anabaptist party is afforded by Francesco Negri of $aSSario; in a measure, as well, by Celio Secondo Curione, The proper father, however, of the Italian Anabaptists

was Ca of Sicily, who, after his conversion, styled himself Renato." His system is quite spiritualistic; whoever is elected receives the " spirit , the children of the " spirit " merely slumber in death't to enter upon a higher form of being thereafter; he rest fall away to destruction,

The sacraments are only emblems; Christ is above
was public abjuration " all a divinely favored man; and more of the same
e e who were under charge, who, for sort. Their theological foundations were fixed in a

Italy, the Reformation in No of Chartres
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
" council," organized, by sixty of their representatives, at Venice in 1550; though not, indeed, without the separation of a more moderate from the radical faction, so that henceforth there are three distinct groups, instead of two, as previously, of Protestantism in Italy. In the subsequent fate of the Anabaptist congregations, which became closely affiliated with the center of the moderate Anabaptist cause at Nikolsburg in Moravia, two brilliant martyr names are encountered in the period when the storm began to rage: Giulio Gherlandi and Francesco dells Saga, who fell a sacrifice to the Venetian Inquisition in 1565. Among advocates of the Reformation in Venetian territory may lastly be named Bishop Pier Paolo Vergerio, because, according to his own acknowledgment, the truth of the Gospel indelibly impressed itself upon him at Padua, by the sick‑bed of the unfortunate Spiera; and because the Inquisition at Venice subjected him to a tedious course of trial. This disputatious battier wielded an inexhaustible store of fresh weapons against the Roman Church out of the armory of his own experience and exact knowledge of the hierarchy; although he did not equal the men of the first generation in disinterested devotion to truth, in courage and joy of sacrifice. Neither can his writings be justly compared with the other products of the movement, as some of them are revealed in the Biblioteca dells Rifornta Italiarut (6 vole., Florence, 1881‑86).
Among the writings of the Italian Reformation, besides the invaluable yield of Juan de Vald€s, the previously cited little book " Of the
7. Italian Benefit of Christ's Death " fills an honReforma‑ orable place. There may also be mention tinned the fact that the Sommario delta
	Writings. Sacra Scrittura was no less effective, al
		though it was not Italian originally, but
a recast Middle Low German (Dutch) work, dating
from the decade 1520‑30. A collection of the litera
ture of the Reformation in Italy after the plan fol
lowed by E. Bohmer for the Spanish Reformation in
the Bibliotheca Wi,$'eniana. is much to be desired.
Rich contributions toward the project would be sup
plied by the serial volumes of Rivista Cristiana from
1873; and a considerable portion of the original
issues are to be found collected in the library accu
mulated by Count Piero Guicciardini, and made over
to the national library of Florence. Long forgotten
and concealed, hardly discoverable in their own
country, these writings bear witness to the high
mental significance of that minority which once
existed in the land of the popes and fought under
the banner of reform. 	K. BENRATH.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The best guide to the sources is K. Ben
	rath, Ueber die Quellen der italieniachen Reformationage
	achichte, Bonn, 1878; idem, in ZKG, i. 81326, iv. 394
	413. Riviata criatiana, a periodical published in Florence,
	1873 sqq., contains much material of the first importance.
	Instructive hints as to sources are given in F. H. Reuach,
	Der Index der ver6otener Bi7cher, i. 373 sqq., Bonn, 1883.
	Consult further: J. Bonnet, Vie de Olympia Morata, Paris,
	1850, new ed., 1882, Eng. transl., London, 1852; idem,
	Aonio Paleario, Paris, 1882, Eng. tranal., London, 1884;
	idem, Rt!cita du 2vi. ailcle, Paris, 18841 idem, Nouveaux
	and Derniera REcita, ib. 1878; idem, many contributions to
	Bulletin du proteatantiame fraWniae; D. Erdmann, Die
	Reformation and Are Martyrer in Italien, Berlin, 1855;
	J. Stoughton, Footprints of Italian Reformers, London,
70
1881; K. Benrath, Geachichte der Reformation in Venedip,
Halle, 1887; idem, Bernardino Ochiuo von Sierra, ib. 1892;
B. Fontana, Renata . . di Ferrara, 3 vole.. Rome, 1889
1899; A. R. Pennington, The Church in Italy, London,
1895; E. Combs, 1 noatri proteatanti, vol. ii., Florence (un
finished, deals only with Venice); A. Agostini, Pietro Car
neaecchi a il movimento Waldeasano, ib. 1899; Cambridge
Modern History, vol, ii., The Reformation, pp. 578‑599,
New York, 1904; E. H. Walshe, Under the Inquisition;
The Refonnalionin Italy, London, 1904; C. Delob, La Foire
lipieuae en Italic au xiv. aipcle, Paris, 1906; C. von Klenze,
The Interpretation of Italy, Chicago, 1907; and the litera
ture under the articles on the Reformers named in the text.
ITHACIUS CLARUS. See PRI$CILLIAN, PRIBCILLIANIBTa.
ITUREA: A region named in Luke iii. 1. The name of a people, " the Itureans," is older than " Iturea" as the name of a region, and is to be connected with the Jetur of Gen. xxv.15, a son of Ishmael denoting a nomadic stock of the Syro‑Arabian desert, whose home, according to the Genesis passage, was in the neighborhood of Teima on the western border of Najd, between Medina and the oasis of Jauf. I Chron. v. 18‑22 tells of a victorious campaign of the Hebrews of the East‑Jordan land against Jetur and other nomads in pre‑exilic times, which shows that Jetur must have changed its place of abode to the neighborhood of the Jabbok; but the mention in Luke iii. 1 can have nothing to do with this passage. Aristobulus I. (105‑104 B.C.) fought the Itureans and annexed part of their territory (Josephus, Ant. XIII., xi. 3), and Strabo (XVL, ii. 10, 18) in Roman times locates them on the plain of Massyas (Marsyas) between Laodicea and Chalcis, i.e., in Caele‑Syria (q.v.), and he is corroborated by an inscription of Quirinius (Mommsen in Ephemeris epigraPhica, iv. 537‑542, Berlin, 1881). It is to be concluded therefore that Jetur and the Itureans are the same stock, and that they came north with the migrations of the Arab tribes, settled down, and adopted the manners of the people of the region.
Iturea as the name of a region is connected with this last phase of the people's history: The first ruler of whom mention is made is Ptolemy, son of Menneus, who reigned 85‑40 B.C., and had a kingdom of considerable size, including some cities on the coast, and the region about the sources of the Jordan as far east as the neighborhood of Damascus (Josephus, Ant. XIII., xvi. 3). This Ptolemy paid Pompey 1,000 talents in order to make his rule secure with the Romans (Josephus, Ant. XIV., iii. 2), and he protected the last of the Hasmoneans. His son Lysanias is called king of the Itureans by Dio Cassius, and was executed by order of Antony, 36 B.C. (Josephus, Ant. XV., iv. 1). Later there were only remnants of the great Iturean kingdom, with Chalcis as the capital, one of which was Abilene, ruled by the tetrarch Lysanias (Luke iii. 1); another was the region of Soi:mus, north of Heliopolis; still another was the region of Chalcis, given by Claudius to Herod, grandson of Herod the Great; and finally the territory of Zenodorus, which came into the possession of Herod the Great (Josephus, Ant. XV., x. 1). After the death of Herod, Augustus joined a portion of the territory of Zenodorus to the territory of the tetrarch Philip (4 >LC.‑34 A.D.), that part which included Batanea, Trachonitis, and Aura‑

nitis; thus Philip ruled a part of the Iturean ter
ritory, a fact which partly justifies the statement
in Luke iii. 1. 	(H. GUTHE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, pp. 544 aqq., London, 1897; F. MOnter, De rebus lturaeorum, Copenhagen, 1824; M. Krenkel, Joaephus and Lukas, pp. 90‑95, Leipaic, 1894; SchOrer, Geachichte, i. 707‑725 Eng. trsnsl., T., ii. 325‑344; DB, ii. 521‑522; EB, ii. 2298‑2297.
IVERACH, iv'er‑dx, JAMES: United Free Presbyterian Church, Scotland; b. in Caithness June 1, 1839. He was educated at the University of Edinburgh (1859‑63) and New College, Edinburgh (18637), and was ordained to the ministry in 1869. He held pastorates at West Calder, Edinburgh (1869‑74), and Ferryhill, Aberdeen (18741887); was professor of apologetics and dogmatics in United Free Church College, Aberdeen (18871907), and principal (1905‑07); and has been professor of New‑Testament language and literature (since 1907). He has written Life of Moses (London, 1881); Is God Knowable Q (1884); St. Paul, his Life and Times (1890); Christianity and Evolution (1894); The Truth of Christianity (1895); Theism, in the Light of Present Science and Philosophy (1900); Descartes, Spinoza, and the New Philosophy (1904); and Other Side of Greatness, anti Other Sermons (1906).
IVES, oivz, LEVI SILLIMAN: Roman Catholic; b. at Meriden, Conn., Sept. 16, 1797; d. in New York Oct. 13, 1867. He served for about a year in the War of 1812 and subsequently studied at Hamilton College. He was originally a Presbyterian, but joined the Protestant Episcopal Church in 1819. After taking orders in 1822, he held charges at Batavia, N. Y., Philadelphia, and Lancaster, Pa., and in New York, till 1831, when he became bishop of North Carolina. He displayed great zeal and ability in the religious education of the slaves, but his Tractarian views brought him into serious difficulties. While in Rome in 1852 he formally submitted to the pope and became a Roman Catholic. The following October he was solemnly deposed from his episcopal office. On his return to New York he became professor of rhetoric in St. Joseph's Seminary, Yonkers, N. Y., also lecturer on English literature and rhetoric in the Convent of the Sacred Heart. He was prominent in the charitable work of the Roman Catholic Church. He published New Manual of Private Devotions (New York, 1831); The Apostles' Doctrine and Fellowship: Five Sermons (1844); On the Obedience of Faith (1849); and The Trials of a Mind in its Progress to Catholicism (Boston, 1853, London, 1854). BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. S. Perry, The Episcopate in Anaeriea, p. 57, New York, 1895.
IVIMEY, JOSEPH: English Baptist historian; b. at Ringwood (17 m. w.s.w. of Southampton) May 22, 1773; d. in London Feb. 8, 1834. In early life he followed his father's trade, that of a tailor, at Lymington and Portsea; became a church‑member in 1790, an itinerant minister in 1794, assistant minister at Wallingford, Berkshire, in 1803; and pastor of the Baptist church in Eagle Street, Holborn, London, in 1805. He was a pronounced opponent of Roman Catholicism, and so denounced the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts; he was also
RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA	Italy, the Reformation is
No of Chartres
interested in the abolition of slavery and in missionary operations. His chief significance is as historian of his denomination, by his History of the English Baptists (4 vole., London, 1834), which, however, is criticized as to be used with caution on account of its mistakes. He wrote on other subjects quite voluminously, his works including Brief Sketch of the History of Dissenters (1810), and John Milton, his Life and Times (1833).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. Pritchard, Memoir of the Life and Writinpa of . . . Joseph Ivimey, London, 1835; DNB, xxix. 81‑82.
IVO, f"vo', OF CHARTRES (IVO or YVO CARNOTENSIS) : Bishop of Chartres (47 m. s.w: of Paris); b. in the district of Beauvais c. 1040; d. Dec. 23, 1116. He studied under Lanfranc at Bee, became a canon at Neale in Picardy, then provost of the abbey of St. Quentin in Beauvais c. 1078, and bishop of Chartres in 1090. As the bishop before him had been deposed for simony, and commanded some support, Ivo's election was contested; but his cause was espoused by Pope Urban IL, who had given him consecration. The same pope protected him when subjected to arrest by King Philip I. of France, because No had not acquiesced in the repudiation of Queen Berths, and the king's liaison with Countess Bertrada of Anjou.‑ In the investiture strife (see INVESTITURE), No took a stand of sagacious mediation between the rights of the State and the Church (cf. his Epiat. ad Hugonem archiepiseopum Lugdunensem in MGH, Lib. de life, ii., 1893, pp. 642, 649, and his letter of 1106 to Pope Paschal II, in MPL, clxii. 19). When subsequently Paschal II. was sharply attacked for his attitude to Emperor Henry V., in the year 1111, No vindicated him, and frustrated the design of Archbishop Joscerannus of Lyons, who aimed to have Paschal's concessions to Henry adjudged heretical by means of a great French council (MGH, ut sup., pp. 649 sqq.). No was highly esteemed in France, and was also on friendly terms with Ansehn of Canterbury. The date of his canonization is uncertain; his day is May 20.
The most important among Ivo's writings are his collections of canons, wherein he anticipated Gratian, the Cdlectio tripartite, the Decretum, and the Panormia. Both as reflecting his own life and as bearing upon the history of his time, his letters are of weight; and there are also twenty‑four of his sermons preserved, some of which are detailed treatises on dogmatic and liturgical questions. He also wrote against Berengar of Tours. Certain historical works of his friend, Hugo of Fleury, have been attributed to him erroneously. Cexr. MIRBT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The works, first printed Paris, 1647, are reprinted with a life in MPL, clxi.‑clxii. . Consult: A. Abry, Yvea de Chartres, sa vie et sea ouvrapes, Strasburg, 1841; F. Ritzke, De Ivone, epiacopo Carnotenai, Wratislaw, 1883; J. Dombrowski, Ivo, Biachof von Chartres, aein Leben and Wirken, Breslau, 1881; A. Sieber, Biacltof No von Chartres, K&nigaberg, 1895; R. von Scherer, Handbuch des Kirchenrechta, vol. i., 53, Graz, 1886; C. Mirbt, Die Publiziatak im Zeitalter Gregory VII., pp. 512 aqq., Leipsie, 1894; F. Fournier, Lea Collections canoniquea attributes d Yves de Chartres, in Bibliotheque de flcole des Chartres,
vole. lvii.‑Iviu., 1896‑97; idem, Yves de Chartres et le droit canonique, in Revue des questions hiatoriquea, Izvii.; 1898; Hauck, KD, iii. 862, 904, 914; and literature indicated in Richardson, Encyclopedia, p. 515.
education in the Indian Training Schools at Carlisle, Pa., and Hampton, Va.
After 1877 his main interests were connected with Alaska, and in 1879 he was commissioned by President Hayes, together with Rev. Dr. Henry Kendall, to prepare a special report on the native tribes of southeastern Alaska as a basis for legislation. Six years later he established the first canoe mail service in Alaska, and in the following year secured the enactment of a law giving limited territorial government, and providing for the establishment of public schools in the same territory.
	r_	,ooc	1.„	....	,.,	.	,	,.:	E	a	n,._,.‑	1	n ___a	..	r	tea
living of Winston, Durham, which he held with
Newcastle. About the same time he was made a
royal chaplain. In 1630 he became president of
Corpus Christi, a post which he filled till his death.
In 1632 he was presented to the crown living of
Witney, Oxfordshire, which he resigned in 1637.
He became prebendary of Winchester in 1635, and
dean of Peterborough in 1639. He was originally a
Calvinist of Puritan leanings, but later became an
Arminian. He ranks high as a theologian, and his
theology has particularly commended itself to mod
ern High‑churchmen. His great work was his Cam‑

dackwn	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	72
J: The symbol employed to designate the Jehovistic (Yahwistic, Judean) document which, according to the critical school, is one of the components of the Hexateuch (q.v.). See' HEBREW LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE, IL, § 4.
JABAL. See CAIN, KENITEa.
JABIN, ja3'bin: A Canaanitic king who appears in two narratives in the Old Testament (Josh. xi. 1‑15, and Judges iv. 1 aqq.). In the first he appears as overlord of the Canaanitic kings of the region of Mt. Naphtali, with his capital at Hazor, and as conquered by Joshua at the " waters of Merom." This narrative purports to give the account of the conquest of northern Canaan as Josh. x. to give that of the south. In Judges iv. the history of Jabin is peculiarly bound up with that of Sisera in the narrative of Deborah and Barak's campaign. Verses 2 and 7 make Siaera Jabin's general, though in the song in chap. v. Siaera is king and in command of kings. Similarly in iv. 12‑22 Sisera is the chief personage, while Jabin hardly appears, verse 17b being an editorial addition, so that the narrative concerning Siaera is in chap. iv. the basis of the story. Two hypotheses have been held concerning this Jabin: that the two accounts refer to different persons, and that they refer to the same person. Judges iv. still retains a trace of the correct tradition that after the time of Joshua a war was conducted against Jabin, king of Hazor. (H. GUTHE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Besides H. Guthe, Geaehichte des Volkea Israel, pp b1‑52 Freiburg, 1899; DB, ii. 524; EB, ii. 2302‑03, 2838‑37; and C. F. Kent, Student's Old Testament vol. z., 1904 the commentaries on Joshua and Judges should be consulted, particularly those on JudgesbyBudde and Moore, and the works on the history of Israel, especially those of Ewald, Kittel, and Wellhauaen.
JABLONSKI, yd‑blen'aki, DANIEL ERNST: Bishop of the Moraviana; b. at Nassenhuben, near Daizzig, Nov. 20, 1660; d. at Berlin May 25, 1741. He was educated at the gymnasium of Liasa and studied theology at Frankfort‑on‑the‑Oder and at Oxford. In 1683 he was appointed Reformed preacher in Magdeburg, and in 1686 became pastor of the Polish congregation and rector of the gymnasium at Lissa. In 1691 he went to Prussia and became court preacher at Konigaberg; but he always remained faithful to the Moravians in their exile and used his political influence to assist them in every way. At the synod of Lissa in 1699 he was chosen senior of the Unity and received their episcopal ordination. In 1737 he consecrated Count Zinzendorf bishop, and thus he formed the transition from the old stock of the Moravian Brethren to the younger branch of the Herrnhuters. His influence upon the development of the Prussian state is still more important‑ Since Sigiamund of Brandenburg had adopted the Reformed creed (1613; see SIGISM"D' JOHANN), a union of the evangelical denominations had become a necessity for the Hohenzollerna, and Jablonski was the man to give this tendency a concrete form and a theological basis. Similar efforts were made at the court of Hanover
by Leibnitz and by Molanus (qq.v.). Anthony Ulrich of Brunswick and the court of Goths also sympathized with these unionistic movements. In
the meantime Jablonski had become court preacher
at Berlin (1697), and as Brandenburg was being
transformed about this time into the state of
Prussia, he considered it his mission to unite all
Protestants under the leadership of Prussia. He en
tered into negotiations with Leibnitz and Molanus,
but the undertaking failed on account of the oppo
sition of the clergy. Another ideal which Jablonski
tried to realize was the introduction of the episco
pate into the Evangelical Church, which met a re
sponse in King Frederick's appointment of his court
preacher's bishops. But failure resulted in 1713 when
Frederick William I. ascended the throne. Against
the demoralization of church life Jablonski at
tempted to introduce ethical societies after the
model of the English societies for the reformation of
manners. The Berlin Academy of Sciences owes
its existence to his advocacy with that of Leibnitz.
Jablonski was its first vice‑president and director of
the philologico‑historical class, and in 1733 he be
came its president. His literary activity was not
less important. He made a careful edition of the
Old‑Testament text which J. H. Michaelis adopted
as the basis of his well‑known Kommentarbibel
(1720); at Jablonski's instigation the Berlin edition
of the Babylonian Talmud was printed. He trans
lated Bentley's Confutation of Atheism into Latin
(Berlin, 1696); his Historic consensus Sendomirieytsia
(Berlin, 1731) is important in the sphere of church
history, likewise his Jura et libertates dissidertEium
in regrzo Poloniae (1708). 	(P. KLEINERT.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. E. Kapp, Sammlunp verlrauler Briefs des
	Freiherrn von Leibnitz and Hofpredipera Jablonski, Leip
	eie, 1747; C. W. Hering, Geachichte der kirchliche Uniona‑
verauehe, ii, 313 oqq„ ib.1838; G. E. Guhrauer G. W.
Freiherr von Leibnitz, ii. 177 aqq, Breslau, 1848; A. L.
Richter Geachichte der evangeliachen Kirchenverfaeanng in Deutschland, Leipsic, 1851; F. Brandes, Geachichte der kirchlichen Politik des Houses Brandenburg, vol. i., Goths,
1872; A. Ritaehl, Geachichte des Pietiamue, iii. 302 aqq., Bonn, 1888• .1. Kvacala, Funfzig Jahre im Preuaeiachen HofPredigerdienate, Dorpat, 1898; idem, Neue Beitrfipa zum Briefwechael zwiachen D. E. Jablonski and G. W. Leibnitz, ib. 1899.
JACKSON, FREDERICK JOHN FOABES: Church of England; b. at Ipswich (18 m. s.e. of Bury St. Edmunds), Suffolk, Aug. 10, 1855. He was educated at Eton and at Trinity College, Cambridge (B.A., 1879), and was curate of Otterahaw, Winchester (187981), St. Giles, Cambridge (188284), and St. Botolph's, Cambridge (1884‑91). He was appointed lecturer on divinity in Jesus Colle~ej

Cambridgel W3,0 *CCed NloT ift 199,Aand made
dean in 1895 and tutor in the following year. Since 1897 he has been examining chaplain to the bishop

of Peterborough, since 1901 honorary canon of Peterborough cathedral, and was Hulsean lees turer in 1902. Theologically he is an orthodox member of the Church of England, and heartily accepts her dogmatic teachings. He has written

History of the Christian Church (London, 1891);
Biblical History 0
	f the Hebrews (Cambridge, 1g03);

7s
and Christian Difficulties in the Second and Twentieth Centuries (Hulsean lectures for 1902; London, 1903).
JACKSON, GEORGE ANSON: Congregationalist; b. at North Adams, Mass., Mar. 17, 1846; d. at Swampscott, Mass., May 8, 1907. He was graduated from Yale (Ph.B., 1868) and Andover Theological Seminary (1871); was pastor at Leavenworth.. Kan. (1871‑73), Southbridge, Mass. (1873‑78), and Swampscott, Mass. (1878‑97), and librarian of the General Theological Library, Boston, after 1897. He wrote: The Christian Faith (Boston, 1875); The Apostolic Fathers (New York, 1879); Fathers of the Third Century (1881) ; Post‑Nicene Greek Fathers (1883); and Post‑Nicene Latin Fathers (1883).

JACKSON, SHELDON: Presbyterian; b. at Minaville, N. Y., May 18, 1834; d. at Asheville, N. C., May 2, 1909. He was graduated at Union College in 1855, and Princeton Theological Seminary in 1858. He was a colporteur of the Presbyterian Board of Publication in 1856, and agent of the American Systematic Beneficence Society in 1857. In 1858 he was ordained to the Presbyterian ministry, and in the same year was appointed missionary to the Choctaw Indians at Spencer Academy, I. T. From 1859 to 1869 he was a missionary in western Wisconsin and southern Minnesota, being also pastor at La Crescent, Minn., from 1859 to 1863, and an agent of the United States Christian Commission to the Army of the Cumberland for three months in 1863, as well as associate pastor with George Ainslee at Rochester, Minn., and principal and professor of higher mathematics at Rochester Female Institute from 1864 to 1869. Throughout this time he itinerated constantly, and in these ten years organized over twenty churches. He declined the superintendency of Presbyterian missions in Minnesota in 1864, but in 1869 he accepted an appointment as superintendent of Presbyterian missions for northern and western Iowa, Nebraska, Dakota, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and Utah. Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, eastern Nevada, and Alaska were later added to his district, thus giving him Presbyterian supervision over nearly half the territorial area of the United States at that time. It was largely through his efforts that the Woman's Board of Home Missions was organized in 1878. In 1879 and 1880 he was commissioned by the Government to collect Indian children from the Pueblo, Apache, Pima, and Papago tribes for education in the Indian Training Schools at Carlisle, Pa., and Hampton, Va.
After 1877 his main interests were connected with Alaska, and in 1879 he was commissioned by President Hayes, together with Rev. Dr. Henry Kendall, to prepare a special report on the native tribes of southeastern Alaska as a basis for legislation. Six years later he established the first canoe mail service in Alaska, and in the following year secured the enactment of a law giving limited territorial government, and providing for the establishment of public schools in the same territory. In 1885 he was. appointed General Agent of Education in Alaska. In 1891 he began the successful introduction of Siberian reindeer into Alaska to
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
provide the Eskimos with food, and in 1897 was a special agent of the United States Government in transporting a colony of Laplanders with their reindeer to Alaska. In 1897 he was commissioned by the Secretary of Agriculture to report on the agricultural possibilities of the Yukon River, and in 1899 established the first reindeer post‑office routes in America.
He was a member of the executive committee of the International Sunday School Association since 1887, and in 1893 was appointed an advisory member of the religious congress held in connection with the Chicago World's Fair. He furnished exhibits of Alaskan ethnology to every national exposition from 1885 to 1905, and presented a valuable collection of ethnological material to Princeton Theological Seminary, which was later transferred to Princeton University. He was one of the founders of Westminster College at Salt Lake City. He edited the Rocky Mountain Presbyterian at Denver from 1872 to 1882, when he presented it to the Board of Home Missions and edited it in New York City as The Presbyterian Home Missionary from 1882 to 1885. He also edited. the illustrated missionary monthly North Star at Sitka, Alaska, from 1887 to 1894. In addition to assisting in editing The World's Best Orations (11 vols., St. Louis, 1899) and The World's Best Essays (10 vols., 1900), he prepared for the United States Government twenty annual reports on education in Alaska since 1881 and fifteen on the introduction of domestic reindeer into Alaska since 1890, and wrote Alaska and Missions on the North Pacific Coast (New York, 1880).
BIHLIOaRAPHY: R. L. Stewart, Sheldon Jackson, Pathfinder
and Prospector of the Missionary Vanguard in the Rocky
Mountains and Alaska, New York, 1908.

JACKSON, THOMAS: The name of two English theologians.
1. Church of England divine; b. at Witton‑onthe‑Wear (10 m. s.w. of Durham) Dec. 21, 1579; d. Sept. 21, 1640. He studied at Queen's and at Corpus Christi College, Oxford (B.A., 1599; M.A., 1603; B.D., 1610; D.D., 1622), where he was made probationer fellow in 1606 and subsequently repeatedly elected vice‑president of Corpus Christi. At Oxford he won a reputation for his theological learning and delivered weekly lectures on theology both at Corpus Christi and at Pembroke. In 1623 he was instituted to the living of St. Nicholas, Newcastle‑on‑Tyne, and in 1625 he was presented to the living of Winston, Durham, which he held with Newcastle. About the same time he was made a royal chaplain. In 1630 he became president of Corpus Christi, a post which he filled till his death. In 1632 he was presented to the crown living of Witney, Oxfordshire, which he resigned in 1637. He became prebendary of Winchester in 1635, and dean of Peterborough in 1639. He was originally a Calvinist of Puritan leanings, but later became an Arminian. He ranks high as a theologian, and his theology has particularly commended itself to modern High‑churchmen. His great work was his Commentaries on the Apostles' Creed (12 bks., London, 1613‑57), of which books ten and eleven were edited by Barnabas Oley. Book twelve first appeared in

Jackson on	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	74
complete form in Jackson's Works (3 vole., 1672‑73). Jackson also published three collections of sermons, Nazareth and Bethlehem (Oxford, 1617); Christ's Answer unto John's Question (London, 1625); and Diverse Sermons (Oxford, 1637). His Theological Works, with the Life of Jackson by Edmund Vaughan, have been reprinted at Oxford (12 vole., 1844).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. A Wood, AUtenae Oxosienaea, ed. P. Bliss ii. 664 and Faati, i. 281, 299, 339 401, 4 vole., London 1813‑20; DNB, xxix. 107‑108 (where notices of scattered references are given).
2. English Wesleyan; b. at Sancton, near Market Weighton (18 m. e.s.e. of York), Yorkshire, Dec. 12, 1783; d. at Shepherd's Bush, London, Mar. 10, 1873. He joined the Methodist Society in 1801, his education having been attained through reading. From 1804 till 1824 he was an itinerant in the Wesleyan connection, occupying important circuits. He was editor of the connectional magazines, 1824‑42, and professor of divinity in the Theological College at Richmond, Surrey, 1842‑61. His more important works are: The Life of John Goodwin (London, 1822); Memoirs of the Life and Writings of the Rev. Richard Watson (1834); The Centenary of Wesleyan Methodism (1839); The Life of the Rev. Charles Wesley (2 vole., 1841); The Life of the Rev. Robert Newton (1855); The Institutions of Christianity (1868); and Recollections of My Own Life and Times (ed. B. Frankland, 1873). Jackson also edited numerous works, including The Works of the Rev. John Wesley (14 vole., 1829‑31); A Library of Christian Biography (12 vole., 1837‑40); The Lives of the Early Methodist Preachers (3 vole., 18371838; 3d ed., 6 vole., 1865‑66); Anthony Farindon's Sermons (4 vole., 1849); and The Journal of the Rev. Charles Wesley (2 vole., 1849).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Consult, besides the Recollections, ut sup„
DNB, xxix. 108‑109.
JACOB (or ISRAEL), THE PATRIARCH.
The Names and Their Dieaning (§ 1). Jacob's Youth (§ 2). His Life in Haran (§ 3). His Later Life (§ 4). Characteristics of the Sources (§ 5). Jacob's Character (§ 61. Historicity of the Narratives (§ 7).
	Jacob, or Israel, the son of Isaac, was the ancestor
	who gave his name to the covenant people. Jacob
	means " one who holds the heel " or
z. The	" one who treads on the heel " (Gen.
	Names and xxv. 26), and is also explained as " one
Their	who overreaches" (cf. Jer. ix. 4) by
	Meaning. means of his practised cunning (Gen.
	xxvii. 36). Israel, on the other hand,
	which became the designation of the people, was
	given him by God as a special distinction after he
	had proved his courage and gained a victory (Gen .
	iii. 28). Jacob is probably an abbreviation of *
	for, among the Palestinian towns captured
	by Thothmes III. and mentioned in his inscriptions
	at Karnak, names appear which may be recognized
	as Ya'kobh‑el and YosepJa‑el, a conclusion all the more
	probable since the name Ya'kubh‑ilu appears in
	Babylonian contract‑tablets. The inference usually
	drawn from this inscription that in the sixteenth
	century the Jacob or Joseph tribes were already
established in Canaan is over‑hasty, since the analogy of the other names indicates rather that communities are meant. Bathgen explains Jacob‑el as " El recompenses "; an alternative is " El wrestles " (Gen. xxxii. 24 sqq.).
Jacob's youth was one untiring effort to secure for himself the birthright which belonged to his
twin‑brother Esau. This struggle had z. Jacob's even a prenatal origin (Gen. xxv. Youth. 22‑23). In contrast with the coarse
and violent Esau, Jacob was quiet and peaceable (Gen. xxv. 27), but shrewd, and able to use cleverly the weaknesses of his more sensuous brother (verse 29). In this he was aided by his mother, while the hunter found favor in the eyes of his father. Isaac; deceived by his wife, unwit‑
tingly bestowed the blessings of birthright upon Jacob (Gen. xxvii.; see ISAAC), who in consequence was forced to abandon for a time the land of promise, and transferred his abode to Haran, the native land of his mother. In the course of his wanderings Jacob came to Bethel, where Yahweh appeared to him in a dream.
The second period of Jacob's life was passed with his kindred in Haran, where he founded his house.
He asked of Laban as a reward for 3. His Life seven years' labor the hand of his in Haran. beautiful daughter, Rachel; but her sister Leah was substituted by the mercenary father, and Jacob was forced to serve seven years longer to gain his beloved Rachel. The latter, however, was unfruitful, while Leah brought him four sons: Reuben , Simeon, Levi, and Judah. As a result of a substitution of WAY% f9T their mistresses, Jacob's family was further increased by four sons, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher. These were followed by two sons of Leah, Issachar and Zebulun. At last Rachel bore her husband's favorite son, Joseph. As God's blessing seemed to be attached to Jacob's person, Laban was loath to lose his services; to his own disadvantage, however, for although the recompense which Jacob required might seem small, it always turned out to be unexpectedly large, and though Laban frequently changed the conditions (Gen. xxxi. 7), the advantage was always with Jacob. The tense rela‑
tions between them hastened Jacob's secret depar
ture with his wives and goods. Laban pursued and
overtook him at the mount of Gilead, but, although
embittered by the loss of his household gods, which
Rachel had carried off WithOUt ha ~U~aflfi NO‑
edge, ale was forced to settle the strife amicably. The name Gilead (explained as Gal'edh, " hill of witness," Gen. xxxi. 48) was from this time a reminder of the treaty thus concluded.
	A third phase of Jacob's history began with his
I reentrance into the promised land and his settle‑
		ment in the heart of the country. But
	4• His first an understanding with Esau was
Later Life. necessary, and then to take possession
	of the disputed heritage, for which a
severe struggle was required. Jacob succeeded by
the help of spiritual powers (Gen. xxxii. 24 sqq.).
After such a victory no human being could do him
harm. The dreaded Esau received him kindly and
retired again to the desert land of the Edomites,

75
RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
Jackson Jacob
while Jacob established himself in Shechem, with whose inhabitants, however, his sons became involved in bloody quarrels. This induced Jacob to depart at first toward Bethel, where he made drinkofferings, according to his vow, where also the Lord appeared to him and gave him the covenant blessings. On their further journey, the last stage of which was Hebron, Rachel bore Benjamin and died in giving him birth. In Hebron Isaac, who died at an advanced age, was buried by Jacob and Esau. After residing for some time in Hebron, while his sons, with their flocks, wandered through the land north of Shechem, Jacob, in his old age, transferred his abode to Egypt, where his son Joseph (q.v.) had attained great honors. In Beersheba the patriarch received a last favorable message from his God (Gen. xlvi. 1 sqq.). In Egypt he was received with favor by the Pharaoh, and lived in Goshen (according to Gen. xlvii. 28, P) for seventeen years, dying at the age of 147. He was embalmed after the Egyptian method, and brought to the family tomb and buried there by his children.
The three sources, J, E, and P, appear in the part of Genesis which contains the Jacob narratives, to which P contributed the least. J and
g. Charac‑ E do not always easily separate, since teristics they followed practically the same traof the ditions; but in J the cunning of Jacob
	Sources.	seems the motive of action, while in
		E miraculous interpositions and ap
pearances in dreams are more common. In JE the
hatred of Esau because of his exclusion from his
father's blessing is given as the cause of Jacob's
emigration to Haran; in P the reason assigned is
dissatisfaction on the part of his parents with the
Hittite marriages of Esau (xxvii. 46‑xxviii. 9).
The two blessings, xxvii. 27 sqq. (JE) and xxviii. 3
(P), are independent, as are the accounts of Esau's
departure to Seir, xxxvi. 6‑7 (P) and xxxii. 3 sqq.
(JE), and of the time of the change of name, xxxii.
28 (J) and xxxv. 10 (P). These divergences show
that independent traditions were transmitted which
are followed by the different sources. The chro
nology of Jacob's life, derived mostly from P, offers
some difficulties. Thus, if from the 130 years of
xlvii. 9 (Jacob's age when presented to Pharaoh)
be deducted the seven fruitful and two unfruitful
years, the thirty years of Joseph when the fruitful
years began (xli. 46) and the fourteen years passed
by Jacob in Haran before Joseph's birth, it would
appear that when he left his father's house he was
about seventy‑seven years of age, though chaps.
xxviii. sqq. evidently regard him as a young man.
The three elements of the patriarchal blessing in
xlviii.‑saix. combine supplementary details: xlvii.
3‑6 is assigned to P, xlviii. 15‑16, 20‑22 to E, and
xlix. to J. The post‑Mosaic authorship assigned to
xlix. (time of Samson by Bleek and Ewald, time of
David by Knobel, much later than this by Stade)
does not take account of the way in which the
Levites are treated.
Jacob's character is best illustrated by his double name. He is called Jacob because of his dexterity and cunning, which always give him the advantage over the physically stronger Esau and over the shrewd Laban. On account of his weakness and
his subordinate position Jacob accommodates himself to the will of the stronger, yet always succeeds in attaining his end by courage and
6. Jacob's tenacity. However much dissimulation
	Character.	there was in his conduct, Jacob did
		not employ it for sordid gain. As
Israel he strives for the blessing of God because
he has recognized therein the highest good. He
devotes his whole energy to obtaining the blessings
of the covenant (Hos. xii. 4‑5). It is true that
Jacob's character does not show the comparative
straightforwardness of Abraham, and therefore he
can not be regarded as a model for all time. He is
not an ideal, even according to the standard of
Israelitic ethics, but a man whose sinful nature
struggles against his better self; but he was purified
by the suffering which made his life a sadder one
than that of his forefathers (xlvii. 9). What raises
Jacob above himself is his reverent, indestructible
longing for the salvation of his God, which after
long struggles attains complete satisfaction.
Whether, and in what sense, Jacob is historical may be a subject of debate. The simplicity and the unconventional sincerity of these re‑
7. Historic‑ citals speak in favor of genuine tradi‑
ity of the tion rather than of heroic poetry.
	Narratives.	Some of the alleged facts would surely
		never have been invented in later times,
as, for example, the contemporaneous marriage with
two sisters (cf. Rev. xviii. 18), or the distinction
awarded to Bethel and the sanctuary there which
was such an object of aversion to the prophets of
the eighth century. The attempt to derive the his
tory of Jacob from nature‑myths has proved a total
failure. While, in general, only the episode on the
Jabbok (Gen. xxxii.) is looked upon as a possible
survival of this nature, Popper has undertaken to
show that Jacob‑Israel is the Asiatic Herakles
Melcarth Palaemon, i.e., the victoriously striving
sun‑god, and has vainly endeavored to bring all
the details of the Biblical narrative into accord
with this myth. More probable is the hypothesis
of an eponymous ancestor. In this way Ewald
saw in Jacob a vigorous Hebrew people which had
emigrated from Mesopotamia (cf. Anne, ARAMEANB;
Deut. xxvi. 5, R.V., margin), coalesced with those of
the same race who ha,d settled in Canaan at an
earlier period, and then proceeded to dominate them,
while elements of common ancestry (Esau), which
had entered Canaan at an earlier period, gradually
withdrew farther and farther toward the south.
With the Aramean neighbors to the north, behind
the mountains of Gilead (Laban), the tribe of Jacob
had many clashes, which are described in the history
of Laban. Stade considers that Israel was a tribe
which lived on the Jabbok, and that their chief city
was Mahanaim; Jacob, on the other hand, was a
tribe of the country west of the Jordan, which lived
in the neighborhood of Bethel. According to him
Rachel, Leah, Isaac, Joseph, and his brothers were
so many different clans, while the combination of
two tribes was represented as a marriage, etc. Ac
cording to the dominant opinion, later conditions
are reflected in the stories of the patriarchs. Well
hausen believes that the popular recitals in regard
to Jacob and Esau must have taken form in the

Jacob the Patriarch	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	76
Jacob of Eltz
earlier period of the kingdom of Israel, after the
subjugation of Edom. For Bernstein. the patriarch
Jacob and his history were invented after the separa
tion of the kingdom in order to glorify Bethel;
and Seinecke even sees in the despondency of the
	returning Jacob a reflex of the fear of the exiles
on their return from Babylon, and in the treatment
of the Shechemitea by Simeon and Levi (xxxiv.)
the reproof of the Samaritans by Ezra.	Apart
	from such fancies, it would never be possible to
	transform the natural and characteristic figures of
	an Abraham or a Jacob into national experiences
	or the disappointments of a tribe. Mere invention
	being out of the question, the alternative is to
	assume that the stories deal with real persons.
	Names such as Jacob‑el and Isra‑el, which include
	the name of a divinity, should be regarded, like
	the name of Abraham, as originally individual
rather than ethnic.	In this way Kittel, Kloster
	mann, and Ewald have looked upon the bearers of
	these names as chiefs who stood at the head of
	nomadic tribes. In the traditions of that far‑away
	time only a few prominent personalities stand out,
	while the tribe which accompanied them in their
	wanderings appears only in details of the narrative.
	The historical standard used in reference to later
	periods may not be applied to primitive traditions;
	but, just as little should their essentially historical
	character be denied as being, in the main, faithful
	pictures of the time of the first residence of the
fathers in the land of promise.	C. VON OBELLI.
	BIBLIOGRAPHY; J: A. Eisenmenger, Entdecktea Judeufhus,.,
	i. 942‑943, KSmgsberg, 1711; C. von Lengerke, Kenaan,
	PP. 290 sqq., ib. 1844; 1. I)ieetel, Der Segen Jakoba,
	Brunswick, 1353; H. Ewald, Geachichte des Yolkes Israel,
	i. 412 sqq., 489 sqq., Hanover, 1884, Eng, transl., i. 341
	382, London, 1883• K. Kohler, Der Segen Jakoba, Berlin,
	1887; A. N. Obbaxd~ The Prophecy of Jacob, Cambridge,
	1867: A. Bernstein, Uraprunp der Saga„ von . . . Jakob,
Berlin, 1871; J.	amburger, Real‑Encykloptidie des Ju
	denthurna, i. 543 eqq, Neustrelitz, 1874• A. Kohler, Bib
	liache Geachichte Altea Teatamentea i. 136 sqq., Erlangen,
	1875; L. Seineeke, Geachichte des yolkea Israel, i. 40 sqq.,
	GSttingen, 1878; J. Popper, UraPrung des Monotheie
	mua, pp. 348 sqq., Berlin, 1879; C. von Orelli, O. T.
	Prophecy, Edinburgh, 185; R. Kittel, Gesehichle der
	Hebrder, i. 122 sqq., Goths, 1892 Eng, transl, London,
	1895; W. Staerk, Studien zur Religions‑ and Sprachpe
	achich.te des A. T., i. 77‑83, ii. 1‑13 Berlin 1899• C. A.
	Briggs, Messianic Prophecy, New York, 1902; DB, ii.
	528‑535; EB ii. 2306‑12; JR, vii, 19‑2, and in general
	the works on the history of Israel as given under Axes,
	JACOB (JACOBUS) BARAD~EUS or ZANZALUS.
See JACOBITES.
JACOB CHRISTOPH AND THE COUNTER‑REF‑
ORMATION
IN SWITZERLAND: The Counter‑
Reformation found centers in Switzer‑
Relations land at Lucerne (see CYSAT, REN
Between WARD), and, somewhat later in the
City and bishopric of Basel. The more difficult
Bishop. task presented itself in Basel, since
here the issue
was not merely to re‑
store Romanism in a district already half conquered
by the Calvinists; there was also a political conflict
with the city of Basel, still striving after complete
independence and extension of its boundaries. The
rights of bishop and municipality often conflicted
even before the Reformation; within the episcopal
domain, in the modern Bernese Jura, the city
possessed sovereign rights at a good many places; the bishop, on the other hand, was not only the spiritual lord of the city, but was endowed with comprehensive rights of sovereignty, being empowered to nominate mayor and council, and the city was pledged to pay him various taxes and the temporal domain of the diocese extended up to the city gates. Before the ecclesiastical agitation, the city of Basel was striving to enlarge its possessions at the expense of the bishopric and of the episcopal rights. In 1521 the municipality, without opposition, relegated all rights of the bishop to the nomination of mayor and council. The introduotion of the Reformation dissolved, in 1529, the last bond between bishop and city, and the chapter moved over to Freiburg im Breisgau. In a treaty with the city, in 1530, Bishop Philip of Gundelsheim (1527‑53) permitted the exercise of the new doctrine in certain districts of the diocese. The total dissolution of the bishopric appeared now to be merely a question of time. The city pursued its goal quietly but persistently; more and more parishes were united with it in various ways, but without assuring the status of the Reformation within the diocese; the bishopric was imperial soil, and the religious peace of 155 expressly excluJed the adherents of Zwingli.
From 1560 a more vigorous church life was astir
in Switzerland on the Roman Catholic side; follow
		ing Borromeo's visit to St. Gall, Ein
	Jacob siedeln, and LuzernP in 1571, the
Christoph Counter‑Reformation distinctly begins
Introduces to be perceptible in the original cantons,
the Conn‑ and even the neglected diocese of Basel
ter‑Refor‑ was reached. On the death of Bishop
	oration. Melchior, in 1575, the time of com
		plianre came to a close. At the ensuing
election, the youngest of the canons, Jacob Chris
toph Blarer of Wartensee (b. 1542), with urgent ad
monitions, elicited from his colleagues the promise
to labor to restore the right belief, and then became
the electors' choice (June 22, 1575). It was no easy
task that he set for Mmself; the bishopric was in‑
volved in debt and ecclesiastically in confusion, and
the city unquestionably had the ascendancy. At
first Jacob Christoph acted in a friendly manner
toward the city, but he inquired into the patronal
privileges of the diocese and their legal bases. Rela‑
tions to the instigator and promoter of the Swiss
Counter‑Reformation became visible; it was Carlo
Borromeo of whom Jacob Christoph requested
synodical by‑laws, and the decrees of the Council
of Trent were proclaimed in the diocese. The
decisive step which he ventured was the conclusion
of a league with the Roman Catholic cantons of
the confederacy, Sept., 1579. This league was a
significant fact; the Roman Catholic districts of
western Switzerland, Fribourg, and Soleure, until
then isolated between Prot%t~p~ ~~r1~9, ~~l~d

a territorial connection with these new allies; the
passage to France, a matter of great importance for
the Roman Catholic Swiss mercenaries, was thereby
secured; and against the city of Basel and its de
mand for the conversion of the diocese to the Protes
tant cause stood henceforth the combined Roman
Catholic federation. Indeed, the treaty of alliance

77	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jacob of Et Patriarch
was framed expressly for reciprocal protection in religious concerns, even against members of the confederacy, and for the recovery of apostate subjects; only the bishop was not to use forte without the allies' consent. In 1580 he came out openly with his designs; he solemnly excommunicated the prominent adherents of the Reformation in Pruntrut, summoned the Protestant congregations of the diocese to return to the Roman Church, dismissed the Protestant preachers, reinstated Roman worship in certain places, and even preached himself, at the most endangered spots. The Jesuit Canisius devised a catechism for the bishopric; a synod, attended by two hundred priests, convened at Delsberg, in Apr., 1581, and conferred concerning a diocesan visitation, the reform of the hierarchy, synodical by‑laws, and the revision of the liturgical books.
The city of Basel and the Protestant cantons lad not failed to remonstrate when the bishop's first steps to repress the new doctrine be‑
Settlement came known. In reply Jacob Christoph of the affirmed his rights. Disturbances in
Contention the districts affected by the bishop
Between	then moved the citizens of Basel to
City sad bring their grievances before the diet
	Bishop.	of the confederacy. A court of arbitra
		tion was accordingly appointed. which,
in the course of two years' proceedings, brought
about a solution of the contention, in 1585. Two
treaties were concluded: the first secured to the
city of Basel the cession of all episcopal claims to
sovereignty, both in the city and in the Sissgau
and certain neighboring districts, for 200,000 florins;
on its part the city renounced all sovereignty rights
within the diocese. The cathedral chapter, in com
pensation for its ancient rights in the city, was to
receive an indemnity of 50,000 florins. In the
second treaty it was provided that the patronal
privileges between Basel and congregations of the
diocese should indeed still nominally exist, but
that no right of the bishop should be thereby in
fringed, and that the city should be forbidden to
protect subjects against the bishop; in return, the
bishop pledged himself to suffer the subjects of
the city to adhere to their own religion, merely
reserving to himself the right of reinstating Roman
Catholic worship. Every one was to enjoy freedom
of choice in religion, and neither side should injure
f he other.
Although both the cathedral chapter and the pope protested against these treaties, it nevertheless appeared that they indicated the only proper course of action. The cession of untenable rights and titles of possession made the bishop unlimited lord in his domain. The city lost its influence over episcopal subjects. The prosecution of church reform no longer encountered insurmountable opposition; everywhere in the diocese the Roman Church recovered firm ground, and the number of Protestants continually decreased. Although the treaty allowed the Evangelicals of Basel free exercise of religion, it soon appeared that the bishop, in virtue of his conceded right of instituting Roman Catholic worship collaterally with the Evangelical, possessed the means of gradually abolishing the latter. The
Evangelical subjects were everywhere confronted with the bishop's Roman Catholic officials, from whom they could obtain justice only with difficulty. Though the Reformation maintained itself in most places to about 1595, it was nevertheless constantly decreasing, and at last quite vanished.
WALTER GOETZ.
BIHLIOnRAPBY: P. Ochs, GeBChiChte dal Stadt 'Ufid La9idachaft Basel, vl. vi., Berlin 1829 J. Burekhardt Die GegenreJorynatio» . , am Erode des 18. Jahrhunderts, Basel, 1855; A. P. von $egesser, Ludwig Pfy$er and aeine Zeit, vole, ii. iii., Bern, 1880‑82; L. Vautrey, Hiat. des ev2quea de Bale, vol. ii., Einsiedeln, 1884.

JACOB (JAMES) OF EDESSA (Lat. Jacobus Edessenus or Orrhoenus; Syr. Urhaya; Arab. aG Rahawi) : The most important of all Syriac writers with the exception of Bar Hebrieua (see ARUL>TARAJ); b. at Indaba, near Antioch, c. 633; d. June 5, 708. The Syriac and Arabic names are derived from the older name for Edessa. He began his studies in a monastery near Kinnesrin and finished them in Alexandria. In 684 or 687 he became bishop of Edessa, but retired after four years; he was too severe for his clergy and burned the canons before the house of the patriarch as useless because not kept. For eleven years he lived as teacher of the monks in the monastery of Eusebona, and then for nine years in that of Telleda. On the death of Habib, his successor as bishop of Edessa, he was recalled, but died four months later while transporting his library to the city. Jacob belonged to the monophysitic branch of the Syrian Church, but is highly esteemed also by the Maronites. He was a " man of three tongues," a theologian, historian, philosopher, and grammarian‑in many respects the Jerome of the Syrians. His numerous writings (see BIBLIOGRAPHY) are not yet all published.
E. NESTLE.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The works of Jacob, not all published, in
	clude one of the earliest of Syriac grammars, the extant
	fragments ed. W. Wright, London, 1871, and A. Merx in
	Hiatoria artia flrammatieae aped Syroa, Leipaie, 1871;
	grammatical tracts, ed. J. P. Martin, London, 1869, and
	G. Phillips, 2 parts, Edinburgh, 1869‑70; Scholia on the
	Old and the New Testaments, ed. Phillips, London, 1864;
	an exegetical work on the Hexaemeron, ed. with transl.,
	A. Hjelt, Heleingfore, 1892. On his tranel. of the Cate
	gories and Analytice of Aristotle S. Schiller has a disser
	tation, Erlangen, 1897; on his correspondence, Journal
	of Sacred Literature, new series, x (1887), 430; ZDMG,
	xxiY (1870), 261, xxxii (1878). 465, 735; on the chrono
	logical canon, E. W. Brooks, in ZDMG, hiii (1899), 261,
	534, 550; on his translation of the Bible, Ugolini in Or;,ens
	Chriatianua, ii. 2; on his ecclesiastical canons, the Germ.
	transl. of C. Kayser, Leipsie, 1888. The Carmen de fide
	contra Neatoriur~a is not his, nor the legend on the sons of
	Reehab. A. L. Frothingham, The Existence of Arneriro
	Known early in the Christian Era, in the American Jour
	nal of Archaeology, iv. 1888, interprets a passage in the
	Hexaemeron. Consult: J. S. Assemani, Bibliotheca orien
	talia, i. 488‑494, Rome, 1719; W. Wright, Catalogue of
	Syriac MSS., London, 1870‑72; DCB, iii. 332 335 (quite
	full).
JACOB OF ELTZ AND THE COUNTERREFORMATION IN TREVES: The Reformation nowhere gained firm footing in the archAggressive diocese of Treves, and the principal Measures, work of the Counter‑Reformation there was to renovate the ancient regime.
To this task Archbishop Jacob III. of Eltz (1567‑
1581) applied himself.Born in 1510, of an old

Jacob of Eltz
Jacob of Barug
family of Trevea, he rose early to the rank of a prebendary of the cathedral and, in 1547, to that of dean of the chapter. After he was elected archbishop, Apr. 7, 1567, he sought to secure his position by forming alliances with the strictly Roman Catholic states; in 1569 he proposed a Catholic league with the Duke of Alva iii Brussels; and when, in the same year, by inspiration from the court of Munich, negotiations began with a view to the extension of the Landsberg League, he was one of the most zealous advocates for the admission of Alva to this league. But, owing to opposition on the Protestant and imperial side, the extensive plans made resulted in no more than the accession to the league of the two electors of Treves and Mainz. Under such conditions the league could not be what had been hoped, and Jacob lost interest in it, although there still survived a close bond between him and the courts of Brussels and Munich, the two centers of the Roman Catholic policy in respect to the empire. He supported, as far as possible, the Bavarian hopes with reference to Cologne (see GEBHARD IL), while both in advance of the imperial diets and pending their sessions he resisted every concession to the Protestants that overstepped the terms of the religious peace. In 1568 Roman Catholic worship was restored under the leadership of the Jesuit Tyraeus, in Neumagen, where the Count of Wittgenstein had procured an entrance for the new doctrines; and likewise the domain of the sometime imperial abbey of Prom was cleansed of all heresy when, in 1576, it became incorporated with the electorate. In 1571 Jacob removed all non‑Catholics from his court, a measure hitting mainly the nobility. In 1572 the order was issued that whoever desired to be received as citizen or inhabitant anywhere in the electorate must establish his Catholic faith. In 1577 the papal nuncio, Portia, could report that the electorate was free from all heresies. Jacob's further activity had to do with the reform of his own Church.
At Easter, 1569, he was the first in Germany who solemnly swore to the decrees of Trent. Between
Apr. and Oct., 1569, the council's deReform cisions were announced in all parishes of the of the electorate. A liturgy elaborated
Church. by Jacob himself, with the assistance
of certain Jesuits, was issued in 1574, as standard for worship, moral discipline, and matrimonial concerns. Portia's further counsels show why the previously attempted reforms were insufficient‑there was lacking a COIUpeteIlt clergy. What ecclesiastics were then available shared, for the most part, the general corruption of the Roman priests. Jacob, too, had directed his attention to this point at the very outset; he had sent for six scholars from the Roman Collegium Germanicum as assistants in 1568, and these were duly followed by others. Moreover, the Jesuits of Treves, where there had been a Jesuit establishment since 1560, stood in high honor with Jacob; in 1570 he fitted up for them the Minorite cloister in Treves, adding wealthy endowments so that their school soon flourished to such a degree that from 1573 to 1589 the average attendance is estimated at 1,000 students annually. In 1580 Jacob also founded a college
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
'rs
for them at Coblena. Yet the service rendered by all these useful auxiliaries became really sufficient only when through their help it became feasible to train up a suitable clergy. In vain did Portia, in 1577, bespeak the institution of a priestly seminary, and the project was first realized by Jacob's like‑minded successor, John of Schonberg, in 1585. Jacob's reforming activity encountered difficulties in the attitude of the Trevea cathedral chapter, which was not inclined to comply with the strict requirements of the Council of Trent; and again, the necessary placeturre regium from the Brussels government for the Luxembourg domains of the archdiocese occasioned contentions over the prerogatives of the spiritual and the temporal power. On the other hand, the incorporation of the abbey of Priim as a part of the archbishopric of Treves was a great gain; its opulent resources accrued to the benefit 'of Jacob's endeavors in the cause of reform. The rejection in 1580 by imperial decision of the claim of the city of Treves to hold charter immediately of the empire likewise strengthened the cause of the Counter‑Reformation.
Jacob died June 4, 1581. Neither his personality nor his activity can be called great; but the way once having been pointed out, even
Jacob's lesser intellects, led by capable coun‑
Achieve‑ selors, could carry through the Coun‑
	meat.	ter‑Reformation. True, the status of
		the archdiocese was not entirely satis
factory at the time of Jacob's death; but his zeal
ously Catholic‑minded successor, John of Schon
berg, continued the work along Jacob's lines, and
completed the reforms by him begun. Out of the
schools of the Jesuits there eventually grow up a
generation submissive to the Church; and in many
channels of activity the fathers of the Society of
Jesus imparted their spirit to the population at
large. In connection with the revival of church life,
Jacob himself had shown the best of examples;
the Roman nuncios continually praise his manner
of life, his zeal, his loyalty to the papal see, and
hold him up as a pattern for all German prelates.
If he did not succeed in accomplishing the reform
completely, the decisive turn came to pass under
his administration. 	WALTER GOETZ.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. von Stramberg, Rheiniecher AnliGuariua i. 2, pp. 295 sqq., Coblenz, 1863; J. Marx, Geachichte du Erzatifta Trier, vol. i., Trier, 1858; A. Kluekhohn, Briefs Friedricha dea Fro‑men, Brunswick, 1867‑70; M. Loosen, Der kolniache Krieg, Goths, 1882; J. Ney, Die Reformation in Trier, 1668, Halls, 1906.
JACOB OF JUETERBOG! Roman flatUlc re‑
former; b. near Juterbog, Brandenburg, 1381; d. at Erfurt 1465. As a youth he entered the Polish Cistercian monastery named Paradise, and was sent by its abbot to the University of Cracow, where
he became professor and university preacher. In 1441, finding the Cistercian discipline too lax, he joined the Carthusians, and removed to the monastery Ad bfontem Sancti Salvatoris in Erfurt. Here
he was active not only as a writer on canon law and theology, but also as professor of law at the university. In 1455 he became its rector. He was intent upon a regeneration of monastic life. His propositions of reform, laid down in Petitioner religiostmcm, pro reformatiorte sui status and De

79
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Jacob of Elta
Jacob of 8arog
negligentia praelatorum, rest upon the view that the
pope is only the most prominent member of the
Church; the infallible presence of the Holy Spirit
is promised not to him, but to the Church, which
has the power to depose the pope. He developed
these thoughts in a reformatory memorial addressed
in 1449 to Pope Nicholas V., under the title Avis
amentum ad Papam pro reformations ecclesiae. A
later work, De septem statt7ws ecclesiae, contains the
passionate lamentation of a hopeless man; its aged
author did not~believe any longer in the possibility
of a reform. In spite of his attempts at moral re
forms, he did not deviate from orthodox Catholi
cism. He wrote also a great number of works on
canon law, ethics and ascetics, which, however,
have mostly perished. The liberal tendency intro
duced by him culminated in humanism at the time
of Luther. 	PAUL T$CHACBERT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. w. Kampaehulte, Die Univeradtdt Erfurt, i. 15‑16, Treves, 1858 (from the Roman Catholic point of view; cf. KL, vi. Il6fr71); C. Ullmann, Reformers before the Reformation, i. 208‑216, Edinburgh, 1874 (from the Protestant viewpoint); Pastor, Popes, ii. 45‑49, 93, 94, 106.
JACOB OF KIEF. See NESTOR.

	JACOB OF MIES (called Jacobellus, from his
small stature): Bohemian reformer, colaborer of
John Huss; b. at Mies (15 m. w. of Pilsen), Bo
hernia, after 1350; d. at Prague Aug. 9, 1429. He
studied at Prague, receiving both the bachelor's
and the master's degree in theology, and became
pastor of the Church of St. Michael and an outspoken
supporter of John Huss. In 1410 he took part in
the disputations regarding Wyclif, defending the
latter against archiepiscopal condemnation. His
study of Scripture and the Fathers had showed
him that the withholding of the cup in the admin
istration of the Lord's Supper to the laity was an
arbitrary measure of the Roman Church. In 1414
he propounded and defended his views in a public
disputation; and when Huss, at that time in jail
at Constants, accepted them, he began to admin
ister the cup to his parishioners, in spite of the
remonstrances of the bishop and the university.
His example was quickly followed by other pastors
in Prague. The fathers of the council, who were
much alarmed, issued a curious decree, admitting
in theory as truth what in practise they condemned
as heresy. Though Jacob would by no means sub
mit, he was not removed from his office, perhaps
because in other points, as, for instance, in the doc
trine of purgatory, he agreed with the Roman
Church. During the last decade of his life Jacob
was regarded as one of the foremost of the Utra
quist theologians. 	(J. L08ERTH.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: E. H. Gillett, Life and Times of John Huss, i., chap. xviii., ii. chap. iii., Philadelphia, 1881; AL, ii, 1315; Neander, Christian Church, v. 297, 331, 337, 338. 387.

JACOB (JAMES) OF fPISIBIS: Bishop of Nisibis, the chief city of Mygdonia, in northeastern Mesopotamia; d. 338. He is known also as Jacob of Mygdonia and Jacob the Great. After leading a severe life in the mountains of Kurdistan with Eugenius, the founder of Persian monasticism, he became first, or second, bishop of Nisibis in 309.
In 313 he began to build the great church, the ruins
of which still bear his name, and finished it in 320.
He attended the Council of Nicaea in 325, and the
sudden death of Arius (q.v.) is attributed especially
to his prayers (cf. the Syrtaxarium ecclesiae Constan
tinopolitanae [=Propylaeum ad ASB, Novembris],
ed. H. Delehaye, Brussels, 1902, Jan. 13), as is also
the protection of Nisibis against Sapor II. He was
also present at the dedication of the Church of
the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. No writings of
Jacob's are known, the great work in twenty‑two
or twenty‑three parts' ascribed to him being really
the production of Aphraates (q.v.), with whom he
was early confounded. The Armenians mistakenly
call him the friend of Gregory the Illuminator.
His day, with the Syrians, is the 12th Iyar (May);
with the Armenians, Dec. 15; with the Copts, the
18th Tobi (Jan.); in the Greek Church, Jan. 13
(14) and Oct. 31; in the Roman martyrology,
July 15. 	E. NESTLE.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ephraem, Carmina Niaibena, ed. G. Bickell, pp. 11, 20, 97, Leipeic, 1888; Eusebiue, Vita Constantini, iv. 43, Eng. tranal. in NPNF, 2d ser., i. 551; Theodoret, Hint. eccl., i. 7, ii. 28, NPNF, 2d ser., iii. 44‑46, 91‑92; Philostorgius, Hiat. eat., iii. 23; Gennadius, De vir. ill., i,; Acta martdrum et aanctorum, ed. P. Bedjan, iii. 393, iv. 282, Paris, 1890‑97; J. S. Asaemani, Bibliotheca orientalie, i. 17, 395, 557, ii. 398, 588. Consult: Ceillier, Auteura eacrh, iii. 369‑372, 525‑528; A. P. Stanley, Leolures on the Hist. of the Eastern Church, lest. v., London, 1884; DCB, iii. 325‑327.

	JACOB (JAMES) OF SARUG: Bishop of Sarug;
b. at Kurtam on the Euphrates toward the end of
451; d. Nov. 29, 521. He is mentioned about 503
as visiting presbyter (periodeutes) at the capture of
Amida, and became bishop of Batnan (Batnae) in
the district of Sarug in 519. He was a most prolific
writer, and was called the " doctor " (malpana) of
the Syrians or of the whole Church, and " the
channel of the Holy Ghost." His memory is cele
brated by Jacobites and Maronites (July or Dec. 29)
and even the Nestorians recognize him, though he
was monophysite till his end. Seventy scribes are
said to have been always busy copying his homilies,
which are all in the dodecasyllabic meter which
bears his name. Seven hundred and sixty‑three
homilies are ascribed to him, besides other works:
Bar Hebraeus had 182 before him, and there are
233 in the Vatican. Four volumes of his Homiline
selectae have been published by P. Bedjan (Paris
and Leipsic, 1903‑08), but most of his works are
still in manuscript. 	E. NESTLE.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: On his works cf. w. Wright, Catalogue of Syriac MSS. in the British Museum, pp. 502‑505, London, 1877. The works are not published in collected form; some are in: Acts aanctorum martyrum orientalium, ed. $. E. Aseemani, ii. 230, Florence, 1748; Acta martbrum et aanctorum, ed. P. Bedjan, i. 131, 160, iii. 865, iv. 471, v. 615, vi. 850, Paris, 1890‑97; ZDMC, vols. xii.‑zv., xxv., xxviii.‑xxxi., 1858 eqq.; w. Cureton, Ancient Syriac Documents, pp. 88‑107, London, 1884; his letter to Stephen bar Sudaili, a Syrian mystic, is edited and translated by A. L. Frothingham in Stephen bar Sudaili Leyden, 1888; a discourse on Alexander is translated ~by E. A. w. Budge, London, 1889; six homilies were rendered into German by P. Zingerle, Bona, 1867; another is published by Sib'ilani, Beirut, 1901. Consult: J. B. Abbeloos, De vita et acriptia S. Jacobi . . . Sarupi, Louvain, 1867; P. Martin, in Revue den sciences ecdEsiaatiquee, 4th aer., vol. iii., 1876; J. S. Assemani, Bibliotheca orientalie, i. 283‑340, Rome, 1719; DCB, iii, 327‑328.

Jacob of Yitry	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	80
Jacobites
	JACOB (JAMES) OF VITRY (JACQUES DE VIT
RY): Bishop of Akko, cardinal bishop of Tuaculum;
b. at Vitry (20 m, s.e. of ChAlons‑sur‑Marne); d. at
Rome Apr. 30, 1240. While a student in Paris he
heard of the miraculous deeds of Mary of Nivelles,
in Belgium, who, from about 1203;~eTonged to the
	society of Beguinea organized by the mother of
	lEgidius, prior of Oigniea, on the southern border
of the province of Namur. He soon removed to
	Oigniea as canon of the Augustinian chapter. In
his intercourse with the Beguines, and especially
with Mary, he appropriated views and principles
which from this time decided the course of his life.
At the wish of Mary, about 1210, he procured
	ordination as priest. About 1211 he undertook a
	pilgrimage to Rome. Afterward he became, through
	Mary, acquainted with Bishop Fulco, of Toulouse,
	who, in 1213, adopted him as companion in his agita
	tion for a crusade against the Albigenses. Jacob left
	Oignies after Mary's death (June 23, 1213), and
	preached in North France in behalf of a crusade
	against the heretics. Soon he preached also a new
	crusade to the Holy Land. His success induced the
	cathedral chapter of Akko to elect him bishop, but
	Jacob preferred to remain in France, and went to
	Italy in 1216 to try to secure appointment as
	legate for the crusade in that country. Honorius
	III., however, consecrated him bishop of Akko, and
	Jacob went to his eastern see. Thence he traveled
	as an itinerant preacher through all places that were
	still in the possession of the Christians, and eagerly
	participated in the expeditions of the large army of
	crusaders that gathered in Akko. In May, 1218, he
	marched against Damietta, but the plan failed
	and in 1221 he was compelled to return to Akko.
	From that time he tried all possible means to rid
	himself of his office, but the pope was relentless.
	Nevertheless he allowed Jacob to return to Europe
	in 1226 to preach the crusade as he had done in 1214.
	In this function he appears in 1227 in northern
	France, and also in the bordering districts of Ger
	many. Later he became temporarily vicar of the
	bishopric of Liege; and finally Gregory IX., his
	intimate friend and protector, released him from
	his Oriental office, and made him bishop of Tuscu
lum, Frascati, and cardinal (1228).
	Jacob of Vitry was first of all a preacher. His
	whole literary activity was governed by the habit
	of gathering material for sermons and religious
	devotion. Two things contributed to his success
	and influence as a preacher: (1) his skill in illus
	trating moral principles by examples, anecdotes,
	parables, and fables; and (2) his manner of ad
	dressing sermons to groups and classes, such as
	prelates, secular and regular canons, scholars,
lawyers, monks, knights, merchants, etc.	Both
	were innovations and created a new epoch in the
	development of the art of preaching. Encouraged
	by the popularity of his sermons, Jacob collected
	them at the end of his life. He makes six divisions
	in this collection: i.‑v., eern:onea de tempore, ser
	mons in the usual style for the pericopes of the
	church year; vi., aer»ton,es vulgares, sermons for
different classes.	The latter are of considerable
	value for the history of Church and culture, depict
	ing in realistic manner the conditions of West
European society of his age. Jacob's homiletic and edificatory tendencies characterize him also as a historian. His most important historical works are the Lxber de muliertbus Leodiensi&us and Vita S. Moriae Oigniacenaia which were composed between 1213 and 1216. The life of Mary contains the moat valuable documents for the inner history of the older Beguiniam. Of less importance, though of greater renown, is his Hisloria orientalia or Hislorio Hierosolyrnitana abbretiata, which he began in 1219. It is largely copied from a similar work of William of Tyre. Of much greater historical value are his letters from 1216 to 1221, which depict the Fifth Crusade with great fidelity. (H. BbanEx.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: For a guide to the chief editions of his Letters and his Hiatoria orientalia consult Potthaet, Wepweiaer, pp. 833‑634. Far his life consult: ASB, June, iii. 237‑258; F. L. Matzner, pe Jacobi Vitriacenaia . .
vita et rebus geatis, Munich, 1883; idem, in KL, v. 11781187; Hiatoire littEraire d` la France, aviii. 209‑248; M. Barroux, Jacques de ,Vi~try , Paris, 1885; T. A. Archer and C. L. Kingsford, The Crusades, passim, New York, 1895; and other literature cited under CRUSADES. On his writings consult: J, L, D. G. Saint‑Genvin, Sur lea lettrea in6ditea do Jacques de Vilry, Brussels, 1847; G. Zacher, Die HiatoNia orientalia des Jacob von Vitry, KSnigsberg, 1885.
JACOB, EDGAR: Church of England bishop of St. Albans, ~. at Crawley Rectory, near Winchester, Nov. 16, 1844. He was educated at New College, Oxford (B.A., 1868), and was ordered deacon in 1868 and ordained priest in the following year. He was curate of Taynton, Oxfordshire (1868‑69), Witney (1869‑71), and St. James', Bermondsey (1871‑72), domestic chaplain to the bishop of Calcutta (1872‑76), and commissary to the same prelate (1876‑88). In 1877 he had charge of Wilberforce Memorial Mission, South London, and was vicar of Port$ea (1878‑96). In 1896 he was consecrated bishop of Newcastle, and in 1903 was translated to his present see of St. Albans. He was also examining chaplain to the bishop of Winchester in 1876‑79, honorary canon of Winchester in 18841896, honorary chaplain to the Queen in 1887‑90 and chaplain in ordinary in 1890‑961 rural dean of Landport and chaplain of the Portsmouth prison in 1892‑96, and select preacher at Oxford in the same year. He has written The Divine Society: or, The Church's Care of Large Populations (Cambridge lectures on pastoral theology; London, 1900).
JACOBI, yd‑kb'bl, FRIEDRICH HEINRICH: German philosopher; b. at Dusseldorf Jan. 25, 1743; d. at Munich Mar. 10, 1819. He studied at Frankfort and Geneva, and in 1764 became the head of his father's business in Diiaseldorf. After his appointment to the council for the duchies of Julich and Berg in 1772 he devoted himself entirely to literature and philosophy. His house at Pempelfort, near Diisseldorf, became the meeting‑place of distinguished literary men. Among his more intimate friends were Wieland, Hamann, Herder, Leasing, and Goethe. On account of the political agitation of the time he went to Holstein in 1794. During
the next ten years he resided chiefly at Wandabeck, Hamburg, and Eutin. In 1804 he accepted a call to Munich is connection with the proposed Academy of Sciences there. He was president of the
academy from its opening in 1807 till 1812. His

		Jsoob
81	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	JacobitesVitry
of
writings are characterized by poetic fancy and religious sentiment rather than by logical necessity. He held that the understanding can only join and disjoin given facts, without explaining them, and that knowledge deduced in this way is conditioned and relatively unimportant, being always related to a background of existence which forever remains beyond abstract thinking. All demonstrable knowledge, therefore, is relative and conditioned; it does not touch the ultimate nature of things. The faculty by which we grasp ultimate facts is not the understanding, but faith, which Jacobi identified with reason. It was Jacobi who first pointed out the fatal contradiction involved in Kant's application of the category of causality to the Ding an sick. His doctrine of the relativity of knowledge was later exploited by Sir William Hamilton. Jacobi's principal works are the two philosophical novels, Woldemar (2 vole., Flensburg, 1779) and Edward Alhvilla Brtefsamlung (Breslau, 1781); Ueber die Lehre des Spinoza (1785; enlarged ed., 1789); David Hums fiber den Glauben, oder Idealismus and Real. iamus (1787), containing his criticism of Kant; Ueber das Unternehmen des Kritizismus, die Vernunft xu Verstande zu brEngen (Hamburg, 1801); and Von den g6ttlichen Dingen and ihrer O,fenbarung (Leipsic, 1811), which was directed against Schelling. During his last years Jacobi was employed in collecting and editing his Werke (6 vole., Leipsic, 1812‑24). His Auserlesenzr Briefwechael was edited by F. Roth (2 vols., 1825‑27). Max Jacobi edited Briefwechsel zwiaehen. Goethe and F. H. Jacobi (1846).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. A. Bchmid, Frledrich Heinrich Jacobi, Eire Daratellurtg seiner Peradn&ichkeit and seiner Philosophic ale Beitrag zu einer Geschichte des modernenWeltproblema, Heidelberg, 1908; F. H. Jacobi each aeinem Leben, Lehren and Wirken, ed. $chlichtigroll, weiller and Thierech. Munich, 1819; J. Kuhn, Jacobi and die Philosophic seiner Zeit, Mainz, 1834; F. Deyeke, F. H, Jacobi im VerhBltniaa zu aeinen Zeitgenoaaen, Frankfort, 1849; F. D. Maurice, Modern Philosophy, pp, 644‑851, London, 1882; E. Zirngiebl, F. H. Jacobi's Leben, DidUete urul Denken, Vienna, 1867; L. L€vy‑Bruhl, La Philoaophie de Jacobi, Paris, 1894; N. Wilds, F. H. Jacobi: a Study in the Origin of German Realism, New York, 1594. Consult also J. E. Erdmann, Geachichte der Philoaophie, 2 vola., Berlin, 18951896, Eng, tranal., 3 vole., London, 1892‑98.

	JACOBI, JUSTUS LUDWIG: Professor in Halls;
b. at Burg (14 m. n.e. of Magdeburg) Aug. 12, 1815;
d. at Halls May 31, 1888. He studied in Halls, and
in Berlin, where in 1841 be became privat‑docent,
and in 1847 professor extraordinary; in 1851 he
went as ordinary professor of theology to Konigs
berg, in 1855 to Halls. As representative of the
" mediating theology " and advocate of the Evan
gelical Union, he was involved in various contro
versies with the confessional party. By founding
the home for deaconesses in Halls with the wife of
Professor Tholuck, he took a practical part in the
charitable works of the Church. His writings betray
the influence of Neander. In Die Lehre des Pelagi.us,
sin. Beitrag zur Dogmengeschichte (Leipsie, 1842)
he represented the standpoint of Augustine. The
first part of Kirchliche Lehre von der Tradition und
heiligen Schrift appeared at Berlin, 1847. His
Lehrbuch der Kirehengesehichte (part i., Berlin, 1850)
is characterized by a thorough presentation of the
sources combined with a fine appreciation of ea
		VL‑6
ternal conditions as well as of internal development, measured by the central doctrine of sin and grace. He also wrote Die Lehre der Irtringiten verglichen mit der heiligen Schrift (1853; 2d ed., 1868); Professor Schlottmann, die hallesche Fakultat and die Centrumsparlei (2d ed., Halls, 1882), a defense of his colleague against the aggressive tendency of the Roman curia in the so‑called Kulturkampf; and Strei, flichter auf Religion, Politik, and Universitdten der Centrumspartei. (1883). He commemorated his teachers in Erinnerecng an D. August NetanaLer (1882), and Baron von Kotttvitz (1882).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Jacobi, J. L. Jacobi and die Yermittet‑
ungatheotoeie seiner Zeit, Goths, 1889.
JACOBITES: The Jacobites are an offshoot of the Syrian Monophysites. While the Syrians were the bearers of Christianity in the East,
General nowhere has ecclesiastical cleavage pro‑
Descrip‑ duced deeper fissures than among them.
	tion.	And the same might be said also of
		political relations. The peace between
the Persians and Jovinian in 363 made a sharp
distinction between Syrians of the Roman empire
and those of Persia, which has continued to the
present. In religion it was differences concerning
Christology which produced the deep rifts, espe
cially those connected with the names of Eutyches
and Nestorius. Hence one speaks no more of " an
Aramaic nation," rather he speaks of two peoples
of Aramaic lineage as distinct as two nationalities.
Indeed, authorities do not use the term Jacobitic
Church or Nestorian Church, they employ the terms
Jacobitic people, Nestorian people. The mutual
dislike of these two descendants from a common
stock is scarcely less intense than their common
hatred of Mohammedans. These peoples seem to
have lost consciousness of racial bonds; they speak
and write two dialects of a common speech, and
this difference goes back to an early time, since
the division had its origin in the fifth century. By
the term Jacobites is meant now the Syrian Mon
ophysites, though in earlier times Egyptian Mon
ophysites were also included. How early the term
came into use is not known; it occurs certainly in
the anathemas of the Council of Nice (787). The
emperors Zeno and Anastasius favored this form of
teaching, and it was introduced among the Syrians
by Barsumas of Edessa,, Xenaias Philoaenus of
Mabug, and Severus of Antioch. Under Justinian I.
many Syrian bishops were deposed and exiled for
refusing recognition to the deliverances of the
Council of Chalcedon. Under the protection of
the Empress Theodora, bishops were consecrated
for the East and South, and particularly Jacobus
Barada;us, whose labors in behalf of monophysitism
were epoch‑making.
Jacobus Baradseus (Jacob Baradai) was born at Tells Mauzalat (55 m. e. of Edessa) toward the close of the fifth century, and died
Jacobus at the monastery of Cassianus, on the
	Baradseus.	Egyptian border, July 30, 578. He
		was educated in the monastery of
Phasilta near Nisibis, lived for fifteen years as a
monk in Constantinople, and was consecrated bishop
in 541 or 543. Clad in rags, he then wandered from
Egypt to the Euphrates and to the islands of the

Jacobites	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	82
Jacobus de Varagine
Mediterranean for nearly forty years, expounding
his doctrines, ordaining deacons and priests, and
consecrating bishops, doing his work in the day
time and traveling at night sometimes forty miles
to a new place of labor. He is said to have con
secrated two patriarchs and twenty‑seven bishops,
and to have created 100,000 priests and deacons.
After the death of the patriarch Severna, he at
tached himself to the party of Sergius of Tells,
and when Sergiua died he had Paulus of Egypt
made patriarch. He left little in the shape of
literature. An Anaphora is ascribed to him (Lat.
tranal. by E. Renaudot, Liturgiarum trrierttalium
collectio, ii., Paris, 1718, pp. 333 sqq.), also a con
fession extant in Arabic and Ethiopic, the genuine
ness of which is doubtful. A number of encyclicals
in a Syriac manuscript in London are thought to
be his.
	It was from Jacobus Baradaeus that the Jacobites
took their name, and not from the Apostle, as was
		stated by John of Ephesus, nor from
	Their	the Hebrew patriarch. They used to
	System	call themselves " the orthodox," and
		and	in Egypt went under the names of
	Order.	Theodosiana, Severiana, and Dioscu
			rians. For the peculiarities of doctrine
consult the articles EUTYCHIANIaM, and MONOPHY
sl‑s. In the propagation of this system they were
peculiarly zealous. In 1587 Leonard Abel found the
agent of the Jacobites ready to acknowledge the
Roman Church, but he absolutely refused to con
demn Dioscorus and to recognize Chakedon. In
the cultua emphasis is laid upon the making of the
bread of the Eucharist of leavened dough mixed
with salt and oil, and also upon the addition to the
tiiaagion " who was crucified on your account."
They make the sign of the cross with one finger,
and the lot is often used at the election of patriarchs
and bishops. Their patriarch takes his title from
Antioch, though he never resides there, inasmuch
as the Greeks regard Jacobites as heretics and refuse
to their chief officer residence in Antioch. His
seat is therefore not fixed, but is sometimes in a
monastery, often in Amid (Diarbekr). During the
Jacobitic schism, 1364‑1494, there were as many as
four officials claiming the title of patriarch in as
many different places. The jurisdiction of the
Syrian patriarch meets that of the Coptic patriarch,
though Jerusalem has both a Coptic and a Syrian
Jacobitic bishop. In the most flourishing period
of the Church it had probably 100 bishops. Under
the patriarch is the Maphrian, who is the primate
of the East, and is sometimes called Catholicus.
His office dates as far back as Jacobus Baradaeus,
though the title is much later. It is not uncommon
for a married man to be admitted to the order of
deacon or presbyter, though marriage after ordina
tion is not permitted. They have a number of
monasteries. The monks are not reckoned among
the clergy, yet the bishops are chosen from among
the monks, and leave charge of the cloisters. The
writers of the Jacobites include Jacob of Edessa,
Jacob of Sarug, John of Ephesus, John of Dara
Isaac of Antioch, George, bishop of the Arabs, and
Philoxenus (qq.v.), also Paul of Tells,, Thomas of
Heraclea, Stephen bar Sudaili, Dionyaius of Tell‑
mahre, Moses bar Kepha, and Dionysius bar Salibi.
	The emperors of the East, with the exception of
Zeno and Anastasius, were opposed to the Jacobitic
		doctrines, and Justinian I. attempted
	History	in vain to unite them with the Cath‑
		and	olic Church. The Syrian Jacobites
	Present	suffered not only under the emperors,
	Status.	but also under the Mohammedans,
			while their brethren in Egypt seemed
to be able better to conciliate the followers of
Mohammed. The Crusaders refused them access
to the Holy Sepulcher. In the time of Gregory
XIII., the Jacobites are said to have numbered
50,000 families, mostly poor, scattered in the towns
and villages of Syria, Babylonia, and Mesopotamia.
Since that time they seem to have dwindled, as the
reports of different travelers are followed from that
time to the present. Sachau reports that at Mosul
out of 2,328 Christian houses, some 900 were those
of Syrian Jacobites. The most recent statistics give
22,700 adherents, twenty‑four parishes, forty‑two
churches, eighty‑one priests; in Mosul is the largest
number of adherents, 7,000, and in Marlin the
next largest number, 4,000. The situation of these
people has been the more critical because, while
the most of the other sects received recognition
from the Ports, they were without it. Through the
interposition of the English this disability was re
moved in 1882. What adds to the difficulty of
their position is that they are regarded as heretics
by all other sects in the region. Perhaps their most
flourishing settlement is at Sadadl on the road from
Damascus to Palmyra. In 1653 the Christians of
St. Thomas of India (see NE$TORIANa) seem to have
had relations with them, though there is no indi
cation of present affiliation. Recently special at
tempts have been made by the Church of Rome
to have the Oriental churches come into connection
with it; the encyclical Prcechsra of Leo XIII. of
June 20, 1894, and particularly the Orientaliurn
dignitas eccleaiarum of Nov. 30, 1894, are evidences
of this movement. Several periodicals are employed
to further these efforts, notably Bessarione in Rome,
the Revue de l'orient ehretien of Paris, with its auxil
iaries, and the Calendarium ecclesiae utriusqzee of
Innsbruck. The earlier attempts of the years
1169, 1237, 124?, and 1442 produced no perma
nent results. 		(E. NEOTLE.)
BI8L100RAPHy; The chief work on the Syrian J&eebite1 is
still J. 8. Aseemani Bibliotheca oricntalie, especially vol. ii., Rome, 1721. Consult farther: E. Renaudot, Hint. patriarcharum ALexandrinorum Jacobitarum, Paris, 1713; M. Le Quien, Oriene Chriatianua vola. ii, iii., ib. 1740; J. M. Neale, Hiat, of the Holy Eastern Church, 2 vole. London, 1850 (for the liturgy); O. H. Parry, Six Months
in a Syrian Monastery, ib. 1895; C. E. Hammond, Lib. orgies Eastern and Western, ed. F. E. Brightman, i. 89110 ib. 1898• F. Diekamp, Die origenistiachen Slreitipkeiten im 8. Jahrhundert, Monster, 1899; R. Duval, La LiUkrature eyriaque, Paris 1900; E. 8achau, Am Euph‑at and Tigris, Leipaic, 1900• J. B. Chabot, Chronique de Michel le Syrien, Patriarchs jacobique d'Anlioche (11881199), 2 vols., Paris, 1900‑p4• F. C. Burkitt, Early Eastern Christianity, London, 1904; L. $ilbernagl, ye,.jas_
sung and pegeniotirtiger Beatand aamtlicher Kirehen lea Orients, Regensburg, 1904• Harnaek, Dogma. Passim; KL, xi. 1124‑34; the periodicals mentioned in the last paragraph above, together with Echoa d'orient; and the literature under EDTYCHrANIaM; Movorararrsa. 0„

Jacob Barada3ue consult H. G. Bleyn, Jacobus Baradeus, Leyden, 1882; DCB, iii. 328‑332.
JACOBS, HENRY EYSTER: Lutheran; b. at Gettysburg, Pa., Nov. 10, 1844. He was graduated at Pennsylvania College, Gettysburg, in 1862, and Gettysburg Theological Seminary in 1865. After being a tutor in Pennsylvania College in 18647, he was a home missionary at Pittsburg, Pa., in 1867‑68, and then pastor and principal of Thiel Hall, Phillipsburg, Pa. (now Thiel College, Greenville, Pa.), in 1868‑70. In 1870 he returned to Pennsylvania College as professor of Latin and history (1870‑80), classics (1880‑81), and Greek (1881 83). Since 1883 he has been professor of systematic theology at the Lutheran Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, of which he has also been dean since 1894. Besides editing The Lutheran Review from 1882‑96, he has translated and edited L. Hutter'a Compend of Lutheran Theology (in collaboration with G. F. Spieker; Philadelphia, 1867); H. Schmid's Doctrinal Theology of the Lutheran Church (in collaboration with C. A. Hay; 1875); The Book of Concord: or, Symbolical Standards of the Lutheran Church (2 vole., 1882‑83); H. A. W. Meyer's Commentary on, Galatians and Ephesiam; (New York, 1884); and F. Diisterdieek's Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Revelation of John (1887). He likewise edited The Lutheran Commentary (13 vole., New York, 1895‑99) to which he contributed the portion on Romans and I Corinthians, and The Lutheran CycloPazdia (1899). As independent works he has written The Lutheran Movement in England during the Reigns of Henry VIII. and Edward VL, and its Literary Monuments (Philadelphia, 1891); History of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the United States (New York, 1893); Elements of Religion (Philadelphia, 1894); Martin Luther, the Hero of the Reformation (New York, 1898); German Emigration to America, 170917.1,0 (Philadelphia, 1899); and Summary of the Christian. Faith (1905).

JACOBS, JOSEPH: Jewish folklorist, historian, and critic; b, at Sydney, N. S. W., Aug. 29, 1854. He was educated at Sydney and London universities and at St. John's College, Cambridge (B.A., 1876), and also studied at Berlin. From 1878 to 1884 he was secretary of the Society of Hebrew Literature, and in 1882‑1900 was secretary of the Mansion House (later Russo‑Jewish) Fund and Committee, taking an active part in behalf of the Russian Jews. He has likewise devoted himself to Jewish history, and for this purpose visited Spain in 1888 to study manuscript sources, later turning his attention to the history of the Jews in England. He helped found the Jewish Historical Society of England, of which he was president in 1898‑99, and also assisted in establishing the Maccabeans; and he was long a member of the executive committee of the Anglo‑Jewish Association. In 1900 he settled permanently in New York, being revising editor of the JE (1901‑06), and in 1906 was appointed professor of English literature and rhetoric in the Jewish Theological Seminary, also becoming editor of the American Hebrew. As a folklorist he occupies a foremost rank, and was for some years
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Jacobites
Jacobus de Varsgine
editor of Folk‑Lore and honorary secretary of the International Folk‑Lore Society. Among his publications special mention may be made of the following: Studies in Jewish Statistics, Social, Vital, and Anthropometrie (London, 1891); Jews of Angevin England, Documents aced Records (1893) ; Studies in Biblical Archmology (1894); Sources of the History of the Jews in Spain (1895); Jewish Ideals, and other Essays (1896); and As Others Saw Him (an imaginative life of Christ from a Jewish point of view; New York, 1903).

JACOBUS: The Latin form of James (q.v.); see also JACOR.
JACOBUS DE VARAGINE, GIACOMO DA VARAZZE, JACOPO DA VARAZZE (often called Jacob, or James, of Viraggio) : Archbishop of Genoa; b. at Casanuova in Varazze (on the coast, 18 m. s.w. of Genoa) c.1228 (or 1230); d. in Genoa July 16 (?), 1298. He entered the Dominican order in 1244, probably studied at Cologne, Paris, and Bologna, became prior at Genoa (or Asti) about 1258, was provincial prior for Lombardy 1267‑76, 1x8186, and archbishop of Genoa 1292‑98. He fulfilled several quasi‑diplomatic missions and as archbishop exercised feudal authority over San Remo and governed certain churches in the Levant. As archbishop he promoted efforts for the reform of the clergy, intervened successfully to promote peace between Guelph and Ghibelline, and transferred the government of San Remo to the civil authority. He was beatified by Pius VII. in 1816, and is popularly reverenced in Liguria as the promoter of peace.
Jacobus is best known for his writings, especially the " Golden Legend," which was possibly the most popular book of the Middle Ages. This work, known also as " Lives of the Saints " and as Historic Lombardica, consists of readings from the lives of the saints for the festivals of the church year. It was probably written before 1260, and was very early translated into at least French, German, English (by William Caxton, 1‑18‑1?), Italian, and Dutch. Within about fifty years after the invention of printing more than 100 editions of original and translations had been printed. Besides the " Golden Legend " Jacobus wrote several series of sermons " On the Saints," " On the Blessed Virgin," etc., only less popular than the Legend, and also known as " Golden " on account of their popularity. His " Chronicle of Genoa " is a somewhat heterogeneous mass, but not without some historical value. He is alleged also to have made the first translation of the Bible into Italian and there are reasons for supposing that he wrote the " Game of Chess," which, like the " Golden Legend," is best known in English under the name of Caxton. Several other hitherto disputed or lost writings, an " Art of Preaching," a " Summary of Vices and Virtues," Sermones in visitationibus religiosoram, ate., have recently been discovered or established as his.
E. C. RICHARDOON.
BIBLIOGRAPHY; For editions of the works of Jacobus consult: Potthaat, Wegweiaer, pp, 83435. An incomplete teat of the Chronicle is in Muratori, .Scriptorea, ix. 5‑56; the moat convenient text of the Sermons is that of Antwerp, 1712, in 6 vole.; the standard edition of she Golden

Jahn °'	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	84
Legend is by J. G. T. Graeeee, Leipsio, 1848, new ed.,
Wratislaw, 1890; the Eng. trsasl. of the Golden Legend
by	Carton, with introduction and notes by Eales, was
published London, 1885, and a sumptuous edition, ed.
W.	Morris and F. 3. Elks, 3 vols., ib. 1892. The prefaces
to the many editions and translations contain biographical
and bibliographical material. The standard monographs
are: P. Anfossi, Memori.e iatoriche apParteneuti alla vita del
	. Jacopo da Voragine, Genoa; G, Spotorno, Notizie
atorico‑critico del . . . Giacomo da Varazze, Genoa, 1823;
and V. M. Palazza, Vita del . . Giacomo da Varazze,
Genoa, 1867. Consult also 11f, Waresquiel, Le Bienheuerux
Jacques de Vorayine, Paris, 1902; J. C. Btousaole, Preface
d la		Legend doraEe, Paris, 1907. The Princeton Theological
Review for April, 1903, contains an article on the Golden
Legend, and for July, 1904, one on "Voragine as a preach
er," Consult farther: J. Qudtif and J. Echard, Scriptorea
ordinia praedicatorum, i. 454‑459, ii. 818, Paris, 1719‑21;
ASB, Jan„ i., pp. xix.‑xx,; KL, vi. 1178‑82.
JACOBUS, MELANCTHON WILLIAMS: The name of two American divines.
1. Presbyterian pastor and educator; b. at Newark, N. J., Sept. 19, 1816; d. at Allegheny, Pa., Oct. 28, 1876. He was graduated from the College of New Jersey (Princeton) in 1834, and from the Princeton Theological Seminary in 1838. The following year he was instructor in Hebrew at the seminary. In Sept., 1839, he entered upon a pastorate of twelve years at the First Presbyterian Church, Brooklyn. In 1851 he became professor of Oriental and Biblical literature in the Western Theological Seminary, Allegheny, Pa., and retained this position till his death. He was also pastor of the Central Presbyterian Church, Pittsburg, 18581870. In 1870 he presided, conjointly with Philemon H. Fowler, at the opening of the first General Assembly of the reunited Presbyterian Church, old and new schools. His principal works are Notes on the New Testament (4 vole., 1845‑59); Notes on the Book of Genesis (2 vole., 1864‑65); and Notes on the Book of Exodus (1874).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Presbyterian Reunion: a Memorial Volume, pp. 530‑532, New York, 1871; Ii,. E, Thompson, in American Church History Series, vi. 144, 178, 181, ib. 1895; J. H. Patton, Popular Hiat. of the Presbyterian Church, p. 407, ib. 1900.
2. Congregationalist, son of the preceding; b. at Allegheny City, Pa., Dec. 15, 1855. He was graduated from Princeton College in 1877, and from Princeton Theological Seminary in 1881; studied at Gottingen and Berlin (1881,84). He was pastor of the Presbyterian Church at Oxford, Pa. (1884‑91), and since 1891 has been professor of New‑Testament exegesis and criticism in Hartford Theological Seminary, where he has been dean of the faculty since 1903, and acting president in 1902‑03. He was also acting pastor of Center Congregational Church, Hartford, Conn., in 1899‑1900 and was Stone lecturer in Princeton Theological Seminary in 1897‑98,
and lecturer on the New Testament in Mount Holy‑' College in 1901 and 1903‑04. He has written
A Problem in New Testament Criticism (Stone lectures; New York, 1900), and has edited Roman
Catholic and Protestant Bibles Compared (New York, 1905); and A Standard Bible Ilictionary (1909).
JACOBY, HERMANN KARL JOHANN: German Protestant; b. at Berlin Dec. 30, 1836. He was educated at the University of Berlin and the preachers' seminary at Wittenberg, and after being i
a teacher in the gymnasium of Landsberg, deacon at Heldrungen castle, and gymnasia) teacher and assistant cathedral preacher at Stendal until 1868, was appointed professor of homiletics in the University of Konigsberg, a position which he still occupies. He leas written Zwei evangelische Lebensbilder aus der katholischen Kirche (Bielefeld, 1864); Liturgik der Refornuttoren (2 vole., Goths, 1871‑76); Beitrdge zur christlichen Erkenntnis (Giitersloh, 1871); Christi Tugenden (Goths, 1883); Luthers votreformatoriache Predigt (Konigsberg, 1883); Allgemeine Padagogik auf Grund der chriatlichen Ethik (Goths, 1883); Der crate Brief des Apostels Johannes (Leipsie, 1891); Neutestamentliche Ethik (KSnigsberg, 1899); and Die Evangelien des Markus and Johannes, homiletische Betrachtungen (Leipsie,1903).
	JACOPONE DA TODI, yd"co‑po'n~ d8 told!
(properly Jacopo de' Benedetti, Lat. Jacobus de
		Benedictis) ; Franciscan poet; b. at
	Life. Todi (24 m. s. of Perugia), c. 1240;
		d. at the monastery of Collazone (near
Perugia) on Christmas night, 1306. Highly en
dowed by nature, he won both degrees in law at
Bologna, and became respected and prosperous in
his profession in his native city. He had a beau
tiful, noble, and virtuous wife, whose death from
the fall of a gallery in a theater in 1268 changed
his entire life. He renounced all that had formerly
appeared to him great and splendid, gave up his
business, divided his property among the poor,
and joined the Franciscan ternaries. To express
contempt of the world and self he went to absurd
extremes of fanaticism and sought to realize literally
the " foolishness " described in I Cor. i. 20‑29, so
that he received the nickname Jacopone (" silly
James "), which he accepted as a badge of honor.
In 1278 he sought to enter the Franciscan order,
but they would not receive him until he proved
the soundness of his mind by a Libellus de mundi
contemtu. Becoming a monk did not change his
eccentric habits, and those who judged him most
mildly pronounced him spt'ritu ebrius. The condi
tions of the time drew Jacopone into the storm of
political life. His love of truth could not endure
the Church's abuses, and many a judgment full of
bitter earnestness did he hurl fn the days of popes
Celestine V. and Boniface VIII. He attacked the lat
ter personally, and, in May, 1297, joined the league
of Roman magnates that aimed to bring about
the pope's deposition, thereby incurring the ban
of the Church. When Boniface VIII. conquered
Pr.Tneste in 1298 Jacopone was imprisoned. After
the death of Boniface he was liberated, Dec., 1303,
and spent his closing years in the monastery of
Collazone.
Jacopone's literary products include sententious maxims of the sort found in the Liter conjormi‑
tatumt compiled by Bartholomew of
Writings. Pisa, which were gratefully preserved
The Stabat and circulated in the Franciscan order. Mater. But a much larger circle of devotees

was won by his Italian and Latin lyrics. The Florentine edition by Bonaccorsi (1490) gives

100 Italian Poems; the Venetian edition by Tressati (1614) no fewer than 211 satires, odes, penitential

86
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
hymns, and spiritual love‑songs. He sinks himself as a mystic into Christian metaphysics, and celebrates the exalted flight of the soul to God and its nuptials with the divine love; he relates the conflict between the penitent spirit and the body still rebelliously striving under the rod. In other poems he scourges with holy zeal the wrongs of the timepopular customs, luxury of the women, worldliness of the nuns, the papal Antichrist. Finally he brings before the people the life of Jesus, to teach them holy living after the rule of Christ, and celebrates poverty most highly.
The question of authenticity is much more difficult in case of the Latin hymns which bear Jacopons's name, and they have been ascribed to various authors. Apart from Cur murtdua militat (cf. H. A. Daniel, Thesaurus hymnologicus, ii., Leipsic, 1844, 379; S. W. Duffield, Latin Hymn‑Writers, New York, 1889, 279‑280) the most important is the renowned sequence Stabat mater dolorosa, beside which the manuscripts contain also the parody Stabat mater speciosa juxla foenum gaudiosa, dum jacebst Parvulus. The hymn undoubtedly originated in the Franciscan order, but who the actual author was is open to many hypotheses. Gregory the Great, Bernard of Clairvaux, Innocent Ill., and others have been suggested. The hymn is anonymous in manuscripts of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and it is tradition of the Franciscan order which names Jacopone as its author. It was sung by the Flagellants who traversed Italy in 1398 (see FLAGELLATION, FLAGELLANT) and, according f0 the Summa histm•ialis of Antoninus Florentinus (d. 1450), sang " hymns in Latin and the vernacular, and especially that Stabat mater doloross which they say Gregory gave forth." The sequence was used in the Church as early as the fourteenth century, and eighty‑three German translations alone are known. Of musical settings for this celebrated hymn, the compositions of Palestrina and Pergolese, Astorga, and Haydn are well known. The Protestant judgment of the hymn must be, doctrinally, that it divides reverence between mother and son in a manner never to be endured by a Protestant temperament; but, regarded esthetically, it may be pronounced a pearl among medieval hymns.
E. LEMPP.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bartholomew of Pica, Liter conformitatum p. 80b, Milan, 1510; L. Wadding, Annalea Minorum, v. 407 sqq., vi. 77 sqq., Rome, 1733; F. A. March, Latin Hymns, pp. 171‑177, 300‑303, New York, 1874 (gives text of Stabal mater, notes on it, and notes on Jacopone); H. Thode, Franz von Assisi and die Anfhnge der Renaissance in Italien, pp. 408 sqq., Berlin, 1885; 8. W. Duffield, Latin Hymn‑Writers and their Hymns, chap. xxv., ib. 1889; KL, vi. 1198‑98. On the Stabat mater the three best works are: F. G. Lisco, Stabat mater, Berlin, 1853; C. H. Bitter, Studie zum Stabat mater, Leipaic, 1883; J. Kayser, Beitrllge zur Geachichte and Erkl&rung der alteaten Kirchenhymnen, ii. 100‑192, Paderborn, 1888; A. Tenneroni, in Nuova Antologia, June 18, 1907; G. Galli, Diaeiplinanti dell' Umbria del 1260 ale loro Landi, Turin, 1907. Available in English are R. C. Trench, Sacred Latin Poetry, pp. 282‑263, London, 1884; Seven Great Hymns, pp. 98‑109, New York, 1888 (text, transl., and notes); D. T. Morgan, Hymns of the Latin Church, pp. 5‑8, 184‑188, London, 1871; W. A. Merrill, Latin Hymns, pp. 85‑86, Boston, 1904 (text and notes); Julian, Hymn nolopli, pp. 1081‑84 (admirable summary of data, details of principal texts and Eng. transls.).
Jsoobns Jaha
JAEGER, y@'ger, JOHANN. See EPI$TOLAE OB$CURUM VIRORUM.
JAFFE, ydf'fg', PHILIPP: German historian; b. at Schwersenz (6 m. e. of Posen), Prussia, Feb. 17, 1819; d. at Wittenberg Apr. 3, 1870. He studied at the University of Berlin under Ranks, and first distinguished himself by his prize‑essay, Geschichte des deutsehen Reichs unter Lothar dem Sachsen (Berlin, 1843), which was followed by his Geachichte des deutsehen Reichs unler Konrad dem DritEen (Hanover, 1845). Finding that, as a Jew, the road to academic preferment in Prussia was closed to him, he took up the study of medicine in 1850, and spent the next three years in the universities of Berlin and Vienna. In 1854, however, shortly after he had passed his examination in medicine, he became the collaborator of G. H. Pertz on the Monuments Germanise hialorica and edited for that collection a number of works in which he showed great ability in historical‑philological criticism. He became extraordinary professor of history at the University of Berlin in 1862, and withdrew from the Monumenta the following year. He turned Christian in 1868, broke with his old friends, fell into despondency, and finally committed suicide. Other important works by Jaff4 are the invaluable Regesta pontifu‑um Romanorum . . . ad annum . . 1198 (Berlin, 1851; 2d ed., Leipsic, 1881‑88); the masterly Bibliotheca rerum Germsnicarum (6 vols., Berlin, 1864‑73); and Ecclesi.te metropolitante Coloniensis codices (1874), in which W. Wattenbaeh collaborated with him.
JAGGAR, THOMAS AUGUSTUS: Protestant Episcopal bishop of Southern Ohio; b. in New York City June 2, 1839. He was educated mainly by private tutors, and pursued his theological studies partly privately and partly in the General Theological Seminary, New York City. He was ordered deacon in 1860, and advanced to the priesthood in 1863. After being minister at St. George's, Flushing, N. Y. (1860‑&2), and Trinity, Bergen Point, N. J. (186314), he was rector of Anthon Memorial (now All Souls'), New York City, in 1864‑68, St. John's, Yonkers, N. Y., in 1868‑70, and Holy Trinity, Philadelphia, in 1870‑75. In 1875 he was consecrated first bishop of Southern Ohio. Ill health, from which he had long suffered, however, obliged him to retire from the episcopal office in 1889, although he still retains his seat and vote in the house of bishops. While at Yonkers he founded St. John's Riverside Hospital in that city. He has written Duty of the Clergy in Relation to Modern Scepticism (Cincinnati, O., 1883), and The Personality of Truth (Bohlen lectures for 1900; New York, 1900).

JAHN, yin, JOHANN: Roman Catholic Biblical scholar; b. at Tasswitz, near Znaim (47 m. n.n.w. of Vienna), Moravia, June 18, 1750; d. at Vienna Aug. 16, 1816. He attended the gymnasium at Znaim, studied philosophy at Olmiitz, and in 1772 began the study of theology at the Premonstratensian convent of Bruck, near Znaim. After he had taken the vow in 1774 he was employed for a time in pastoral work at Mislitz, but was soon recalled to Bruck as teacher of Oriental languages and Biblical hermeneutics. On the suppression of the

Jainism	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	86
convent in 1784, he was given a similar chair in the lyceum at Ohniitz, and in 1789 he was transferred to the University of Vienna as professor of Oriental languages, Old‑Testament introduction, and Biblical archeology. To this professorship dogmatics was added in 1803. On account of his advanced views concerning the Bible he was honorably removed from his chair in 1805 and promoted to a canonry in St. Stephen's, Vienna. Henceforth he lived in retirement, devoting himself to Biblical and linguistic studies. His most important works are Einleittcng in die gottliehen Schri/'ten des Alten Bundes (2 parts, Vienna, 1792; 2d ed., 4 vols., 1802‑03); Biblische Arehdologie (5 vols., 17971805); Introductio in h7rros sscros Veteris Ftederis in compendium redacts (1804; 2d ed., 1814; Eng. transl., Introduction to the 0. T., New York, 1827); Archarologis Biblics in compendium redacts (1804; 2d ed., 1814; Eng. transl., Biblical Archwology, Andover, 1823); Enchiridion hermeneuticce (1812); Appendix hermenetetica (2 fast., 1813‑15); and the posthumous NachtrZige (Tiibingen, 1821). Jahn also published a number of grammars, lexicons, and text‑books of Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac, and Arabic, and an edition of the Hebrew Bible (4 vols., Vienna, 1806). His Introductio, Archceologia, Enchirldiox, and Appendix hermeneutics were plated upon the Index in 1822.
BII3LI0(3nAPHT: Vindiciae Joattnie Jahn, Leipaic, 1822; F. H. Reusch, Index verboterun BUcher, ii. 1083‑84, Bonn,
1885; KL, vi. 1208‑10.
JAINISM.
The Founder (§ 1).	Basis in Brahmanism 	4j.
Relation to Buddhism The System and its History
t§ 2). 	($ b).
The Jain Philosophy (§ 3). The Literature (§ 6).
	The remote origin of Jainism is traced to a teacher
named Parsva who lived in north central India in
		the eighth century before Christ and
	r. The	left a school of thought which did not
	Founder. become active till two centuries later.
		The immediate founder was a certain
Vardhamana, a younger son of Siddartha, and a
contemporary of Buddha. The Jain literature,
following the usual tendency of religious books to
exalt and glorify the founder, represents the father
of Vardhamana as king of a large town named
Kundagrama or Kundapura, identified as the mod
ern Basukund. Investigation has shown that this
place was a mere suburb of the town Vaisali, the
modern Besarh. Siddartha could therefore have
been at best only headman of a village, though he
was connected with the king of Vaisali and with
the dynasty then ruling hlaga,dha. Vardhamana
consequently belonged to the Kshatriya or warrior
class, as did Buddha, therefore to the aristocracy.
The traditions represent him as living with his
parents till they died, when his elder brother, Nan
divardhana, succeeded as head of the household.
Vardhamana was then twenty‑eight years of age,
and he sought and gained permission to enter the
spiritual career. For twelve years he followed the
life of the meditative ascetic, after which he was
recognized as a prophet, having claimed " ° perfect
knowledge and faith," and was hailed Mahavira,
" great hero," Jina, " victor," and greeted with
other titles indicative of his success. He lived thirty years after this, following the career of a teacher and ascetic, preaching his doctrine and organizing his Church. He died at Papa or Pava, the modern Padraona. His contemporaneity with Buddha is established by the fact that the traditions of Jaina and Buddhists alike refer to the same contemporaries, which brings out the farther coincidence that the two religions arose in approximately the same region, north of the center of India, and that Jainism became active and made its early conquests in a region comprising the modern Oudh and the districts of Tirhut and Bihar in western Bengal, where its progress can be traced by inscriptions from the time of Asoka in the third century B.C.
The rise of two religious leaders of the same caste in the same region and period, bearing the same
titles, which were gained in practically z. Rela‑ the same manner, using a common tion to stock of ideas expressed in a common Buddhism. technic of names and epithets, and founding churches with similar forms of organization, and having each a Nirvana as the goal of human striving, is a phenomenon which might well cause not only dispute between the later adherents of the religions, but also confusion and perplexity among scientific students. For long the resemblances between Buddhism and Jainism were explained by the supposition that one was a schism or an offshoot of the other, and the question of priority was hotly debated. Recent study has cleared the atmosphere not only in the matter of
I	origins, but in exact knowledge of the details of the lives of the founders and of the religious and philosophical conceptions and modifications of such ideas as were inherited from the society and religion existent prior to the rise of these two sects. Thus of the founders it is now known that the birthplaces were different, that Buddha's mother died while he was an infant, while Vardhama,na's lived to see him reach maturity; that Buddha entered the ascetic life against the will of his father, Vardhamana after his parent's death and with the consent of his family; and that Buddha lived this life for six years and contemned its results, while Vardhamana pursued it for twelve years and regarded the exercise as salutary, continuing the vocation
after reaching sainthood. Among the common
titles of the founders are Jina, Arhat, Mahavira, Tathagatha, Buddha, and Paranivrita, every one of which is in the sacred writings of the sects given to the founders. But each sect has a marked and unmistakable preference for a certain set of these different from that preferred by the other. Common to both sects as developed is the worship of the founders; but in Jainism this is consistent with the fundamental ideas of the system, while in Buddhism the primitive ideal rigidly excludes it‑the practise there has been fostered by the people's inability to live up to the abstract ideal the Buddhist faith presents. A fundamental doctrine in both sects is that of Ahimsa or the sacredness of all life. In this the principal difference between the two religions is the irrational extreme to which the Jains have carried the practise. The Jain may eat even of vegetables and fruit only such as have no trace of

87	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	sainimm
life left‑may not pluck the vegetable or fruit from its source‑and moat strain through a cloth the water he drinks. Further regulations prescribe the covering of the ascetic's mouth and nose with a cloth that no insects may be drawn in with the breath to their death, and the pushing of a broom before him as he walks that no living thing may be crushed by his feet. The systems have developed along similar lines, with orders of monks upon whom severe duties press, and lay communicants from whom a lesser degree of abstinence is demanded. Both have had temples of ambitious structure, in which were placed statues of the founders and their disciples, though those of the Jains are the more monumental. These reeemblancea and differences are now quite fully socounted for.
The fundamental assumption of the Jaina is the eternity of matter, which is regarded as atomic in structure. Time proceeds in pairs of
3. The Jain cycles each of enormous length, in the
Philosophy. first of which goodness constantly increases, and in the second diminishes. Since matter is eternal, no necessity arises for creative agency, and Jains have consequently been called atheists. But worship is paid to the Jina, and indeed to Hindu deities, since the native predilection to polytheism has in Jainism, as in Buddhism, been too strong for the philosophy to overcome. Over against the eternity of matter the Jain puts the eternity of individual spirits. The Jain philosophy is therefore dualistic as against the spiritualistic monism of Buddhism. These spirits are bound by the action of Karma (the accumulated effects of all deeds in former existences), but owing to the differences in the manner of conceiving individual existence, that action is regarded differently from the Buddhistic method. To the Buddhist the soul is not a permanent individual entity passing as a unit from one state of existence or incarnation to another, but a dissoluble aggregate of qualities in which not individuality but the effect of Karma is the integrating factor. To the Jain the human spirit is an eternal entity which in its various incarnated lives Karma affects as a permanent individuality. Consequently Nirvana takes a different form in the two religions. Logically in Buddhism it is the annihilation of Karma as an integrating principle, in consequence of which the individual as such ceases to exist. In Jainism Nirvana is release of the soul from union with the body and from connection with matter, but the soul continues consciously to exist. Salvation is wrought through ascetic practises, guided by the three jewels of right faith, right knowledge, and right conduct. For the layman eight reincarnations are necessary to secure release, while the ascetic secures the same result by twelve years of strenuous self‑denial, after which he may if he will at once enter Nirvana by felo de se. The monks are compelled to take the five major vows, practically identical with those of Buddhism.
The great similarity of the two systems and also their mutual dislike led to patient search for the reasons of the resemblances and the differences. Especially have the religious life and obligations of the pre‑Jain Brahman ascetic been under review.
The result is, the discovery that of the Brahman ascetic of early times were demanded four of the five major vows, viz., Ahimea, truthful‑
4. Basis nese, honesty, and continence. But
in Brah‑ besides these points, common to the
	manism.	three systems, there are others which
		are established as clearly pre‑Jainiatic.
Thus it was required of the Brahman recluse not to
change his residence during the rainy season, at
other times the period of his stay in a place was
limited, though in the later systems the bounds of
his stay varied; the rules for dress in all three
systems reduce to practically the same basis, and
Brahman and Jain ritual provide for the elimination
of hair and beard. Even the straining of drinking
water is Brahmanic, and the equipment of clokh
and begging‑bowl is common to Brahman and
Jain. Jainism stands revealed, therefore, as one of
the two revolts against Brahmanic teaching, ritual,
and doctrine which took form in the sixth century
s.o., and for ten centuries threatened the extinction
of the parent faith. Yet, like Buddhism, it bor
rowed thought and even much of its religious ter
minology and practise from Brahmanism. Its
monks are called Yatis, a Brahmanic name for
eremite, and the titles given the Jina. are common
places in pre‑Jain Brahmanism.
On such a basis, in the sixth century B.C., in the north central part of India, Vardhamana, after twelve years of asceticism, launched
g. The his system. His social status as a
I	System Kshatriya opened to him the ears of
and its the wealthy, while his performance of
	History.	the ascetic vows and the sanctity thus
		gained won him the reverence of the
lower orders of the population. He laid the usual
emphasis of the Brahman upon the evil in matter
and on the value of the ascetic life as the means
to evade it. The older vows were made more
stringent; a theology with its heaven and hell and
Nirvana was formulated. The system broke with
Brahmanism in making its benefits extend to all
castes and even to the outcasts, though it was
affirmed that all preceding Jinas (twenty‑three in
number) were of the warrior caste. Its ascetics were
called Nirgrantha, " freed from bonds," Yatis,
" ascetics," or Sadhus, " holy ones." And since
not all could follow the ascetic pattern, provision
was made for the lay community. The members
vowed obedience to the Jina, the law and the
teacher; in the early morning they worshiped at
home, and in the temple the image of the Jinx,
read and recited from the scriptures, sang hymns,
and then at different times of the day practised
their devotions. Meanwhile they had the privilege
of contributing to the support of the monastica,
and received the name of upasakas or " worshipers"
and aravakas or" hearers." After eight reincarna
tions they were promised Nirvana. For the monk a
more rigorous routine is prescribed, and a speedier
release foretold. During the rainy season he seeks
shelter in a monastery of the order, for then life is
more abundant and movement pregnant with dan
ger to it. For the remaining eight months he takes
the road and wanders barefoot and bareheaded;
he may not sleep in a bed nor take any conveyance,

Jsini°n	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	88
James
and may have as his only possessions his cloth,
bowl, broom, and sacred books‑indeed, these are
not reckoned his own. He may not touch metal,
may eat no fruit and drink no wine, light no fire,
and take no bath except in water which has been
previously used by another and has so been rendered
void of life. He may not disturb the insects or
vermin which torment his flesh, nor do anything
that may harm even potential life. After twelve
years thus spent he gains his goal and may seize
the possession, or may continue in this life as a
teacher. Moreover, his discipline covers the inner
life as he gains mastery over his own mind, con
science, aced heart. Thus the system was laid. In
the fourth century B.c. differences of opinion re
specting the stringency of the Jina,'s commando
regarding clothing split the religion into two parts,
the Svetambaras or " white‑clothed " and the
Digambaras or " air‑clothed." The latter wore a
minimum of clothing, sometimes none, and are
possibly, even probably, the Gymnosophoi. of Greek
literature. The Svetambaras have both monks and
nuns, the Digambaras do not admit women to the
ascetic life. The former have divided into seven
minor sects, differing only on lesser points of faith
or practise. The religion spread to the west and
south, the Svetambaras remaining in the northern
portion, the Digambaras developing to the south.
Its course can be trackd by inscriptions dated from
the third pre‑Christian century until, in the fifth
Christian century, it is found far south of Central
India. There it met the opposition of the Brahman
sages Manikka Vasagar and Tiru Nana Sambandha,
who were effective in staying its progress in the
tenth century. It has never been a missionary
religion in the sense that Buddhism has been, con
sequently its adherents have been confined to the
peninsula.. Its numbers, according to the census
of 1901, are 1,334,148, though the authorities de
clare that more exact details would make the total
greater, since many known Jaina returned them
selves simply as " Hindus." The institutions are
the temples, the monasteries where the monks spend
the rainy season, and the hospitals for animals,
where the maimed and even the healthy are sup
ported. A great deal of wealth is in the possession
of adherents of the religion, and this is held at the
service of the order.
The literature of Jainism is as yet comparatively unknown, and until 1870 almost none of it beyond
the Kalpa Sutra was in the possession
6. The of Occidentals. The general name corLiterature. responding to the word Scripture is Siddantha, under which term are included six classes of writings, viz.: twelve Angas, twelve Upangas, ten Painnas, six Ghedasutras, two sutras without special names, and four Mulasutras. There is constant reference in this literature to a class of writings called Purvas, or primitive ecripturea, which took form perhaps as early as the fourth century B.c., but are either lost or embodied in the Angas. There are references also to the loss and recovery of these primitive scriptures such as lead to the suspicion that the sacred books of the Joins have passed through experiences like those of the Hebrews, Christians, Zoroastrians, and Con‑
fucians. At any rate, so far as known, the present
literature does not contain anything recognized as
Purva. The Angas are the authoritative scriptures
of the Svetambaras, and the authoritative recension
took place in the fourth century of our era. The
language is the Prakrit, as is that of most of the
other literature so far as it is known; some of it
is in Gujarati. To each of the Angas there are sub
sidiary parts, just as there are Brahma,nas to the
Vedas. The Kalpa Sutra may be called the manual
of the Svetambaras. The Joins who went south
ward developed a later literature different from the
Angas, and indeed did much in the way of founding
the literature of the Kanarese, Tamil and Telugu;
consequently the Digambaras have their own
sacred books apart from that of the rival sect.
The whole of the Angas reproduce in their literary
features the traits of other sacred books, the parts
being of unequal merit, often evidently fragmentary,
and covering a long period in their dates of origin.
They have been subject to recension, in which harmo
nistic effort is clearly traceable. This often includes
slokas or sections of much earlier literature, much
as the Pentateuch contains bits of early folk‑song
like the song of Lameeh or of the well. Moreover,
commentaries exist which contain alleged quota
tions which are not in the extant texts, showing
that parts have been lost. The codification took
place, as is noted above, some 800 years after the
origin of the religion. Two series of publications
embodying the texts are in course of issue, one be
gun under the auspices of a wealthy Jain, the late
Rao Bahadur Dhanapatisinha, in which some thirty
treatises have been produced, with comment and
explanation, at Calcutta and Bombay. The Jain
Religious Book Society of Murshidabad is publish
ing the other, which has already duplicated the
first series and has added a number not otherwise
printed. 	GEO. W, GILMORE.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the literature the moat exhaustive study is by A. Weber, in Indiache Studien, xvi.‑xvii., Leipsic, 1883‑84, reproduced in English in the Indian Antiquary, xvii.‑xxi., 1888‑92, and in his Sacred Literature of the Joins, Bombay, 1893. Consult also A. Guerinot, Essai de bibliographic Jaina, Paris, 1908. A very defective translation of the Kalpa Sutra appeared in London, 1848. H. Jacobi has made several of the Sutras available in English in SBE, xxi., xlv., with valuable introduction concerning the religion, and has edited the Kalpa Sutra, with introduction and notes, Leipaic, 1879, and the Tattvarthadhigama Sutra, ib. 1908. Other sutras have been edited by Leumann in Abhandlunpen fur die Kunde des Morpenlandea, vol. viii., and in ZDMG, vol. xlvi.; also by Hoernle, in Bibliotheca Indices, 2 vols., text, commentary and ttansl., Calcutta, 1888‑90.
On the religion the best single discussion is by J. G. Btihler, Ueber die indiache Sects der Jaina, Vienna, 1887, Eng. transl., On the Indian Sect of the Jainaa, London, 1903. Consult: H. T. Coleridge, Essays, late ed., London, 1879 (good for description, not for explanation of origins); J. Bird, Historical Researches on the Origin and Principles of the . . Jaina Religion, Bombay, 1847; E. Thomas, Jainism, London, 1877; J. Burgess, Jain Cave Temples, in Ferguaeon's Cave Temples, ib. 1880; idem, Temples and Jaina Caves in Western India, 2 vols., 55 plates, ib. 18811883; J. S. Warren, Lea Idiea philoaophiquea et relipieuaeadta Jainas, in Annales de lllusee Guimet, x. 321‑411, Paris, 1887: E. W. Hopkins, Religions of India, pp. 280‑297, Boston 1895 (not up to the standard of the rest of his book, his verdict is disparaging and condemnatory); Jogendra Nath Bhattacharjee, Hindu Castes and Sects, Calcutta, 1898; V. A Smith, The Jain Stupa and Other Antiquities of Mathura, India Archa?ological Survey, Re‑

89	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jainism
		James
	ports, vol. xx., 1901; A. Barth, Bulletin des religions de
	fTnde, iv., Paris, 1902; RHR, xlv. 171‑18b (by Barth),
	xlvii. 34‑50 (by A. Guerenot). The files of the ZDMa
	contain much important matter by the few students of
	the subject, e.g., vol. i (by A. Weber), xxxii. 509 eqq.,
	axxiv. 247 eqq., xxxv. 887 sqq., xxxviii. 1 aqq., xl. 92 eqq.
	(all by Jacobi), xx3iv. 445 sqq. (by Klatt), xxxiv. 748 eqq.
	(by Oldenberg), xlviii (by Leumann, on the Jain legends).
	Similarly contributions have been made to the Indian An
	tiquary by various observers, including Hoernle and B iihler.
	The files of the JRAS contain occasional articles of value.
	JAIR (Hebr. Ya'ir and Ya'ir): An Old‑Testament
name which takes two forms and originally had as
an element a divine name which has sloughed off.
	Ya'ir (II Sam. xxi. 19) was a Bethlehemite, and
	father of the Elhanan who slew Goliath of Gath,
or his brother (I Chron, xx. 5). Ya'ir (Esther ii. 6)
	is the father of Mordecai, and also the name of a
	strong clan in the district east of the Jordan. With
the last this article is concerned. '
	Judges x. 3‑5 speaks of a Jair who was one of
	the minor judges and ruled Israel twenty‑two years,
a period which falls within the interregna of the
	greater judges, and is included in the chronology
	which reckons 480 years between the Exodus and
Solomon (I Kings vi. 1). Ni5ldeke identifies this
	Jair with the eponymous ancestor of the Jair clan.
	Though Jair the judge can find no place in the
	history of Israel, the Judges passage is serviceable
	in investigating the clan. The thirty cities there
	mentioned (the Hebrew for " cities " involves a
	word‑play between the words for city and colt
	which the Greek poleis and polo= reproduces) sug
	gest thirty divisions of the clan, and in one of these
	cities, Camon, Jair is said to have been buried.
	Camon suggests the Kamun which Antiochus III.
	took on the march from Pella to Gephrun (Poly
	bius, V., lxx. 12), which is located on an old road
	by the identification of Pella with the modern
	Tabakat Fahil and of Gephrun with Kazr Wadi el
	Ghafr, not far from Irbid. A Kamm and Kumem
	were located by Dr. Schumacher from six to ten
	miles east of Irbid. Kamm is a ruined city of con
	siderable extent, Kumem a modern village a mile
	south of the road with remains of an old wall still
	showing; the former may be the Camon of Judges,
	and may indicate the region of the cities of Jair south
	of the Yarmuk and in the northern part of Gilead.
	Other Old‑Testament passages speak of the tents
	(or tent‑villages) of Jair. Num. xxxii. 41 tells of
	the conquest of these tents, but does not state
	the place of departure or the time: the intention
	of the compiler was to place it in the time of Moses;
	but that was not the original meaning, and the
	event must have taken place from a starting‑point
	in the West Jordan land and when Israel was
	growing strong in the early days of the kingdom.
	The conclusion of commentators that the thirty
	cities grew from earlier " tent‑villages " disregards
	the fact that this was not a region frequented by
nomadic herders. Consequently the " tent‑vil
	lages " of Jair indicate nomadic settlements, the
	" cities " rather the habitations of the settled por
	tions of the clan, the former, on the basis of I Kings
	iv. 13, to be placed on the border of the desert.
	Yet this passage is a later addition and is not in
	the Septuagint. Deut. iii. 14 makes Jair conqueror
	of the whole region of Argob: Josh. xiii. 30 gives
to Jair sixty cities. According to I Chron. ii. 23, the shepherds of the clan were in early times subdued. Num. xxxii. 41 makes Jair belong to the tribe of Manasseh. According to I Chron. ii. 21‑23 the Judahite Hezron married a daughter of Machir, whose grandfather, Jair, possessed twenty‑three towns in Gilead, representing a mingling of the two tribes in which Judah took the leadership. But this expresses a relationship of post‑exilic times, and the number of cities has diminished. This account forms the bridge to the story in I Mace. v. 24‑54 of the removal of the Gileadite Jews for security of life to Jerusalem: it was in part the Jews of the cities of Jair on whose account Judas was concerned. The passage in the Chronicler seems to have been taken in part from an old source.
(H. GUTHE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Kuenen, De Stain Manaaae, in ThT., xi (1877), 478 sqq.; G. Schumacher, Northern Ajlun, pp. 137‑138, London, 1890; idem, Daa aiidZiche Baean, in ZDPV, xx (1897), 109. 173; DB, ii. 540; EB, ii. 2315; JE, vii. 65‑66.
JAMAICA. See WEST INDIES.
JAMBLICHUS. See NEO‑PLATONIaM.
JAMES. See also JACOB.

JAMES.
I. The Apostles and the
	Brother of Jesus.
1. James the Son of Zebedee. His Life and Work (§ 3). 2. James the Son of Alphwus. II. The Epistle of James.
3. James the Just. 	The Readers (¢ 1).
Brother, Step‑brother, or	Aim, Contents, andStyle
Cousin of Jesus (§ 1). 	($ 2).
Date, Canonicity, and Reception (§ 3).
I. The Apostles and the Brother of Jesus: In the Mew Testament two, or better three, notable men bear the name of James.
1. James the Bon of Zebedee: In the Synoptic Gospels this James appears only in close connection with his brother John. Their father pursued the calling of a fisherman on the Lake of Galilee (Mark i. 19; Matt. iv. 21‑22), perhaps near Capernaum (cf. Luke v. 10 with iv. 31, 38), with his sons and with the help of hired servants (hark i. 20). His wife, Salome, was one of those companions of Jesus who cared for the needs of his daily life (Mark xv. 41; Luke viii. 3). It is uncertain whether Salome was in any way related to Jesus, for it is doubtful if the sister of Jesus' mother (John xix. 25) can be identified with Salome (Mark xv. 40). Certain only is her pious devotion to Jesus, whom she faithfully followed in his wanderings through Galilee, on his last journey to Jerusalem, and also on his way to crucifixion (Matt. xxvii. 56; Mark xv. 40). Her firm faith in the Messianic destiny of Jesus and her impetuous nature are shown in ner somewhat rash prayer to the Lord that, in his kingdom, he should seat her sons on his right hand and on his left (Matt. xx. 20 sqq.). These characteristics she transmitted to her sons; of these, James seems to have been the elder, since in the lists of the Apostles and usually elsewhere he is named before John (Matt. x. 2; Mark ii. 17; cf. Luke vi. 14). It can not be determined from John i. 40 whether James had already come into contact with Jesus in the following of the Baptist at the Jordan;
New‑Testament 	Idea,
Brother (§ 2).

James	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	90
the summary way, however, in which both brothers were called by Jesus to become his disciples, and the readiness with which they obeyed (Mark i. 19‑20), make it appear probable that they were prepared for this summons. From that time they remained disciples of Jesus with all the burning zeal which characterized them. This zeal was not without its drawbacks; it could lead them into heartless fanaticism (Luke ix. 54) and also inspire unbridled ambition (Mark x. 35 aqq.); but it enabled them to endure resolutely the hardest sufferings with Jesus (Mark x. 35 sqq.). How highly Jesus appreciated their fervent nature is apparent in his applying to them the epithet " sons of thunder " (Mark iii. 17) and in his receiving them, with the equally impetuous Peter, into the inner circle of the twelve apostles (Mark v. 37, ix. 2, xiii. 3 sqq., xiv. 33 sqq.). After the departure of the Lord, however, James seems to have become less prominent. Nevertheless, he soon took precedence over the other apostles as the first who gave his life for the faith, since he was executed by order of Herod Agrippa I (Acts xii. 1, 2).
2. James, the Son of Alphaeus : This James is mentioned with this name in the four lists of the apostles (Matt. x. 3; Mark iii. 18; Luke vi. 15; Acts i. 13), but no other passage of the New Testament can be brought into connection with him or his family. Especially groundless is everything that has been asserted regarding a relationship of James Alphwus (see Arra.EUS) and his house to Jesus, based on the identity of the names Alphwus and Cleophas. The statement of Hegesippus (in Eusebius, Hist. ecct., III., xi.) that Cleophas was a brother of Joseph, the foster‑father of Jesus, can not be accepted, and the identification of the names Alphwus and Cleophas can not be established. Possibly James Alphaeus is alluded to in Matt. xxvii. 56; Mark xvi. 1, xv. 40; Luke xxiv. 10; if so, it may be inferred from these passages that James's mother was called Mary and belonged to the followers of Jesus, and that he had a brother called Joses, and that the epithet of " the little " was applied to him. Possibly this passage refers to another James of whom nothing further is known. It is altogether improbable, however, that in Luke vi. 16 and Acts i. 13 the designation " Judas of James " [R. V. " Judas the son of James " marg. or, " brother," as in A. V.] signifies that Judas was the brother of James Alphaeus, since this designation can only mean " Judea the son of James," and a combination of these passages with those in which a Mary is named as the mother of James and Joses is quite impossible. But neither the apostle Judas Lebbaeus (see JUDAS) nor Simon Zelotes is to be regarded as a brother of James Alphseus. Nothing further is heard of James Alphteus, except the legend that he was active in the southwest of Palestine and in Egypt, and was crucified in Oatrakine, in Lower Egypt (Nicephorus, ii. 40).
S. James the Just: A James who was the Lord's brother, head of the community of Jerusalem, is mentioned as a different person from both the apostles in Matt. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3; Acts xii. 17, xxi. 18; I Cor. xv. 7; Gal. i. 19, ii. 9‑12, as well as James i. 1; Jude 1. Also, outside of the New Tes‑
tament, by Joaephus (Ant. XX., ix. 1), Hegeeippus (in Eusebius, Hiat. eccl., II. 23), and other Church Fathers. The view of the early Church
1. Broth‑ was that Jesus and this James were or, Step‑ brothers, and James was distinguished Brother or from the two apostles of the same
	Cousin of	name. Clement of Alexandria ex
		pressly states that this view, which he
himself rejected, was general in his time (Strum.
vii. 93 aqq.). Tertullian refers to the marriage of
Mary after the birth of Jesus and to the mention
of his brothers in connection with her, as a proof
of the reality of the humanity of Jesus (De mono
gamin, viii.; De carne Christi, vii.; " Against
Marcion," 19). In the Apostolic Constitutions (ii. 55,
vi. 12, 13), besides the twelve apostles and Paul,
James, the Lord's brother, is mentioned as one of
the advocates of catholic doctrine, and he is reck
oned among the seventy disciples. Eusebius counts
fourteen apostles; the twelve, Paul and James
(on Isa. xvii. 5; Hist. eccd., L, xii., IL, i., VIL, xix.),
and when he once writes of James as the " so‑called "
brother of the Lord, the context shows that he is
not suggesting a more distant relationship. When,
however, the idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary
gained ground in the Church, the brotherly rela
tionship between Jesus and James was transformed
into the more distant one of stepbrother, this view
appearing in several popular writings such as the
Proto‑Gospel of James (ix. 2), the Gospel of Peter,
the Gospel of pseudo‑Matthew (viii. 4), the Gospel
of Thomas (xvi.). and the History of .Joseph (ii.).
In the period after Epiphanius, the recognition of
James as a son of Joseph and Mary is seldom met.
On the other hand, the view of Origen, that James
was a stepbrother of Jesus, was followed in the
East by Ephraem, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa, Chrysos
tom, Cyril of Alexandria, Epiphanius, and later by
Euthymius; in the West by Hilary, Ambrose, end
Ambrosiaster. Alongside of this, however, arose
the other opinion that the brothers of Jesus were
cousins and were identical with the men of the
same name among the apostles. It is possible that
Clement of Alexandria entertained this view as
well as the hypothesis that James was a stepbrother
of Jesus (in Eusebius, Hist. eccl., IL, 1). The first
assured defender is Jerome, who, in his writings
against Helvidius, expounds it, but practically
abandons it in his Commentary on Isaiah (xvii. 6),
in that he counts fourteen apostles: the twelve,
Paul, and the Lord's brother, James. Ambrose
and Augustine express themselves even more doubt
fully. Gradually, however, the hypothesis of iden
tification was more and more widely accepted in
the West. In the Middle Ages it was the predom
inant theory. On the other hand, it found so little
favor in the East that two different festival days,
one for James the Just and the other for James
Alphmus, remained traditional.
The statements of the New Testament favor the view that James was a full brother of Jesus and the son of Mary. Matt. i. 25 and Luke ii. 7 imply that, after the birth of Jesus, a conjugal relation existed between Joseph and Mary and that they had children. Whenever in the Gospels brothers of Jesus are mentioned, they appear in such a

91	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	dames
connection with Joseph and Mary, or with Mary alone, that they are clearly regarded as their children
(John ii. 12; Matt. xii. 47; Mark vi. 3; Acts i. 14). The designation of Mary Testament as the mother of Jesus, employed in Idea,
Brother. these passages, implies that the word
brothers is used in the same proper sense. They could not therefore have been stepbrothers of Jesus, sons of a former wife of Joseph or of a former husband of Mary, or foaterchildren of Mary (thus J. P. Lange); and just as little only cousins of Jesus and identical with the apostles James Alphaeus, Judas Lebbaeus, and Simon Zelotes. Moreover, nowhere in the New Testament is James the brother of the Lord called James Alphaeus, and nowhere is the word brother used in a sense of distant relationship. That James Alphaeus is a brother of the apostles Judas Lebbseus and Simon Zelotes is absolutely excluded by the way in which they are named together, to be distinguished from other brothers who are alluded to in the same way. Besides this the brothers of the Lord are not only named alongside of the apostles as distinct from them (ut sup.), but they appear also as a circle, separate in every way from the disciples of Jesus (Matt. xii. 46; John vii. 5). Only after the departure of the Lord does there arise a closer companionship of the brethren of the Lord with the apostles, and James gains apostolic rank as head of the mother‑church in Jerusalem, while still remaining distinct from the apostles (Gal. i. 19, ii. 9; I Cor. xv. 7).
The story of the material and spiritual life of James, the brother of the Lord, is quite clearly
defined in its outlines. During the 3. His Life public ministry of Jesus, his brothers and Work. adopted a skeptical attitude, probably because they could not reconcile his lofty claims with the commonplace conditions in which they had lived together in their home. Jesus complains of a lack of recognition on the part of his own relatives (Mark vi. 4), and he could not count them as his spiritual kindred (Mark iii. 31‑34) After the miracle of the loaves and fishes in the desert it seems that then the idea of his Messianic task may have dawned upon them, but the humility of his attitude prevented them from confidently believing in him. Even at the time of his Passion, the brothers seem to have separated themselves from his mother, who now believed in him (John xix. 27). Nevertheless, the superhuman patience with which Jesus went to his death may have won their hearts, especially that of James; for to him was vouchsafed an appearance of the risen Christ (I Cor. xv. 7), which affirmed his faith. He therefore appears after the ascension of the Lord as a member of the Christian community, wherein he won a leading position after the death of James, the son of Zebedee, and the flight of Peter. In general, his activity was confined to Jerusalem (Gal. i. 17). He took part in the council of the apostles with Peter and John as one of the three pillars of the Jewish‑Christian Church (Gal. ii. 1 aqq.; Acts xv. 1 sqq.). There he showed himself free from the pharisaical and strictly legal views of the‑ Judaizing opponents of Paul who desired to
impose upon Gentile Christians the full observance of the Mosaic laws. At the same time he gave the hand of fellowship to Paul in proof of their thorough agreement on the basis of the Gospel. Nevertheless he considered it important that Jewish Christians should strictly observe the laws of their fathers and should require for these laws a certain respect on the part of the Gentile Christians. The standpoint of James also appears in the influence exerted by his friends in Antioch (Gal. ii. 11 sqq.) upon Peter. The Ebionite party in the post‑apostolic age endeavored to cover itself with the authority of James and to envelop him with a legendary atmosphere of glory. According to Epiphaniua (Haer. XXX., xvi.), there were legends even of his ascension to heaven. Concerning the death of James there are two contradictory accounts. Hegesippus relates (Eusebius, Hist. eccd., II. 23) that he was thrown from the tower by the Pharisees, not long before the beginning of the Roman‑Jewish was (of. Zahn, Forschungen, vi. 235, Leipsic, 1900), therefore, about 66 A.D. According to Josephus (Ant. XX., ix. 1), however, the party of the Sadduceea made use of the change in the proconsulahip in 62 or 63 A.D. to have James atoned to death, against the will of the Pharisees. It is, however, strongly suspected that this passage of Josephus is an interpolation (Zahn, ut sup. vi. 301 aqq.). On the other hand, the date given by Hegesippua is supported by the pseudo‑Clementine literature, according to which James survived Peter, and also by the Chronicon Paschale (p. 592), and therefore is to be preferred.
II. The Epistle of James: This bears a title in the opening verse which names the writer and those for whom it was destined. To see in
1. The this only the dedication to a dogmatic
	Readers.	writing, or a homily, is counter‑indi
		cated by the formal salutation common
in Greek letters. Neither should it be assumed that
this epistolary form only served the literary fiction
of an unknown writer, nor that it is a title added
to the writing about 200 A.D., since in both cases
the author would probably have been called an
apostle. Therefore, the words in the title " to the
twelve tribes which are scattered abroad " may
well be used to determine the first readers. This
expression, however, " the twelve tribes " is so
specifically national and Israelitic that it can not be
referred even figuratively to all Christianity. Xe
cording to the title, therefore, the Epistle is ad
dressed to the whole Jewish people outside of
Palestine. This designation of the readers is lim
ited, however, by the statement that the writer
calls himself " a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ ";
therefore he assumes that his readers recognize the
authority of Jesus. Those readers are therefore
neither Jewish and Gentile Christians nor Chris
tians of Jewish and Gentile descent nor principally
Gentile Christians; and just as little are they Jewish
Christians within or without Palestine: they are
Jewish Christians living outside of Palestine. They
can, therefore, only be called the twelve tribes in
the dispersion in the sense that they were the true
Israel so far as it existed outside the Holy Land.
These Jewish Christians living outside of Palestine

James	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	92
are not to be sought only in one place or in one limited district; indeed, the generalness and fulness of the expression " the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad " render it certain that all Jewish Christians living outside of Palestine were meant, and make it extremely probable that there already were such far and wide. The inferences from the title are not refuted by the letter itself, but partly confirmed. It is not justifiable to cite the silence of the author regarding the Law, the temple, and the unbelieving members of his race against the Jewish origin of the readers, because he is not altogether silent concerning the Law (ii. 8 aqq.) and had no occasion to speak of the temple and unbelieving Jews. That the readers are Christians and not Jews is to be seen from ii. 1, and the whole tone of the Epistle is opposed to a narrow local limitation of the circle of readers. In this epistle, not only is there no personal relation whatever between the writer and the readers, no special salutation, etc., but the conditions referred to are of a very general character. It is not, therefore, justifiable, because the conditions treated of in the Epistle of James appear to point more to Palestine than to the diaspora, to assume that the Epistle was originally addressed to the community of Jerusalem and was later sent to communities outside of Palestine. The Epistle of James is therefore not in the true sense of the word a letter, but rather an address in the form of a circular letter to all Jewish Christians within the pale of Christianity, which was already quite widely disseminated.
What, however, the author recognizes as fundamental in the spiritual condition of his readers is
the worldliness and superficiality of 2. Aim, their Christianity. With the multifaContents, rious sufferings (i. 2) and the delay in and Style. the second coming of Christ (v. 7,8)
they began to lose patience and their hearts were divided between God and the world (i. 7). Alongside of flattery to the rich, there is contempt for the poor (ii. 1 sqq.), there is also bitterness against the former (iv. 11, v. 9). Alongside of the prayer for means to satisfy their pleasures (iv. 3), there is impious security on the part of the well‑to‑do (iv. 13 sqq.). Stress is laid upon the profession of faith (ii. 14), which was a subject of wrangling and dispute, and every one was eager to impart instruction (chap. iii.); but there were few signs of application of faith to practical life. These conditions are not to be derived from Judaism so much as from a stagnation of the spiritual life succeeding to a period of loving enthusiasm. The aim and contents correspond to these spiritual conditions of the readers. After an exhortation to be steadfast and prudent in trials, there follows the lesson that the temptation to fail in the hour of trial proceeds from man's own sinful inclinations, not from God, the giver of all good, the author of regeneration by the word of truth (i. 13‑18), and to this is attached the admonition to assimilate this word of truth in a humble and obedient spirit (i. 19‑27). Later on there are special warnings against the errors and faults named above. The conclusion consists of various brief admonitions, v. 12‑20. The simple style of the letter suits its
practical contents admirably, following the method of the didactic writings of the Old Testament, in which the single proverbs are strung together in groups like rows of pearls. Instead of the precision of Paul's keen, logical thinking, there is found more rhetorical amplification. The Greek is comparatively pure, although there are not a few Hebraisms. While this Gospel is designated as a law, it is yet the perfect law of liberty (i. 25), not, like the law of the Old Testament, a heavy yoke but to be engrafted in the heart (i. 21), so that man, by his own initiative, responds to the divine will. Inasmuch as the Gospel is essentially identical with the law of the Old Testament, everything that concerns the person of the mediator of the new revelation is placed in the background, even the name of Christ is mentioned only twice, and the synoptic concepts of the Son of Man and the kingdom of heaven are lacking. Nevertheless, the moral teachings of Jesus, principally those of the Sermon on the Mount, are much more freely used than in any other writing of the New Testament. Therefore this epistle is somewhat in disaccord with the Apostle Paul, whose attention is directed more to that side of the Gospel which is in opposition to the Law. It has even been held that ii. 21, 24 (cf. with Rom. iii. 28, iv. 2; Gal. ii. 16) is in irreconcilable opposition to Paul; indeed, that it shows a conscious polemic against him. This difficulty can not be avoided by assuming that the Epistle of James was earlier than the Pauline epistles which contain the divergent propositions, which would not affect the objective difference; indeed the suspicion of conscious contradiction would merely be transferred from James to Paul. But this view of the chronological relation of the writings of Paul and James is untenable, for there is no indication that the formula " to be justified by faith " or the use of the passage Gen. xv. 6 in support of this, was common, as is assumed in this epistle, on the part of its readers. Indeed it remains doubtful whether the Epistle of James is intended to combat the standpoint of the Pauline epistles. In any case this epistle is in accord with Paul in what it really endeavors to prove, that is, that faith without works can not bring salvation (cf. II Cor. v. 10), and that a faith which does not find expression in moral conduct is utterly worthless (I Cor. xiii. 2). Paul regards works as unimportant for justification, while James looks upon works as a condition of justification. While Paul would not have said that there was a justification by the works of faith in the sense of the Epistle of James, because he has a stricter conception of what constitutes conduct well‑pleasing to God, his idea of a moral righteousness of believers is approximately that of the Epistle of James. Therefore, there is, if not perfect agreement on this point between James and Paul, at least only an unessential and not an irreconcilable opposition in principle. It is generally recognized that the polemic of the Epistle of James is only directed against a distorted and one‑sided Paulinism. The opinion that this epistle was designed to attack Paul's teaching, though unsuccessfully, is without foundation. What is combated is not any doctrine in itself, but only a false standard of

98	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jamey
conduct. It denounces a lack of moral application of faith, dependent upon a formalizing of Christianity and palliated by a misuse of Pauline dootrine.
These results show that the epistle should be placed in a relatively late period of the Apostolic Age when the Church had attained a
s. Date, considerable extent and Christian life Canonicity, had lost something of its first fresh and Recep‑ vigor. It is not the earliest or even
tion. o~ of the earliest of the New‑Tester went writings. The synagogue [so the Am. R.V., i. 2] is not a Jewish one, as though a common use of the synagogue still existed with Jews and Christians; it is a meeting‑place for Christians, which they control (ii. 3). The conception of the imminence of the Parousia (v. 8) appears even beyond the Apostolic Age. That the Epistle of James only addresses Jewish Christians does not prove that there were not also Gentile Christians, and if it contains more passages recalling the sayings of Jesus than any other of the Apostolic epistles, that is to be attributed to its theological character, and perhaps to the employment of written sources. Its use in the Church begins at an early period. It is probably cited in I Peter, in I Clement, in the Shepherd of Hernias, and by Justin Martyr. It was certainly used by Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Dionysius of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, Didymus, and Ephraem, and it was also included in the Peshito version. Origen, who is the first to cite it expressly as a writing of James, the Lord's brother, looks upon it as uncanonical; Eusebius counts it among the antilegomend, and Theodore of Mopsuestia rejected it. Jerome says it was regarded as pseudonymous in the Latin Church, but he includes it among the canonical books, and his influence and Augustine's assured its acceptance as canonical. This view was not disputed until Erasmus expressed certain doubts. Luther thought it a " right strawy epistle " (recht stroherne Epistel), written by a certain pious man, and Cajetan expressed doubts as to its authenticity. Calvin defended it, but Luther's views were accepted by the Magdeburg Centuriators and by some Lutheran dogmatists, as well as by the Calvinist Wetatein. In modern times the opposition to its authenticity was begun by De Wette and Schleierlnacher. Naturally no use could be made of the title in the debate as to the origin of the epistle on the assumption that it was added at a later period in order to gain for the epistle (really the work of an unknown author) acceptance in the canon through a title bearing the name of an apostle. Still less tenable is the hypothesis that the epistle, apart from the two (assumed as interpolated) mentions of Christ (i. 1 and ii. 1), was the work of an unknown Jew. The method of interpolation assumed is devoid of motive and without analogy. The introduction of Christian ideas into Jewish writings bearing the name of highly revered Jews is often met, but is entirely different from the attempt assumed here, to make the author of a Jewish writing appear to be a Christian. Besides this, much in the Epistle of James is clearly Christian, apart from the two supposed additions (i. 18‑21, 25, ii. 8, 12, 14‑26).
If, then, " James, a servant of God and of the
Lord Jesus Christ," was originally named as author
of the epistle, there can be no doubt who is to be
understood thereby. James, the son of Zebedee, of
whom Jager (Zeitschrift fur lutherische Theologie,
1878) thinks as the author, was no longer living in
the period after the beginning of Paul's mission
(Acts xii. 2); James Alphaeus withdraws entirely
into the background in this time, and either of
them would have been designated as an apostle.
The only James who is prominent in this period
and needed no more precise designation is James,
the Lord's brother, the head of the community of
Jerusalem. And there are no imperative grounds
for refusing to ascribe the epistle to him. The
vacillation in the traditions of the early church as
to the canonical acceptance of the epistle is ex
plained by the facts that James was not an apostle;
that he became the patron‑saint of the Ebionitea,
and that the epistle seemed to contain a polemic
against Paul. The author appears rather to have
been a man of a practical turn of mind, pious and
prayerful, who does not fail to recognize the essen
tial superiority of the Gospel over the Law, but
who, nevertheless, emphasizes the relationship of
the morality of the former to that of the latter.
All this perfectly suits James, the Lord's brother,
as known through the New Testament and Hege
sippus. It may therefore be assumed that James,
the Lord's brother, wrote this pastoral letter in
Palestine for the Jewish Christians outside of Pales
tine, at a time when the activity of Paul had ceased,
either because of his captivity, or his death. For
the Protevangelium of James see APOCRYPHA,
B, L, 1. 	F. SIEFFERT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the general topic consult: DB, ii. b40548; EB, ii. 2317‑28. On the three Jamesea consult the histories of the Apostolic Age, e.g., Schaff, Christian Church, i. 199 aqq., 265 eqq., 272 aqq„ et passim; A. C. McGiffert, Apostolic Age, Passim, New York, 1897. The question of the relationship of the third James to Jesus is discussed in DB, i. 320‑326; by J. B. Lightfoot in his Commentary on Galatians, in a special section; in the Introduction to Mayor's Commentary on James (see below); in F. W. Farrar, Early Days of Christianity, chap, xix., London, 1884; in $chegg's commentary (see below); and often in the other commentaries. Consult also W. Patrick, James the Lord's Brother, Edinburgh, 1906. For the questions concerning the authenticity, date, contents, etc., of the episth consult in general the works on Introduction to the New Testament‑especially those of JOlicher, 1894 Eng, tranal., Edinburgh, 1904; T. Zahn, 1900; and B. W. Bacon, 1900‑and those on NewTeatament theology, especially that of Beyschlag, Eng. tranal., Edinburgh, 1896. Works on special topics are: W. G. Schmidt, LBhrepehalt deg Jakobuabriefea, Leipsic, 1889; P. J. Gloag, Introduction to the Catholic Epistles, Edinburgh, 1887 W. C. van Manen, in ThT, xxviii (1894), 478‑496; A. H. Cullen, Teaching of James; Studies in the Ethics of the Epistle of James, London, 1904; M. Meinertz, Der Jakobuabrief and aein Verfaaaer, Freiburg, 1905.
Of commentaries on the epistle the best for English readers is by J. B. Mayor, London, 1897. Others which may be mentioned are: W, Augusti, Lemgo, 1801; J. W, Greshof, Essen, 1830; 11f. $chneckenburger, Stuttgart, 1832; G. W, Theile, Leipaic, 1833; C. R. Jachmann, ib. 1838; F. H. Kern, Tiibingen, 1838; C. A. $charling, Copenhagen, 1841; C. E. Celldrier Geneva, 1850; A, Neander, Eng transl., New York, 1852; A. Wiesinger, K&nigaberg, 1854; De Wette, Leipeic,. 1865; F. Graupp, Breslau, 1361; R. Wardlaw Edinburgh, 1882; H. Boumann, Utrecht, 1865; A. H. Blom, Dort, 1889; H. Ewald, Gettingen, 1870; J. C. C. Hoffmann, NSrdlingen, 1875; H. Alford, Greek Testament, vol. iv., London, 1877; E. H.

James
Jansen	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	94
Plumptre, in Cambridge Bible, Cambridge, 1878; J. T. Demarest, New York, 1879; D. Erdmann, Berlin, 1888; K. F. Keil, Leipsic, 1883; P. 8chegg, Munich, 1883; W. Beyachlag, GSttingen, 1588; A. F, blanoury, Bar‑leDuc, 1885; C. F. Deems, New York, 1889; E. T. Winkler, Philadelphia, 1389; A. Plummer, in Expositor's Bible, London, 1891; B. Weiss, in TU, viii. 2 (1892); P. Feine, Eisenach, 1893; ,J. Adderley, London, 1900; W. H. Bennett, in Century Bible, ib. 1901; C. A. Bigg, ib. 1902; C. Brown, ib. 1906; F. J. Taylor, Fourteen Addressee, ib. 1907.
JAMES, SAINT, OF COMPOSTELLA, ORDER OF:
A military order, founded in 1161, as the Knights of St. James of the Sword (de Spades), by Pedro Fernandez of Fuente Encalada, in the diocese of Astorga, Spain, united in 1170 with the Canons of San Loyo (St. Eligius) of Compostella. Toward the end of the century it was confirmed by Pope Celestine III. In purpose and character the order was like those of Alca,ntara and Calatrava (qq.v.), but it never equaled them in importance. It came to an end in 1835. See COMPOaTELLA.
(O. Zticxri;at.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. Giucci, Icouografia atorica degli ordini religioai a cavallereachi, i. 96‑100, Rome, 1836; P. B. Gams, Die Kirchengeachichte von Spanien, iii., 1, p. 58, Regensburg, 1576; Currier, Religious Orders, p. 217.
JAMES, JOHN ANGELL: English Congregationalist; b. at Blandford Forum (1? m. n.e. of Dorchester, Dorset) June 6, 1785; d. at Birmingham Oct. 1, 1859. After serving four years as an apprentice to a linen‑draper at Poole, Dorset, he entered the theological academy at Gosport in 1802, and qualified under the Toleration Act as a dissenting preacher the following year. He was called to Carr's Lane Chapel, Birmingham, in 1805, and ordained pastor there early the following year. He remained in this pastorate till his death. He was chairman of the board of education of Spring Hill College, Birmingham (now Mansfield College, Oxford), from 1838 till his death; and in 1846 he was one of the chief promoters of the Evangelical Alliance. He was held in high esteem as a preacher and author, and as a public man. Though a Calvinist in creed, he laid more stress on Christian duty than on doctrinal niceties. He published numerous single sermons and addresses and a dozen small volumes, of which the best known are Christian Charity (London, 1828); and The Anxious Enquirer rafter Salvation (Birmingham, 1834), which was widely circulated in England and America and translated into Welsh, Gaelic, and Malagasy. Other writings by James will be found in his Works (17 vols., London, 18604).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: James's Autobiography was published as the last volume of the Works, ut sup. Consult also: J. Campbell, Review of J. A. James' History and Character, London, 1859; R. W. Dale, Life and Letters of John Angell James, ib. 1861; DNB, xxix. 215‑217.
JAMES, MONTAGUE RHODES: Church of England; b. at Livermere (6 m. n.e. of Bury St. Edmund's), Suffolk, Aug. 1, 1862. He studied at King's College, Cambridge (B.A., 1885), and in 1903 was appointed Sanders Reader in bibliography. Since 1905 he has been provost of King's College, and is also director of the Fitzwilliam Museum. He has written or edited Psalms of Solomon (in collaboration with H. E. Ryle; Cambridge, 1891); Testament of Abraham (in collaboration with W. E.
Barnes; 1892); The Gospel according to Peter and the Revelation of Peter (in collaboration with J. A. Robinson; London, 1892); Apocrypha Anecdotes (2 vols., Cambridge, 1893‑97); On the Abbey of St. Edmund at Bury (1895); The Life and Miracles of St. William of Norwich. (in collaboration with A. Jesaopp, 1896) ; Sources of Archbishop Parker's Collection of Manuscripts (1899) ; Verses in the Windows of Canterbury Cathedral (1901); Ancient Libraries of Canterbury and Dover (1904); and Ghost Stories of an Antiquary (1904); as well as descriptive catalogues of the manuscripts (especially western) in the libraries of Eton College (Cambridge, 1895), the Fitzwilliam Museum (1895), and Lambeth Palace (1900), and of the following Cambridge colleges: Jesus (1895), King's (1895), Sidney Sussex (1895), Peterhouse (1899), Trinity (4 vole., 1900‑05), Emmanuel (1904), Pembroke (1905), Christ's (1905), Clare (1906), Queen's (1906), Trinity Hall (1907), and Gonville and Caius (2 vols., 1907‑08).

JAMES, WILLIAM: American psychologist and philosopher; b. in New York Jan. 11, 1842. He studied in private schools, then at the Lawrence Scientific School and the Harvard Medical School (N.D., 1869). He has taught at Harvard since 1876, having been instructor in philosophy 1872‑76, assistant professor of anatomy and physiology 1876,80, assistant professor of philosophy 188085, professor of philosophy 1885‑89, professor of psychology 1889‑97, and professor of philosophy again since 1897. He holds a position in the front rank of modern psychologists, and in this field has exercised a potent influence both in Europe and America. In philosophy he represents what may be called empirical idealism as opposed to absolute idealism. His works have been widely translated, and are characterized by keen analysis, apt illustration, lucid exposition, and a charm of style rarely encountered in works on philosophy. He has published The Principles of Psychology (2 vols., New York, 1890); Psychology‑Briefer Course (1892); The Will to Believe, and Other Essays in Popular Philosophy (1897); Human Immortality: Two Supposed Objections to the Doctrine (Boston, 1898); Talks to Students on Psychology, and to Teachers on Some of Life's Ideals (New York, 1899); Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature (1902), Gifford Lectures delivered at Edinburgh 1900‑01, a work which has attracted much attention, and establishes his claim to mention in a religious encyclopedia; Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking (1907); and Pluralistic Universe (Hibbert Lectures; 1909). In 1908 a volume of Essays Philosophical and Psychological was published in his honor in New York.
JAMESON, je'me‑sun, ANNA BROWNELL: English authoress; b. in Dublin, Ireland, May 17, 1794; d. at Ealing (9 m. w. of St. Paul's, London), Middlesex, Mar. 17, 1860. She was the daughter of Denis Brownell Murphy, an Irish miniature‑painter, who came to England in 1798 and settled with his family at London in 1803. After spending a number of years as governess in the family of the marquis of Winchester, and in other noted families, she contracted an unhappy marriage with Robert Jameson,

96	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
a young barrister, in 1825. She practically separated from her husband in 1829, when he went to Dominica as puisne judge. In 1836 she joined him in Canada, where he had secured, through her influence, an important legal appointment in 1833, but left him after six months, though she did not return to England till 1838. In the course of her literary work she spent much time in France, Italy, and Germany. Her most important work is Sacred and Legendary Art, in four sections, Legends of the Saints (2 vole., London, 1848), Legends of the Monastic Orders as Represented in the Fine Arts (1850), Legends of the Madonna as Represented in the Fine Arts (1852), and The History of Our Lord as Exemplified in Works of Art (2 vole., 1864), which was completed by Lady Eastlake. Other works deserving mention are the popular Diary of an Ennuy& (1826); the excellent Characteristics of Women (2 vole., 1832), essays on Shakespeare's heroines dedicated to Fanny Kemble; Visits and Sketches (4 vole., 1834), a charming work; Winter Studies and Summer Rambles in. Canada. (3 vole., 1838); and Memoirs and Essays (1846). In her later life Mrs. Jameson became interested in the work of Sisters of Charity and wrote Sisters of Charity (1855) and The Communion of Labour (1856). BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. Macpherson, Memoirs of the Life of
Anna Jameson, London, 1878; DNB, axix. 230‑232.
jANNES AND JAMBRES: The names given in II Tim. iii. 8 to the adversaries of Moses, who opposed their magic to his miracles, but were overcome by him (Ex. vii. 11 aqq.). Paul derived the names from Jewish tradition. Jambres appears in the forms Yambris, Yombr03; the Talmudista write it mature' and mamrey, " the rebel." Tannzs appears as Yannis and Yo‑nos, and in the Talmud as Yohannan (Yohanne). Buxtorf and Levy consider this last to be the original form; but the analogy of Jambres suggests that it also had an adjectival quality expressing a hostile character and that it was later confounded with the usual name Johannes. The names probably read Yani we Yamri, Aram. Yanne we Yamre,. " he who seduces and he who makes rebellious."
Jewish tradition makes them sons of Balsam (Targum of Jonathan on Num. xxii. 22), and places their rise at the time the Pharaoh gave command to kill the first‑born of Israel (Sanhedrin, f. lO6a; Sofah Ila), and supposes them to have been teachers of Moses, the makers of the golden calf (Midrash Tanbuma, f. 115b), and to have accompanied their father Balsam.
These names were doubtless familiar to the apostle educated in the school of Gamaliel, and they seem also to have been well known in the heathen world. Origen end Ambrose mention an apocryphal book about Jannes and Mambres (see PaEUDEPICIRAPHA, OLD TESTAMENT, IL, 37). The Pythagorean Numenius (second century) knew of the two Egyptian magi (Eusebius, Praeparatio eianr gelica, ix. 8), Apuleius had heard of them (Apologia, ii.). The two names occur in the Gospel of •Nicodemus (chap. v.), in the Martyrium Petri et Pauli (chap. xxxiv.; R. A. Lipsius, Acta apostotorum apocrypha, Leipsic, 1891, pp. 148‑149), in the Acts Petri et Pauli (chap. IV.; Lipsius, ut sup. p. 202),
and elsewhere. The apostle has been blamed for employing so unimportant a tradition, but may be justified by the resemblance between these men and the false teachers of II Tim. iii. 6 sqq.
C. VON ORELLI.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: 9ehiirer, Geschichte, iii. 292‑294, Eng. travel., T1., iii. 149‑150. The forms are discussed in the lexicons; e.g.: J. Buxtorf, ed. of Base], 1839, pp. 945 eqq.; J. C. Suieerus, Thesaurus ealesiaetirut, s, v. " IBnn$8 "; J. A. Fabrieius, Codex paeudepipraphua Veterie Testaments, i. 813 eqq.. Hamburg, 1723; DB, ii. 549; EB, ii. 2327‑29; JE, vii. 71.
	JANOW, yd'nef, MATTHIAS OF: The first of the
so‑called precursors of Huss; d. in Prague Nov. 30,
1394. He descended from a noble Bohemian family
and studied theology in Prague and Paris, where
he remained nine years, to which was due his
title of magister Parisienais. In 1381 he was ap
pointed canon in the cathedral of St. Vitus in Prague
and confessor. He was not a great preacher, but
exercised influence through his pastoral labors and
writings. He considered that the abuses of the
Church started from the papal schism, and that
they could be healed only by moral renovation.
Therefore he was intent upon church reform. In
his writings he addressed himself to the common
people. The reforms which he advocated were the
abolition of all human additions to Christianity
(doctrinal and ceremonial), and a return of believers
to the love of Jesus and the simple foundation on
which rested the Apostolic Church. He laid special
stress on frequent communion, since he regarded
the Lord's Supper as the most important means
for spiritual growth, and emphasized the common
priesthood of believers. He was a diligent student
of the Bible and wrote from 1388 to 1392 various
treatises which he later collected under the title
Regtelae veteris et novi testaments. Parts of this work
were erroneously ascribed to Huss and embodied in
the Nuremberg collection of his works (vol. i., pp.
376‑471). 	(J. LOBERTH.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY. J. P. Jordan, Die Vorlliufer des Huaai.tentuma in Bohmen, Leipeie, 1848; F. Palaeky, Geachichte von Bdhmen, iii. 1, pp. 173 sqq., Prague, 1851; idem, Duoumenta Joannia Hue, pp. 699 sqq., ib. 1869 (the retracts, tion of Janow); E. H. Gillett, Life and Times of John Hue, pp. 28 sqq., Philadelphia, 1870; A. H. Wratislaw, John Hua, pp. 81 aqq London, 1882‑ J. Loaerth, WicLiJ and Hue, ib. 1889; Count Liitaow, John Hue, pp. 3‑80, ib. 1909.
JANSEN, CORNELIUS, JANSENISM.
Origin of Movement (¢ 1).	Quesnel. The Bull Unipen
Cornelius Jansen (§ 2).		itua (§ 5).
Jansenism Condemned by	Acceptants and Appellants
	Pope (¢ 3).		(§ 8).
Arnauld and Pascal (§ 4).	Convolutioniata (¢ 7).
Close of Controversies (§ 8).
	The religious movement known as Jansenism
originated in the controversy on the doctrine of
		grace. It divided the Roman Catholic
	z. Origin Church of France for over a. century
	of Move‑ and developed a puritanical and sep
	ment. aratist spirit in many ways analogous
		to that of French Calvinism. Since
the writings of Augustine, after Paul, chiefly deter
mined the belief of both Luther and Calvin, the
Counter‑Reformation was driven into an attitude of
practical, though veiled, hostility toward his special
teachings. They had had a powerful influence in

Jaasea	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	98
the Middle Ages on the mystics and the scholastics, which left its mark on the Thomistic theology of the Dominican order. At the Council of Trent, in regard to the doctrines of grace and of sin, they opposed the Scotist tendency toward semi‑Pelagianism exemplified in the Franciscans and Jesuits. These latter, however, were victorious in the main, and soon boldly developed their deductions from the concessions made to them. The Pauline and Augustinian doctrine was now upheld especially by Michael Bajus (q.v.), professor of Louvain. The Franciscans obtained the condemnation of seventy‑six of his propositions in 1567 and 1579. When the Jesuit Molina in 1588 taught semiPelagianism, the Dominicans brought serious charges against him. In order to settle the dispute between the two orders, Clement VIII. convoked in 1597 a congregatio de auxiliis to define decisively the relation of grace to conversion, but it was dissolved in 1607 by Paul V. As the gulf between the Roman Catholic Church and the churches of the Reformation became wider, the spirit of semiPelagianism in life and doctrine assumed larger dimensions in the Roman Catholic Church, and as Thomism degenerated into a lifeless scholasticism, it is not strange that the doctrine of Augustine became, in 1612, a new revelation for two young and zealous students of the University of Louvain, Cornelius Jansen and Duvergier de Hauranne, afterward abbd of St. Cyran (see DUVERGIER DE HeuRANNE).
Cornelius Jansen (b. at Acquoy in North Holland Oct. 28, 1585; d. at Ypres [66 m. w. of Brussels,
Belgium] May 6, 16.38) studied then. Cornelius ology at the college of Adrian VI. in
Jansen. Louvain, where he formed an intimate
acquaintance with Duvergier. He declined a position as teacher of philosophy, hating Aristotle as the father of scholasticism, and believing Plato's ideas of God and virtue superior to those of some Roman Catholic theologians. As president of the college of St. Pulcheria he taught theology. By continually reading the writings of Augustine, Jansen came to the conviction that the Roman Catholic theologians of both parties had deviated from the doctrine of the primitive Church, and in 1621 he resolved, with his friend Duvergier, to work for reform. For this purpose he entered into intimate connections with prominent Irish divines, and with the leaders of the new French Congregation of the Oratory. At his instigation, the University of Louvain excluded Jesuits from positions as teachers, and, in behalf of the university, he undertook journeys to Madrid, in 1623 and 1627, with reference to certain encroachments of the Jesuits. In 1630 he was appointed regiua professor of Holy Scripture in Louvain, and in 1636 bishop of Ypres. He laid down the results of his studies of Augustine in his comprehensive work, Augustinus, seu doctrind Sancti Augvstini de humanae naturae sanitate, degritudine, medicines adversus Pelagianos et Massilienses (3 vols., Louvain, 1640). The first volume gives a historical exposition of the semi‑Pelagian heresies; the second sets forth the Augustinian doctrine as to the state of innocence and the fall; while the third treats of
the grace of Christ and of predestination in the spirit of Augustine. While the work was still in the press at Louvain, strenuous efforts were made by the Jesuit party there, through the papal nuncio at Cologne, to prohibit its appearance, but in vain. It was immediately reprinted in Paris and Rouen. The bull In eminenti (1642) reproached Jansen for the renewal of the heresies of Bajus, but he had then been dead for four years. It was only after a resistance of several years on the part of bishops, universities, and provincial estates that the bull was published in the Spanish Netherlands and its subscription enforced.
The leader of the Janaeniat party after the death of Jansen and Duvergier was Antoine Arnauld (see
ARNAULD), the learned doctor of the 3. Jansen‑ Sorbonne, who, in 1643, published De ism Con‑ la fHquente communion on the basis of demned the doctrine of predestination as taught by Pope. by Augustine and Jansen. At the
same time the Jesuits were eagerly at work to effect the condemnation of the Janseniat principles, being aided in their efforts by the French Dominicans, while the Dominicans of Spain and Italy took the part of Jansen. The University of Louvain requested the assistance of the Sorbonne in repelling the encroachments of the Jesuits and preventing the condemnation of Jansen's doctrines. As no particular doctrines of Jansen had been condemned as heretical in the papal bull, the Jesuits attempted to formulate, in the shape of definite propositions, the heresy of which they accused him. These were finally reduced to five, and in 1650 forwarded to Rome. They are as follows: (1) Some commandments of Cod are impossible of execution by the just, and the grace by which they might be truly fulfilled is lacking; (2) in the state of fallen nature inward grace is never resisted; (3) in the fallen state merit and demerit do not depend on a liberty which excludes internal necessity; freedom from external constraint suffices; (4) the semi‑Pelagiana admitted the necessity of an inward prevenient grace for the performance of every (good) act, even for the first act of faith; their heresy consisted in their assertion that this grace was of such a nature that the will of man was able either to resist or to obey it; (5) it is semi‑Pelagian to say that Christ died'or shed his blood for all men without exception. Pope Innocent X. condemned these theses in 1653 in the bull Cum occasione. Although this bull was confirmed neither by the assembly of the clergy nor by parliament, it was sent to the different dioceses for subscription, at the instigation of the Jesuits. The Jansenists declared their willingness to condemn the five theses in their heretical sense, but not as propositions of Jansen. Moat of the Jansenists admitted the infallibility of the pope in matters of faith, but not as to facts of merely human knowledge. In 1654 the pope declared that these condemned theses were really in Jansen's Augustinus, and that their condemnation as the teaching of Jansen would have to be subscribed on pain of deprivation. Under these circumstances hundreds of the " party of grace" signed the condemnation.

9?
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
In 1654 a priest at St. Sulpice, in Paris, refused absolution to the duke of Liancourt because of his
protection of a priest who had refused
4. Arnanld subscription. Thereupon Antoine Arand Pascal. na,uld (q.v.) published his Lettre ii one
Personne de quality, from which two propositions were immediately extracted by his opponents: (1) The grace of God, without which we can not do anything good, had left Peter at the time when he denied the Lord; (2) since not everybody can convince himself that the five condemned theses are in Jansen, a submission of respectful silence under the papal decision suffices; the submission of faith can not be required for the fact. Arnauld was expelled from the Sorbonne (1656), and eighty doctors went out with him rather than sign his excomuhunication. At this time Bla,ise Pascal (q.v.) sent forth his Lettres Zc un provincial, in the first of which he attacked the Thomiata for opposing the teachings of Jansen and Arnauld, while they themselves, according to him, with their mechanical view of predestination, really shared their views. In the following letters he attacked the casuistry and moral theology of the Jesuits. But Louis XIV. was intent upon thoroughly eradicating Jansenism. In 1660, at an assembly of the French clergy, a formulary was prepared which condemned the five propositions of Jansen, and subscription was again required not only from the clergy, but now from nuns as well. Those who refused were imprisoned, De Sacy, ono of the most excellent men of the Port Royal group, in the Bastile. Arnauld insisted upon the distinction between fait and draft, though in 1656 Alexander VIL, in the constitution Ad aandam bead Petri aedem, had again laid down the " fact " that Jansen had taught the five theses in an objectionable sense. In 1664 he issued a new constitution in which he required all clergy to accept by a new signature the papal pronouncements of 1642, 1653, and 1656. Four bishops would promise no more as to the fact, and a number of others signed with reservations intended to protect the doctrine of Augustine. The strength of the opposition impressed both the Curia and the king. After some hesitation, the distinction between fait and draft and the possibility of a " respectful silence " was admitted by Pope Clement IX. in 1668, and thus a temporary peace was established. This " peace of Clement IX." was evidently a defeat for the Curia, which practically admitted that the situation was beyond its control unless it was supported by the secular arm.
The dissensions were revived by the publication of Quesnel's Nouveau Testament en fran§ais aver des
reflzxhons Morales (1693), which was
5• QUM& dedicated to Noaillea, at that time
The Bull bishop of ChAlons. But before the Uaigenitus. development of this new stage, Jan‑
senism of the older period had come to an end. Louis XIV. became more and more jealous of his authority and inclined to assure the pardon of his sine by the persecution of heretics. He availed himself of a dissension which had broken out among the Jansenists themselves, by urging Pope Clement XI. to adopt severe measures against them. The pope was glad to seize an opportunity VI‑ ‑7
to assert his authority over the Gallican Church, and issued the bull Vineram Domini (1705) in which the five theses of Jansen were unconditionally condemned. The none of Port Royal refused to subscribe the bull, and their convent was suppressed in 1709 and destroyed a year later. In the mean time Cardinal de Noailles had become archbishop of Paris. By his protection of Quesnel's " New Testament " he had incurred the hatred of the Jesuits, who influenced the pope to condemn certain propositions which Le Tellier, the Jesuit confessor of the king, had selected from the New Testament of Quesnel. Thereupon the pope issued, in 1713, the bull Unigenitus, in which 101 propositions from Quesnel were condemned as Jansenistic or otherwise heretical. Among these, however, were not only some which may be found almost literally in Holy Scripture and in Augustine, but even some substantially identical with the decrees of the Council of Trent, as, for instance, the second, " The grace of Jesus Christ is necessary for all good works; without it nothing (truly good) can be done "; the twenty‑sixth, " No grace is imparted except through faith "; the twenty‑ninth, " Outside of the Church no grace is given "; and the fifty‑first, " Faith justifies when it is operative, but it is operative only through love." The bull was laid before the assembly of the French clergy and accepted by the majority. Noaillea prohibited the book; but before he accepted the bull, he asked the pope for several explanations. The parliament obeyed the order of the king to enter the bull in the laws of the kingdom, with the reservation, however, that its views regarding excommunication should not interfere with loyalty to the king. The Sorbonne split into different parties, and some of its most prominent teachers were banished from Paris or lost their right of voting. The king, intolerant of resistance, thought of settling the matter by a national council, but the pope would not hear of so risky a measure; and at his death in 1715, Louis XIV. left the Jansenist question in the greatest confusion and bitterness of feeling.
The successor of Louis XIV., the frivolous duke of OrMana, cared for neither party, considering the
principles of both equally foolish. The
6. Accept‑ exiles were allowed to return, and the ants and Sorbonne withdrew its half‑hearted so‑
Appellants. ceptance of the bull Unigenitus. Aocordingly, the pope threatened Nosilles with deprivation and even excommunication. But now a number of hitherto submissive bishops began to ask for explanations, and in 1717 several of them appealed from the pope and his bull to a future general council. These were called Appellants, in distinction from the Acceptanta, who accepted the bull. Almost twenty bishops, the faculty of Paris and two other theological faculties, and a large part of the secular and monastic clergy joined the cause of the Appellants. They were stigmatized as Jansenists by their opponents, though in some cases unjustly. Noaillea also took the part of the Appellants, after a vain attempt at mediation. The Party of the Acceptants was headed by Mailly, archbishop of Reims. But Dubois, the favorite of the regent, was ambitious of a cardinal's hat,

Jaaeen	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	98
Jansenist Church
and took sides against the Appellants; and Louie
XV., led by his former teacher, Cardinal Fleury,
oppressed them in every way. Noaillea was com
pelled to submit (1728), and in 1730 the bull was
formally registered as the law of the kingdom.
	A young Jansenist clergyman, Franrois de Paris,
had died in 1727 as a result of his ascetic practises,
		with his " appeal " in his hand, and
	y. Convolu‑ some miraculous cures performed at
tionists.	his grave were looked upon as a divine
		confirmation of the cause of the Ap
pellants; even children fell into convulsions and
trances on his grave, prophesying and testifying
against the bull. Infidels were carried away by
the fanaticism of the thousands who knelt at the
grave of Pftris in the churchyard of St. M6dard.
In 1732 the king ordered the graveyard to be closed;
but portions of earth which had been taken from
the grave were equally efficacious, and the number
of convulsionary prophets of coming ruin to Church
and State continued to increase until the movement
ended in strife, and sometimes in moral disorder,
after giving occasion to the skeptics to draw con
clusions unfavorable to the miracles of Christianity.
	The Jansenista of the first generation had en
deavored to enforce the practise of confession to
		the pariah priest, not to friars and
	& Close Jesuits, but the subsequent persecu
	of Con‑	tion compelled them to confess to
	troversies. appellant priests. On their death‑bed,
		however, they had to confess to their
regular pastor if they wished to be buried with the
rites of the Church. Under the influence of the
Jesuits, Beaumont, archbishop of Paris, resolved
to refuse the last rites of the Church to all those
who produced no evidence that they had confessed
when in health to their parish priest. When a
priest in 1752 accordingly refused absolution to an
Appellant, the archbishop was summoned before
parliament and threatened with confiscation of his
revenues.	Most of the bishops took the side of
the archbishop, in defense of the unrestricted
right of the Church to control the sacraments, while
other parliaments took sides with that of Paris,
on the ground that it was trying to protect citizens
against clerical oppression. In 1753 the king forbade
the parliament to meddle in ecclesiastical affairs,
and its members were dispersed and banished;
but in the following year they were recalled, al
though they still insisted upon their rights, and
the archbishop who still refused absolution to
Appellants was exiled. The bishops, supported by
the king, requested the decision of the pope, who
now manifested considerably more caution in regard
to the bull Unigenitus by refusing the sacraments
only to such Appellants as were recognized as such
publicly and by law. The king referred grievances
concerning the refusal of the sacraments to spiritual
courts, but with the right of appeal to secular
courts. The dissensions of Jansenism ceased only
with the excitement preceding the expulsion of
the Jesuits. The literature on these disputes from
the time of the bull Unigenitus comprises three
or four thousand volumes in the Bibliotheque
Nationals of Paris.
(PAUL TSCHAC%ERT.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The beat earlier literature is given in Schaff, Creeds, i. 102. Consult: T. Bouvier, Hint. du Jana6nieme, Strasburg, 1884; 8. P. Tregellea, The Jansenista; their Rise, Persecutions and existing Fragments, London, 1851; R. F. W. Guett6e, JanaEniame et JEauitiame, Paris, 1857; R. Rapin, Hint. du Janahniame, Paris, 1865; idem, M& moirea our Z'egliae IBl,4‑98, ed. L. Aubineau, 3 vole., ib. 1885; F. X. Linseumann, M. Baina and die Grundlepung des Janaenismue, Tlibingen, 1887; W. H. Jervis, The GaRican Church, i. chaps. 3d.‑xiv., ii. chaps. v. vi., viii.. 2 vole., London, 1872; A. 8chill, Die Constitution Unipenitua, Freiburg, 1878; E. L. T. Henke, Neuere Kirchengeachichte, ed. Gass, ii. 97 eqq., Halls, 1878; A. Vandenpeerenboom, Cornelius Janaeniue, Bruges, 1882; A. Ricard, Lea Premiere Janaeniatea, Paris, 1883; L. 8dche, Lea Derniera Jana6niatea, 1710‑1870, 3 vole.; ib. 1891; C. Gilardoni, La Bulls UniBenitue, Vitry‑le‑Franeoia, 1892; idem, ‑ L'Abbaye de Haute‑Fontaine et le Janaeniame, ib. 1894; C. Callewaert, Janaeniua Evgque d'Yprea, Louvain, 1893; Mrs. M. Tollemache, French Janaeniata, London, 1893; G. Doublet, Le JanaEniame dares l'ancien diocPae de Vence, Paris, 1901; J. Gaillard, Un prelat janseniate. Choart de Buzeuval, ev0que de Beauvais, 1661‑79, ib. 1902; A. M. P. Ingold, Bouasuet et 2e JanaEniame, ib. 1904; V. Durand, Le Janaeniame au xoiii. ai3cle et Joachim Colbert, Evlque de Montpellier (1888‑1738), ib. 1907; Cambridge Modern History, v. 82 eqq., New York, 1908. The bull Unigenitus is given in Lat. in Reich, Documents, pp. 388‑389. The reader should consult also for further light on the subject the literature given under PASCAL, BLAIBE; PORT ROYAL; and QUEBNEL, PABQUIER.

JANSEHIST CHURCH IN HOLLAND.
Contributory Causes of the Schism of 1702 (§ 1). Its Immediate Occasion (§ 2). History (§ 3). Differences from the Roman Catholic Church (§ 4).
	The doctrines of Jansenism (see JANSEN, COR
NELIU9, JANBENIBM) left no permanent trace in
		Belgium or in France, but in Holland
	z. Con‑ there has been for more than two cen
	tributory turies a church popularly called Jan
	Causes senist. Its adherents reject the name,
	of the rightly calling themselves the Old
	Schism Catholic Church of Holland, since the
	of ><7o2. schism among the Dutch Roman Cath
		olics in 1702, to which they owe their
origin, sprang from the adherence of the Dutch
clergy to the privileges of their church rather than
from dogmatic principles. The first bishop in
Holland was Willibrord (q.v.), consecrated bishop
of Utrecht by Pope Sergius I. in 695. Among his
successors were not a few who opposed the growing
tendency to regard the pope as the unrestricted
governor of all Christendom. The bishop of Utrecht
was originally chosen by the clergy, and in 1145
the Emperor Conrad III. confirmed the right to
the chapter of St. Martin's Cathedral. The choice
was not always accepted by Rome. In 1559 in
accordance with the wish of Philip II. of Spain,
then ruler of the Netherlands, the pope elevated
Utrecht to the rank of an archbishopric with five
sufFragan sees, and it was then agreed by pope
and king that the latter should select the bishops,
to be confirmed by the pope. Nine years later
the War of Liberation broke out, lasting for eighty
years, and involved the Roman Catholics in many
difficulties. Though they joined. with the Protes
tants in fighting against the Spanish yoke, they
were mistrusted, and about 1573 the public exer
cise of Catholic worship was forbidden‑a prohi
bition which remained in force till the revolution
of 1795. As the incumbents of the episcopal sees

99
died, it was found difficult to fill their places. Sasbold Vosmeer, chosen general vicar by the Utrecht chapter in 1583, after the death of the archbishop in 1580, was consecrated archbishop by the pope in 1602, but with the title archbishop of Philippi. His successors were chosen and consecrated in the same way. Under the fifth of them, Petrus Codde (consecrated 1689), occurred the schism.
More formidable opponents than the Protestants had appeared against the Roman Catholic clergy of
Holland. During the turbulent con‑
2. Its ditions of the long war the country Immediate had been invaded by " regular " clergy
Occasion. especially by the Jesuits after 1590,
who accused the Dutch clergy of the Jansenistic heresy. In 1697, during the negotiations of peace at Ryswik, there appeared an anonymous treatise in French, soon afterward also in Latin, and some years later in Dutch, under the title " Short Memorial concerning the Condition and Progress of Jansenism in Holland." Some copies fell into the hands of Codde, who hastened to send the book to Rome with an apology. He was declared innocent in Rome, although there was no end of insinuations. Since Alexander VII. had issued his constitution against the so‑called five theses of Jansen in 1656, the accusation implied that the accused was suspected of agreeing with the five condemned theses, or of refusing to believe that Jansen had taught those theses in his Augustinus, and thereby given rise to the heresy condemned by the church. Codde and his subordinate ecclesiastics could easily defend themselves against the charge of agreeing with the content of the condemned theses, although the former did not express himself on the question whether Jansen had really taught them or not. But since the decision of Alexander, this point involved the absolute supremacy and infallibility of the pope, and the Jesuits were intent upon having this question decided. Codde was summoned to Rome in 1700, and in 1702 was declared guilty of heresy. There was great consternation in Holland when it was learned that he had been dismissed from office, and still more when Theodor de Kock, his opponent, was appointed general vicar. The estates took the part of Codde and forced his opponents to let him return to Holland, where he arrived in 1703. The question now was, what attitude would Codde, the Dutch clergy, and the Utrecht chapter assume. If they accepted Codde's dismissal, the independence of the Utrecht church was necessarily abolished. Codde himself, from love of peace, remained until his death in a passive attitude, stedfastly asserting his rights and those of his church, but refraining from exercising them. A large party of the Dutch' clergy and laity, however, remained faithful to him, although another part followed De Kock. Thus Codde's dismissal led to a schism in the Dutch Roman Catholic Church which has never been healed.
It was to be expected that the church of the Jansenists, as Codde's party was now called, would decrease in numbers after Rome had spoken. Owing to the lack of higher ecclesiastics, the church of Utrecht was on the point of extinction, when aid came in an unexpected manner. Several French
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Jeasea
	T 	,at Church
clergymen who refused to sign the bull Unigenitus
in 1713 (see JANSEN, CORNELIUS, JANSENISM) sought
		refuge on Dutch soil. Moreover, in
	3. History. 1719, Dom Maria Varlet (chosen bishop
		of Babylon in 1718 and consecrated as
bishop of Ascalon Feb. 19, 1719) spent some time
in Amsterdam before he undertook his journey to
the Orient. In Amsterdam be hecame acquainted
with ecclesiastics of the Old Catholic Church and
	was active in their behalf. He had hardly reached
	the Orient when the pope suspended him as a Jan
	senist. He then returned to Holland, where the
	Utrecht chapter in 1723 had elected Cornelis
	Steenoven as archbishop to prevent the extinction
	of the Old Catholic Church. In 1724 Bishop Varlet
	consecrated him. The pope, of course, immediately
	put Steenoven under the ban, but the Utrecht
	church was saved from extinction. Steenoven died
	in 1725, and was succeeded by Barchman Wuytiers
	(d. 1733), who was followed by Theodor van der
	Croon (d. 1739), both consecrated by Varlet. The
	Utrecht church soon recognized the danger of
	making its continuance dependent upon the life
	of a single bishop, and consequently Hieronymus
	de Bock was consecrated bishop of Haarlem in 1742,
	and B. J. Bijevelt bishop of Deventer in 1758.
	Several attempts to reconcile the pope failed. A
I serious danger threatened the Old Catholic Church
	in Holland under the administration of the Roman
	Catholic king, Louis Bonaparte (1806‑10), and
	under the regime of Emperor Napoleon (1810‑13),
	who contemplated prohibiting the election of a
	new Old Catholic bishop; but this danger passed
	with the restitution of the independence of Holland,
	and in 1814 W. van Os was elected archbishop of
	Utrecht, and in 1819 Johannes Bon bishop of
	Haarlem (see EPISCOPACY, III.). The difficulties
	which threatened the church under King William I.
	and King William IL, who desired to establish a
	concordat with the pope, passed as soon as the
	agreement failed. The law concerning church asso
	ciations enacted in 1853 assured entire freedom to
	all ecclesiastical organizations, including the Old
	Catholics. In this way the small church has grad
	ually increased its members from 5,000 to almost
	8,000, and its parishes from twenty‑five to twenty
	six. It is not strange that the Old Catholic bishops
	disapproved the dogma of the immaculate concep
	tion in 1854, and that of papal infallibility in 1870.
	The chief points of difference between the Old
	Catholics of Holland and their Roman Catholic op
		ponents are the following: (1) The old
	;. Differ‑ Catholic Church considers the deposi
	ences from tion of Archbishop Codde illegal, and
	the Roman asserts that, in spite of the Reforma
	Catholic tion of the sixteenth century and its
	Church. influence upon the affairs of Holland,
		the Roman Catholic Church has existed
	without interruption, and has continuously retained
	its right to administer its own affairs as a national
	church, independent of the church in Rome. (2)
	It refuses to sign the formula of Pope Alexander
	VIL, unless permitted to make a distinction between
	a signature quoad jua and quond fnctum; namely,
	between the question whether the five incriminated
theses were heretical, and the question whether

Janssen Japan
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
100
Jansen had taught them in a heretical sense. (3)
It rejects the bull Unigenitus, since this bull val
idates the moral system of the Jesuits for the whole
Roman Catholic Church. The importance of the
Old Catholic Church of Holland for all Roman Cath
olic Christendom lies not only in the fact that it is
a monument of the spirit of the earlier centuries,
but also in the fact that it has entered into rela
tions with the Old Catholic movement in Germany
and Switzerland. When the Old Catholic spirit
was aroused in Germany in opposition to the dogma
of .infallibility in 1870, and the necessity of a bishop
for the newly organized Old Catholic Church was
felt, it was H. Heykamp, the Old Catholic bishop of
Deventer, who, in 1873, consecrated J. H. Reinkena
bishop of the German Old Catholics. See OLD
CATHOLICS. 	(J. A. GE'RTH VAN WIJK.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: C, P. HOy71Ck a Papendreeht, Hitt. ecclesiae Uitralectinae, Mechlin, 1725; T. Baekhusius, BewijrSchrift, 3 vole., Utrecht, 17230; M. G. Dupao de Bellegarde, Hiet, abr4g6e de l'Epi%ae m0ropoZitaine d'Utreeht, ib. 1852 J. W. Neale, Hint. of the so‑called Janaeniat Church of Holland, London 1858; R. Bennink Janaeonius, Oeechiedenia der Oud‑RoomacA‑KathoZieke Kerk in Nederland, The Hague, 1870; F. Nippold, Die r6miach‑katholiache Kirche . der Niederlande, Leipeie, 1877; J. A. van Beek, Geschiedenis der hollandache Kerk, Rotterdam, 1886; Neerlsndia Catholics, Utrecht, 1888; J. do Huller, Bijdrape tot de peachiedenie van hot Utrechtachs 3chisma, The Hague, 1892; W. P. C. Knuttel, Ds Toealand der nederlandache Katholieken, 2 vote., ib. 1892‑94; J. Meyhoffer, Le Msrtyrdope Protestant des Paya‑Bas, 1¢88‑1697, The Hague, 1907. The literature of the church is given by J. A. van Beek, Lijat roan taeken uitpsuen in de Oud‑KatJwlieke Kerk, 3 vole., Rotterdam, 1892‑93. Much of the literature under JAlI6ENIaM is pertinent, e.g., the work of Tregellee.
JANSSEN, y8na'sen, JOHANNES: Roman Catholic; b. at Xanten (15 m. a.e. of Cleves) Apr. 10, 1829; d. at Frankfort Dec. 24, 1891. He studied at Munster, Louvain, Bonn, and Berlin from 1849 to 1853 (Ph.D., Bonn, 1853), and was professor of history in the gymnasium of Frankfort from 1854 until his death. He was ordained to the priesthood in 1860, was a member of the Prussian House of Deputies in 1875‑76, was created a domestic prelate to the pope and an apostolic prothonotary in 1880. His theological position was so ultramontaniatic as to evoke sharp criticism from Protestant historians for his partizan views of the moral, economic, and religious results of the Reformation. Of his many books the chief is the monumental Geschichte des delttschen Volkes cost dem Ausgang des Mittelalters (8 vole., Freiburg, 1879‑94), the last three edited and completed by L. Pastor; Eng. tranal. by M. A. Mitchell and A. M. Christie, Hist. of the German People at the Close of the Middle Ages, 12 vole., London, 1896‑1907; Pastor has also reedited the whole work, and has supervised the publication of a series of monographs in defense of it under the title Erlliuterungen and Ergdnzungen zu Janssens Gesehichte des deutschen Volkes (6 vole., Freiburg, 1898‑1908). Janssen replied to his critics in his An meiree Kritiker (Freiburg, 1882) and Ein zweites Wort an meine Ifritid;er (1883).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Pastor, Johannes Janssen, 1818‑81, sin
Lebenebild, Freiburg, 1893; F. Moister, ErintuTUnp an
Johann Janssen, Frankfort, 1896.
jAft1PSENS, ERASMUS (ERASMUS jOHANftES) Dutch Unitarian theologian; b. about
1540; d. at Clauaenburg (220 m, e.s.e of Budapest) 1596. He became rector of the college at Antwerp in 1576, but because of his Socinian teaching was compelled by William of Orange to resign and go into exile. He became rector of the college at Emden, and in 1579 he went to Frankfort, where there seemed prospects of larger religious liberty. But his Clare demonstratio Antichristum immediate post mortem apoatolorum coepissi regnare in ecelesia Christi (n.p., 1584) caused him new trouble, and he emigrated to Cracow in Poland. A disputation with Faustus Socinus Nov. 29‑30, 1584, led to Janssena' De unigeniti filii Dei existentia (Cracow, 1595). A little later Janssens withdrew his opposition to the Unitarian doctrine, being offered the pastorate of the Unitarian church at Clausenburg, in the service of which he closed his life.
His system of theology is stated in his Antithesis ttoctrinte Christi et Antichrists de uno vero Deo (n.p.,1583; reprinted with refutation by J. Zanchius, Neuatadt, 1586). He was author also of Scriptum quo causal proPter yuas vita aIerna eorttingat complecEitur (1589), and furnished the part on the prophets in the Latin Bible of Tremellius and Junius (Frankfort, 1579).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: C . $andiue, Bibliolheca antitrinilamm‑um,
passim, Freistadt, 1884; J. N. Paquot, MJmmoirea pour aeruir h 1'hiet. Litthra%re de . . . Pays‑Bas, vii. 328‑333, 18 vole., Louvain, 1783‑70; J. C. A. Hoofer, Nouvelle Mapraphie pEnErale, xxvi. 357, Paris, 1881.
JANUARIUS, SAINT: The patron saint of Naples; b., according to tradition, either at Naples or Benevento about the middle of the third century; martyred at Puteoli Sept. 19 (according to other socounts, May 1 or 2, Oct. 19, or Dec. 16), 305. Within a century after his death his relics are said to have been translated to ,a, church before the gates of Naples, whence they were taken, about 820, to Benevento (the head being left in Naples), and were finally interred in a church of Benevento in 1129. Since 1497 they have rested in the Januariua chapel of the cathedral of Naples, the head and two glass flasks said to contain his blood being in the Capelladi Tesoro of the same structure. The famous miracle of the liquefaction of the blood in the flasks when brought near the head is said to have taken place first in the twelfth century, and is abundantly confirmed since the middle of the fifteenth century, as by Pius II. (Aeneas Sylvius), the physician Angelus Cato (1474), the Bollandiata Henschen and Papebroch (Mar. 10, 1881), and the Bollandiat Stilting (Aug. 21, 1754); cf. the account of J. P. Peters, in American Church Magazine, Aug. or Sept., 1902. , It occurs three times a year‑on the first Saturday of May, in the evening, on Sept. 19 and Dee. 16, between 9 and 10 A.m. "According as the liquefaction is rapid or slow it is considered a good or evil omen for the ensuing year." (Baedeker.) Other miracles are also related as occurring in the nineteenth century in connection with this phenomenon. There are other less important saints and beatified of the same name.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The early Acts and Transdatio, with com‑
ment, are in ASB, Sept., vi. 782‑894. A list of litera
ture is given, Potthast, 1Vepweixr, p. 1385. Consult:
Kirwan's Romaniam at Home, pp. 81‑94, New York, 1852:
J. Peter, Zs LEgcnds de S. Janvia, Lausanne, 1884; E.
Gothein, Die CullurenhoickZunp Sod‑Italiens, pp, 112142, Breslau, 1888.

I. The Country and People.
IL Native Religions.
1. Shinto. it. Character (¢ 1). Its Obacuration by Buddhism (¢ 2). Its Revival ($ 3). Its Writings and Cosmogony (¢ 4). its Worship and Sects (¢ b).
2. Buddhism. Its Establishment in Japan (¢ 1). Its Dominance. Decline, and Recovery (¢ 2). Buddhist Sects ($ 3). Modern Doctrinal Basis (¢ 4).
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
JAPAN.

7Ii. Christianity in Japan.
I. Roman Catholic Missions.
Introduction under St. Francis Xavier (¢ 1).
Conditions Favoring Christianity (¢ 2).
Beginnings of Persecution (¢ 3).
Diaeeneiona among Roman Cstholice (¢ 4).
Persecution under Ieyasu (¢ 5).
Period of Exclusion of Christianity (¢ 8).
Renewed Missionary Efforts (¢ 7).
Modern Roman Catholic Missions (§ 8).
I. The Country and People: [Japan, called by its own people Nihon or Nippon, consists of a chain of nearly 4,000 islands, of which about 500 are inhabited, in the western Pacific, reaching from Formosa to the Kurile Isles, or from 22° to 51° north latitude, a distance of about 2,400 miles, and lying generally in direction n.e. to s.w. off the eastern coast of Asia. Its climate, consequently, ranges from the subtropical to the subarctic. Ira central portion is the most important, consisting of the four great islands (named from north to south), Yezo, Honshin, Shikoku, and Kiushiu. Ira territory, including Formosa, has an area of 162,154 square miles with a deeply indented coast line nearly 20,000 miles in length, favorably conditioned therefore for commerce by water. It is a country of high mountain ranges, deep valleys, few plains, no great rivers, many volcanoes, and frequent earthquakes, few of which are severe. Ira population, slightly under 50,000,000, is of varied stock, the result of the fusion of several migrations possibly of Mongol stock with the original inhabitants. The Ainu, found only in the northern parts, seem to represent the aborigines. The Formosans betray a strong Malay infusion. The principal industries are agriculture and the fisheries, though the development of mining and manufactures during the last quarter century has been enormous. Its government, since 1889, is a constitutional monarchy, with two houses of parliament, the lower entirely elective by the people, the upper partly elective and partly appointive.]
II. Native Religions.‑1. Shinto: This indigenous cult of Japan combines nature worship, hero wor‑
ship, and reverence for ancestors. At 1. Its times its most distinguishing character‑
Character. istic has been reverence for the im‑
	perial family, and the present tendency
is to emphasize this feature‑ nevertheless through
long periods of Japanese history the emperors were
almost forgotten by the mass of the people, and the
extreme honor shown at the present day is largely
a growth of the last forty yearn. The name ShintB
is the Chinese equivalent of the Japanese Kami no
michi, " Way of the Superior Beings," the word
kami (Chinese shin), although employed by Chris
tians as the name for God, being used of super
natural beings‑whether good or evil‑of. the
spirits of departed heroes, and even of extraordi
nary natural objects. The number of these beings
is said to be 800 myriada. The beginnings of the
system are lost in antiquity; but its oldest elements
Jensen Japan
Results (¢ 9).
2. Missions of the Eastern Church. Initiation by Nicolai Kseatloa (¢ 1). Results (¢ 2).
3. Protestant Missions. Beginnings in 1869 (¢ 1). Alternating Advance sad Reaction (¢ 2). The Advance, 1873‑88 (¢ 3). The Obstacles Encountered (¢ 4). The Reaction of 1889 (¢ 5). The New Advance since 1899 (¢ (i). Harmony of Protestant Effort (¢ 7). General Results (¢ 8).
are found in the worship of the forces of nature. phallicism was once common, but in recent times the government has caused most of the symbols to be removed from public view. Shinto combines religious and non‑religious elements, the former being sometimes so overshadowed by the latter as to be hardly discernible. In its present form it has no system of dogmas, no prescribed code of morals, and no sacred writings unless a few aemihistorical books and some forma of addresses to the kami can be considered such.
Buddhism came to Japan in 552 A.D., and in the
ninth century it taught that the kami were avatars (reincarnations) of Buddhist saints. 8. Its Ob‑ Buddhism proved the stronger religious
sonration element in this combination, and most
	by	of the prominent Shinto shrines, with
Buddhism. the exception of those at Ice and Izumo,
were served by Buddhist priests, who
introduced the images, inCen9e, and elaborate fltUdl
of their worship. Many of the smaller shrines remained unchanged, and there was nothing in either Shinto or Buddhism that made it aim inconsistent for the people to observe the rites of both. While every locality had its Shinto shrine where some hero or other superior being was honored as the patron saint of the community, it may be said that the people were at the same time Buddhists and Shintoiats. There was, however, one marked distinction in their conceptions of the two systems. The chief concern of Shinto was with the present world, while Buddhism busied itself more with what came after death. The erection of buildings and the commencement of public works were preceded by Shinto rites, and infants were taken to
the village shrine for consecration to the ]9%1 gGit~i
but funerals and memorial services for the dead
were conducted by Buddhist priests. Hence graveyards were contiguous to Buddhist temples, while Shintoiam avoided the pollution associated with
death. In the rare cases where Shinto funerals were held, there were usually additional Buddhist rites.
In the seventeenth century a movement began
for the revival of ancient Shinto, largely political
		in its motives. It was chiefly conduo
	S. Its red by scholars who investigated old
	Revival. records and embodied the results in
	books that advocated a return to
ancient ideas of government and ritual. Their
writings, though reaching only a small section of
people, had an important influence in bringing

Japan	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	102
about the overthrow of the shogunate in 1868 and the restoration of imperial power. In connection with that great change the ancient department of Shinto rites was reestablished. Buddhist ornaments and ritual were banished from the ancient shrines, a grant equal to about 1300,000 a year was made for their maintenance, and preachers I, were sent out to instruct the people in the ancient beliefs. This movement was ahortlived. The department of Shinto rites was degraded until it became a subbureau of the home department, the Buddhists recovered many shrines, and in most respects people returned to their former ways. In 1899 the officials of the most honored Shinto shrine, that of Dai Jingu in Ise, obtained the government's consent to .their request that they no longer be considered as forming a religious body, but as an association for performing rites in honor of the imperial ancestors and for conducting patriotic ceremonies. The tendency of recent years has been to consider Shinto itself a system for fostering patriotism and loyalty. This makes it possible, without violation of the freedom of conscience guaranteed by the national constitution, to claim that every Japanese ought to support it and take part in its ceremonies. While, however, the shrines are not considered religious buildings, there are frequently connected with them voluntary associations of a religious character called kyakwai, the name used by Christians to designate a church.
The chief authority for the cosmogony and mythology of Shinto is the Kojiki (" Records of Ancient
Matters "), a compilation of legends 4. Its Wri‑ that was completed in 712 A.D. The
tinge and Nihongi (" Chronicles of Japan "), Cosmogony, though compiled only eight years later,
is much more affected by Chinese ideas. The Yengishiki describes the ritual as practised in the Yengi era (901‑923) and includes prayers that had come down from more ancient times. According to the Kojiki, after heaven and earth were separated from the original chaos, three kami came into existence on the Heavenly Plain and afterward passed away. They were succeeded by others until finally there came two named Izanagi (" Male who Invites ") and Izanami (" Female who Invites "). Standing on the bridge of Heaven, these two thrust a spear into the liquid mass below them, and as they drew it back, the falling drops became an island, to which they descended. They there gave birth to the other islands of Japan and afterward to a number of gods and goddesses. The birth of the Fire‑god caused the death of Izanami. Izanagi visited her in the underworld, but did not succeed in bringing her back to earth. After his return, as he purified himself from the pollution he had incurred, new deities were produced from each article of clothing and from different parts of his body. The most important of these was Amaterasu‑O‑Mi‑Kami, the Sun‑goddess, who, after a quarrel with one of her brothers, withdrew into a cave, leaving the earth in darkness. The 800 myriad deities lured her forth by offerings, dances, songs, and the exhibition of a mirror in which she seemed to see another being as splendid as herself. One of her descendants was Jimmu Tenno, the first em‑
peror of Japan, whose ascension to the throne is said to have occurred 660 B.C.
A Shinto shrine in its purest form is of very simple architecture, being constructed of unpainted
wood and thatched with bark or thin 6. Its Wor. shingles. Before it is a torn or de‑
ship and tached portal. There is no visible
Sects.	object of worship, but hidden within
the sanctuary is something in which the spirit of the kami is supposed to reside. At the shrine in Ise there is a mirror said to have been bestowed by the Sun‑goddess on her grandson when she sent him to subdue the land. Shrines where mirrors are exposed to view and those with tiled roofs or painted wood show the influence of Buddhism. Services consist chiefly of the recital of ancient prayers, the offering of articles of food, and dancing by priestesses. Ise and other prominent shrines are visited by large numbers of pilgrims, who carry home charms to be placed in their household shrines. Shinto lays stress on ceremonial purity. There is no formulated system of ethics, such being thought necessary only for the immoral people of other lands, while in Japan each person's heart teaches him what he ought to do. A number of popular sects have more of the religious element than has the Shintoism thus far described. The Kurozumi, Tenrikyo, and Remmonkyo sects are the ' best known. Springing up in the last century, they combine Shinto, Buddhist, and Confucian elements. Most of these sects make much of curing disease through faith or by incantations, and at times have gained large numbers of adherents.
2. Buddhism: Buddhism was introduced into Japan in 552 A.D. when the king of Kudara, a
Korean state, sent to the mikado a 1. Its Es‑ golden image, some sutras, and other tahliahmeat religious objects. A temple was built
in Japsn. and put under the care of the prime
minister. An epidemic that soon after broke out was attributed to the anger of the gods at the introduction of the foreign religion, and the temple was overthrown; but it is averred that all attempts to destroy the image proved vain, so that it is in existence at the present day, there being, however, two temples, each of which claims to possess it. Priests and nuns, with images and books, were soon after sent from Korea. Though Buddhism found much favor at court, there was a strong party that opposed the supplanting of Shinto by the foreign system, but an appeal to arms resulted in the defeat of the Shintoists. The new religion made a great gain when a Korean priest claimed to recognize in the mikado's infant son the reincarnation of a famous priest of China and obtained permission to superintend the boy's education. The prince, beat known by his posthumous name, Shotoku Taiahi (57221), afterward became regent and was an earnest defender of Buddhism. An imperial edict in 621 made it the established religion of the country. There were at that time forty‑six temples with 1,385 priests and nuns. Many of these had come from Korea and China, countries which had contributed to Japan their literature arts, and sciences through the teachers of Buddhism. Appreciation of the new civilization

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
made progressive people more ready to listen to the religious doctrines of its representatives.
Acceptance of the doctrine that the ruler of a nation gained great merit by abdicating and becom‑
ing a monk vastly increased the in2. Its Dom‑ fluence of the monasteries, which thus
finance,	came allied with the imperial family.
Decline, The new faith spread from the upper
	sad	to the lower classes. Ira progress was
Recovery. more easy because it did not demand
the abandonment of old beliefs and forma of worship. As in other countries, Buddhism could accommodate itself to the religious ideas of those whom it desired to win. At the beginning of the ninth century the priest Kukai (better known by his posthumous title, Kobo Daishi) formulated the doctrine that the Shinto deities were avatars of Buddhist saints, while the classification of many
deified heroes as gongen, temporary manifestations of Buddha, simplified the problem and provided for the apotheosis of future emperors and great men. Most of the Shinto shrines soon lost their former simplicity, images and decorations of various kinds being introduced into them, while the forms of worship combined Shinto and Buddhist elements in proportions that differed with time and locality. Buddhism became the chief religious force in Japan and gradually attained to great political influence and even military power. In the Middle Ages some of the monasteries were strong fortresses, the monks of which took an active pact in war with rival sects or political enemies. In the last half of the sixteenth century these fortresses were destroyed by the military leaders, Nobunaga and Hideyoahi, while the power of Buddhism was further weakened by the success of the Roman Catholic missions. Under the Tokugawa shoguns (1603‑1867) it was restored to favor. The advent of Christian missions has done much to arouse the Buddhist priests from the lethargy into which they had fallen. Some of the sects imitate Christian methods, establishing schools for boys and girls, young men's associations, women's societies, and charitable institutions, while many Buddhist journals are published. Preachers have been sent to Korea, China, Hawaii, and California, primarily for the sake of Japanese colonists; but also with the hope of gaining converts.
Japanese Buddhism is divided into many sects. Some of these were brought from China, while others originated in Japan itself. Those s. Buddhist now in existence, with the dates of Sects. their establishment, are as follows: Tendai (three subsects), 805; Shingon (two subsects), 806; Yuzu Nembutsu, 1127; Jodo (three suhsects), 1174; Rinzai (nine subsecta), 1168; Shin, also called Monto or Ikko (ten subsects), 1224; Soto, 1227; Ir'ichiren or Hokke (seven subsects), 1253; Ji, 1276; Obaku, 1650. The Rinzai, Soto, and Obaku sects are offshoots from the old Zen sect, by whose name they are sometimes called. The word zen signifies " contemplation," the earnest followers of this system giving much time to meditar tion, or rather to an attempt to induce a sort of hypnotic condition, in which there is a complete absence of thought. The Zen sects together with the Tendai and Shingon are sometimes called the
Japan
learned sects, as they have attached much importance to the study of the Sanacrit texts. The wets having the moat influence with the people at the present time are the Jodo, Shin, and Nichiren. The name of the first signifies " Pure Land." It teaches that Amide (Amitabha), the object of its worship, made a series of vows to the effect that on attaining the state of a Buddha he would create a paradise into which those who had faith in him should enter after death. This faith is chiefly shown by use of the formula Namu Amide Butau (" Hail, Amide Buddhal "). The Shin sect sprang from the Jodo, which it rebukes for seeking salver tion through " self‑effort depending on the merits of another," while it teaches reliance upon Amide's merit alone. Thin belief in salvation by faith, the rejection of penance, fasting, and other forma of asceticism, together with the fact that it permits its priests to marry, has caused the Shin sect to be called the Protestantism of Japanese Buddhism. The Nichiren sect highly esteems charms, amulets, and pilgrimages. Its temples are gorgeous and the services noisy, and its priests are considered expert in exorcising demons. Delighting in controversy, the priests attack the doctrines of other sects, while these declare that the Nichiren sect ought not to be considered as belonging to Buddhism. The Yuzu Nembutsu and the Ji sects have but a small following.
Though three extinct sects belonged to the Him ayana (" Smaller Vehicle "), Japanese Buddhism
of to‑day billonga to the Mahayana 4. Modern (" Greater Vehicle "). The differences
Doctrinal that divide the sects turn upon ab‑
Basi`• atruse metaphysical and technical
points, and often depend upon the sutras that are held in chief honor, here being one point in which the divisions of Buddhism differ from those of Christianity with its one Bible. It is to be remembered further that, as very few of these books have been translated into Japanese, they are read only by the priests. The common
people have but slight knowledge of BUddhi9t d00.
trines. Simply following the religious customs that have been handed down in their families for generations, they know little about the meaning of the rites or the nature of the beings that they worship. The beliefs of the younger priests are being greatly influenced by Western ideas. One resulting movement has taken the name " New Buddhism." It is an attempt to bring Buddhist doctrines, or rather nomenclature, into harmony with modern thought. The doctrines are so explained as to bear little resemblance to what was formerly taught; and there is an attempt to replace the pessimism of Buddhism by a more hopeful philosophy. No formulated system has yet been constructed, as the leaders differ greatly among themselves; some
being atheistic some pmthe4G' y(Me others
assert that they believe in a personal God.

III. Christianity in Japan,‑1• Roman Catholic Missions: The Portuguese, who had previously visited the Liukiu Islands, reached Japan proper about
1542. Six years later one of their ships brought a young Japanese named Yajiro (the Paul Anjiro of the Jesuit accounts) to Malacca, where he met St.

Japan	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	104
Francis Xavier. He was sent to the Jesuit college in Goa, and there, with his servant and another
Japanese, was soon afterward bap1. Intro‑ tined. In response to Yajiro's en‑
dnotion treaties that missionaries be sent to
Under his people, Xavier, with Fathers Coamo St. Francis
Xavier. and Torres and Brother Juan Fernan‑
den, accompanied the three Japanese back to their own land, reaching Kagoshima Aug. 15, 1549. There they met a favorable reception, the daimio (feudal lord) of that region authorizing them to teach their religion and permitting his subjects to become Christians. With Yajiro's help Xavier prepared a summary of Christian doctrine in Japanese, which he wrote out in Roman letters, and since he never learned much of the language of the country, his direct evangelistic work while in Japan consisted chiefly in reading this book upon the streets to those who were drawn by curiosity to see and hear the foreigner. About 100 persona had been baptized in Kagoshima when the Buddhist priests stirred up the daimio to order that no more of his people should become Christians under penalty of death. After having been in Kagoshima a little more than a year, the missionaries went to Hirado, where Xavier says that " in a few days about 100 persons became Christians." He and Fernandez then pushed on to Kyoto, the capital, where it was their hope to convert the rulers of the land. That city was so convulsed by civil strife that it was impossible to obtain a hearing. They therefore returned to Yamaguchi, where they had spent a few days on their way to Kyoto, and where ere long a number of converts were secured.
In all, Xavier spent only twenty‑seven months in Japan before returning to India. Though he led
the way and inspired others, the real 8. Condi‑ work was done by Torres and Fertioae favor‑ nandez, who spent the remainder of y°‑ their lives in Japan, and by those who
afterward joined the mission. Many circumstances favored their success. The Japanese were to a remarkable degree ready to listen to new doctrines. Shintoism had little religious influence; Buddhism was powerful, but its leaders were taking an active part in political and military affairs, and for this reason many of the daimios were ready to favor a movement that seemed likely to weaken the power of the arrogant priesthood. Some of the feudal lords were also desirous of attracting foreign commerce. The country had long been vexed by interns! strife; and Nobunaga, the military leader who, by gaining control of the central provinces, began the work that finally resulted in the unification of the country, was a bitter enemy of the Buddhists and openly favored the missionaries. Among the early converts were several feudal lords and other men of high rank. Some of these confiscated the Buddhist temples, destroyed the images, and compelled their subjects to be baptized. Christianity soon gained a strong foothold in $iushiu and in the region of Kyoto. Churches, monasteries, and schools were built, and many books of instruction or devotion were published. In 1583 the Christian lords of Kiuahiu sent four young men on an embassy to the pope. In 1581
the Christians numbered about 150,000, and probably the highest number ever attained was 300,000 in 1596.
Hideyoshi, who, soon after Nobunaga's death (1582), gained control of political affairs, seemed at first inclined to favor the Christians,
Bees‑	some of whom were among his leading
niage of officers. In 1587, however, he suddenly
Persecu‑
tion.	sent into exile Taka ama Ukon the
Persecu‑
tion. Justo Ucondono of the Jesuit historians), the most prominent of the Christians, and ordered all the missionaries to leave the country within twenty days. The chief reasons given by Roman Catholic historians for this action are the scandalous lives of the Portuguese merchants, that Hideyoahi was angered at Christian maidens who would not yield to his lust and that the refusal of a Portuguese captain to bring into harbor a large ship that he wished to examine aroused suspicions. Japanese accounts say that from the first he had considered Christianity dangerous to the state and had only been waiting a favorable opportunity for attacking it, and also that the arrogant demeanor of the missionaries enraged him. Murdoch suggests that Hideyoahi probably had no desire to extirpate Christianity, but only to reduce it to the position of a serviceable tool. However this may be, he postponed the time of the missionaries' departure for six months, and even then did not insist upon the enforcement of the decrees, though he pretended to be angry at the failure to carry them into effect. The missionaries worked in a less public manner than formerly, but there continued to be many baptisms.
Papal bulls by Gregory XIII., Jan. 28, 1585, confirmed by Clement IIL, 1600, had decreed that none
but Jesuits should go as missionaries 4. Dissen‑ to Japan; and Philip IL, ruler of Spain sions
Among and Portugal, had given the merchants
Roman of the latter country a monopoly of
Catholics. trade with Japan. The Spanish colo‑
nists in the Philippines and the different religious orders that had established themselves there were very restive under these restrictions, and finally broke them. Franciscan monks, coming as envoys from the governor of the Philippines, were allowed by Hideyoahi to reside in Kyoto on condition that they would not attempt to teach their religion. Soon, however, they were engaged in the open propagation of Christianity. Bitter feeling arose between the two orders, and also between the Portuguese and Spanish merchants who allied themselves respectively with the Jesuits and the Franciscans. In 1595 the pilot of a Spanish ship wrecked on the coast of Japan was pointing out on a map the wide possessions of his king. When asked how so many lands in different parts of the earth had been brought under one sway, he replied: " The king first sends out teachers of religion. After they have gained the hearts of a sufficient number of persons, soldiers are sent to unite with these converts in subduing the desired territory." This speech was reported to Hideyoshi, who had always suspected that the missionaries had political ends in view. Thinking it time to give them another warning, he ordered arrests to be made, and six

106
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Franciscan missionaries and twenty Japanese Christians were taken to Nagasaki and crucified. A new edict forbade any of the daimios to become Christians, and ordered all missionaries to leave the country. By dressing Portuguese merchants in clerical robes and sending them on board a ship, the Jesuits pretended to be obeying the command, and thus, with a few exceptions, they were able to remain concealed in Japan.
Hideyoshi died in 1598. The missionaries came out from their hiding‑places and were reenforced
by new arrivals. Unfortunately their 6. Persecu‑ work was weakened by dissensions betion Under tween the orders. Augustinians and
Ieyasn. Dominicans, as well as Franciscans,
		disregarded the papal prohibitions and
came to Japan from the Philippines. After a period
of civil strife, Ieyasu, the founder of the Tokugawa
	line of shoguns, gained control of the country. His
	desire for commerce led him to adopt a kindly policy
	toward the missionaries; but some of the Chris
	tians were active supporters of his enemies, and
	they were also accused of plots with foreign rulers
	to effect his overthrow. Indeed, in all this history
	of Roman Catholicism in Japan, the chief cause of
	official opposition was the suspicion that its teachers
	were agents of the European nations that wished
	to gain possession of Japan. In 1614 Ieyasu or
	dered the expulsion of the missionaries and the
	suppression of Christianity, and the flames of per
	secution broke out. Not only missionaries, but
	many Japanese Christians were deported, and hor
	rible tortures were invented t0 secure feCant8t1011.
	Although multitudes apostatized, there wire many
	that stood firm. Men, women, and even little
	children were beheaded, burned at the stake, ...
	crucified. Many missionaries also suffered, for they
	had endeavored to remain in the country, and even
	those who had been once expelled returned under
	various disguises to face almost certain martyrdom.
	After Ieyasu's death (1616) the persecution was
	continued by his son, Hidetada. The final blow
	came in the suppression (1638) of a rebellion raised
	by the peasants living in Shimabara and Amakusa.
	Though largely a revolt against the oppression of
	their daimios, the leaders were Christians, and they
	fought under banners inscribed with the names of
	Jesus, of Mary, and also of St. James, the patron
	saint of Spain. The rebels seized an old castle
	where they defended themselves so b avely that
	they were put down only with the greatest difficulty.
	When finally defeated, all of them were put to death.
	The lawn against Christianity were thereafter en
forced still more strictly, and the country was closed
to all foreigners except the Dutch, who were per
mitted under restrictions to have a tradin9_PO,t m
Nagasaki.
For more than two centuries Japan refused to have intercourse with foreign nations The Chris‑
	8. Period ef tians were deprived of all the sacra ‑
	Exclusion ments except baptism. In every town
	otChrie‑ was Posted a notice saying °~ T~ evil
tianity, sect called Christian is strictly prohib‑
iced " and Off e
	g regards for infor
~tilonr..4 against believers 		h
u
priest=,
ificate that no member of his family
was a	n. In many parts of the land all were
compelled to trample on a cross or on a copper
plate that bore a representation of the crucified
Jesus. The publication of books containing refer
ences to Christianity was prohibited. The Dutch
	ships that came to Nagasaki were closely searched
for priests and Christian books. Nevertheless Chris
	tianity was not completely extirpated, but was
	carefully handed down from parent to child. Sacred
	images were hidden in what had the appearance of
	Buddhist shrines, lay baptism was practised, in
	some villages nearly all the inhabitants were be
	lievers, and had their catechists and baptizers.
	Ways were devised for evading the teats used for
	the detection of believers, In some pldoes Whete
the officials were themselves Christians the plate on which the people trampled was engraved with Buddhist symbols. Elsewhere the believers, after stepping upon the cross, would wash their feet and drink the water while returning thanks that they had been permitted to touch the sacred symbol. But from time to time Christians were discovered by the officials and punished.
The missionaries made some attempts to return.
In 1642 five Jesuits entered the country and were put to death; they were followed a 7. 8enewed year later by five others, who were imXisdonery prisoned until their death; as was also Efforts‑ the case with Sidotti; an Italian priest
	who, in 1709, had himself set ashore
on the coast of Japan. In 1844 a French war vessel
left under the f191t1A of Oiheisl interpreters a mission‑
ary and a Chinese evangelist in Liuchiu, which was a dependency of Japan. It was thought that they might there learn the Japanese language, do missionary work among the people, and be preparing for the opening of the Japanese group itself. They and others who succeeded them were so closely watched that they were able to have but little intercourse with the inhabitants. Protestants were also seeking entrance to Japan. In 1837 the ship Morrison attempted to restore some shipwrecked Japanese to their country. In addition to this philanthropic

motive, there was a hope that the expedition might help to open the land to trade and the Gospel. Three missionaries from china accompanied it. The waifs were not allowed to land, and the Morrispn Was &W
upon, So that It 64 'o return without
having accomplished anything. A Dumber of British officers organized the Loochoo Naval Mission, and in 1845 sent Dr. Bettelheim, a medical missionary, to the Liuchiu Islands. Though subjected to the most annoying surveillance and opposition, he baptized a few persons.
He also pry
Pared Japanese translations of portions of the Scriptures, and some of these were printed.

ti In 1854 Commodore Parry succeeded in negotia‑
ng a treaty between the United States and Japan.

g, ~~ern This did not provide for the residence
	of Americans	treaties made
8oman		; but later
Catholic with the United Staten and some other Missions nations perm;tad their citizens after
	to procure annually veer °useholder was ~ The Soci6tg July' M~ions live m certain ports.
y from the Buddhist commenced work	Ptrangisrea at once
	in Yokohama, gakOdate, and

Japan	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	108
Nagasaki. At first the missionaries could do little except study the language and open schools, where they taught those desiring to learn French. In 1862 a church, nominally erected for the use of foreigners, was dedicated in Yokohama, and the missionaries soon found themselves engaged in addressing the crowds that gathered about them, and several of their auditors were arrested. The French minister secured the release of these persons by promising that there should be no more preaching in the Japanese language. In 1865 a church building was dedicated in Nagasaki. One morning, as M. Petitjean, the missionary in charge, was kneeling before the altar, three women drew near and kneeling near him, said in a low voice, " Our heart is one with yours," and then told him that all the people in the village from which they came were Christians. The descendants of the ancient Christians, for whom the missionaries had from the first been seeking, were found. The discovery of other Christian communities followed, and ultimately the missionaries learned of about 50,000 persona, most of them living near Nagasaki, who considered themselves Christians, though for various reasons about half of these refrained from entering into close relations with the missionaries. The missionaries became busily occupied in instructing and caring for these believers. Though they tried to exercise due caution, it was not long before arrests began to be made. After the new government was thoroughly established in 1868, the persecution became severe, and from one cluster of villages 3,000 persons were exiled to distant provinces. The official representatives of Western nations united in a protest, declaring that by persecuting Christians Japan was showing dishonor to the countries whose people believed in the same religion. The Japanese government at first refused to yield and told the foreign ministers that " it would resist the propagation of Christianity as it would oppose the advance of an invading army." In 1873, however, orders were issued for removing from public view the edicts against Christianity. Though the laws had not been repealed, it was evident that they would not be enforced. From that time Roman Catholics shared with others the constantly increasing degree of religious freedom which at last found expression in the following article of the constitution promulgated in 1890: " Japanese subjects shall, within limits not prejudicial to peace and order, and not antagonistic to their duties as subjects, enjoy freedom of religious belief."
In comparing the growth of Roman Catholicism with that of Protestantism and of the Greek Church, it must be remembered that it began 9. Results. its new propaganda with several thousand adherents, while the others had none. On the other hand, it has been more hindered than they by the prejudices aroused three centuries ago against Christianity. Its work has spread into most of the large towns of Japan. It is governed by an archbishop who, with his coadjutor, lives in Tokyo; and there are four bishops, whose residences are in Tokyo, Sendai, Osaka, and Nagasaki. At the close of 1907 the missionaries, most of whom
are French, numbered 124 men and 124 women. There were 33 Japanese priests and 303 catechists. The number of believers was 61,095, of whom more than half were in the island of Kiuahiu. 1,551 adults and 3,604 infants were baptized in 1907. Schools for the training of priests had 20 students. There were several other schools, while in 19 orphanages 1,027 children found a home. Among other forms of charity, two hospitals for lepers deserve special notice. A large number of books is published, among them being a translation of the Bible. There are also two periodicals issued by the mission.
	2. Missions of the Eastern Church: In 1861
Nicolai Kasatkin went to Hakodate as chaplain of
		the Russian consulate there. As a
	1. Eaitia. student he had been moved by a desire
	tion by to give the Gospel to the Japanese,
	Nicolai and this position furnished an opening
	Hasatkin. for carrying oat his wish. His first
		convert was a Shinto priest whose
prejudice against Christianity led him to come to
the chaplain either to conquer him in argument,
or to assassinate him, who, however, became con
vinced that the foreigner's doctrine was true, and
in 1868 he and two others were secretly baptized.
When the Shogunate was overthrown, many of
those who belonged to the defeated party went to
Hakodate, among them several from the Sendai
clan. Led in part by curiosity and in part by the
thought that a new religion might subserve their
political aims, some of them began to study Chris
tianity. Many accepted it and returned as evan
gelists to their own province, or went elsewhere to
teach what they had learned. In a visit to Russia,
Nicolai organized a missionary society to support
his efforts, and when in 1871 another priest took
his place in Hakodate, he removed to Tokyo, where,
besides engaging in direct evangelistic work, he
opened a seminary for training evangelists and also
a school for teaching languages and the sciences.
In 1872 three evangelists in Sendai were arrested
with several of their hearers, and there were arrests
in Hakodate. Appeals to the imperial government
resulted in the release of these persons. That same
year Nicolai baptized ten persona in Tokyo; the
greatest secrecy was observed, but a few days later
a Buddhist priest showed him a sketch, drawn by
a spy of the government, of the room in which the
ceremony had taken place. But, as no arrests fol
lowed, anxiety gave way to confidence. Other
spies entered the school as pupils and at least two
became Christians. Great success attended the
early efforts at evangelization, especially in Sendai
and its vicinity. In 1875 the man mentioned above
as the first convert was ordained as the first priest.
	Nicolai was made a bishop in 1880. The growth
of the Eastern Church in Japan has been to a re
		markable degree due to this one man.
2. Results. There have never been more than four
		other missionaries, and most of the
time only one. He trained the Japanese priests
and, in addition to the supervision of churches and
schools, he prepared a translation of the New Tes
tament and published several other books. A force
of ten translators and writers is kept busy under his

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
107
direction. The connection of this mission with Russia, and the relations of Church and government in that land have made it the object of much suspicion. The large cathedral in Tokyo occupies one of the most conspicuous sites in the city, and stands on ground leased in the name of the Russian legar tion, facts which have caused considerable illfeeling, and even given rise to threats of destruction. Bishop Nicolai has, however, gained the respect of all; when war broke out in 1904 between Japan and Russia, he left it to his followers to decide whether he should remain in Japan or return to his own land. They urged him to stay with them, and this he did, to the general approval of the public. The statistics for 1907 show 265 churches, 30,166 members, 37 ordained Japanese priests, and 129 other evangelists. The contributions of the churches for the year amounted to 10,711 yen (5.355.50). Workers for the Church are trained in a theological seminary and an evangelists' school. The former gives a liberal education and teaches theology in the Russian language; the latter is of a lower grade, and uses only the Japanese language. There are two boarding‑schools for girls and several day schools, while three periodicals are published. In 1907 Nicolai was made an archbishop, another Russian being sent out as bishop.
3. Protestant Missions: The treaty made by Japan with the United States in 1858 provided that
in July of the next year certain ports 1. Begin‑ should be opened for the residence of
n 8~9 in American citizens; also that " Amer‑
icans in Japan shall be allowed the free exercise of their religion, and for this purpose shall have the right to erect suitable places of worship. No injury shall be done to such buildings, nor any insult offered to the religious worship of the Americans." This treaty was followed by similar ones with other Western nations. Though no permission was given for teaching Christianity to the Japanese, it was believed that this would soon become possible. Soon after the treaty was signed, Chaplain Wood, U. S. N., Dr. S. Wells Williams, the well‑known missionary and diplomatist, and Rev. E. W. Syle met in Nagasaki. As a result of their conference, they decided to write to the Episcopal, Reformed (Dutch), and Presbyterian Boards in America, urging that they send missionaries to Japan. Within a year all three societies had done this. In May, 1859, two months before the time set for opening the ports, the Rev. J. Liggins, of the Episcopal Board, was in Nagasaki, where he was followed a month later by the Rev. (afterward Bishop) C. M. Williams. In October J. C. Hepburn (q.v.), of the Presbyterian Board, reached KanagaWa, while the next month saw the arrival of three missionaries of the Reformed Board‑Rev. S. R. Brown and D. B. Simmons, M.D., at Kanagawa, and Rev. G. F. Verbeck (q.v.) at Nagasaki. The next April, Rev. J. Goble, who had been a marine on Parry's expedition, came to Kanagawa under the American Baptist Free Mission. At first the missionaries labored under great difficulties. They were surrounded by spies and were in danger of attack from
those who hated all things foreign, and especially the Christian religion. One man became Dr. Hep‑
burn's teacher with the intention of assassinating him. Japanese who showed any inclination toward Christianity were in danger of arrest. The teaching of English gave some opportunities for exerting an influence over young men. Even before missionaries came, Chaplain Wood, U. S. N., had held classes, and though extreme caution was necessary, the questions asked by students about words found in their books could be answered only by telling something concerning Christian beliefs. In 1861 the Shogun's court itself sent several persons to the missionaries for instruction in English. As many of those who were gathered in such classes afterward held places of influence, the honor in which they held their teachers and the ideas that they received concerning morals, politics, education, and religion had much influence in shaping the course of events in which these men became leaders. It was a great help to the propagation of the Gospel that educated Japanese could read Chinese. Their curiosity to learn about Western ideas led them to purchase not only works on geography, history, and science prepared by missionaries in China, but also those dealing directly with Christian truth, and even the Bible itself.
In Jan., 1866, a meeting held by Christian believers of various nationalities living in Yokohama
issued an address to the Christian 2. Alterna‑ world asking that special prayers be
tins Ad‑ offered for Japan. It mentioned among
vanoe and encouraging changes that the misaion‑
B,eaotion. aries were no longer watched by spies,
but were in some instances employed by the goverment as school‑teachers, that students of English no longer uttered the name of Jesus with bated breath, but manifested a readiness to talk about Christianity; and that some of them went daily to the missionaries " to read the English Bible, preferring this to the study of school‑books." At Yokohama,. in 1864 occurred the first Protestant baptism in Japan. In 1866 at Nagasaki a high official from Saga was baptized with his brother. The greatest secrecy had to be observed, as the new converts were liable to capital punishment. Up to the spring of 1872 only ten persons had been baptized. Soon after the restoration of imperial
power in 1868, the attempt to revive the Shinto religion was accompanied by a renewal of strong opposition to Christianity. The new government posted edicts against it almost identical with those of the Shogunate. One of the few baptized Protestants was cast into prison. In 1870 and 1871 two
teachers of missionaries were arrested under suspicion of being Christians, and one of them died
in prison. Knowledge of these persecutions made
other persons afraid for a while to visit the missionaries. Yet even before the removal of the edicts in 1873, it became evident that the government was becoming more liberal, and in Mar., 1872, the first Japanese church was organized in Yokohama with eleven members as a result of the work of the Reformed and the Presbyterian missionaries. Though this church has since become connected with the Nihon Kirisuto Kyokwai (Presbyterian), it at first had no denominational name. The next two churches, those of Kobe and Osaka, organized

7apaa	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	108
in 1874 in connection with the mission of the American Board, were of a similar nature, and it was the hope of most of the missionaries then in Japan that this policy could be continued; but that same year new churches in Yokohama and Tokyo were put " on a strictly Presbyterian basis."
The year 1873 marked the beginning of a period of rapid advance. Among progressive Japanese there sprang up a great desire to adopt S. The Ad‑ Western customs and ideas. Protea‑
vanoe, tant Christianity, as the religion of 1878‑88• England and America, was thought to be at least worthy of investigation, and large audiences listened to its proclamation. Some, like the popular leader Fukuzawa, argued that as a matter of policy it would be well for the country nominally to adopt Christianity. The Christian schools became crowded with earnest young men and women, many of whom became Christians and showed much zeal for carrying the Gospel to others. Bibles and other religious books had an increasing sale. The churches received large accessions to their membership, and several became self‑supporting. In 1883 a general convention of the missionaries and a union meeting of the Japanese Christians were followed by marked religious awakenings. So rapid did the growth of the churches become that extravagant expectations were aroused, and even some enemies of Christianity said that ere the century closed it would be the most prominent religion of the land. The statistics of Protestant missions for 1888 showed 249 churches with a membership of 25,514, the number of adults baptized in the year being 6 959. Outside of the professedly missionary ranks there were those from foreign lands who did much to help on the movement. Among them may be mentioned President Clark of the Massachusetts Agricultural College, who, in 1876, went to Japan to assist in establishing a similar institution in Sapporo. Capt. Janes, U. S. A., who was employed as a teacher in the city of Kumamoto, invited his pupils to come to his house for the study of the Bible. Some of them became Christians, whereupon a severe persecution broke out. A number of these went, in 1876, to the Doshisha School which Joseph Neesima and missionaries of the American Board had opened the preceding year in Kyoto. Mr. Neesima was a young man who, at a time when an attempt to leave the country was a capital crime, had been led by his desire to learn about God and Western civilization to go to America (1864). He was there befriended by Alpheus Hardy, a Boston merchant, and given opportunities for study such as fitted him to do a noteworthy religious and educational work for his own people.
The period of rapid growth was not without its difficulties. The movements of missionaries were hampered by regulations that limited 4. The Ob. freedom of travel in the interior. While stacles En‑ the imperial government as a whole countered. pursued a liberal policy, the educational department was much of the time in control of those who exerted a strong influence against Christianity. Local officials sometimes put hindrances in the way of evangelization, and there was much petty persecution by the rela‑
tives and neighbors of believers. Fear of losing office, trade, or popularity deterred many from following what they believed to be the truth. Buddhism awoke from its slumber to oppose the rival religion by means of lectures, tracts, schools, and societies. When elections were to be held in 1890 for the first national diet, the Buddhists entered the political arena and urged that the people should not choose any Christians to represent them. It was a bitter disappointment when returns showed that out of the 300 members of the House of Commons, thirteen were Christians, one of whom was made president, while another became chairman of the committee of the whole. Incidentally it may be mentioned that in subsequent diets Christians have several times held the same offices or that of vice‑president, which is one of many facts that disprove the assertion that the influential classes in Japan are not reached by the Gospel.
The movement in favor of Christianity was checked by a reaction that began to be apparent about 1889. Failure to secure desired
b. The Re‑ revision of treaties, with other unaotion of toward events, caused the Japanese to
	1889.	feel much irritation against foreign na
		tions. Conservatives seized the oppor
tunity to foster a nationalistic spirit; while the
relations of Christianity with western lands had once
been helpful, now they proved a hindrance. Preach
ing‑places were no longer crowded; pupils left the
Christian schools, there were few additions to the
churches, and many defections. Hitherto there
had been but little doctrinal discussion; this was
now aroused by the coming of Unitarian and other
liberal missions, as well as by the increased reading
of books written in other lands. The fondness of
the Japanese for novelty and the desire of many
to show their independence of the missionaries who
had been their teachers increased the tendency to
advocate all aorta of views, while theological unrest
led to spiritual decline and a relaxation of evangel
istic efforts, and the growth of trade and manu
factures fostered a commercial spirit that made it
more difficult to interest men in religious themes.
Nevertheless, some advance was made in this period,
so that in 1900 there were 538 churches with 42,451
members.
This reaction gradually spent its force. Revised treaties, becoming effective in 1899, lessened the feeling against foreigners and made it e. The New possible for missionaries to travel or
	Advance	reside in any part of the land, while
Since 1899. the treaty of alliance with Great Brit
		ain (1902) increased the favor with
which Christian lands, and consequently their re
ligion, were regarded. Regulations issued by the
government regarding buildings used by religious
bodies were a practical recognition of Christianity
and put it on the same standing as Buddhism.
Moreover, the twentieth century opened with the
manifestation of renewed earnestness and evangel
istic zeal on the part of the Christiai.s. The war
with Russia did much to sober the thoughts of the
people and incline them to consider other than
material interests, and also opened up many oppor
tunities for work in behalf of the soldiers, the

106
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
military authorities cordially welcoming that car'r'ied on by the Young Men's Christian Association in Manchuria, the emperor himself contributing to its support, while in Japan there was much done for the soldiers on their way to the front, for the invalids in the hospitals, and for the families that were in distress. The statistics of Protestant missions show that at the close of 1907 there were 295 male missionaries and 255 unmarried women; the total, including wives, being 789. There were 529 organized churches, of which 102 were wholly eelfsupporting. The church‑members (including probationers and baptized children) numbered 71,818, of whom 57,830 were communicants. The adult baptisms in the year had been 8,623; and the money raised by the churches amounted to 274; 608 yen (137,304). There were 469 ordained Japanese ministers, 626 evangelists, and 208 Biblewomen.
While many varieties of Protestantism are represented in Japan, there has been a great degree of harmony among the different bodies. 7. HarmonyNearly all have joined heartily in
of Protes‑ united evangelistic efforts, and have tent Effort. manifested a tendency toward the organic union of churches having similar forma of government. The churches connected with the various Presbyterian missions form the Nippon Kirisuto Kyokwai (Church of Christ in Japan); those connected with Episcopal missions of America. and England form the Sei Kokwai (Holy Catholic Church); and a similar union of Methodists was effected in 1907. These three bodies and the Kumi‑ai Kyokwai (Congregational churches) are of nearly equal strength, their membership including more than five‑sixths of the whole. Nearly all the churches except the Sei Kokwai use the same hymn‑book; and by arrangement with the latter body 100 of its hymns are uniform with those of the Union Hymnal. Most of the missions are represented in the " Standing Committee of Cooperating Missions," which serves as " a general medium of reference, communication, and effort." The Japanese Christians are also united in an alliance that holds large conventi0n8 from time t0 time. Most of the missions have educational institutions of various grades; a few schools have been established by the Japanese Christians. In many of the government schools of higher grade tire are Christian associations • The International Young Men's Christian Association has sent secretaries to several of the larger cities of Japan, and these, in addition to work for the general associations, give counsel and help to those in the schools. The educational officiaiy have also used their aid in securing from America men of good character and ability as teachers of English. In the island of Yezo the Church Missionary Society has
to the Ainu, an aboriginal race which is gradually
re	a mission becoming extinct. Of
1,200	the 16,000 elm
been done amabout ho Christian' 	Much successful

and on the Pacificthe Japanese erajgra nts Form 	Coast of the United States.
	°~' Mme into the lion of Japan, ln Hawaii
of the Japanese churches have teat e~
there 	some
to labor for their own people and also
native inhabitants. Other evangelists have been sent for similar work in Korea (q.v.) and the Chinese ports.
Even before the country was opened to foreign intercourse, moat Japanese men were able to read
more or less; and since the eatabliahS. General went of the educational system this Results. ability has become almost universal
among both men and women. This has made a great opening for Christian literature. The translation of the New Testament was completed in 1879, that of the Old Testament in 1877. For the most part the Scriptures are sold, and not given, to the people, the largest work of gratuitous distribution being in the army. Other Christian books and tracts were at first prepared by the missionaries or under their supervision, but now they come almost entirely from Japanese writers and are to a large extent published by Japanese firms. The same is true of Christian periodicals. Schools for poor children, orphan asylums, hospitals, dispensaries, leper asylums, schools for the blind, reform schools, and homes for released prisoners have been established, and these institutions have been founded and conducted by the Japanese Christians themselves. They have so far gained the approval and confidence of the people that believers
and non believers alike have HAM Mild
their support, and some of them have received large gifts from the emperor and empress. The Christians are also recognized leaders in reform movements, such as those against intemperance, debasing exhibitions, and the system of licensed prostitution. The influence of Christianity is being felt in many ways that can not be tabulated. Partly because many literary men are Christians, or have been educated in Christian schools, Biblical quotations, theistic expressions, and arguments based on religious thought are common in newspapers and magazines. This shows that, in addition to what
is visible to the eye, the leaven of Christian truth is silently working in the hearts of men. Apart from the directly religious results produced by the

preaching of the (,06p,,l JoC1ety I ~l~ ~1 1$8ny
Ways affected by Christian ideas. No one can understand modern Japan who overlooks the influence

that Christianity is exerting upon the thoughts and
sentiments of the people. 	OTrs CARP.

Brarroaserat: F. Von Wenekstem Bibliography of the
Jaya~ Empire 1868‑88, Vol. iE., Leyden, 1895; Vol, ii.
Tokyo, 1907. On I. aoneult . $~mpfer, Hilt. of

Japan, 2 vole. London, 1728, new ed. 3 Vol,.,
New York, 1908• H. Faulde, Nine year, in 1Vipon, oston, 1$88' P. Lowell, The ,gout of tl,e Far Eaat ib. 1888: E. Lama;reeee Le Japon, )aistoire, relipiou p~ 1g~2,

H. Norman, 14al Japan Stud' rura Morals, Adniireistra 	ea an Conte»rpomy ifan‑
p~ Japan, ' M~aY. The ~ orgy Politics. New York,
		its People and Mi~ and n 1894 C.
	tiger, 	ieJapaner Berlin, 1898• W G_ Aeto89b
1°''?l of Japanese Liter
Japan. Boston 1902; B re, New York, 189gi F °'
Now Yor ~ A ~h~,,,l~, ~~'~e
G,ri.~)~ ~~aDeJ ~~y
ib~ 9p7903 'to e19W id, 	tor&. A .1k,".
' The Japa~,s~r~Pi''e. 2vola Mare

social and	$.•GuliDek E~i P''esrnt Daft Ja7
are Atte„,pt at 1 New York, rgp b°'eb°'~ °f the Japan
Knox, Japa,uuse lije i~'e•a~ Cn„d n. $egp~ , ea hr.
		°un&7/. New York,

day n	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	120
1904; idem, Imperial Japan: the Country and its People, London, 1905 ; I. O. Nitobe, Buahido, the Soul of Japan, New York, 1905 ; Mrs. E. Bickersteth, Japan, 1908.
On II, 1, consult: the Kojiki, tranal. by B. H. Chamberlain, the supplement to Transactions of the Asiatic. Society of Japan, Vol. x., 1882; the Nihongi, transl. by W. G. Aston in the Transactions of the Japan Society, 1898; W. G. Aston, Shinto, New York, 1905; P. Lowell, Occult Japan, Boston, 1895; F. Rinder, 07d World Japan: Legends of the Land of Gods, New York, 1895; J. Batchelor, The Ainu and their Folklore, London, 1901; F. Brinkley, Japan, ut sup.; W. E. Griffis, The Religions of Japan, New York, 1904; M. Revon, Le Shintoiame, Paris, 1907; G. W. Knox, The Development of Religion in Japan, New York, 1907; E. Buckley, Phallicism in Japan, Chicago, privately printed. There are many papers of importance in the Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan, e.g., E. Satow, The Shinto Temples of tae, ii. 113; idem, The Revival of Pure Shinto, iii. appendix; idem, Ancient Japanese Rituals, iv. 409, vii. 97, ix. 183; P. Lowell, Esoteric Shinto, xxi.xxii.; D. C. Greens, Tenrikyo, xxiii. 24; K. Florenz, Ancient Japanese Ritual, xxvii. 1; A. Lloyd and D. C. Greens, The Remmankyo, xxiv. 1, 17; J. Leo, Die Entxoickelung den &lteaten japanischen Seelenlebena, Leipaic, 1907.
On II, 2, consult: B. Nanjio, A Short Hint. of the Twelve Japanese Buddhist Sects, Tokyo, 1888; World's Parliament of Religions. 2 vole., Chicago, 1893; L. Hearn, Gleanings in Buddha Fields, Boston, 1897; idem, Japan, an Interpretation, ut sup.; F. Brinkley, ut sup.; W. E. Griffis, The Religions of Japan, ut sup.; and the following papers in the Transactions of the Asiatic Satiety of Japan: J. M. James, Notes on Rosaries used by Different Sects of Buddhists, ix. 173; J. Troup, On the Tenets of Shinshiu, xiv. 1: J. Summers, Buddhism and Traditions concerning its Introduction into Japan, aiv. 73; J. Troup, The Gobunaho, xvii. 101; A. Lloyd, Developments of Japanese Buddhism, xxii. 337.
On III, 1, the most valuable sources of information are to be found in the letters and reports of the missionaries, of which J. Hay gives many in De rebus Japonicda, Antwerp, 1605. Consult: Abby de Talon (J. Crasset), Hint. de l'egliae du Japon, 2 vole., Paris, 1689, Eng. transl., London, 1705; P. F. Charlevoix, Hiat. et description generate du Japan, 9 vole., Rouen, 1736; idem, Hint. du chrialianisme au Japan, 2 vole., ib. 1715; L. Pages, Hiat. de la religion chretienne au Japon, 2 vole., Paris, 1869; Le Premier Mieaiorutire catholique du Japon au xix. aipcle, Lyons, 1885 (largely composed of the letters of T. A. Foreade); F. Marnas, La Religion de Jeaua reaauacitee au Japan, 2 vole., Paris, 1896; B. A. Wilberforce, Dominican Missions and Martyrs in Japan, London, 1897; J. Murdoch and Y. Yamagata. History of Japan lbl,2‑1661, Kobe, 1903; M. Steichen, The Christian Daimyo, Yokohama, 1903; part of the literature under FBANCIa XAVIER; also the letters and reports in Annals of the Propagation of the Faith and Catholic Missions, periodicals published in London.
On III, 2, consult: C. Hale, Missions of the Russian Church, in American Church Review, Oct., 1878; G, W, Taft, Bishop Nicolai, in Japanese Evangelist, June, 1896; The first two volumes of a compendious history in Japanese, Nihon Seikyo Dendo Shi, were published Tokyo, 1900.
On III, 3, consult: Proceedings of the General Conference of Protestant Missionaries of Japan, Yokohama, 1883; General Conference of Protestant Missionaries of Japan, Tokyo, 1901; H. Ritter, Dreiaaig Jahre proteatantiacher Mission in Japan, Berlin, 1890, Eng, transl., History of Protestant Missions in Japan, Tokyo, 1898: i\I. L. Cordon, An American Missionary in Japan, Boston, 1892; Jinzo Nsruae, A Modem Paul in Japan: Account of the Life arid Work of Rev. P. Sawhyana, ib. 1893; R. B. Peery, The Gist of Japan, New York, 1897; idem, Lutherans in Japan. Newberry, S. C., 1900; A. D. Hail, Japan and its Rescue, Nashville, 1898; E. Stock, Japan and the Japan Mission of the Church Missionary Society, London, 1898: O. Cart', Japan and its Regeneration, New York, 1904; W. E, Griffin, Dar Chriatua, ib. 1904; H. Moors, The Christian Faith in Japan, London, 1904; E. W. Clement, Christianity in Modern Japan, Philadelphia, 1905; H. K. Miller, Hint, of the Japan Mission of the Reformed Church, 1878‑1904. ib. 1905; A. Arnold, The Light of Japan. Church Work in . . . . South Tokyo, Osaka,
and Kiuahiu under the Church of England, Hartford. 1906; W. M. Imbrie, The Church of Christ in Japan. Philadel‑
phia, 1908; The Christian Movement in its Relation to the
New Life of Japan, an annual published in Tokyo, 1903
aqq.: R. Allier, Le Proteatantiame au Japon, Paris, 1908;
O. Cart', Hint. of Christianity in Japan, New York, 1909.

JAPHET. See TABLES OF THE NATIONS, § 4.

JASON: A Greek name borne often by Jews of Maccabean or later times and by Jewish Christians. On account of its resemblance to the Hebrew‑Jewish name Jesus or Joshua, it was often assumed by Jews inclined to Greek culture or living in a Greek environment. The following are notable bearers of the name.
1. A brother of the high priest Onias III., himself occupying the office 174‑172 B.C. Two very different accounts of him exist, the first in II Mace. iv. 7 sqq., v. 5 aqq. (cf. i. 7), and the second in Josephus, Ant. XII., v. l (cf. XV., iii. l). According to the first account, Jason became an apostate from the Jewish religion, bought from Antiochus IV. the office of high priest for 440 talents, and for 150 more the right to erect in Jerusalem training‑places for Greek athletics and to enroll Jerusalemites as citizens of Antioch. He encouraged Greek sports, and sent an embassy with a gift to the Heracles‑Melcarth festival at Tyre. After three years he was superseded by Menelaus, who outbid him for the office. He fled to the Ammonites across the Jordan, but returned in 170 B.C. with a band of 1,000 men, when a report was spread that Antiochus had died on his second Egyptian expedition, took Jerusalem, and inflicted great slaughter there. He was compelled again to flee, first to the Ammonites, then to the Arabian Prince Aretas, next to Egypt, and finally to Lacedemonia, where he died. According to Josephus he came into the office in an orderly manner, after the death of his brother, fell into disfavor with Antiochus, and was compelled to yield his office to his brother Menelaus, who was the real sponsor for Greek culture. Willrich accepts Joaephus' account on the ground that II Maccabees is a falsified " tendency‑writing," but the majority of scholars are against this.
2. The son of Eleazar, who, according to I Mace. viii. 17 (cf. II Mace. iv. 11 and Josephus, Ant. XII., x. 6), was sent about 161 B.C. with Eupolemus to Rome by Judas Maccabeus as ambassador to make a treaty of friendship. The treaty was made, though its results were not actually apparent. Willrich casts doubts upon the historicity of the event.
3. Jason of Cyrene, a Hellenistic Jew who, socording to II Macc. ii. 19, wrote a history in Greek in five books on the Maccabees, the purification of the temple, the wars of the Jews against Antiochus Epiphanes and Eupator, and the divine help which' came in those times. It embraced the period 171161 B.C., and is the basis of II Maccabees, the author of which lays the responsibility for his form of statement of the facts upon Jason, though probably Jason is also a mask through which his own personality speaks. Jason wrote between 162 and 125 a.c., and probably in Egypt.
4. In Rom. xvi. 21 Paul speaks of a kinsman Jason, who possibly lived in Corinth (cf. Ram. xvi. 1).

‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑

5. According to Acts xvii. 5‑9, Paul, while at Thessalonica, dwelt at the house of a Jason, who is probably to be distinguished from the foregoing. g. For the Jason of the " Dialogue between Jason and Papiscus " see AR18T0 of PELLA.
(R. KRATZBCHMARt.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A treatment of the whole subject may be found in DB, ii. 551‑552; EB, ii. 2336‑37; and of 1‑3 in JE, vii. 74‑75.
For 1 consult: H. Willrich, Juden and Griechen vor der makkabaiachen Erhebunp, G&ttingen, 1895; A. P. Stanley, Lectures on the Hist. of the Jewish Church, iii. 324, London, 1884; J. Wellhausen, laraelitiache and yildiache Geachichte, p. 325, Berlin, 1895; A. Biiehler, Die Totriaden and die Oniaden, pp. 106 eqq., Vienna, 1899; Schiirer, Geachichte, i. 220, 194‑198, Eng. tranal., L, i. 202‑205, 231 (on 1 and 2).
On 3: Trieber, in Nachrichten der kbniplichtn (iesellechaf der Wieaenachafteu zu Gottingen, 1895, pp. 401, 408; Willrich, ut sup., chap. ii.; idem, Judaica, chap. iv., GSttingen, 1900; A. Schlatter, in Festschrift der Univeraittlt Greifawald, Greifswald, 1899; Sehiirer, ut sup., L 40, 359381, Eng. transl., L, i. 47, IT., iii. 211‑218.
On 5 consult: W. M. R.amesY. St. Paul the Traveller, p. 231, London, 1897.
		JASPER, JOHN: Colored Baptist pulpit orator;
	b. a slave on the Peachy plantation on the James
	River, in Fluvanna Co., Virginia, July 4, 1812; d.
	in Richmond, Va., Mar. 30, 1901. His father was
	Philip Jasper, his mother's name was Nina, and he
	was her twenty‑fourth child, born two months after
	his father's death. When grown to manhood he
	came to Richmond as a slave and was employed
	as a Stemmer in the large tobacco factory of Samuel
	Hargrove, a prominent Baptist. He had no educa
	tion, but with the help of a colored man almost
	as ignorant as himself he learned to read six months
	before his conversion, which occurred on Thursday,
	July 25, 1839. His father had been a preacher, and
	he followed his example. He soon became a fa
	vorite among the colored people of Richmond, then
	his fame spread, especially as a funeral preacher,
	until he was known all over the State. He made
	himself master of the Bible, and was a formidable
	opponent of those who questioned his interpreta
	tion. When emancipated he gathered about him
	a congregation and soon had a building to preach in.
	More and more came to hear him until at length the
	Sixth Mount Zion Church was built for him, and
	there he preached to several thousand people every
	Sunday. In 18'78, in the regular course of his min
	istry, he preached from Ex. xv. 3, " The Lord is
	a man of war; the Lord is his name." He began
	with Biblical illustrations of the almighty power
	of God, but branched off into the demonstration
	by Biblical texts literally construed of the proposi
	tion that " the sun do move." The sermon was
	prepared to end a dispute upon the question of
	the sun's motion and was delivered without any
	desire to cause talk. It made a sensation, had to
	be repeated again and again, and he was even sent
	out by a lecture bureau to repeat it outside of
	Richmond. But it only made his name a by‑word
and obscured to many the fact that he really had
solid claim to be considered a pulpit orator. Even
this particular sermon was saved from being ridio
ulous by the Preacher's profound reverence for the
Bible, simple faith in the Bible miracles, and his
logical power and remarkable eloquence of a rude
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Javpan an
but genuine kind. He had also humor of the moat delicious variety. In short, in him the type of the ante‑bellum uneducated but gifted, pious, and witty colored preacher reached its culmination.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. E. Hatcher, John Jasper, New York,
1908.
JASPIS, ALBERT SIGISMURD: General superintendent of Pomerania; b. at Nossen (19 m. w. of Dresden) Feb. 15, 1809; d. at Stettin Dec. 20, 1885. He studied at the gymnasium in Freiburg‑on‑theMulde and at Leipsic. In 1832 he became catechist and afternoon‑preacher in St. Peter's Church in Leipsic. In 1835 Jaspis became pastor in Lugau, three years later diaconus in Lichtenstein, and pastor in Rodlitz. His faithfulness and especially his success with children and young people won him the hearts of his parishioners in both places. In
1845 he went over to the Prussian State Church, after having been elected third preacher of the Evangelical Lutheran congregation in Elberfeld. In 1855 he was called to Stettin as general superintendent of Pomerania. He represented a pietistic confesaionalism, and his gifts lay in the direction of the practical cure of souls. He was not without success as a writer of devotional and pastoral literature, and some of his tracts found a large circulation.
But the publication which carried his name far beyond the borders of Evangelical Germany was
his compilation of Luther's small catechism for the
instruction of young people to be confirmed. This
booklet is one of the most successful attempts at
the solution of the catechetical problem of the
Church as it was eone2iv2d in the m1dd10 Of the
nineteenth century in the circles of pietistic con
fessionalism. 	(Hexs KESSLER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sketches were written by his son, one prefixed to Jaspis' Erinuerungeu an eine Zeit wo es tru6e uxal finater war, Cologne, 1888, the other in Bilder aua dem kirchlichen Leben . . . in Povnmern, pp. 205 eqq., Stettin, 1895.
JAUFFRET, zho"fry', GASPARD DEAR ARDRE JOSEPH: Bishop of Metz; b. at Roque‑Brussane (15 m. n. of Toulon), Provence, Dec. 13, 1759; d. in Paris May 13, 1823. He studied at Toulon, Aix, and Paris, where, in 1791, he established the Annales de la religion et du sentiment to oppose the civil constitution of the clergy. After the Revolution he was one of the principal collaborators on the Annales religieuses. About 1801 he became
vicar‑general of Lyons. Subsequently ~e was re_
called to Paris as secretary of the grand almonry. He became bishop of Metz in 1806. In 1811 he was appointed by Napoleon to the archbishopric of Aix , but was never instituted. His best‑known works are: De 7a religion h l'Aesembl6e Nationale (Paris, 1790); Du cults public (2 vols., 1795); Meditations sur les sou,~'rances de la Croix de Notre‑Seiyneur Jtssus‑Christ (1800), and Entretiem8 Bur le sacrement de la confirmation (1809).
JAVAft: A designation common to the Old Testament and the entire Orient for Greeks in general
and those of Asia, Minor in particular. The name is an example of a tribal name being given to a whole people, and the Hebrew (Ya7aan) form corresponds to the Greek Itwneg or IaFonea. In an inscription of Sargon II. (722‑705 B.C.), also

J.J	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	112
in one of the Indian King Asoka, the name occurs as
Javana, and on one of Darius as Jauna. The
reason why all Greeks were called Ionians in the
Orient is that after the eighth century before Christ
the Ionians controlled the commerce of the East.
	Old‑Testament mention is found in Ezek. aavii.l3,
where Javan is mentioned with Tubal and Meshech,
and refers probably to the Ionians settled in Asia
Minor on the coast of the Black Sea; Isa. Levi. 19
(Septuagint) connects Lud, Meshech, Tubal, and
Javan; Javan in Ezek. xxvii. 19 is a corruption of
the text, as the Septuagint shows. The word has
the general sense of " Greeks " in Gen. x. 2, 4; in
verse 2 they are connected with Tubal and Meshech,
but in verse 4 the term includes Elishah (probably
Sicily), Tarahish in Spain, Kittim (Cyprus), and
Rodanim (see DODANIM), and therefore covers the
people of the Mediterranean. The priestly writer
who wrote this verse knew of the supersession of the
Phenicians by the Greeks, in commercial matters.
Joel iii. 8 mentions the Greeks, Zech. ix. 13 speaks
of the Greek empire, Dan. viii. 21 has in mind
Alexander's kingdom, and x. 20 that of the Seleu
cidee. 	(H. GumaE.)
BIHLIOOSAPHY: B. $tade, De popuio Javan, Giessen, 1880, also in Reden and Abhandlunpcn, pp. 123‑142, ib. 1899; E. Meyer, Geschichte des Altatuma, i. 490‑494, ii. 433, 885 eqq., Stuttgart, 1884‑93; A. H. $eyce. Higher Criticism and the Monuments, London, 1894; DB, ii. bb2‑553; EB, ii. 2338‑39; also literature under TABLE Os THE NATIONS.
JAY, WILLIAM: English dissenting preacher and author; b. at Tilbury (13 m. w. of Salisbury), Wiltshire, May 8, 1769; d. at Bath Dec. 27, 1853. After serving for two years as apprentice to his father, a stonecutter and mason, he entered the religious seminary of Cornelius Winter at Marlborough in 1785, and began to preach in the neighboring villages the same year. On leaving Marlborough in 1788 he preached at Surrey Chapel, London, and achieved considerable notoriety as the " boy preacher." After short ministries at Christian Malford, near Chippenham, and Hope Chapel, Clifton, he became pastor of the Argyle Independent Chapel at Bath Jan. 30, 1791. He retired from this pastorate sixty‑two years later. His preaching attracted hearers from all classes and from all denominations. John Foster calls him the prince of preachers, and Sheridan styles him the most natural orator he had ever heard. Some of his writings have been widely circulated and frequently reprinted in America. His beat‑known works are: The Mutual Duties of Husbands and Wives (London, 1801); An Essay on Marriage (Bath, 1806); The Domestic Minister's Assistant (London, 1820); The Christian Contemplated (1826); Morning Exercises in. the Closet (2 vole., 1829); and Evening Exercises for the Closet (2 vole., 1831). His Works (12 vole., Bath, 1842‑48) were edited by himself.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: His Autobiography, ad. G. Redford and J. A. James, appeared London, 1855. Consult T. Wallaoe, Portraiture of W. Jay, ib. 1864; S. Wilson, Memoir of W. Jay, ib. 1854; C. Jay, RecoZtedione of William Jay, ib. 1859 (by his son); DNB, xd:c. 255‑258.
JAYNE, FRANCIS JOHN: Church of England bishop of Chester; b. at Llanelly (15 m. s.e. of Carmartlwn), Carmarthenshire, South Wales, Jan.
1, 1845. He was educated at Wadham College, Oxford (B.A., 1868), and became deacon and priest in 1870. He was fellow of Jesus College, Oxford, 1868‑73, and lecturer in the same college and tutor of Keble College, Oxford, 1871‑79. He was curate of St. Clement's, Oxford, 1870‑71; principal of St. David's College, Lampeter, as well as sinecure rector of Llangeler, 1877,86; rural dean of Lampeter, 1885‑86; vicar and rural dean of Leeds, 1886‑88; and was consecrated bishop of Chester in 1889. He was also Whitehall Preacher, 1875‑77, and select preacher at Oxford in 1884.

jE: The product resulting, according to the critical school, from the union of the J document and the E document in the Hexateuch (q.v.). See HEBREW LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE, IL, § § 4, 7.

JEALOUSY, TRIAL OF. See ORDEAL.

JEANNE D'ALBRET, zhsn dill"brr3': Queen of Navarre; b. at Pau (56 m. e.s.e. of Bayonne) Jan. 7, 1528; d. at Paris June 9, 1572. She was the eldest child of Henry of Navarre and Margaret of Angoul6me‑Alengon, the mater of Francis I. of France. By the death of her brother John, she became heir presumptive of Navarre‑Barn, a kingdom which was important on account of its position between France and Spain. She received a thorough education, although her trend was practical and ambitious rather than scholarly, nor could she sympathize with the intellectualism and mysticism of her famous mother. Suitors for her hand were numerous, and as early as 1535 Francis had intended to marry her to Anthony of Bourbon, but when, in 1540, Charles V. of Spain sought her se a wife for his son Philip, her uncle decided to wed her to Duke William of Cleves. Despite her resistance, the ceremony was performed on June 14, 1541, but her youth made the marriage a mere form, and her ill health obliged her to remain in France while her husband returned to Germany. The change of political conditions caused Francis to desire an annulment of the marriage, and a brief of Paul III. on Oct. 12, 1545, declared the enforced wedlock void. Three years later (Oct. 20, 1548) she married Duke Anthony of Bourbon‑VendBme. The first two children of this union died while still infants, but on Dec. 14, 1553, she gave birth at Pau to her son Henry, afterward Henry IV. of France. The death of her father on May 29, 1555, made her queen of Navarre, and she succeeded in having Anthony recognized as king, although the actual sovereignty devolved on her.
It was in her relation to the Reformation that Jeanne was most important. She had been brought up in an atmosphere favorable to the new teaching, although Margaret of Navarre never formally became a convert to Protestantism. Jeanne remained true to Roman Catholicism, even after her husband entered into correspondence with Calvin ~ in 1557, and became the mainstay of the Reformed. I Her disaffection with the Roman Catholic Church, however, steadily increased, and on Christmas of the same year she publicly renounced her former faith and received communion according to the I Reformed rite. Within s year her court heft=

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
the center of the Reformed, and her zeal for her new creed and its adherents was most pronounced. She educated her eon in the Reformed faith, and Navarre was thoroughly Calvinized by Raymond Merlin in 1563‑&4. Many statues were forcibly torn from the churches, and the monasteries were transformed into schools, while their incomes were devoted to the establishment of educational institutions.
A sudden opponent arose, however, in the person of Pius IV., who, in a bull of Sept. 28, 1563, cited her to appear before the tribunal of the Inquisition or to forfeit her territories both for herself and her children. This peril was obviated by her suzerain, Charles IX., and the bull was annulled, but the peace which she now hoped to enjoy was broken by the wars of religion which broke out anew, and she was forced to flee from Navarre and to take refuge in La Rochelle. During the war she was untiring in her encouragement of her coreligionists, and her son Henry (then sixteen years of age) was the nominal head of the Huguenot party, with Coligny and Andelot as his advisers, a course by which Jeanne increased her own prestige. Meanwhile Navarre‑Barn had been overrun by the royal troops under Terndes, Pau was captured, and only the little fortress of Navarrein still held out. Thither Jeanne sent Montgomery, who reconquered the country for its queen within two months. Jeanne thereupon forbade the exercise of the Roman Catholic religion, and expelled the priests and monks, but in Navarre, where her power was limited, she tolerated it. In the Peace of St. Germain (Aug. 8, 1570) her counsels and perseverance were important factors in obtaining favorable terms for the Protestants, and she remained at La Rochelle until Aug., 1571, declining to be present at the marriage of Charles IX. with Elizabeth of Austria (Nov. 26, 1570), but attending the third Reformed synod held at La Rochelle Apr. 2‑10, 1571.
Though she had pleaded the length of the journey, she was, in reality, deeply distrustful of the court, and repeatedly declined invitations to visit it, despite the fact that she was planning a marriage of her son with Margaret, the daughter of Henry II. This match had been proposed by Henry himself as early as 1556, but had been forgotten until negotiationa were renewed during the war in the autumn of 1569, and again in Jan., 1571, this time in earnest. In Nov. the reluctance of Jeanne was overcome, despite the difference in religion of Henry and Margaret, for she hoped that the princess would become a convert to Protestantism. In Jan., 1572, the queen of Navarre consented to visit the French court, and in the following month Met Catherine. Negotiations for the marriage dragged but in April it was decided that the ceremony should be performed at Paris. On Apr. 11 the marriage‑contract was signed, but the pope would not give the requisite dispensation, although Charles IX. earnestly advocated the union which was so necessary for the peace of the land. Jeanne then hastened to Paris to ‑make the final preparations for the marriage and on June 3 received communion at Vincennes with a number of her coreligionists, but died six days
vr.~
later. It was this marriage which was followed
by the massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day.
(THEODOR SCHOTJ't.)
BIHLIOCYSAPHY: The beat account, based on documentary evidence, of the life of Jeanne d Albret is in the three works of A. de Ruble, Le Mariage de Jeanne d'Albret, Paris, 1877, Ant. de Bourbon et Jeanne d Atbret, 4 vole., ib. 1881‑88, and Jeanne d'Albret et la guerre ciwil8, i6. 1897; for her later life very important is Letbee d 'Antoine de Bourbon of de Jeanne d AZbret, ib. 1877. Consult further: W. G. Boldan, Geschuhte des Protestantsamua in Frankreich, 2 vole., Goths, 1856; G. von Polenz, Geachichfe des Iranz6eiadben Calviniamue, 5 vole.. Ixipeia, 1857‑g9; N, de Boodenave, Hint. de Bearn et Navarre, Paris, 1873; J. Delaborde, Elkonore de Roye, ib. 1878; idem, Gaspard de Colipng, vol. i., ib. 1879; H. M. Bsird, Hilt. of the Rise of the Huguenots, 2 vole., New York, 1880; Cambridge Modern History, iii. 8, 11, 13, 17‑18, New York,
1905.
	JEBB, JOHN: Bishop of Limerick; b. at Drog
heda (26 m. n, of Dublin), Ireland, Sept. 27, 1775;
d. at East Hill, near Wandsworth (6 m. s.w. of
London), Surrey, Dec. 9, 1833. He studied at the
	Londonderry grammar‑school, and in 1791 entered
	Trinity College, Dublin (M.A.,1801; B,D, and D,D,I
	1821). He was ordained in 1799 and instituted to
	the curacy of Mogorbane, Tipperary county, in 1801.
	He became Archbishop Brodrick's examining chap
	lain in 1805 and archdeacon of Emly in 1820. For
	his services in maintaining order in his parish
	during the disturbances that followed the famine
	of 1822 he was rewarded with the bishopric of
	Limerick in Dec. Of that year. In 1827 a stroke of
	paralysis incapacitated him for active work. There
	after he resided at various places in England,
	devoting himself to literary pursuits. He had a
	strong tendency toward High‑church ritual, and is
	regarded as a forerunner of the Oxford movement.
	His chief works are: Sermons (London, 1815); Sacred
	Literature (1820); Practical Theology (2 vole., 1830);
and a Biographical Memoir o f W
(1832). His correspondence with Alexander Knox was edited by C. Forster (2 vole., 1834). ,
BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. Forster, Llfe and Letters of John Jebb,

London 1851 Anne Motley, Letters of J, H, Non, i. 440, 470, ib. 1890; DNB, xaia, 2N_2g1.
	JEBUS, ji'bus, JEBUSITES, jeb'u‑sons: Upon
the basis of Judges xix. 10‑11 and I Chron. xi. 4‑5
Jebus was formerly supposed to have been the pre
Israelitic name of Jerusalem (cf. II Sam. v. 6).
But Judges xix.‑xxi, took its present form in post_
exilic times, and probably Jebus did not occur in
the original' text' consequently the testimony for
Jebus as the name of a city is late, for in all early
narratives only the name Jerusalem is found, as it
is in the Amarna Tablets (see AnfAxNA TABLETS,
IIL). The passages cited, the rCfO~) ~~ ~~
erronepilg gpnCl MOD that the earlier name of the
city was Jebus. It is to be noted, however, that
the Jebusites were not spoken of as limited j0 their
dwelling‑place w" the elty, but as inhabiting

Immediate region thereabout (II Sam, v. 6) p the
mountain region in

Josh. xi. 3). The Particular (Nmn. xiii. 29,
better conclusion therefore ;e hat the people derived its name from a district ether than a city. They are represented as bolding 1 important point in the highland after

Israel id carried on a victorious campaign against the tnasnites, and from the mountain fortress of Zion

Jeffers
Jehoiakim
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
ruling a small territory limited on the north by the Benjaminitic Nob, Gibeah of Saul, and Ramah, and on the south by Bethlehem of Judah. Their independence was not especially important until the time of David, when he wished to unite his northern and his southern territories, and therefore captured the place (II Sam. v. 6‑S; I Chron, xi. 4‑6). After that they were in part freemen on their own possessions (implied by the story of Arauna,h or Oman, II Sam. xxiv. 16; I Chron. xxi. lb), and in part slaves (under Solomon, I Kings ix. 20‑21). The teat of the description of the boundary between Judah and Benjamin calls the hill north of the Valley of Hinnom " the Shoulder of the Jebusites " (Josh. xv. 8, xviii. 16), whence it may be concluded that the part of the city which the Jebuaites occupied in later times was that to the southeast. It might be concluded from Josh, x. 5 that as Adoniaedek is reckoned to the Amorites the Jebuaites were also Alnorites; but this is not conclusive, as it may be held that the Amorites had recently come in, while the Jebusites were regarded as early inhabitants of the land. From the frequent mention of the people (e.g., Gen. x. 16; Deut. vii. 1, xx. 17) nothing certain can be gathered regarding the racial affinities of the Jebusites. (H. GUTHE.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The subject is treated in the literature under AMARNA TABLETS and JERUSALEM. Consult 8190: G. F. Moors, Commentary on Judges, New York, 1895; K. Budde, Dae Buck der Richter, G6ttingen, 1896; DB, ii. b54‑5b5; EB, ii. 2415‑16.

JEFFERS, ELIAgIM TUPPER: Presbyterian; b. at Stewiacke, Nova Scotia, Apr. 6, 1841. He studied at Jefferson College, Canonsburg, Pa. (B.A., 1862), and Princeton Theological Seminary (18621865), and at the United Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Allegheny, Pa (18656). He was pastor of the United Presbyterian Church at Oxford, Pa. (1865‑72), after which he was president of Westminster College, New Wilmington, Pa., until 1890, and professor of theology in Lincoln University, Oxford, Pa (1883‑90). He was pastor of the First Presbyterian Church, Oil City, Pa. (1890‑93) and since 1893 has been president of the York Collegiate Institute, York, Pa. He has written Shortest Road to Cwsar (New York, 1896).

JEFFERS, WILLIAM HAMILTON: Presbyterian; b. at Cadiz, O., May 1, 1838. He was graduated from Geneva College, Northwood, Pa. (now Beaver Falls, O.; A.B., 1855), and at the United Presbyterian Theological Seminary at Xenia, O. (1859). He was pastor of the combined United Presbyterian churches of Bellefontaine and Northwood, O. (18621866); was professor of Latin and Hebrew in Westminster College, New Wilmington, Pa. (1866‑69); professor of Greek in the University of Wooster, Wooster, 0. (1869‑75); pastor of the Euclid Avenue Presbyterian Church, Cleveland, O. (1875‑77); and professor of historical theology in the Western Theological Seminary, Allegheny, Pa. (1877‑1903). He has since resided at Los Angeles, Cal., and lectures on church history. While at Bellefontaine he was a member of the committee to revise the United Presbyterian metrical version of the Psalms.
JEFFERSON, CHARLES EDWARD: Congregationalist; b. at Cambridge, O., Aug. 29, 1860. He was educated at Ohio Wesleyan University (A.B., 1882); was superintendent of public schools is Worthington, O. (1882‑84); studied at the School of Theology attached to Boston University (18841887). He was pastor of the Central Congregational Church, Chelsea, Mass., from 188? to 1898. Since 1898 he has been pastor of the Broadway Tabernacle, New York City. He has written: Quiet Talks with Earnest People in My Study (New York, 1898); Quiet Hints to Growing Preachers in My Study (1901); Doctrine and Deed (1901); Things Fundamental (1903); Faith arid Life (1905); The Minister as Prophet (190b); The New Crusade (1907); The Old Year and the New (1907); Character of Jesus (1908); and My Father's Business: Series of Sermons to Children (1909).

JEHOAHAZ, je‑h5'a‑haz: 1. Eleventh king of Israel, son and successor of Jehu. His dates, socording to the old chronology, are 856‑840 B.C.; according to Kautzach, 814‑798 B.C. Under him the oppression of the northern kingdom by the Arameans reached its height, the army being reduced to fifty horsemen, ten chariots, and 10,000 foot soldiers. An addition to II Kings xiii. 22 in the Septuagint shows that the Arameana operated from the southwest as well as from the north against Jehoahaz. Under him the Asherah worship seems to have revived (II Kings xiii. 6). ,
2. Sixteenth king of Judah, third son and successor of Josiah (called Shallum, Jer. xxii. 11). He reigned only three months, according to the old chronology, in 610 B.C.; according to Kautzsch, 609 B.C.; according to Peaks, 608 B.C. He was evidently regarded as more energetic than his elder brother (see JEHOIAKIM), since the people elevated him to the throne; but both the Book of Kings and Joaephus give him a bad character (II Kings xxiii. 30 eqq ; Ant. X., v. 2). Pharaoh Necho, on his return from his campaign to the Euphrates, summoned Jehoahaz to Riblah and threw him into chains to be carried to Egypt, whence he never returned, and put his brother Jehoiakim (Eliakim) in his place as king. Whether the name Shallum (_" retribution "T) was symbolically applied or was his original name, discarded when he became king, is a subject of debate. [The list of Josiah's sons in I Chron. iii. 17‑18 erroneously makes Shallum to be a different person from Jehoahaz.J
The name appears also in II Chron. xxi. 17 as that of King Ahaziah of Judah, and also, II Chron. xxxiv. 8, of a recorder under Josiah of Judah.
(E. KAUxzaca.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are: II Kings xiii. 1‑9, xxiii. 3U‑35;
II Chron, iii. 19‑18, xxxvi. 1‑3; Jer. xaii. 1o‑12. Con‑
sult the pertinent sections of the histories mentioned under
AHAB; and ISRAEL, HISTORY OF; and the articles in DB,
EB, and JE.
JEHOIACHIN, je‑hei'a‑kin: Eighteenth king of Judah, son and successor of Jehoiakim. He reigned only three months, in 598 B.C. according to the old chronology, 597 B.C. according to nearly all modern historians. The difference in his age at his accession and in the length of his reign as given in II Kings xxiv. 8 and II Chron. xxxvi. 9 is probably

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
due to a shifting in the Chronicler's narrative of the
numeral ten from his age to the length of his reign.
When Jehoiachin ascended the throne, Jerusalem
was already under siege by the Babylonians or was
	besieged soon after, and he rendered himself prisoner
	to the besiegers, with his household and his officers,
	and was carried into exile to Babylon, where he
	remained a prisoner until Evil‑Merodach set him
	free in 562 (II Kings xxiv. 10‑15, xxv. 27 aqq.)
	and gave him an honorable place at the court of
Babylon. 	(E. KeuTZacx.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are TI Kings xxiv. 8‑15. xxv. 2730 ; II Chron. xzxvi. 9‑10; Jer. Xtii., axiv., xxvii.‑xxix. Consult the pertinent sections in the works on the history of Israel cited under ARAB, and the articles in the Bible dictionaries; J.,W. Rothstein, Die Genealopie des KGniga Jojachin and aeiner Nachkommen, Berlin, 1902.
JEHOIADA, je‑hei'a‑da: High priest in the time of Athaliah and Joash, king of Judah. His wife, Jehoaheba, sister of Ahaziah, saved Joash from death at the time of the slaughter of the seed royal by Athaliah. Six years after that event Jehoiada set Joash on the throne, and had Athaliah killed. He followed this up by destruction of the Baal temple and the slaying of the priest of Baal, and renewed the service in the temple of Yahweh. While Jehoiada was practically regent during the minority of Joash, the independence of the king on reaching maturity is indicated in II Kings iii. 7. The Chronicler relates that Jehoiada died at the age of 130 and was buried among the kings because of his good deeds (II Chron. xxiv. 15‑16).
Others of the name are the father of Benaiah,
one of David's heroes, and a eon of Eliashib, a
priest among the returning exiles named in .Neh. iii.
~10 aqq. 	(E. KAUxzsca.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are II Kings xi.‑iii. 18; II Chron. mni. 10‑xxiv. 18. Consult the pertinent sections in the
works on the History of Israel mentioned under AHAB, and the articles in the Bible Dictionaries.
JEHOIAKIM, je‑hei'a‑kim: Seventeenth king of Judah, second son of Josiah, and successor of Jehoahaz. His dates, according to the old chronology, are 609‑598 B.C .; according to recent authorities 608‑597 B.c. He was set on the throne by Pharaoh Necho in place of his brother Jehoahaz (q.v.), and his name changed from Eliakim. Through the defeat of Necho at Carchemish the Egyptian overlordship of Hither Asia was broken and the Judeana came practically under the sway of the Babylonians, though not for some time did a Babylonian force appear in the land. After remaining a vassal of Nebuchadrezzar for three years Jehoi‑
akim rebelled, doubtless at the instigation of Egypt while the neighboring Edomites, Moabites, and Ammonites were encouraged to ravage his territory, Finally Jerusalem was besieged by the Babylonians, and possibly during the siege Jehoiakim died (II Kings xxiv. 6), though the Chronicler reports that Nebuchadrezzar put him in chains, which ma
due to a confusion of Jeh ' ‑ .
Ptuag	wk.. '
the ga ae, Iof hron. xa‑xvi. g t~ e seint	ch Omissionhis
Je>ters
Jehoialdm
the city, an assault made on him to take him prisoner, and that he was killed in the m@l6e; in this way he accounts for the definiteness in the lamentation of Jeremiah.
Jehoiakim (Joiakim) is also the name of a postexilic high priest (Neh. iii‑10 sqq.), and (Joakim) of the husband of Susanna. (E. KAUTZ$CH.)
In 609 B.C. Pharaoh Necho advanced from Egypt against Babylon. Josiah, king of Judah, as ally
of Babylon met him at Megiddo, was defeated and
slain (II Kings xxiii. 29). The people of Jerusalem then made Jehoahaz king, passing by the elder brother, Jehoiakim, with the purpose doubtless of continuing the pro‑Babylonian policy of Josiah. Three months later Necho placid Jehoiakim upon the throne and carried Jehoahaz to Egypt. Jerusalem was distracted. The court party favored Egypt, but Jehoiakim was not the people's choice. The anti‑Egyptian party was incensed at the fine which Necho imposed‑not on the royal treasury, but on the inhabitants (II Kings xxiii. 34, 35), and Jeremiah earnestly warned against the Egyptian alliance (Jer. xxvi).
The Egyptian and Babylonian armies did not meet in 608, but the conflict was only postponed, and four years later! 6051 Necho wlit3 balk jjojul
The intervening time was employed by Nebuchadrezzar in making alliances and suppressing enemies on the line of Necho's projected return. This ap‑
pears from Berosus (Josephus, Apion, i. 19), who says that after the defeat of Necho at Carchemish in 605, " Nebuchadrezzar was sent by his father against the parts of Caele‑Syria and Phenicia which had revolted from him, and that he reduced the country under his dominion again." If they revolted they must have been in subordination of some sort. The interval 608 to 605 suggests itself as the time when that subordination took place. Judah was one of those countries. It had been friendly under Josiah. It must be made friendly under Josiah's son. The three years' vassalage
(IT Kings xxiv. 1) fits into this inteTYal, It 19 a meaningless phrase applied to any other portion of Jehoiakim's reign. Jeremiah's silence also from the " beginning » of Jehoiakim's reign to the ` fourth year 11 of that reign (Jer, xxxvi. 1) is consistent with friendly relations between Judah and Babylon. During this interval, i.e., in 606 a.c., the young nobles of Judah were taken to Baby'
(Dan. i. 1) to be brought up at court‑an arrangement designed to promote good feeling betWeen the subordinate and the dominant powers. That these
young men became captives along with their Whole nation was due to Jehoiakim's folly.

	But when, in 605, the tramp of the
	gain Jehoiakim	EgYPtian army
was heard a	put aside pretense and
joined Necho. Necho's defeat at Carcbemj~
y ~the whole country
or to an	olaklm with	He punished th 	° NPbu,,6d
adds t I	indicated	h	SUCCe	rez
from alle		a nations which ]~d	s dada.
their	glance to him bY tranapo
and burred him	People to Me sopotamia (Joaephu glue
° away
Uzza. ' Ewald Is of the	inJerusalem
some of
the difficulties occasioned
accounts and	bth b 	e Opinion that
b	by their lack'	Y the brevity	In Jehoiakim rn great fear		au
				A fast was procla,i ed
'8 fifth Year (Jer. xxxv;, g) and Nebu‑
Y of the clladrezzar,a vengeance did not fall '
	g test Jehoiakimagw ement are solved Nebuchadrezzar contented himself Immediately all ‑ ,
C11aldeana, Ammonites, and twith

Jeeh~oeheplut
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
ravage Judah (II Kings xsiv. 2). The Jewish monarchy existed thereafter only on sufferance.
Jehoiakim reigned eleven years, dying in 597 B.C. He was not put to death by Nebuchadrezzar, as Josephus says, but may have perished by assassination, for he had filled Jerusalem with innocent blood and was a curse to his country.
JOSEPH D. WILSON.
BIBLIOGRAPHY' Sources ate IT Kings xxiii. 34‑xxiv. 7; IT Chron. sxcvi. 4‑8; Jer. vii.‑ix., x. 17‑25, xiv.‑xvii. 18, xviii.‑xx., etc.; and the Book of Habakkuk. The subject is treated in the pertinent sections of the literature named under ABAB and in the Bible Dictionaries.

JEHOSHAPHAT, je‑heah'a‑fat: Fourth king of Judah, son and successor of Asa. His dates, according to the old chronology, are 91,4‑893 B.C.; according to Kamphausen, 876‑852 B.C.; according to Duncker, 869‑848 B.C.; according to Curtis (DB, i. 401), 876‑$51 B.C. He was an energetic ruler, whose extensive preparations for war and prudent measures (It Chron. xvii. 2, 12‑13) induced Ahab of Israel to seek an alliance in view of the strained relations between Israel and the Syrians, and of the dangers arising from the pressure from the rising power of Assyria (e.g., the victory of Shalmaneser II. at Karkar; see A9aYRIA, VI., 3, § 8). Good relations with Israel were also desired by Jehoshaphat; accordingly he became only too intimate with the heathenized court of Samaria and sealed his friendship by arranging a marriage between his son Joram and Athaliah, daughter of Ahab and Jezebel. This alliance had its first test in an unsuccessful campaign against the Syrians, the object of which was to recapture the fortress of Ramoth in Gilead, which was important as the center of the country east of the Jordan (I Kings xxii. 1 sqq.). When Jehoshaphat returned he received a severe rebuke from the prophet Jehu, son of Hanani for entering into relations with those whom the Lord hated (II Chron. xix. 1 aqq.; cf. II Chron. xx. 34). Nevertheless, moved by his continued desire for a closer connection with the northern kingdom, he was ready to undertake, in company with Joram (q.v.), another campaign against the Moabites, who had revolted from Israel (II Kings iii.). This expedition, to which Edom was also forced to furnish aid, marched through the desert of Edom around the southern end of the Dead Sea, and was threatened with defeat through the lack of water in this region, when Eliaha, for Jehoshaphat's sake, gave counsel and promised rescue and victory. King Mesha, besieged in his fortress Kir‑hareseth (the modern Kerak), in his dire extremity offered his son as a sacrifice to the national god, Chemosh, whereupon, according to the mysterious statement in II Kings iii. 27, " there was great indignation against Israel " (i.e. on the part of Chemosh) and the allies were forced to turn back, so that they returned home without having accomplished their task. The Chronicler, who omits this story and does not allude to the activity of the prophet Elisha, speaks (II Chron. xx.) of a defensive, but more successful, expedition of Jehoshaphat against the Ammonites, Moabites, and Meunim (cf. II Chron. xx. 1, R.V. margin, but read Mehomtne'unim). As this expedition is mentioned only by the Chronicler, many
critics maintain that his story is a readjustment of the events related in II Kings iii., and credit it with no historic value. Nevertheless, in view of the great difference in all the principal details, it is best regarded as an account of an independent act of Jehoshaphat.
Both earlier and later sources praise Jehoshaphat's piety and his reforming tendencies (I Kings xxii. 43, 46; II Chron. xvii. 3, 6, xix. 3). According to the Chronicler he was a zealous reformer of legal procedure (II Chron. xix. 5 sqq.), and sought to impress his judges with a true sense of their responsibilities. In each city of the land he established a court of justice, and in Jerusalem a supreme tribunal composed of the chiefs of the families, of Levites and of priests, entrusted with decision in the most difficult cases. In this tribunal a priest presided when the religious cases were tried, and a prince when the action was a civil one. Both sources tell of an unsuccessful mercantile venture of Jehoshaphat, though the narratives are not altogether concordant (I Kings xxii. 48; II Chron. xxi. 35, 37). He endeavored to reestablish the traffic to Ophir from Ezion‑geber, but the newly equipped ships were wrecked by a storm.
	The picture of Jehoshaphat, although not without
its shadows, is still the brightest presented by the
house of David after Solomon's time. The land
was densely populated (II Chron. xvii. 14 sqq.) and
highly prosperous; little Judah was respected
beyond her boundaries because of the wisdom and
bravery of her king (II Chron. xvii. 10‑11). Justice
and religion flourished and developed, the sacred
writings were carefully guarded and enriched. The
king himself, another David in his piety, submitted
to the sharp reproach of the prophets, was far
sighted, endowed with a noble, generous nature,
and displayed tireless energy in his care for his
people's welfare. That the condemnation of the
well‑meaning efforts of Jehoshaphat for a closer
connection with the idolatrous royal house of Israel
did not spring from narrow fanaticism was only
too well proved immediately after his death, since
the marriage of his son with Athaliah bore the
worst possible fruits and robbed the land of the
blessings which Jehoshaphat's reign had bestowed
upon it. 	C. V0P ORELLI.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The sources are I Kings xxii.; IT Kings iii.; IT Chron. xvii.‑xxi. 1. The literature is given under
Axes. Consult also: C. F. Burney, Notes on the Hebrew
Text of Kings, Oxford, 1903; DB, ii. 561; EB, ii. 2352‑
2353, cf. i. 770; JE, vii. 8(3‑87.
JEHOVAH, je‑hS'vd: An erroneous form of the divine name of the covenant God of Israel which appears first about 1520 A.D. The error arose from the fact that the utterance of the divine name, in original quadrilateral form (the tetragrammaton) xxwR, became unlawful in Jewish usage as early as the third Christian century and probably much earlier, at least outside the sacred precincts (cf. Ex. xx. 7; Lev. xxiv. 16, the Septuagint of which reads " name the name " for " blaspheme the name "). Consequently in reading the sacred text, " Adonai " (Heb. .4dhonai, " my lord ") was pronounced instead of it (or " Elohim " in case the collocation Aditonai Yhwh occurred) and the consonants of

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
JehoshaDhat Jenks
Adhonai were often written in the margin of the He had the gates of the city guarded so that no
manuscripts. When the vowel punctuation was news could reach Joram, and then hastened with a
added, the vowels of Adhonai were written in the troop toward Jezreel. After two messengers des
text with the tetragrammaton, which thus appeared patched by Joram had been detained, Joram and
to read Yehowah (rarely Yehowih), or, according his friend Ahaziah went to meet Jehu. In answer
	to an older system of transliteration, Jehovah. This to the question whether he brought good news, he
	form, with anglicized pronunciation, entered the replied with the sinister remark that nothing could
	English Bible and so came into general use in war‑ be good as long as the heathenish practises of
	ship and theology as one of the names of God, Jezebel continued, and then sent an arrow through
	connoting especially his majesty and greatness. For the heart of the fleeing Joram. Jehu ordered the
	the derivation, meaning, etc., of the Hebrew form, dead body to be thrown into the neighboring field
of Naboth, and then entered Jezreel. Jezebel, by his command, wad hurled from the window at which
she stood and mocked. The nobles, who felt no disposition to risk anything for the house of Ahab, submitted to Jehu, and he ordered them to appear before him the next day with the heads of the seventy princes who were in Samaria. He declared, hypocritically, that he was innocent of the death of the princes, which had been accomplished by the will of God in fulfilment of the words of Elisha, and then proceeded to slay all the relations of Ahab as well as his officials, friends and priests. Thereupon he advanced against Samaria. On his way thither, he slew forty‑two princes of the house of
kh David, who were on their way to Jezreel to visit
ah their kindred (II Kings x. 12‑14). Jehu openly
on sided with the party which would not tolerate the
, worship of Baal and proceeded to do all in his
y power to extirpate it.
46,	All that is known of the subsequent twenty‑eight
syears of Jehu's reign is that he fought unauccess‑
7 ),	fully against the Arameans under Hazael (II Kings
w	x. 32), who ascended the throne of Damascus about
ithe same time as Jehu became king of Israel (II
d	Kings viii. 7‑15) and by the same means‑regicide.
f	The misfortune in this war with Syria is ascribed
to	(II Kings x. 31) to Jehu's protection of the calf
	Worship in Israel, although the continuance of his
	dynasty for four generations is regarded as a re‑
	ward for rooting out Baal‑worship.	W. LOTZ.
	BieLIOGRAPHY: The sources are I Kings xix. 117; II
		Icings ix.‑x.; II Chron. xxii. 7‑9. The literature is given
		under AHAB (q.v.). Consult also: C. F. Burney, Noka on
		the Hebrew Text of , Kittge, Oxford 1903; DB, ii,
		564‑566; EB, ii. 2365‑2357; JEI viii 00_~1
		JENKS, BEftjAIRB; English clergyman and
	theological writer; b. at Eaton‑under‑Haywood (13
	m. s. of Shrewsbury), Shropshire, May, 1646; d,
	I at Harley (8 m. s.e. of ShrewsburShropshire
			y), Shropshire
Y),~
May 10, 1724. Very little Is ]CflOWri of his Life.
After his ordination he officiated for a time as curate
at Harley, and subsequently and subsequently became vicar of cha the
parishes of	enle
to Francis		Y, and also 	plain
Viscount Newport livilivings. He is remem	, the patron of these
	tiered for his Prayers and
O,~ces of De~tion for Families, a~ for pa~i~r Persons upon Most Occasions (London, 1697; 2
urtngvols., 1706; 26th ed. by C, Sjmeon, 1808; 13th Id.
rameans at	~ ,lead, of Simeon'.' revision, 1866), O
had the chief command Aa	taking are Medi
council him ktn message from theprophet '	yuth appeared,. gave	Ten	tons, u,~h Short	they works by Jenk$
				(London, 1701	Pray~"3 Annexed, in
	g over Israel, and	Elisha~ anointed	Meditcttin	)i A S
	); and The	Qn entu
			Y d
(1704	econd
	hastened away. Jehu		Poor M
	then regarded himself as Yahweh's appointed instru‑ 	C°m~n~ (1713).
ment to execute justice upon the house of Ahab. Bx~xoRerar: Gexelerraae 315.
one day with
See YAHWEH.
In Christian theology since the Reformation " Jehovah " has become an expression inclusive of the three persons of the Trinity. In the case of the Third Person this is rather tacit than explicit; in the case of the Second Person, the inclusion is explicit. Thus C. Hodge remarks: " This manifested Jehovah [i.e., the Malakh Yahweh or " Angel of Yahweh "], who led his people under the OldTestament economy, is declared to be the Son of God, the 26yoS, who was manifested in the flesh " (Systematic Theology, i. 485; cf. " Christ is represented . . . as the Jehovah of the Old Testament, who led the Israelites through the wilderness,"
p. 512). Similarly Shedd first identifies the Mala
Yahweh with Yahweh and then says: " The Jehov in the theophany was the same trinitarian pera
who is in the incarnation " (Dogmatic Theology
Theology
i.110, New York, 1888). To the same purport Ma
be cited A. H. Strong (Systematic Theology, p. 1
New York, 1902), A. A. Hodge (Popular Lecture
nn Theological Themes, i. 263, Philadelphia, 188
S. Harris (God the Creator oral Lord o/' All, i. X15, N,
York, 1896), W. F. Geas (Das Dogma van Christ
Person and Werk, pp, 244‑246, Basel, 1887), an
dogmaticians in general. Church covenants no
infrequently use the term " Jehovah‑Jesus "
emphasize the deity of Christ.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: See literature under YAHWEH.
JEHU (Hebr. Yehu; Assyr. Ya‑u‑a: LXX. lou; Josephus, leous): Tenth king of Israel, a usurper, successor of Joram whom he slew. His dates, according to the old chronology, are 884‑856 s.c.; according to Kamphausen, 843‑815; according to Kohler, 881‑853 n.c.; and according to Curtis (DB, i. 401), 842‑815 B.C. The Bo olts of Kings (I, xix. I6‑17; II, ix.‑x,) give a detailed account of the manner in which Jehu gained his throne, rooted out the house of Ahab, and exterminated the worship of Baal. The statement (II Kings x. 32‑34) that during the reign of Jehu Hazael of Damascus took possession of the whole of the country east of the Jordan is to be understood of the whole of Bashan and Gilead. The rest of the recital, as well as I Kings xx. 22, and probably II Kings iii. 4‑27, vi, 24‑vii. 17 is derived from a special North_Israelitic source, both old and valuable.
	Jehu was a leader in Joram's army attd d .
the battle with the A 	Ramott ‑g'
him	with hi a cant 	one day he was
""4'ia. Doc‑, 1852; DNB,

deaninas	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	118
Jeremiah
JENNINGS, ARTHUR CHARLES: Church of England; b. in London Dec. 19, 1847. He was educated at Jesus College, Cambridge (B.A., 1872), and was ordered deacon in 1873 and ordained priest in 1874. He was curate of St. Edward's, Cambridge (1873‑74), and rector of Whittlesford, Cambridgeshire 0877,86). Since 1886 he has been rector of King's Stanley, Gloucestershire. Theologically he is a broad churchman. Besides contributing the commentary on Nahum, Haggai, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah to the fifth volume of C. J. Ellicott's Old Testament Commentary (London, 1884), was joint author of Commentary on the Palms (2 vole., London, 1875‑77); Ecclesia Anglicanct: A History of the Church of Christ in England . . . to the Present Times (1882); Synopsis of Ancient Chronology (1886); D1anval of Church History (2 vols., 1887‑88; 3d ed., 1905); Chronological Tables of the Events of Ancient History (1888); and Medic teval Church and the Papacy (1909).

JEPHTHAH, jef'th8: The name of one of the Judges of Israel. It is related (Judges x. 6‑xii. 7) that he was driven from his home because of illegitimate birth, and became captain of a band of freebooters in the land of Tob. When the Israelites of the East Jordanland were oppressed by the Ammonites, they sent for him to return and lead them against their enemies. This he consented to do if he were given the headship, which was promised him. After vainly trying by argument to induce the foe to retire, he made a vow to sacrifice whatever should come forth to meet him if he should return from the campaign victorious. He won a brilliant victory, and was met by his daughter on his return who consented to the performance of his vow, asking, however, a reprieve of two months. He performed the sacrifice, and a yearly celebration was established in which for four days the women lamented Jephthah's daughter. Jephthah was assailed by the Ephraimitea for not summoning them to the battle, and in an ensuing conflict inflicted upon them a stinging defeat. He then ruled as judge for six years.
Examination of the narrative shows that several sources are employed, and the story enclosed in the pragmatic framework is itself complex.
Discussion Jephthah is mentioned as the son of of the Gilead by a foreign wife; but Gilead
	Sources.	is the name of a district or of its popu
		lation. Moreover, the section xi. 12‑28
severs the continuity of the narrative and discusses
the Moabites, whom the Hebrews had left unassailed
(Num. xx. 14 sqq.), while xi. 34 shows that the hero
had a house in Mizpah, which does not accord
with verse 3. And it is difficult to relate the episode
of the Ephraimitic conflict with the two months of
the reprieve of Jephthah's daughter, since it is not
likely that the Ephraimites would await the issue
of that event. Many scholars have suspected an
extension of the original text by interpolation, the
passage xi. 12‑28 especially being regarded as of
late introduction, though this is opposed by Holz
inger and Budde on the ground that the verses in
which the Ammonites are mentioned (12‑1b, 27)
show the same conception as the main portion of
the narrative. It is probable, however, that this is an independent report which the redactor wished to bring into connection with the Ammonitic war. Wellhauaen and Frankenberg suspect also xii. 1‑7 as a late interpolation founded upon viii. 1‑3. While the individuality of this section differentiates it from viii. 1‑3, it is probably taken from an independent source. Holzinger disposes of one of the difficulties by supposing that Jephthah, on his recall from Tob, acquired a residence in Mizpah. That a war with Moab is implied in xi. 12‑28 goes well with the place names in verse 33, some of which are Moabitic, while others are Ammonitic, and thus a double narrative is suggested dealing with two episodes, which an addition in verse 33 of the Septuagint, " and unto Amon," supports. Then the Moabitic war was later, and the residence in Mizpah already acquired goes well with the " I " and " me " of verse 27. Holzinger finds in xi. 29 a suggestion of a journey made by Jephthah in the West Jordanland (" and Manasseh ") connecting xi. with xii. 1‑6, and concludes that there are two sources combined inside the framework of this story.
Against the historical character of the narrative of the Ammonitic war there is no reasonable objection. Jephthah appears as an exile
Historicity who has gained position as head of a of the band like that of David. The differ‑
	Narrative.	ences of the two sources do not oppose
		the historicity, since the events may
be referred to different times and occasions, a war
with the Ammonites and one with Moabites. The
hero is not to be taken as a mythical invention to
explain the celebration of the death of his daughter,
and analogies of the event are not lacking in the
history of other Semitic peoples. One is furnished
by the story of II Kings iii. 27, and another comes
out of Arabic history of the seventh Christian cen
tury (Tabari, i. 1073‑1074), so that the historical
character of the event which the celebration com
memorated appears at least probable. Since in the
narrative there is no mention of substitution, it
must be that Jephthah really sacrificed his daughter.
This was the understanding of the early exegetes
until D. Kimchi, who asserted that the maiden was
simply devoted to the service of Yahweh, an ex
planation which gained the approval of later Chris
tian exegetes, who combined the idea with that of
an enforced celibacy. The reason for this is not
far to seek, since not only is human sacrifice in itself
unusual for such a state of society, but it was
supposed that the Pentateuchal legislation was well
known in the time of the Judges (cf. Lev. xviii. 21,
xx. 2‑5, and see Vows, L; cf. also the Targum on
Judges xi. 39); moreover emphasis was laid on the
fact that the maiden bewailed not her life, but her
virginity, as though condemned to a single life.
Some support was gained from Ex. xxxviii. 8 and
I Sam. ii. 22, though it is not said that the women
mentioned here were celibates. But the true ex
planation of verse 37 doubtless is that the cause of
the maiden's grief was that she must die without
being either wife or mother. Some take refuge in
a disjunctive in the statement of the vow (very
31) making the last two clauses apply to different

119	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	JJerennings
objects, human and animal. Other syntactical devices have been proposed with the object of getting rid of the sacrifice of a human being, but they all fail in view of the fact that the verb used in the passage (he'elah) is that employed in the technical language of the ritual for sacrifice. Moreover, human sacrifice is involved in the whole story; only thus can be explained the despair of the father and the grief of the daughter; and the celebration itself finds no adequate ground short of the actual sacrifice of the maiden. In anti‑prophetic circles human sacrifice was not unknown (Jer. xsxii. 35); indeed, within the prophetic circle itself the idea was not absolutely strange (Gen. xxii.). That the words of Jephthah's vow involve that he thought only of a human being and must therefore have reckoned upon the possibility of the victim being his daughter is rightly characterized by Reuss as " detestable." But the, idea of human sacrifice lay in the background of the Yahweh‑religion, and in later times under foreign influence the
7. The Prophet.
Family and Social Connections (§ 1).
His Life and Times (§ 2).
Literature Ascribed to Jeremiah (§ 3).
II. The Book of the Prophet Jeremiah.
1. The Contents.
practise broke out in opposition to the prophetic
teaching. 	(F. Bv1iL.)
BiHrsoaswrax: The beat discussion is in the Commentary on Judges by G. F. Moors, with which should be compared the treatment in the Commentaries of Studer, Heil, Cassel, Bertheau, Harvey, Oettli and Budde, as mentioned under JonoES, and that in the standard works on the History of Israel, mentioned under Aaes. Consult further: E. w. Hengatenberg, Einleitunp in daa A. T., iii. 127, Berlin, 1839, Eng, transl., Edinburgh, 1847‑48; K. A. Auberlen, in TSK, 1880, pp. b40 eqq.; E. Reuse, Geachiehte der heilipen Schriften A. T., Brunswick, 1874, Eng, tranel., Boston, 1884; I. Goldaiher Der bfythua bei den Hebr6ern, pp. 113 aqq., Leipaie, 1878; A. Kuenen, Hiatoriach‑kritiach Onakrzoek, i. 349, Leyden, 188b• J. wellhauaen, Komlroeition des Hexateucha, pp, 228‑229, Berlin 1889; K. Budde, Richter and Samuel, pp. 125 eqq., Giessen, 1890; M. K&hler, Biblieche Geachichte des Alter Bundea ~ ii. 1, p 100 H. Schultz, O. T. Theology. London, 1892• W. Frankenberg, Die Kompoaititm dte dtuteronomisrhen Richtebuc)a Marburg, 1895; A. Kamphaueen Dos Verhdlnie des MencheopJee sur ieraelitiechen Religion, pp. 48 eqq.. Bonn, 1898; E. t3ellin, Britrtipe zw iaraelitiechen and jffdiaehen Religion, i 200 eqq., Leipeic, 1896; DB, ii. 687‑bBB; EB, ii. 2369‑82; JE, vii, 94‑9b.
JEREMIAH,
jer"e‑mtli'a.
Chapters i.‑x. (§ I).
Chapters xi.‑xvii. (§ 2).
Chapters aviii.‑xxia, (§ 3).
Chapters xxx. lii. (§ 4).
2. The Composition.
The Groundwork and its Expansion (§ I).
The Greek and the Hebrew Teat (§ 2).
I. The Prophet: The name (Hebr. Yirmeyahu or Yirmeyah; Gk. leremias) is borne not only by the
	prophet, but also by the father‑in‑law
1. Family of King Josiah (II Kings sxiii. 31), by
and Social a Rechabite e xxx), y p
Connec‑ of the time of Nehem h .(Neh. xl 3)
bone.
and by persons in the Chronicler's tables (I Chron. v. 24, xii. 4, 10, 13). In spite of his importance the prophet is seldom mentioned in the Old Testament outside of his book (II Chron. xxxv. 25, xxxvi. 12, 21, 22; Ezra i. 1; Dan, ix. 2), which remains the principal and quite full source for knowledge of his life. According to this source Jeremiah was of priestly lineage from the little city of Anathoth, 3 m. north of Jerusalem (i. 1), a son of Hilkiah (i. 1), and nephew of Shallum (xxxii, 7). A possible relationship to Abiathar is suggested by I Kings ii. 26, but the identity of his father with the Hilkiah of II Kings xxii, is improbable. His known history begins in the thirteenth
year of Josiah
(626 B.c.), when he was called to the prophetic office (i. 6). His Position regarding sacrifice (vii. 22) is against the supposition that he acted as a priest. Notwithstanding the hatred aroused among the people there by his preaching, he exercised his duties as (W 21' iii. if, xxxvu. 12
From 'vi. Prophet were performed at the ~cgpi~l.
married. 2 it seems
	Probable that he
J
callmiah lived in critics •	Was lin‑
the law b	I times. Five years
Josianic ref‑	°°k was fou
3. The Importance of the Book.
III. The Lamentations of Jeremiah.
Names Place in the Canon (§ 1).
The Artistic Form (§ 2),
Traditional View .of Authorship
(§ 3).
Arguments Concerning Jeremianio
Origin (§ 4),
of a nature to respond to prophetic ideals, being a brutal despot wrapped up his building‑projects
z. His (xxi1' 13‑19). The prophet denounced
	I ifs and in his addresses the heathen and un
		Timee. ethical influences protected by the
			princes, and at the time of the battle
of Carchemish appeared with a prophetic pro
gram which aroused against him the bitterest hate.
At the beginning of the king's reign an address
in the court of the temple foretelling the fate of
that structure incensed priests, prophets, and
people (vii., xxvi.), and in 605 he gave definite form
to this, pointing to the Chaldeans as the people into
whose power Judah was to fall, and had Baruch
commit it to writing. This was brought to the king,
who tore it into pieces and threw it into the fire
(xxxvi). The events of succeeding years proved the
justification of Jeremiah, though they caused him ~
in his love for bid AO, N d4gJehoiakim	~9 sulering,
	had become the vassal of the Chaldean
king, but soon began to intrigue against him, relying
on the power of Egypt, thus causing a Chaldean
attack which was the beginning of the ends and lj]9
successor Jeconiahi with the best of the people, was carried away to Babylon
Zedekiah, was	(597 B.c.), The	,
		new
	not so hostile to Jemmiahl and
	indeed twig ~~ed ~s
	hick 	, in
i'mation t	nd which	afar p oph k m. ~ Wished ~a f continue	the 'Court
xi. apply'. But tittle ° which Iris Words	the	. who	s Opposed	policy of
work	is kno	rds in chap, Power, and	Predicted reliance	s~
	under JOB'		osed alms b
Jehoiakim (q. v.) mote °.8 go told. his $~es Wider came	ee oath 8 voIt broke out encouraged
of	final his	gYPt Was 	of
Jeho
was notfor counsel to Je~ lema Iyhenc~ kzare army
	rm
Jeremiah, the latter ad,,fsed applied

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
ditional surrender, to the Chaldeana. Temporary retirement of the Chaldeans filled the people with joy, which Jeremiah foretold would be short‑lived, as events proved (xxxiv.). Meanwhile, as Jeremiah was going out of the city to visit Anathoth, he was arrested and thrown into prison, but removed by the king to another place of detention and by him supported there (xxxvii.). His opponents, who rightly feared his influence, besought the king to have him put to death, and to that end had him thrown into a foul cistern to die, whence he was again rescued by the king's order and placed in detention near the king (xxxviii.). At the capture of the city Jeremiah was taken prisoner, but was released by a Babylonian commander and given his choice between going to Babylonia and remaining in Judea, accepting the latter alternative. He gave his support to Gedaliah, the governor appointed by the Chaldeans. Gedaliah was soon after murdered, and the leaders of the people, in fear of the consequences, and following the advice of a prophet who opposed Jeremiah, fled with a number of the population to Egypt, taking with them both Jeremiah and Baruch. There the hostile relations between prophet and people continued because of his denunciations of their heathen proclivities and his prediction that Egypt should fall into the power of Nebuchadrezzar (xxxix.‑xliv.). This closes the authentic record of the prophet's life. The Old Testament does not tell of his death. Tradition has it that he was stoned to death in Egypt (Tertullian, Scorpiace, viii,; ANF, iii. 640; II Mace. ii. gives a report of his hiding certain sacred utensils in a cave, on which is founded the ParaliPomena of Jeremiah and the apocryphal Baruch literature with its sequellae (see APOCRYPHA, A, IV., 5; PBEUDEPI(3RAPHA, OLD TESTAMENT, IL, 10‑11, 35; and cf. Schiirer, Geschichte, iii. 223 sqq., 285‑286, Eng. trans]. IL, iii. 83‑93; II Mace. xv. 11 sqq.; Matt. xvi. 14),
It is reported in II Chron. xxxv. 25 that Jeremiah wrote a dirge on the death of Josiah, called Lamentations; this is probably the first trace
8. Liters‑ of the tradition which ascribes to him
tare As‑ the book of that name, which is, how‑
°ribed t° ever, opposed by the contents of the
Jeremish.
book. A manuscript of the Septuagint ascribes Ps. LIV. and cxxcvii. to him, and there is an apocryphal Epistle of Jeremiah (see APOCRYPHA, A., IV., 6). A passage in the Book of Jeremiah is luminous for the history of that production (xxxvi. 2 eqq.). According to this, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim Jeremiah dictated to Baruch the prophecies which he had uttered in the twenty‑three years of his prophetic activity. This being burned by the king, he had Baruch rewrite it with many additions (xwi. 32). This new book is not identical with the present book, since the latter contains prophecies of a later time; but that it formed the basis of our book may be confidently assumed, and it may be reconstructed by putting together the pieces which are older than Jehoiakim's fifth year.
B. The Book of the Prophet Jeremiah.‑I. The Contents: Chap. i. states that the prophet is informed in the thirteenth year of Josiah before his birth that he had been called to predict the com‑
ing of powers from the north against his people, whose hate he was to incur. But the indication
in the chapter itself of the lapse of 1. Chapters twent ears
i.‑=,	y years proves that the narra‑
tive depends upon the memory of the prophet and is not exactly contemporary with the utterance itself. It is clear that Jeremiah narrates the story of his earlier experiences in the light his later life had given him, and sharp distinction between later and earlier utterances is not possible. In ii.‑vi. the parts are closely related to each other and belong to the same conditions in the reign of Josiah. These chapters bewail the people's sins, their idolatry, their fondness for covenants with foreign powers, and foretell coming judgment. Yet in this section passages suggest the time of Jehoiakim (v. 1, ii. 18, 36). Who the northern foe in these chapters is raises a difficult question. They are an ancient people, whose speech is unknown to Israel, carrying bow and spear and possessing chariots. Some of these marks appear when the prophet's utterances concern the Chaldeans in the time of Jehoiakim. Some scholars refer them to the Scythians, in which case Jeremiah must later have modified them, since their present form hardly fits references to that people. It is questionable therefore whether Jeremiah's earlier prophecies were not general; when the Chaldeans appeared on the scene he may have identified them with the foe foretold. While v. 18 and the related v. 10 are not unJeremianic, they do not fit their present place; similarly iii. 6‑iv. 2 is hardly intelligible unless iii. 14‑18 is taken out. It is probable that these passages are genuine, but transferred hither by an editor. Chapters vii.‑x. contain a discourse delivered in the court of the temple, upon which structure the people put their trust. If they continue in their sine, the temple will be no help, but will perish as did the sanctuary at Shiloh. Its sacrifices are worthless, the people who bring them are untrue and have filled it with heathen symbols which represent their own unethical nature. Chaps. ix. 22‑x. give the impression of fragmentariness, and, as the Septuagint shows, have been expanded, and suggest a deutero‑Jeremiah. The little pieces ix. 22‑23 and 24‑25 have no connection with the previous context, while x. 17 aqq. appear to be genuine and the original continuation of ix. 21. Genuineness is apparent in vii. 1‑ix. 21, but, contrary to Hitzig, Havernick, and others, the passage appears to belong rather with xxvi. and to connect not with the time of Josiah, but with the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim, especially in the matter of heathen practises.
In xi. 1‑17 Jeremiah warns the people to regard " the words of this covenant." In spite of the pun‑
ishment of their fathers, the present 2. Chapters generation continues its service of other
zi.‑zvii. gods and renders divine punishment
imminent. That the " covenant " is the law book found under Josiah is generally recognized; the passage can not, however, in its present form have been uttered then, but in the time of Jehoiakim and so furnishes a good example of the way in which in the reduction of his words to writing Jeremiah mingled past and present. In xi.

121	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	7eremish
18‑xii. 6 the prophet deals with the hostility of his fellow villagers of Anathoth. Formally, by the "then" of xi. 18, it is connected with the preceding; but the exact relation expressed is not clear, and this suggests that the passage is not in its original context. Uncertain in date is xii. 7‑17. It contains a lament for the desolation of the land and threats against the neighbors who have done the evil. It fits in well with the destruction suggested by II Kings xxiv. 2, but still better with conditions during the exile. Indeed, the lament seems to have been put together out of two diverse compositions of different age. The humiliation of Judah in Babylon is figuratively described in xiii., with a lament for the condition resulting. Most critics date the piece (by verses 18‑19) in the time of Jeconiah (Jehoahaz), Graf in that of Jehoiakim, the latter regarding verses 18‑19 as an addition out of Jeconiah's age. A terrible drought is the occasion of xiv.‑xv., in which Jeremiah prays for his people‑unavailingly, for even Moses and Samuel could not save them (xv. 1). At the close (xv. 1021) Jeremiah bewails his personal sorrows caused by his foes. Whether this piece is in its original connection is uncertain, but it may be placid in the original book and dated at the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim. In xvi.‑xvii, the prophet is forbidden to marry, or to participate in mourning or feasting; the destruction of the people is near, since its sins can not be forgotten and its punishment is certain. The connection of this with the preceding is quite certain, though probably xvii. 14‑18 is inserted by a later hand from another place. The genuineness of xvii. 19‑27 is, however, very doubtful.
In xviii. 1‑10 the work of the potter pictures God's methods with man; judgment might be
averted were it not for the people's S. Chapters wilful sin (11‑17); the prophet bewails zdii.‑zzia. his people's hostility to him (18‑23) ;
as an earthen vessel is broken, so shall the people be (xix. 1‑15); the prophet retorts upon Pashhur, who had put him in the stocks, with a prophecy of personal evil and general doom (xx. ice), and then bewails his own sad lot (7‑18). The indications favor the time of Zedekiah, especially the mention of Pashhur and the imprisonment of Jeremiah in the stocks. Some have seen in chap. xvii. an earlier piece, and regard xix.‑xx. as pieces edited by later hands and containing genuine experiences of the prophet. To the time of Zedekiah belongs xxi. 1‑10, and to the time of the siege verses 4‑5, but 11‑14 has no connection with the preceding, and perhaps goes with xxii. The kings of Judah are dealt with in xaii. 1‑xxiii. 8. A king, not identified, is warned to do justice in order to escape judgment (xxii. 1‑5); in succeeding verses Shallum (i.e. Jehoahaz), Jehoiakim, and Jeconiah are dealt with; better shepherds are to be given (xidii.l‑4), and a new shoot isto epnug from the Davidic stump (4‑8). The principal part of this is of the time of Zedekiah, but iii. fi‑9, 20‑23 are later insertions. The genuineness of xxiii. 1‑4 has been questioned and is hard to prove, and the passage has been assigned to exilic times. A speech against false prophets is found in xxiii. 9‑40. In
xxiv. the exiles are compared with good figs, Zedekiah and the people remaining with bad ones. According to the superscription xxv. belongs to the fourth year of Jehoiakim, the year of the battle of Carchemish. In it Jeremiah foretells the desolation and captivity which are to come through Nebuchadrezzar, and then after seventy years God will again rule his people. The genuineness of this chapter has been sharply attacked (cf. verses 1214), though Giesebrecht rightly sees a Jeremianic basis. The cipher in verse 26 (cf. R.V. margin) is not in Jeremiah's style. A report of the danger of death incurred by the prophet through the address in the temple court, given in chap. vii., is given in chap. xsvi. It does not belong to the groundwork or original basis of the book. According to xxvii.‑xxix., ambassadors had come to Jerusalem from the neighboring states to urge common action against Babylon (xxvii.). A prophet Hananiah foretells the return of the exiles to Babylon within two years; Jeremiah retorts with a prediction of Hananiah's death within the year and a contradiction of his prophecy of a speedy return (xxviii.). A letter from Jeremiah to the exiles in Babylon is in xxix. These chapters appear to have existed at one time as a separate and independent section.
A aeries of prophecies of comfort are continued in xxx.‑xxxiii., and xxxii. rests on a personal relation
of Jeremiah regarding the purchase 4. Chapters of a field, which is made the basis of a
aaa.‑lii. prediction of return from exile. The
chapter bears the marks of an editor, however, and verses 17‑23 have been especially suspected, while xxxiii. 14‑15 recall xxiii. 5‑6, the genuineness of which is under a cloud. Even if the earlier passage is genuine, it does not seem likely that Jeremiah would so modify the representation as the later passage does. Smend denies xxx.‑xxxi. to Jeremiah, and is possibly right as to xxx., though xxxi. seems to contain more of Jeremiah's work; possibly those two chapters are exilic. Chapter xxxiv. belongs to the narrative part of the book and is placed in the time of the siege of the city. The R,echabites appear in acv. as an example of faithfulness and as a lesson to Judah. The time is that of the passing of a Chaldean army through the land in the time of Jehoiakim, but the occasion can not be decided; it belongs to the narrative portion of the book, and Jeremiah speaks in the first person. Chapter xxxvi. is also narrative, and tells of the committal to writing of the predictions of the prophet. Similar narrative portions are xsxvii.xliv.; xxxix. is an insert and an expansion of part of Iii. Consolation is offered in xlv. A aeries of prophecies against foreign peoples is contained'in xlvi.‑Ii., the nations mentioned being Egypt, Philistia, Moab, Ammon, Edom, Damascus, Arabia,, Elam, and Babylonia. Chapters 1. li., according to li. 59‑64 imparted to Seraiah in the fourth year of Zedekiah, are by moat modern critics regarded as un‑Jeremianic. These chapters depend not only on secondary parts of Jeremiah, but on later parts of Isaiah. Some critics separate li. 59 sqq. from the rest as genuine; others regard the chapters as expanded statements of genuine oracles of Jeremiah. In general, the use of other predictions in these

Jeremiah	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	i$$
1. The
Ground
work sad
its Ex
pansion.
chapters and the departure from the accustomed forms of Jeremiah's usage seem to warrant suspicion. On the other hand, in the undoubted portions of the book there are prophecies against foreign nations, and in this portion Nebuchadrezzar is represented as the medium of divine punishment, which is a Jeremianic conception; moreover, the time noted
in xlix. 34 looks genuine. Chapter Iii. is not b
Jeremiah, but is chiefly an excerpt from II Kin xxiv. 18‑xxv. 30.
2. The Qomporition : The foregoing review show
that to the groundwork written in the fourth yea of Jehoiakim and rewritten the ne year belong i. 2‑8, xi. 1‑17, vii. 1‑9,
21, xi. 18‑xii. 6, xiii. (except verse 18‑19), aiv.‑xv., xvi.=xvii. (except
some interpolations), xxv. (so far as it
is original), and xlvi. 1‑xlix. 33 (so far
as they are Jeremianic), referring to the times of Josiah and Johoiakim. To the time of Zedekiah belong xxiv., xxi., xxiii. 9‑40, and xlix. 34 aqq. (if genuine). Of the rest which may be ascribed to this prophet the time of writing is less evident, though xxxi., iii. 14‑16, and perhaps the genuine parts of xxiii. 1‑8, seem to belong to the time of the capture of Jerusalem. Larger parts which can not be certainly ascribed as a whole to Jeremiah are x. 1‑16, xvii. 19‑27, I.‑Iii. The narrative portions present a difficult problem, and the boundaries between them and the oracle portions are not always easy to fix. Some of these are in the first person, and were doubtless dictated to Baruch. Such pieces are xviii. (probably from the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign), xxxii. (under Zedekiah), and xxxv. (under Jehoiakim). Other pieces speak in the third person of " Jeremiah " or " the prophet Jeremiah," and can be only secondarily Jeremianic; such are xix.xx., xxvi., xxvii.‑xxix., xxxiv., xxxvi., xxxvii.‑xliv. These rest on Baruch's authority, as does xlv., an oracle of consolation imparted to him by the prophet. So that in the Book of Jeremiah there are earlier and later pieces passages in Jeremiah's words and those reported of him, and some not at all Jeremianic, bound up together in variegated fashion. Chronological order can not always be determined. The history of the book is not one that can at the present be made out. Certainly the composition of the fourth year of Jehoiakim lies at the basis, and this is expanded by later oracles and by narrative portions. The latter is in part no doubt from Baruch and contains reports of Jeremiah's discourses delivered to him by the prophet. The supposition that a life of the prophet has been interwoven into the book is improbable, since the earlier life of the prophet is not related. More likely is it that a literature of Jeremiah including his later speeches and narratives about him grew ups out of which our book is edited. Little dependence can be placed in i. 3, since that verse is probably only a secondary title.
To the foregoing considerations is to be added the fact that the Book of Jeremiah belongs to those Portions of the Old Testament in which the Sep_ tuagint . diverges essentially from the Massoretic text, a divergence which is very variously explained. Some esteem the Septuagint so highly
r
xt
s
that they speak of two recensions, a Palestinian and an Egyptian; while others speak of arbitrary
changes by the translator. Both of 2. The these hypotheses have been shown cheek and unfounded (Kuenen, Giesebreeht, and the Hebrew others). While evidences of misun‑
derstanding by the Greek translator
y	and indeed of wilful change exist, there are passages
gs	where the text at the base of the Septuagint points to a text more original than the Masaoretic. One
s	such passage is that relating to the foreign nations,
	in which in the Greek xlvi.‑Ii. follow xxv. 13, and
the order of arrangement is different. The original connection of these parts is evident, though the entire section should not stand before xavi. 15, and
the Alexandrine order is less natural than the Massoretic. The difference in the length of the two texts, altogether apart from proofs of arbitrariness on the part of the translator, show that at the time of the translation the book had not yet reached a fixed form, a conclusion which is strengthened by observation of the evidence of inclusion of glosses.
8. The Importance of the Book: This can not be appreciated if only the contents of the predictions are kept in mind. In this particular Jeremiah is not specially original, and particularly so if the purely Messianic passages, such as xxiii. 5‑6, xxniii. 15‑16, are the basis of estimate, since these are lusterless in comparison with such passages as Iaa. ix. 5‑6, xi. 1‑2. One might say in general that Jeremiah took over the prophecies of Amos and Hoses, being in his earlier deliverancea especially dependent upon Hoses. For twenty years the prophet preached the insecurity of the basis of the people's hopes and trust. Even by the captivity of 597 the people were not awakened, but supposed that the deportation of Jeconiah was the excision of a worthless limb. For Jeremiah it was the fulfilment of prophecy which demanded submission and humility instead of new pride and the waking of hopes to be unrealized. The complete destruction of Jerusalem awaited persistence in the people's wilful course. Yet the prophet was not without hope in its truest sense. A new generation was to arise which was to bear Yahweh's law on the inner tablets of the heart, not on tablets of atone. In all this there was little that was not already existent
in prophecy. Jeremiah's originality stands out in the vivid impression of his work as that of a prophet who was accounted a traitor to his people and a godless despiser of the sanctuary while he was yet the mouthpiece for the utterance of divine truths. It was this which made of him the greatest martyr among the prophets, and the evidence of it exists in his prayers written in his book, which give the clearest insight into the motive of his hf`
bewails the hab v~th a,Llcb the people pursued him

who was that people's truest mediator wed and reveals himself not merely as a prophet, but
as a man living in the closest fellowship with God.
In this respect he is creative and a pattern of
religious sincerity, and thus be inspired the poets
of the Psalm‑book and the great poet of the Book
of Job. The sense of the personal relation of the

individual to God which appeared in later Judaism is a result of his work. In view of the importance of

123	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	deremish
this service, the question of external form becomes
a minor one. The disturbed conditions of his times
did not minister to esthetic expression. The beauty
of the book lies not in its poetic form, but in its
deep and noble expression of the life of tenderness
which it portrays. 	(F. BUHL.)
III. The Lamentations of Jeremiah: This is the name given by tradition to five elegies bearing a
close resemblance to one another and 1. Names, bewailing the sad lot which befell
Place in Jerusalem and its inhabitants during the Canon. and after .the siege by the Chaldeana
(587‑586 B.c.). In Hebrew manuscripts and editions these elegies usually bear the title ekhah, " how," from the opening word of three of them; the Jews were, however, familiar with the designation kinoth, " lamentations " (Jerome, Preface to Lamentations, cf. Baba Bathra, 14b; LXX, Threnoi; Lat. Threni or Lamenlatioyees). In the Greek version, which differs in character from that of the prophecies of Jeremiah, they are placed next to the prophecies (after Baruch), and are counted with the prophecies as one book. Only in this way could twenty‑two canonical books be counted (Joaephus, Apion, i. 8; Origen in Euaebius, Hiat. eccl., vi. 25; Jerome in Prologue galeatus). Still the number twenty‑four was common, in which computation Ruth and Lamentations were counted separately and placed among the Hagiographa. This arrangement differs from that followed by the Christians, which was the same as that of the Septuagint, but is in accord with that of the Talmud (Baba Bathra 14b), which places Lamentations among the Kethubim, where they probably stood from the time of the formation of the third division of the canon.
In form the first four of these five elegies are characterized by an acrostic use of the alphabet.
They are also composed in the rhythm 2. The Ar‑ which Budde has shown to be that of
	tistic	the lament or threnody. In chaps.
	Form‑	i.‑ii. a group of three lines in this
		meter (composed of a normal and a
shortened member) is placed under each of the
acrostic letters; the same is true in chap. iii., except
that each of the three lines (in this case a verse)
begins with the same letter, which, therefore, ap
pears three times. In chap. iv., on the other hand,
each acrostic letter includes two lines. No acrostic
is found in chap. v., although the elegy consists
of twenty‑two verses presenting the usual parallel
ism, though the peculiar meter of the dirge is not
very manifest. The five elegies refer to the same
national misfortune and have many similarities in
thought and form; yet each has its own peculiar
quality. So chap. i. shows the sorrowing Zion,
deserted and abandoned; chap. ii. describes the
act of the angry God, the just enemy, who has
destroyed the city; chap. iii. presents a more in
dividual point of view; chap. iv. describes the sad
fate of the populace of the city during and after
the siege; chap. v. sketches briefly the resulting
miserable state of the people. That the five songs
were all produced under one inspiration is psycho
logically improbable; but in any event they did
not arise without regard to one another. Style and
language show many points of resemblance, and the historical situation is essentially the same in all. They can not have appeared during the siege itself; the misfortune is already complete, intense agony is already changing into a softer sadness, and feeling finds relief in seeking for a form of artistic expression.
Ancient tradition unanimously names Jeremiah as the author. The Preface to the Septuagint doclarea that " after the captivity of
H. Tradi‑ Israel, and the desolation of Jeruear tional View lem, Jeremiah sat down weeping and
of Author‑ sang this lamentation over Jerusalem and said." This same tradition appears in the Talmud and is accepted by the Church Fathers. Jerome is indeed mistaken when (on Zech. xii. 11) he refers to Lamentations the statement in II Chron. xw. 25, where mention is made of elegies composed by Jeremiah on the death of Josiah. Perhaps he was misled by Lam. iv. 20. Josephus had already fallen into the same error. The Chronicler's notice shows that the prophet was accustomed to compose such elegies, and was naturally qualified to compose a ~,‑ina on a grand scale, treating of the fall of Jerusalem, just as Ezekiel composed a series of such " threnodies " over other cities and peoples. Many passages in the Lamentations are in agreement with the thought and diction of the prophet; indeed, a prophetic note runs through these poems. The older authorities, almost without exception, hold the traditional view; only in modern times has the Jeremianic authorship been contested, and on grounds of importance. Theniua attributed only chaps. ii. and iv. to Jeremiah, Meier chaps. i.‑iii.; others, for instance, Ewald, Noldeke, Schrader, Nagelsbach, Lbhr, Budde, entirely abandon Jeremianic authorship.
The arguments against Jeremiah's authorship are partly formal and founded on esthetic grounds and partly refer to the contents of the
4• Argu‑ poems and their theological quality. ments Con‑ N$gelabach (Commentary, p. xi. sqq.)
	cerning and Lohr ZATW, 1894) have noted
JerC ~i ~ ie statistically the agreements and differ
		ences in the vocabulary of Lamenta
tions and of the prophecies of Jeremiah, and the
probability appears to favor difference of authorship
or a reediting of Jeremianic elegies. This prob
ability is strengthened by linguistic similarities
with the writings of Ezekiel. It was believed that
an important distinction had been discovered be
tween the writings of the prophet and these songs,
in that these lacked the strong emphasis upon the
sins of the people which would be expected from
the prophet. Thus v. 7 is cited, according to which
the unhappy generation suffered not so much for
its own sins as for those of its forefathers (contrast
Jer. xxxi. 29). That, in addition to inherited
suffering, the measure has been filled up by the
people's own faults and that thus a judgment has
been called down upon them is a thought which
runs through Lamentations also and finds partic
ular expression in v. 16, 21. Budde finds that the
consciousness of the guilt of the people is little
developed in chaps. iv. and ii. (but cf. iv. 8). If
Jeremiah was the author he does not here appear

Jeremiah
Jeroboam	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	124
as God's advocate to bring an accusation against
	his people, but he gives free expression to natural
	sympathy, which he had suppressed until at last
	judgment was fully executed. Jeremiah loved his
	people and his rulers more than did the patriots,
	although a higher power had set him in opposition
	to them (Jer. i. 18). In this way iv. 20 must be
	explained, where the manner in which the king is
	spoken of might be thought strange as coming from
	Jeremiah, while iv. 17 offers no difficulties since he
	may well have voiced the timid hopes of the people
	in the last period of their trials, although these hopes
	were not shared by him. On the other hand, an
	unsolved difficulty for all who reject Jeremiah's
	authorship is offered by the unconditional condem
	nation of the prophets of Jerusalem (ii. 9, 14, iv. 13).
	Jeremiah might indeed have expressed himself in
	this way (cf. Jer. xiii. 13, xiv. 13 sqq., xxiii. 15);
	but if another had composed a lament over these
	events he could scarcely have forgotten the prophet
	who had won the highest reverence from the whole
	people through his sufferings. It was the general
	opinion that only Jeremiah's personal sufferings
	were described in chap. iii., and this seems most
	probable according to verse 8 (cf. Jer. vii. 16, xi. 14,
	xiv. 11). Verses 37‑38 would then refer to those
	prophecies of misfortune with which he was re
	proached. Smend (ZATW, 1888, pp. 62‑63) and
	many others suppose that in chap. iii. the poet
	speaks in the name of the community; in that case
	the very beginning, °` I am the man," is exceedingly
	harsh and without analogy in this manner. The
	family of Shaphan (Gedaliah) has been especially
	considered in this connection (Lohr, ZATyV, 1894,
	p. 55). As there is no mention of the rebuilding of
	Jerusalem and of the temple, and as dependence
	upon the second Isaiah can not be proved by a few
	lexical similarities, the exilic origin of Lamentations
	seems most reasonable. Whether these songs
	originated in Palestine, in Egypt, or in Babylonia
	is indeterminable, but it seems most probable that
	Jeremiah had a share in their production. This
	does not mean that they came from his hand in
	their present poetical form; the artificiality of form
	suggests the work of a school or of a group of dis
	ciples who, collecting and completing such thren
	odies, wove them together into the form in which
	they now appear. 	C. VON ORELLl.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the life and times of Jeremiah consult:
T. x. Cheyne Jeremiah, )Lil Life and Timm
	, London,
1888; C. 17. Cornill. Jeremia and seine Zeit, Heidelberg . 1880; K. Marti Der Prophet Jeremia, Basel, 1889; M. Lazarus, Der Prophet Jeremia, Breslau, 1894; W. Erbt, Jeremia urud seine Zeit G6ttingen, 1902• F. B. Meyer ,
Jeremiah, Priest and Prophet London, 1902; J. R. Gil‑' Jeremiah. the Man arid his Message, ib. 1907; J. F.
McCurdy, History, Prophecy, and the Monuments, vol. iii.,
New York, 1901.
	Questions of criticism concerning the prophecies of
Jeremiah are discussed in: G. C. Workman The Text of
Jeremiah, or a Critical Examination of the Greek and the
Hebrew with the Variatiorra in the LXX, Edinburgh, 1889;
E. Kith), Dos Yerhdltniaa der Maaaora zur Septuagint zm
livr de, JHalle, 1882; E. Bruaton, De l'importanee du
		emie dens 7a criti7ue de l'A. T. Montauban ,
1893; A. von Bulmerineq, Daa ZukunJtabild dea Propheten
Jeremia, Riga, 1894• C. H. Cornill, in SBOT, 1895; id em,
Die metriachen SCttcke dea Bathes Jeremia, Le. 1902;
A. W. $treane, The Double Text of Jeremiah, London,
1898.
Commentaries which cover both the prophecies and
Lamentations are by: B. Blayney, London, 1838; E.
Henderson, Andover, 1888; H. Cowles, New York, 1869; C. W. E. Nbgelsbach, in Lange's Commentary, New York, 1871; R. P. Smith, in Bible Commentary, London, 1875; A. W. $treane, in Cambridge Bible, Cambridge, 1881; T. K. Cheyne and others in the Pulpit Commentary, 2 vole., London, 1885‑98.
	Commentaries on the Prophecies are: $. R. Driver,
London, 1896; W. Lowth, London, 1718; J. G. Dahler,
2 vole., Strasburg, 1825; W. Neumann, 2 vole., Leipaic,
1858‑58; C. H. Graf, ib. 1882; F. Hitzig, ib. 1868; H.
Ewald, G6ttingen, 1868, Eng, transl., London, 1878;
C. F. Keil, 2 vole., Edinburgh, 1873‑74; 3. Scholz, Wiirz
burg, 1880; L. A. $chneedorfer, Prague. 1881; C. von
Orelli, 2d ed., Munich, 1905, Eng, trans]., Edinburgh, 1889;
C. F. Ball, in Expositor's Bible, London, 1890; F. Gieae
breeht, G6ttingen, 1894; W. H. Bennett, London, 1895; B.
Duhm, TObingen, 1901; G. Douglas, London, 1903; A.
Ramsay, ib. 1905; A. Maclaren, ib. 1906. w ~ '
	Commentaries on Lamentations are: T. ~agel~t,
Leipsic, 1887; E. Gerlach, Berlin, 1868; C. F. Keil, Leip
eic 1872; L. A. $chneedorfer, Prague, 1876; J. M $chon
felder, Munich, 1887; $. Oettli, NSrdlingen, 1889; M.
LShr, G6ttingen, 1891, 1907; P. Mayriel, Montauban,
1894; C. Budde Freiburg, 1898; J. P. Wiles, Half‑Hours
with the Minor Prophets and Lamentations (London, 1909).
Consult also: DB, ii. 569‑578; EB, ii. 2366‑95; JE, vu. 98‑107; and the works on O: T. Theology, on Introduction to the O. T., on Prophecy in general, and on Messianic Prophecy.
JEREMIAS IL, jer"e‑mai'as: Patriarch of Constantinople; b. at Anchialos (now Ahiolo, 130 m. n.w. of Constantinople) about 1530; d. at Constantinople 1595. He received no systematic education in his youth. After officiating as metropolitan of
Larissa, he was patriarch of Constantinople from 1572 to 1573 or 1579, from 1580 to 1584, and again
from 1586 to 1595, n his aom to reorpniZe 6h~
Greek Church he reenforced the existing laws and ordinances, and reached the climax of his endeavors in the synod held at Constantinople in 1593, which assailed simony, demanded a better education of the clergy, who were also required to preach frequently, took up the question of common schools, and reinstitttted the " national synod." In his foreign relations Jeremias is noteworthy as the founder of the patriarchate of Russia, during a visit to that country in 1588‑89, while he vigorously maintained the independence of the Greek Church against the Jesuits sent by Gregory XIII. to the East to win it over to the Roman Catholic Church. In the same spirit he refused to accept the Gregorian calendar, which was regarded by the Greeks as heretical.
Jeremi is particularly	ing 	f
his correspondence with

	~heL~of account the letters being contained in the Acta et scripts
theologorum Wirlembergensium et Patriarehse Con
stsntinopolitani D. Hieremise (Wittenberg, 1584).
Although the replies of the patriarch were not ac
tually written by him, but by his pronotary, Theo
dosios Zygomalas, and are merely compilations from
such Church Fathers as Basil and Chrysostom, and modern authors like Joseph Bryennios, Nikolaos Kabasilas, and Symeon of Thessalonica, they are important for an evaluation of the modern Greek Church, since they manifest genuine Greek ortho‑
doxy and contain its first official verdict on Lutheranism, which they definitely rejected.
The history of the affair was as follows: In 1573 Stephen Gerlach went to Constantinople as preacher to the German ambassador with letters of recommendation to the patriarch from Jakob Andrea

126	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	aeremiab
		Jeroboam
(q.v.), chancellor of the university at Tiibingen, and
Martin Crusius, the celebrated Hellenist and his
torian. The letters were well received; and the
Tubingen professors were not slow to avail them
selves of the opportunity of establishing communica
tion between the Greek Church and the Lutherans,
especially as Gerlach had become a personal friend
of Zygomalas. They accordingly sent a second
letter, dated Sept. 15, 1574, together with a Greek
translation of the Augsburg Confession, and a third
letter, dated Mar. 20, 1575, with a Greek translation
of two sermons by Andrea and a request for an
opinion concerning the Lutheran creed. The pa
triarch's answer, dated May 15, 1576, consisted of
an elaborate treatise, in which he praised the
articles on the church, the ecclesiastical office, the
marriage of priests, and eschatology, but cen
sured the introduction of ", filioque " in the creed,
and the depreciation of good works. He also in
sisted on seven virtues, vices, and sacraments, trine
immersion, monastic vows, and the invocation of the
saints at the consecration of the elements. The
treatise, however, induced the Tiibingen theologians
to give a systematic defense of the principles on
which their confession rested, and a new letter was
sent, dated June 18, 1577, but it took two years
before the patriarch's answer arrived (May, 1579),
and it read more like a rebuke than an answer.
Nevertheless, the Lutherans determined to try once
more, and in the spring of 1580 sent a defense to
Constantinople, but the patriarch's answer of
June 6, 1581, was curt and final, and the Protestants
were obliged to clone the correspondence.
		(PHILIPP MEYER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: P. Meyer, Die fIlC0l0g1.8CJde LLtW.atHr der
	griechiachen Kirchs im IB. Jahrhurdert, Leipeic, 1899;
	Hefele, in TQS, 1843, p. 544; P. Kerameus, in Bgranti
	nieche Zeitschrift, 1899, pp. 392 eqq.
	JEREMIAS, ye"re‑mi'iis, ALFRED: German Lu
theran; b. at Markersdorf (a village near Chemnitz),
Saxony, Feb. 21, 1864. He was educated at the
University of Leipsic (Ph.D., 1886); was a teacher
at a high school for girls in Dresden from 1887 to
1890, and deacon at the Lutherkirche, Leipsic, from
1890 to 1901. Since 1901 he has been pastor of the
Lutherkirche, and since 1905 privat‑docent for the
history of religion and Old Testament in the Uni
versity of Leipsic. In theology he is a believer in
revealed religion. He has written Die Holleniahrt
der Istar, sine altbabylmeische Beschworungslegende
(Munich, 1886); Babylonisch‑assyrische Vorstell2cttgen
vom Leben reach dem Tode unter Beriicksichtigung der
alttestumentlichen Parallelen (Leipaic, 1886); Izdubar
Nimrod, sine altbabylmcische Heldensage each den
Keilschriftfragmenten dargestellt (1891); Im Kampfe
urn. Babel and Bibel (1903); Monotheiatische Strdfry•
ungen innerhalb der babylonischen. Religion (1904);
Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients (1904);
Babylonisches im Neuen Testament (1905); and Die
Panbabylanisten. Der alts Orient and die ayyPtische
Religion (1907).
	JERICHO. See JUDEA, IL, 2, § 1.
	JEROBOAM, jer"o‑Worn: The name of two
kings of Israel.
	1. Jeroboam L: First king of Israel, son of
Nebat and Zeruah, an Ephraimite of Zereda (Zaretan and Zartansh; Gk. Sareira or Sarida) north of Jericho and not far from Beth Shean (Josh. iii. 16; I Kings iv. 12). His dates, according to the old chronology, are 97rr958 B.C.; according to Riehm, 938‑917 B.C.; according to Cooks (DB, ii. 582) 937915 B.C. According to the narrative in I Kings xi. 26 sqq., be was a servant of Solomon who, on socount of his industry, was raised to a place of command in the region which he afterward ruled. On one occasion, when leaving Jerusalem, he was met by the prophet Ahijah from Shiloh, who rent his own (not Jeroboam's, as Ewald has it) mantle into twelve pieces and gave ten of them to Jeroboam as a sign that he was to rule over ten tribes, while one tribe was to remain under the Davidic dynasty. The Deuteronomic editor gives as the reason for this division of the kingdom the idolatry of Solomon; but there were probably also political and religious motives, among the former the old jealousy of the northern tribes and among the latter a prophetic interest (Ahijah was a Shilonite). Solomon heard of the incident and Jeroboam was forced to flee to Egypt, where he remained under Shishak till Solomon's death.
In I Kings xii. 3 (probably a later report) Jeroboam appears as spokesman for Israel at the gathering at Shechem to make Rehoboam king; but verse 20 makes it appear that Jeroboam was made king immediately on his return from Egypt. Rehoboam's intention to subject the revolted tribes by force of arms was overruled by the prophet Shemaiah on the ground that the division was of divine provision. Probabilities are against the repreaentar tion of a long war between Jeroboam and Rehoboam (I Kings xiv. 30, xv. 6; II Chron. xiii. 2 aqq.); but it is not unlikely that an alliance was formed between Abijam and Damascus, renewing that which had been broken under Solomon (I Kings xi. 24).
Important measures of Jeroboam were the fortification of Shechem and the selection of it as his capital, and the fortification of Penuel to secure his eastern possessions. Tirzah, often a residence of the kings of Israel until the time of Omri, was also a place of note in his time (I Kings xiv. 17). Of supreme importance was Jeroboam's measure in sanctioning the cult of Bethel and of Dan to remove the necessity of going to Jerusalem to worship. This was probably only the legitimating of existing worship, and was not intended to be a rejection of the Yahweh cult (see CALF, THE GOLDEN, AND CALF WORSHIP). The later (Judaic) reports make Jeroboam create priests of the lower classes of the populace, the Levitea being deposed. The festival established by Jeroboam is regarded by the narrator as intended to replace the Feast of Tabernacles (I Kings xii. 32). Of the narratives in I Kings xiii.‑xiv. that in chap. xiii. is a midrash upon II Kings zxiii. 17 sqq.; that in chap. xiv. has made use of an earlier source, and is in Deuteronomietic spirit.
2. Jeroboam IL: Thirteenth king of Israel, son and successor of Joash. His dates according to the old chronology are 825‑784 B.C.; according to Curtis (DB, i. 401) 782‑741 B.C., according to Cooks (DB,

dsrome	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	1$8
ii. 583) 790‑749 s:c.; Jeroboam II. was one of the
most important and powerful kings of the northern
kingdom, his rule extending " from Hamath to the
sea of the plain " (II Kings aiv. 23‑29), probably
including Moab under his power. According to
Schrader (RAT, pp. 212 aqq.) his extraordinary
success is to be explained from his relations with
Assyria,. Ramman‑nirari III, of Assyria had over
thrown Mari of Damascus, and in his inscription
he claims to have laid the land of Chnri (i.e., Israel)
under tribute. It is not improbable that the con
quered Damascus and its territory was turned over
to Jeroboam in return for tribute. Commentators
are at variance over the meaning of the reference in
Hos. x. 14, " as Shalman spoiled Beth‑arbel,"
whether it refers to a conquest of the Galilean city
under Shalmaneaer III, or IV., or to a calamity
experienced by the Moabite King Salamanu men
tioned by Tiglath‑Pileaer. II Kings xiv. 25 regards
the success of Jeroboam as the fulfilment of the
prophecy of Jonah the son of Amittai; but the
prophecies of Hoses and Amos give a far different
impression of the state of his kingdom, which under
the external glory carried the seeds of decay,
speedily to bear fruit. 	(E. KeuTZSCx.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: 1. The sources are: I Kings xi. 28‑40, xii. 1‑xiv. 20; II Chron, x. 2‑19, xi. 14‑18, xii. 15, xiii. 2. Sources are: II Kings xiv. 23‑29, xv. 1, 8; and especially the books of Amos and Hosea. For literature on both kings see the pertinent sections in the works cited under Aces; IeaaeL, HISTORY Or.
JEROME.

I. Life,	Historical (¢ 2).
Studies and Travels to Dogmatic and Polemical
378 (§ 1).	(13).
Sojourn in Rome, 382‑ Letters (¢ 4).
385 (¢ 2). 	TII. Theological Position.
	Residence in Palestine	His Excellences and De
		after 385 (§ 3).		fects (¢ 1).
II. Works.	His Lackof Independence
	Biblical and Exegetical		(¢ 2).
		(§ 1).
	I. Life: The famous ecclesiastical author com
monly known as St. Jerome, whose full name was
		Eueebius Sophronius Hieronymus, was
	z. Studies born at Stridon, on the border between
and Travels Pannonia and Dalmatia, in the second
	378• quarter of the fourth century; d. near
		Bethlehem Sept. 30, 420. He came of
Christian parents, but was not baptized until about
360, when he had gone to Rome with his friend
Bonosus to pursue his rhetorical and philosophic
studies. These were principally secular, probably
including Greek literature; he seems as yet to have
had no thought of studying the Greek Fathers, or
any Christian writings. His journey with Bonosus
to Gaul seems to have followed immediately upon
a stay of several years in Rome. During this so
journ in eastern Gaul and " on the semi‑barbarous
banks of the Rhine," he seems to have been occu
pied with theological studies, and to have copied
for his friend Rufmus Hilary's commentary on the
Psalms and treatise De synodis. Next came a stay
of at least several months, possibly years, with
Rufinus at Aquileia where he made many Christian
friends. Some of these accompanied him when he
set out about 373 on a journey through Thrace and
Asia Minor into northern Syria. At Antioch, where
he made the longest stay, two of his companions died and he himself was seriously ill more than once. During one of these illnesses (about the winter of 373‑374) he had a vision which determined him to lay aside his secular studies and devote himself to the things of God. In any case he seems to have abstained for a considerable time from the study of the classics and to have plunged deeply into that of Holy Scripture, under the impulsion of Apollinaris of Laodicea, then teaching in Antioch and not yet suspected of heresy. Seized with the desire for a life of ascetic penance, he went for a time to the desert of Chalcis, to the southwest of Antioch, known as the Syrian Thebaid, from the number of hermits inhabiting it. During this period, however, he seems to have found time for study and writing. He made his first attempt to learn Hebrew under the guidance of a converted Jew; and at this time he seems to have been in relation with the Jewish Christians in Antioch, and perhaps as early as this to have interested himself in the Gospel according to the Hebrews, asserted by them to be the source of the canonical Matthew.
Returning to Antioch, in 378 or 379, he was ordained by Bishop Paulinus, apparently with some unwillingness and on condition that he
z. Sojourn still continue his ascetic life. Soon
in Rome, afterward he went to Constantinople
	382‑385•	to pursue his study of Scripture under
		the instruction of Gregory Nazianzen.
There he seems to have spent two years; the next
three (382‑385) he was in Rome again, in close
intercourse with Pope Damasus and the leading
Roman Christians. Invited thither originally to
the synod of 382 held for the purpose of ending the
schism of Antioch, he made himself indispensable to
the pope, and took a prominent place in his councils.
Among other duties he undertook the revision of
the text of the Latin Bible on the basis of the Greek
New Testament and the Septuagint, in order to
put an end to the marked divergences in the current
western texts (see BIBLE VERSIONa, A, IL, 2). This
commission determined the course of his scholarly
activity for many years, and gave occasion to his
most important achievement. He undoubtedly
exercised an important influence during these three
years, to which, outside of his unusual learning,
his zeal for ascetic strictness and the realization of
the monastic ideal contributed not a little. He was
surrounded by a circle of well‑born and well‑edu
cated women, including some from the noblest
patrician families, such as the widows Marcella
and Paula, (qq.v.) with their daughters Blaesilla
and Eustochium. The resulting inclination of these
women for the monastic life, and his unsparing
criticism of the life of the secular clergy, raised a

growing hostility against him, especially in the class just named. Soon after the death of his patron,
Damasus (Dec. 10, 3841 he deGlAq to RUT from
a position which was fast becoming impossible.
In August 385 he returned to Antioch, accompanied by his brother Paulinianus and several friends and followed a little later by Paula and Eustochium, who had resolved to leave their pa‑
trician surroundings and to end their days in the Holy Land. In the winter of 385 Jerome accom‑

18?	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jerome
panied them and acted as their spiritual adviser. The pilgrims, joined by Bishop Paulinus of Antioch,
visited Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and the
3. Resi‑ holy places of Galilee, and then went
dence in to Egypt, the home of the great
Palestine heroes of the ascetic life. In Alexan‑
after 385. dria Jerome listened to the blind cate‑
chi§t Didymus expounding the prophet Hoses and telling his reminiscences of the great Anthony, who had died thirty years before; he spent some time in Nitric, admiring the disciplined community life of the numerous inhabitants of that " city of the Lord," but detecting even there " concealed serpents," i.e., the poison of Origenistic heresy. Late in the summer of 388 he was back in Palestine, and settled down for the remainder of his life in a hermit's cell near Bethlehem, surrounded by a few friends, both men and women (including Paula and Eustochium), to whom he acted as priestly guide and teacher. Amply provided by Paula with the means of livelihood and of increasing his collection of books, he led a life of incessant activity in literary production. To these last thirty‑four years of his career belong the most important of his works‑his version of the Old Testament from the original text, the best of his scriptural commentaries, his catalogue of Christian authors, and the dialogue against the Pelagians, the literary perfection of which even a controversial opponent recognized. To this period also belong the majority of his passionate polemics, which distinguished him among the orthodox Fathers, including notably the treatises occasioned by the Origenistic controversy against Bishop John of Jerusalem and his early friend Rufinus. As a result of his onslaughts on the Pelagians, he was subjected to actual persecution at their hands about the beginning of 416, when a body of excited partizans broke into the monastic buildings, set them on fire, and laid violent hands on the inmates, killing a deacon, and forcing Jerome to seek safety in a neighboring fortress. The date of his death is given by the Chroreicon of Prosper. His remains, originally buried at Bethlehem, are said to have been later translated to the church of Santa Maria Maggiore at Rome, though other places in the West claim some relics‑the cathedral at Nepi boasting the possession of his head, which, according to another tradition, is in the Escurial.
II. Works: The writings of Jerome cover nearly all the principal departments of Christian theology;
but the most numerous and important
z. Biblical belong to that of Biblical study, inand eluding especially his labors for the Exegetical. improvement or translation of the
Latin text. His knowledge of Hebrew, primarily required for this branch of his work, gives also to his exegetical treatises (especially to those written after 386) a value greater than that of most patristic commentaries, although he is as a rule too much hampered by Jewish tradition, and indulges too often in allegorical and mystical subtleties after the manner of Philo and the Alexandrian school. But he deserves credit for the distinctness with which he emphasizes the difference between the Old‑Testament Apocrypha and the
Hebraica. veritas of the canonical books (cf. especially his introductions to the Books of Samuel, see Paoi.oaus GALEATUB, to the Solomonic writings, to Tobit, and to Judith. His exegetical works fall into three groups: (a) his translations or recastinga of Greek predecessors, including fourteen homilies on Jeremiah and the same number on Ezekiel by Origen (translated c. 380 in Constantinople); two homilies of Origen on the Song of Solomon (in Rome, c. 383); and thirty‑nine on Luke (c. 389, in Bethlehem). The nine homilies of Origen on Isaiah included among his works were not done by him. Here should be mentioned, as an important contribution to the topography of Palestine, his book De situ et nominibus locorum Hebraeorecm, a translation with additions and some regrettable omissions of the Onarnasticon of Euaebius. To the same period (c. 390) belongs the Liber interpretationis naminum Hebraicorum, based on a work supposed to go back to Philo and expanded by Origen. (b) Original commentaries on the Old Testament. To the period before his settlement at Bethlehem and the following five years belong a series of short Old‑Testament studies‑De seraphim, De voce Osanna, De tribes quaestionibus veteris legia (usually included among the letters as xviii., xx., xxxvi.); Quaestionea hebraicae in Genesis.; Commentaries in Ecclesiasten; Tractatus aeptem in Psalmos x.‑xr'. (lost); Explanationea in Miehaeam, Sophoniana, Nahum, Habacuc, Aggaeum. About 395 he composed a aeries of longer commentaries, though in rather a desultory fashion‑first on the remaining seven minor prophets, then on Isaiah (c. 395‑c. 400), on Daniel (c. 407), on Ezekiel (between 410 and 415), and on Jeremiah (after 415, left unfinished). (c) New‑Testament commentaries. These include only Philemon, Galatians, Ephesians, and Titus (hastily composed 387‑388); Matthew (dictated in a fortnight, 398); Mark, selected passages in Luke, the prologue of John, and Revelation. Treating the last‑named book in his cursory fashion, he made use of an excerpt from the commentary of the NorthAfrican Tichonius, which is preserved as a sort of argument at the beginning of the more extended work of the Spanish presbyter Beatus of Libana. But before this he had already devoted to the Apocalypse another treatment, a rather arbitrary recasting of the commentary of Victorinus (d. 303), with whore chiliastic views he was not in accord, substituting for the chiliastic conclusion a apiritualizing exposition of his own, supplying an introduction, and making certain changes in the text.
One of Jerome's earliest attempts in the department of history was his Temporum lxher, composed
e. 380 in Constantinople; this is a re‑
	s. His‑	casting in Latin of the chronological
	torical.	tables which compose the second part
		of the Chronicon of Euaebius, with a
supplement covering the period from 325 to 379.
In spite of numerous errors taken over from Euse
bius, and some of his own, Jerome produced a valu
able work, if only for the impulse which it gave to
such later chroniclers as Prosper, Casaiodorus, and
Victor of Tannuna to continue his annals. Three
other works of a hagiological nature are the Vita
Pauli monachi, written during his first sojourn at

Jerome
Jerome of Prague
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Antioch (c. 376), the legendary material of which is derived from Egyptian monastic tradition; the Vita Malrhi monachi captivi (c. 391), probably based on an earlier work, although it purports to be derived from the oral communications of the aged ascetic Malchus originally made to him in the desert of Chalcis; and the Vita Hilarionis, of the same date, containing more trustworthy historical matter than the other two, and based partly on the biography of Epiphanius and partly on oral tradition. The so‑called Martyrologium sancti Hieronymi is spurious; it was apparently composed by a western monk toward the end of the sixth or beginning of the seventh century, with reference to an expression of Jerome's in the opening chapter of the Vita Malchi, where he speaks of intending to write a history of the saints and martyrs from the apostolic times. But the most important of Jerome's historical works is the book De viris illustribus, written at Bethlehem in 392, the title and arrangement of which are borrowed from Suetonius. It contains short biographical and literary notes on 135 Christian authors, from St. Peter down to Jerome himself. For the first seventy‑eight Euaebiua (Hist. eccl., i.‑viii.) is the main source; in the second section, beginning with Arnobius and Laotantius, he includes a good deal of independent information, especially as to western writers.
Practically all of Jerome's productions in the field of dogma have a more or less violently polemical character, and are directed
3. Dog‑ against assailants of the orthodox doo‑
matic and trines. Even the translation of the
	Polemical.	treatise of Didymus on the Holy Spirit
		into Latin (begun in Rome 384, com
pleted at Bethlehem) shows an apologetic tendency
against the Arians and Pneumatomachi. The same
is true of his version of Origen's De principiis (c.
399), intended to supersede the inaccurate transla
tion by Rufinus. The more strictly polemical
writings cover every period of his life. During the
sojourns at Antioch and Constantinople he was
mainly occupied with the Arian controversy, and
especially with the schisms centering around
Meletius and Lucifer. Two letters to Pope Damasus
(xv. and xvi.) complain of the conduct of both
parties at Antioch, the Meletiana and Pauliniana,
who had tried to draw him into their controversy
over the application of the terms ousid and hypo
stasis to the trinity. At the same time or a little
later (379) he composed his Libel' Contra Lucifer.
iauos, in which he cleverly uses the dialogue form to combat the tenets of that faction, particularly their rejection of baptism by heretics. In Rome (c. 383) he wrote a passionate counterblast against the teaching of Helvidius, in defense of the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary, and of the superiority of the single over the married state. An opponent of a somewhat similar nature was Jovinianus, with whom he came into conflict in 392 (Adversus Jovinianum, and the defense of this work addressed to his friend Pammachius, numbered xlviii. in the letters). Once more he defended the ordinary catholic practises of piety and his own ascetic ethics in 406 against the Spanish presbyter Vigilantius, who opposed the oultue of martyrs
and relics, the vow of poverty, and clerical celibacy. Meanwhile the controversy with John of Jerusalem and Rufinus concerning the orthodoxy of Origen occurred. To this period belong some of his most passionate and most comprehensive polemical works ‑the Contra Joannem Hierosolymitanum (398 or
399); the two closely‑connected Apologize contra
Rufinum (402); and the " last word " written a few months later, the Liber tertius seu uZtima responsio adversus scripts Rufini. For further details see ORI(IENIaTIC CONTROVERSIES. The last of his polemical works is the skilfully‑composed Dialogue contra Pelagiarcos (415).
Jerome's letters, both by the great variety of their subjects and by their qualities of style, form
the most interesting portion of his
4. Letters. literary remains. Whether he is dis‑
cussing problems of scholarship, or reasoning on cases of conscience, comforting the afflicted, or saying pleasant things to his friends, scourging the vices and corruptions of the time, exhorting to the ascetic life and renunciation of the world, or breaking a lance with his theological opponents, he given a vivid picture not only of his own mind, but of the age and its peculiar characteristics. The letters most frequently reprinted or referred to are of a hortatory nature, such as xiv., Ad Heliodorum de laude vitae solitariae; xxii., Ad Eustochium de custodia virginitatis; Iii., Ad Nepotianum de vita clericanem et mondchorum, a sort of epitome of pastoral theology from the ascetic standpoint; liii., Ad Paulinum de studio scripturarum; lvii., to the same, De institutiaae monachi; Lyx., Ad Magnum de seripbrtbus ecclesidslicis; and evii., Ad Laetam de in~ stitutione filiae.
III. Theological Position: Jerome undoubtedly ranks as the most learned of the western Fathers.
He surpasses the others especially in
z. His his knowledge of Hebrew, gained by Eacellences hard study, and not unskilfully used.
sad It is true that he was perfectly conDefects. scious of his advantages, and not entirely free from the temptation to despise or belittle his literary rivals, especially Ambrose. His own scholarship is by no means without its weak points. His acquaintance with Greek and Latin literature, both pagan and Christian, is great, but by no means without its gaps and its traces of superficial reading; and his knowledge of Hebrew offers innumerable points of attack

to m(>dACri criticism. As a general rule it is not so
much by absolute knowledge that he shines as by an almost poetical elegance, an incisive wit, a singular skill in adapting recognized or proverbial phrases to his purpose, and a successful aiming at rhetorical effect. His weaknesses are moat noticeable in dogmatic subjects. He was so little of a dogmatic theologian that he contributed only indirectly to the development of doctrine. The same may be said of his contribution to moral theology, in which he showed less an interest in abstract ethical speculation than a morbid ascetic zeal and passionate enthusiasm for the monastic ideal.
It was this attitude that made Luther judge him so severely. In fact, Evangelical readers are generally little inclined to accept his writings as authori‑

129	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jerome
		Jerome of Prague
tative, especially in consideration of his lack of in
dependence as a dogmatic teacher and his submis
			sion to orthodox tradition. He sp
		a. His	proaches his papal patron Damasua
	Lack of	with the most utter submissiveness,
	Iadepend‑ making no attempt at an independent
		ence.	decision of his own. The Church
			founded upon the rock of Peter is to
decide whether he is to recognize, with the Mele
tians, three hypostases in the divine ottsia, or, with
the Paulinisns, one hypostcasis with three prosifpas or
persons. " Decide, I pray thee, and I shall not
fear to speak of three hypoatasea." He may be
called not only the forerunner of modern ultra
montanism, but even of the Jesuit unreasoning
obedience. The tendency to recognize a superior
comes out scarcely leas significantly in his corre
spondence with Augustine (cf. the letters numbered
Ivi., Ltvii., cii‑ev., ex.‑cxii., cxv.‑cxvi. in his own,
and will., xxxix., xi., Ltvii.‑lxviii., lxxi.‑hw.,
lxxri.‑Lxxxii. in Augustine's).
	Yet in spite of the defects and weaknesses already
mentioned, Jerome has retained a rank among the
western Fathers. This would be his due, if for
nothing else, on account of the incalculable influence
exercised by his Latin version of the Bible upon
the subsequent ecclesiastical and theological devel
opment. But that he won his way to the title of a
saint and doctor of the catholic Church was possible
only because he broke away entirely from the
theological school in which he was brought up,
that .of the Origenists. In the artistic tradition of
the Roman Catholic Church it has been usual to
represent him, the patron of theological learning,
as a cardinal, by the side of the Bishop Augustine,
the Archbishop Ambrose, and the Pope Gregory.
Even when he is depicted as a half‑clad anchorite,
with cross, skull, and Bible for the only furniture
of his cell, the red hat or some other indication of
his rank is as a rule introduced somewhere in the
picture. 	(O. ZbCKRERt.)
BIHLIOaaAPHY: The article in W. Smith, Dictionary of Greek
	and Roman Biography and Mythology, ii. 459 eqq., London,
	1890, is valuable as a bird'"ye view of Jerome's works,
	particularly in giving a table showing the numbers of the
	letters as they appear in the three principal arrangements
	A valuable bibliography is given in Potthaet, Weptoaiaer,
	pp. 69b‑698, 1370‑71; another is in the British Museum
	Catalogue and Supplement, still another in U. Chevalier,
	REpertoire des sources ><iatoriQuee du moge» 8pe, pp. 1283
	1285, Paris. 1894 eqq.
		The edition of the " Works " by Erasmus, including all
	then known, appeared, 9 vole., Bead, 1518‑20, followed
	by that of Marianna Victorians, 9 vole., Rome, 1585‑72;
	then came editions by U. Calixtus and A. Tribbechovius
12 vole.. Frankfort, 1884‑90, the Benedictine by J. Mer
tiansy, b vole., Paris, 1893‑1708; the edition of Vallarei,
11 vole., Verona, 1734‑‑42, reproduced in moat subsequent
edition4 including that of MPL, xxii.‑xxa. NPNF, 2d
eer., vol. v, contains Eng. tranal. of many of the 150 Letters,
the Prefaces to his works, and a number of treatises, includ
ing his " Life of Hilarion," " Dialogue against Jovinianue "
and " Dialogue against the Pelagiana, with a valuable
Introduction and Life.
The best sources for a life are his own writings, particularly his Letters and Prefaces, the latter of which often give a clear insight into his mental states as well as a knowledge of external events in his life. Augustine refers to him in Epiet. 281, Ad Oceanum, Contra JuLianum l., sad " City of God," xviii. 42; $ulpicius 8everus records his impression, received during a stay with Jerome at Bethlehem lasting six months, in his Dialopi, i. 7‑9. Elsb‑
VL‑9
orate modern treatments of the life are O. Z6ckler, Hierony. mus, aein Leben and Wirken, Goths, 1886, and A. Thierry, S. Jerdme, to eoci.W chr6tienne h Rom et fdmipradon romaine en terse saints, 2 vole„ Paris, 1875. Consult far. they: F. C. Collombet, Hint, de S. J&Bme: as trio, ass ecrita, et as doctrine, 2 vole., Paris, 1844; W. $. Gilly, Viyilantiua and his Times, pp. 91‑124, London, 1844; C. F. de T. Montslembert, Lea Moines d'oeeident, i. 144187, Paris, 1881; E. Bernard, Les Voyage* do S. Jkrilms~ ib. 1884; E. L. Cutts, St. Jerome, in Fathers for Enptiak Readers, London, 1878; A. P. F. de Lambel, S. JErBms, Tours, 1880; C. Martin, Life of St. Jerome, London, 1888; F. W. Farrar, Lives of as Fathers, ii. 1b0‑297, New York, 1889; P. Largent. S. JdrBme, Paris, 1898. Eng. travel., Londofi, 1900; G. GrUtamachar, Hieronymus, 3 vole., Leipei0. 1901‑08; J. Broohet, S. JErBme et ass ennenaia. Paris, 1908; J. Turmel, Saint JErBma, ib. 1908; Jose de $egu6naa (Father Fray), Life of St. Jerome, London, 1907; 1511emont, MEmoires, vol, xii.; CeilGer, Auteurs aacrEa, vii. 54b‑711 et passim (other volumes contain much useful matter, consult Index); Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 206‑214, 987‑988, and in general, the church histories dealing with the period; DB, iv. 873‑874; DCB, iii. 29‑50.
Volumes dealing with special phases of Jerome's activity are: M. Rshmer, Die hebraiaehen Traditional is den Werken den Hieronymus, Breslau, 1881; Aemil. LObeek, Hieronymus goon twverit scriptures at ex quibua hauaerit, Leipaio, 1872; A. Ebert, AILgemeins Geschichte der Litteratw den Mittelaltera, i. 178‑203, ib. 1874; W. Nowaek, Die Bedautung den Hieronymus Air die aUkstamentlieht Testkritik, G6ttingen, 1875; H Goelser, 9tuda lezitopraphique et prammaticate de is tatinitE de S. JErMne, Paris, 1884; A. R,ohrieht, Eaaai our S. JhBtne, exEpt!te, ib. 1891.

JEROME OF PRAGUE: One of the chief followers and most devoted friends of John Hues; b. at Prague about 1379; burned at the stake at Conetance May 30, 1416. His family were well‑to‑do, and, as he was desirous of seeing the world, after taking his bachelor's degree at the University of Prague in 1398 he secured in 1399 permission to travel. In 1401 he returned to Prague, but in 1402 visited England, and at Oxford copied out the Dialogue and Tri.alogus of Wyciif, and thus evinced his interest in the great Oxford doctor. He also became an ardent and outspoken advocate of realism, and ever afterward Wyclifism and realism were charges which were constantly getting him into trouble. In 1403 he was in the Holy Land, in 1405 in Paris. There he took his master's degree, but Gerson drove him out. In 1406 he took the same degree in the University of Cologne, and a little later in that of Heidelberg. Nor was he any safer in Prague, to which he returned, and where, in 1407, he took the same degree. In that year he returned to Oxford, but was again compelled to flee. During 1408 and 1409 he was in Prague, and there his pronounced Czech preferences aroused opposition to him in some quarters. Early in Jan., 1410, he made before the university a cautious speech in favor of Wyolif's philosophical views, and this was cited against him at the council of Constance four years later. In Mar., 1410, the bull against Wyclif's writings was issued, and on the charge of favoring them Jerome was imprisoned in Vienna, but managed to escape into Moravia. For this he was excommunicated by the bishop of Cracow. Returned to Prague, he appeared publicly as the advocate of Hose. In 1413 he was in the courts of Poland and Lithuania, making a deep impression by his eloquence and learning. In Cracow he was publicly examined as to his acceptance of the forty‑five articles which the enemies of

Jerome of Prague Jerusalem
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
ISO
Wyclif had made up from Wyclif's writings and which they asserted represented Wyclif's heretical teachings. Jerome declared that he rejected them in their general tenor.
When, on Oct. 11, 1414, Huss left for the council of Constance, Jerome assured him that if need be he would come to his assistance. This promise he faithfully kept, for on Apr. 4, 1415, he arrived at Constants. As he had, unlike Huss, come without a safe‑conduct, his friends persuaded him to return to Bohemia. But on his way back he was arrested at Hirschau on Apr. 20 and taken to Sulzbach, where he was imprisoned, and was returned to Constance on May 23, and immediately arraigned before the council on the charge of fleeing a citation‑one having been really issued against him, but as he was away at the time he was ignorant of it. His condemnation was predetermined in consequence of his general acceptance of the views of Wyclif, and also because of his open admiration of Huns. Consequently he had not a fair hearing. His imprisonment was so rigorous that he fell seriously ill and so was induced to recant at public sessions of the council held on Sept. 11 and 23, 1415. The words put into his mouth on these occasions made him renounce both Wyclif and Huss. The same physical weakness made him write in Bohemian letters to the king of Bohemia and to the University of Prague, which were declared to be entirely voluntary and to state his own opinions, in which he announced that he had become convinced that
I. Topography.
II. Water Supply. III. Soil and Formation. TV. Climate.
V. History of the City.
Pre‑Iaraelitic Jerusalem (§
I. Topography: The ground upon which Jerusalem stands is formed by a plateau extending southward from the Palestinian mountain range, and cut by valleys into several heights. The culmination of the range or watershed runs west of the city, and the surface on which the city is built elopes to the east and south, and on the south and southeast sinks abruptly into deep valleys. The watershed northwest and north of the city rises to a height of 2,675 feet above the Mediterranean; the lowest place in modern Jerusalem is 2,360 feet in elevation; while the whole city is situated at a lower elevation than the country round about. The heights about the city are in part still known by their old names. That to the east is the Mount of Olives (Zech. xiv. 4; Matt. xxi. 1), in early times the site of a sanctuary (II Sam. xv. 32). Looking from the city, it is seen to have four summits, of which the second from the north (Karam al‑&yyad) is the highest (2,sso feet), while the third (Jabalal‑Txtr), from twenty to forty feet lower, on which are several consecrated buildings, passes in common speech as the Mount of Olives. The most southern Peak (Bain aLHawd, 2,430 feet high) was known as the Mount of Corruption or Destruction (II Kings viii. 13; cf. I Kings xi. 7). The hill to the west corresponds probably to the hill Gareb of Jer.
Hues had been rightfully burned for heresy. But this pitiful course did not secure his liberation nor decrease the likelihood of his condemnation. For on May 23, 1416, and on May 26, he was put on trial by the council. On the second day he boldly recanted his recantation, and so on May 30 he was finally condemned and immediately thereafter burned. He died heroically.
Jerome was of blameless life, and his attachment to the Roman Church was sincere; consequently, as he rejected Wyclif'a teachings as to the Lord's Supper, the council really had slender grounds for his execution. His extensive travels, his wide erudition, his eloquence, his wit, made him a formidable critic of the degenerate church of his day, and it was for his criticisms rather than for heresy that his death was compassed.
Brnrrocawpnr: The contemporary sources of his life are the well‑known letter of Poggio Bracciolini describing his trial (Opera, pp. 301‑305, translated by William Shepherd, Life of Poggio Braccialini, 2d ed., 1837, pp, fig‑79), and the chronicle of Jan Zizkovi, edited by Jaroslav Goll in Bohemian and published in Prague in 1878, Vypaani o Miatru Jeronymovi z Prahu. It has been followed by the Bohemian scholars, A. H. Wratislaw in his John Huea,
London, 1882, pp. 376‑408; and Count Liilzow, John Hua, ib. 1909, pp 321‑334. Consult further: L. Heller, Hieronymus von PTaA, Liibeck, 1835; C. Becker, Die beiden biihmiachen Reforynatoren . . Hua and Hieronymue von Prag, Nordiingen, 1858; E. H. Gillett, Life arid Times of John Huss, 2 vols., New York, 1871; and the literature under Huss, JoaN.
JEROME, SAIftT, ORDERS OF. See HIERONY.1fITEa; JE9UATEa.
JERUSALEM.
Dsvidic and Solomonic Jerusalem
	(§ 2).
From Solomon to the Exile (§ 3).
From the Exile to Herod (§ 4).
From Herod to the Destruction, 70
A.D. (§ $).
Until Constantine the Great (§ 8).
From Constantine to the Capture by the Arabs (¢ 7).
Under the Arabs to'the Crusades (§ 8).
During the Crusades (§ 9).
From 1187 to the Present (§ 10).
xxxi. 39 rising to the height of 2,555 feet; that to the south, called Goah in Jer, xxxi, 39 (2,545 feet
high), is the modern Abu ,Tur, called by Europeans the Hill of Evil Counsel, on the basis of John xi. 47‑53. The elevation north of the city is called Skopos by Josephus (Ant. XI., viii. 5).
The principal valley is that of the Kidron, rising north of the city, bending east and then south, and dividing the city from the Mount of Olives, all the time deepening rapidly. At present, parts of this valley bear different names. Of tributary valleys may be mentioned one which in early times emptied opposite the Garden of Gethsemane of the Latins immediately below the Golden Gate of the present east wall of the Harem al‑Sharif; it is now practically filled up. Formerly it was formed of two branches which served to divide the city , as is shown by the researches of Warren and Wilson.
Another tributary valley used t0 Qmpty lmIXtoly
north of the Virgin's Fount, opposite the upper part of the village of Silwan, but is now completely

filled. A third empties below the Pool of Siloam, opposite the lower part of the village of Silwan, and rises in two hollows above the Damascus Gate. It runs first southeast, then south and then again southeast, being joined about the middle of its course by a valley coming from the west. Both

131	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jerome of Prague
		Jerusalem
this and the valley which joins it are now filled up, but their importance for the old city must have been great. The name as given by Josephus (War, V., iv. 1) is the Tyropaeon valley. A fourth tributary valley empties into the Kidron still farther south than the Tyropaeon. It begins in the watershed west of the present Jaffa Gate, runs south and then east till it joins the Kidron opposite the southern end of Silwan, falling a distance of 650 feet in its course. It has different names for different parts, but is in general known as the valley of Hinnom (Josh. xv. 8 and often; cf. Gehenna). It is remarkable that Eusebius and Jerome place the valley of Hinnom to the east of Jerusalem, but they were probably influenced by Zech. xiv. 3‑4. In the eighteenth century it became the erroneous fashion to call the upper and middle part of this valley the Gihon.
II. Water Supply: The preceding description shows that the drainage of the region is from north to south or from northwest to southeast. While the watershed is at an elevation of 2,675 feet, the union of the Kidron and Hinnom valleys is only 2,065 feet above the Mediterranean; there is therefore no deadwater in the brooks which in the rainy season flow through these valleys. Part of the drainage is subterranean. The hill country of Palestine is poor in water, and such expressions as " the brook Kidron " may convey a false impression if it is not recalled that " brook " means no more than the Arabic " wadi," a natural channel of drainage for the flow of the rainy season, dry the rest of the year except near a spring. In the upper and lower parts the valleys are tilled; betpveen the city and the Mount of Olives the floor of the valley is denuded of soil. In the Kidron water flows only during exceptional rainfall or when there is a quick melting of a heavy snowfall. A shallow brook runs even yet in the Tyropaeon after long‑continued rains, forming a pool called the Birkat al‑13amra. In the Hinnom valley a small ditch between the garden plats suffices to carry off the drainage. The region is poor in springs, the Old Testament naming only three, Gihon, En‑rogel, and the Dragon's Well. The Gihon was in the Kidron valley (II Chron. xxxiii. 14), and its waters were led by Hezekiah into the City of David (II Chron. xxxii. 30). These data nerve to identify .it with the only spring which is found to‑day in the Kidron valley near Jerusalem and feeds the pool of Siloam through the Siloam conduit. It is known now as the Virgin's Fount and the Fountain of Steps, the second name due to the fact that the water is reached by a stone stairway. The spring is covered by an arch to protect it from debris, and lies in a deep hollow some seventy‑five feet lower than the heaps of debris round about. It is intermittent, but rather irregularly so; in winter it may flow three or four times a day, in summer once or twice, in autumn at most once. This peculiarity is probably to be explained by the fact that the spring has two sources m the hill, one constant and one variable, the latter intermittent and fed from below. Doubtless the action of this spring influenced the prophetic representations in Ezek. xlvii.1‑12; Joel iv. (iii.) 18; Zech. xiv. 8, which went upon the supposition that there
were great chambers of water in the interior of the mountain. Josephus calls the water of this spring sweet; at present it is brackish. The second spring, En‑rogel (Josh. xv. ?, xviii. 16), was on the boundary between Judah and Benjamin, and at some distance from the city (II Sam. xvii. 17; I Kings i. 9, 41 sqq.), in the royal gardens south of the city (Josephus, Ant. VIL, xiv. 4); therefore it is to be sought near the union of the valley of Hinnom with that of Kidron. There is now no spring in the region, but there is a well, called by the Arabs Job's Well, by Jews Joab's Well, and by Christians Nehemiah's Well, having a depth of 122 feet, partly walled and partly sunk in the rock. In very wet seasons it fills up and drains off a part of its `water, a circumstance regarded by the inhabitants as presaging a fruitful season. From this overflow it probably got its name as a spring, though in earlier times, when the country was wooded, its overflow may have been constant and so justified the name of spring. About a third of a mile south and on the west side of the valley is a spring which flows during the rainy season, and in early times may have been constant. A third spring, the Dragon's Well, appears to be mentioned in Neh. ii. 13 (LXX, " Spring of Figs "), as approached from the valley gate, which was probably at the southwest corner of the old city. It should therefore lie in the lower Hinnom valley or in the Kidron valley; but no spring or well besides those already mentioned is now known.
III. Soil and Formation: The old city was built upon the naked rock. The situation is altogether unfavorable to the formation of vegetable soil and to the retention of any which may be artificially created, since the heavy rainfall of winter washes it into the crevices of the rocks or sweeps it into the valleys. Disintegration of the rock produces a rich loamy soil which adheres well to the rocky substratum where the lie of the land permits it. The rock is a crystalline chalk of the middle cretaceous period, and of dark gray color. Varieties distinguished at the present are: a pure hippurit.ic chalkstone, granular, not hard, esteemed for building, not blemished by cracks, when quarried generally pure white, and hardening with exposure to the atmosphere; a second variety, of three kinds, either gray or marked with red and gray veins and not found in such large masses as the first variety; a variety which laminates and does not break in the fire; a fourth variety, so soft as to receive and retain the imprint of the fingers, sometimes, however, hard and worked with the saw, reddened often through infiltration of iron, and generally used for the little sarcophagi so numerous in the neighborhood.
IV. Climate: The usual rainy season is from October to May, rarely September to June, while the average rainfall for the year is about twentythree inches, and the southwest and west winds carry the rain clouds. Snow may fall from December to March, rarely in April, though it does not often lie long. The temperature ranges from 25° to 102° Fahrenheit, with high average for July of 77° and for January of 43°. Ice may form at night in January, but melts during the day except in shady

Jerusalem	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HEftZOG	282
spots. The atmospheric humidity ranges widely. The prevailing winds are from the northwest, though the radiation of the land in summer often produces a sea breeze from the Mediterranean which lasts well through the night and brings much moisture. East winds blow in autumn, winter, and spring, rarely in summer. The sirocco blows from the southwest. The months in which sickness prevails are May to October. The preceding data are the result of observations taken during the second half of the nineteenth century, and the question has been raised whether the climate is the same as it was in early times (see PALESTINE). Here it need be said only that great changes are improbable; such changes as may have taken place are most likely in the direction of greater contrast of temperature and of reduced rainfall. But Jerusalem must always have been a city not abundantly supplied with water, as is proved by the many devices for conserving the rainfall.
V. History of the City: It is clear that the name Jerusalem was not given by the Israelites, since it appears c. 1400 s.c. in the Amarna z. Pre‑ Tablets (q.v.) in the form Urusalim,
Iaraelitic which corresponds consonantally with
Jerusalem. the Hebrew form of the name, though the vocalization of the last syllable is different in the Old Testament but not in the Aramaic or Septuagint. The form Yerushalayirrx is Massoretic. The legend of the founding of the city reported by Josephus (Apion, i. 14 sqq.) and Plutarch (Isis et Osiris, xxxi.) goes back to Manetho, who attributes the building of the city to the Hykaos when they left Egypt. But the legend unites the Hyksos and the Hebrews in a manner which prevents giving credit to the story. The earliest mention is that of the Amarna Tablets ut sup., in which Ebed‑Hiba appears as tributary to the Pharaoh, while the correspondence suggests that the ruler of Jerusalem was charged with oversight of the princelings of southern Syria (cf. the representation in Judges i. 5‑7 of Adoni‑bezek with his seventy subject kings). The Israelitic accounts dealing with the time c. 1020 B.C. make the Jebusitea masters of Jerusalem and the immediate surroundings, and Zion the stronghold (II Sam. v. 7). Until the second half of the nineteenth century Zion and the City of David were located between the valleys of Hinnom and the Tyropaeon at the southwest corner of the city. At present scholars agree that Zion was applied to the eastern part of the city and that the southeastern hill corresponds to the fortress of Jebus. The " city of David " is not to be confused with " Jerusalem," since it formed only a part of the greater whole (cf. II Kings xiv. 20). The city of David was situated on lower ground than the temple and the palace of Solomon (II Sam. xxiv. 18; I Kings viii. 1‑4), and Solomon's palace lay lower than the temple (II Kings xi. 19), from which it was separated only by a wall (Ezek. xliii. 8). The location of the temple, it is agreed, was on the site of the present Mosque of Oman whence the directions implied in the foregoing data can lead one only to the southeastern hill between the Kidron and the Tyropaeon. Thin conclusion is fully corroborated by the indications in Neh. iii. 15‑26, xii. 31‑39
compared with ii. 13‑14. According to II Sam. v. (3 the fortress of Zion was difficult of access, which corresponds with the situation to the east and the south of the southeastern corner of Jerusalem, and it must have been protected to the west by the Tyropaeon before the latter was filled with d6brie. Similarly on the north a ravine extended, mentioned above as one of the tributary valleys of the Kidron. Consequently at that early time the fortress was entirely isolated by ravines, while the boundaries suggested probably marked out the city of the Jebusitea, placed on the lowest of the eminencea in the neighborhood. The Jerusalem of the Amarna Tablets has been placed westward of Jebus and on the southwest hill of the modern city.
	With the capture of the JebusitefortresaJeruea
lem fell into David's hands, and this may have been
		while he was still king of Hebron. He
	z. Davidic was thus placed in contact with the
	and northern tribes and in command of the
	Solomonic roads, while the stronghold became
	Jerusalem. the capital of his kingdom, a place be
		longing neither to Judah nor to the
northern tribes, and therefore neutral. But because
of David's relationship to Judah, it is sometimes
ascribed to Judah, while elsewhere it is called Ben
jamin's territory because of its situation. David
did not exterminate the Jebusites, but left them life
and property (II Sam. xxiv. 18); he forced them,
however, to evacuate Zion, whence they went to
the southwest elevation, while he and his following
occupied " the city of David." The old fOfGTG66 Wag
completely transformed, being built up by David,
and a palace erected there (II Sam. v. 9, 11; cf.
Neh. xii. 37) upon one of the western levels of the
hill, while the' tombs were hewn out still lower;
the fortification was completed by walls and towers,
the remains of which have been traced. In this
part of the city was the tabernacle‑sanctuary (II
Sam. vi. 17), and here were the residences for the
people of the court, as well as a great number of
cisterns for water supply. Solomon extended the
building toward the north and built the Millo for
protection, though as yet the exact location of this
defensive work is not determined and the came is
true as to its exact character‑whether it was a
wall or a tower. Solomon's palace and temple were
to the north and on higher ground, the temple on
Moriah and the palace on OPhell * 4141 our,

rounded by defensive walls, probably pierced with
great gates on the south, where were the principal
approaches. The arrangement included three parts,
a greater court with an inner court containing the
temple, and a second or middle court (I Kings

vii. 8, 12; II Kings xx. 4), the temple thus being
the farthest north, while these separate parts were
probably upon different levels. In the great court
to the south were the house of Lebanon, the hall
of pillars, and the throne hall. The middle court
contained Solomon's palace and the palace of his
Egyptian queen. To Solomon is ascribed the build
ing of the wall which surrounded Jerusalem (I
Kings iii. 1 ix. 15). The question of the extent of
the city in those times and therefore of the extent
and course of this wall is much debated. It must be
borne in mind that a distinction was made between

133	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jerusalem
the " city of David " and Jerusalem, and by the latter was meant the city on the southwest hill, which must have been the part so protected by Solomon's wall, the course of which Josephus claims to give (War, V., iv. 2). Remains of a wall which may have been. the northern part of Josephus's wall have been discovered south of David Street, viz., the so‑called Wilson's arch; but the latter can hardly be ascribed to the time of Solomon. Investigations respecting the course of Solomon's wall have been carried on by the English engineer, H. Maudsley, and the American, F. J. Bliss, during which several gates have been discovered as well as the direction of the fortification, but whether these belonged to the erection of Solomon or to later times is not fully determined. The valley gate was probably at the southwest corner of the old city, the dung gate on the south, and the fountain gate to the east by the Tyropoeon valley (formerly called the gate between the two walls, Jer. xxxix. 4).
The successors of Solomon, according to the Old Testament, often added to the fortifications of the city, and probably all the additions
3. From made are not mentioned in the records.
Solomon Of special importance is the report that
	to the	Hezekiah built " the other wall " (II
	Exile.	Chron, xxxii. 5), i.e., one outside what
		had been till then the city limits, called
by Josephus the second wall (War, V., iv. '_). A
good basis for tracing this wall is found in Neb. iii.
(of. xii. 31, 37‑40), and some remains have been dis
covered which are with good reason identified with
the wall of Nehemiah. These remains are to the
north of the so‑called David's Tower, upder the
foundation of the German Evangelical Church, and
still farther near the northwest corner of the Haram
al‑Sharif. This wall was pierced by two gates,
called the old gate and the fish gate (Neb. iii. 6,
xii. 39); the first was probably near the quarter of
the Holy Sepulcher corner of the city, by the Prus
sian Hospice of St. John; the fish gate must have
led to the Tyropoeon. From Zeph. i. 10 it may be
deduced that in this quarter or new city the Phe
nician traders had their shops. The towers of
Hananeel and Hammeah (Jer. xxxi. 38; Neb. iii. 1)
are usually located on the site of the later Antonia,
and not far to the east must have been the sheep
gate (Neb. iii. 1), perhaps identical with the gate
of Benjamin (Jer. vii. 13). A short distance
east of the sheep gate the wall bent southward to
follow the bank of the Kidron; the complete course
of the wall is not yet made out, but that it changed
direction several times is clear from Neb. iii. 19‑20,
24‑25, while iii. 26 compared with aii. 37 leaves
doubtful the location of the water gate giving toward
the east. Other gates mentioned are the middle
gate (Jer. xxxix. 3), the gate of potsherds (Jer. xix.
2), the first gate of Zech. xiv. 10 near the corner
gate, the gate of the guard (II Kings xi. 19, be
longing to Solomon's palace), and the horse gate
(Neb. iii. 28), the locations of which have not been
found. The residents continued to make provision
for water supply by hewing or constructing cisterns
in which to collect rain‑water. Neb. iii. 16 men
tions an artificial pool in the city of David, called
"the pool that was made," probably to distinguish
it from the natural pools theretofore used. It is difficult to locate all the cisterns or pools mentioned in the Old Testament. The upper pool of Isa. xxxvi. 2 seems to have been to the north or northwest of the old city, perhaps therefore the Mamilla pool west of the Gaza gate or the pool of Hezekiah; but many have distinguished the former a.9 the upper pool and the latter as the lower pool (Isa. xxii. 9). The reservoir between the two walls of Isa. xxii. 11 is to be sought in the Tyropaeon valley between the city of David and Jerusalem; the pool of Shelah of Neb. iii. 15 is identified by many with that of Siloam. The inhabitants sought in three ways to make available the waters of the Gihon spring; an approach through the rock of the hill, a channel from the foot of the hill southward in the neighborhood of the water gate, and a tunnel conducting the water into the city. The first was discovered by Charles Warren in 1867‑68; the second, in part, by Conrad von Schick in 1886 and 1890, found to be partly a covered channel, partly a tunnel; the third is the famous Siloam tunnel (in which is the Siloam inscription, q.v.), hewn not in a straight line, but first leading west from the spring, then south, and finally west again into the king's pool of Neb. ii. 14. 1f it be right to attribute this tunnel to Hezekiah, the other means of leading the water into the city belong to an earlier age, the first perhaps going back to the time of David or of the Jebusites. Signs indicate that during the Davidic dynasty numerous attempts were made to supply the city with water from a distance. To the south of Bethlehem is a group of waterworks which divide into three parts. To the west of the little village of Artas, three hours south of Jerusalem, are three great pools called the pools of Solomon, fed partly by springs in the neighborhood, partly by two canals, the one leading from the Wadi al‑Biyar emptying into the upper pool, the other from the Wadi al‑`Arrub emptying into the middle pool. The connection with Jerusalem was by two channels, an upper and a lower, of which the upper has a remarkable peculiarity. At first an ordinary canal, at the grave of Rachel it becomes a line of piping, which sinks and then rises farther on, built of atones bored into hollow cylinders fitting closely together and laid in a bed of masonry. This breaks off north of the tomb of Rachel, and from there only indistinct traces are discoverable. This must be regarded as ancient, possibly Solomonic or Davidic; the date of the lower channel is about that of Herod the Great. Besides these two conduits, traces of a third have been found.
The capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadrezzar, 587‑586 B.c., resulted in the burning of the temple, the royal palace, and the larger dwell;. From ings of the city; the encircling wall the Exile was also thrown down. The remnant to Herod. of inhabitants left by the conqueror in the city was too poor and dispirited to think of rebuilding. Gedaliah had his residence in Mizpah, which indicates the unfitness of Jerusalem as a capital. From Haggai (i. 4) is first heard the story of rebuilding in the year 519 a.c. and of the rebuilding of the temple 519‑15 s.c., though the

Jerusalem	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	134
stress of circumstances continued to be felt. In
445 B.C. Nehemiah came with full powers from
Artaxerxes L, rebuilt the wall and erected its gates
	in fifty‑two days (Neh. iii., aii. 27‑43), finishing
	with a festival. The most of the repairs had to be
	made on the north, east, and south, while mention
	is made of the house of the mighty men, the great
	tower of the upper palace, and David's palace
	(Neh. iii. 16, 25, xii. 37) as though still standing.
	The priests were masters of the temple and its
	vicinity, while some dwelt in the neighborhood of
	the old Da vidic residence (Neh. iii. 20 sqq.). From
	Neh. xi. 4‑19 it may be gathered that the popu
	lation when Nehemiah came was about 10,000, a
	small number for so large a space (Neh. vii. 4).
	But during the next two centuries the city must
	have grown greatly in spite of the damage it suf
	fered from Persians and Egyptians. In 198 B.C.
	it came into the power of the Seleucidae. It is after
	this that mention is made of a fortress inside the
	city held by a foreign force and called the Akra (or
	the acropolis). It is related in I Mace. i. 33‑37 that
	the officers of Antiochus IV. fortified the city of
	David with a strong wall, and that this became a
	menace to the sanctuary. In thus distinguishing
	the city of David from the rest of the city, and both
	of these from the temple hill, the author of Mae
	cabees follows Old‑Testament usage. The supposi
	tion that the Akra hill overlooked the temple con
	tradicts all testimony regarding the relative levels.
	The importance of David's city was gradually less
	ened by means of the temple hill. The high priest
	Simon (Ecclus. 1. 1) and later the Hasmonean Judas
	(I Mace. iv. 60) fortified the temple, and Jonathan
	renewed the protection after Antiochus Eupator
	had destroyed it. Thus Zion became a fortress in
	side the unwalled city. The encircling wall of
	the city was restored by the Hasmoneans several
	times, and they also cut off the Akra by a high
	wall to shut out the garrison from the market.
	Another work of this period was the palace of the
	Hasmoneans, west of the temple and on higher
	ground, probably on the edge of the southwest hill,
	the upper city of Josephus (Ant. XIV., i. 2). It
	came later into the possession of the Herods, and
	was occupied by Agrippa II. when he stayed in
	Jerusalem. Near it, but lower in the Tyropaeon
	valley, was the Xystos, either a great hall or an
	open place, while across on the east side of the
	valley was the council‑house of the Sanhedrin and
	near it the hall of records. Toward the end of this
	period belongs probably the description of Jerusalem
	found in the letter of Aristeas, in all likelihood
	based on Heca,taios of Abdera.
For the next period Josephus is the authority, and he distinguishes between the upper city, or the
upper market, the lower city, the tem‑
	5. From ple or the temple hill, the proasteion,
	Herod and the new city or Bezetha, but never
	to the uses the name Zion. The upper city
Destruction, lay opposite the temple and the lower
	qo A.D. city; the latter was the Akra, south
		of the temple and situated on the low
est level within the walls; the proasteion coincided
with the new city enclosed within the so‑called
second wall of the post‑Solomonic kings; the new
city of Josephus arose in the decade after Herod to the north of the temple and westward about the wall to the tower of Hippicus. Still farther, Josephns distinguishes between Bezetha, the new city, and the wood market; Bezetha lay north of the temple and Antonia and east of the street leading from the gate by the Women's Tower to Antonia. His account can not be followed without a knowledge of the earlier arrangement of the city. Through Her od's building operations the city took on something of the splendor of a Grecian city. Besides the temple he erected a stately tower, which he named Antonia in honor of the Roman triumvir, and the palace of Herod (located by its three great towers, Hippicus, Phasael, and Mariamne) which commanded the city as the Antonia commanded the temple hill. The three towers served as a protection for the city as well as for the palace (cf. for description of towers and palace Josephus, War, V., iv. 3‑4). The palace was occupied later by Archelaus and Agrippa L; when the Romans appointed a procurator over Judea, it was ceded to him and his guard. Gessius Florus and Pontius Pilate are said to have had their judgment seat in front of the structure, hence here must be sought the pretorium. In the upper city was the hippodrome, and Herod is said to have built a theater in Jerusalem and an amphitheater in the plain (the latter probably discovered in 1887 by Dr. Schick above Bir Eyyub). Finally, Herod took care for the water supply of the city. Schick has shown that the lower of the two conduits from the pools south of the city near Artas is of Herod's building. It begins immediately below the lowest of the three pools and is carried in a winding course past Bethlehem to Jerusalem as a masonry or hewn canal covered with flat stones, only twice taking the character of a tunnel. It has been repaired or improved several times‑by Pontius Pilate, again in the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries and in 1865. The third wall to the north of Jerusalem protects the " new city " of Josephus. Agrippa I. began to build it, but ceased because of the distrust of the Romans. At the outbreak of the Jewish war it was again undertaken and speedily finished. It was pierced by many gates, the names of which are unknown; one, protected by the so‑called Women's Tower, was probably where the Damascus date now is. Its course was approximately that of the present north wall. The inhabitants of Jerusalem at this time, including the guests at the Passover, are reckoned by Josephus at 2,700,000 (War, VI., ix. 3; cf. IL, xiv. 3); Schick would place the normal population at the beginning of the Christian era at from 200,000 to 250,000. In the reign of the Emperor Claudius (41‑54 A.D.), Queen Helena of
Adiabene on the upper Tivisi her spa iqj%, Ong
other members of her family became converts to Judaism and built residences for themselves in the
lower city (Josephus, War, IV., ix. 11, V., vi. 1). Agrippa I. had the streets of the city paved to give occupation to the great number of laborers left without work (Josephus, Ant., XX., ix. 7), The
Amygdalon pool mentioned in War, V., xi. 4 is doubtless the pool of Hezekiah; the name is a Greek form of the Hebrew mighdal, "tower," and the

181E	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jerusalem
pool was near the Mariamne tower of the palace. The Struthion pool of 11'ar, V., xi. 4 lay north of Antonia, but its site is not yet certainly recovered. The location of the pool of Bethesda is also uncertain; it seems to have been near the sheep gate and north of the temple. Dr. Schick has located the Bethesda of the Middle Ages to the west of the church of St. Anne north of the temple. Gethsemane lay at the foot of the Mount of Olives, certainly not far from the city, according to John xviii. 1 a garden, and the site of the betrayal of Jesus. The present garden in the possession of the Franciscans has been known since the tenth or eleventh century, but there are indications that the earlier site was farther to the north. The Herodian monument was located to the west of this, above the valley of Hinnom, and has been identified by Dr. Schick. The tomb of Queen Helena of Adiabene was about a third of a mile from the north wall of the city (Ant. XX., iv. 3); it is probably the crypt with court, portal, and numerous chambers known as the King's Tomb north of the Damascus Gate.
The city suffered greatly during the siege and gradual capture under Titus. His express command to destroy the city received willing
6. Until obedience from the embittered Roman
Constan‑ soldiery. Titus regarded only the three
tine the towers of the palace as worth preserv‑
	Great.	ing, and he spared the western part of
		the city wail, as it guarded the camp
of the garrison on the southwest hill in the upper
city. The investment of the city began at the
Passover, when there was present a vast number of
visitors, so that the count of Joaephus (War, VI.,
ix., x.) is not improbable. The place where the
faith of the Jews had received so severe a blow was
naturally avoided by them and Jabne (Jamnia)
became the center of Jewish life in Palestine. The
young Christian community, which before the in
vestment by Titus withdrew to Pella, east of the
Jordan, had as headquarters the house of John Mark
and his mother Mary (Acts xii. 12‑17 ). Probably
there was the great upper chamber (Mark xiv. 15)
in which Jesus celebrated the last supper and also
the chamber mentioned in Acts i.13 and ii. Although
the site of this place is pointed out by a tradition
reaching to the fourth century, there is no doubt
concerning its correctness. Epiphanius of Salamis
(392 A.D.) reports (De mensuris, xiv.) that when
Hadrian made his visit to Jerusalem in 130‑131
he found city and temple destroyed except for a
few dwellings and the little Christian church on
what was then called Mount Zion. Since the time
of Cyril of Jerusalem this church, or another built
on its site, has been well known; it corresponds to
the present Nebi Da'ud on the southwest hill south
of the wall and above the tombs of the Davidic
dynasty. The name Zion was probably attached
to the church through an extension of usage out of
the Old Testament, since the name is not found
used of a part of the city by Josephus. According
to this usage the place of assemblage of the early
Christian community came to be called "the holy
Zion "; out of this grew the identification of the
southwest hill as Mount Zion, and so the topo‑
graphic signification of the term was lost. Hadrian made an end of the desolation of the city and commanded that it be rebuilt as a Roman colony; during the rising of Bar Kokba it was for a few years a free city, after that again a Roman colony, but without the jus Italicum, and was called Elis Capitolina, shortened in common speech to Elia, in the Arabic to Iliya, till the late Middle Ages. The city deity was Jupiter Capitolinus, whose temple was on the site of the Jewish temple. Jews were excluded from the new city under pain of death.
'i	The area was diminished, and the old city of David was outside the city limits. In this period were fixed the form and topography of the city which have survived till the present.
The heathen character of the city did not prevent Christians from visiting or settling there; pilgrimages began in the third century and
y. From were numerous in the fourth. Helena,
Constan‑	the mother of Constantine, came there
tine to the in 326‑327 and had churches built on
	Capture	the sites of the birth and ascension of
	by the	Christ, in Bethlehem, and on the Mount
	Arabs.	of Olives (for Constantine's building
		see HOLY SEPULCHER). Constantine
relaxed the harsh laws against the Jews, Julian gave
them permission to restore their temple, but after
Julian the earlier prohibitions against the Jews seem
to have been renewed. In the second half of the
fourth century eremites and monks from Egypt
and Syria began to crowd into Palestine, in the
'fifth and sixth centuries causing bloody feuds
through dogmatic strife. The first monastery in
Jerusalem seems to have been built in the fifth
century. The coming of the Empress Eudocia,
consort of Theodosius IL, in 438 had great conse
quences for the city. To her is‑ascribed the renewal
of the old wall to the south, and various sacred
sites were joined to the city. She built the Church
of St. Stephen (possibly included in the present
possessions of the Dominicans). The Emperor
Justinian had the architect Georgics of Conatan
tinople erect a great basilica (that of the Theotokos)
in connection with a pilgrims' house and a hospital
in the middle of the city, perhaps south of the
Church of the Holy Sepulcher. The capture of the
city by the Persians under Choaroes II. (614) re
sulted in the destruction of most of the ecclesiastical
structures, in the restoration of which the abbot
Modestus showed great zeal, though when the
Emperor Heraclius marched in (638), much of the
city was in ruins. In 638 the Caliph Omar took
Jerusalem.
The stipulations of the surrender to the effect that civic and ecclesiastical protection should be given and that the churches were not
8. Under to be used as dwellings were observed
the Arabs with comparative good faith. The to the Arabs named the city Bait al‑Mulcaddaa
	Crusades.	or al‑M4kd is, " Place of the Sanctuary,"
		shortened to nt^Kuds, but made Lydda
their first military capital in Palestine. Onlyoo
casionally had the pilgrims cause to complain of
hard usage, the relations between the East and the
West being good under the friendship of Charle.
magne and Harun al‑Raschid. In the tenth can‑

dsrasalem
Jezasalem, Bishopric is
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
tury began the strife between Islam and Christianity, furthered by the bad faith of the Egyptian Fatimidea, who disregarded all treaties; the pilgrims were compelled to pay a fee for entrance into the city, and the Caliph al‑Hakim in 1010 began a severe persecution of the Christians. Merchants from Amalfi, however, gained a footing in Jerusalem with permission to trade, and soon had a church (Sancta Maria Latina) and a monastery (Monsaterium de Latina) to the south of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.
When Godfrey of Bouillon captured the city, July 15, 1099, only two churches were found unin
jured, that of the Holy Sepulcher and
g. Doting that of the Italian merchants, for the
	the	latter of which tribute was paid. Dur
Crueades. ing the continuance of the kingdom of
	Jerusalem great zeal was displayed in
building. The principal gates of thin period were
David's gate (Jaffa gate), Stephen's (Damascus),
Jehoahsphat's, and Zion gate in the south. Near
David's gate was David's tower (the present cita
del, often repaired from the ruins of Herod's palace),
hence the later location of the "city of David."
Extensive building operations went on within the
grounds of the Amalfi merchants; the Benedic
tines built a hospital in honor of Johannes Elee
mon (q.v.) in connection with which a community
dressed in black robes with a white cross came into
being‑the beginning of the Knights of St. John.
The Hoepitalera under the patronage of John the
Baptist took over the woman's guest‑house. Since
the Latina located the pretorium north of the Zion
Church, later northwest of the temple square, the
direction of the Via Dolorosa was placed accordingly.
The pool of Bethesda (John v. 2) was placed by
them near the Church of St. Anna, discovered in
1888 northwest of . this site; later it was located
north of the Haram al‑Sharif. The Church of St.
Anne was known as early as the seventh century,
was repaired by the Franks, and later was con
nected with a nunnery. The hills to the west sad
south of the Hinnom valley were called Gihon. In
the valley of Jehoahaphat the Franks repaired the
tomb of the Virgin Mary and its church; while on
the third peak of Olivet stood, about 1130, a great
Church of the Ascension, where Constantine had I
built a sanctuary, 	i
Jerusalem opened its gates to the victorious Saladin Oct. 2, 1187. Moat of the Latin Christians
departed; the Greeks remained. The
:o. From Christian and Occidental character a87 to the which the city had assumed during
Present the crusades soon changed as Christian
churches and cloisters became mosques or Mohammedan schools. Sahldin had the walls renewed when Richard the Lion‑hearted threatened s siege in 1191‑92, but the Sultan Malik al‑Muazzam of Damascus ordered them destroyed that they might not become a protection to the Christians (1219‑20). A treaty between the German Frederick II. and the Egyptian Sultan al‑Kamil secured the city for the Christians (except the Harem al‑Sharif) for about ten years and a half from Feb. 1, 1229, after which Nasir Daud, prince of Kerak, took the city and destroyed the walls. The Egyptian Sultan
Eyyub took it in 1244, in 1517 it fell under the power of the Turks under Selim L, and his successor Solyman in 1542 gave to the walls of the pity their present form. Syria was in the possession of Mehemet Ali of Egypt 18310. In 1219 the Franciscans gained a footing in the city, in the thirteenth century held firmans under the Egyptian sultans, in 1333 came into possession of the Zion Church and perhaps of other sacred plates, some of which they had to yield to Solyman in 1523 and 1551; their present location, northwest of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, was obtained in 1559. Since the conquest of Jerusalem by the Turks the Christian powers, with France in the lead, have protected the Roman Catholic Christians in Palestine, Russia has cared for the Greek Christians. A revolution in the situation at Jerusalem was brought about by the English (1826) and American (1821) missionaries; an English consulate was established there in 1839, a Prussian in 1842. England and Prussia had the Evangelical bishopric of St. James created (see J>xRU6ALEM, ANGLICAN‑GERMAN BIaHOPRIC IN). Other Christian powers thus had their attention drawn to the situation. The Greek patriarch Cyril transferred his seat from Constantinople to Jerusalem in 1845, and Rome reestablished the Latin patriarchate is 1847. Pilgrim‑houses, hospitals, churches, schools and monasteries have been erected, and these mark the character of the peaceful crusade of the nineteenth century, with the result that Jerusalem is no more an Oriental city. Of its 60,000 inhabitants, 41,000 are Jews, 12,800 are Christians, 7,000 are Mohammedans. Of the Christians, 6,000 are Greeks, 4,000 Latins, 1,400 Protestants, 800 Armenians, 200 Uniate Greeks, 150 Copts, 100 Abyssinians, 100 Syrians, and 50 Uniate Armenians. The Jews are poverty‑stricken and do not exert an influence corresponding to their numbers. (H. GUTHE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lists of literature are the Bibliot>uca peographics Paleatinae, by R. RShricht, Berlin, 1890, and by T. Tobler, Leipeic, 1887. Indispensable for following recent investigations are the Quarterly Statements of the PEF, also the files of ZDPV, the Mitteilungen and Nachricbten of the Deutxher Paliistina‑Verein, the files of ZDMO, Recueil d'archEoloAie orientate, and JBL. Valuable as summarise are the articles in DB, ii. 584‑801; EB, ii. 2407‑2432; JF., vii. 118‑157; DCG, i. 849‑859.
For excavations and topographical details consult: C. Warren, C. R. Conder, Survey of Western Palestine, Jsl'uaalem, London, 1884: E. G. 9chulfa, Jentaalent, Berlin, 1845; W. Krafft, Din Topopraphis Jerusalem, Bonn, 1848; T. Tobler, Die Siloaltquelle and der Oei6erp, 9t. Gall, 1852; idem, Zuni Bficher Topopraphis von Jerusalem ib. 1853‑b4; E. Pierotti Jerusalem Explored, 2 vola., London, 1884; C. J. M. de Vogffd, Le Temple de Jerwalem, Paris, 1884• C. W. Wilson Ordnance Survey of Jerusalem, 2 vole., Southampton, 1887‑70; C. Wilson and C. Warren, Reeovsry of Jerusalem London, 1871; P. Wolff, Jerusalem, Leipaic, 1872; C. Warren, Underground Jerusalem, London, 1878; 13. Guthe, Ausrabungen bei Jerusalem, Leipeie, 1883; C. Wilson, Jerusalem the Holy City. London, 1888; F. J. Bliss, Excavations at Jerusalem, 1894‑87, London, 1898: C. Mommert, Topographic du atlas Jerusalem, ! vole., Leipaic. 1902‑OS• 8. Merrill, Ancient Jerusalem, New York 1908; G. A. Smith, The Topography, ,Economics and History of Jerusalem to 70 A.D., 2 vole., London, 1908; Robinson, Researches, and Later Researches. On the question of the Akra consult C. E. Ceapsr4 in TSY, 1884, pp, 309‑328; G. Gatt, in TQ, lnri (1884). 34‑84 lza (1$89). 77‑125; idem, Die Hagel van Jerusalem, Freiburg, 1897.
For descriptions of the city consult: J. F. T6rupp. Ancient Jerusalem, London 1855; A. B: MseGrigor, Index of Passages . . .' upon do Topography of Jerusalem. Glsr

gow, 1878; C. Zimmermann, Karten and Pldns our Topographic des aiten Jerusalem, Basal, 1878; G. Williams, The Holy City, 2 vole., London, 1849; C. Bitter, Comparative Geography of Palestine, iv. 1‑212, Edinburgh, 1888; W. M. Thomson, The Land and the Book, vol. i., New York, 1880: F. Spices, Dos Jerusalem des Joaephue, Berlin. 1881; H. Nicole, Plan topopraphique de Jerusalem et sea environs, Par* 1888‑87; J. H. Lewis, The Holy Places of Jerusalem, London, 1888; G. R. Lees, Jerusalem Illustrated, ib. 1894; G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, passim, ib. 1897; F. Diekamp, Hippolytus von Thebsn, pp. 98 eqq., Miineter, 1898; W. Sanday, Sacred Sites of the Gospels, Oxford, 1903; Mien A. Goodrich Freer, Inner Jerusalem London, 1904 (an excellent description of the present city); Baedeker's Handbook on Syria and Palestine, 8th Germ, ed„ Leipeio, 1904, 4th Eng. ed., 1908. Pictorial productions are G. Ebera and H. Guthe, Paldetina in Bild and Wont, vol, i., Stuttgart, 1883; HartmannBensinger, Paltletina, Hamburg, 1889; and the views published by the PEF.
On the history of the city in the Biblical period consult: L. B. Paton, Jerusalem in Bible Times, Chicago, 1908; E. Bevan, Jerusalem under the High Priests, London, 1904; and the works on the history of Israel cited under Aaen. For later periods consult: C. J. M. de VogitE, Les Afpliau do la terre saints, Paris, 1880; T. Levin, Siege of Jerusalem by Titus, London, 1883; V. Gudrin, La Torre saints, 2 parts, Paris, 1884; J. Guy Is Strange, Palestine under the Moslems. London, 1890; G. Dodu, Hist. des institutions monarehiquea daps k royaume Ja6in de Jerusalem, Paris, 1894; Jerusalem et su principaux aanctuairu, ib. 1895; C. A. Couret, La Prise do Jerusalem ... en 614; trois documents, ib. 1898; C. R. Conder, The Latin Kingdom q1 Jerusalem, 108L‑1881, London, 1897; $. Lane Poole, 3aladin and the Fail of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, New York, 1898; R. R&hrieht, GueAicAte des R6nigreicha Jerusalem, Berlin, 1898; W. Secant sad E. H. Palmer, Jerusalem, the City of Herod and Sa7adin, London, 1899; A. Aahleitner, Jerusalem, Mains, 1905; W. $. Cnldecott, The Second Temple in Jerusalem, London, 1908; and the publications of the Palestine Pilgrim Text Society.
Maps of value are the Plan of Jerusalem prepared by the PEF, and Karte der Matsrialsn sw Topographic des Allen Jerusalem, accompanied by MateriaLsn sur Topographic des Allen Jerusalem both by A. KOmmel, Halls, 1904‑08.
JERUSALEM, ANGLICAN‑GERMAN BISHOPRIC IN: An episcopal see founded in Jerusalem in the nineteenth century by joint agreement of the Anglican and the German Lutheran churches. As a result of more than one missionary effort in the Holy Land in the earlier years of the century, and of the expedition sent thither in 1840 by the so‑called Quadruple Alliance, Frederick William IV, of Prussia thought the occasion favorable for establishing a firm position for Evangelical Christians in that country. The Armenian, Greek, and Latin churches had long possessed the advantage of permanent corporations under treaty sanction, the two latter having also powerful protectors, while Protestants had no regular standing. The king therefore sent Bunsen on a special mission to Queen Victoria to lay before the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of London, who welcomed the proposal, a plan for the joint erection of a Protestant bishopric under the protection of England and Prussia. The endowment of the see was fixed at £30,000 in order to secure an annual income of £1,200 for the bishop, who was to be appointed by Prussia and England alternately; the archbishop of Canterbury, however, had a veto on the Prussian nomination; in other particulars the organization of the see was practically that of an Anglican bishopric, and its holder was at first subject to the metropolitan authority of Canterbury. His jurisdiction, which extended provisionally beyond Palestine over the
RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
Jeraulsm
Jsrnralem, Bishopric In
Protestants of all Syria, Chaldes, Egypt, and Abyssinia, was to be exercised according to the canons and usages of the Church of England. An act of Parliament (Oct. b, 1841) authorized the consecration of a bishop for a foreign country who need not be a subject of the British crown nor take the oath of allegiance, while, on the other hand, the clergy ordained by him would have no right to officiate in England or Ireland. It was agreed by both parties that the bishop should protect and aid German communities, among whom the cure of souls should be provided for by German clergy, ordained according to the English rite after examination and subscription of the three ecumenical creeds; that the liturgy was to be compiled from those received in the Lutheran church of Prussia and authorized by the archbishop of Canterbury; that confirmation was to be administered to the Germans by the bishop after the English form. These far‑reaching concessions aroused great dissatisfaction among the German Lutherans, and the project was unfavorably received by the High Church party is England on opposite grounds. The first bishop appointed under the agreement was a Jewish convert, Michael Solomon Alexander (b. at SchtTnlanke, 50 m. n.n.w. of Posen, 1799; became a rabbi, and while serving at Plymouth was converted, 1825. He entered the ministry of the Church of England, became a missionary of the London Society for the Conversion of the Jews, and professor of Hebrew and rabbinical literature at King's College, London). He took up his residence in Jerusalem at the beginning of 1842, and died in the desert near Cairo Nov. 23, 1845. He was succeeded by Samuel Gobat (q.v.), a native of Cr6mine in the Berneae Alps, and a former missionary in Abyssinia. In his time it became evident that the joint bishopric could not endure. The German community showed a notable increase, numbering 200 members in 1875, and important charitable works were connected with it; a provisional chapel for their worship was erected in 1871, to be replaced by the larger church dedicated in the presence of the German emperor on Oct. 31, 1898. Meantime the relations between the German and English congregations had become more and more merely nominal. Bishop Gobat was succeeded in 1879 by an Englishman, Joseph Barclay (q.v.), who died two years later, and the next nomination came to Germany. The final separation was brought about by the insistence of the English Church that the bishop should subscribe the Thirty‑nine Articles and be consecrated according to the English rite. Germany objected to this, and the agreement was finally abolished by the emperor on Nov. 3, 1888, [since which time the bishopric has been maintained by the English Church alone. The present incumbent, George Francis Popham Blyth (q.v.), was consecrated Mar. 25, 1887. His title is "Bishop of the Church of England in Jerusalem and the East," and his jurisdiction includes the English congregations in Egypt, the regions about the Red Sea, Palestine, Syria Asia Minor (except portions attached to Gibraltar), sad the Island of Cyprus].
(PHILIPP MEYER.)
BrartoasePar: Consult the literature under Goasm, SAMUEL; W. H. Heckler, The Jerusalem Bishopric. London, 1883;

Jerusalem Chamber	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Jerusalem, Synod of		138
H. Smith The Protestant Bishopric in Jerusalem, ib. 1846;
A. MeCaul, Jerusalem its Bishop, its Missionaries, ib. 1886; A. Riley, Progress and Prospects of the Archbishop of Canterbury's Mission to the Assyrian Christians, ib. 1889; Der Herr haul Jerusalem. Eine DenkachriJt fiber dae Werk der evanpeliachen Kirchen in Jerusalem, Berlin, 1895.

JERUSALEM CHAMBER: A large hall in the deanery of Westminster, London, adjacent to the abbey. The origin of the name is obscure; possibly it is derived from the tapestries with which it is hung, representing in part scenes from Jerusalem or vicinity, including the adoration of the magi, the circumcision, and also the wanderings in the wilderness. The hall was built by Abbot Littlington between 1376 and 1386, and served as the guest‑room or parlor of the abbot. In it Henry IV. died (Mar. 20, 1413) when about to set out on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and the prophecy that he was to die in Jerusalem was supposed thus to be fulfilled (cf. Shakespeare, Henry IV., part IL, act iv., scene 4). It became the meeting‑place of the Westminster Assembly (q.v.) when cold weather came on in September, 1643, the hall being heated from its huge fireplace. There Addison (1719) and Congreve (1728) lay in state previous to burial in the abbey. It was the place of session of the company of revisers of the New Testament, and from it the Revised Version of the New Testament is dated: " Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster Abbey, 11th November, 1880." The revisers of the Old Testament also met there when the New‑Testament company was not in session. It is the place of meeting of the lower house of convocation of the province of Canterbury.
BIBLIOa&APBY: A. P. Stanley, Memorials of Westminster Abbey, reissued in Everyman'a Library, 1906; W. J. Loftie, Westminster Abbey, London, 1889.
	JERUSALEM, PATRIARCHATE OF: A see of
the Eastern Church (q.v.), supposed to have been
			founded by James, the brother of the
		Early	Lord. Though Jerusalem has remained
	Bishops.	for Christianity the "holy city," it
			has never occupied an authoritative
position.	Nevertheless it produced some note‑
worthy men, and several synods of importance
have been held there. During the crusades it
was the center of interest as the object, not
as the subject, of action. The patriarchate, that
was established there in 451, could never be com
pared to other patriarchates, not even to that of
Antioch. The city lost its importance after its
capture by Titus and especially after Hadrian had
made it, in 136, the Xlicx Capitolina in which Jews
were no longer tolerated, but the old name of the
city never entirely vanished, although it was offi
cially recognized again only in the fourth century.
Eusebius states that until the time of Hadrian there
were only Jewish Christian bishops in Jerusalem,
and afterward only Christians converted from pa
ganism. The list of bishops until c. 300 is contained
in the church history of Eusebius and in his Chror
icon, also in Epiphanius, but it is not wholly trust
worthy. Among the Christian bishops of Jerusalem
before Juvenal, under whom the patriarchate was
founded, may be mentioned especially Narcissus,
Alexander, Maca,rius, Maximus, a supporter of Ath‑
anasius, Cyril (q.v.), and John (see OaloErfrsxrc CONTROVERSIES). The Council of Nicxs decreed that according to ancient usage the bishop of 1Elia should be honored, but the first rank should be given to the bishop of the " metropolis," by which undoubtedly Caesarea was understood. The relation of Jerusalem to Caesarea was naturally disturbed from that time. Ambitious and energetic bishops such as Maximus and especially Cyril did not recognize the bishop of Caesarea as metropolitan. Cyril was opposed successfully by Acacias of Caesarea, a not less vigorous personality. But Juvenal especially won for Jerusalem an important position. At the Council of Nicaea, however, the questions as to the rank of the bishops were still comparatively simple and only slightly developed from a legal standpoint. Only under the political organization of the empire undertaken by Diocletian did the church constitution provide rigidly circumscribed eparchies and dioceses, and only then did the capital of the political eparchy or metropolis have also ecclesiastical precedence. Jerusalem, however, obtained no political supremacy. Even when Palestine was divided into several distinct provinces by Valens, and afterward, it did not become a metropolis. In Palestine Prima, to which it belonged, Caesarea remained the chief seat of the episcopacy, in Palestine Secunda it was Scythopolis, in Palestine Tertia Petra. Jerusalem was only fourth in rank.
Juvenal (q.v.) induced Emperor Theodosius II. to make him patriarch, and at the council of Chalce‑
don succeeded in obtaining the three During the Palestines as patriarchate. At the fifth Crusades. ecumenical council of Constantinople
in 553, it was ordered definitely that Jerusalem should possess the fifth see in the church. There are only a few prominent names in the long series of patriarchs. The history of the patriarchate is intimately connected with the vicissitudes of political history. In 637 the :Mohammedans under Caliph Omar conquered Jerusalem, Patriarch Sophronius mediating the surrender on conditions regarding the toleration of Christian faith. Nevertheless there followed a time of great oppression, no patriarch being elected for more than sixty years (644‑705), but even after the restoration of the patriarchate the church was almost always in a destitute condition. The crusades (conquest of Jerusalem 1099) caused a new interruption of the succession of patriarchs. The first patriarch elected after this period (in 11427) resided at first in Constantinople; only after Saladin in 1187 had taken Jerusalem from the Franks did the patriarchs return
to Palestine, although not immediately to the holy
city. The chief importance of Palestine, especially of the neighborhood of Jerusalem, from early times lay in the fact that it had become the country of monks and hermits. In the sixth century Palestine took the leadership in Greek monasticism; through men like Euthymios (d. 473), Sabas (d. 532), and especially Theodosius (d. 529), Palestine became a shining example for the whole East, but after the
tenth century its importance began tQ decrease.
In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries Jerusalem became so desolate that the patriarchs, owing

189	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jerusalem Chamber
Jerusalem, Synod of
to the failure of their revenues, traveled to collect funds. Tamerlane conquered Syria in 1400, and afterward Palestine was ruled by the Mamelukes
from Egypt. In 1517 the Ottoman
In Middle sultan conquered Syria, and conseAges and quently the patriarchate of Jerusalem Modern became dependent upon the ecumenTimes. ical patriarchate in Constantinople. While in the time of the Arabs only natives of Palestine were patriarchs, now Greeks stepped into the foreground. Many patriarchs of the city fixed their residence at Constantinople; only since 1845 have the patriarchs permanently resided there. At the time of the foundation of the patriarchate the three Palestines comprised not less than fifty‑nine bishoprics, at present there are only a few. There is still a metropolitan of Cxsarea, but in 1880 he ruled Haifa only, a place of a thousand inhabitants. Beside the metropolitan of Ca;sarea there is still a metropolitan of Scythopolis and Petra, also one of Ptolemais, Bethlehem and Nazareth; beside them, six archbishops and one bishop. According to Baedeker (Palestine and Syria, pp, lix.‑lxii., 4th ed., Leipsic, 1906), Syria and Palestine with 3,526,160 inhabitants has 978,068 Christians. The mutessarifat of Jerusalem is estimated to have 341,638 inhabitants (p. Ix.), while the number of Christians in Jerusalem amounts to about 13,000 among 60,000 inhabitants (p. 24). There are 6,000 members of the orthodox Greek church in Jerusalem.
After the conquest of Jerusalem in 1099 Godfrey of Bouillon as king of the city established a Latin
patriarchate which assumed the whole Latin organization of the Palestinian church. Patriarchate The orthodox patriarchate was ignored.
	and Other	There were Latin patriarchs until 1291,
	Bishoprics.	nominally even until 1374. They re
		sided in Ptolemais (Acton) until 1291,
then in Cyprus. In 1847 Picas IX. named J. Valerga
as patriarch (d. 1872), and at present there are in
Jerusalem 4,000 Latin Catholics, besides several
hundred " United " Catholics of different rites.
There are also the patriarchates of the Melch
itea (united Greeks) and that of the Armenians.
The Gregorian Armenians possess a patriarch
ate of Jerusalem, organized in the seventeenth
century.
The Jacobites have a bishop and a small church
in Jerusalem, and the Abyssinians also have a
church. 	(F. Knxx>;lvsuscx.)
BIBLIOGa.,PHY: The fundamental work is in Greek by Doaitheua, a patriarch of Jerusalem (d. 1707), " On the Patriarchs in Jerusalem," ed. by his successor Chrysanthos, Bucharest, 1715. Consult further: M. Le Quien, Oriena Chriatianua iii. 101 sqq., Paris, 1740 (important);‑ H. Guthe, in ZDPV, xii (1899), Sl aqq.; O. Werner, Orbia terrarum Catholicus, chap. xvii.. Freiburg, 1890; Schlatter, in Beitr6ge zur Forderung chriatlicher Theologie, ii. 3 (1898); E. Hempel, Unterauchungen caber daa lateiniache Patriarchal von Jerusalem, Erlangen, 1899; Vai1hB, in Revue de l'orient, 1899, pp. 44 aqq., 512 aqq., 1900~ pp. 19 sqq.; A. Zagarelli, in 7.DPV, xii (1899), 35 sqq.; T. Zahn, Forachungen zur Geachichte dea Kanons, vi. 281 aqq., Leipsic, 1900.

JERUSALEM, SYNOD OF, i67a: By far the moat important of all the synods held in Jerusalem after the meeting of the apostles (Acts xv.; see AFO6TOLIC COUNCIL). From the time of Cyril Lucar
(q.v.), the Eastern Church had lain under the suspicion of Calvinistic tendencies, and not altogether without cause. But Cyril's violent death sealed the fate of the movement he had led. His successor, Cyril of Berrhoe, condemned his teaching at a synod in Constantinople in 1638, and so did his successor, Parthenius, four years later, in a synod at Jassy. Peter Mogilas, the Russian metropolitan of Kiev, put together a confession of faith in 1843, for which he obtained the sanction of Partheniua and of the patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Moscow. Meantime the Roman Catholic and the Protestant parties in the West were trying to support their respective aides by adducing Eastern testimony, not always, if the Greeks are to be believed, quite accurately. Thus the French Calvinist preacher, Jean Claude, in his controversy on the Eucharist with Nicole and Arnauld, appealed to the older Eastern writers, whose teaching seemed to have been revived by Cyril and his adherents; the Jansenists, supported by the French court, to the orthodox profession of the Greeks. Nectarius (q.v.), patriarch of Jerusalem, published a book against Claude; and his successor Dositheus (q.v.) considered it necessary to take still more formal action, not without pressure from the French ambassador, Olivier de Nointel, who influenced him to call a synod at Jerusalem to refute these accusations of Calvinism. This synod was attended by most of the prominent representatives of the Eastern Church, including six metropolitans besides Dositheus and his retired predecessor, and its decrees received so universal a sanction as to make them more truly an expression of the faith of the Greek Church than any later synod could claim for its own. Its occasion is seen in the fact that the first part of its discussions is directed to the refutation of the " shameless " attempts of the Calvinists to support their teaching by Eastern authority. This part contains the acts of the councils of Conatantinople and Jassy, and reviews the recent history with the purpose of showing the freedom of the patriarchate from error, while at the same time anathematizing the heretical writings and propositions which bore the name of a patriarch. The second part contains the declaration of orthodox faith which Dositheus, in the name of the assembled Fathers, set forth in opposition to the rejected tenets of Cyril. It follows them point by point, adhering as far as possible to their structure, but changing their substance into an orthodox content. It contains eighteen decreta and four quaestiones. The former deal with the Trinity; Holy Scripture and
I it exposition by the Church; predestination; the
	S
origin of evil, and the relation to it of divine providence; original sin; the incarnation; the median torial office of Christ and the saints; faith working by love; the Church, its episcopate, its membership, its infallibility; justification by faith and works; the capability of natural and regenerate man; the seven sacraments; infant baptism; the Eucharist; and the condition of the soul after death. The questions cover the canon of Scripture, whether it can be understood by all, the matter of images, and the cultus of the saints. Taken as a whole, the " Shield of Orthodoxy," as the entire pronounce.

Jsrnrslem "suits
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
ment was entitled, is one of the mgt important expressions of the faith of the Eastern Church.
(Rtrnorir HoFzaAxx.)
Bxatxoonsrrit: A good edition of the Acts is in Harduin, Concilia, xd. 179‑272, and a critical edition in E. J. Kimmel: Monuments Jldei eccZeeise occidentalie, Jens, 1850; they are in English in The Ads and Decreae , , , transt, from the Greek . . containing the Confession . of Cyril Lukar, with Notes by J. N. W. B. Robertson, London, 1899. Consult: W. Gale, Bymbotik der prtechiselMn Ruche, pp. 79 aqq, Berlin, 1872; F. Ifattenbuach, Verpleichende KonJessionakunde, p, 145, Freiburg. 1890; KL, vi. 13691380.

JERUSALEM, y6‑rfl'ztt‑lem, JOHANN FRIEDRICH WILHELM: Apologist and theologian; b. at Oanabriick, Hanover, Nov. 22, 1709; d. at Wolfenbiittel (7 m. s. of Brunswick) Sept. 2, 1789. He began the study of theology at Leipsic in 1727, continued his studies in Leyden, and for a time preached in the German church of that city. He was appointed court preacher to Duke Charles of Brunswick in Wolfenbiittel and tutor of his son (1742); in the following year he became provost of the monasteries of the Holy Cross and St. lEgidius, in 1749 abbot of Marienthal, in 1752 abbot of Riddagehausen, and in 1771 vice‑president of the consistory of Wolfenbiittel. He founded the Karolinum, an institution of learning in Brunswick, and organized the system of the poor laws. His moat important work is Betrachtungen abet die vortaehmr aten Wahrheiten der Religion (2 vols., Brunswick, 1768‑?9), which was translated into many languages and was still used in the beginning of the nineteenth century as a work on apologetics. Jerusalem took also a significant rank as preacher; two collections of his sermons appeared in Brunswick, 1741r53. His son, Karl Wilhelm Jerusalem, was the friend of (loethe who committed suicide at Wetzlar in 1772 and gave occasion for Die Leiden des jungen Werth(A. HAUC%.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: An autobiography was printed in his Nachgelmesene $ehriJten Brunswick, 1793. Consult J. M. li. Dtinng, Die dsutachm Kanselrednsr den 18. and 18. JaArhundsrts, Neustadt, 1830; ADB, sill. 779; KL, vi, 13851388.
JESSOPP, jes'ep, AUGUSTUS: Church of England; b. at Cheshunt (13 m. n. of London), Herts, Dec. 20, 1824. He was educated at St. John's College, Cambridge (B.A., 1848), and was ordered deacon in 1848 and ordained priest in 1850. He was curate of Papworth St. Agnes, Cambridgeshire, in 1848‑55, master of Helaton Grammar School, Cornwall, in 1855‑59, headmaster of King Edward VL's School, Norwich, in 1859‑79, and has been rector of Scarning, Norfolk, since 1879. He has been honorary canon of Norwich, as well as honorary fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, and of Worcester College, Oxford, since 1895, and chaplain in ordinary to the king since 1902. He was select preacher at Oxford in 1896, and has written or edited Donnes Essays in Divinity (London, 1855); Norwich School Sermons (1864); Dissertations on the Fragments of Primitive Liturgies and Confessions of Faith contained in the Writings of the New Testament (1871); Letters of F. Henry Walpole, from the Original Manor xripta at Stonyhurat College (Norwich, 1873); One Generation of a Norfolk House: A Contribution to
140
Elizabethan History (London, 1876); History of the Diocese of Norwich (1884); Autobiography of Roger North (1887); Arcady for Better for Worse (1887); The Coming of the Friars, and Other Historical Essays (1888); The Trials of a Country Parson (1890); Studies of a Recluse (1892); Random Roaming (1893); Simon Ryan the Peterite (1896); Frtvola (1896); The Life and Miracles of St. William of Norwich, by Thomas of Monmouth (in collaboration with M. R. James, Cambridge, 1896); John Donne, Sometime Dean of St. Paula (1897); Before the Great Pillage (1901); and William Cecil, Lord Burghley (1904).

JESSUP, jea'vp, HENRY HARRIS: Presbyterian; b. at Montrose, Pa., Apr. 19, 1832. He was graduated at Yale in 1851 and Union Theological Seminary in 1855. In the latter year he went to Tripoli, Syria, under the auspices of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, remaining there until 1860, when he went to Beirut, where he has since remained. Since 1870 he has worked under the auspices of the Presbyterian Board of Foreign Missions, and has been professor of church history, theology, and homiletics in the Syrian Theological Seminary, Beirut. He was a member of the TurcoAmerican commission on indemnities after the massacres of Oct., 1860‑July, 1861. In theology he is Calvinistic according to the Revised Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian Church, and has written Women of the Arabs (New York, 1874); Syrian Home Life (18?4); The Mohammedan Missionary Problem (Philadelphia, 1880); and The Life of Kamil (1894). He has in preparation A History of the Syria Mission (2 vole.).
JESUATE, jez'yu‑6t: A religious order, originally called Cler£ciapostolici, Sancti Hieronymi, founded at Sienna about 1360 by Giovanni Colombini, a wealthy merchant and senator. After living with his wife in continence for some time, he separated entirely from her and placed her in a convent, with his daughters, giving them a portion of his property. The rest he bestowed on the religious and poor and, with his friend Francesco Miani, lived in poverty, caring for the sick and preaching. Expelled from Sienna, he continued his work in Arezzo and elsewhere. In 1367, when Urban V. returned from Avignon to Rome, he was besought by Colombini and his followers to permit them to found an order and to assign them a habit; but this was refused for some months because of a suspicion that the Jesuates were connected with the heretical Fraticelli. This Colombini was able to disprove, and the order was confirmed. After the founder's death (July 31, 1367), Francesco Miani assumed control. The Jesuates devoted themselves chiefly to the care of the sick and to works 'of mercy, and consisted of lay brothers with minor vows. Their rule was originally a mixture of Benedictine and Franciscan elements, but later was changed to a somewhat modified Augustinian rule. In 1668 the order, which had already been reformed by Paul V. in 1606, became so worldly that it was suppressed by Clement IX. The female branch of the order, founded at Sienna by Caterina Colombini (d. 1387),

141	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
a kinswoman of Giovanni Colombini, preserved the original vigor of its rule, and consequently survived the male Jeauatea fully two centuries.
	(O. GtSCKLE$t.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Vita J. Columbini, in ASA July, viii. 354‑
I. Organisation and Discipline of the Society. Qualifications of Candidates (§ 1). Analysis of the Constitutions (12). " On the Virtue of Obedience " (¢ 3). Rules and Other Manuals (5 4). II. History of the Society.
JESUITS.
Privileges and Eaemptione (4 1).
Early Achievements in Italy, Portugal, and France (¢ 2).
In Germany and Austria (¢ 3).
In Belgium, Holland, and England (¢ 4).
Mission Work in America ($ b).
Unethical Teachings and Practises (¢ 8).
The Jesuits (.Societal Jean, " Company of Jesus ") is " the most wide‑spread of all the religious orders founded in modern times." For an account of the founding of the order see IONATIUB Oh LoroLA.
I. Organization and Discipline of the Society: The Coastitutiones Societatis Jesx cum earum dec‑
larationibxis, having been approved by :. Qualifi‑ Paul III., Julius III., and Paul IV., cations of and commended after careful eaamiCandidates. nation by the Council of Trent, was
again emphatically approved and confirmed by Gregory XIII. (Feb., 1582) and printed in Rome in 1583. The text is accompanied by marginal declarations or explanatory notes printed in italics, with a full alphabetical index. The end of the society is declared to be the salvation and perfection of the souls of its members as well as of men in general. The ordinary vows of obedience, poverty, and chastity are required of all members, and that of poverty is explained so as to exclude absolutely not only individual but collective possessions. Receiving compensation for masses, sermons, lectures, or any sort of religious service, even in the form of alma, is absolutely prohibited (Examen, i. 3). An exception is made in the case of colleges and houses of probation with their buildings and revenues. Scholars take the three ordinary vows of poverty, obedience and celibacy and promise to enter the higher ranks of service if the glory of God should require it. Coadjutors or helpers, whether in spiritual or in temporal things, take only the same. Their promotion to the ranks of the Professed depends on their faithfulness and efficiency in the things committed to them. The Professed, or members of the inner circle, who possess the secrets of the order, and from whom the officers are chosen, take in addition to these vows a special vow to the pope, that they will journey without parleying and without asking for traveling expenses, whithersoever he may order, whether among believers or unbelievers. A fourth class is made up of those whose position in the order has not yet been determined, but who are in readiness to enter either grade that the superior may direct. A period of probation (novitiate) usually lasting for two years, in which the candidate is trained in obedience and thoroughly tested as regards aptitude, mental, physical, moral, and spiritual, for the purposes of the order, precedes entrance into any of the grades mentioned (Examen, i. 12). Inquiry is to be made of each candidate whether he has ever been separated
398, and by G. Boaafide, Rome, 1842. Later working over of the material is given in the lives by F. Poee1, Regeneburg, 1846; sad Countess Rambutesu, Paris, 1889. Consult: Helyot, Ordres monastiquea, iii. 407 eqq.: Heimbuaher. Dean and %anprepationen, ii. 240‑242: RL, vi. 1371 eqq.
Internal Development and Moral
Declension (¢ 7).
Decline and Proscription (¢ 8).
Illicit Continuance and Restoration
(5 s).
III. Female Orders in Imitation of
Jesuits.
from the Church by reason of denial of the faith or falling into errors or into schism; whether he has perpetrated homicide or become infamous on nocount of enormous sine; whether he has belonged to another order; whether be has been bound by the chain of matrimony or servitude; whether he is afflicted with poor judgment. Affirmative answers to these questions disqualify for admission (Examen, ii.). Careful inquiry, is further to be made respecting name, age, birth‑place, legitimacy of birth, religious character of ancestors, names, occupations, and worldly condition of parents (similar inquiries about brothers and sisters); whether he is under obligation to marry, whether he has any son, whether he is in debt or has civil liabilities, whether he has a trade and can read and write, whether be has any disease, has received ecclesiastical ordination, or is under a vow; what have been his habits of religious devotion, reading, and meditation; whether he entertains any religious opinions different from those of the Church, whether he is ready to leave the world and to follow the counsels of our Lord Jesus Christ, whether he fully purposes to live and die in the society; and when, where, and by whom was he first moved to take this position. The answers expected to these inquiries are manifest (ibid. iii.). The candidate is required to relinquish his possessions, if not immediately, at latent after one year. Intercourse with relatives is restricted and practically prohibited. He must agree to have all his defects and errors pointed out to him. He must submit to training in the " Spiritual Exercises," and spend a month doing menial work in a hospice and another month in traveling as a mendicant. For the rest of the two years of probation many other tests are applied, the aim being to make the candidate as a "corpse or a staff" in the hands of his superior. The candidate moat express a willingness to become a secular coadjutor or whatever his superiors may determine to be for the greater glory of God and to be willing in all things to submit his own feeling and judgment to that of the society (ibid. v.). For coadjutors and scholars a still further testing of absolute obedience and requisite efficiency is provided (ibid. vi.‑viii.).
The body of the work consists of eight books. Part I. treats of" Admission to Probation." To the general belongs the final decision as to whether an applicant shall be accepted or rejected. The qualities sought in those to be admitted are given in detail: good appearance, health, youth, physical

Jesuits	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	148
strength and endurance, sound doctrine or aptitude
for learning it, discretion in doing things or good
judgment for acquiring it, good memory, avidity for
		all virtue and spiritual perfection, quiet
	s. Analysis news, constancy, strenuosity in service,
	of the zeal for the salvation of souls, grace
	Constitu‑ fulness of speech, honorable appear
	tion. ante, nobility, wealth, good reputation
		(these last not necessary, but highly
desirable). Detailed directions are given (Part L)
concerning the manner of admitting those who seem
to have in sufficient measure the qualities desired.
Part II. pertains to dismissing those who have been
received on probation and have proved unfit. The
main thing here is to satisfy the person to be dis
missed that no injustice is done him, but that the
greater glory of God requires his dismission, and so
to retain his friendship, and to satisfy the rest of
the household that he has not been arbitrarily dealt
with. Part III, treats of the training and pro
moting of those who remain in probation. The
cultivation of all the mental, moral, and spiritual
elements that are considered desirable, especially of
prompt and cheerful obedience and deep interest
in the purposes of the society, and such hygienic
living as will conserve and increase the physical fit
ness of the probationer, are described in detail. No
stress is laid upon asceticism, perfect physical con
dition being the thing sought. Part IV. treats of
the education of the members and education as a
means of influence upon those that are without.
Conditions of admission, discipline, and curricula,
with prescribed texts, in theology and in liberal
arts, science, and philosophy are somewhat minutely
given. Public schools to be open to non‑Jesuits are
to be conducted in connection with the colleges.
Universities are to be established under the auspices
of the society; but it is not thought wise for the
society to burden itself with faculties of law or med
icine. The ultimate aim of all educational effort
was evidently to gain an absolute mastery over the
pupil and the devotion of his powers to the purposes
of the society. Part V. treats of the things that per
tain to admission into the body of the society, that
is, into the rank of the " professed." The right of
admitting belongs to the general, but he may dele
gate it to subordinates when he thinks it expedient
to do so. Only those are to be admitted into the
inner circle who have manifested the possession in a
high degree of the gifts and graces, the acquisitions,
the enthusiasm, the efficiency, the absolute devotion
to the interests of the order that the system was de
signed and adapted to produce. Out of this body
come the officials, including the general. Part VI.
deals with the demeanor and duties of the professed.
The utmost stress is laid upon obedience and the
scrupulous execution of the constitution and rules
of the society. They must love poverty as the strong
wall of religion and preserve it in its purity. Part
VII. treats of the things that pertain to the distri
bution of the professed throughout the Lord's vine
yard for the good of mankind (prozirnorum). Their
obligation to go without questioning wherever the
pope or the general may direct and to devote them
selves unsparingly to the accomplishment of what
ever tasks may be assigned is much emphasized.
Part VIII. deals with methods to be employed in keeping the parts of the organization in close touch with the head and with each other. The utmost importance is attached to the vital unity of the body, and frequent and full correspondence with the head and among those charged with various enterprises is insisted upon. Provision is also made for general congregations for the discussion and settlement of important matters. It is thought to be in the interest of unity that the general reside in Rome, where he can always be reached, and that each provincial reside continuously at the point determined upon in his province. In case of the death or retirement of the general, a general congregation is to be called for the election of his successor, and detailed directions are given for the election. The general is expected to appoint a vicar to assist him and to summon the general congregation in case of his demise. Part IX. deals with the functions and authority of the general and of the authority and watch‑care of the society over the general. The society controls the expenses and manner of living of the general. He is subject to constant watching, to admonition, and to deposition in case his conduct or teaching should warrant it. He must confess regularly to a properly authorized confessor. The provincials are to lead in proceedings against the general. Part X. (and last) treats of the manner in which the whole body of the society may be conserved and increased in its good estate. The vow taken by the professed closes the work. He promises that he will never consent to a change of the ordinances concerning poverty, " unless at any time from just cause of exigent affairs it seems that poverty ought rather to be restricted," that he will never directly or indirectly put forth effort to secure his own election or promotion to any office or dignity in the society, that he will never seek or consent to be elected to any office or dignity outside of the society unless compelled by obedience to higher authority, that he will report on any brother that he knows to be seeking office or promotion, that if he should accept an ecclesiastical position he would have constant regard to the obedience due to the general.
For "The Spiritual Exercises," see EXERCITIA SPIRITUALIA.
Ignatius' tract " On the Virtue of Obedience " stands side by side with the Spiritual Exercises and the Constitution as one of the
3. " ° On the foundation books of the society. It
	Virtue of is a letter of less than 4,000 words
Obedience." addressed in April, 1553, to "the breth
		ren of the Society of Jesus who are in
Lusitania." He wishes his brethren, while being
perfect in all spiritual gifts and ornaments, to be
preeminent in the virtue of obedience:

" The only virtue that inserts the other virtues in the mind and guards those that have been inserted, while this flourishes, beyond doubt the rest will flourish .... Our salvation was wrought by Him who ' became obedient unto death.' ~ we may the more easily suffer ourselves to be surpassed by other religious orders in fastiaR_e, vigils, and other asperity of food and clothing, which each by its own ritual sad discipline holily receives: I could wish, dearest brethren, that you who serve our Lord Jesus Christ in this society should be conspicuous indeed in true and perfect obedience and abdication of will and especially of judgment.

143	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesuits
and for the true and germane progeny of this same society to be distinguished as it were by this note, that they never look upon the person himself whom they obey, but in him look upon Christ the Lord for whose sake they obey. Even if the superior be ornamented and furnished with prudence, goodness, and whatever other gifts, he is not to be obeyed on account of these things, but solely because he is God's vicegerent by whose authority he performs his functions, who says ` be that heareth you heareth me,' ` he that despiaeth you deapiseth me': nor, on the contrary, even if the superior should be somewhat deficient in counsel or prudence, ought there to be any remission of obedience on that account, so long as he is one's superior; since it has reference to the person of Him whose wisdom can not be deceived: and He will supply whatever may be wanting to his minister, whether he be lacking in probity or in other ornaments‑seeing that when Christ had said in express words ' The Scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses' seat,' he straightway added ' Ah things therefore whatsoever they have said to you, observe sad do, but refuse to do according to their works.' "
He proceeds to show that mere outward obedience to a superior, with inner disapproval of the command, is the " lowest and utterly imperfect form of obedience, not worthy of the name of virtue unless it ascends to another grade, which makes one's own the will of the superior and so agrees with it that not only the execution appears in the effect, but also the consent in the affection, and so both will the same thing and disapprove the same thing." Obedience is declared to be " the sacrifice of one's own will, which is the highest part of the mind," the highest possible offering we can make to God. He warns his readers never to attempt to bend the will of a superior to their own. This would be not to conform your will to the divine, but to wish to regulate the divine will by the standard of your own. As a third degree of obedience, which he would have his readers attain, he urges that they should not only will the same, but also think the same as the superior; they should subject their judgment to his. The devout will is able to sway the intelligence, so that " whatever things the superior commands and thinks may seem to the inferior right and true." The best way to accomplish this " holocaust " so essential to personal peace and tranquillity, alacrity, and diligence, and to the unity and efficiency of the society, is " not to look upon the person of the superior as a man obnoxious to errors and miseries, but as Christ himself, who is the highest wisdom, immeasurable goodness, infinite love, who can neither be deceived nor does he wish to deceive you; and since you are conscious within yourselves that by the love of God you have subjected yourselves to the yoke of obedience, that in following the will of the superior you follow more certainly the divine will, do not allow yourselves to doubt that the most faithful love of the Lord will go on by his own ministry which he has appointed over you to govern you from step to step and lead you in right ways. Therefore the voice of your superior and his orders receive not otherwise than as the voice of Christ." On Jan. 1, 1604, Acquaviva, general of the society, prescribed the reading of this tract by every member of the society every two days. It is appended to the Regulae Societatis Jesu in the edition published in Rome in 1616 and frequently afterward.
Early in the history of the society a body of rules was printed for the guidance of members in private and in public life. The edition of 1616, published in
Rome by Bernardus de Angelis, secretary of the society, embraces additions made by the Seventh General Congregation. It begins with
4. Rules a summary of the Constitution. " Com‑
and Other mon rules " to be observed by all re‑
	Manuals.	garding general deportment, religious
		exercises, reading, etc., follow. Next
come the " Rules of the Provincial," the responsible
leader in a province, and his assistants; those of the
provost of the house of the professed; those of the
college rector; those of the examiner who has to
pass upon the qualifications of candidates for ad
mission into the society; those of the master of the
novices (with a list of ascetical books suitable for
his use); instruction for rendering an account of
one's conscience, comprising fourteen questions to
be answered in confession and intended to cover all
experiences of soul for six months (a year in case
of the professed) follows. Rules for those who go
on pilgrimages, for assistants of provosts and rec
tors, consultora (experts without office available for
the settlement of difficulties that may arise in any
institution of the society), the monitor (whose func
tion is to admonish superiors and report to con
sultors, to collect the letters of consultors and send
them to superiors, etc.). A formula for writing
letters by superiors to provincials and by provin
cials to the general, and directions for the prepara
tion of the annual catalogue of each institution with
full information about each member, follow. Rules
for prefects, priests, preachers, proctors, librarians,
sextons, those who have the care of the sick, etc.,
are also given.
The Institulum Societatis Jesus (Rome, 1606, Lyons, 1607) and the Corpus Institutionum S. J. (Antwerp, 1709) include a collection of the works already mentioned, with the " Decrees and Canons of the General Congregations," the " Ordinances of the Generals," and some ascetical works.
In 1614 there was published at Cracow what purported to be the secret instructions given to members of the society as to the means to be used to acquire influence over the rich and the noble and to get the advantage of members of other orders and of secular priests in the confessional and other kinds of service. It abounds in worldly‑wise advice and recommends the use of all kinds of chicanery for the enrichment and aggrandizement of the society. It consists of seventeen short chapters. It has been frequently reprinted and translated into many languages, thus becoming widely circulated. It seems highly probable that Hieronymus Zahorowski, who had recently severed his connection with the society, published the book with the cooperation of Count George Zbaraski and other Polish enemies of the order. The repudiation of the work by the society is no conclusive evidence of its spuriousness. It has been its policy from the beginning to deny all discreditable reports and to take the chances of being proved unveracious. If the Monita Secrets was really written by Jesuit officials, it is probable that it was never printed by them and that copies in manuscript were very closely guarded before sad especially after the publication of 1814. On the other hand, there is no conclusive proof of the genuineness of the work. It embodies in true

7eenite	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	144
Jesuit style what was believed to be the actual practise of members, and if it be formally a fabrication, it was written by one who was thoroughly conversant with the society's literature, modes of thought, and practise at that time. There is nothing in the work that is more cynical or immoral than much that is found in acknowledged Jesuit writings.
II. History of the Society: The popes from Paul III. to Urban VIII. bestowed one after another almost every imaginable privilege and
z. Privi‑ exemption upon the society, including loges and the performing of religious services Ezemp‑ of all kinds without regard to the lions. rights of the clergy and of other orders and even when an interdict is in force. Nothing seems to have been omitted that would add to their influence and authority (cf. Li#erae apoatolicae, quibua institutio, confirrnatio, d varua Pnarilegia emttinefitter Socielatis Jesu, Antwerp, 1635, and often, with later documents, and Compendium privilegiorum et gratidrum Societatis Jesu, Antwerp, 1635). These privileges and exemptions covered nearly all cases ordinarily reserved to the popes and all cases ordinarily reserved to the bishop, ordination, unction, chrism, adjuration, exorcism, confirmation, distribution of indulgences, granting divorces, baptizing bells, making new statutes, dispensing from fasts and prohibited foods for members of the order and others, neglecting canonical hours for worship and masses, and acting as advocates, judges, and guardians in all aorta of cases, criminal, civil, or mixed. Gregory XIII. ordered that all refusing to assist them in work of this kind be excommunicated. He expressly commanded archbishops, bishops, and other clergy to assist the Jesuits laboring within their jurisdiction with their power and resources and never to permit them to be impeded, molested, expelled, or deprived of their possessions. In 1575 he appointed Jesuits as pontifical librarians and charged them with the censorship of books. Armed with such privileges, and with the resources of the whole papal church at their command, it is so wonder that they multiplied in numbers and planted their institutions of learning and their religious houses throughout the world; nor that they became arrogant and oppressive. That they should have incurred the jealousy and hatred of the other religious orders, of the secular clergy, and of the prelates, and that they should have struck terror to the hearts of Protestants in regions exposed to their ravages, might have been expected. A learned Roman Catholic writer (Caspar Seioppius [7] in his Anatomic Soeietatis Jean, n.p., 1668) charges them with attempting to establish for themselves a monopoly of things of the greatest necessity and dignity:

" Of grace with God, that nobody may be able to be in God's grace nor to obtain indulgence or absolution of sine save through the Jesuits; of grace with princes and magnates, that no one may be able to obtain honors, offices or wealth from them, save through the Jesuits; of the Catholic faith, that no one may be able from being a pagan to become a Christian or from being a heretic to become a Catholic, save by the work of the Jesuits; of perfection, that no one may be able to be perfect or holy, save through the Jesuits, i.e., unless he be received into their society; of learning, that no one may be able to learn divine and human letters, unless he avail himself of Jesuit masters; of virtue or good morals,
that no one may become well moralised, save through the admonitory examples of the Jesuits; of reputation or good name, that no one may be esteemed good or learned, save by i their votes, or at least with the euffraace of the Jesuits " (p. 11; for several other classified and tabulated statements against the society cf. pp. 9‑23).
	Having approved of the constitution of the
society and conferred upon it extensive privileges,
		Paul III. proceeded at once to employ
	s. Early its members in the most difficult and
	Achieve‑ responsible undertakings. In fact his
	meats in eagerness to send his associates on
	Italy, missions was embarrassing to the
	Portugal, founder, who feared that such promi
	and neat service would interfere with the
	France. maintenance of obedience, humility,
		and poverty that he thought essential.
They soon came into sharp rivalry with the Domin
icans, the recognized leaders in philosophy and
theology, and formerly the promoters and executive
officers of the Inquisition (see DOMINIC, SAINT, AND
THE DOMINICAN ORDER). In the Council of Treat,
especially the later sessions, they were the confi
dential spokesmen of the papal teaching and policy
and took a leading part in the revival and the es
tablishment of the Inquisition wherever it was prac
ticable. In Italy the influence of the society soon
became paramount. The Collegium Romanum, en
dowed with special privileges and moat generously
supported by the pope and his friends, carried on
the educational work of the society with the greatest
eirthusiasm and success (1550 onward). Side by
aide with this the Collegium Germanicum was estab
lished by Gregory XIII. (1753) for the education
of those who were to carry forward the Counter‑Ref
ormation in German‑speaking countries. It was the
policy of the pope and of the Jesuit administration
to fill this college with students of noble birth,
though it was not found practicable to make the
restriction absolute. About the middle of the sev
enteenth century the nobles were in the majority
(cf. documents cited by Reusch in ZKG, xiii. 269
270, 1892). The king of Portugal invited Francis
Xavier (q.v.) and Simon Rodriguez d'Azendo, two
of Ignatius' earliest and most zealous associates,
to his court and committed himself to the fullest
cooperation with the society. Rodriguez became
his chief counselor and Xavier went on his great
mission to India and China under the king's patron
age. The Jesuits were soon in control of the
college at Coimbra, and until a reaction occurred
in 1578 they virtually ruled the state. In Spain
their conquest was leas rapid and complete. They
were opposed to the policy of conciliation in rela
tion to Protestantism that had been adopted by
Charles V. The Dominicans, who had gained great
prestige in Spain because of their leadership in the
drastic measures against Mohammedans and Jews
as well as against nascent Protestantism, bitterly
opposed the society, partly because of its early
manifestation of Pelagian tendencies. Melchior
Cano (q.v.) denounced the Jesuits as the forerunners
of Antichrist (II Tim, iii. 2). Philip IL, though in
accord with their uncompromising hostility to Prot
estantism and influenced to some extent by them,
never surrendered himself completely to their dom
ination. The winning of Francis of Borgia (q.v.),

145	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesuits
duke of Gandia, who had been a courtier of Charles V., and had been employed in important administrative offices, to membership (1548) was no doubt the most important addition to the personnel of the society since it received papal recognition. He was to prove one of the ablest and most enthusiastic workers and to become the third general (July 2, 1565). The universities of Alcala and Salamanca resisted strenuously the efforts of the Jesuits to gain control; but they finally succeeded in establishing themselves in these centers of influence. Further progress was less difficult. The society encountered antipathy and mistrust in France. A number of youths sent by Ignatius to the University of Paris in 1540 were driven away. The archbishop of Paris, the parliament of Paris, and the Sorbonne united their forces ‑in opposition to the aggressions of the body. The cardinal of Lorraine supported the society. The Jesuits did not succeed until 1661 in establishing a college in France, and this (Clermont) was long denied university privileges. The Jesuits Auger and Pelletian preached and labored with such efficiency in Lyons (1559) as to cause an uprising against the Huguenots that resulted in the burning of their books, the banishment of their preachers, and the suppression of their worship. A Jesuit college was established there in commemoration of their triumph. They persistently opposed Henry of Navarre in his struggle for the crown, refused to pray for him after his submission to the pope, and denounced the Edict of Nantes. Henry did everything in his power to conciliate them, recalled a decree of banishment that had been issued against them, made a Jesuit his confessor, and sought to use the Jesuits in defending himself against Spain, where the Dominicans were highly influential. He was not content with giving to the Jesuits a foremost place in France, but he sought to secure their restoration to Venice, whence they had been expelled in 1606, and to extend the sphere of their influence in other lands. He eagerly promoted the canonization of Ignatius Loyola and Francis Xavier (1608). Yet he was distrusted by the society and when, as he was on the point of marching an army against the emperor and his allies, he was assassinated by Frangois Ravaillac, the Huguenots charged that Jesuit influence had compassed his death, though direct instigation could not be proved After the death of Henry IV. the society became still more powerful in France, and the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes (q.v.) and the destruction of the Huguenots (q.v.) were largely due to their persistent efforts. The Jansenista asserted that their theology was Pelagian and that their morals were lax (q‑v.; Bee also ARNAULD; DU VERQIER DE HAURANNE, JEAN; PASCAL, BLAIBE; PORT ROYAL; QUEBNEL, PASQUIER).
Germany and Austria were the scenes of their greatest triumphs. The first Jesuit to enter Germany was Lefwre, who, in 1640, so‑
3. In Ger‑ companied Ortiz, deputy of Charles V.
many and to the Diet of Worms. In the city of
Austria. Worms he found only one priest that was not a concubinary or polluted with crime, so with a zeal rarely surpassed he undertook to rally the demoralized Catholic forces VI‑10
and to inspire with love for RomaniBm and hatred for Protestantism the few priests and laymen that were amenable to his influence. He participated in the Diet of Regensburg (Apr., 1641), at which Butzer and Melanchthon represented the Evangelical interests. Deeply lamenting the lack of zeal and efficiency in the Catholics present, he invited bishops, prelates, electors, ambassadors, vicarsgeneral, theologians, and others to his courses in training in the Spiritual Exercises. He was made the confessor of the son of the duke of Savoy. Germans, Portuguese, Spanish, and Italians eagerly sought his spiritual guidance. He extended his efforts to Nuremberg. Having been ordered by the general to Portugal, his place was taken by LeJay, whose chief work was to train the priests for aggressive work against heresy and to inspire the nobles with the conviction that heresy must be exterminated at whatever cost. He was soon reinforced by Bobadilla, who in 1541 had achieved a great success in the diocese of Viterbo, had formed an intimate acquaintance at Innsbruck with Ferdinand L, king of the Romans, won him to the Jesuit way of thinking, and accompanied him to Vienna, and had supported the Catholic cause in a number of diets. A college was established in Vienna, which soon became affiliated with the university. LeJay succeeded in filling with enthusiastic zeal against Protestantism many priests who had been idle and indifferent and in enlisting many nobles in the coercive and educational measures proposed by the society. Lefwre returned to Germany in 1642 and made his influence powerfully felt in Speyer, Mainz, Brandenburg, and ether places. Peter Canisius (q.v.) was even more important than LeMvre or LeJay in organizing Jesuit work in Germany and in establishing training‑schools for the propagation of Jesuit principles. From 1559 onward Munich was the chief Jesuit center, and came to be known as the " German Rome "; and the college established there attracted many noble Protestant youths, who were won over by their instructors. All the chief cities of Germany where Catholics had retained the ascendancy and many where Protestantism had made great headway felt the influence of these enthusiastic and dauntless missionaries. Under their guidance Albert V. of Bavaria gave his Protestant subjects the choice of becoming Catholics or leaving the country. With their help Baden was cleared of Protestants in two years (1570‑71). Similar measures were carried out in the territory of the abbot of Fulda, in Cologne, Munster, Hildeaheim, Paderborn, and Wurzburg. In 1595 the bishopric of Bamberg was cleared of heretics, and about 1602 the work was completed in the archbishopric of Mainz. From 1578 onward Jesuits led in the work of exterminating Protestantism in the Austrian provinces. The Counter‑Reformation had largely accomplished its work in Austria and its dependencies before the outbreak of the Thirty Years, War (1618; q.v.). It was rapidly pressed to completion from this time onward. For the details of Jesuit activity in the Counter‑Reformation and in the revived Inquisition, see COUNTERREFORMATION and articles there referred to; also INQUISITION.

Jesuits	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	146
From 1542 onward the Jesuits had been active in Belgium. They were expelled from the country during the early years of the war with
4. In Bel‑ Spain, but were readmitted, under the
gium, Hol‑ patronage of Alexander Farnese, after land, sad Spanish authority had been reestab‑
	England.	liahed, and were protected by Philip IL,
		who had formerly opposed them (1581
1584). Within a few years they had almost taken
possession of the land and made it the base of suc
cessful propagandism in the Protestant Nether
lands. By 1692 twenty‑two Jesuits and 220 secular
priests, moat of whom had been educated in their
colleges, were working in the United Netherlands,
and the Catholic membership had increased from a
few thousand scattered and discouraged souls to
345,000. The assassination of William of Orange
(1b84) was commonly attributed to Jesuit in
fluence on the ground that, as was asserted, Baltha
ear Gerard claimed the blessing of the rector of
the Jesuit college at Trevee before committing the
crime.
The Jesuits early addressed themselves to the task of reestablishing papal supremacy in England. In 1542 Paschasius Brouet and Alphonso Salmeron (q.v.) made a secret and rapid tour through Ireland and in thirty‑four days succeeded in inflaming the Catholics of Ireland against the government of Henry VIII. and against Protestantism. But the Jesuits met with little success in Scotland. In England they carried on for more than a century a secret but effective propaganda. In 1569 William Allen (q.v.), afterward a cardinal, established at Douai (q.v.) a training‑school for Jesuit missionaries to England, where a large number of British Catholic youths were prepared for the extremely perilous work of restoring papal authority in Britain. Sacked by the Protestants of Flanders at the instigation of the English government, the college was reopened at Reims under the patronage of the archbishop, and continued to train men for English work and martyrdom. In 1579 an English college was opened in Rome for the same purpose. The moat active leaders of the Jesuit work in England were Robert Parsons and Edmund Campian (qq.v.). In Scotland Jesuits attached themselves to the court of Mary Stuart (c. 1587), and by encouraging her aspirations after the English crown wrought her destruction. The " Gunpowder Plot " (1605) was commonly attributed to their machinations.
	The missionary efforts of the Jesuits, under
	French patronage, in North America among the
v 	Indians (see INDIANS OF NORTH AmER‑
$. Mission ICA, MISSIONS TO; MISSIONS TO THE
Work 111 HEATHEN, A) and the French col‑
	America.	oniata were from their own point of
		view highly successful. In Florida,
Mexico, South America and Central America, and
California they established their great mission com
pounds where captured natives, sometimes guarded
and forced by Spanish and Portuguese troops, were
employed as laborers and compelled to conform to
Roman Catholic observances. Their work among
the North American Indians, as well as among the
natives of India, China and Japan, displayed heroic
self‑sacrifice of the highest order along with a will‑
ingness to receive a very superficial knowledge of Christianity as evidence of its acceptance. Those whom they baptized, even clandestinely, they claimed as members of the Christian Church.
Attention has already been called to the obligation of absolute and unquestioning obedience inculcated by Ignatius that involved the
6. Uneth‑ suppression or destruction of the fin‑
ical Teach‑ dividual conscience. The doctrine of ings and Probabiliem (q.v.) was not originated
	Practises,	by the Jesuits, but was wrought out
		by their writers during the seventeenth
century with more minuteness than by earlier
Roman Catholic writers. According to this teaching
one is at liberty to follow a probable opinion, i.e.,
one that has two or three reputable Catholic writers
in its favor, against a more probable or a highly
probable opinion in whose favor a multitude of the
highest authorities concur. To justify any practise,
however immoral it might be commonly esteemed,
a few sentences from Catholic writers sufficed, and
these were often garbled. Some Jesuits and some
popes repudiated this doctrine. In 1680 Gonzales,
an opponent of the doctrine, was made general of
the society through papal pressure; but he failed
to purge the society of probabiliam and came near
being deposed by reason of his opposition. Another
antiethical device widely approved and employed
by members of the society is Mental Reservation or
Restriction (see RESERVATION, MENTAL), in ac
cordance with which, when important interests are
at stake, a negative or a modifying clause may
remain unuttered which would completely reverse
the statement actually made. This principle jus
tified unlimited lying when one's interests or con
venience seemed to require. Where the same word
or phrase has more than one sense, it may be em
ployed in an unusual sense with the expectation
that it will be understood in the usual (amphibol
ogy). Such evasions may be used under oath in a
civil court. Equally destructive of good morals
was the teaching of many Jesuit casuists that moral
obligation may be evaded by directing the inten
tion when committing an immoral act to an end
worthy in itself; as in murder, to the vindication
of one's honor; in theft, to the supplying of one's
needs or those of the poor; in fornication or adul
tery, to the maintenance of one's health or comfort.
Nothing did more to bring upon the society the fear
and distrust of the nations and of individuals than
the justification and recommendation by several of
their writers of the assassination of tyrants, the
term " tyrant " being made to include all persons
in authority who oppose the work of the papal
church or the order. The question has been much
discussed, Jesuits always taking the negative aide,
whether the Jesuits have taught that " the end
sanctifies the means." It may not be possible to
find this maxim in these precise words in Jesuit
writings; but that they have always taught that for
the " greater glory of God," identified by them
with the extension of Roman Catholic (Jesuit) influence the principles of ordinary morality may be set aside, seems certain. The doctrine of philosophical sin, in accordance with which actual attention to the sinfulness of an act when it is being committed

147	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesuits
is requisite to its sinfulness for the person committing it, was widely advocated by members of the society. The repudiation of some of the most scandalous maxims of Jesuit writers by later writers, or the placing of books containing scandalous maxims on the Index, does not relieve the society or the Roman Catholic Church from responsibility, as such books must have received authoritative approval before publication, and the censuring of them does not necessarily involve an adverse attitude toward the teaching itself, but may be a mere measure of expediency.
Lainez, who succeeded Ignatius in the office of general (1558‑65), manifested in the administration of the affairs of the society more of worldly wisdom and less of pietistic enthusiasm than the
founder. Paul IV. became alarmed 7. Internal at the remarkable growth and aggres‑
Develop‑ siveness of the society. He sought
meat and (1558) to curb the almost irresponsible
	Moral	power of the generals by limiting their
Declension. tenure of office to three years, and to
limit the freedom of the body by requiring the observance of the canonical hours for singing in the choir. These changes would have placed the society on somewhat the same basis as the other orders and would have stripped it of half its power. These measures were earnestly resisted and the death of the pope (1559) prevented the car lamity. Pius IV. let Lainez have his ambitious and aggressive way and employed his services in the later sessions of the Council of Trent. Francis of Borgia had spent his fortune in founding a college in Gandia and the Collegium Romanum and came to the office of general (1565) with all of the ascetical enthusiasm of Ignatius, but with little of his worldly wisdom. He was succeeded in 1572 by Mercurian, whose administration was relatively feeble. The greatest of all the generals was Claudius Acquaviva (1581‑1615), a Neapolitan. He had to contend with a powerful and determined Spanish faction in the society that resented Italian control. The Spanish Jesuits secured the support of the Inquisition, of Philip IL, and of Clement VIII. The latter summoned a General Congregation (1592) to deal with the difficulties. Acquaviva managed the meeting with such adroitness that he was triumphantly vindicated and thoroughly established in his office. Molina's Pelagian teaching provoked a fresh Dominican onslaught on the society. Acquaviva and his supporters espoused the cause of Molina (q.v.), though he had been condemned by the Spanish Inquisition. The pope transferred the dispute to Rome (1596) and for a time it looked as if the Dominicans would triumph; but Acquaviva's consummate skill again averted calamity. At the General Congregation he confounded his opponents by springing upon the assembly the news that Henry IV. of France had espoused his cause. Under Acquaviva the Counter‑Reformation was carried forward with astonishing success. The failure of Dominicans, Inquisition and pope to silence the Pelagian anthropology of the order encouraged its members to go to the greatest extremes in their moral theology. Under the administration of Mutius Vitelleschi (1615‑45) the Counter‑Reformation was car‑
ried almost to its completion and the Thirty Years' War almost ran its course. In 1640 the jubilee of the society was celebrated with great dclat. It now numbered 15,000 members distributed into thirtynine provinces. The ascetical requirements of Ignatius had been put aside. The professed had increased in numbers in far greater proportion than the membership, and now freely accepted positions of honor and influence, enjoyed regular incomes, and lived like gentlemen, leaving the drudgery of the educational and church work to younger and less experienced men. They constituted a sort of aristocracy that neutralized to some extent the autocracy of the General. Degeneration continued unimpeded under Caraffa (d. 1649) and Piccolomini (d. 1651). The German Nickel (1651‑64) proved so unsatisfactory as general that Oliva was made his vicar (1661). Oliva was a favorite of the pope and lived in splendor. His independent administration (1664,81) was favorable to the development of the worst features of Jesuitism. He was an advocate and promoter of Probabilism and other immoral forms of teaching and encouraged to the utmost the disposition to meddle with national and
I	international politics that had become characteristic of the society. Ignatius had opposed with all his might the promotion of Jesuits to high ecclesiastical positions. In 1593 Tolet was made a cardinal; in 1599, Bellarmine; in 1629, Pazmany; in 1643, De Lugo, and many afterward. Their literary activity in all religious and secular branches of learning was very great during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The same may be said of the more recent time.
The growing secularization of the society and its need of vast resources for the maintenance and extension of its world‑wide work and the diminution of free‑will offerings that had sufficed in the times
when religious enthusiasm was at its 8. Decline height led the society to engage in and Pro‑ great speculative business enterprises, scription. those conducted in Paraguay and Martinique resulting in disaster to many innocent investors (1753 onward), and brought upon the society much reproach in Portugal and France. In Portugal the Marquis of Pombal, one of the foremost statesmen of his time, became convinced that
the liberation of the country from ecclesiastical rule, in which Jesuits had long been predominant, required the exclusion of the latter. An insurrection in Portuguese Paraguay by the natives furnished an occasion to Pombal for denouncing the Jesuits to the king and for demanding papal prohibition of their commercial undertakings. The papal prohibition
was issued in 1758 and priestly privileges were withdrawn from Jesuits in Portugal. An attempt upon the life of the king (Sept. 3, 1758) was attributed to Jesuit influence and led to a decree for the expulsion of the society and the confiscation of its prop‑
erty (Sept. 3, 1759). The pope tried in vain to protect them and his nuncio was driven from the country. Malgrida, a Jesuit, was burned at the stake
in 1761. Speculations by Jesuits in Martinique, in which vast sums of money were lost by French citizens, led to a public investigation of the methods of the society. and on April 16. 1761. the Parliament

Jesuits	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	148
of Paris decreed a suppression of Jesuit establishments in France and on May 8 declared the entire order responsible for the debts of the principal promoter of the collapsed enterprise. Other parliaments followed that of Paris. King, pope, and many bishops protested in vain. Eighty of their colleges were closed in April, 1762. Their constitution was denounced as godless, sacrilegious, and treasonable, and the vows taken by Jesuits were declared to be null and void. On Nov. 26, 1764, the king agreed to a decree of expulsion. In Spain 6,000 Jesuits were suddenly arrested at night and conveyed to papal territory (Sept. 2‑3, 1768). Refused admission by the pope, they took refuge is Corsica. A similar seizure and transportation of 3,000 had occurred at Naples (Nov. 3‑4, 1767). Parma dealt with them similarly (Feb. 7, 1768), and soon afterward they were expelled from Malta by the Knights of St. John. The Bourbon princes urged Clement XIII. to abolish the society. He refused, and when he died (Feb. 2, 1769) there was much intriguing among friends and enemies of the Jesuits in seeking to secure the election of a pope that would protect or abolish the society. Cardinal Ganganelli was elected and it is highly probable that he had bargained with the Bourbons for the destruction of the Jesuits. From the beginning of his pontificate powerful pressure was brought to bear upon him by Sp9,in, France, and Portugal for the abolition of the order. He gave promises of early action, but long hesitated to strike the fatal blow. He began by subjecting the Jesuit colleges in and around Rome to investigation. These were promptly suppressed and their inmates banished. Maria Theresa of Austria, who had been greatly devoted to the Jesuits, now regretfully abandoned them and joined with the Bourbons in demanding the abolition of the society by the pope. This combined pressure of the chief Catholic powers was more than the pope could withstand (" Coactus feci.," he is reported to have afterward said). On July 21, 1773, he signed the Brief Dominus ac Redemptor nosier, which abolished the society, and on August 16 the general and his chief assistants were imprisoned and all their property in Rome and the States of the Church confiscated (Eng. transl. of this brief is most easily accessible in Nicolini, Hist. of the Jesuits, pp. 387‑406, London, 1893). The brief recites at length the charges of immoral teaching and intolerable meddlesomeness in matters of church and state, of the abuse of the unlimited privileges that the society has enjoyed, and virtually admits that it has become totally depraved and a universal nuisance. To restore peace to Christendom its abolition is declared to be necessary. A papal coin was struck the same year in commemoration of the event, with Christ sitting in judgment and saying to the Jesuit fathers arraigned on his left, " Depart from me all of you, I never knew you."
At the time of its abolition the society had about 22,000 members. It would have been unreasonable to expect that so large a body of trained men, adepts at secret and evasive methods of work, and with centuries of successful effort behind them, would suddenly vanish in response to a papal brief
extorted by the Roman Catholic powers. Thousands of them, without change of principles, became
members of societies of the Sacred
	9. Illicit	Heart of Jesus; others of the society of
	Continu‑	Fathers of the Faith, founded by Nicolo
	ance and	Paccanari (q.v.); others became Re
Restoration. demptorists or Liguorists (see LIGUORI,
ALFONaO MARIA DE). Frederick II. of Prussia encouraged and protected them with a view, no doubt, to using their political knowledge and skill against the Bourbons, the Hapsburgers, and the pope. Catherine II. of Russia hoped by showing them favor to conciliate her new Polish subjects and to use them against Bourbons and Hapsburgera. In Naples and in France the papal decree was only imperfectly executed. Pius VI. gave full papal approval (1783) to the perpetuation of the society in Russia, while Pius VII. (1801) approved of their designating their vicar‑general as general. The same pope approved of the restorer tion of the society iv Naples and Sicily (July, 1804) so that the head of the society now became " General for Russia and Naples." The Napoleonic disturbance of Europe having come to an end and Pius VII. having been released from his French captivity, the need of the society for leadership in an aggressive movement for the restoration of the Roman Catholic Church to its former power was profoundly felt by the Curia. On Aug. 7, 1814, Pius VII. issued the bull Solicitudo omaium ecclesiarum, by which he restored the society. Since that time it has suffered many reverses and much persecution. Most of the states of Europe have repeatedly expelled its members. Yet it has steadily grown in power and has for nearly a century dictated the policy of the papal administration. Jesuits are to‑day the chief diplomats of the Roman Catholic Church and they are surpassed in astuteness and the ability to achieve results by those of no civil government. The promulgation of the dogma of the immaculate conception of Mary (1854), the Encyclical and Syllabus of 1864, the Vatican Council with its decree of papal infallibility (1869‑70), the recent drastic measures against Biblical criticism and in opposition to freedom of research and freedom of teaching and publishing, are commonly attributed to Jesuit influence. The society had in 1902, 15,231 members, 6,743 being priests and 4,542 students for the priesthood. There are about 1,800 in the United States, and they are numerous in Canada, Mexico, Central and South America, Cuba, and the Philippines. [The Jesuits have from the beginning laid especial stress upon education and adopted a high standard. But they have had to run the gantlet of sharp criticism not only from Protestants but from Roman Catholic;. Nor can it be explained away that the order was f;rr a considerable period under the papal ban. Their secrecy, superior skill and learning, and especially the casuistry advocated in books written by members of the order, have concentrated much attention on them, not always to their approval. They can not claim exemption from the common failings of mankind, or any special divine leadership. They have had ambitious and unscrupulous members and have been under unworthy leadership. Their med‑

149
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
filing in politics has not always been to their credit. But when all has been said against them the Jesuits still retain their preeminence. They were the authors of the Counter‑Reformation which prevented the collapse of the Roman Catholic Church in lands in which Protestantism had gotten a hold. They gave their church its theology and raised its standard of education and of clerical morality. They cleansed it of much of its foulness, put new breath into its foreign missions, and everywhere displayed a zeal, patience and piety which revived the whole church. And these services in the past are continued into the present, and every year the Roman Catholic Church is still heavier in their debt.]
The number of Jesuits throughout the world is small. In 1902 there were but 15,231 of all grades. The O,flicittl Catholic Directory for 1909, pp.746‑747, gives these figures for the United States:
New York ‑ Maryland
Province . . . . . . Missouri Province . . . . . . New Mexico and Colo‑
rado Mission ........
New Orleans Province..
California and Rocky
Mountain Mission ...
.
Fathers.	Scholas
			tics.
	340		333
	338		252
	59		34
	132		77
	154		128
	1,023		824
Lay
Brothers.

157
158

26 48
108
495
III. Female Orders in Imitation of Jesuits: The Society of Jesus has no recognized affiliated societies of women. Before his first pilgrimage to Jerusalem Ignatius formed the acquaintance in Barcelona of Isabella de Rosella, a gifted and wealthy woman, and greatly interested her in his plans and purposes. When he returned in 1524 she ministered to his needs for a considerable time. In 1543, after the society had secured papal approval and when he was occupied with world‑wide schemes for the mastery of the nations, she visited him in Rome, with two other like‑minded ladies, and begged to be taken under his spiritual guidance. He was unwilling to assume this additional burden; but the persistent women secured from the pope an order (1545) that Ignatius should accede to their wishes. With great reluctance he yielded; but soon found that these women, with the small sisterhood that. they had gathered, gave him more trouble than the administration of the affairs of the entire society, and at his earnest request the pope relieved him of the obligation (1547). It was no easy task to secure the consent of Isabella and her companions to be released from the obligations that. they had been so eager to assume; but he was inexorable and Isabella had to be content to be a " mother " rather than " daughter " of the great leader. The English Ladies (q.v.) founded by Mary Ward, an English woman, at St. Omer in Flanders in 1609, sought affiliation with the Jesuits, but failed to secure permanent recognition as Jesuitesses. A similar sorority, founded in 1607 by Johanna, marchioness of Montserrat, came into close relations with the Jesuits without becoming identified with the society. The same may be said of the sisters of the
Jesuits
Sacred Heart and of the Faith of Jesus. It is the
policy of the Jesuits to influence and control many
of the sisterhoods without assuming any responsi
bility for them and without entrusting to them the
secrets of the society. 	A. H. NEWMAN.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A rather full list of works, including sources, is given in Hauck‑Herzog, RE, viii. 742 aqq.; and a monograph devoted to the subject is A. Carayon, Bibliopraphie historique de la Compapnic de Jesus, Paris, 1804. Without consulting the earlier and now often inaccessible editions of the documents which created and protected the society, it is possible to obtain a view of all that is essential in the late edition of the documents, 3 vole., Rome, 1889 sqq., which contains the Constitutions, the Examen generals, the pertinent papal bulls, briefs, and privileges, the decrees and canons of the General Constitution, the plan of study, the " Spiritual Exercises," and the Directorium. A late edition of the Monita privates is by C. Souvestre, Paris, 1880,
On the general history of the order the great work of De Backer (see vol. i., p. xxiii, of this work) and of Crktineau‑Joly are of first importance; and the literature under Ignatius of Loyola contains much of importance. Consult further for the general history: Maynard, The .Studies and Teaching of the Satiety of Jesus at the Time of its Suppression, 1760‑1763, Baltimore, 1855; C. Paroissen, Principles of the Jesuits, London, 1860; J. M. S. Daurignae, Hint, of the Society of Jesus, 2 vols., Cincinnati, 1865; F. Nippold, Der Jeauitenorden son seiner Wiederherstellung bia zurGepenwart, Mannheim, 1867; 8. Rose, Ignatius Loyola and the Early Jesuits, London, 1871; J. Stephen, Founders of Jesuitism, in Essays in Ecclesiastical Biography, London, 1875: W. C. Cartwright, The Jesuits; their Constitution and Teachings, London, 1876; P. Bert, La Morale des Jeauitea, Paris, 1880; T. Griesinger, The Jesuits; a complete History of their Proceedings, London, 1883; T. Carlyle, Jesuitism, in Works, II. 259‑485, Boston, 1885; T. Hughes, Loyola and the Educational System of the Jesuits, London, 1892; G. B. Nicolini, Hist. of the Jesuits; their Origin, Progress, Doctrines and Designs, London, 1893; E. Piaget, Eaaai our 1'orpaniaation de la compagnie de Jam, Paris, 1893; F. H. Reuseh, Beitrtige zur Geachichte des Jeauitenordena, Munich, 1894; R. W. Thompson, The Footprints of the Jesuits, New York, 1894; E. Gothein, Ignatius von Loyola and die Gegenrefornuition, Halls, 1895; M. F. Cusack, The Black Pope; a Hiat. of the Jesuits, London, 1896; H. Miiller, Les Oripinea de 7s Compapnie de Jesus; Ipnace et Lainez, Paris, 1898; A. Hamy, Galerie illuab•Ee de 7a Compsg nie de Jesus, Paris, 1900; J, blichelet and E. Quinet, Etude our lea Jeauites, latest ed. Paris, 190(1; J. Hochstetter, Monita Secrets; Die peheimen Instruktionen der.Jeauiten, Stuttgart, 1901; Kaiser Franz Joseph 1. and die Jeauiten, Barmen, 1901; L. Wittwe, Friedrich der Grosse and die Jeauiten, Halls, 1901; R. Schwiekerath, Jesuit Education, its History and Principles, St. Louis, 1903; J. Wzy, Un predicateur apoatolique au IB. aiecle, Frey de Neuvilte, 1893‑1774, Paris, 1904; B. Pascal, The Provincial Letters, often reprinted, e.g., New York, 1904; P. Suan, St. Franpaia de Borpia, 1610‑167,x, Paris, 1905; A. Brow Les Jeauitea de la legends. Part I. Les Oripinea juaqu'd Pascal, Paris, 1906.
For the Jesuits in England consult: H. Foley, Records of the Enpli:h Province of the Society of Jesus, 8 vole., London, 1877‑83: A. Kohler, Die Mdrtyrer and Bekenner der Geaellachajt Jeaa in England 1680‑IB81, Innsbruck 1886; E. L. Taunton, Hial. of the Jesuits in England, 16801773, London, 1901; W. Walsh, The Jesuits in Great Britain, London, 1903. For their history in France: A. Carayon, Documents inkdita concernanta la Compapnie de Jesus, 23 vole., Poitiers, 1883 sqq.; J. Prat, Ls Compapnie de Jesus en France, 4 vole., Paris, 1877; E. Piaget, Hiat. de 1'etabliaaement des Jeauitea en France 1640‑1680, Leyden, 1895; M. Chosset, Les Jeauitea et leura awrea d Avignon, 1663‑1788, Avignon, 1896; E. Souillier. Les Jeauitea d Marseille aux 18. et 18. aieclea, Avignon, 1899; J. Pre, Les Jeauitea h Grenoble, 1687‑1763, Lyons, 1901; J. Delfour. Les JEsuitea h Poitiers, IBO4‑176,x, Paris, 1902. For Germany: S. Sugenheim, Geechichte der Jeauiten in Deutschland 1640‑1773, 2 vole., Frankfort, 1847; J. Hansen, Rheiniache Akten zur Geachichte des Jeauitenordena, iti¢t1688 Cologne, 1896 ; B. Duhr, Die Jeauiten an den deutachen Fiirstenleofen :Zex IB. Jahrhuuderta, Freiburg,

Jesus Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	160
1901; idem, Aktenatiicke slit Geaehichte der Jeauiten‑Missionen in Deutschland, 181,8‑187.9', ib, 1903; idem, Geachichte der Jeauiten in den L6ndern deutacher Zunpe, ib. 1907; M. Rist, Die deutachen Jeauxten auj den Sch7aehtfeldern and in den Lazaretten 1866, 1870‑1871, Freiburg, 1904. For North America: Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents; Travels and Explorations of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France, ed. R. G. Thwaitea, 73 vola., Cleveland, O., 1896‑1902; T. Hughes, Hiat. of Society of Jesus in North America colonial and federal, vol. i. to 1845, London, 1907; idem, Documents, vol. i., part L, nos. 1‑140 (1605‑1838), London, 1908; F. Parkman, The Jesuits in North America in the Seventeenth Century, Boston, 1897; idem, Pioneers of France in the New World, ib. 1879; idem, La Salle and the Discovery of the Great West, ib.1878; W. I.
JESUS CHRIST.
I. Consideration of the Sources.
Heathen Writers (¢ 1).
The Apostle Paul (¢ 2).
Paul and the Earthly Life of Jesus (¢ 3).
Other Epistolars (§ 4).
The Gospel of Luke (¢ 5).
bfark and Matthew (¢ 0).
The Primitive "Narrative Source" IV. (¢ 7).
"Sayings of Jesus" (¢
Individual Sections of Luke and Matthew (¢ 9).
The Gospel of John (§ 10).
Gospel Portrait of Christ not Invented (¢ 11).
II. The Portrait of Jesus.
His Humiliation (¢ i).
His Meseiahahip and Deity (¢ 2).
Central Conceptions (¢ 3).
III. Attempts to Naturalize the Portrait of Jesus.
Literary and Historical Criticism (¢ 1).
Methods of Historical Criticism (¢ 2).
Its Embarrassment (¢ 3).
Its Historical Development (¢ 4).
Its Issue (¢ 5).
The Life of Jesus.
In What Sense a "Life" Impossible (¢ 1).
Framework of the "Life" (¢ 2).
Outline of the "Life" (¢ 3).
The Public Ministry (§ 4).
Instruments of the Ministry (¢ 5).
The Virgin‑Birth; the Resurrection (¢ 6).
B. I. Limitation of the Field. II. The Sources.
The Epistles of Paul (¢ 1).
A. I. Consideration of the Sources; The rise of Christianity was a phenomenon of too little apparent significance to attract the attention of the great world. It was only when it had refused to be quenched in the blood of its founder, and, breaking out of the narrow bounds of the obscure province in which it had its origin, was making itself felt in the centers of population, that it drew to itself a somewhat irritated notice. The interest of such heathen writers as mention it was in the movement, not in its author. But in speaking
of the movement they tell some1. Heathen thing of its author, and what they Writers, tell is far from being of little moment.
He was, it seems, a certain " Christ," who had lived in Judea in the reign of Tiberius (14‑37 A.D.), and had been brought to capital punishment by the procurator, Pontius Pilate (q.v.; cf. Tacitus, Annals, xv. 4‑1). The significance of his personality to the movement inaugurated by him is already suggested by the fact that be, and no other, had impressed his name upon it. But the name itself by which he was known particularly attracts notice. This is uniformly, in these heathen writers, " Christ," not " Jesus." * Suetonius (Claudius, xxv.) not unnaturally confuses this " Christus " with the Greek name " Chrestus "; but Tacitus and Pliny show themselves better informed and preserve it accurately. " Christ," however, is not a personal name, but the Greek

* In Josephua, Ant. XVIIL, iii. 3, XX., ix, 1, "Jesus," "Jesus, surnamed Christ," occur. But the authenticity of the passages is questionable, especially that of the format.
Kip, The Early Jesuit Missions in North America, New York, 1882; idem, Historical Scenes from the Old Jesuit Missions, ib. 1875; Z. Engelhardt, The Missions and Miasianariea of California, San Francisco, 1908. For other countries: H. Lutteroth, Ruaaland and die Jesuiten 177e18g0, Stuttgart, 1846; P. Mury, Lea JEauitea & Cayenne, Strasburg, 1895; M. de Anglt:a y Gortari, Loa Jeauttaa en el Paraguay, Assumption, 1898; R. Perez, La Companfa de Jesus en Colombia y Centro‑America, Valladolid, 1896; A. Aatrain, Hiataria de to companFa de Jesus en la asiatencia de Esparta, 2 vola., Madrid, 1902‑05; R. B. Cunningham Graham, A Vanished Arcadia; being some account of the Jesuits in Paraguay, 1807 to 1767, New York, 1901; F. Colin, Labor evanpelica de fos Obreros de la Compafiia de Jesus en las Islas Filipinos, Barcelona, 1904.
The Gospels (¢ 2). The Pauline Gospel (¢ 3). Its Relations and Character (¢ 4). The Petrine Gospel (¢ b). Its Character (¢ 8), Consequences (¢ 7). Four Types of Tradition (¢ 8). The Gospel of John (¢ 9). Matthew and Luke (¢ 10). Q and the Aramaic Source (¢ 11). Results of Source Analysis (¢ 12).
III. Critical Outline of the Story of Jesus. Relations with John the Baptist (¢ 1).
The Motive for Jesus' Ministry (¢ 2). Message and Miracles (¢ 3).
Breaking of Bread (¢ 4),
Collision with the Authorities (¢ b). The Crisis in Galilee (¢ 8).
Jesus as " Son of Man " ($ ~). The Finale (¢ 8).
The Issue (19).
rendering of the Hebrew title " Messiah." Clearly,
then, it was as the promised Messiah of the Jews
that their founder was reverenced by " the Chris
tians "; and they had made so much of his Messiah
ship in speaking of him that the title " Christ "
had actually usurped the place of his personal
name, and he was everywhere known simply as
" Christ." Their reverence for his person had, in
deed, exceeded that commonly supposed to be due
even to the Messianic dignity. Pliny records that
this " Christ " was statedly worshiped by " the
Christians " of Pontus and Bithynia as their
God (Puny, Epist., xcvi. [xcvii.) to Trojan).
Beyond these great facts the heathen historians give
little information about the founder of Christianity.
	What is lacking in them is happily supplied,
however, by the writings of the Christians them
selves. Christianity was from its beginnings a
		literary religion, and documentary
	2. The records of it have come down from the
	Apostle very start. There are, for example,
	Paul. the letters of the Apostle Paul (q.v.),
		a highly cultured Romanized Jew of
Tarsus, who early (34 or 35 A.D.) threw in his
fortunes with the new religion, and by his splen
did leadership established it in the chief centers
of influence from Antioch to Rome. Written
occasionally to one or another of the Chris
tian communities of this region, at intervals
during the sixth and seventh decades of the cen
tury, that is to say, from twenty to forty years
after the origin of Christianity, these letters reflect
the conceptions which ruled in the Christian com‑

151	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesus Ohrist
munities of the time. Paul had known the Christian movement from its beginning; first from the outside, as one of the chief agents in its persecution, and then from the inside, as the most active leader of its propaganda. He was familiarly acquainted with the Apostles and other immediate followers of Jesus, and enjoyed repeated intercourse with them. He explicitly declares the harmony of their teaching with his, and joins with his their testimony to the great facts which he proclaimed. The complete consonance of his allusions to Jesus with what is gathered from the hints of the heathen historians is very striking. The person of Jesus fills the whole horizon of his thought, and gathers to itself all his religious emotions. That Jesus was the Messiah is the presupposition of all his speech of him, and the Messianic title has already become his proper name behind which his real personal name, Jesus, has retired. This Messiah is definitely represented as a divine being who has entered the world on a mission of mercy to sinful man, in the prosecution of which he has given himself up as a sacrifice for sin, but has risen again from the dead and ascended to the right hand of God, henceforth to rule as Lord of all. Around the two great facts, of the expiatory death of the Son of God and his rising again, Paul's whole teaching circles. Jesus Christ as crucified, Christ risen from the dead as the first fruits of those that sleep ‑here is Paul's whole gospel in summary.
Into the details of Christ's earthly life Paul had no occasion to enter. But he shows himself fully
	familiar with them, and incidentally
3. Paul	conveys a vivid portrait of Christ's
and the	personality. Of the seed of David on
	Earthly the human, as the Son of God on the
Life of	divine aide he was born of a woman
Jesus.	>
	under the law, and lived subject to its
	ordinances for his mission's sake, humbling himself
	even unto death, and that the death of the cross.
	His lowly estate is dwelt upon, and the high traits
	of his personal character manifested in his lowli
	ness are lightly sketched in, justifying not merely
	the negative declaration that " he knew no sin,"
	but his positive presentation as the model of all
	perfection. An item of his teaching is occasionally
	adverted to, or even quoted, always with the ut
	most reverence. Members of his immediate circle
	of followers are mentioned by name or by class
	whether his brethren according to the flesh or the
	twelve apostles whom he appointed. The institu
	tion by him of a sacramental feast is described, and
	that of a companion sacrament of initiation by
	baptism is implied. But especially his sacrificial
	death on the cross is emphasized, his burial, his
	rising again on the third day, and his appearances
	to chosen witnesses, who are cited one after the
	other with the greatest solemnity. Such details
	are never communicated to Paul's readers as pieces
	of fresh information. They are alluded to as mat
	ters of common knowledge, and with the plainest
	intimation of the unquestioned recognition of them
	by all. Thus it is made clear not only that there
	underlies Paul's letters a complete portrait of
	Jesus and a full outline of his career, but that this
	portrait and this outline are the universal posses_
sion of Christians. They were doubtless as fully before his mind as such in the early years of his Christian life, in the thirties, as when he was writing his letters in the fifties and sixties. There is no indication in the way in which Paul touches on these things of a recent change of opinion regarding them or of a recent acquisition of knowledge of them. The testimony of Pauhs letters, in a word, has retrospective value, and is contemporary testimony to the facts.
Paul's testimony alone provides thus an exceptionally good basis for the historical verity of Jesus' personality and career. But Paul's
4. Other testimony is far from standing alone.
Epistolars. It is fully supported by the testimony of a series of other writings, similar to his own, purporting to come from the hands of early teachers of the Church, most of them from actual companions of our Lord and eye‑witnesses of his majesty, and handed down to us with credible evidence of their authenticity. And it is extended by the testimony of a series of writings of a very different character; not occasional letters designed to meet particular crises or questions arising in the churches, but formal accounts of Jesus' words and acts.
Among these attention is attracted first by a great historical work, the two parts of which bear the titles of " the Gospel according to Luke " and " the Acts of the Apostles." The first contains an account of Jesus' life from his birth to his death and resurrection; or, including the opening paragraphs of the second, to his ascension. What directs attention to it first among books of its class is the uncommonly full information possessed concerning its writer and his method of historical
5. The composition. It is the work of an edGospel of ucated Greek physician, known to have
	Luke,	enjoyed, as a companion of Paul, spe
		cial opportunities of informing him
self of the facts of Jesus' career. Whatever Paul
himself knew of the acts and teachings of ,his
Lord was, of course, the common property of
the band of missionaries which traveled in his
company, and could not fail to be the subject
of much public and private discussion among
them. Among Paul's other companions there
could not fail to be some whose knowledge of Jesus'
life, direct or derived, was considerable; an
example is found, for instance, in John Mark,
who had come out of the immediate circle of
Jesus' first followers, although precise knowledge
of the meeting of Luke and Mark as fellow com
panions of Paul belongs to a little later period
than the composition of Luke's Gospel. In com
pany with Paul Luke had even visited Jerusalem
and had resided two years at Ca?sarea in touch with
primitive disciples; and if the early tradition which
represents him as a native of Antioch be accepted,
he moat be credited with facilities from the begin
ning of his Christian life for association with orig
inal disciples of Jesus. All that is needed to ground
great confidence in his narrative as a trustworthy
account of the facts it records is assurance that he
had the will and capacity to make good use of his
abounding opportunities for exact information,

Jesus Christ	TAE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	152
The former is afforded by the preface to his Gospel in which he reveals his method as a historian and his zeal for exactness of information and statement; the latter by the character of the Gospel, which evinces itself at every point a sincere and careful narrative resting upon good and well‑sifted information. In these circumstances the determination of the precise time when this narrative was actually committed to paper becomes a matter of secondary importance; in any event its material was collected during the period of Paul's missionary activity. It may be confidently maintained, however, that it was also put together during this period, that is to say, during the earlier years of the seventh decade of the century. Confidence in its narrative is strengthened by the complete accord of the portrait of Jesus, which its detailed account exhibits with that which underlies the letters of Paul. Not only are the general traits of the personality identical, but the emphasis falls at the same places. In effect, the Jesus of Luke's narrative is the Christ of Paul's epistles in perfect dramatic presentation, and only two hypotheses offer themselves in possible explanation. Either Luke rests on Paul, and has with consummate art invented a historical basis for Paul's ideal Christ; or else Paul's allusions rest on a historical basis and Luke has preserved that historical basis in his careful detailed narrative. Every line of Luke's narrative refutes the former and demonstrates the latter supposition.
Additional evidence of the trustworthiness of Luke's Gospel as an account of Jesus' acts and teaching is afforded by the presence by its side of other narratives of similar character and accordant contents. These narratives are two in number and have been handed down under the names of members of the earliest circle of Christians‑of John Mark, who was from the beginning in the closest
touch with the apostolic body, and of 6. Mark Matthew, one of the apostles. On
and comparison of these narratives with Matthew. Luke's, not only are they found to present, each with its own peculiar point of view and purpose, precisely the same conception and portrait of Jesus, but to have utilized in large measure also the same sources of information. Indeed, the entire body of Mark's Gospel is found to be incorporated also in Matthew's and Luke's.
This circumstance, in view of the declarations of Luke's preface, is of the utmost significance for an estimate of the trustworthiness of the narrative thus embodied in all three of the " Synoptic " Gospels. In 'thia preface Luke professes to have had for his object the establishment of absolute " certainty," with respect to the things made the object of instruction in Christian circles; and
to this end to have grounded his nar7. The rative in exact investigation of the
Primitive course of events from the beginning. "Narrative In the prosecution of this task, he
Source‑" knew himself to 6e working in a
goodly company to a common end, namely, the narration of the Christian origins on the basis of the testimony of those ministers of
the word who had been also " eye‑witnesses from the beginning." He does not say whether these fellow narrators had or had not been, some or all of them, eye‑witnesses of some or of all the events they narrated; he merely says that the foundation on which all the narratives he has in view rested was the testimony of eye‑witnesses. He does not assert for his own treatise superiority to those of his fellow workers; he only claims an honorable place for his own treatise among the others on the ground of the diligence and care he has exercised in ascertaining and recording the facts, through which, he affirms, he has attained a certainty with regard to them on which his readers may depend. Now, on comparing the narrative of Luke with those of Matthew and Mark, it is discovered that one of the main sources on which Luke draws is also one of the main sources on which Matthew draws and practically the sole source on which Mark rests. Thus Luke's judgment of the value and trustworthiness of this source receives the notable support of the judgment of his fellow evangelists, and it can scarcely be doubted that what it contains is the veritable tradition of those who were as well eyewitnesses as ministers of the Word from the beginning, in whose accuracy confidence can be placed. If the three Synoptic Gospels do not give three independent testimonies to the facts which they record, they give what is, perhaps, better,‑three independent witnesses to the trustworthiness of the narrative, which they all incorporate into their own as resting on autoptic testimony and thoroughly deserving of credit. A narrative lying at the basis of all three of these Gospels, themselves written certainly not later than the seventh decade of the century, must in any event be early in date, and in that sense must emanate from the first followers of Christ; and in the circumstances‑of the large and confident use made of it by all three of these Gospels‑can not fail to be an authentic statement of what was the conviction of the earliest circles of Christians.
By the aide of this ancient body of narrative must be placed another equally, or, perhaps, even more ancient source, consisting largely,
8. The but not exclusively, of reports of " say‑
	"8ayings	ings of Jesus." This underlies much
	of deans.°'	of the fabric of Luke and Matthew
		where Mark fails, and by their em
ployment of it is authenticated as containing, as
Luke asserts, the trustworthy testimony of eyewit
nesses. Its great antiquity is universally allowed,
and there is no doubt that it comes from the very
bosom of the Apoatolical circle, bearing independ
ent but thoroughly consentient testimony, with the
narrative source which underlies all three of the
Synoptists, of what was understood by the primi
tive Christian community to be the facts regarding
Jesus. This is the fundamental fact about these
two sources‑that the Jesus which they present is
the same Jesus; and that this Jesus is precisely the
same Jesus found in the Synoptic Gospels themselves,
presented, moreover, in precisely the same fashion
and with the emphases in precisely the same places.
This latter could, of course, not fail to be the case

168	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesus Christ
since these sources themselves constitute the main substance of the Synoptic Gospels into which they have been transfused. Its significance is that the portrait of Jesus as the supernatural Son of God who came into the world as the Messiah on a mission of mercy to sinful men, which is reflected even in the scanty notices of him that find an incidental place in the pages of heathen historians, which suffused the whole preaching of Paul and of the other missionaries of the first age, and which was wrought out into the details of a rich dramatization in the narratives of the Synoptic Gospels, is as old as Christianity itself and comes straight from the representations of Christ's first followers.
	Valuable,	however, as the separation out from
the Synoptic narrative of these underlying sources
is in this aspect of the matter, appeal can not be
made from the Synoptics to these sources as from
		less to more trustworthy documents.
9. Individ‑ On the one hand, these sources do not
	ual 8ea‑	exist outside the Synoptics; in them
	tions of	they have "found their grave." On
	Luke and	the other hand, the Synoptics in large
	Matthew.	pate are these sources; and their trust
		worthiness as wholes is guaranteed by
the trustworthiness of the sources from which
they have drawn the greater part of their materials,
and from the general portraiture of Christ in which
they do not in the least depart. Luke's claim
in his preface that he has made accurate in
vestigations, seeking to learn exactly what hap
pened that he might. attain certainty in his
narrative, is expressly justified for the larger
part of his narrative when the sourceg which
underlie it are isolated and are found to approve
themselves under every test as excellent. There
is no reason to doubt that for the remainder of
his narrative (and Matthew too for the remainder
of his narrative) not derived from these two sources
which the accident of their common use by Mat
thew, Mark, and Luke, or by Matthew and Luke,
reveals, he (or Matthew) derives his material from
equally good and trustworthy sources which hap
pen to be used only by him. The general trust
worthiness of Luke's narrative is not lessened but
enhanced by the circumstance that, in the larger
portion of it, he has the support of other evange
lists in his confident use of his sources, with the
effect that these sources can be examined and
an approving verdict reached upon them. His
judgment of sources is thus confirmed, and his
claim to possess exact information and to have
framed a trustworthy narrative is vindicated.
What he gives from sources which were not used
by the other evangelists, that is to say, in that por
tion of his narrative which is peculiar to himself
(and the same must be said for Matthew, mutatis
rnutandis), has earned a right to credit on his own
authentication. It is not surprising, therefore, that
the portions of the narratives of Matthew and Luke
which are peculiar to the one or the other bear
every mark of sincere and well‑informed narration
and contain many hints of resting on good and
trustworthy sources. In a word, the Synoptic
Gospels supply a threefold sketch of the acts and
teachings of Christ of exceptional trustworthiness.
If here is not historical verity, historical verity would seem incapable of being attained, recorded, and transmitted by human hands.
Along with the Synoptic Gospels there has been handed down by an unexceptionable line of testimony under the name of the Apostle John another narrative of the teaching and work of Christ of equal fulness with that of the Synop‑
10. The tic Gospels, and yet so independent of
Gospel of theirs as to stand out in a sense in
	John.	strong contrast with theirs, and even
		to invite attempts to establish a con
tradiction between it and them. There is, however,
no contradiction, but rather a deep‑lying harmony.
There are so‑called Synoptica,l traits discover
able in John, and not only are Johannine elements
imbedded in the Synoptical narrative, but an oc
casional passage occurs in it which is almost more
Johannine than John himself. Take, for example,
that pregnant declaration recorded in Matt. xi. 27
23, which, as it occurs also in Luke (x. 21, 22),
must have had a place in that ancient source
drawn on in common by these two Gospels which
comes from the first days of Christianity. All
the high teaching of John's Gospel, as has been
justly remarked, is but " a series of variations "
upon the theme here given its " classical expres
sion." The type of teaching which is brought
forward and emphasized by John is thus recognized
on all hands from the beginning to have had a
place in Christ's teaching; and John differs from
the Synoptics only in the special aspect of Christ's
teaching which he elects particularly to present.
The naturalness of this type of teaching on the lips
of the Jesus of the Synoptists is also undeniable;
it must be allowed‑and is now generally allowed
that by the writers of the Synoptic Gospels, and,
it should be added, by their sources as well, Jesus
is presented, and is presented as representing him
self, as being all that John represents him to be
when he calls him the Word, who was in the be
ginning with God and was God. The relation of John
and the Synoptists in their portraiture of Jesus
somewhat resembles, accordingly, that of Plato
and Xenophon in their portraiture of Socrates;
only, with this great difference‑that both Plato
and Xenophon were primarily men of letters and
the portrait they draw of Socrates is in the
hands of both alike eminently a sophisticated and
literary one, while the evangelists set down simply
the facts as they appealed to them severally. The
definite claim which John's Gospel makes to be the
work of one of the inner circle of the companions of
Jesus is supported, moreover, by copious evidence
that it comes from the hands of such a one as a com
panion of Jesus would be‑‑a Jew, who possessed an
intimate knowledge of Palestine, and was ac
quainted with the events of our Lord's life as only
an eye‑witness could be acquainted with them, and
an eye‑witness who had been admitted to very
close association with him. That its narrative
rests on good information is repeatedly manifested:
and more than once historical links are supplied
by it which are needed to give clearness to the
Synoptical narrative, as, for example, in the chron
ological framework of the ministry of Jesus and the

Jesus Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	154
culminating miracle of the raising of Lazarus, which is required to account for the incidents of the Passion‑Week. It presents no different Jesus from the Jesus of the Synoptists, and it throws the emphasis at the same place‑on his expiatory death and rising again; but it notably supplements the narrative of the Synoptists and reveals a whole new side of Jesus' ministry, and if not a wholly new aspect of his teaching, yet a remarkable mass of that higher aspect of his teaching of which only occasional specimens are included in the Synoptic narrative. John's narrative thus rounds out the Synoptical narrative and gives the portrait drawn in it a richer content and a greater completeness.
This portrait may itself be confidently adduced as its own warranty. It is not too much to say with Nathaniel Lardner that " the history of the
New Testament has in it all the marks
11. Gospel of credibility that any history can Portrait have." But apart from these more
of Christ usually marshaled evidences of the Not trustworthiness of the narratives, there
Invented. is the portrait itself which they draw,
and this can not by any possibility have been an invention. It` is not merely that the portrait is harmonious throughout‑in the allusions and presuppositions of the epistles of Paul and the other letter‑writers of the New Testament, in the detailed narratives of the Synoptists and John, and in each of the sources which underlie them. This is a matter of importance; but it is not the matter of chief moment; there is no need to dwell upon the impossibility of such a harmony having been maintained. save on the basis of simple truthfulness of record, or to dispute whether in the case of the Synoptics there are three independent witnesses to the one portrait, or only the two independent witnesses of their two most prominent " sources." Nor is the most interesting point whether the aboriginality of this portrait is guaranteed by the harmony of the representation in all the sources of information, some of which reach back to the most primitive epoch of the Christian movement. It is quite certain that this conception of Christ's person and career was the conception of his immediate followers, and indeed of himself; but, important as this conclusion is, it is still not the matter of primary import. The matter of primary significance is that this Portrait thus imbedded in all the authoritative sources of information, and thus proved to be the conception of its founder cherished by the whole of primitive Christendom, and indeed commended to it by that founder himself, is a portrait intrinsically incapable of invention by men. It could never have come into being save as the revelation of an actual person embodying it, who really lived among men. " A romancer," as even Albert Rkville allows, " can not attribute to a being which be creates an ideal superior to what be himself is capable of conceiving." The conception of the God‑man which is embodied in the portrait which the sources draw of Christ, and which is dramatized by them through such a history as they depict, can be accounted for only on the assumption that such a God‑man actually lived, was seen of men, and was painted from the life. The miracle of the in‑
vention of such a portraiture, whether by the conscious effort of art, or by the unconscious working of the mythopeic fancy, would be as great as the actual existence of such a person. Of this there is sufficient a posteriori proof in the invariable deterioration this portrait suffers in its secondary reproductions‑in the so‑called ".Lives of Christ," of every type. The attempt vitally to realize and reproduce it results inevitably in its reduction. A portraiture which can not even be interpreted by men without suffering serious loss can not be the invention of the first simple followers of Jesus. Its very existence in their unsophisticated narratives is the sufficient proof of its faithfulness to a great reality.
II. The Portrait of Jesus: Only an outline of this portrait can be set down here. Jesus appears in it not only a supernatural, but in all the sources alike specifically a divine, person, who came into the world on a mission of mercy to sinful man. Such a mission was in its essence a humiliation and involved humiliation at every step of its accomplishment. His life is represented accord‑
1. His ingly as a life of difficulty and con‑
Humili‑	flict, of trial and suffering, issuing in a
	anon.	shameful death. But this humiliation
		is represented as in every step and stage
of it voluntary. It was entered into and abided in
solely in the interests of his mission, and did not ar
gue at any point of it helplessness in the face of the
difficulties which hemmed him in more and more
until they led him to death on the cross. It rather
manifested his strong determination to fulfil his
mission to the end, to drink to its dregs the cup
he had undertaken to drink. Accordingly, every
suggestion of escape from it by the use of his in
trinsic divine powers, whether of omnipotence or
of omniscience, was treated by him first and last as
a temptation of the evil one. The death in which
his life ends is conceived, therefore, as the goal in
which his life culminates. He came into the world
to die, and every stage of the road that led up to
this issue was determined not for him but by him:
he was never the victim but always the master of
circumstance, and pursued his pathway from begin
ning to end, not merely in full knowledge from the
start of all its turns and twists up to its bitter con
clusion, but in complete control both of them and
of it.
	His life of humiliation, sinking into his terrible
death, was therefore not his misfortune, but his
		achievement as the promised Messiah,
2, gin by and in whom the kingdom of God
Messiah‑ is to be established in the world; it ship and was the work which as Messiah he
	Deity.	came to do. Therefore, in his prose
		cution of it, he from the beginning
announced himself as the Messiah, accepted all
ascriptions to him of Messiahship under what
ever designation, and thus gathered up into
his person all the preadumbrations of Old‑Testa
ment prophecy; and by his favorite self
designation of " Son of Man," derived from
Daniel's great vision (vii. 13), continually pro
claimed himself the Messiah he actually was,
emphasizing in contrast with his present humilia‑

166	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesus Christ
tion his heavenly origin and his future glory. Moreover, in the midst of his humiliation, he exercised, so far as that was consistent with the performance of his mission, all the prerogatives of that " transcendent " or divine Messiah which he was. He taught with authority, substituting for every other sanction, his great " But I say unto you," and declaring himself greater than the greatest of God's representatives whom he had sent in all the past to visit his people. He surrounded himself as he went about preaching the Gospel of the kingdom with a miraculous nimbus, each and every miracle in which was adapted not merely to manifest the presence of a supernatural person in the midst of the people, but, as a piece of symbolical teaching, to reveal the nature of this supernatural person, and to afford a foretaste of the blessedness of his rule in the kingdom he came to found. He assumed plenary authority over the religious ordinances of the people, divinely established though they were; and exercised absolute control over the haws of nature themselves. The divine prerogative of forgiving sine he claimed for himself, the divine power of reading the heart he frankly exercised, the divine function of judge of quick and dead he attached to his own person. Asserting for himself a superhuman dignity of person, or rather a share in the ineffable Name itself, he represented himself as abiding continually even when on earth in absolute communion with God the Father, and participating by necessity of nature in the treasures of the divine knowledge and grace; announced himself the source of all divine knowledge and grace to men; and drew to himself all the religious affections, suspending the destinies of men absolutely upon their relation to his own person. Nevertheless he walked straight onward in the path of his lowly mission, and, bending even the wrath of men to his service, gave himself in his own good time and way to the death he had come to accomplish. Then, his mission performed, he rose again from the dead in the power of his deathless life; showed himself alive to chosen witnesses, that he might strengthen the hearts of his people; and ascended to the right hand of God, whence he directs the continued preparation of the kingdom until it shall please him to return for its establishment in its glorious eternal form.
It is important to fix firmly in mind the central conception of this representation. It turns upon the sacrificial death of Jesus to which the whole
life leads up, and out of which all its 8. Central issues are drawn, and for a perpetual
Concea‑ memorial of which he is represented
tions. as having instituted a solemn memo‑
rial feast. The divine majesty of this Son of God; his redemptive mission to the world, in a life of humiliation and a ransoming death; the completion of his task in accordance with his purpose; his triumphant rising from the death thus vicariously endured; his assumption of sovereignty over the future development of the kingdom founded in his blood, and over the world as the theater of its development; his expected return as the conaummator of the ages and the judge of all‑this is the circle of ideas in which all accounts move. It is
the portrait not of a merely human life, though it includes the delineation of a complete and a completely human life. It is the portrayal of a human episode in the divine life. It is, therefore, not merely connected with supernatural occurrences, nor merely colored by supernatural features, nor merely set in a supernatural atmosphere: the supernatural is its very substance, the elimination of which would be the evaporation of the whole. The Jesus of the New Testament is not fundamentally man, however divinely gifted: he is God tabernacling for a while. among men, with heaven lying about him not merely in his infancy, but throughout all the days of his flesh.
III. Attempts to Naturalize the Portrait of Jesus: The intense supernaturalism of this portraiture is, of course, an offense to our anti‑supernaturalistic age. It is only what was to be expected, therefore, that throughout the last century and a half a long series of scholars, imbued with the anti‑supernaturalistic instinct of the time, have assumed the task of desupernaturalizing it. Great difficulty has been experienced, however, in the attempt to construct a historical sieve which will strain out miracles and yet let Jesus through; for Jesus is himself the greatest miracle of them all. Accordingly in the end of the day there is a growing disposition, as if in despair of accomplishing this feat, boldly to construct the sieve so as to strain out Jesus too; to take refuge in the counsel of desperation which affirms that there never was such a person as Jesus, that Christianity had no founder, and that not merely the portrait of Jesus, but Jesus himself, is a pure projection of later ideals into the past. The main stream of assault still addresses itself, however, to the attempt to eliminate not Jesus himself, but the Jesus of the evangelists, and to substitute for him a desuperna,turalized Jesus.
The instruments which have been relied on to effect this result may be called, no doubt with some but not misleading inexactitude, literary and historical criticism. The attempt has
i. Literary been made to track out the process by
and His‑ which the present witnessing docu‑
torioal ments have come into existence, to
	Criticism.	show them gathering accretions in
		this process, and to sift out the
sources from which they are drawn; and then
to make appeal to these sources as the only
real witnesses. And the attempt has been
made to go behind the whole written record,
operating either immediately upon ' the docu
ments as. they now exist, or ultimately upon
the sources which literary criticism has sifted out
from them, with a view to reaching a more primi
tive and presumably truer conception of Jesus than
that which has obtained record in the writings of
his followers. The occasion for resort to this latter
method of research is the failure of the former to
secure the results aimed at. For, when, at the
dictation of anti‑supernaturalistic presuppositions,
John is set aside in favor of the Synoptics, and
then the Synoptics are set aside in favor of Mark,
conceived as the representative of " the narrative
source " (by the side of which must be placed‑

Jesus Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	168
though this is not always remembered‑the second source of " Sayings of Jesus," which underlies so much of Matthew and Luke; and also‑though this is even more commonly forgotten‑whatever other sources either Matthew or Luke has drawn upon for material), it still appears that no progress whatever has been made in eliminating the divine Jesus and his supernatural accompaniment of mighty works‑although, chronologically speaking, the very beginning of Christianity has been reached. It is necessary, accordingly, if there is not to be acknowledged a divine Christ with a supernatural history, to get behind the whole literary tradition. Working on Mark, therefore, taken as the original Gospel, an attempt moat be made to distinguish between the traditional element which he incorporates into his narrative and the dogmatic element which he (as the mouthpiece of the Christian community) contributes to it. Or, working on the " Sayings," discrimination must first be made between the narrative element (assumed to be colored by the thought of the Christian community) and the reportorial element (which may repeat real sayings of Jesus); and then, within the reportorial element, all that is too lofty for the naturalistic Jesus must be trimmed down until it fits in with his simply human character. Or, working on the Gospels as they stand, inquisition moat be made for 2. Methods statements of fact concerning Jesus or
of His‑ for sayings of his, which, taken out of torical the context in which the evangelists Criticism. have placed them and cleansed from the coloring given by them, may be made to seem inconsistent with " the worship of Jesus " which characterizes these documents; and on the narrower basis thus secured there is built up a new portrait of Jesus, contradictory to that which the evangelists have drawn.
The precariousness of these proceedings, or rather, frankly, their violence, is glaringly evident. In the processes of such criticism it is pure subjectivity which rules, and the investigator gets out as results only what he puts in as premises. And even when the desired result has thus been wrested from the unwilling documents, he discovers that he has only brought himself into the moat extreme historical embarrassment. By thus desupernaturalizing Jesus he leaves primitive Christianity and its supernatural Jesus wholly without historical basis or justification. The naturalizing historian has therefore at once to address himself to supplying some account of the immediate universal ascription to Jesus by his followers of
S. Its Em‑ qualities which he did not possess and
barrass‑ q
	ment.	to which he laid no claim; and that
		with such force and persistence of con
viction as totally to supersede from the very begin
ning with their perverted version of the facts the
actual reality of things. It admits of no doubt,
and it is not doubted, that supernaturalistic Chris
tianity is the only historical Christianity. It is
agreed on all hands that the very first followers of
Jesus ascribed to him a supernatural character.
It is even allowed that it is precisely by virtue of
its supernaturalistic elements that Christianity has
made its way in the world. It is freely admitted that it was by the force of its enthusiastic proclamation of the divine Christ, who could not be holden of death but burst the bonds of the grave, that Christianity conquered the world to itself. What account shall be given of all this? There is presented a problem here, which is insoluble on the naturalistic hypothesis. The old mythical theory fails because it requires time, and no time is at its disposal; the primitive Christian community believed in the divine Christ. The new " history‑ofreligions " theory fails because it can not discover the elements of that " Christianity before Christ " which it must posit, either remotely in the Babylonian inheritance of the East, or close by in the prevalent Messianic conceptions of contemporary Judaism. Nothing is available but the postulation of pure fanaticism in Jesus' first followers, which finds it convenient not to proceed beyond the general suggestion that there is no telling what fanaticism may not invent. The plain fact is that the supernatural Jesus is needed to account for the supernaturalistic Christianity which is grounded in him. Or‑if this supernaturalistic Christianity does not need a supernatural Jesus to account for it, it is hard to see why any Jesus at all need be postulated. Naturalistic criticism thus overreaches itself and is caught up suddenly by the discovery that in abolishing the supernatural Jesus it has abolished Jesus altogether, since this supernatural Jesus is the only Jesus which enters as a factor into the historical development. It is the desupernaturalized Jesus which is the mythical Jesus, who never had any existence, the postulation of the existence of whom explains nothing and leaves the whole historical development hanging in the air.
It is instructive to observe the lines of development of the naturalistic reconstruction of the Jesus of the evangelists through the century and a half of its evolution. The normal task which the student of the life of Jesus seta himself is to penetrate into the spirit of the transmission so far as that transmission approves itself to him
4. Its His. as trustworthy, to realize with exacttorical _ ness and vividness the portrait of Jesus
	Develop‑ p	conveyed by it, and to reproduce that
		portrait in an accurate and vital por
trayal. The naturalistic reconstructors, on the
other hand, engage themselves in an effort to sub
stitute for the Jesus of the transmission another
Jesus of their own, a Jesus who will seem " nat
ural " to them, and will work in " naturally " with
their naturalistic world‑view. In the first instance
it was the miracles of Jesus which they set them
selves to eliminate, and this motive ruled their
criticism from Reimarua (1694‑1768), or rather,
from the publication of the Wolfenbuettel Frag
ments (q.v.), to Strauss (1835‑36). The domi
nant method employed‑which found its culmina
ting example in H. E. G. Paulus (1828)‑was to
treat the narrative as in all essentials historical,
but to seek in each miraculous story a natural fact
underlying it. This whole point of view was tran
scended by the advent of the mythical view in
Strauss, who laughed it out of court. Since then
miracles have been treated ever more and more

167	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesus Christ
confidently as negligible quantities, and the whole strength of criticism has been increasingly . expended on the reduction of the supernatural figure of Jesus to " natural " proportions. The instrument relied upon to produce this effect has been psychological analysis; the method being to rework the narrative in the interests of what is called a " comprehensible " Jesus. The whole mental life of Jesus and the entire course of his conduct have been subjected to psychological canons derived from the critics' conception of a purely human life, and nothing has been allowed to him which does not approve itself as " natural " according to this standard. The result is, of course, that the Jesus of the evangelists has been transformed into a nineteenth‑century " liberal " theologian, and no conceptions or motives or actions have been allowed to him which would not be " natural " in such a one.
The inevitable reaction which seems to be now asserting itself takes two forms, both of which, while serving themselves heirs to the negative criticism of this " liberal " school, decisively reject its positive construction of the figure of Jesus. A weaker current contents itself with drawing attention to the obvious fact that such a Jesus as the " liberal " criticism yields will not account for the Christianity which actually came into being; and on this ground proclaims the " liberal " criticism bankrupt and raises the question, what need there is for assuming any Jesus at all. If the only Jesus salvable from the d6bria of legend is obviously not the author of the Christianity which actually came into being, why not simply recognize that Christianity came into being without any author‑was just the crystallization of conceptions in solution at the time? A stronger current, scoffing at the projection of a nineteenth‑century "liberal" back into the first century and calling him " Jesus,' insists that " the historical Jesus,, was just a Jew of his day, a peasant of Galilee with all the narrowness of a peasant's outlook and all the deficiency in culture which belonged to a Galilean countryman of the period. Above all, it insists that the real Jesus, possessed by those Messianic dreams which filled the minds of the Jewish peasantry of the time, was afflicted with the great delusion that he was himself the promised Messiah. Under the obsession of this portentous fancy he imagined that God would intervene with his almighty arm and set him on the throne of a conquering Israel; and when the event falsified this wild hope, he assuaged his bitter disappointment with the wilder promise that he would rise from death itself and come back to establish his kingdom. Thus the naturalistic criticism of a hundred and fifty years has run out into no Jesus at all, or worse than no Jesus, a fanatic or even a paranoiac. The " liberal " criticism which has had it so long its own way is called sharply to its defense against the fruit of its own loins. In the process of this defense it wavers before the assault and incorporates more or less of the new conception of Jesusof the " consistently eschatological " Jesus‑into its fabric. Or it stands in its tracks and weakly protests that Jesus' figure must be conceived as
greatly as possible, so only it be kept strictly within the limits of a mere human being. Or it develops an apologetical argument which, given its full validity and effect, would undo all its painfully worked‑out negative results and lead back to the Jesus of the evangelists as the true " historical Jesus."
It has been remarked above that the portrait of Jesus drawn in the sources is its own credential; no man, and no body of men, can have invented this figure, consciously or unconsciously, and dramatized
8. Its it consistently through such a varied
Issue.	and difficult life‑history. It may be
added that the Jesus of the naturalistic criticism is its own refutation. One wonders whether the " liberal " critics realize the weakness, ineffectiveness, inanition of the Jesus they offer; the pitiful inertness they attribute to him, his utter passivity under the impact of circumstance. So far from being conceivable as the molder of the ages, this Jesus is wholly molded by his own surroundings, the sport of every suggestion from without. In their preoccupation with critical details, it is possible that its authors are scarcely aware of the grossness of the reduction of the figure of Jesus they have perpetrated. But let them only turn to portray their new Jesus in a life‑history, and the pitiableness of the figure they have made him smites the eye. Whatever else may be said of it, this must be said‑that out of the Jesus into which the naturalistic criticism has issued‑in its best or in its worst estate‑the Christianity which has conquered the world could never have come.
IV. The Life of Jesus* The firmness, clearness, and even fulness with which the figure of Jesus is delineated in the sources, and the variety of activities through which it is dramatized, do not insure that the data given should suffice for drawing up a properly so‑called " life of Jesus." The data in
the sources are practically confined toy
1. In What the brief period of Jesus' public work. Sense a Only a single incident is recorded from
"Life"	his earlier life, and that is taken from
Impoe‑	his boyhood. So large a portion of
	Bible.	the actual narrative, moreover, is oc
		cupied with his death that it might
even be said‑the more that the whole narrative
also leads up to the death as the life's culmination
‑that little has been preserved concerning Jesus
but the circumstances which accompanied his birth
and the circumstances which led up to and ac
companied his death. The incidents which the
narrators 'record, again, are not recorded with a,
biographical intent, and are not selected for their biographical significance, or ordered so as to present a biographical result: in the ease of each evangelist they serve a particular purpose which
may employ biographical details, but is not itself a biographical end. In other words the Gospels are not formal biographies but biographical arguments‑a circumstance which does not affect the historicity of the incidents they select for record, but does affect the selection and ordering of these incidents. Mark has in view to show that
this great religious movement in which he himself had a part had its beginnings in a divine interpo‑

Jesus Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	168
eition; Matthew, that this divine interposition was in fulfilment of the promises made to Israel; Luke, that it had as its end the redemption of the world; John, that the agent in it was none other than the Son of God himself. In the enforcement and illustration of their several themes each records a wealth of biographical details. But it does not follow that these details, when brought together and arranged in their chronological sequence, or even in their genetic order, will supply an adequate biography. The attempt to work them up into a biography is met moreover, by a great initial difficulty. Every biographer takes his position, as it were, above his subject, who must live his life over again in his biographer's mind; it is of the very essence of the biographer's work thoroughly to understand his subject and to depict him as he understands him. What, then, if the subject of the biography be above the comprehension of his biographer? Obviously, in that case, a certain reduction can scarcely be avoided. This in an instance like the present, where the subject is a superhuman being, is the same as to say that a greater or lesser measure of rationalization, " naturalization," inevitably takes place. A true biography of a Godman, a biography which depicts his life from within, untangling the complex of motives which moved him, and explaining his conduct by reference to the internal springs of action, is in the nature of the case an impossibility for men. Human beings can explain only on the basis of their own experiences and mental processes; and so explaining they instinctively explain away what transcends their experiences and confounds their mental processes. Seeking to portray the life of Jesus as natural, they naturalize it, that is, reduce it to correspondence with their own nature. Every attempt to work out a life of Christ must therefore face not only the insufficiency of the data, but the perennial danger bf falsifying the data by an instinctive naturalization of them. If, however, the expectation of attaining a " paychologica,l " biography of Jesus must be renounced, and even a complete external life can not be pieced together from the fragmentary communications of the sources, a clear and consistent view of the course of the public ministry of Jesus can still be derived from them. The consecution of the events can be set forth, their causal relations established, and their historical development explicated. To do this is certainly in a modified sense to outline " the life of Jesus," and to do this proves by its results to be eminently worth while.
A series of synchronisms with secular history indicated by Luke, whose historical interest seems
more alert than that of the other 2. Frame‑ evangelists, gives the needed informawork of the Lion for placing such a " life " in its
« ~fe." right historical relations. The chronological framework for the " life " itself is supplied by the succession of annual feasts which are recorded by John as occurring during Jesus' public ministry. Into this framework the data furnished by the other Gospels‑which are not without corroborative suggestions of order, season of occurrence, and relations‑fit readily; and when so arranged yield so self‑consistent and rationally de‑
veloping a history as to add a strong corroboration of its trustworthiness. Differences of opinion respecting the details of arrangement of course remain possible; and these differences are not always small and not always without historical significance. But they do not affect the general outline or the main drift of the history, and on most points, even those of minor importance, a tolerable agreement exists. Thus, for example, it is all but universally allowed that Jesus was born c. 5 or 6 s.c. (year of Rome 748 or 749), and it is an erratic judgment indeed which would fix on any other year than 29 or 30 A.D. for his crucifixion. On the date of his baptism‑which determines the duration of his public ministry‑more difference is possible; but it is quite generally agreed that it took place late in 26 A.D. or early in 27. It is only by excluding the testimony of John that a duration of less than between two and three years can be assigned to the public ministry; and then only by subjecting the Synoptical narrative to considerable pressure. The probabilities seem strongly in favor of extending it to three years and some months. The decision between a duration of two years and some months and a duration of three years and some months depends on the determination of the two questions of where in the narrative of John the imprisonment of John the Baptist (Matt. iv. 12) is to be placed, and what the unnamed feast is which is mentioned in John v. 1. On the former of these questions opinion varies only between John iv. 1‑3 and John v. 1. On the latter a great variety of opinions exists: some think of Passover, others of Purim or Pentecost, or of Trumpets or Tabernacles, or even of the day of Atonement. On the whole, the evidence seems decisively preponderant for piecing the imprisonment of the Baptist at John iv. 1‑3, and for identifying the feast of John v. 1 with Passover. In that case, the public ministry of Jesus covered about three years and a third, and it is probably not far wrong to assign to it the period lying between the latter part of 28 A.D. and the Passover of 30 A.D.*
The material supplied by the Gospel narrative distributes itself naturally under the heads of (1) the preparation, (2) the ministry, and (3) the consum‑
S. Outline oration. For the first twelve or thir‑
	of the	teen years of Jesus' life nothing is
	"Life. "	recorded except the striking circum
		stances connected with his birth, and
a general statement of his remarkable growth.
Similarly for his. youth, about seventeen years and
a half, there is recorded only the single incident at
its beginning, of his conversation with the doctors
in the temple. Anything like continuous narrative
begins only with the public ministry, in, say, De
cember, 26 A.D. This narrative falls naturally into
four parts which may perhaps be distinguished as

* Ramsay, Sanday, and Turner prefer 29 A.D. for the date of the crucifixion. Turner's dates are: birth, 7‑6 e.c.; baptism, 28 A.D.; ministry, between two and three years; death 29 A.D. Sanday's dates are: birth, ‑; baptism, late 26 A.D.; ministry, two and a half years; death, 29 A.D. Ramsay's dates are: birth, autumn 8 ex.; baptism, early in 26 A.D.; ministry, three years and some months; death, 29 A.D.

159	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	leaus Christ
(a) the beginning of the Gospel, forty days, from December, 26 to February, 27; (b) the Judean ministry, covering about ten months, from Feb., 27 to Dec., 27; (c) the Galilean ministry, covering about twenty‑two months, from Dec., 27 to Sept., 29; (d) the last journeys to Jerusalem, covering some six months, from Sept., 29 to the Passover of (Apr.) 30. The events of this final Passover season, the narrative of which becomes so detailed and precise that the occurrences from day to day are noted, constitute, along with their sequences, what is here called " the consummation." They include the events which led up to the crucifixion of Jesus, the crucifixion itself, and the manifestations which he gave of himself after his death up to his ascension. So preponderating was the interest which the reporters took in this portion of the " life of Christ," that is to say, in his death and resurrection, that about a third of their whole narrative is devoted to it. The ministry which leads up to it is also, however, full of incident. What is here called "the beginning of the Gospel " gives, no doubt, only the accounts of Jesus' baptism and temptation. Only meager information is given also, and that by John alone, of the occurrences of the first ten months after his public appearance, the scene of which lay mainly in Judea. With the beginning of the ministry in Galilee, however, with which alone the Synoptic Gospels concern themselves, incidents become numerous. Capernaum now becomes Jesus' home for almost two full years; and no leas than eight periods of sojourn there with intervening circuits going out from it as a center can be traced. When the object of this ministry had been accomplished Jesus finally withdraws from Galilee and addresses himself to the preparation of his followers for the death he had come into the world to accomplish; and this he then brings about in the manner which beat aubservea his purpose.
Into the substance of Jesus' ministry it is not possible to enter here. Let it only be observed that it is properly called a ministry.
4. The He himself testified that he came notPnni tr
	Ministry.	to be ministered unto but to minister,
		and he added that this ministry was
fulfilled in his giving his life as a ransom for many.
In other words, the main object of his work was to
lay the foundations of the kingdom of God in his
blood. Subsidiary to this was his purpose to make
vitally known to men the true nature of the king
dom of God, to prepare the way for its advent in
their hearts, and above all, to attach them by faith
to his person as the founder and consummator of
the kingdom. His ministry involved, therefore, a
constant presentation of himself to the people as
the promised One, in and by whom the kjngdOIn
of God was to be established, a steady " campaign
of instruction " as to the nature of the kingdom
which he came to found, and a watchful con
trol of the forces which were making for his de
struction, until, his work of preparation being ended,
he was ready to complete it by offering himself
up. The progress of his ministry is governed by
the interplay of these motives. It has been broadly
distributed into a year of obscurity, a year of
popular favor, and a year of opposition; and if
these designations are understood to have only a relative applicability, they may be accepted as generally describing from the outside the development of the ministry. Beginning first in Judea Jesus spent some ten months in attaching to himself his first disciples, and with apparent fruitlessness proclaiming the kingdom at the center of national life. Then, moving north to Galilee, he quickly won the ear of the people and carried them to the height of their present receptivity; whereupon, breaking from them, he devoted himself to the more precise instruction of the chosen band he had gathered about him to be the nucleus of his Church. The Galilean ministry thus divides into two parts, marked respectively by more popular and more intimate teaching. The line of division falls at the miracle of the feeding of the five thousand, which, as marking a crisis in the ministry, is recorded by all four evangelists, and is the only miracle which has received this fourfold record. Prior to this point, Jesus' work had been one of gathering disciples; subsequently to it, it was a work of instructing and sifting the disciples whom he had gathered. The end of the Galilean ministry is marked by the confession of Peter and the transfiguration, and after it nothing remained but the preparation of the chosen disciples for the death, which was to close his work; and the consummation of his mission in his death and rising again.
The instruments by which Jesus carried out his ministry were two, teaching and miracles. In both
alike he manifested his deity. Wher6. Instru‑ ever he went the supernatural was
	mente of	present in word and deed. His teach
	the min‑	ing was with authority. In its in
		sight and foresight it was as super
natural as the miracles themselves; the hearts of
men and the future lay as open before him as the
forces of nature lay under his control; all that the
Father knows he knew also, and he alone was the
channel of the revelation of it to men. The power of
his " But I say unto You)' was as manifest as that
of his compelling " Arise and walk." The theme
of his teaching was the kingdom of God and him
self as its divine founder and king. Its form ran
all the way from crisp gnomic sayings and brief
comparisons to elaborate parables and profound
spiritual discussions in which the deep things of
God are laid bare in simple, searching words. The
purport of his miracles was that the kingdom of
God was already present in its Ring. Their num
ber is perhaps usually greatly underestimated. It
is true that only about thirty or forty are actually
recorded. But these are recorded only as speci
mens, and as such they represent all classes. Mir.
aeles of healing form the preponderant class; but
there are also exorcisms, nature‑miracles, raisinga
of the dead. Besides these recorded miracles, how
ever, there are frequent general statements of
abounding miraculous manifestations. For a time
disease and death must have been almost banished
from the land. The country was thoroughly
aroused and filled with wonder. In the midst of this universal excitement‑when the people were ready to take him by force and make him kinghe withdrew himself from them, and throwing his

Jesus Christ
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
circuits far afield, beyond the bruit and uproar, addressed himself to preparing his chosen companions for his great sacrifice‑first leading them in the socalled " Later Galilean ministry " (from the feeding of the 5,000 to the confession at Caesarea Philippi) to a better apprehension of the majesty of his person as the Son of God, and of the character of the kingdom he came to found, as consisting not in meat and drink but in righteousness; and then, in the so‑called " Perxaxi ministry " (from the confession at Caesarea Philippi to the final arrival at Jerusalem) specifically preparing them for his death and resurrection. Thus he walked straightforward in the path he had chosen, and his choice of which is already made clear in the account of his temptation, set at the beginning of his public career; and in his own good time and way‑in the end forcing the hand of his opponents to secure that he should die at the Passover‑shed his blood as the blood of the new covenant sacrifice for the remission of sins. Having power thus to lay down his life, he had power also to take it again, and in due time he rose again from the dead and ascended to the right hand of the majesty on high, leaving behind him his promise to come again in his glory, to perfect the kingdom he had inaugurated.
It is appropriate that this miraculous life should be set between the great marvels of the virgin‑
birth and the resurrection and ascene. The sion. These can appear strange only virgin‑ when the intervening life is looked Birth; the upon as that of a merely human being,
Eesurree‑ endowed, no doubt, not only with un‑
usual qualities, but also with the unusual favor of God, yet after all nothing more than human and therefore presumably entering the world like other human beings, and at the end paying the universal debt of human nature. From the standpoint of the evangelical writers, and of the entirety of primitive Christianity, which looked upon Jesus not as a merely human being but as God himself come into the world on a mission of mercy that involved the humiliation of a human life and death, it would be this assumed community with common humanity in mode of entrance into and exit from the earthly life which would seem strange and incredible. The entrance of the Lord of Glory into the world could not but be supernatural; his exit from the world, after the work which he had undertaken had been performed, could not fail to bear the stamp of triumph. There is no reason for doubting the trustworthiness of the narratives at these points, beyond the anti‑aupernaturalistic instinct which strives consciously or unconsciously to naturalize the whole evangelical narrative. The " infancy chapters " of Luke are demonstrably from Luke's own hand, bear evident traces of having been derived from trustworthy sources of information, and possess all the authority which attaches to the communications of a historian who evinces himself sober, careful, and exact, by every historical test. The parallel chapters of Matthew, while obviously independent of those of Luke‑recording in common with them not a single incident beyond the bare fact of the virgin‑birth‑are thoroughly at one with them in
the main fact, and in the incidents they record fit with remarkable completeness into the interstices of Luke's narrative. Similarly, the narratives of the resurrection, full of diversity in details as they are, and raising repeated puzzling questions of order and arrangement, yet not only bear consentient testimony to all the main facts, but fit into one another so as to create a consistent narrative‑which has moreover the support of the contemporary testimony of Paul. The persistent attempts to explain away the facts so witnessed or to substitute for the account which the New Testament writers give of them some more plausible explanation, as the nattll>alistic mind estimates plausibility, are all wrecked on the directness, precision, and copiousness of the testimony; and on the great effects which have flowed from this fact in the revolution wrought in the minds and lives of the apostles themselves, and in the revolution wrought through their preaching of the resurrection in the life and history of the world. The entire history of the world for 2,000 years is the warranty of the reality of the resurrection of Christ, by which the forces were let loose which have created it. " Unique spiritual effects," it has been remarked, with great reasonableness, " require a unique spiritual cause; and we shall never understand the full significance of the cause, if we begin by denying or minimizing its uniqueness."
For details see the separate articles on the several distinct topics, e.g., CHRIBTOLOGY; GOSPELS; MIRACLES; PARABLES; RESURRECTION; VIRGIN‑BIRTH.
BENJAMIN B. WARFIELD.
B. I. Limitation of the Field: The means of writing a satisfactory life of Christ have never existed. From the outset what the Church attempted was no more than the story of Jesus covering a twelvemonth. Even in this its object was not historical but apologetic. There exists a bare mention by a few secular writers of 110‑120 A.D. of the origin of the obnoxious " Christians." Pliny, the earliest (112 A.D.), merely describes the sect. Tacitus, aI. accurate historian, c. 115 A.D., dates its rise from the execution of " Christus " by Pilate, procurator of Judea tinder Tiberius. Secular writers have no more to tell. They would have been compelled to refer inquirers to the tradition preserved by the sect itself. Now even the latest of our four Gospels can be traced in some form by its use in orthodox, heretical, and even anti‑Christian writers, to about the same period; so that the whole question of the historical investigator resolves itself into a valuation and comparison of the writings preserved by the Church itself, in the interest of its own defense and edification.
II. The Sources: The story of Jesus included what was needful for the uses of the Church. Fortunately the severest tests known to the science of literary and historical criticism leave the Church in possession of two groups of writings which circulated in Christian conventicles 50‑100 A.D. These are (1) apostolic letters, homilies and " prophecies," writings directly addressed to the edification of particular churches; and (2) etiological narratives, purporting to give account of Christian origins.

181	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	assns Christ
Of these sources the former contain from the nature of the case but slight and incidental allusion to the tradition; but for the very rea‑
l. The son that no effort is made to prove a
Epistles case the readers being merely ro‑
of Ps1~1. minded of generally accepted facts, this testimony, so far as it goes, is of far greater value than apologetic narrative. Moreover, the nucleus of this group consists of extensive " epistles " by a known author addressed at a fixed date to definite localities critically authenticated, and from twenty to fifty yearn earlier in date than the anonymous narratives. It is needless, in view of this, to explain why the historical critic takes his' stand primarily at the situation of belief and practise indirectly revealed by the great Pauline Epistles, employing them as a standard. The minor elements of this group, disputed letters of Paul, later and doubtful writings attributed to Peter, John, James and Jude add little in any event to the knowledge of Christianity as it existed in Corinth c. 55 A.D. derivable from the two Epistles to the Corinthians alone.
The narrative writings (2) are four in number, all anonymous, none earlier than 65 A.D., the latest, attributed in veiled language, in a subsequently at‑
2. The Cached appendix, to the Apostle John
Gospels. not earlier than 98 A.D. They show a large degree of mutual dependence, but certainly have no mere partial presentation in mind. Each aims to furnish to its respective region " the Gospel " as locally understood inclusive of all essential features. Not in the case of Mark, admittedly representing the tradition as it circulated at Rome, nor even in the case of John, representing that of proconsular Asia, can it be supposed that the writer intended merely to supplement certain standard authorities already current. Just as Mark represents " the Gospel " as understood in Rome, one of the two chief Pauline centers, and John that of Ephesus, the other, so the double work attributed to Luke, whom tradition declared of Antiochian parentage, represents " the Gospel " (Luke i. 4) as understood in " Syria and Cilicia " (Acts xv. 23; Gal. i. 21); while southern Syria, whose historic relations are with Egypt, seems to be represented by the Gospel attributed to Matthew. Critical examination shows these four Gospels to be largely interdependent so that practically the whole of Mark has been transcribed to form the narrative ‑outline of both Matthew and Luke while John shows dependence on all three. Yet in each there persists a significant local type. Both Syrian gospels, besides the conspicuous Mark element, make large use of a factor absent from gospels of the Pauline or Greco‑Roman field, that of the commandments of Jesus. This factor (Q) determines the very nature of Matthew, whose whole mission is to teach men " to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you " (Matt, xxviii. 20), Luke's drafts from this same " teaching " source are only second in extent to his extracts from Mark, and are transcribed with much greater exactness. He adds, however, quite a body of narrative not used by Matthew, including his whole second " treatise," and by such additions,' as well as the VI‑11
treatment of material, generally approximates more nearly than Matthew to Mark's idea of " the Gospel " as the whole drama of Jesus' career (Acts i. 1). The motive of the Ephesian Gospel is different. While in form largely composed of dialogue, often tending to monologue (iii. 1‑21), it does not aim to transmit " commandments of the Lord." Its discourses are controversial expositions of the great Pauline doctrines of new birth, life in the Spirit, etc. Nor does the author aim at history. The " works " he relates are seven symbolic " signs " " manifesting the glory " of the incarnate Logos. The explicit aim is to produce faith in Jesus as the incarnate Son of God, and thus convey that mystical " life " which is the essence of Pauline religion (John xx. 31; cf. Gal. ii. 20).
The great Pauline Epistles recall the conditions out of which the Greek Gospels have grown. They re‑
produce not only Paul's own conception Pauline of " the Gospel " including an outline
Gospel. of the story, but certain fundamental
differences between Paul and.the older apostles, which in some degree correspond to and explain the persistent differences of type in the Grew‑Roman and the Syrian tradition. . Paul was both unable, and of principle unwilling, to compete with those who claimed to report acts and utterances of the Lord from their own observation. Even had he known a flesh and blood Messiah, such a Messiah, were it even the earthly Jesus himself, he would know no more (II Cor. v. 1B), because since his experience in conversion, redemption had lost all interest save as a spiritual experience beginning in the individual soul: His own hopeless struggle for the righteousness of the law, on which participation in the Messianic age, the rabbinic " world to come," was in his view conditioned, had issued in a moral death, from which he had been raised by vision of the risen Lord of Stephen and of many another Christian martyr. Dawning faith in the crucified Messiah of the publicans and sinners, outcasts from synagogue orthodoxy, had brought to him not merely hope of a forgiveness without the works of the law, but an experience similar to that he witnessed in .them, though of loftier, moral type, an influx of life and power from " the spirit." The starting‑Point of

everything was to Paul the risen, glorified Christ, giver of the Spirit. He had been revealed as the Son of God with power by the resurrection (Rom. i. 4). This inward experience made pate an apostle (Gal. i. lfi) and gave him his message. Conference with those who were apostles before him was not needful to prepare him to preach it (Gal. i. 1617). And yet without the safe anchor of connection with the historic Jesus, this doctrine of a spiritual Christ was exposed to all kinds of vagaries.
From what it actually suffered at the hands of docetic Gnostics (see DOCETIBM), and of ultra Paulinista like Marcion (q.v.), it seems that it would soon be assimilated in the hands of Greek converts to the myths of the redeemer‑gods (them Mares), who, incarnate in the form of demigods, or as invisible eons, " powers," or " emanations," were held to participate in the life of men. The whole ethical content .of Paul's religion of the Spirit was

Jesus Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	182
dependent on the identification of this Spirit, whose manifestations formed the basis of all church life with "the mind that was in Christ Jesus." Rigidly his converts must be disciplined in the subordination of the spectacular gifts of the Spirit, " miracles," " tongues," " prophecies," to the " abiding," the moral (I Cor. xiii.).
It is no surprise, therefore, to find Paul, three years after his conversion, going up to Jerusalem to " become acquainted with Peter, " literally " to hear his story " (Gal. i. 18). From that Petrine story must have come many an
4. Its allusion in Paul's letters to Jesus' Relations teachings (I These. iv. 15; I Cor. vii. d 10' ix. 14 the purity of his life (II Cor.
Character. v.21), the tragedy of his betrayal and death (I Cor. xi. 23), the manifestations of his resurrection glory (I Cor. xv. 3‑7). From it came certainly the institution of the Eucharist (I Cor. xi. 23‑25; see below, IL, § 8), but not that of baptism (I Cor. i. 17). Moreover, if it related, as may surely be assumed, marvels of healing and exorcism outshining those of the " strolling Jews, exorcists " and even the " gifts of healing " and " miracles " boasted in the Church (I Cor. xii. 28‑29), it is somewhat significant that Paul ignores this whole element, large as it looms on the pages of Mark. Ultimately in the latest of the undisputed epistles Paul states the essence of his Gospel in a " nutshell" (Phil. ii. 4‑11; cf. Mark. x. 42‑45). Such is Paul's messianism, the starting‑point of which is the glorified one of his vision, but in its backw*d look almost overleaps the earthly career as a mere episode, a period of " humiliation," in the great economy of God, with whom this second Adam had enjoyed the riches of heaven (II Cor. viii. 9) before the first Adam walked in Paradise. Essentially and fundamentally Paul's Gospel is an incarnation doctrine, closely allied in its sacraments, its aspiration to life by mystic union with Christ and God in the Spirit, and even in its terminology, with Greek and Oriental mystery religion. Its soteriology recalls the avatar doctrine of the redeemer‑gods (see HINDUISM). That which gives it power to assimilate rather than be assimilated in the maelstrom of intermingling religious ideals, is its ethical root in the life and teaching of the historic Jesus.
It can not be too emphatically insisted that the gospel of Peter was essentially, in its starting‑point, and in religious value, identical with that of Paul (1 Cor. xv. ll; Gal. ii. 2, 6‑8, 15‑16). It also did not start from the story of the ministry,
8. The but from the resurrection (Acts iv. Petrine 33). It rested upon an experience of
Gospel. peter only less profoundly ethical than Paul, a rescue by the felt presence of the risen Christ from the abyss of moral agony. The four canonical Gospels have uniformly canceled the story of this fundamental event in the history of the Christian religion in favor of more concrete, more tangible and marvelous tales of the empty tomb and reappearances of Jesus in palpable form. Not a trace of this appears in Paul. His account of the tradition of the resurrection appearances is unassailable, and certainly complete. It puts his
own experience in line with Peter's, and coincides with the remnants and allusions in the Gospel narrative of how first of all " the Lord appeared to Simon " (Luke xxiv. 34). Many traces of this initial vision of Peter exist in the canonical story itself (Mark xiv. 28, xvi. 1, cf. ix. 2‑10), in additions to it (John xxi. 1‑13), in extra‑canonical fragments (Gospel of Peter, end), and above all in the recorded prayer of Jesus for the " turning again " of Simon (Luke xxii. 32). These amply corroborate the statement of Paul that the first " appearance " was " to Simon," and establish the essential justice of the tradition which explains the name of " Cephas " or " Peter " (" Rock ") as given because the Church owed its foundation to the newborn faith of this disciple. Because Peter in Galilee rallied his " brethren " with the assurance of his experience of a manifestation of Jesus in glory, Christianity became a religion. What was‑what is the experience of the presence of the risen Christ? This is not a problem of history but of religious psychology. With Peter's experience, soon repeated in that of his " brethren," of 500 at once, of Pentecost, of James, of Paul (I Cor. xv. 3‑8) " the Gospel " began its career. It was essentially the story of the resurrection as a message of redemption (II Cor. v. 19‑21). The psychological phenomenon, vital as it is in the spiritual history of the race, falls from its very nature outside the limits of this discussion; yet it alone accounts for the preservation of the implied story of Jesus' previous career.
In Peter's case as in Paul's this starting‑point was the resurrection. But that which tradition reports (Papias, in Eusebius, Hist. eccl., III., xxxix. 15) of the nature of Peter's preaching is that which could be anticipated from all known of his past. To Peter the remembrance of Jesus' earthly g. Its career would not be, as to Paul, a
Character. mere episode in the eternal plan of redemption, an avatar of God's redeeming Spirit suffering humiliation and death. It would be a priceless jewel of personal recollections filled with foregleams of the later glorification. Peter's Christology would be fundamentally not an incarnation doctrine, but just as it is actually found in the Petrine speeches of Acts (ii. 32‑36, iii. 18‑23, 26) an apotheosis doctrine. An early source even sketches the outline of Peter's story. It " began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power; who went about doing good, anti healing all that were oppressed of the devil, for God was with him." From this point it passes immediately to the story of the crucifixion in Jerusalem and the witness to the resurrection (Acts x. 37‑41). The correspondence of this outline with the outline of that Gospel (Mark) which tradition declares to be founded on Peter's narrative, is a phenomenon of great. significance. Disregarding the portions elaborated in the Pauline interest, which show connection at many points with (,2 and perhaps also with the " special source " of Luke, and taking only the underlying narrative, three essential data appear in Mark: (1) the beginnings in Galilee after the bap‑

lgg	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesus Christ
tism of John, including the healings which center in Capernaum, and in fact at the very door of Peter's house (Mark i. 15‑39, ii. 1‑22, iv. 35, v. 43); (2) the journey to Jerusalem, interpreted by Peter as a Messianic enterprise (Mark viii. 27 sqq., xi. 15 sqq.); (3) the night of betrayal (cf. I Cor. xi. 23), the crucifixion and resurrection (Mark xiv. 16). In all these Peter's figure is central.
Two unavoidable inferences from what Paul has shown of Peter's Gospel confirm the tradition which connects the story of Jesus with him. (1) Without the impression of an extraordinary personality
7. Con‑ and an extraordinary career, the ini‑
aeqnenoea. tial experience of Peter, echoed in
that of his brethren and of Paul (I Cor. xv. 3‑11), the true foundation experience of the Church, could never have occurred. (2) Having occurred, all Peter's remembered intercourse with Jesus would be shot through with transfiguring rays from the later vision of his heavenly glory. The process is artlessly acknowledged in the case of the so‑called triumphal entry in John xii. 16. What proved Jesus to have been the Christ whose coming to establish his kingdom only awaits Israel's repentance (Acts iii. 19‑26)‑this formed the substance of Peter's story.
Turning to the second and later group of sources, the fourfold tradition, the four canonical Gospels in their fundamental character may fairly be compared with the four tendencies so distinctly marked
by Paul among the Corinthian believ8. Four ers of 55 A.D. The Roman Gospel
Types of (Mark) recalls those " of Paul," the
Tradition. Ephesian (John) those " of Apollos," the Antiochian (Luke‑Acts), those "of Cephas," the Palestinian (Matthew) those " of Christ." Mark and John are both Paul_nc in the sense of making faith in the person of Christ essential rather than obedience to precept. But in Mark it is the external side of Paulinism which is presented. It appears with the same crudity in its doctrine of the Spirit, and brusqueness in repudiation of Jewish scruples, which calls forth Paul's rebuke of his too inconsiderate adherents in Corinth.
The Fourth Gospel systematically idealizes the tradition both of " sayings " and " doings " for the inculcation of a Christology now openly allied
to the Logos philosophy of Ephesus 9. The and Alexandra. Differences exist.
GJohn ~f among critics as to its authorship, but
comparatively none as to its speculative and theological character. Its slender modicum of underlying historic tradition can be employed only with utmost critical caution to criticize or supplement the Petrine story in a few details, so completely has it been volatilized in the dominant interest of presenting Christological theory. Aiming only to depict the drama of the incarnate Logos, this Gospel takes indeed the foremost rank as a source for the later history of Pauline Christology, but. is almost unusable for the history of Jesus of Nazareth.
The two Gospels assigned respectively to Jerusalem and Antioch have much in common after the subtraction of Mark. They do not, with Paul, Mark and John, ignore the Davidic descent of Jesus
(cf. Rom. i. 3‑4 with Mark xii. 25‑37; John vii. 4043), but prefix independently to the Petrine narrative two genealogies, followed by accounts of Jesus'
10. Xat‑ miraculous birth and childhood. The
thaw and pedigrees, though mutually exclu‑
dohn.	sive, are really ancient attempts to
justify the tradition alluded to by Paul (Rom. i. 3), which possibly had some foundation in the claims of Jesus' family. The stories of the virgin‑birth are equally inconsistent with one another, and merely seek in a crude way to adjust the Jewish‑Christian doctrine of the pedigrees (Jesus the Christ as son of David) to the Greek or Pauline incarnation doctrine. These also have significance for the history of Christologica,l doctrine, but not for the history of Jesus. The most important new element contributed by Matthew and Luke is the source which they share in common. This was certainly in its fundamental character more closely allied in aim to Matthew than to Luke, its principal object being not to narrate the career of Jesus, but to embody his precepts. If it be supposed that those of Corinth who said " I am of Christ " meant " my conduct is governed by the precepts delivered as from him," their later development may be traced in the combination effected in Matthew, as all critics now admit, of the Gospel of Mark with that primitive compilation of Jesus' teachings made by the Apostle Matthew in the tongue of Palestine, to which Papias refers in 145 A.D. as the " Logia or Syntagma of the Dominical Oracles." The greater leaning of Luke to narrative material, his less intolerant attitude toward teachers and workers of " lawlessness," and the central position accorded to Peter and to the Petrine solution of the great issue at Antioch in his second treatise (Acts xv.; cf. Gal. ii.), justify in classifying the Antiochian Gospel as corresponding to those who declared " I am of Cephas."
It will readily be seen that the most invaluable of all sources for that extraordinary character and career which through its influence on Peter and
Paul has given rise to the Christian re11. Q and li ion, is the underlying non‑Mark the element common to Matthew and Luke
Aramaic

	Source.	~QHebrew~ compilation (the compilation relation to t reported
is as yet unexplained. Unlike the " wonder‑lov
ing " Mark, Q is not dominated by the effort to
prove	by accounts of prodigies surrounding his
career that Jesus was the Son of God in the Pauline
sense (Mark i. 1), but aims primarily to report his
teaching. Even more, while it alludes to Jesus'
miracles, as Paul alludes to those of his time, it
presents	Jesus' attitude toward them 8S one Of
severe	rebuke of the popular craving far signs

(Matt. xii. 38 sqq.; Luke xi. 29 aqq.) as well as of the suggestion that he might violate by his human will the divine order of the world (Matt. iv. $‑7; Luke iv. 3, 4, 9‑12). This aim, and this relative independence of Pauline Christology qualify Q, fragmentary as it is, for use as a corrective in rela‑
tion to the Petrine tradition, much as the Pauline epistles have been used in relation to the fourfold narrative.
The foregoing analysis of the sources in their

Jesus Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	184
nature and	their relation to one another and to
doctrinal development in the Church or its equiva
lent, is indispensable to every serious‑minded mod
	ern student of the subject. The har
12. Results	monistic method, satisfying to an age
of Source which made the equal value and error‑
	Analysis.	lesanesa of all Biblical writings its
		point of departure, confronted a rela
tively simple task. Whatever each evangelist said
must be added to, or dove‑tailed into, the report of
every other. Discrepancies could be ignored or ex
plained away. Variant forms could be attached
one after the other, as subsequent similar occur
rences or repetitions. To‑day the comparative
method is displacing the harmonistic. The more
vital the subject, the less can the truth‑loving and
reverent mind be satisfied to exempt it from the
most searching analysis possible under the methods
of documentary and historical research. The re
sults concern not mere individual anecdotes or say
ings, but the traditional story of Jesus as a whole.
As already seen, the beginnings of the Christian re
ligion do not deal so much with the career of the
carpenter of Nazareth, as with the glorified Lord,
whom Paul identified with the redeeming Spirit of
God (II Cor. iii. 1,7), in whom he even sees that
semi‑personal wisdom which the " wisdom " writers
had presented as the agency of God in creation
(I Cor. viii. 6; cf. Prov. viii. 22 aqq.; Wisdom of
Sol. vii. 21‑30). It is this Hellenistic incarnation
doctrine which became " Christianity." And yet
" Christianity" was saved from absorption in eclec
tic Gnosticism only by virtue of the persistence of
the career and teaching of the historic Jesus, the
contribution of the Syrian type of Gospel tradition,
whose respective elements " Petrine " and " Mat
thean "fall now to be analyzed.
It is true that Paul was dependent on Peter; but it is at least equally true that Peter, or more exactly those secondary sources which represent the Petrine tradition, show to an enormous extent the influence of Paul. Only the ultimate substratum of narrative in the Greek Gospels can claim to represent the Aramaic story of the Galilean fisherman. The one source which in its original Aramaic form was comparatively unaffected by Pauline soteriology was the Matthean collection of the " Sayings," which survives only .in fragments from a Greek version utilized by Luke in connection with an. otherwise unknown narrative source, and by Matthew to complete his manual of " commandments." Even the Logia must have started with the presupposition of Jesus' superhuman authority, and, at least in the Greek form, applied to him the apocalyptic title " Son of Man " from Dan. vii. 13.
III. Critical Outline of the Story of Tesus: The task here is to draw from these materials a consistent outline of Jesus' historical career and teaching, determining from these the character of the man, and the nature of the movement which he set on foot " first in Galilee and afterward in Jerusalem."
The story of Jesus began " after the baptism which John preached." (On the infancy chapters of Matthew and Luke see above, L, § 10). The further
back the sources are traced the more apparent is it that the movement which Jesus inaugurated was a continuation of that of John, from
1. Rela‑ which the Church subsequently bor‑
tions with rowed its rite of initiation. Great
John the stress is laid in the earliest source
Baptist.	(Q)
	on the distinction between John's as
	cetic life, emphasizing his stern warnings of judg
	ment and wrath to come, and that of Jesus, who
	came into the populous b%unta of men with his
	winning proclamation of forgiveness. The latest
	source (John) is deeply concerned to show how
	void of all significance was the whole Johannine
	movement, except as premonitory of the Gospel.
	And yet the true relation is evident in the rever
	ential regard of Jesus for John, in whose movement
	he saw no leas a matter than the great repentance,
	to be effected according to Scripture " before the
	great and terrible Day of Yahweh " (Q, Matt. xi.
	2‑19, xii. 41, xxi. 32; Luke vii. 18‑28, 31‑35, xi.
	32, xvi. 14‑16). Equally apparent is it in the
	fundamental note of Petrine story, which begins
	with Jesus' coming into Galilee after John's arrest,
	with an invitation to the fishermen to join him in
	gathering men, rescuing the strayed sheep of the
	flock of Israel. There is all the less reason to doubt
	the statement that Jesus had been himself bap
	tized by John, inasmuch as later evangelists expe
	rience great difficulty in adjusting this fact to their
	doctrine of Messiah's sinlessnesa (Matt. iii. 13‑15;
	Gospelof Hebrews, fragment 3).* But the so‑called
	Prologue of Mark (i. 1‑13), wherein this scene is
	depicted on the basis of the Jewish legend of the
	anointing of Messiah by Elias, with employment
	of the voice from heaven of the transfiguration
	apocalypse (see below II. 7) does not belong to the
	basic Petrine tradition, which begins at verse 14
(cf.. Acts x. 37).
The real impulse under which Jesus took up the standard of the martyred prophet and carried it away from the wilderness into the centers of halfheathen Galilee, is clearly apparent
2. The from his invitation to the fishermen
Motive (with Mark i. 17 cf. Jer. xvi. 16 and
for Jesus' Matt. xiii. 47) and kindred utterances
Ministry.
from Q (Matt. ix. 35‑38, x. 6, xviii. 1214; Luke x. 2, xv. 3‑7). It is made even more unmistakable in the special source of Luke, in which the humanitarian and sociological aspect of Jesus' work is strikingly emphasized. Synagogue religion under the domination of the scribes had in fact made it almost impossible for the " people of the land " to expect any " share in the world to come." The spiritual inheritance of Israel as a whole had been monopolized by the scribes and their devout followers the Pharisees. The ideal since even the times before the monarchy (Ex. iv. 22; Hos. xi. 1) had been that Israel was to be a people of God's " sons." Now none were allowed to be so reckoned who did not " do the will," as revealed in the sacred law and interpreted by the scribes. The Johannine movement as interpreted by Jesus (Q, Matt. xxi. 32=Luke vii. 29) was a protest against this

* In John i. 32‑34 the baptism and voice of adoption become a mere manifestation to John and Israel. The Logos is of course already conscious of his nature and mission.

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
usurpation. The rite of baptism itself, foreign as
it is to the Mosaic code, and spontaneous to its
symbolism, justifies this view of the movement of
John. The epithet " friend of publicans and sin
ners," flung at Jesus by his foes the synagogue au
thorities, the scene of his early ministry, the very
class in society to which he belonged, make it ap
parent that the beginning of Jesus' ministry in
Galilee had exactly this character of protest in the
name of the " little ones " whose poverty alone would
have made the yoke of the law, ever heavier as the
scribes were making it, a yoke which in Peter's words
(Acts xv. 7) "neither we nor our fathers were able
to bear." It was sociological, and ethico‑religious.
	Jesus did more than merely carry on the baptism
of John. He renewed John's preaching of repent
ance in view of the coming kingdom, but instead of
awaiting in the wilderness those whom curiosity
s. ~eseage or, conscience might drive to him, he
		and carried the message where the lost
	Miracles. sheep of Israel were most numerous.
		He enlisted the aid of fishermen, pub
licans, wage‑earners like himself to proclaim it. He
went from Caperna,um to the towns of Gennesaret,
from Gennesaret to the villages of Galilee. He
preached in the synagogues and in the streets. Bap
tism itself was for the time being left behind, since
physical conditions made it impracticable. The
message also was infinitely bolder, and at the same
time infinitely more hopeful than John's. Fortu
nately much of it is preserved in substantially orig
inal form. The repentance itself of the sinful was
to Jesus a proof of that divine forgiveness for the
attainment of which the repentance had been de
manded (Matt. xxi. 28‑32=Luke xv. 11‑32, vii.
36‑50). He declared in the name of the great
Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that there was
access to him, forgiveness, adoption, life in the
	kingdom, for those who " did the will "; not in the
	sense of scribe and Pharisee, but by simple imita
	tion of the spirit of the loving God of nature (Q,
	Matt. v. 43‑48=Luke vi. 27‑36). He welcomed
	such to spiritual brotherhood with himself (Mark
	iii. 35 and parallels). Inward, not outward, purity
	was made the condition of " seeing God "; and the
	essence of the law simple‑hearted devotion to God,
	and God‑like goodness to one's fellow men, " even
	to the unthankful and the evil." This was much
	more than all whole burnt‑offering and sacrifice.
	The immense effect of Jesus' preaching was not due
	alone to the reawakening in the land of the voice
	of prophetic authority, with its moral imperative,
	" thus saith the Lord "; but to certain startling
accompaniments, which at their first appearance
were the occasion to Jesus of one of his vigils of
prayer (Mark i. 35‑39), but were ultimately a‑el
comed by him as a divine aid and seal upon his
proclamation of forgiveness. His stern rebuke of
an outcry from a " possessed " person in the syna
gogue in Capernaum resulted in an involuntary
exorcism. The " demon " went out. In Peter's
on immediately after, a " healing " took place
		appeal of the inmates that he would lay
hands upon the patient. Straightway Jesus was
besieged with the importunities of the sick in body
and mind, with the result that he appears divided
Jeans Christ
between the desire to give physical help, and the vivid appreciation of the danger involved of being forcibly diverted from his higher aims. A whole cycle of marvels of healing and exorcisms, even the subduing of the demons of wind and storm, appears at this point of the Petrine tradition. Q, with more sobriety, presents Jesus' attitude on the subject in contrast with the malignant interpretation of the scribes. The " mighty works " are the evidence of God's gracious intervention to overthrow the power of Satan. Such evidence would have led Tyre and Sidon, Sodom and Gomorrah, to repentance; but to that hardened generation they were simply an occasion of " stumbling in him." In point of fact he was accused by leading scribes of collusion with Beelzebub.
Before relating the irrepressible conflict with the scribes into which Jesus was led by his championship of the " people of the land," a few words must be devoted to a cycle of narratives presented in duplicate by Mark and Matthew, occupying a central position in every one of the Gospels.
4. Break‑ The chief feature of these is the feed‑
ing of ing of. the multitude. They owe their
Bread.
conspcuous position, as appears from the features on which they dilate, to their etiological significance, as explaining and defining the order of the church rite of the breaking of bread; and the very existence from earliest times of this institution, with its significant name of Agape or Love‑feast (qq.v.; Acts vi. 4; I Cor. xi. 20‑34; Jude 12), proves the fundamental historicity of the tradition. True, Mark's narrative is controlled by the idea of a pfodigy outstripping the miracle related of Elisha in II Kings iv. 42‑44, and the later evangelists follow this lead. Still the original motive is different. It inculcates that 'wonderful spirit of absolute abandon in self‑denying service which formed one of the primitive " gifts of the Spirit "
(I Cor, xiii. 3; Acts ii. 446, iv. 32‑37), and which was rightly attributed to the influence of Jesus. The multitude gathered about Jesus in the wilderness had hung upon his words until the hour of the evening meal. Yet instead of dismissing them to find shelter and food as they best could in the neighboring villages, as the disciples urged, Jesus
directed that the whole stock of their common re sources be set before them. He not merely made the multitude thus materially his guests, but took
them formally into the very circle wherein he was
himself wont to act as house‑father, " ° blessing and
breaking the bread." The results in even a phys
ical sense seem to have filled his followers with
amazement, but became far more memorable after
Jesus on a later occasion had exemplified the same
spirit in the surrender of his very lifeblood. Paul
is the witness (I C or. xi. 24) that on the night of
his betrayal Jesus asked the continuance of this custom of the breaking of bread as a fitting memorial of the life which was being laid down to open the kingdom of heaven to the spiritually disinherited.
" In I Cor. xi. and John vi, the two rites, agape and Eucharist, are inextricably interwoven; for church practise had already taken this inevitable course. But in Luke xxiv. 35 men who know nothing of the latter recognize the practise of the former.

Jesus Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	188
Invasion of the domain of synagogue authority by such a movement as that of the prophet of Nazareth could not fail to provoke a violent reaction. This became apparent first in the murmurs of the Galilean Pharisees at the disregard b. Collision shown by his followers for set fasts,
with the ceremonial ablutions, and even for the
Authors‑
	ties.	Sabbath. Jesus deprecated icono
		clasm, but insisted on the prior right
of " the greater matters of the law, judgment, mercy
and good faith." Local orthodoxy was reenforced
by a delegation of " scribes from Jerusalem."
These, when their unworthy ascription of the heal
ings wrought " by the Spirit of God " to Beelzebub
had been rebuked by Jesus, openly challenged his
authority to teach, and demanded a prophet's au
thentication by " sign from heaven." Jesus' reply
was a noble repudiation of such criteria in favor of
God‑given " signs of the times." He denounced
the usurpation by the scribes of the right to ad
mit to or exclude from " sonship," and their pre
tensions to be solely qualified to reveal " the Fa
ther." Against them he appealed to the " inward
light." He thanked the infinite " Lord of heaven
and earth " that his truth was not given to the
wise and prudent, but to minds as simple as babes.
As representative and champion of the " little
ones " he even declared that real knowledge of the
Father belongs to him who has the filial spirit;
while the Father reserves to himself alone the right
to say who is a son (Q, Matt. xi. 2:r27=Luke x.
21‑22).*
But the Jews required a sign. The scribes remained masters of the field. Whether because of popular desertion, or the threatening attitude of Antipas, whose secret murder of John the Baptist
e. The at Machaerus falls at about this period Crisis in (Mark vi. 14‑29; cf. Luke xiii. 31‑35),
	Galilee.	Jesus' public work in Galilee is from
		now on abruptly broken off. He re
mains in hiding on the northern frontier until, after
secretly rallying his adherents in Capernaum, he
undertakes with them the last emprise. The ulti
mate decision was made at Caesarea Philippi, near
the ancient Dan. Jesus consulted his few remain
ing followers as to his own career. The campaign
must either be abandoned, or else reopened on a
larger, but far more perilous scale. The impetuous
Peter, so Petrine tradition relates, broached at this
time the daring proposal of an actual Messianic
coup dWat at Jerusalem. It was met by Jesus with
a rebuke of crushing severity. He did indeed pro
pose to attack the central seat of hierocratie usur
pation, to vindicate in the temple itself the right of
all the people to their own national sanctuary, now
perverted into a mere instrumentality of extortion
by a godless band of " robbers." Jesus was con
templating the throwing down of a gage of battle,
in the face of the degenerate priestly aristocracy
whose only relic of the splendid heritage of Macca
bean sovereignty was the citadel of the temple.
But he would do so in the name only of " the things
that be of God." Zealot nationalists should not
For the generic use of " the son " cf. John viii. 35. For the being known (" recognized") of God, cf. Gal. iv. 9; 11 Tim, ii. 19.
seize the reins to pervert his movement into a mere fruitless insurrection against the Romans. Once turned in this direction the result to himself, his followers, his cause, as he could not but foresee, would be inevitably fatal. Of the imminence of this danger he warned them, once and again. Yet withal, in the spirit of that unconquerable faith in God which they bad learned to know as his moat distinctive trait he assured them that even if‑as was only too probable‑shipwreck did thus come of all their earthly hopes, even if they lost their lives for his sake and the Gospel's, they should find them again. Within the lifetime of that unworthy generation should come his vindication in the great " day of the Son of Man " of Danielic vision.
In the light of later conviction this assurance of divine vindication in the Messianic judgment came to be interpreted as a prediction by Jesus that he
himself would come again as the Son 7. Jesus of Man. This term is already con‑
es " song sistentl employed in the oldest evan‑
gelic source (Q) as a self‑designation of Jesus, though not yet in Paul. From Q it passes to Mark and thence to the entire evangelic tradition, creating the wrong impression that Jesus was a visionary (Eksiatiker), carried away with the apocalyptic enthusiasm of the early post‑resurrection conventicles. In reality his ideal was ethicoreligious; and the integrity and unswervable fidelity of his simple, straightforward purpose ought to have made it impossible in the present to impute to him a perversion from this ideal. In spite of Jesus' crushing rebuke, a later element of the Palestinian Gospel (Matt. xvi. 17) makes Peter's suggestion of Messiahship at this time the foundation of the Church. Jesus, it is said, declared it a bath kol, or revelation from God. Parallel to this prose statement is the apocalypse or " vision " story of the transfiguration, interjected by Mark in ix. 210 from some Pauline source of the symbolic type represented in John. Jesus was " metamorphosed " (cf. II Cor. iii. 18) before the eyes of Peter, James and John into his glorified form, while the translated " witnesses of Messiah," Moses and Elias, stood beside him. The voice of Cod then declared his true character. This again, it need hardly be said, belongs to the history of Christological doctrine; not to the story of Jesus.
The exodus from Galilee was accomplished secretly. The little body of those who were willing to leave all and follow Jesus to possible martyrdom went by way of the Jordan valley, Peraea and
8. The Jericho. At this last stage of the
Finale. journey it received an encouraging so‑
cession, whether the story of Mark is followed or the " special source " of Luke. Shortly before Passover, Jesus entered the temple, surrounded by a motley company of enthusiastic, yet orderly supporters. The priestly authorities were overawed. The most obnoxious of abuses inaugurated in the sanctuary by " the hissing brood of Annas " was abolished, peremptorily, and yet without mob violence. In answer to the challenge of the sanhedrin Jesus gave as the sign of his authority " the baptism of John," a movement " from heaven and not of men." He had succeeded in

187	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Toone Christ
averting the danger of Messianistic outbreak, and asserted the religious rights of the " last sons " in the central sanctuary, without affording a just pretext for Roman intervention. But his success was short‑lived. He had to deal with a hierocracy which had no scruples about defending its supremacy by intrigue and midnight assassination; a Roman governor notorious for his ruthless harshness and readiness to shed innocent blood; and for support the broken reed of a fickle populace, ready at a moment's notice to forsake the champion of their rights in the kingdom of God. The tragedy as related by the first witnesses bas but a single act" the night in which he was betrayed." The scenes of that night, the last supper with its warning of the end, its pathetic " memorial," Gethsemane, the arrest, with desertion of the twelve, sequestration of Jesus till the morning in the high priest's house, Peter's denial and flight, show a vividness unequaled elsewhere in the Gospel story. All that follows is relatively vague and self‑contradictory. Trial was impossible from time conditions alone. It could only prove self‑stultifying to the accusers, if attempted. Annas and his fellow conspirators were far too shrewd to involve themselves in such public responsibility. They merely " delivered over " Jesus to Pilate as a Mesaianistic agitator. It may well be believed that Pilate put no faith in the disinterestedness of such accusers, and even that he hesitated at another judicial murder. But he soon discovered that the popularity of Jesus was less formidable than the pressure of synagogue authorities and priestly aristocracy. Jesus' conscience‑stricken disciples emerged from their hiding‑places to hear the awful issue. On the day before the Passover, as the priests had planned (Mark xiv. 2), Jesus was crucified. The accusation was written as custom prescribed upon his cross. He died as having aspired to the throne of David. Friendly but unknown hands accorded him hasty burial.
Such is the career whose outline critical analysis dimly discerns beneath the tradition of the Church. The vindication came, though not as Jesus expected it. The throne to which he had not aspired
	9. The	was given him by the love and faith
	Issue.	of humanity. There was a " turning
		again " when the influence of Jesus,
whether by the reaction of memories of the past,
or in direct spiritual intervention from the unseen
world, reawakened the faith of Simon Peter, and
Christianity began, founded in devotion to the
risen and glorified Lord. BENJAMIN W. BACON.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The literature is enormous and the following is no more than a selection aiming to direct to the moat useful works from venous points of view. The literature cited is exclusive of works on the teaching, work, and character of Jesus, and on special topics or phases of his life trial, death, resurrection, and ascension. A bibliography carrying all these and other topics is: $, G, Ayres, Jesus Christ Our Lord; an English Bibliography of Christologp comprising ova,. 61X10 Titles annotated and classified, New York, 1906 ef. ~W. B. Hill, A Guide to the Lives of Christ for English Readers, New York, 1905 (gives evaluation of thirty‑six lives of Christ). Volumes which review discussions of the life and works of Christ are: A. Schweitzer Von Reimarua zu Wrede, Eine Geaehiehte der Leben‑.7eau‑Forachunp, Strasburg, 1908 (reviews the attempts up to date to write the life of Jesus);
H. Jordan, Jesus im ICampfe der Parteien der Gepentaart, Stuttgart, 1907; F. Spitta, Streitfrapen der Geachichte der Jeau, GSttingen, 1907; W. Sanday, Life of Christ in Recent Research, New York, 1907; H. Weinel, Jesus im 19. Jahrhundert, Tiibingen, 1907 (a review of the work of the century); G. Pfanmuller, Jesus in Urteii der Jahrhurodarts, Leipeie, 1908.
Possibly the earliest attempt at a systematic life was that in s aeries of Meditatroonea vitae Christi attributed to Bonaventura, Eng. tranal. by W. H. Hutchings, New York, 1881; a corresponding effort in English is Jeremy Taylor's Great Exemplar of Sanctity and Holy Life, London, 1649 (devotional). A new period opened with J. G. von Herder, Erlsaer des Menschen and Von Gottea Sohn, in his Chriatliche Schriften, Riga, 1794‑98 (the first notable works to apply scientific research). Stadia were marked by H. E. G. Paulus, Daa Leben Jesu, Heidelberg, 1828 (rationalistic); D. F. Strauss, Daa Leben Jesu, 2 vole., Tiibingen, 1835‑38; Eng. tranala., e.g., 3 vole., London, 1848, and Daa Leben Jean fur daa deuteche Volk, Leipaic, 1864, Eng. tranals., London, 1879 (advanced the mythical theory and evoked a storm of protest and a large number of replies); A. Neander, Daa Leben Christi, Goths, 1837, Eng. transl., London, 1848 (one of the earliest and best answers to Strauss); E. Renan, Vie de Jeaua, Paris, 1883, Eng, tranals., frequent eda., e.g., New York, 1904 (more appreciative than Strauss of historical verities, but Yet‑ so stressed the legendary that it evoked as much opposition se Strauss's work); T. Keim, Geaeh%chte Jeau von Nazara, 3 vole., Zurich, 1887‑72, Eng. tranal., 6 vole., London, 1873, new ed., 1897 (critical, rationalistic, yet to be reckoned with). It may be serviceable to the historical student to know that the British Museum Catalogue gives in the entries under each of these notable works the titles of replies or criticisms which they evoked. While the works just named in a way .mark stages in the study, the lives which follow are those which are of chief value among the very large number of works on the life of Christ; F. W. Farrar, Life of Christ; with an appendix, 2 vole., London, 1874 (popular); C. Gaikie, ib. 1876; E. De Preasensd, London, 1879; J. Stalker, Edinburgh, 1879; A. M. Fairbairn, Studies in the Life of Christ, New York, 1882; A. Ederaheim, London, 1883 (utilizes rabbinic sources); S. J. Andrews, New York, 1884 (one of the best in English); B. Weiss, 2 vols.. Berlin, 1884, Eng, tranal., 3 vols., Edinburgh, 1884; G. Dalman and A. W. Streane, Jeaua Christ in the Talmud, Midraeh, Zohar, and the Liturgy of the Synapopue, texts and tranel., London, 1893 A. Robinson, A Study of the Saviour in the Newer Light, London, 1898 (critical but reverent); G. Matheson, Studies in the Portrait of Christ, 2 vole., London, 1900 (sympathetic and spiritual); R. Rheea, New York 1900 (concise); O. Holtzmann Tiibingen, 1901, Eng, transl., London, 1904; N. Schmidt, The Prophet of Nazareth, New York, 1905 (critical, of high value); D. Smith, The Days of His Flesh, ondon, 1905 (highly esteemed); A. Whyte, The Walk, Conversation and Character of Jesus Christ, Our Lord, Edinburgh, 1905 (brilliant and original); W. Bouseet, Jeaua, Eng. transl., London, 1908 (a judicial consideration of the testimony of the Gospels); A. Rt:ville, 2 vols., Paris 1908 (critical); W. Sanday, Outlines of the Life of Christ, 2d ed., Edinburgh, 1908, For the critical literature on the sources see under GOaFELB; PAUL THE APOSTLE; and under the articles on the separate Gospels.
JESUS CHRIST, BROTHERS OF. See JAMS I L, 3, §§ 1‑2.
JESUS CHRIST, MONOGRAM OF.
I. Christ.
Different Forma		Symbolism (§ 3):
	(§ I).
Date of origin (§ 2).	II. Jesus.
III. Jesus Christ.
"Monogram of Christ" is the term Usually ap‑

plied to a combination of the first two letters of the Greek word for Christ (XP), although it is also given to an abbreviated form of the name Jesus as well as to a synthesis of both.
I. Christ: The monogram for "Christ" shows
two chief forms, the " rho " being either placed

Jesus Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	188
within the " chi " ( 4), or the latter being set upright and the former superimposed on that arm, which thus becomes vertical ( f ). Two additional forma were given by the reversal of the " rho " 1. Different ( 1: ' t )' and the addition of a horizon‑
Forme. tal fine at right angles to the " rho "
in the first of the main types gave yet another pair of monograms ( 4, 1k). There are also a number of less usual forms, as when the Latin " r " is substituted for the Greek " rho," which is found in Syria (420), Gaul (after the middle of the fifth century), and Italy (chiefly at Ravenna and on a tombstone at Milan).
The form f' is exclusively Christian, although it closely resembles the Egyptian ankh ( ? ), the symbol of life, which is twice altered into the Christian monogram in an inscription of the sixth century from the island of Philae, where it marks the transformation of a temple into a church. The monogram J, on the other hand, is pre‑Christian, and appears on Attic tetradrachms, on Ptolemaic coins, and in an inscription to Isis of 138‑137 a.G., while in Greek manuscripts of the Christian period it foams an abbreviation of various words.
It has long been a problem whether the monogram for the name of Christ was introduced by the Emperor Constantine or was in use before his time. The inscriptions with this symbol to which appeal has been made in confirmation of the latter hypothesis are either spurious or extremely doubtful. The oldest Roman epitaphs of certain date which bear the monogram * are of 323 and 331, both in the reign of Constantine, while the earliest dated
monument from Gaul is in 347. Yet 2. Date since a monogram was made for the f
0rij, name Jesus in the second century, it
would seem that the name Christ underwent the same process, and that Constantine adopted a form which was already current. This is confirmed by the fact that f as an abbreviation for "Christ " is found in certain inscriptions of the third century. The monogram occurs with great frequency in the inscriptions on Christian graves, sometimes alone and sometimes with the " alpha " and " omega " (see ALPHA AND OMEGA), with the fish, between two doves, between palmbranchea, in a garland, in a circle, and the like. It is found throughout the Greek and Roman world, as well as among the Copts and in Germany. Nor is it confined to inscriptions, but occurs on funeral lamps, glass vessels, sarcophagi, wall‑paintings, ornaments, and even on clothing and other articles of daily life. The two main forms of the monogram long existed side by side, and occasionally occurred on the same monument, but in the fifth century ; gradually yielded to f , and both finally gave place to the simple cross.
The Emperor Constantine placed the monogram, apparently in the form JR , on his standard and helmet, as well as on the shieldof his soldiers, and its use was very frequent on the coins of his successors (except Julian) until Justinian I. (d. 565), when it was replaced by the cross. In the second half of the fourth century the monogram was placed on public buildings, the earliest dated instance being from Sion (Switzerland) in 377. It was like‑
wise employed in the churches, the oldest example being a mosaic in the Church of St. Constantia at Rome, where it appears in a scroll in the hand of Christ. In the remarkable church of the Savior at Spoleto, which dates probably from the second half of the fourth century, the monogram Al occurs on the great arch above the altar, while the IF is found on the tympanum of two side‑windows of the fagade. Other structures showing the monogram are the temple on the banks of the Clitumnus (apparently transformed into a church in the fifth century), Sta. Maria Maggiore in Rome (fifth century), and Sta. Francesca Romans in the same city (twelfth or thirteenth century).
	In epitaphs the monogram is either used as a
simple abbreviation of the name Christ, or, if
isolated grammatically, denotes confession of
Christ. In early art it stands as a symbol of Christ,
as when he is typified on a sarcophagus in the
Vatican grottos by a lamb which stands on a
mount (Rev. xiv. 1) and bears the f on its head.
It is likewise associated with the human figure of
Christ, a single monogram being placed either above
his head or in a halo, while in other cases one is
		represented on each side of his head.
3. Sym‑ When set between two persona on
	bolfsm.	glues vessels, the monogram symbol
		izes the presence of Christ in their
midst. Particularly interesting is the symbolism
frequently found on sarcophagi which represents
the monogram A in a garland sustained by a
flying eagle above the cross, at the feet of which
appear the guardians of the grave. Here the lower
portion typifies the crucifixion and the repose of the
tomb, while the upper part is an emblem of the
resurrection and ascension. The monogram appears
also as a purely symbolic figure, as when a tomb
stone of 355 represents a man holding the f in
his outstretched right hand.
	II. Jesus: The oldest form of the monogram
for the name Jesus is the Greek II H, which is im
plied in the Epistle of Barnabas ix., where in the
318 men circumcised by Abraham (a combination
of Gen. xvii. 23 with xiv. 14) is traced an allusion
both to Jesus (IH) and to the cross (T), the Greek
mode of writing 318 being 1;7r', an interpretation
which passed to the Latin Church. The employ
ment of this monogram in ancient Christian monu
ments, however, is rare, although it is found in the
catacomb of Priscilla and in the atrium of the so
called Capella Grceca. In the Occident the form
IHS has been extremely wide‑spread since the end
of the Middle Ages, this being due especially to the
sermons of Bernardin of Sienna, who used to dis
play at the close of the addresses which he delivered
in various cities a tablet containing these letters
written in gold and surrounded by the rays of the
sun. This monogram later became the special
emblem of the Jesuits.
III. Jesus Christ: The simplest form for the combination of both the divine names in Greek is
*, consisting of the initials I X. This monogram, though ancient, is rare, but is found on a tombstone from Rome in 268 or 279, and on others from Gaul in 491 and 597. It likewise occurs between the " alpha " and " omega " (bronze

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
lamp in the museum of Eatenae) and in a circle (above a throne in the center of a sarcophagus at Tuaeulum). The form is occasionally modified to gf, especially in graffiti of the catacomb of St. Caliztus, white a Gallic gravestone of 498 shows the three forms t , BE , and +. The monogram occurs also in the mosaics of several churches of Ravenna.
	The usual abbreviation of the two names in the
oldest manuscripts of the New Testament is I C
X ‑C, which is also found in the Neapolitan cata
combs, while in the Greek Church it was frequently
placed on the base of the paten. It appeared on
the coins of the Byzantine emperors from John
Zimiskea (969‑975) to the fall of the dynasty, and
was also employed in Greek paintings and sculp
tures, as well as on the bronze doors of 1070,
formerly in the church of St. Paul at Rome. Par
ticularly noteworthy is the transfer of this mono
gram to the medieval Latin Church. In the ancient
church of St. Peter at Rome were mosaics of the
time of Innocent III., which represented Christ
enthroned between Peter and Paul with the in
scription I C X C, while similar mosaics are still
preserved from the early part of the fourteenth
,Tesus Christ
century in the church of Sta. Maria Maggiore at Rome. Italian easel‑pieces of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries likewise show this form of the monogram. The Latin form of the monogram for Jesus Christ was !`HS XItS, which occur in the earliest Latin manuscripts of the Bible, the first two letters of each part being expressly declared to be Greek and the last Latin. In the Occident this form was used from the earliest times in inscriptions, sculptures, and paintings, especially in miniatures of the Carolingian period and in medieval panel‑paintings, while it was placed on Byzantine coins from Basilius Macedo (867‑886) to Romanus Diogenea (1068‑71). (A. Haucg.)

BIHLIOaaAPHY. Spicilepium Soleamenee, ed. J. B. Pitra, iv.
	505 sqq., Paris, 1858; E, Is Blant, Inscriptions chre
	tiennea de la Gaule.vol. i., passim, ib. 1858; G. B. de RoA,
	Inacriplionea christiante w6ia Roma, vol. i. passim, Rome,
	1881; R. Garrucei, Scoria dells ante criatiana, i. 183 sqq.,
	Prato, 1881; F. X. Kraus, Real‑EncyklopUdie der chriat
	lichen Alkrthiimer, ii. 125 sqq., 412 sqq., Freiburg, 1888;
	V. Schultze, ArehYologie der alte7triaUschen Kunat, pp.
	235 aqq.. Munich, 1895; DCA, ii. 1310‑14; C. M.
	Kauffmann, Hand6uch der chriatlichen Archdolopie, pp.
	295 sqq., Paderborn, 1905; H. Leclereq, Manual d'ar
	chBologde chrEtienne, ii., 383 sqq., Paris, 1907; F. Cabrol,
	Dietionnaire d'archEolopie chr€tienns, i.178 sqq., Paris, 1903.
JESUS CHRIST, PICTURES AND IMAGES OF.

I. The Oldest Views and Data on the	II. Literary Data on the Oldest Pic‑	2. Pictures of Jesus in Ancient Art.
	External Appearance of Jesus.		lures of Jesus.		Symbolical and Allegorical Repre‑
	The Apocrypha and Pseudepig‑ III. Extant Pictures of Jesus.				sentationa (¢ 1).
		rapha (¢ I).	1. Portraits Ostensibly Authentic.		Representations se Teacher and
	The Church Fathers (¢ 2).	Portraits by Painters, Sculptors,			Lawgiver (¢ 2).
	Other Data (¢ 3).	etc. (¢ 1).	IV. Origin of the Pictures of Jesus.
			Alleged Supernatural Pictures (¢ 2).
I. The Oldest Views and Data on the External Appearance of Jesus: Neither the New Testament nor the writings of the earlier post‑Biblicl.l Christian authors have any statements regarding the personal appearance of Jesus, thus contrasting sharply with the Apocrypha and the Pseudepigrapha and especially with the works of the Gnostics. In the " Shepherd " of Herman (ix. 6, 12) the lofty stature of the Son of God is emphasized, and according to the Gospel of Peter he even towered above the heaven at his resurrection. Gnostic influence is betrayed by visions in which Christ appears as a shepherd, or the master of a ship, or in the form of one of his apostles, as of Paul and of Thomas, or again as a young boy. In the Acts of Andrew and Matthew he assumes the figure of a
lad, and the same form is taken in the
r. The Acts of Peter and Andrew, in the
Apocrypha Acts of Matthew, and in the Ethiopic
	and	Acts of James. Manazara is healed
Pseud‑ by a youth in the Acts of Thomas,
epigraphs. and a beautiful lad appears to Peter
and Theon in the Actus Yer
Ceu271325,
which also mentions the smile of friendship in the face of Jesus. A handsome youth with smiling face appears at the grave of Drugiana in the Acts of John, but certain widows to whom the Lo
restored their sight s
indescribable	~ Ouse an, aged man of
him a		appearance, ' You	gh ohers
aion of Saints Perpetua and Felicitas ascribed to the risen Christ the face of a youth with anowwhite hair.
The early Christian authors were by no means concordant in their opinions of the personal appearance of Jesus. Some, basing their judgment on Isa. Iii. and liii., denied him all beauty and comeliness, while others, with reference to Ps. xlv. 3,
regarded him as the most beaUtlflll of mankind.
		To the former class belong Justin
	z. The Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Basil,
	Church Ieidor of Peluaium, Theodoret, Cyril of
	Fathers. Alexandria, Tertullian, and Gyprian.
		Origen declared that Christ assumed
whatever form was suited to circumstances. It
was not until the fourth century that Chlysostom
and Jerome laid emphasis upon the beauty of Jesus.
While Isidor of Pelusium had referred the phrase,
" Thou art fairer than the children of men), in
Ps. xlv. 2, to the divine virtue of Christ, Chrysoatom
interpreted the lack of comeliness mentioned in
Isa. liii. 2 as an allusion to the hUmihtion of the
Lord. Jerome saw in the profound impression
pang foes aj~he first sight of ~~ 	I

and eyes. pro., p~f .Of heavenly b ~~ ~9eiples
Augustine concludedetmsulta jnfficted beauty In face
youthfulness ndd others isalso a boy. 	~~t°~ Persecutors,
	alall, $~le ~ ~ljyhe h~ ate
	been
	since the virgin h~ loved
of Christ	mentioned in	The Problem of t
the life	passion of St. C	us, and the p~	he external appearance of Jesus
possessed but minor interest for the Church Fathers,

Jesus Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	170
although the Catholic Acts of the Holy Apostles ascribe to him an olive complexion, a beautiful beard, and flashing eyes. Further details are first found in a letter to the Emperor Theophilus attributed to John of Damascus (in MPG, xcv. 349), which speaks of the brows which grew together, the beautiful eyes, the prominent nose,
3 Other the curling hair, the look of health,
	Data.	the black beard, the wheat‑colored
		complexion, and the long fingers, a
picture which almost coincides with a hand‑book
on painting from Mt. Athos not earlier than the
sixteenth century. In like manner, Nicephorus
Callistus, who introduced his description of the
picture of Christ (MPG, cxlv. 748) with the words,
" as we have received it from the ancients," was
impressed with the healthful appearance, with
the stature, the brown hair which was not very
thick but somewhat curling, the black brows
which were not fully arched, the sea‑blue eyes
shading into brown, the beautiful glance, the prom
inent nose, but brown beard of moderate length,
and the long hair which had not been cut since
childhood, the neck slightly bent, and the olive and
somewhat ruddy complexion of the oval face. A
slight divergence from both these accounts is shown
by the so‑called letter of Lentulus, the ostensible
predecessor of Pontius Pilate, who is said to have
prepared a report to the Roman Senate concerning
Jesus and containing a description of him. Accord
ing to this document Christ possessed a tall and
handsome figure, a countenance which inspired
reverence and awakened love and fear together,
dark, shining, curling hair, parted in the center in
Nazarene fashion and flowing over the shoulders,
an open and serene forehead, a face without wrinkle
or blemish and rendered more beautiful by its
delicate ruddiness, a perfect nose and mouth, a full
red beard of the same color as the hair and worn
in two points and piercing eyes of a grayish‑blue.
The unauthentic character of this letter is admitted
by all.
II. Literary Data on the Oldest Pictures of Jesus: (1) A handkerchief embroidered with the figures of Jesus and his Apostles, and made, according to legend, by his mother, is said to have been seen by the monk Arculfus during his residence in Jerusalem (Adamnan, De Locis sanctis, i. 11 [12]). (2) In his account of his visit to Ca'sarea Philippi, Eusebius mentions (Hilt. eccl. vii. 18) a group of statuary in brass which consisted of a kneeling woman and a man standing with his hands stretched out toward her. Local tradition saw in this a figure of Jesus and the woman healed of an issue of blood, who was said to have come from CTsarea Philippi. This legend was accepted by Eusebius, Asterius Amasenus Photius, Sozomen, Philostorgius, and Macarius Magnes, the last‑named calling the woman Beronike. The actual meaning of the group is uncertain. Some have seen in it an emperor and a province, possibly Hadrian and Judea while others have regarded it as 1Esculapius and Hygeia, a view which is vitiated by the fact that no mention is made of the serpent‑staff characteristic of statues of the god of healing. It is entirely possible that the group actually represented Christ and either j
the woman with an issue of blood or possibly the woman of Canaan who implored him to heal her daughter. (3) According to Irenaeus (Hwr., L, xxv. 6), pictures of Christ were possessed by the Gnostic sect of Carpocratians, who crowned them with garlands like the pictures of philosophersPythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, and others‑while, according to the Carpocratians, Pilate had a portrait of Jesus painted during his lifetime, and the Carpocratian Marcellina possessed a picture of Christ which she honored, like those of Paul, Homer, and Pythagoras, with prayer and incense. (4) The Emperor Alexander Severus had a picture of Jesus; it must have been, however, only an ideal portrait, like those of Apollonius, Abraham, Orpheus, and others, which were also included in his lararium (Lampridius, Vita Alex. Sev. xxix.). (5) A brass statue of the Savior was erected by Constantine the Great before the main door of the imperial palace of Chalce (Theophanes in MPG, cviii. 817). (6) A picture of Jesus " painted from life " was possessed by the Archduchess Margaret which may be the same one as Diirer's altar‑piece of St. Luke at Brussels (M. Thausing, Durer, p. 420, Leipsic, 1876).
While the portraits just mentioned were prepared by human agency, there were others to which a supernatural origin was ascribed. To this category belong (7) a picture at Camulium in Cappadocia, apparently on cloth and perhaps a copy of that of Edessa (see below). It was mentioned at the second Nicene Council and was carried to Constantinople by Justin IL, where it was regarded as so sacred that a special festival was instituted in its honor, and it was frequently carried in war as a potent icon (J. Gretsei opera, xv. 196‑197, Regensburg, 1741). (8) In the war against the Persians the General Philippicus had a picture of Christ which the Romans believed to be supernatural in origin, and the same portrait served to quell a mutiny in the army of Priscus, the successor of Philippicus. This icon was apparently on cloth, and was a copy of an original which was frequently confounded with a portrait in Amide, although the latter is expressly said to have been painted, and was, consequently, natural in provenience (Zacharias MPG, Ixxxv. 1159). (9) A Syriac fragment mentions a picture of Jesus painted on linen and found unwet in a spring by a certain Hypatia shortly after the Passion. This portrait left a miraculous imprint on the napkin in which it was wrapped, and one of these pictures found its way to Caesarea while the other was taken to Comolia (possibly identical with the city of Camulium already mentioned), although a copy was later found at Dibudin (?) (Lipsius Die edessenische Abgarsage, p. 67, n. 1, Brunswick, 1880). (10) About 570 a linen mantle was shown at a church in Memphis which bore the impress of the Savior's face and was so bright that none could gaze at it (Antoninus Martyr, Delocissanctis,xliv.). (11)Byzantineliteraturefrequently mentions pictures of Christ impressed on bricks. According to a legend which presents several slight variations, the portrait of himself which Jesus had sent to Abgar at Edessa was believed to have been walled up to save it from the attack of

171	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesus Christ
King Ananun and to have been rediscovered in
539 together with a brick which bore a miraculous
copy of the original (Georgius Cedrenus, ed. Bekker,
i. 312, and others). (12) The patriarch Germanus,
when forced to leave Constantinople, is said to have
taken with him a picture of Christ which later came
into the possession of Gregory II. (G. Marangoni,
1 ataria dell' oratorio di San Lorenzo, pp. 78 sqq.,
Rome, 1747). (13) The cloth with a picture of
Christ presented by Photius to the hermit Paul at
Latro in the ninth century was merely a copy of a
miraculous original, although only he to whom the
gift was made was able to perceive the portrait,
others seeing only the cloth (Gretsea, ut sup. p,186).
(14) More important than all other statements con
cerning the oldest pictures of Christ is a passage of
Augustine (De trin. viii. 4), stating that the por
traits of Jesus were innumerable in concept and
design.
III. Extant Pictures of Jesus. 1. Portraits oateneibly Authentic: (1) The paintings of Luke, of which the best known are two at Rome. One of these is in the chapel Sanctus Sanctorum, although the statement that Luke painted a portrait of Jesus
dates only from medieval times, the 1. Portraits monk Michael, the biographer of Theo‑
by Paint‑ dore of Studium, being one of the carers, Sculp‑ liest sources. In the last quarter of the
	tore, etc.	twelfth century the legend of Luke was
		interwoven by Wernher of Niederrhein
with the tradition of Veronica (see below). Luke,
in answer to Veronica's entreaties, is said to have
made repeated attempts to portray Christ, but his
endeavors were unsuccessful. Jesus then impressed
the image of his face upon the handkerchief of
Veronica. Another picture ascribed to Luke and
painted on cloth is in the Vatican library, while
a third is said to have been placed in the
cathedral of Tivoli by Pope Simplicius. Other
pictures are likewise ascribed to a similar prove
nience, and very late traditions even attribute
statues of Christ to the chisel of Luke. [In the
church of San Miniato at Monto, in the en
virons of Florence, Italy, is shown a portrait
of Christ, attributed to Luke.] (2) To Nicode
mus is ascribed a statue of the crucified Christ
carved in black cedar and preserved in the Ca
thedral of Lucca. Its design shows that it dates
at the earliest from the eighth century, although
tradition states that the model of Nicodemus was
furnished by the impress of the Savior's body on
the linen cloths purchased to cover the corpse at
the descent from the cross. (3) A " true and only
portrait of our Savior taken from an engraved
emerald which Pope Innocent VIII. received from
Sultan Bajazted II. for the ransom of his brother,
who was a captive of the Christians," frequently
reproduced in photograph is in reality the copy of
a medal which may have been cut at the command
of Mohammed IL, and which is, at all events, of
comparatively modern date. (4) The mosaic in
the Church of St. Praxedis in Rome, which is ex
hibited on festal occasions, is by no means one of the
earliest Christian mosaics, although tradition re
gards it as a present to Pudens from the Apostle
Peter.
	Alleged supernatural pictures may be divided
into those which represent the entire figure of Jesus,
and those which give only his face. (1) Clothe of
medieval date containing more or less clear outlines
of the figure of a man, all claiming to be the " nap
kin " in which Jesus was wrapped in the grave and
		on which his image was impressed,
2. Alleged were formerly found in ChambSry,
	8upernat‑ and until the end of the eighteenth
	oral Pic‑ century, in Besan9on, while theY still
		exist at CompiSgne and Turin, the lat
ter " napkin " being declared authentic by a bull
of Sixtus IV. Far more famous, however, are the
cloths which bear only the impress of a head or face
and of these one of the best known is (2) the picture
of Edessa, or the Abgar picture. According to the
Doctrine of Addai and Moses of Choren, Hanan, the
envoy of the king of Edessa, painted a portrait of
Jesus and took it to his royal master. Evagrius,
on the authority of Procopius, states that Christ
sent to the king a picture of miraculous origin.
The legend apparently arose about 350, and may
well have been based on an actual painting which
remained at Edessa till 944, when it was brought
to Constantinople by the Emperor Romanus I. Its
subsequent fortunes are uncertain, although various
cities laid claim to its possession, especially Genoa,
Rome, and Paris, the first‑named city advancing
the most probable arguments for authenticity and
receiving the confirmation of Pius IX. (see ABGAR).
This picture shows only the head of Jesus, but
legend also knows a full‑length Edessene portrait
on linen produced by contact with the body of
Christ. It is mentioned by Gervase of Tilbury in
the beginning of the thirteenth century, who bases
his statement on ancient sources and says that it
was exhibited on festivals in the chief church of
Edessa, and that on Easter it shows Jesus succes
sively as a child, boy, youth, young man, and in the
ripeness of years. (3) One of the choicest treasures
of the Roman Church is the handkerchief of Ve
ronica, which is shown only on special occasions,
particularly in Passion Week. This portrait is
said to have been transferred in 1297 by Boniface
VIII. from the Hospital of the Holy Ghost to St.
Peter's in Rome, where it reposes behind the statue
of St. Veronica. The picture, which is now much
faded, shows an elliptical face with a low‑arched
forehead, in marked contrast with the long nose.
The mouth is slightly open, and the scanty hair is
visible only on the temples. The beard on the
cheeks is thin, but is stronger on the chin, where it
ends in three points, while the mustache is more
conspicuous for color than for strength. The
eyes arched by scanty brows, are closed, and,
combined with features distorted by agony and
stained with blood complete the picture of a
martyr pale in death. From the point of view of
esthetics and the history of art, the picture is
probably Byzantine. Although one would expect
the picture of Veronica to be regarded as the napkin
which covered the head of Christ, there is no tra
dition as to its origin, although a mesa of medieval
legends connects it with the name of a woman.
These may be divided into two classes. In the older
group, apparently written shortly before the ninth

Jams Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	172
century, Veronica appears as the woman afflicted
with an issue of blood, who had a portrait of Jesus
either painted by herself or at her bidding, or else
	impressed by Christ himself upon a piece of cloth.
The second form of the legend sprang up in France
	and Germany in the course of the fourteenth cen
	tury and superseded the older version before 1500.
	According to this tradition, Veronica gave the
	Savior a handkerchief on his way to Golgotha, and
	received it back impressed with his features.
	Further amplifications of the tradition stated that
	the napkin was brought to Rome by John VIL, or
	even during the reign of Tiberius, while it is certain
	that Celeatine III. prepared a reliquary for it. At
	all events, what is clear is that during the medieval
	period Rome possessed a cloth picture of Christ,
	which was apparently supposed to be the miracu
	lous impress of the head of Jesus in the sepulcher.
	It is significant, moreover, that it bore the name
	s‑udarium before the rise of the legend of the hand
	kerchief given Christ to wipe his face on his way to
	the cross, nor was it until the twelfth century that
	the name of Veronica even began to form a part of
	the tradition, a connection suggested by a popular
etymology of Veronica as Very eiKirv	(" true
	image "), This legend of Veronica gave rise to a
	tendency of art which reached its culmination in
	Darer, who represented the napkin of Veronica and
	the Savior with a crown of thorns, combining the
	suffering in the face of Jesus with the loftiness and
	the majesty of the Son of God, (4) The picture of
Christ in the apse of St. John *	at Rome is
	supposed to have been miraculously produced when
	the church was dedicated by Pope Sylvester, al
though it is in reality a mosaic of recent date..
2. Pictures of Jesus is Ancient Art: In the course of time pictorial representations of Jesus became either real or symbolical and allegorical, the latter tendency gradually giving way to the former. To the category of symbols belong the fish, the lamb, the various monograms of Christ, and the Good Shepherd, the last‑named leading to representations of Jesus in human form. As early as Tertullian the
Good Shepherd adorned chalices,
1. Symbol. and it was a favorite form of decora‑
ical and
Allegorical Lion in the catacombs, where the
Represen_ fire usually carries a goat or a
	tations.	wether. In these pictures, often
		adorned with other animals, trees,
and shrubs, and based on Luke xv. 5; John x.;
and Ps. xxiii., the Christ appears only in youth
ful guise, although the Shepherd is usually clad in
garments of a higher rank and wears the Roman
tunic and the gallium as well as sandals. The
figure, moreover, is Latin instead of Oriental in
type, and represents a youthful and beardless
sometimes even boyish, figure, a
curling hear, and a frank face with round head wit~ This type or‑egular features.
f picture, purely ideal went evolution in the course of time.
century the face grew more ovalhair grout. slightly over the forehead
and flowed on the The first
rep‑
resentations though the
sides,
became more and more a subject for pictorial representation. In the midst of all or a part of his disciples, including Paul, Christ appears either on a plain, as in Spain and southern France, or standing on a mountain either within or without the four
rivers of Eden, or sitting on a throne 2. Repre‑ with his feet on a footstool or on the
seatation Teacher clouds while mosaics represent him
and Laar. as sewed ota the cele0tial 0O1t Al
giver.	a teacher, he is depicted as speaking
'	and as holding a book or scroll either
in his hand or on his bosom, while as a lawgiver
lie proffers the Gospel to Peter or Paul. In
both of these latter categories the beardless,
youthful type gradually grows leas frequent, so
that on Roman, Upper Italian, and French sarcoph
agi the central Christ appears bearded, although
in the reliefs on their aides he wears no beard, the
former representing the risen Lord and the latter
the earthly Savior. Originally a characteristic of
the ascended Christ, the beard was attributed to
Jesus during his earthly ministry after the end of the fourth or the beginning of the fifth century. The struggle between the two types is seen in the mosaics of Sant'Apollinare Nuovo at Ravenna and of St. 'Michael, but the eaT11C6t specimen of the
bearded Christ is generally believed to be the socalled Calliatinian mosaic which was found in the catacomb of St. Domitilla. In conformity with the manhood implied by the beard, the body increased in height and breadth, while the features became more sharply defined as the bones gained in accentuation over the flesh. The nose became longer and more prominent, and the eyes were deeper and their pupils enlarged, while the angles of the nose and mouth were more sharply outlined. The hair, while frequently less curling than hitherto, was now represented as falling to the neck and shoulders, and was often parted in the middle. The color both of the hair and of the beard varied through all shades from yellow to gray and black. The upper lip was never clean‑shaven, and the beard
was sometimes close and sowtilueu either polnto

or rounded, the parted type being found only in rudimentary form in early Christian art.
The bearded Christ represents the climax of the art of .early Christianity, and the fifth century ushered in a period of decay marked by all manner of exaggeration. Majesty became stiffness, exaltation unapproachability, and earnestness gloom. Thus the Christ of Saints Cosmas and Damian (q.v.) in Rome, dating from the sixth century, is a figure with, long face, projecting .cheek bones, ashen complexion, attenuated nose, mane‑like hair, and scanty beard.
It was the task of the Middle Ages to reduce the multiplicity of concepts of the likeness of Christ to unity, a task which required centuries for its completion. The Carolingian period sad. ~ ~O~ Of

fruitle,v recrudeseenee Of ~~a process of evolution [n
_	of the early Christian Period. Even during the
••• sue centerRenaissance the beardless type struggled for su_
e	in wavy or curly locks,	premacy with the bearded, especially in miniatures
real impulse, however to artistic rep‑ and ivories, but the former steadily lost 	un
of Jesus R.~	~ dr
given by his miracles,so that its Last spor,dio occurrence is a Scandi‑
risen Lord as a teacher and a lawgiver,navian Christ in glory of the thirteenth century,

173	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesus Cbxist
such pictures as the Pieta of Bottieelli at Munich being mere anachronisms.
IV. Origin of the Pictures of Jesus: While the theory may be advanced that the oldest pictures of Christ were based either on works of art still more ancient or on tradition, it is practically certain that they are not real portraits but ideal representations. This is clear both from their extreme diversity and from the words of Augustine: " What his appearance was we know not." The moat primitive type, wherein early Christian and Gnostic documents agree, is that of a boy or youth. The youthful vigor of the early Church in religious and in moral thought, sustained by the belief in the second coming of the Lord and strengthened by persecution, inspired the artist to depict the Christ as the incarnation of undying youth, even as Noah, Job, Abraham, and Moses were represented as beardless boys. Herein, too, lay the genesis of the concept of the Good Shepherd.
With the fourth and fifth centuries the bearded type was evolved side by side with the beardless. The explanation of this change lies in the perfection, strength, and manliness implied by the beard. The parted hair, on the other hand, which is characteristic of the pictures of Christ in this period, especially in the mosaics, typifies his earthly lineage and designates him as one of the children of Israel, since of human beings only Jews and Judeo‑Christians are represented with parted hair in early Christian art. The theory, advanced by many scholars, that Greek religious art influenced the various early Christian concepts of the personal appearance of Christ seems to lack sufficient evidence to be in any wise conclusive.
(NISOLAUS MtJLLER.)
BiaLI06aAPHY: W. Bayliss, Rex reBUm. A Painter's Study a/ the Likeness of Christ from the Time of the Apostles, London, 1903; A. N. Didron, Iconographic chrEtienne. Hiatoire de Dieu, Paris, 1843; W. Grimm, Die Sage vom Uraprung der Chriatuabi7der, pp. 121‑175, Berlin, 1844; Mrs. Jameson, History o/ our Lord as ExemplifisdinWorka of Art, 2 vols., London, 1872; A Hauck, Die Entatehung dee Chriatuatypua in der aLendlundiachan Kunst, Heidelberg, 1880; T. Heaphy, Likeness of Christ, New York, 1886 (illustrations valuable); H. M. A. Guerber, Legends of the Virgin and Christ, with Special Reference to .
Art, ib. 1896; E. M. Hurll, Life o/ Our Lord in Art, Boson, 1898 (valuable); E. von DobeohUta, Chriatuabilder, Leipsie, 1899; F. W. Farrar, Life of Christ as Represented in Art, London, 1900; J. L. French, Christ in Art, Boston, 1900; F. Johnson, Have We the Liken6as of C)u4at. Chicago, 1903: J. Burns, The Christ Face in Art, New York, 1907; J. S. Weir‑Liebersdorf, Chrietua‑ and Apoetelbilder, Freiburg, 1902; J. Heil, Die friUtchriatdichen Daratellunpender Kreuzigung Christi, Leipsie, 1904; K. M. Kaufmann, Handbuch der chriatlichen Arehaologie, Paderborn, 190b: G. A. Miiller, Die Ziebliche Gestalt Jeau Christ, naeh der achriftlichen and monumenfalen Urtradition, Styria, 1909.

JESUS CHRIST, THREEFOLD OFFICE OF: A phrase connoting the functions of Christ as prophet,
priest, and king. From the earliest times Jesus has been recognized as the representative of a twofold and yet unitary theocratic function, as king and priest. The spiritual kingdom of the Messiah has its foundation in the sacrifice of his life (Matt. xvi. 16‑25, xa. 25‑28). This thought may be traced from the second century to the time of the Reformation. But as early as Eusebiua a threefold office is ascribed to Christ, that of prophet, priest, and
king, and this is traceable to Jewish sources. The view of a threefold office, however, did not suppress the tradition of a twofold office, although the three
designations of Christ were always used Historical separately. Among the medieval theo‑
Survey. logiane, Thomas Aquinas approaches
closely the conception of Eusebius since he speaks of legislator, saeerdoa, and rex, but with him this is merely a mechanical division, and Thomas makes no further use of the threefold scheme. The Evangelical doctrine followed in the beginning the tradition of a twofold office (cf. the works of Luther and the older Evangelical catechisms). Calvin added the prophetic office as a third function, and his conception of the doctrine of Christ's work became the basis for its treatment in Reformed theology and soon also in Lutheran theology. As prophet the Messiah brings the full light of intelligence and thus becomes the fulness and consummation of all revelaEions. As king of a spiritual and eternal kingdom he not only brings his people external and passing aid, but equips them especially with the gifts for eternal life and guards them against their enemies. As priest Christ secures to his people by his atonement and vicarious suffering the blessing that God deals with them not as judge, but as gracious father. In accordance with these principles Calvin emphasized the truth that communion with God is found in Christ's living personality and in life communion with that personality. In the Heidelberg Catechism (Questions 31 and 32) the thought of Calvin received a finished form and found a large circulation. The orthodox followers of Qalvin, however, attempted both to explain the full content of the Messianic person from three points of view, arid to analyze the act of salvation in its historical development according to the threefold scheme, thus not easily escaping the mistaken assumption that Christ had become first prophet, then priest, and finally king. It became the custom to deprive Christ of his royal function in the state of humiliation and of the prophetical function in the state of exaltation. Against this mechanical tendency, Cocceiua opened new and fruitful points of view by returning to the living material of the Bible. The usual order of the offices of Christ seemed to him justified in so far as the dignity of Christ rose in the growing mind of the people, from the state of a prophet to that of a king. But in reality, be states, Christ's priesthood must be put in the first place, since even before time he mediated between his Father and the people; then follow the royal and prophetic offices. The first office is that through which Christ acquires his people; the second that through which he keeps them; and the third that through which he leads them to the knowledge and love of the king. This double consideration would have resulted in an organic and simultaneous union of the offices in the living personality, even if Cooceius had not expressly added that'the entire mediatorial act lasted until the end of days.
The Roman catechism also teaches the threefold office of Christ. In Lutheran theology the doctrine was adopted only at a late period. Melanchthon had not left to the school of theology which followed him a uniform system as Calvin had left for Re‑

Jesus Christ	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	174
formed orthodoxy. The interest in the individual reception of justification drew attention from an allsided objective observation of Christ and his
		gifts. There was even a tendency to
	In Lu‑ reduce the twofold office of Christ to a
	theran single function. According to Me
	Theology. lanchthon and Hesahusen, Christ is be
		fore everything priest; oven as king he
exercises essentially priestly functions. Selnecker
seems to have been the first who used the formula
of a threefold office, but his exposition is governed
also by the priesthood of Christ, to which the two
other offices are related like introduction and con
clusion. Others again, like Gerhard, tried to iden
tify the priestly and prophetical offices. Hemming
and Nicohlus Hunnius taught that the office of the
king was supreme and that it comprehended the
other two functions. Everywhere the same con
centration upon one point is found. In the mean
time, however, Hafenreffer and especially Gerhard
had directed their attention to the idea of a three
fold office as advocated by Eusebius and Calvin.
Gerhard not only used the new expression, but
tried to prove that only the sum of the three offices
offers the fulness of Christ's benevolent gifts. In
the regnum potentiae he found a specific function
for the royal office. Since the middle of the seven
teenth century, after the old Melanchthonian scheme
of dogmatics had been replaced by an objective
and historical arrangement of the material, there
was room for a coherent representation of the work
of Christ, which was systematized according to the
threefold office. There was a reaction of the old
Lutheran sentiment in 1773 when Ernesti criticized
the reigning doctrine because he could not see why
the clear and sufficient designation of the work of
Christ as satisfactio should be obscured by meta
phorical phrases. Moreover, he was of the opinion
that the different offices were not clearly separated
from each other, so that one title might justly cover
all of them. Other dogmaticians after him raised
similar objections on the ground that neither the
prophetical nor the royal office stands upon equal
footing with the priestly office, but that both point
to the atonement which is included in it. But the
majority of recent dogmaticians adhere to the
scheme of a threefold office. Schleiermacher took
the lead in this tendency by attempting the suo
cesaful proof that the three offices in their indisso
luble union completely define and circumscribe the
character of redemption as accomplished by Christ.
With the exclusion of the prophetic office, he holds,
the clear consciousness of the believer would be su
perseded by a magical mediation of salvation.
Without the royal office, there would be lacking the
relation of the individual believer to a community.
Finally, the absence of the priestly office would rob
	foundation	foundation of Christ of its religious content.
The doctrine of Christ's threefold office represents the redeemer as the fulfiller of all Old‑Testament prophecies and thus of all needs of the human being. Everything that Israel expected of its future salvation had concentrated itself more and more in the hope of the Messiah, " the anointed of God " (John i. 41, iv. 25). He was thought of as the king who was to restore the glory of Davjd's kingdom.
In the course of time the prophet, who as successor of Moses was never to be wanting among God's people (Dent. xviii. 15), became identical with the Messiah
(John vi.14‑15). The third office 18
Interprets‑ reflected in the picture of the Men
	tion and aiah in Isa. liii. God's people can feel
Significance themselves secure only when all con
	of the flict of the theocratic offices is excluded
	Doctrine. by unity and every blessing of sal
		vation is to be found in one single
person (Heb. vii. 23 sqq.). There was a longing
especially for the solution of the frequent historical
conflict between kingdom and priesthood (I Sam.
ii. 35; Zech. vi. 12 sqq.). A priest‑king after the
manner of Melchizedek was hoped for (Ps. ex. 4).
All these elements were combined in the idea of the
Messiah who was to possess the spirit of God in
many‑sided fulness and as the power of a compre
hensive redeeming activity (Isa. xi. 1 sqq., lxi. 1
sqq.; cf. Luke iv. 18 sqq.; John iii. 34). The
anointing with the spirit mentioned in these pas
sages has the significance of the anointing of kings,
priests, and to a certain extent also of prophets in
so far as they were endowed with the charismata.
By confessing Jesus as Christ, the Christian congre
gation expresses that it finds in him the performer
of all activities which secure salvation to the people
of God. Jesus is king (Matt. xxi. 5, xxvii. 11),
prophet (Matt. xxi. 11; Luke vii. 16), and high
priest (Heb. ii. 17, iii. 1). The scheme of the three
fold office permits of arranging the Biblical material
in its original connection, as it belongs to a com
plete representation of the person of Christ. Its
systematic value becomes evident only from the
proof that for the fulfilment of the Messianic ac
tivity there is necessary nothing more and nothing
less than the functions designated by it. The three
offices of prophet, priest, and king correspond to
the needs of the moral education of man and of his
connection with human society and the surround
ing world. If the activity of Christ on earth were
restricted to atonement, it would not be possible
to speak of the perfection of the human being in
connection with Christ. It is a matter of course
that in every moment of his earthly and heavenly
activity Christ exercises at one and the same time
all his offices. Socinianism claims for the entire
activity of Christ on earth only the prophetical
office in order to reserve the other functions as faint
ornaments' for the state of exaltation (R,acovian
Catechism, §§ 191 sqq., 456 sqq.). The permanent
union and simultaneous exercise of the three func
tions do not exclude, however, a fixed aim, namely,
the kingdom. To this as the Or~an~h1~ pUrpow Ai
the whole points before everything the Biblical
basis of the formula, the starting‑point and essential
content of the Messianic office is royal dominion
over and for God's people, the peculiar modification

of which is described by the other titles.
(E. F. KARL MtLLER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: For history of the doctrine consult: H. L. J. Heppe, Dopmatik des deutachen Protestantiamua im ItT.
Jahrhundert, pp, 209 sQq.. 222 eqQ. Goths 1857• idem, Dogmatik der evangelisch‑reJormirtea Kirche, Elberfeld,

1861; A. Schweizer, GZauAenslehre der evanpelisek‑reJor,n ‑
ten Kirche vol, ii., Zurich, 1847 H. Schmid, Dopmatik der evarvelisch‑rejormirten Kirche, Frankfort, 1876: A.

175	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesus Christ
Ritsehl, Die chriatliche Lehre van der Rechtfertigunp and
Veraehnung, i. 520 aqq., iii. 394 eqq., Bonn, 1882‑83, Eng.
tranal., of vol. i., Edinburgh, 1872. For exposition of the
doctrine consult .~ ASSEMBLY. literature under DOGMA, DOGMATICS;
WESTMINSTER AOaEMBLY.
	JESUS CHRIST, TWOFOLD STATE OF: The doc
trine dealing with the humiliation and exaltation
of Christ. Christian faith has always spoken of a
humiliation and exaltation of Christ when it com
pared the earthly appearance of Jesus on the one
side with the mode of existence of the preexisting
Logos, and on the other side with the present world
		rule of the Mediator. But the formula
	The of a twofold state has been coined only
	Lutheran in connection with the definite inter
	Doctrine. pretation given to the incarnation by
		Luther and the Christological theory
that followed in his steps. From the dogmatic idea
of the unchangeableness of God and of the commu
nication of divine attributes to the human nature
of Christ there results a terminology which must
make room in the earthly life of the Redeemer for
a human development, otherwise inconceivable, by
a special " state of humiliation." Incarnation de
notes, accordingly, not a descent of the Logos, but
an elevation of human nature, which has been re
ceived into the most intimate connection with the
divine nature. In virtue of the Communicatio
Idiomatum (q.v.) which began with his incarna
tion, it was impossible for Christ to rid himself of
his divinity. With the incarnation the exaltation
of human nature to divine glory was completed
once for all. " When he [Christ] began to be a
man, he also began to be God " (Luther). Ac
cording to Brenz, the real ascension of Christ began
with the incarnation. " Divine nature," however,
" can neither be humiliated nor exalted." The life
of Jesus within the limits of human development
rests, therefore, upon that act of self‑limitation of
the God‑man‑not of the Logos‑which is described
in Phil. ii. 5‑9. In this way the state of self‑renun
ciation is brought about. The exaltation or " maj
esty " of Christ was self‑evident, but the great prob
lem to be solved was how humiliation was possible.
	Johann Gerhard among the Lutheran theologians
most fully developed the doctrine of the two states
of Christ. The communicatio idiomatum, accord
ing to him, was accomplished at the moment of in
carnation, but Christ did not make use of them, he
renounced them, he took upon himself the form of
a servant, until he ascended to heaven and sat on
the right hand of God; hence the distinction be
tween the state of self‑renunciation and the state
of exaltation. The state of humiliation, there
fore, does not denote the unconditional lack and ab
sence of the divinity and majesty communicated to
the flesh, but only the retraction and intermission
of its use. In 1616 there originated a controversy
between the theologians of Giessen and those of
Tiibingen (see CCARIaTOLOGY, IX.) as to the manner
in which Christ, emptied himself (see KENOSIS) of
his divine attributes, whether it was mere conceal
ment (Gk, krypsis) or an actual emptying (kenosis).
The orthodox theologians did not consider the self
renuncia,tion of Christ mere simulation, but a true
and real self‑renunciation of the plenary communi
cated divine majesty and virtue. There arose also
a question as to the time when the state of selfrenunciation began. According to Luther's interpretation of Phil. ii. this state began only after the birth of Jesus. After his birth Jesus might have exalted himself above men, if he had not been willing to serve them. But according to the later dogmaticians the state of humiliation began with the conception. Since humiliation, however, does not consist in the assumption of human nature, but in the assumption of the form of a servant, incarnation is distinguished from its incongruous form‑the incarnation of the Logos is not his humiliation but an exaltation of human nature, while the act of conception is the first act in the humiliation of the God‑man. The state of exaltation begins with the descent of Christ into hell as the triumph of the God‑man over the devil (see DESCENT OF CHRIST INTO HELL).
For Reformed theologians the doctrine of the twofold state of Christ is of minor dogmatic importance; their attention was concentrated not so much upon the dogmatic assertion of the unchangeablenesa of God as upon the practical Biblical view
of the truly human development of The Jesus. According to the Reformed Reformed doctrine the Logos himself is the sub‑
Doctriae. ject of the kenasis described in Phil.
ii. In this way it was impossible for the Reformed to avoid contradiction with the dogma of the unchangeableness of God. In reference to Phil. ii. they accepted the Lutheran doctrine that the Logos did not assume human nature in general, but the form of a servant, and by identifying incarnation with Christ's obedient conduct until his death on the cross, the Reformed were able to speak of a humiliation of the God‑man. The exaltation beginning with the resurrection actually extols human nature to a higher stage.
Within Protestant orthodoxy the treatment of the doctrine of states has led to a tendency to dissolve the theory of the two natures in its scholastic
form. On the Lutheran side the true Develop‑ humanity of Christ became inconceiv‑
	ment.	able, on the Reformed side there was
	Modern	at least proposed the full revelation of
Teachings. God in Christ. Holding to the ortho‑
dox standpoint of the unchangeableness of God, the Lutherans could not make conceivable the humiliation of Christ, while the Reformed could not explain the full and essential connection of God with the humiliated Christ. By their efforts to satisfy merely the immediate religious needs, in consonance with the practical and empirical spirit of modern times, theologians like Ritschl have discarded altogether the doctrine of states, holding that we must not transcend the simple belief that the man Jesus stands over against us on the side of God. Thus they simply cut off all insoluble questions concerning the relation of the eternal to the earthly son of God, and accordingly there is no need to speak of a special state of humiliation. But the development not only of the thought, but of practical faith results in the recognition that the truth of God's appearance in the flesh must in the end suffer if this side of the doctrine of states is discarded. In this connection the question of pre‑

Jesus Christ
Jews, Missions to the
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
existence can not be discussed, but it is to be remembered that the Biblical passages relating to it confirm an actual participation of God in the revelation in Christ. God's self‑offer in Christ becomes conceivable only by the humiliating sacrifice of the eternal son for sinful humanity. Passages like John iii. 16; I John iv. 9; Rom. viii. 31‑32; Gal. iv. 4 testify that in Christ we have the living and decisive expression of divine love, not merely a historical phenomenon which assures this love. A$ to the interpretation of Phil. ii., there has been brought forth only one really exegetical reason which apparently excludes the relation of that passage to the descent of Christ from heaven. It has been pointed out that the apostle desires to give in Christ an example of humiliation which is irritable. But this objection may be refuted if it is considered that the imitation of Christ in the sense of the New Testament does not always mean an actual appropriation of his actions in their essential quality, but simply the mode and manner of his actions and sentiments so that he, like God himself, may be an example in matters which are not irritable in their essence (Eph. v. 25; I Pet. iii.13,18‑19; Matt. v. 45; Eph. V. 1‑2). See CBRI$TOIAGY.
(E. F. KARL MtILLER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. J. Van OOBteiZeO, Christian Dogmatics, u. 494 eqq., New York, n.d.; J. H. Ebrard, Chrdatliche Dogmatik, vol. ii., KSnigpberg,.1852; F. A. Philippi, Rirchliche Glaubenaiehre vol, iv., Gitteraloh, 1885; A. B. Bruce, Humiliation of Christ in its Physical, Ethical and Official Aspects, New York 1887; J. KSatlin, Lathers Theolopie, Stuttgart, 1901; W. A. Brown, Christian Theology in Outline, pp. 332‑338, New York, 1908; and the literature
under COMMUNICATIO iDIOaIATUa7.
JESUS THE SON OF SIRACH, WISDOM OF. See APOCRYPHA, A, IV., 12.
JETZER, yet'ser, JOHANNES: Journeyman‑tailor and religious impostor; b. at Zurzach (16 m. n.n.e. of Aarau) in the canton of Aargau, c. 1483; d. after 1520. In 1506 he entered the Dominican monastery of Bern as lay brother. He is described as uneducated, morally depraved and deceitful, even suspected of theft. On Mar. 24, 1507, socording to his story, St. Barbara appeared to him and a few days afterward the mother of God to announce that she had been indeed conceived in sin, as the Dominicans taught. To prove the truth of her divine revelations, she impressed upon him in repeated visits the stigmata of Christ, and now Jetzer began to act the story of Christ's sufferings in the church in lively manner. The monastery, whose picture of Mary shed bloody tears, attracted large crowds of people, and sold with great success handkerchiefs moistened with the blood. But doubts arose, and in July the bishop of Lausanne undertook an investigation which came to nothing. Subsequently the magistrate of the town investigated the case. Jetzer was imprisoned and tried; after various denials he confessed that the whole affair was an imposture in. which the four head‑masters of the monastery, Johannes Vatter, Dr. Stephen Boltzhurst, Franz' Uelschi, and Heinrich Steinegger, were implicated. The matter was immediately reported to Rome and after a competent jury had been instituted, the culprits were tried under tor‑
ture. In 1509 the four monks
and burned alive as blasphemers, and Jetzer disap
peared. The scandal caused great sensation and
indignation, especially at Bern. A large literature
of pamphlets in Latin, German, French, and Dutch
told the scandalous story and confirmed the gen
eral verdict concerning the corruption of monastic
life. 	(E. BLtlscat.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. Rettig, Die Urkunden des Jetzerproseasea, in Archiv des hiatonachen Vereina des ICattton Bern, vol.
xi.. 1888; R. Paulus, Ein Juatismord an user Dominikanern
bepanpen, Frankfort, 1897.
	JEWEL, JOHN: Bishop of Salisbury and a noted
	defender of the Reformation settlement in Eng
land; b. in the parish of Berimber, Devonshire,
	May 24 1522; d. at Monkton Farleigh (2 m. n.w.
of Bradford), Wiltshire, Sept. 23, 1571. He went
	first to Merton College, Oxford, and then, winning a
	scholarship, to Corpus Christi College, taking his
	bachelor's degree in 1540. Two years later he was
	elected to a fellowship at Corpus Christi. During
	his university life he was strongly influenced in the
	direction of Biblical criticism by John Parkhurst,
	his tutor, and confirmed in a general Protestant at
	titude by Peter Martyr, who came to Oxford in
	1547. Some time before 1551 he took orders, and
	about the end of that year became vicar of Sun
	ningwell, near Oxford. On the accession of Mary
	in 1553 he lost his fellowship, and ultimately, after
	seeking peace even at the cost of signing articles
	which he did not believe, was forced to flee. He
	arrived at Frankfort in March, 1555, but soon joined
	Peter Martyr at Strasburg, and followed him to
	Zurich in the following year. On receiving the
	news of Queen Mary's death he started for Eng
	land, arriving there in March, 1559, and was made
	bishop of Salisbury Jan. 21, 1560. He was active
	in preaching and in the visitation of his diocese, and
	soon took a prominent place in the controversy
	with Rome. His Apologia pro ecclesia Anglicdna
	(London, 1562) has been called "the first methodi
	cal statement of the position of the Church of Eng
	land against the Church of Rome." By it Jewel se
	cured acknowledgment as the official champion of
	Anglicanism. He was engaged for several years
	in an exchange of controversial works with Thomas
	Herding, an old Oxford contemporary, who sup
	ported the papal Cause. All his writings are noted
	for learning, clarity, and precision. Of his works,
	which are all deliberate, scholarly, and logical, a
	complete edition was published in 1609. Modern
	editions are those by R. W. Jelf (8 vole,, Oxford,
	1848) and another in 4' vols., published by the
Parker Society (Cambridge, 1845‑50).
	BIBLIOGRAPHY: The original biography W88 by L. Humphrey,
	Joannie Juelli . . vela et more, London, 1573, and was
	condensed by D. Featley in the Memoir prefixed to the
	Works 1809; a second. condensation was prefixed to all
	reproduced n~p and the Epistle to Scipio, London, lgg5,
	Waodaworth, EccZeeiaatical Biography,
	ib. 1853. These lives were the basis of that by C, w,
	Le Bas, ib. 1835. A Memoir is prefixed also to the Parker
	Society ed, of the Works. Consult further: DNB, x>ax,
	378‑382 J. H. Overton, The Church in England, i. 458
	481, ii. 36‑37, London, 1897; W, $, Fare, The English
	Church (1558‑1825). Passim, ib. 1904; and in general the
works on the history of Jewel's time.
were condemned	JEWS, See ISRAEL, HISTORY OF.

177	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jesus Christ
		Jews, Miadons to the
	I.	7n the Primitive Church.
It. In the Roman Catholic Church.
		Early Missions (§ 1).
		Missions in Spain (§ 2).
		Missions in Other Countries (§ 3).
III. In Protestant Churches.
JEWS, MISSIONS TO THE.
Lutheran and Reformed Churches (§1
English Missions (§ 2).
Minor English Missionary Societies (§ 3).
Missionary Societies in Other Countries (§ 4).
Missions in the United States 0 5).
I. In the Primitive Church: Although the kingdom of God which Christ had come to realize was to extend, according to the predictions of the prophets, not only over Israel, but over the whole earth, Jesus had, nevertheless, restricted his personal sotivity to Israel; and had even commanded his disciples not to go in the way of the Gentiles (Matt. x. 5). It was not till he was about to depart from the earth that he commanded them to teach and baptize all people. The Twelve, however, directed their efforts primarily to the Jews; and the earliest Christian congregations were composed entirely of Jews and proselytes to Judaism. Apostolic missions among the Jews were so successful that James could point out to Paul thousands of converted Jews (Acts xxi. 20). A large number of priests were also obedient to the faith (Acts vi. 7); and in the congregations which Paul founded in Asia Minor, Greece, Crete, etc., the nucleus was Jewish. That the conversion of the Jews was not lost sight of in the second or third century is proved by the dialogue of Justin Martyr with the Jew Trypho and Tertullian's Adversus Judcaos. But Jewish Christianity had long developed a heretical tendency by insisting upon the national and religious peculiarities of Judaism and by avowing the most pronounced Gnosticism. The further growth of the Jewish element in the Church would have seriously endangered her inner life and existence, if the insurrection of Bar Kokba had not led to a sharp separation of Judaism from the universal catholic character of the Church. Deprived of their political power and national autonomy, the Jews concentrated their whole spiritual life upon the study of the Law and produced the Talmud. The transformation of prophetiam into Talmudism created a wide gulf between Jews and Christians. From the very beginning, the spirit of the Talmud drew a veil over their eyes (II Cor. iii. 13‑16).
II. In the Roman Catholic Church: The early church did not possess any special institutions for the conversion of the Jews, although
x. Early there were always those whom the love
Missions. of Christ compelled to preach the Gospel to the Jews, and there were likewise other factors which made it advisable for the leaders of both Church and State to win the Jews for Christianity. Cassiodorus, when he became a monk, felt himself constrained, in his exegesis of the Psalms (as in his conclusvo to Ps. Lvxxi.), to urge the Jews to be converted. So the Emperor Justinian, from political motives, stated that the purpose he had in ordering the synagogues to use the Greek and Latin translations of the Old Testament, and to abstain from Talmudic exegesis, was to lead the Jews to Christianity. Bishops did not hesitate to resort to acts of violence to compel the Jews to become Christians. Justice, however, demands reoVL‑12
IV. Methods and Practical Coneiderations.
Methods in Christian Lands (§ 1).
Methods in Non‑Evangelical Countries (§ 2).
Influence of Zionism on Jewish Missions (13).
ognition of the fact that many popes protected the Jews. Gregory I. condemned all compulsory baptisms, and by kindliness and rewards tried to win the Jews for the Church. Although he put no high estimate upon converts gained in this way, he counted upon their descendants. " If we do not win the parents," he said, " we shall have their children "‑a remark which experience proved to be ill‑founded, especially in Spain. There was hardly a century that works were not written to bring about the conversion of the Jews, hardly one in which rewards were not offered to secure them for the Church, and also not a century in which numbers of proselytes, thoroughly convinced, did not pass over to Christianity, many of whom became an honor to the Church.
	Proselytes	have ever been especially active in
missions to the Jews. In the seventh century
		Bishop Julian of Toledo (d. 690) wrote
x. Missions the De aeztce W,tatia comprobatione con.. in Spain. tra Jtidceos to refute the Jewish notion, then asserting itself, that Jesus could not be the Messiah, as he was not to appear until the sixth millennium of the world. Almost at the same time Isidore of Seville wrote two books in which he proved the Christian doctrine of faith from the Old Testament and especially pointed out that the Christians now formed the true Israel. Raymond of Pennaforte, general of .the Dominicans, introduced the study of the Hebrew language and Talmudic writings in his order, especially for the promotion of missionary activity among the Jews; and another Dominican, Pablo Christiani of Montpellier, a Jew by descent, was the first real missionary preacher. He traveled ia southern France and elsewhere, preaching and disputing with the Jews in churches and synagogues, and proving the Messiahship and divinity of Jesus from Bible and Talmud. At the same time the Dominican Raymond Martin, a Christian by birth, but well versed in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic, wrote his Pugio fidei. contra Macros et Jvdmos, an armory for the disputes of the following times. Abner of Burgos, a respected physician and Christian convert, wrote several Hebrew and Spanish books for the conversion of the Jews. John of Valladolid, another proselyte, wrote an exposition on.Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Ten Commandments and a Concordia legum of Judaism and Christianity. Cardinal Pedro de Luna, later Benedict XIII., himself had a debate in Pampeluna with Rabbi Shem Tob ben Shaprut, and took a lifelong interest in the conversion of the Jews. He was the first patron of Rabbi Solomon Halevi (1353‑1435), later known as Paul of St. Maria, archbishop of Burgos, and interchanged controversial letters with Joshua of Lorca, until he finally became a Christian. Among the thousands who at that time entered the Church,

dews, laesioas to the	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	178
frequently, it is true, for secular reasons, or from fear or compulsion, there was a great number of sincere believers in Christ. In the beginning of the fifteenth century the Dominican Vincent Ferrer (q.v.), who wandered through Italy, France, and Spain as a missioner, developed an astonishing activity in converting Jews; at least 20,500 are said to have been baptized in Castile and Aragon. The reason for such zeal of conversion in Spain was due to the extraordinary power of the Jewish population which threatened to suppress the spiritual and material development of Spain.
In France there were comparatively few efforts in this direction; and at the court of Louis the Pious there was even a suspicious sympathy with Judaism. With the exception of Nicholas of Lyra
(1300‑40), of Jewish descent, though 3. Missions born a Christian, who wrote a number in Other of controversial writings against the
Countries. Jews, there was hardly any one who
labored for the conversion of the Jews. Still, France lacked neither pious proselytes and families of proselytes nor numerous compulsory baptisms, persecutions, and acts of violence. In Italy both power and monks were deeply interested in the conversion of the Jews. Lorenzo of Brundisium (d. 1619), general of the Capuchins, preached with great power and traveled through Italy, Hebrew Bible in hand, converting rabbis and laymen. In Rome many Jews accepted Christianity at all periods, and in 1550 Paul III. founded an institute for the conversion of the Jews; while Pius V. won more than a hundred learned and rich Jews for the Church. Many of the innumerable proselytes in Italy occupied high positions in the Church, or were received into the nobility of the nation. The history of missions among the Jews in England is singular. During the reign of William Rufus, the Jews complained because so many of their number became Christians; the king attempted to force them to return to Judaism, but the steadfastness of these proselytes hindered the execution of his menaces (1100). About 1200 Richard, prior of Bermondsey, established a hospital of converts, and the Dominicans in Oxford opened a similar institution. Henry III. set apart a special house in London for the reception and care of proselytes, for which it soon became necessary to organize branch institutions. Under Edward I. 500 proselytes received baptism in the Converts' House, yet this same king was compelled, in 1290, to banish 16,500 Jews for usury and coining. Germany stands in the strongest contrast to England. Here there is no record of any missionary efforts, but only of compulsory baptisms occasioned by the persecutions during the crusades, the invasions of the Tatars, and the Black Death.
Modern Roman Catholic efforts for the conversion of the Jews began in France. The two brothers Lehmann, both proselytes, worked successfully under Pius IX. among the Jews of France. The proselyte Abbd Bauer used his brilliant oratorical gifts for the conversion of the Jews in Paris and Vienna. The most extensive work, however, was carried on in Palestine by the proselyte Maria Alphonae Ratiabonne, who joined the Roman Catho‑
lic Church in 1842. With his brother he established the order of NBtre Dame de Sion for the education of Jewish girls and founded many charitable. institutions, not only in Palestine, but also in France, England, Chalcedon, Galatia, and elsewhere.
III. In Protestant Churches: Luther's attitude toward the Jews was at first favorable, as is evident from his Dass Jesus eim, geborner
z. Lutheran Jude war, but in later works, as in his and Von den Juden and ihren Liigen, he
Reformed	showed utter hopelessness of the con‑
	Churches.	version of the Jews, so that little zeal
		in that direction could have been ex
pected. Nevertheless, there were numerous pros
elytes in the Lutheran and Reformed Churches,
among them Immanuel Tremellius of Ferrara, who
at Heidelberg, with Ursinus and Olevianus, took
part in the compilation of the Heidelberg Catechism.
In the seventeenth century Ezra Edzard (b. at
Hamburg June 28, 1629; d. there Jan. 1, 1708) of
Hamburg, was greatly interested in the conversion
of the Jews, and from his own means established a
considerable fund for that purpose. His sons Georg
and Sebastian continued his work. Similar funds
seem to have existed in other cities; as, for example,
in Geneva, where a part of the ecclesiastical rev
enue is still called Fond des proselytes, and again in
Darmstadt and Frankfort. Among the Pietists,
who distinguished themselves by their missionary
zeal, Spener declared it the duty of the government
to take care of the conversion of the Jews; while
the Moravian Samuel Lieberkuhn labored thirty
years among the Jews. In 1728, at the suggestion
of A. H. Francke, Callenberg founded at Halls an
Institutum Judaicum, which lasted until 1792.
The two first missionaries of that institution were
Widmann and Manitius, who from 1730 to 1735
traveled through Poland, Bohemia, Germany, Den
mark, and England. In 1736 they were joined by
Stephan Schulz, the most important worker of that
institute, who extended his travels over the whole
of Europe and the Orient. Through the instru
mentality of Leasing, and still more through Moses
Mendelssohn, a reform movement took place among
the Jews, starting from Germany and penetrating
the East, while in the Romance countries similar
results .were achieved by the French Revolution.
The gradual renunciation of the Talmud on the
part of the liberal Jews dates from that time. The
immediate result was that large numbers turned
to Christianity, especially in Berlin. In 1816‑43,
3,984 Jews, and these the richest and most cultured,
were baptized in the eight old Prussian provinces.

	The corruption of the churches and their institu
tions, and the apostasy of thousands from all faith,
led many lA ~j~"~(~d ~~ ~~l~l~ ~~
	i. English	the end 1lof the world was near, and
	Missions.	that soon a general conversion of the
		Jews was to take place. With Simeon
of Cambridge, Marsh of Birmingham, the proselyte
J. F. Fry, and the Preacher Legh Richmond, Lewis

Way, a wealthy clergyman, founded in 1808, under
the patronage of the Duke of Kent, the London
Society for Promoting Christianity among the Jews,
which included both churchmen and dissenters until
1815, when the latter withdrew from the organiza‑

179	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Tews, Missions to the
tion. Way traveled in Holland, Germany, and Russia to better the political and social position of the Jews and to awaken missionary zeal among the Christians. He induced Alexander I. to promise, in 1817, his special protection, as well as lands, to baptized Jews. In 1814 the Duke of Kent laid the cornerstone of a church for the Jews, to which was added an educational institution for children of proselytes, a Hebrew college for the training of missionaries, and a trade school for proselytes. Baptisms became no numerous that in 1832 the founding of a Hebrew‑Christian Church in England was planned, but could not be realized. The society is the oldest, largest, richest, moat enterprising, and best organized of its type, and has auxiliary societies throughout the British Isles and Canada. The society, whose income in 1900‑01 was £46,338, with an expenditure of £36,910, employed at 52 missionary stations 199 workers, among them 25 clergymen, 19 physicians, 34 female missionaries, 20 lay missionaries, 35 colporteurs, 58 teachers, and 8 apothecaries. Of these, 82 were converts from Judaism. Of the 52 stations 18 are in England, 3 in Austria, 1 in France, 4 in Germany, 2 in Holland, 1 in Italy, 4 in Rumania, 1 in Russia, 1 in Conatantinople; in Asia there are 10 stations, among them Jerusalem with 27 workers; in Africa there are 7 stations. About 5,000 Jews have been baptized by the society since its foundation. Its principal organs are the Jevriah Missionary Intelligence and the Jewish Missionary Advocate.
Among the other English missionary societies for the conversion of the Jews are the following: The Free Church of Scotland Jewish Mission, estab‑
lished in 1840, with about 77 workers 3. Minor and stations at Budapest, Conatanti‑
English nople, Breslau, Tiberias, Safed, and
Missionary Edinburgh, and publishing the Free Societies. Church of Scotland Monthly and The
Children's Record; the Presbyterian Church in Ireland Jewish Mission, established in 1841, with stations at Hamburg‑Altona (with two ordained missionaries and three colporteurs and Evangelists) and Damascus (with four ordained missionaries and four other laborers), and publishing The Missionary Herald of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland; the British Society for the Propagation of the Gospel among the Jews, established in London in 1842, its membership including representatives of the various dissenting bodies, with twentytwo missionaries and sixteen stations in England, Germany, Austria, Russia, and Turkey, and publishing The Jewish Herald; the Church of Scotland Jewish Mission, established in 1841, with stations in Alexandria, Beirut, Smyrna, Constantinople, and Saloniea, and publishing The Church of Scotland Home and Foreign Mission Record; The Presbyterian Church of England Jewish Mission, established in 1860, with two missionaries in London, one agent in Aleppo and one in Corfu; Parochial Missions to the Jews at Home and Abroad, established in 1875, under the auspices of the Established Church, laboring chiefly in parishes with a large percentage of Jewish population, having stations in England and Bombay, and publishing Church arid Synagogue; the Mildmay Mission to the
Jews, established in 1878, with stations in Russia, South Africa, Egypt, and Bulgaria, and publishing Trusting and Toiling; the East London Mission to Jews, established in 1877, with a mission house and orphans' home; the Barbican Mission to the Jews, established in 1879; The Jerusalem and the East Mission Fund, established in 1897 by Bishop Blyth of Jerusalem, with eighteen assistants in Jerusalem, Beirut, Haifa, Cairo, and Suez, and publishing Bible Lands; The Kilburn Mission to the Jews, established in 1896 by the proselyte Ben Oliel, especially for the well‑to‑do business men of London; and The London City Mission to Jews with sixteen laborers among the 250,000 foreign Jews in London. Besides these societies, a Hebrew Christian Union and a Prayer Union for Israel were founded in 1897, the latter publishing The Friend of Israel.
In Germany there are three societies for missions among Jews. The GeselLschaft zur Verbreitung des Chriatentuma unter den Juden was established in
1822 at Berlin under the influence of ;. Mission‑ Lewis Way and Tholuck. It has ataary tions in Berlin, Posen, Czernowicz, and
Societies Stanislau. Since its existence about
in Other 713 baptisms have taken place. Its
Countries. official organ is the Nathanael. Inde‑
pendently of this missionary society Prof. H. L. Strack manages the Inatitutum Judaicum, an association formed for the purpose of acquainting theological students at the university with the mission among the Jews. The Evangelisch‑lutherischer Centralverein fur Mission unter Israel was established in 1871 at Leipsic. It tries to unite all Lutheran missions among the Jews to uniform activity and employs three laborers in Leipsic and in Galicia; its organ is the Saat auf Hofnurcg. In connection with it Professor Delitzach founded in 1880 the first Institutum Judaicum. There is also a seminary for missionaries among the Jews. The Westdeutscher Verein fiir Israel was established in 1843 in Cologne. It has stations at Cologne, Frankfort, and Strasburg. Its organ is the Missionsblatt des westdeutschen Vereina fur Israel.
Switzerland has a Verein der Freunde Israels at Basel, established in 1830. It publishes Der Freund Israels and L'Ami d'larael. France has a Soci6tk frangaise pour 1'wang6lisation d'Israel, established in 1888 by the Rev. G. Kruger, with one missionary for France and agencies in Algiers and Oran. Its organ is Le Reveil d'larael. Scandinavia has three societies for missions among the Jews: the " Evangelical National Society," established in 1856, with a station at Hamburg; the " Society for Missions among Israel," established in 1875 by the Rev. A. Lindstrom at Stockholm, with a home for proselytes at Stockholm and lay missionaries at Budapest and Cracow, and publishing Missions Tidnireg J8r Israel; the " Norwegian Central Committee for Missions to Israel," established in 1865 at Christiania, with two missionaries at Galaz and Braila in Rumania, and publishing Missions Blad for Israel. In Russia, where half of all the Jews of the world live, the government limits Protestant missionary work among the Jews. Missionary work in the proper sense is restricted to the State Church.

Jews, Missions to the
Jeareel	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	180
In Kishinef Faltin developed a successful missionary activity after 1859, and Joseph Rabinowitz in 1882‑99. In Melbourne, Australia, there is the Friends of Israel Association, of which the proselyte Abramowitz is the head.
In the United States there are eleven church missions: the Church Society for Promoting Christianity amongst the Jews (Protestant Epis‑
g. Missions copal) established in 1842 in New York, in the with stations at New York and PhilaUnited delphia and five missionaries, and pubStates. lishing The Gospel of the Circumcision; the Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church of North America, established in 1871 m New York, working at Urumia, Teheran, Ramadan, and Sidon, and publishing The Assembly Herald; the Reformed Presbyterian Mission to the Jews, established in 1894 in Philadelphia, with three laborers; and the Messiah Mission of Chicago, established in 1896 and continued since 1899 as the Mission of the Women's Association of the United Presbyterian Church of North America. Specifically Lutheran are the four following missions: the Norwegian Zionaforeningen for Israelamissionen blandt norske Lutheranere i Amerika, established 1878 at Minneapolis, with three laborers in Minsk and Odessa in Russia and New York; the Jewish Mission of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States, established in 1885 in New York; the Jewish Mission of the Joint Synod of Ohio, established in 1892; and the Mission of the German Lutheran Synod of the Jews in Chicago, established in 1894 in Chicago. The Methodists have the New York City Church Extension and Missionary Society, established in 1892; the Baptists, the Missionary Society of the Seventh Day Baptists, established in 1887; and the Quakers the.Friends' Mission at Ramallah in Palestine, established in 1870 by English Quakers, and continued in 1887 by American Quakers as the Eli and Sibyl Jones Mission. Besides these, there are twenty‑one independent missions, the most important of which are: the New York City Mission, the oldest of all American missions, established in 1828; the Chicago Hebrew Mission, founded in 1887 and publishing The Jewish Era; the Gospel Mission of the Jews, formerly the Hope of Israel Mission, established in 1892 in New York; the Brooklyn Christian Mission to the Jews, established 1892 in New York and publishing Our Hope and the Yiddish " Hope of Israel "; the World's Gospel Union, established in 1892 at Kansas City, Mo., with eight missionaries, one in Morocco; the American Mission to the Jews, established in 1895 by the proselyte Warachaviak; and the Immanuel Mission to the Jews in Cleveland, established in 1898, and publishing Immanuel's Witness. The American missions to the Jews engage 150 laborers in all.
IV. Methods and Practical Considerations: A distinction must be drawn between missions among those Jews who live scattered in a Christian country, and those who live in a compact mass and have their own language and customs, and those in Mohammedan and heathen countries. Missions to the Jews living within the pale of Christian churches can have no other purpose but to incorporate
them in the churches. This is especially the case
with the Jews of western Europe. For more than
a century they have been in a process of assimilation
		with Christian nations. Self‑preserva
	r. Meth‑ tion, if no other motive, must compel
	ods in the Christian Church to carry on mis
	Christian sionary work among the Jews; for it
	Lands. would be extremely dangerous if so
		many thousands of Jews in the midst of
Christians were equal or even superior to them in
political, social, moral, and economical respects,
and yet opposed in religion. It is the duty of the
Church to educate suitable catechetes and evangel
ists for this work among the Jews. All missionary
activity should start from the Church. Among the
Evangelical churches only the English and Scotch
and some smaller free churches promote these mis
sions as a branch of their churchly activity. It is
not the duty of the Church, however, to provide
for the material assistance of proselytes; this be
longs rather to private charity and independent
associations. The proper persons to be employed
in converting the Jews are Christian clergymen;
although it is much more difficult to prepare born
Christians for work of that kind than born Jews,
who can more easily adapt themselves to the mode
of thinking of their brethren. But it would be en
tirely wrong to gather the Jews into a separate
Judaeo‑Christian Church, since that would lead only
to a new sect; and, on the other hand, extreme
caution must be observed that baptism may not be
granted too hastily or to unworthy recipients.
Methods of missionary work differ according to the
various conditions of the Jews. While the Jews
lived almost without any legal rights among the
Christians the State and the Church could force
them to hear the preaching of the Gospel in their
own synagogues or in churches. Since the eman
cipation of the Jews, this method has become im
possible, and they have accordingly been visited
in their homes, and the Gospel has been announced
to them by the distribution of tracts and books.
But as such visits may be considered by the Jews
an invasion of their homes, nothing is left but occa
sional meetings in public places. Public lectures,
reading‑rooms, and free schools have also contrib
uted to the success of missions. The instruction of
catechumens must be adapted to their religious con
dition and spiritual training. Special considera‑
tion must be devoted to those difficult doctrines
which for the Jew are not only offensive, but even
detestable, such as the doctrines of,the Trinity, of
the divinity of Christ, and of the atonement.
Missionary activity must assume a different attitude in non‑Evangelical countries, where Jews live
		in a compact mass. This is the case
	a. Meth‑	principally in eastern Europe, espe
	ods in	cially in the western provinces of Rus
Non‑Evan‑ sia that formerly belonged to Poland.
	gelical	The number of Russian Jews is esti
Countries. 	mated at from 4,500,000 to 6,()00,000.
	Thousands of Jews are also crowded
together in Galicia and Rumania. In countries like
Russia missionaries encounter special difficulties,
owing to deep‑rooted Jewish fanaticism, hatred of
the Christians, Jewish narrowness, and great eni‑

181	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jews, Missions to the
		Jezreel
dition in the Talmud and Cabala. A missionary who
is not thoroughly versed in Hebrew literature and
science will here be little respected. As only con
verted Jews thoroughly know the Jewish heart and
the Jewish head, they have, almost without excep
tion, been used for this kind of missionary work.
But there is always danger that inefficient mission
aries may be employed merely because they are
proselytes, and that born Jews may be too indul
gent to Jewish peculiarities and prejudice. Such
deficiencies and dangers will best be avoided by the
combined work of born Christians and proselytes.
Missionary activity among foreign Jews has offered
almost insuperable difficulties. If an individual
person or family in the midst of large Jewish con
gregations adopts Christianity, reception into a
Christian congregation already in existence is often
impossible. The conversion of whole families has
been almost impossible, but since a peculiar inter
est in Evangelical Christianity has arisen in Poland
and Russia, and dozens of Jews desire instruction
from clergymen and missionaries, it will perhaps be
possible to gather eventual converts into Judaeo
Christian congregations; for the Jews of the East
are neither suited nor willing to be absorbed into
another nationality and church. Literature is a
very important means of influencing Jews, espe
cially as the Hebrew New Testament is well received
and much read by the Jews of the East, particu
larly in the excellent translation of Delitzsch. Jews
in heathen or Mohammedan countries form the
smallest part of the population and they are on the
lowest level in spiritual and moral respects. Though
not learned in the Talmud, they cling obstinately
to their old traditions, and Christianity has taken
little root among them.
	Since 1897 the movement of Zionism has pre
sented new problems to Christian missions. It
		arose as a reaction against the efforts
3. Influence of assimilation, and as a means of
	of Zion‑	remedying the oppressions of anti
	ism on	Semitism; and its object is to regain
	Jewish	the Jewish country for the Jewish peo
	Missions. ple. It looks upon missions as an in
		strument by which an increasing num
ber are cut off from the national body of the Jews;
but on the other hand, the Zionists seek the friend
ship of the Christians because they need their moral
and material aid in the realization of their plans.
Thus Zionists are enemies of missions, but not ene
mies of Christianity. Missionaries must, therefore,
convince the Jews that acceptance of Christianity
does not necessarily include the sacrifice of Jewish
nationality, and that a national regeneration of
their people is impossible without a religious re
generation.
	The total number of missionaries working among
the 10,000,000 or more Jews in the world is about
500.		(F. HEalail.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. F. A. de Is Rai, Die evangeZiache Chriafen
	heit and die Juden enter dem Geachichfapunkt der Mission,
	3 vols., Carlsruhe, 1884‑92; A. A. Boner, Narrative of a
	Mission of Enquiry to the Jews from the Church of Scatland,
	Edinburgh, 1854; .1. Mason, Three Years in Turkey;
	Medical Mission to the Jews, London, 1880; Mrs. Edwards,
	Missionary Work among the Jews in Moldavia, Galicia,
	and Silesia, ib. 1867; C. li. Kslkar, Israel and die Kirche,
	Hamburg, 1889; G. A. Dalman, KurzDefaeatea Hand6uch
der Mission enter Israel, Berlin, 1893; J. Dunlop, Memories of Gospel Triumphs among the Jews, London, 1894; The Jewish Question and the Mission to the Jews, ib. 1894; A. L. W illiams; Missions to the Jews, ib. 1897; W. T. Gidney, The Jews arid their Evangelization, ib. 1899; idem, Missions to Jews, ib. 1899; At Home and Abroad, ib. 1900; A. E.1'hompson, A Century of Jewish Missions, Edinburgh, 1902; J. Richter, Jiidiache Miaeionageachichte, GOteraloh, 1906; H. O. Dwight, Blue Book of Missions for 1907, New York, 1907; J. Schneider, Kirchliches Jahrhuch, GOteraloh, 1909.
JEZEBEL: Wife of Ahab, seventh king of Israel. She was a daughter of Ethbaal, king of Tyre, and one of the most unscrupulous yet energetic queens of history. She seems to have swayed the mind of her husband, and where he was weak and vacillating, she supplied courage and resolution. She established the worship of the Phenician Baal in the kingdom, and, while supporting at her own table the priests of Baal, persecuted the prophets of Israel (I Kings xviii. 4), and vowed vengeance upon Elijah (I Kings xix. 2). When her husband despaired of getting Naboth's vineyard, she ordered the judicial murder of Naboth and secured for her husband the coveted possession (I Kings xxi. 5). She survived Ahab fourteen years, but continued to have great influence at court, and saw her daughter Athaliah married to the king of Judah (II Kings viii. 26). When Jehu drove into Jezreel, with the design of extirpating the house of Ahab, Jezebel was thrown from the upper story of the palace to death on the atones beneath. Her body was crushed under Jehu's chariot‑wheels, and, according to II Kings ix. 3035, devoured by dogs. See ARAB; and ELIJAH.
131BLIOGRAPFIY: Consult, besides the pertinent sections in the works named under AHAB: DB, ii. 858‑867; EB, ii. 2457; JE, vii. 188.
JEZREEL: A plain mentioned Josh. avii. 16; Judges vi. 33; Hos, i. 5, etc. The name (" God sows ") denotes the fruitfulness of the plain as something unusual, extraordinary, and wrought by God, and indicates that from the moat ancient times agriculture was adequately recompensed in the region. Jezreel is the largest plain in the mountain land of Israel, and is therefore called the " valley " (Judges v. 15; I Sam. xxxi. 7), and " the great plain " (I Mace. xii. 49). It was of great significance in commerce, and the road from Egypt led by three breaches to the southern edge of the plain and continued northwest to the coast, northeast to Tabor and Damascus, while the eastern edge was crossed by the road from Samaria to Galilee. This made it a continual cause of strife. The Israelites first gained possession of it by the victory of Barak and Deborah (Judges v.), though the Canaanitea retained possession of Megiddo, Ibleam, Taanach, and Dor until the time of the kings (Judges i. 27). To Manasseh belonged the southern portion (Josh. xvii. i1‑13), to Iasachar the eastern part (Josh. xix. 18‑20), while Zebulun was on the north (Josh. xix. 10 sqq.). The Israelites Under Saul and Jonathan sustained a defeat beneath Gilboa (I Sam. xxxi.); Ahab defeated Ben‑hadad II. near Aphek (I. Kings xx 26); and Josiah was defeated by Necho II. at Megiddo (II Kings xxiii. 29). The city of Jezreel, belonging to Issa,char, was situated on the plain, at the foot of Gilboa (Josh. xix. 18), above Beth‑ahean (I Kings iv. 12), not far from Carmel

Jamb	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	182
(I Kings aviii. 45), and was the home of Ahab and Naboth (I Kings sai. 1) and the scene of Jehu's exploit (II Kings ix. 17 eqq.). It is called Esdraelon in Judith, iii. 9, iv. 6, and in later times, as in the Onomasticon of Euaebius; the modern village Zer'in has preserved the name. There were other places of note on the plain. Josephus (Ant. XX., vi. 1) mentions Ginaea, the modern Jenin, the old Engannim of Josh. xix. 21. Taanach of Judges v. 19 is the modern Ta'annuk. The city of Megiddo lay on the south border of the plain, and appears as the Egyptian Maketi and as Magidda in the Amarna Tablets; it was a royal Canaanitic city, and was refortified by Solomon. In the western part lay the village of Nein, to be identified with the Nain of Luke vii. 11 aqq. The modern Endur bespeaks the ancient En‑dor of Josh. xvii. 11, south of which is Sulem, the Shunem of Josh. xix. 18. Aphek must be sought not far from the city of Jezreel, possibly in the ruins of the modern El‑Fule.
(H. GumfiE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the
Holy Laud chap. xtix.,. London, 1897; H. Reland, PalBa
tina, pp 359‑370, Utrecht, 1714; C. Bitter, Comparative
Geography of Palestine, ii 314‑31b, 317 322, iv. 333, 343
3b0 Edinburgh, 1888; G. Ebera and Ii. Goths, PaldatBna
to Byld and Wort, i. 27b‑290, Stuttgart, 1883; W. M.
Thomson, The Laud and the Book, ii, 177‑191, New York,
1888; W. M, MUller Asiea uud Europa, pp, 1b7‑1b8, 187,
Ixipaie, 1893; F, Buhl, Geographic des alter Paltiatina,
PP. 108 sqq., 204 eqq., TQbingen, 1898; Robinson:
Researches iii. 181‑188; $ehUrer, (3eachichte, i. 494‑49b,
Eng, tranal., T., ii. 89; DB, ii. 857‑8b8; EB, ii. 24b8‑2480,
JE, vu. 188‑187.
JOAB: One of the most notable contemporaries of David, son of Zeruiah, sister of David, and brother of Abishai and Aeahel (II Sam. ii. 18). He first appears in II Sam. ii. 13 as one of David's captains in the war with Ieh‑bosheth, though I Sam. xxii. 1 implies that he had then been long a companion of David. In this war Abner, the leader of Iah‑bosheth's forces, slew Asahel, Joab's brother, causing a blood feud with Joab, who avenged his brother by killing Abner, but under ouch circumstances as to involve David in the suspicion of playing Abner false, since he was treating with Abner for the union of the northern tribes under his sway (II Sam. ii.‑iii.). Joab was so powerful in the army that David had to confess his inability to punish Joab for the murder and the consequences which might have resulted (II Sam. iii. 39). I Chron. xi. 4‑8 makes Joab win his position of leader by capturing the fortress of Jerusalem; but this does not agree with II Sam. v. 6‑9 and the context, according to which Joab was already a leader.
According to II. Sam viii. 16, when David became king of all Israel, to Josh was given command of the army, but since military achievements thereafter were ascribed to David himself, the name of Joab appears only occasionally. He waged a bloody war in Edom and drove the Edomitic king in exile to Egypt (I gaga xi. 117); defeated the Aran mean allies of the Ammonites (II Sam. x. 6‑14); executed the command of David to have Uriah killed in a skirmish (II Sam. xi. 14‑27); and yielded to David the glory of a hard‑earned victory over the capital of the Ammonites (II Sam. sii. Zg~al),
It was Joab who, by employing a stratagem carried through by a wise woman of Tekoa, persuaded David to recall from exile Absalom, who had killed his brother Amnon, and two years later secured a formal reconciliation between father and son (II Sam. xiii. 39‑xiv. 33). In the rebellion of Absalom Joab remained true to David, killed the unfilial rebel, and advised the king wisely when the latter in mourning for his son was likely to alienate the affections of his people. He defeated an attempt of David to appoint Amass in his place (II Sam. xvii.‑xa.), killing Amass in the war which arose over the rebellion of Sheba and thus raising another blood‑feud. He opposed the census of the people ordered by David (II Sam. xiv. 1‑9). At the end of David's reign Joab favored Adonijah as the rightful heir to the throne, and thereby incurred the enmity of Solomon, who was designated David's quocensor and was favored by the party of Nathan. For this and earlier offenses Joab was slain at the altar by command of Solomon (I Kings ii. 18‑34). (H. GuxaE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The commentaries on Samuel and Kings and the relevant sections in the works on the history of Israel (named under ARAB); DB, ii. 858‑859; EB, ii. 2480‑2482; JE, vii. 187‑189.
JOACHIM L, jb'a‑kim: Margrave of Brandenburg; b. Feb. 21, 1484; d. at Stendal (4J m. n.n.e. of Magdeburg), July 11, 1535. Although only fifteen years of age at the death of his father he assumed control of the government and appeared in the diet of 1500 with the dignity of electoral prince, having associated his ten‑year‑old brother with himself as nominal eo‑ruler. Through Dietrich of Bulow the young prince had received a thorough humanistic education, and in his intense admiration for the new learning he sought and secured the friendship of the famous Tritheim, abbot of Sponheim, who, after a long solicitation, visited Berlin in 1505 and took part in the following year in the foundation of the University at Frankfort‑on‑theOder. Both by Tritheim and by Aleander Joachim was praised as a learned prince and as a patron of the sciences. In the government of his territories he displayed exceptional energy in the suppression of public disorder and he followed this up with the introduction of the Roman law and important judicial reforms which, however, were slow in coming into effect. In the imperial election which resulted in the choice of Charles V., Joachim played an unworthy r81e of mingled duplicity and weakness, carrying on secret negotiations both with Emperor Maximilian and with Francis I. of France and appearing finally as a candidate himself. He failed, however, to secure the vote even of his brother Albert, whom his influence had made, in 1514,
archbiahpp of Mainz (see AtgERT of DRANnEN‑
suaa). He held himself aloof from the imperial court until the victory of Pavia in 1525 made Charles all‑powerful in Germany. Thereupon Joachim became a thorough partizan of the House of Hapsburg .
As early as 1514 he had allowed the sale of indulgences to be carried on in his dominions, and
three years later Tetzel was permitted to pursue his practises there. The theologians at the University of Frankfort took sided against Luther, whom the

188	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Joab
Joachim
margrave regarded with personal dislike because of the format's bitter attack on Archbishop Albert. A personal interview with Luther previous to the meeting of the Diet of Worms served only to intensify the opposition between the two. In the execution of the provisions of the Edict of Worms Joachim took the leading part, gaining thereby increased favors from the emperor. In 1524 he married his eldest son to a daughter of Luther's enemy, George of Saxony, and in the following year joined the association formed at Dessau for the destruction of " The Abominable Sect of Lutherans." In spite of all his efforts, however, the new teachings made rapid progress in Brandenburg and created disaensions in his own household. In 1527 his wife Elizar bath received the communion secretly from a Lutheran priest, largely through the influence of her brother Christian II. of Denmark, whose interference in his domestic affairs aroused bitter resentment in Joachim. The electresa escaped lifelong imprisonment only by flight, and Luther's intervention served but to intensify the elector's hatred. At the Diet of Augsburg he appeared as one of the leading champions of a policy of relentless warfare against the Lutherans. In 1533 he concluded with George of Saxony and Archbishop Albert a league at Halls in opposition to the Schmalkald League. In his will, drawn up in 1534, he laid the injunction upon his successors to remain faithful to the Roman communion, and, when his son Joachim's wife died, he obtained for him the hand of Hedwig, daughter of Sigismund, king of Catholic Poland. His death revealed, however, that his efforts against the spread of the reformed faith were practically vain.
(G. KwwEBnv.)
BIHLIOOAAPHT: J. G. Droyaen, Geachiehte der Preuaniachen Politik, ii. 2, pp. 1‑183, Leipaie, 1870; A. Miiller, GescAichta der Reformation in der Mark Brandenburg, Berlin, 1839; C. W. Bpieker, Geachichte der Einfiihrung der Reformation in . . . Brandenburg, ib. 1839; D. Erdmann, Luther and die Hohenzollern, pp. 37 eqq., Breslau, 1883; J. Heidemann. Die Reformation in der Mark Brandenburg, Berlin, 1889. For matter upon the choice of the emperor consult: Reichatapaakten, new aeries, vol. i., Goths, 1893; E. R. Roesler, Die Kaiaerwahl Carla V. Vienna, 1878. Consult also the literature given under TsrrasM:vs.
JOACHIM IL: Margrave of Brandenburg; b. Jan. 9, 1505; d. at K&penik (8 m. s.e. of Berlin), Jan. 3, 1571. He was the son of Joachim I. (q.v.), was educated under the supervision of his uncle the Elector Albert (see ALBERT OF BRANDENBURG), and at an early age conceived an interest in theological questions. By his marriage with the daughter of George of Saxony in 1524 and of Sigiamund of Poland in 1535, his father had sought to bind him to the Roman faith. But it was early apparent that he would not follow closely in the footsteps of his father, whom he succeeded in 1535. At first he attempted to play the part of mediator between the two parties and eagerly embraced the plan of a general council for the settlement of the religious schism, but when the convocation of such an assembly was repeatedly postponed he turned his efforts solely in the direction of establishing harmony within the empire. In 1538 he submitted to the emperor a compromise program for the attainment of such an end, which led to prolonged negotiations in that and the following year without re‑
salting in any definite achievement. The death of George of Saxony in 1539 removed one of the strongest influences for Catholicism in Brandenburg. For some years before this event Joachim had permitted the open extension of the Lutheran influence, and in 1538 he submitted to Melanchthon a program of church reform drawn up for him by the dean of Elgersma. Melanchthon rejected the constitutions as insufficiently Evangelical, and the widespread movement among the nobles and the third estate convinced the margrave that the time for a radical change had come. New church constitutions were drawn up, after preparation by Prince Georg von Anhalt, by a commission comprising Jacob Stratner, Georg Buchholzer, and Georg Witzel and were approved by Melanchthon. In November, 1539, the margrave formally received the Lord's Supper according to the Lutheran form and subsequently the revised church constitutions were sent to Wittenberg, where they received the approval of Luther, Melanchthon, and Jonas, though of all Protestant Church systems they represented the least departure from the Roman Catholic position. Joachim succeeded in obtaining the confirmation of the emperor on the promise of submission to the decisions of a future council. The new ordinances were speedily introduced and the gradual abolition of the monastic system was begun.
In the field of politics also Joachim attempted to play the r81e of arbitrator between the two parties. At the Colloquy of Worms (q.v.) in 1540‑41 his representatives sat with the " submissive " as opposed to the " protesting " deputies, and he bated much hope upon the plan here secretly formulated for another conference at Regensburg where it was hoped that the reunion of the parties might be achieved. Luther, to whom the project was submitted, rejected its terms as unsatisfactory both to the Roman Church and to the Protestants, but Joachim did not abandon his activity, and when the emperor contemplated the despatch of a special mission to Luther he offered himself for the service. Before the outbreak of the Schmalkald War (1548) he attempted to mediate between the leaders of the League and the emperor, but, failing, sent a force of cavalry in the following year to the aid of Maurice of Saxony in return for the elevation of his second son Frederick to the post of coadjutor bishop of Magdeburg and Halberstadt. He pledged himself to abide by the decisions of the council to be assembled at Trent and obtained the same conteesions in the religious sphere that had been granted to Maurice of Saxony. He was active in advocating the adoption of the Augsburg Interim (see AoalooLA, JOHANN; INTERIM, 2). From this time his political importance declines; his subsequent efforts were directed toward dynastic aggrandizement, and with this ambition he permitted his son Sigiamund to accept the archbishopric of Magdeburg and the see of Halberstadt on the condition of complete submission to the pope. It was only political interests, however, that prevented the complete introduction of the Protestant confession in his dominions, an event which followed the death of Joachim and the succession of his son John George.
(G. KAwEBw.)

of Fiore	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	184
Joaah
	BIBLIOGRAPHY: Besides the literature given under JOACHIM
	T., consult: A. Hartung, Joachim II. and aein Sohn Johann
	Georg, Berlin, 1798; F. Meine, Die vermittelnde Stellung
Joachima 11. .	. zu den politiachen and religi been Parteien
	seiner Zeit, Liineburg, 1898; articles in the Forechungen
	zur trandenburgiaehen and preuasischen Geaehichte, ii (1889),
	395 eqq., and vii (1894), 181 eqq., by F. Holtze, and vi
	(1893), 529.eqq., by H. Landwehr; and new articles of im
	portance by N. MUller in Jahrbuch fur brandenburgiache
Geschichte, 1904 sqq.
	JOACHIM OF FIORE (Lat. Floris) and the
	"EVERLASTING GOSPEL" (Evangeliumaeternum):
	Joachim, abbot of San Giovanni in Fiore (in
	the Sila Mountains, 25 m. e. of Co
	Joachim's eenza), Calabria, is said to have been
	Life and born of wealthy parents at Celico, a
	Writings. village near Cosenza, in 1145(?), to
	have made a pilgrimage to Palestine,
	and then to have become a monk. In 1177 he was
	abbot of a Cistercian monastery at Corazzo (12 m.
	s.e. of Cosenza), but often withdrew to the mother
	monastery of Casamari (near Veroli, 50 m. s.e. of
	Rome) to pursue his studies. Later (not before
	1188) he gave up his place at Corazzo and founded
	San Giovanni in Fiore, which became the center of
	a congregation comprising more than thirty monas
	teries. Leading a strictly ascetic life and being re
	puted a prophet, he was highly respected by po
	tentates and popes, who encouraged him in his
	Biblico‑apocalyptic studies. He was very loyal to
	the papacy, and required the members of his order
	not to publish the writings which he left before they
	had passed the examination of the papal censor.
	Of his works only the three which he considered the
	most important have been printed, viz.: (1) Liber
	concordiae novi ac veteris teatamenti (Venice, 1519);
	(2) Psalterium decem chordarum (Venice, 1527);
	(3) Expositio apocalypais (also called Apocalypses
	nova, Venice, 1527). There are other works still in
	manuscript. The commentaries on Isaiah and Jero
	mesh, attributed to him as early as the middle of
	the thirteenth century, are not his and differ from
	his genuine writings especially by their harsh atti
	tude toward the Church of Rome. Now that they
	have been eliminated (by Engelhardt and Fried
	erich), a correct estimate of Joachim is first made
possible.
	He belongs in part to those of the twelfth cen
	tury who, like Bernard of Clairvaux and Gerhoh of
	Reichersberg, in spite of their ecclesias
	His Rela‑ tical sentiment and attitude, had never
	tions and theless a keen eye for the shortcomings
	Significance. of ecclesiastical life. To this, like the
	visionaries Hildegard of Bingen and
	Elizabeth of Schiinau, he added an excited expec
	tation of an impending transformation of all things.
	The ancient hope of a glorious time of the Church
	on earth, preceded by fearful struggles, was revived
	anew. This hope Joachim based not on new revela
	tions, but mainly upon the Holy Scriptures, for
	whose deeper understanding he imagined himself
	especially equipped through divine illumination.
	This illumination, however, did not take the place
	of study, but rather led him to a very thorough and,
	in his way, closer examination of the Scriptures, re
	quiring much time and pains, and united to an
	artificial system of historico‑prophetical theology.
	One may say that in this respect‑following certain
predecessors like Rupert of Deutz‑he opens up a new development in the department of prophetical theology‑a treatment which was afterward continued by Cocceius and Bengel, but it must not be forgotten that Joachim differs from both successors at least as much as each differs from the other.
Upon the principles indicated above the following notion of history is established. It is divided into three dispensations (status) of the Fa‑
His Ex‑ ther, of the Son, and of the Spirit; or,
position of with reference to the three chief classes
	History.	in the Church, the times of the pre
		dominance of the married, of the clerics,
and of the monks. The first commenced with Adam,
the second with John the Baptist; the preparation
for the third began with St. Benedict, its develop
ment commenced with the order of the Cistercians,
and about 1260 the final development will take
place. The helping power, the Parvuli de ecclesia
latina, will come from the Church of the West, which
he thinks of as a monastic order, the ordo jusEorum.
The elect in the Greek Church will also be united
with the Roman Church, and the conversion of
Gentiles and Jews will take place. This is the time
in which, as is written in the Scriptures, Spirit and
Life shall be in the Church, the time of the eternal
Gospel (cf. ALKG, i. 52 aqq. and iii.). But there
must still take place a last fight against the power
of evil, which appears in the person of the last and
worst antichrist, in Cog. After this will follow the
final judgment and the great Sabbath of the con
summation will be ushered in.
These thoughts, as further expanded in Joachim's writings, were favorably received. The thirteenth century was filled with more extrava‑
His Influ‑ gant expectations of the future than
ence and the twelfth even, and the zealous Fran‑
Followers. ciscans, who thought more of the ideal
The " Ever‑ of poverty than of the official Church,
lasting were not the last to foster them. Here Gospel." the ideas of Joachim found the most ready reception, and received an interpretation and expansion which were contrary to his own meaning. Here belong also the commentaries on Isaiah and Jeremiah. The Minorite Gerhard of Borgo San Donnino went the furthest. He regarded the three principal works of Joachim as truly inspired and canonical writings, as the last and highest part of the canon, which as Evangelium aeternum surpassed the Old and New Testaments. He prepared an edition of the same, supplied it with glosses and an Introductorius in evangelium aeternum. This work published at Paris in 1254, caused a great stir (cf. the passage from the Roman de la rose in Haupt, 379, note 1). The theologians of the University of Paris, who saw themselves threatened in their ecclesiastical and scientific position by the mendicant monks, took up the gauntlet and made a complaint at Rome. In 1255 Alexander IV. appointed a commission to examine the matter (cf. the protocols in AKLG, i. 99‑142). On Nov. 4, 1255, a bull was issued which condemned the Introductoriua, without censuring, however, the writings of Joachim. When a synod at Arles (1260 or 1263) afterward condemned the writings of Joachim,

lab	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Joaohim of P'iore
Joash
this decision obtained no general ecclesiastical au
thority. His name remained as that of one beati
fied (beatus) in the memory of the Church, and as
such he has a place in the Acts Sanctortim. Still less
could this condemnation prevent Joachim's pro
phetical expositions from being read over and over
again, and finding believers, though the year 1260
passed without change in the ecclesiastical relations.
Johannes Petrus Olivi and Ubertinus of Casale, in
general the Spirituales of the Minorites, are under
their spell. There were Joachimites who adhered
to the pope as well as Ghibelline Joachimites, and
through the entire medieval period traces of Joa
chimism are found. 	S. M. DEUTaCH.
B113LIOGRAPHY: Besides the writings of Joachim and scattered notices, the first source is: Synopsis virtutum 6eati Joachimi, by Luca Coneentinas, in F. Ughelli, Italia sacra, ix. 205 eqq., Venice, 1722 (also, with the Vita by Jacobus Grascue $yllanaeus and prefatory remarks, in ASB, May, vii. 83‑112). Consult: J. G. V. Engelhardt, Kirchenpeaehichtiiche Abhandlunpen, pp, 1‑150, 280‑291, Erlangen, 1832 (fundamental); C. U. Hahn, Geachichte der Ketzer in Mittelalter, iii. 72‑175, 259‑346, Stuttgart, 1850 (in Engelhardt and Hahn's comprehensive extracts from Joachim's works); Friederich, in ZWT, ii (1859), 349‑363, 444‑514 (on Joachim's commentaries on Isaiah and Jeremiah); J. J. T. von Dollinger, in Hiatoriachea Taachen6uch, v., i (1871), 257‑370; W. Preger, Geachichte der deutaehen Myatik, i. 198‑207, Leipaic, 1874 (defective); H. F. Reuter, Geachichte der relipioaen Aufkldrunp im Mittelalter, ii. 191‑218, 384‑388, 536 eqq., Berlin, 1877; $. Denifle, Dae Evangelium aeternum and die Commission zu Anagni, in ALKG, i (1885), 49‑141; H. Haupt, Zur Geachichte des Joachimiamua, in ZKG, vii (1884), 372 sqq. (agrees with Denifle on independent grounds); W. Bouaset, Der Antichrist in der Ueber7ieferung, Gottingen, 1895: E. wsdstein, Die eachatolopiaehe Ideenpruppe, Antichrist, Weltaabbat and Weltgericht, Leipeic, 1898; Neander, Christian Church, iv. 220‑232 et passim; Mueller, Christian Church, ii. 418‑417.
JOAN, POPE: An alleged female pope, the central figure of a legend dating from the middle of the thirteenth century. The story occurs for the first time in the chronicle of Jean de Mailly, whence it was borrowed by his brother Dominican Stephen of Bourbon (d. 1261), both dating Pope Joan about 1100. The legend was chiefly disseminated, however, by the chronicle of Martinus Polonus (d. 1278). According to him, she was born either in Mainz or England, disguised as a man studied in Athens, aroused deep admiration at Rome by her learning, and was finally elected pope in 855, ruling two and a half years under the name of Johannes Angelicus. She died in childbirth in the street during a public procession and was buried where she expired. In the fifteenth century the legend of Pope Joan was regarded as a fact and was one of the main arguments in the controversies on the justification and extent of the papal power, additional credibility being given the story through its circulation by Roman Catholic historians. The legend is now regarded as based on a local Roman tradition concerning an ancient statue which has disappeared, but which seems to have represented a priest of Mithra and a child. This figure of the priest was popularly supposed to be a woman, and the unintelligible inscription on the group was taken.to be the epitaph of the female pope. The name Joan (Johanna, Johannes) is obviously due to the numerous popes John, some of whom bore an indiffer‑
ent reputation. The double date of 855 and 1100
originated in an attempt to fill a supposed lacuna in the list of popes at those times. (R. SCHMID.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The one book of importance is J. J. T. von Dellinger, Papetfabeln des Mittelaltera, ed. Friedrich, Munich, 1890, Eng, tranal, of lat ed., pp. 3‑74, New York, 1872. Consult also: E. Rhoides, La Papeaee Jeanne, Paris, 1878, Eng, transl., London, 18$7, Germ. transl., Leipsic, 1904; Neander, Christian Church, iii. 387, v. 285, 307; Mueller, Christian Church, ii. 159.
JOASH (JEHOASH; the two forma are used interchangeably in the sources): 1. Seventh king of Judah, son and successor of Ahaziah after the six years' usurpation of his mother Athaliah. His dates according to the old chronology are 878‑838 B.C.; according to Kamphausen, 836‑797 B.C.; socording to Duneker, 837‑797 B.C.; and according to Curtis (DB, i. 401), 836‑796 B.C. He was hidden by his aunt Jehoshebah when Athaliah massacred the seed royal, and in his seventh year was brought out from his concealment and made king under the practical regency of the priest Jehoiada (q.v.). The important external event of his reign was a threatened or real attack on Jerusalem by the Arameans under Hazael, which, according to II Kings xii. 18, was averted by a heavy tribute which stripped the city of its treasures, but according to the Chronicler (II Chron. xxiv. 23‑24) was consummated and proved disastrous to the kingdom. Joash's religious significance lies in his services to the temple, which, under the usurpation of Athaliah, had been allowed to fall into disrepair. This was first committed to the charge of the priests and Levites, but was neglected by them. The matter was then taken out of their hands and entrusted to the chief priest and a civil officer. The sources seem to imply a defection from religious zeal after the death of Jehoiada; both sources, Kings and Chronicles, record his death by assassination at the hand of " his servants," and the Chronicler asserts that he was not buried " in the sepulchers of the kings."
2. Twelfth king of Israel, son and successor of Jehoahaz. His dates, according to the old chronology, are 840‑523 B.C.; according to Kamphausen, 797‑782 B.C.; according to Duncker, 798‑790 B.C.; according to Curtis, 798‑782 B.C. He gained a series of victories over Ben‑hadad of Damascus by which he recovered large parts of the kingdom which had been lost to Hazael under Jehoahaz‑an event made possible by the fact that under Shamshi‑Ramman Assyria had renewed its battering at the gates of Damascus (see ASSYRIA, VI., 3, § 9), and the Syrians were therefore fully employed guarding their eastern frontier. A second important matter was the defeat of Amaziah of Judah after the latter had wantonly provoked a conflict, and his punishment by a partial destruction of the wall of Jerusalem and reduction to vassalage. Some light is cast upon the religious status of Joash by II Kings xiii. 14 aqq., telling of a real attachment between himself and the prophet which suggests that the sentence of condemnation uttered in II Kings xiii. 11 implies a Judaic standpoint from which all the kings of Israel were regarded as recreant.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: For 1 the sources are IT Kings xi‑xii; 11 Chron. xxii. 11‑xxiv.; and for 2, TI Kings xiii. 10‑2b, xiv. 8‑18. Besides the literature given under ARAB, consult: C. F. Burney, Notes on the Hebrew Text of . . . Kings, Oxford, 1903; DB, ii. 558‑557; BB, ii. 2483.

rob, Boos of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	188
I. Place of the Book in the Canon. IL The Text.
The Septuagint Text Shorter than the Hebrew (§ 1).
Possible Explanations of Difference of Text (§ 2).
Parallelism as an Aid to TextCriticiam (¢ 3).
Corruptions of Consonantal Text Explained (§ 4).
I. Place of the Book in the Canon: Among the Kethubhim, constituting the third division of the Hebrew canon (see CANON OF Soairrolt>r), three books stand together as a class marked by a system of accentuation different from that of the other books of Scripture. These are Psalms, Proverbs, and Job. The position of Job in the sources, however, varies greatly. The Talmud (Baba batra 14b) places it between Psalms and Proverbs; Jerome's Prologus galeatus puts it before Psalms; Origen seems to say (Eusebius, Hist. eccl., vi. 25) that while Psalms and the three Solomonic writings separate the historical and prophetical books, Job stood after the prophetical books and before Esther. Melito places Job after Psalms and the Solomonic books and before the prophetic writings. Indeed no uniformity appears and a very varying order of arrangement is attested; it is sufficient to say that the order in the English Bible‑Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles‑is attested by a large group of patristic writings. There is, on the other hand, a group of authorities which arrange the history of pious Job with those of other pious persons, Tobit, Judith, Esther, and Ezra, placing these among the historical books. A noteworthy position, due to the supposition that Job is a work of Moses, locates it with Joshua immediately following the Law. The idea underlying these various arrangements is either the poetic form, the relationship of contents, or the supposed authorship or the connection of its hero with early celebrities.
11. The Text: The best helps to the text are the direct translations, including that of the Targum (which often gives a double rendering), the Peshito, the translations of Jerome and the Greek of Origen. The Hebrew basis of these versions witnesses to the same recension of the Hebrew as underlies the Masoretic text. From this the Septuagint varies in an astonishing manner, not only in its additions (like that of the speech of Job's wife in chap. ii., explicable on psychological grounds) but in its omissions; and with the Septuagint goes the Old Latin derived from it. With this corresponds also the Old Latin which Jerome sought to supplement by his Latin translation of the Septuagint juxta pmecos and later by his editio jvzta Heiiraeos. Jerome testifies to the lacunas, amounting to seven or eight hundred verses, in the Old Latin and the Septuagint, which Origen had supplied from other versions in which the readings, according to Jerome, were often without sense. The number of omissions might be suspected as exaggerated in the foregoing statement were it not that, in the first place, Jerome indicates that the Old‑Latin version is more defective and disfigured than the Greek basis, and, in the second place, the statement ex‑
JoB, Boos OF.
Early Condition of the Tent (¢ 5). III. Plan, Contents and Purpose.
The Elihu Section a Later Addition (5 1).
The Plan (¢ 2).
The Religion of Job and His Friends (§ 3).
Genuineness of the Prologue (§ 4).
Satan in the Prologue and in Other Scripture (15).
The Purpose (¢ B).
Organic Interconnection of Dla. logos and Narrative (§ 7).
Result of the Divine Admonitions (¢ 8).
Job's Attempt to Comprehend His Misfortunes (§ 9).
Job's Ultimate Position (¢ 10).
7V. The Author and the Time of Composition.
ceeda only	a little the results from atichometric
counts. Zahn gives the reckoning for the first
	form as varying between 1,800, 1,700,
r. The	and 1,600 stichoi, the last testified by
Septuagint a number of manuscripts, for which
	Test	the number of the corresponding im
	Shorter	proved text is 2,200. This last num‑
than the ber as a round statement agrees closely
	Hebrew.	with the count of a number of man
		uscripts and editions, and also with
the Masoretic count of the verses of Job as 1,070,
which gives 2,140 stichoi, allowing two stichoi to
each verse. According to this testimony, the im
proved Greek was 500 or (according to Hesychius)
600 stichoi longer than the earlier Septuagint; but
how this result was reached or upon what basis the
statement was made is now unknown. It is further
noticeable that the statement refers to a form of
the Septuagint which differs from that of Origen.
And the situation is further complicated by the
fact that the Hexaplar notes transmitted can not
be either fully or rightly understood. At any rate,
it is possible to affirm that the Job of the old Sep
tuagint was at least a fourth part shorter than the
present Hebrew text. The traditional explanation
was that a text corresponding to the present lay
before the Greek translator, but that the rendering
was shortened either by one of the ordinary mis
haps attending copying and translation, or pur
posely because the contents were offensive to the
translator, or because the wordl3 were not under
stood, or because the book seemed too long. If it
is noted that in many cases corruption is inherent
in the Greek text, individual cases are explained
upon that ground. But when it is noted that the
translator is dexterous in substituting phrases in
telligible in Greek for obscure Hebrew ‑phrases and
in making the condensed Hebrew luminous by ad
ditions, it becomes more difficult to hold that the
translator wilfully shortened the text or passed
over passages because they were difficult.
On the other hand, it has often been the case that scholars, prejudiced in behalf of the Hebrew, have found in the other Greek versions and in the
tradition reaching back to Jerome pure creation, even where the paraphrase is l like that of the Tar.
gum, suggested by the Hebrew. Such a passage is vi. 7, where, instead of orge, horme is to be read as the rendering of naphshi in the sense of intensity of hunger. The extension of this verse is not to be explained by the introduction of a gloss, but by the attempt in the paraphrase to express clearly the meaning of the original. A similar example is found in the passage iv. 12, where the free translation expresses well, though in expanded form, the original Hebrew, with slight changes in reading.

187	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	dob, Book o!
These and similar cases, of which many might be
adduced, show that the Septuagint is an independ
ent and close equivalent, and that, no matter how
changed it may be, the translator exercised thought
and criticism upon the text which lay before him,
which was in very close relationship with that
which is now in our possession. This is shown
in vi. 6 in which the difficult phrase in the
present Hebrew text 111f35t1 1'13 was read in
		the text before the translator of the
	:. Possible Septuagint TIlbSR '1313. It is to be
	Eaplana‑ recognized that alongside of the prea
	tions of ent Hebrew text, which may be called
	Difference Palestinian, there was in the father
	of Text. land of the Septuagint a second to
		which the name Egyptian may be ap
plied, and that these had the same parentage.
For both of these, the Septuagint in rather extended
form, have prologue and epilogue, the omission of
the third speech of Zophar for which another by Job
is substituted; and both have the speech of Elihu
and the same plan of dialogue. In the translation,
even when paraphrastic, the correspondence of the
Greek with the Hebrew is so close that the text out
of which the translation arose can be restored. On
the other hand, the Hebrew text has often a longer
reading of which at most the rudiments appear in
the Egyptian. No a priori decision can be made in
either case, for it is a possibility both that the
Palestinian text has received additions and that the
Egyptian has been abbreviated. It is possible to
solve the question in one of two ways. Our Pales
tinian text may be considered as the last edition of
an archetype meant for the Palestinian community,
	which became the ancestor of the Egyptian Job.
The fact that it has certain parts which the Egyp
tian lacks may be emphasized without attempting
to make it a characteristic of the whole. The sec
	ond way is to discriminate in the Greek Job, after
eliminating the corruptions of the Greek as such,
between the translation of the Hebrew and the ex
pansion of the translator and to try the resulting
text with reference to its congruency and to the
impression it makes of deficiency and fragmentari
ness. Of the Hexapla there are only fragments,
and there is no text which gives the Septuagint and
that alone; the Sahidic and the Old‑Latin Job were
	translated from Greek manuscripts more or less
exactly, but from them it can not be deduced how
they were related to the original. Moreover, it ap
pears that the Alexandrian translator was influenced
in his understanding by an Aramaic targum (cf. F.
Buhl, Kanon and Teat, p. 171; TLB, 1899, pp. 446
447), a fact which further complicates the problem.
	Another help to the recovery of the text is the
poetic form based upon the principle of parallelism.
The clearly apprehended structure of a first line is
a sure indication of the sense and the content of
the second, when couplets are in question; but when
one passes from the distich and possibly the tris
tich to the strophe of four, five, or more lines, this
canon fails as a help to the recovery of the text or
as a test upon which to decide upon the correctness
of the text. Moreover, the question of the transmis
sion of the author's text arises, since the task of the
editor was to present a text intelligible and instruc‑
tive to the community, in which it is probable that the matter of metrical and strophical structure was disregarded. Modern studies, also,
3. Parallel‑ have too inexact a basis, since the pro‑
ism as an nunciation and accent of Hebrew is all
Aid to Teat‑ but unknown, and schemes of strophes
	Criticism.	presented differ greatly. Moreover, it
		is improbable that the author would
present a uniform meter and strophe in the varying
parts of the poem. Thus in chap. iii. the " why "
and " wherefore " of verses 11 and 20 divide that
chapter into three parts, 3‑10, 11‑19, 20‑26, the
first of which has eighteen lines, the second eight
een, but the third only fourteen; further, when in
verse 6 " that day" is restored for " that night "
(as the sense requires), verses 4‑6 give nine lines in
three tristichs, devoted to the cursing of the day,
while verses 7‑10 give as many lines devoted to the
cursing of the night, but in distichs, except verse 9
which is a tristich. This change from the tristich
to the diatich seems to be grounded in the nature
of the contents, and Bickell's attempt to do away
with the tristich of verse 9 has no basis outside of
his preconception. On the other hand, the balance
of the first two parts of the chapter raises the ques
tion why the last part has only fourteen lines. The
answer that we do not know` may possibly be
deemed sufficient. But on exegetical grounds verse
23 can not be connected with verse 20 and the ab
rupt introduction of the first person and of the
idea of eating in verses 24‑26 suggests a loss of two
couplets from the text, though neither in the Pales
tinian text nor in the Egyptian is there a trace that
their ancestor possessed them.
The punctuation of the Masoretic text is a most valuable commentary upon Job, and, in view of the great difficulties, an extremely significant one. The passages are many in which the punctuation is indicative of difficulties which the Masorites resolved by seeing in the consonantal text the telescoping of words, as minlam in xv. 29 is taken for min lahem. The fact that the Masoritea made so many mistakes may be explained either as due to false divisions of the unseparated words or to defect in the text as it lay before them. Examples explicable from both causes are at hand.
The older consonantal text is to be regarded as the edition (established by an authority of the community) of a text still older which existed in a number of manuscripts, fidelity to which was traversed by a desire to furnish to the community an intelligible text, and, where the exemplar was meaningless or corrupt, to set carefully aside possible shocks to the religious feeling of the reader. Examples of this are found in i. 16‑18, where in the exemplar a defective "TV was changed to the fully written `I1j1,
while in xxxiv. 23, '1y0, having lost
4. Corrup‑ its initial sound through the effect of
	tioas of the closing syllable of the preceding
	Conso‑ WWII was protected against the pos‑
nantal Teat sible meaning 1y " witness." A false
	Explained.	division in xviii. 20 has been mediated
		by the introduction of a 1 in 1b'i?y,
which was then separated into the two words 1fDt'"~iY
The short or abbreviated form of the suffixes and

Job, Book of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	188
affixes which the earlier scribe used was treated with the greatest freedom and became a potent source of error. In such cases as xiv. 3, xix. 28 (cf. R. V, margin), ix. 19b, the third person is indicated by the parallelism, the logical sequence, and the versions. There are directions in rabbinical instructions which point the same way, as when in xii. 2b the instruction reads: say not tmwth, but twmth. Changes due to religious timidity are also in evidence. Thus in xxxii. 3e " Job " is substituted for a word which might through changes in the text have been read as " God." Similarly xxxii. lb, Septuagint, reads " in their eyes," and is justified by logic, since there is no adequate reason in Job's self‑justification alone for the silence of the friends. Probably also to the same cause is due the identical expressions in xxxviii. 1, xl. 6, where " out of the whirlwind " is to be explained by the dropping of a word beginning with n after a word ending with the same, which would be represented by the expression " out of the roar of the storm." It is not impossible that by 11yD in the passages just cited, differently from the 11vtJ of ix. 17 (where the Targum reads " hair "), was understood not an atmospheric storm, but the theophanic hurricane like that in which Elijah was rapt away. But other causes have brought about changes in the text, such causes as are common in the transmission of all texts of antiquity. In reading the copyist has dropped out a letter or a syllable. Thus in xii. 2 the unintelligible word Dj1, " people," is doubtless to be explained as the remains of the word Dy`tVI, and the verse should read: " No doubt ye are the possessors of knowledge, and wisdom shall die with you " (cf. xxxiv. 2). Other mistakes are due to the confusion of letters that look alike, either in the old form or in the square writing, and still others to similarity in sound when the copy was made from dictation. Still another potent source of error are glosses, which have either lengthened the text or made it unintelligible.
From a view of all these cases it is possible to assert that the Hebrew consonantal text is the edition of a copy which goes back to an archetype, transmitted through we know not how many transcriptions, which was also the original to which the Hobrew text which the Greek translator used is to be traced. This archetype was already characterized by mistakes and corrections, by gaps in the text and by conflate readings. In the course of transmission these changes have been so increased that, in spite of the close general resemblance, in particular passages copies seem altogether foreign to each other. In proportion as we are successful in reconstructing this archetype out of its descendants and
in understanding it with its gaps, mis‑
s. Early takes, and additions, we approach the
Condition form which the poet gave to his work. of the There is a consensus among modern Teat. critics to the effect that the original
Job bas been enlarged by the insertion of the four speeches of Elihu, chaps. xxxii.‑xxxvii. But the circumstance that the surviving text refers neither in the preceding nor in the following parts to the entrance of Elihu (for which preparation
could have been made in a few words), which is the chief ground for suspecting the originality of the section, is proof positive that the one who inserted the passage regarded with respect the text to which he made the addition. This is indeed a guaranty that in the earliest times Job was looked on as the inviolable possession of an inspired man for which he himself assumed the responsibility. When it became a book for the community, for which the leading authorities in that community assumed accountability, the liberty was taken of changing it where the interests of instruction of the community seemed to demand it.
III. Plan, Contents, and Purpose: Prior to consideration of the artistic form of the book it is necessary to take up the question of the originality of the Elihu section. The argument from linguistic considerations may be answered by the suggestion that it was prematurely given out and has been corrupted. The consideration that the section brings nothing new against the friends and anticipates what Yahweh is to say is explained by Elihu's different attitude toward Job and his sorrows. On the other hand, in ii. 11‑13 only the three friends are mentioned and in xlii. 7‑8 reference to them alone is found. Does Elihu belong to the party on whose aide the truth is, though he charges Job with adding to his sin that of rebellion (xxxiv. 37), or to those of whom Yahweh demanded repentance ?
When Yahweh gives his testimony of z. The truth to his servant Job or ignores this Elihu judge of Job, nothing more can be
Section meant than that the author. of the
a Later book and the readers have also ignored
Addition. Elihu, since neither had in him any in‑
terest. In other words, this points to
a time when the book of Job was read without the speeches of Elihu, when at the silence of the friends and the last speech of Job God entered to teach and instruct. This is substantiated by the express testimony of Elihu, xxxii. 12‑14. Since the friends have nowhere said that Job seemed to have so surpassed them and all men in cleverness that God alone could overcome his error, Elihu must speak under the impression that the intention of the author was to have deity take up the discourse that Job might recognize his folly. Mal. iii. 16 speaks of a book of remembrance caused by Yahweh to be written for discernment between righteous and wicked; and this recalls the fact that Job wished for such a book (xix. 23) and that Elihu (xxxvii. 20) raises the question whether a scribe is noting for Yahweh what he has to say. Elihu comes forward as a man filled with new knowledge. There can be no doubt that he does so on the ground of a newer insight into the instructive meaning of evil for the community gained from the teaching of the prophets and thus comes forward as a young man
pushed out from his position of reserve to confront the older men who stand for the old wisdom.
Whether the writer who introduced this section wished to identify himself with Elihu or to differentiate himself from him must be decided in favor of the latter supposition by consideration of the stilted vanity of Elihu's introduction of himself, in which he vaunts that he is bringing into view new,

189	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	Job, Book or
weighty, and incontrovertible arguments, by which course he prejudices his hearers against himself. While, then, the innovator introduced Elihu with great promises and then let him conclude in terrified fashion with the statement of the unsearchablonesa of God (xxxvii. 23), whither the approach of the storm appears to bring him (xgxvii. 1), the conclusion of the original Job so returns to the point reached before the introduction of Elihu as to make it clear that the book of Job rightly understood is not affected by the indirect criticism represented by Elihu. In that case the writer of the section was a man of like spirit with the original poet and the speeches of Elihu are as worthy a place in Scripture as are those of the three friends. But, in taking socount of the book of Job in its original form, this part must be put out of account. The meaning of the book with Elihu included can beat be seen in Budde, who has used great industry and keenness in attempting to vindicate that section.
The real body of the poem is built about the intercourse of the four friends mentioned in ii. 11, from early times regarded as set forth in three sets of speeches (chaps. iii.‑xiv., xv.‑xxi., xxii.‑xxvi.), followed by two addresses of Job (chaps. xxvii.xxviii., xxix.‑xxxi.), after which Yahweh speaks out of the storm (chaps. xxxviii.‑xxxix., xl. 6xli.). Since the author has placed Job's cry of pain (which opens and defines the whole discussion) in close connection with the seven days of silence and since the silence of the friends during that time is intelligible only on the ground that Job first broke that silence, it is reasonable to assume that the first round of speeches filled the first day of the second week, and that each of the two next rounds consumed a day. Such a reckoning is implied in xxiii. 2, where a distinct difference in time
is expressed. This helps to explain
	a. The	the similarity of formulas in xxvii. 1
	Plan.	and xxix. 1, different from that in iii.
		1, and also the identity of formulas in
xxxviii. 1, xl. 6. The reader was expected to un
derstand that the two speeches of Job in xxvii.
xxxi. occupied the fourth and fifth days, while the ad
monitions of Yahweh occupied the sixth and seventh
days. So that the seven days of silence, the tor
tures of which led Job to curse his life, are carefully
balanced against the seven days of speech, at the
end of which Job yields humble submission. Theo
dore of Mopauestia rightly compared Job to the
drama of the Greeks in which the speeches of the
characters owe their origin to the art of the poet.
To criticisms of the treatment it may be said that
the range of the poem reveals to the ear the tones
of an inner life, that a stream out of experience is
flowing in our presence which at length reaches the
appointed end of its course. In vi. 2‑7 Job aban
dons the cry of pain of chap. iii. as an error forced
from him by the very fever of his sorrow, that over
against the argumentation which had so shocked
his friends he protests solemnly in xxvii.‑xxviii. his
willingness to persevere in piety as the basis of life,
and, at the conclusion of the contrast between for
mer happiness and present misfortune (which is in
spite of his good conscience toward God and men),
he reveals his heart's desire for the living God.
	Job is no prophet receiving his instruction direct
from God; he gets his religious instruction from
men and with it a limitation of thought and judg
ment from which he is freed only by his experience
of God (xlii. 5), through seeing him with his own
eyes. His earlier experiences do not appear as fal
		sity, but only as incompleteness. The
	3. The religion of Job and his friends is not a
	Religion folk‑religion, but that of the wise, so
	of job far as an orderly view of the world
	and His goes, and it may be compared with
	Friends. that of (say) Plutarch and Seneca.
		God is the incomparably wise and
mighty one, the creator, the pattern of morals who
has ordered life and its penalties for evil. Man who
is born of woman is bound up in native sinfulness,
his life‑course is marked out and comprises a period
of growth, of activity in work, and of enjoyment
which makes that life worthful. There is implanted
in man knowledge of the right way of using life,
knowledge also of God as creator and giver of all
good. Correct appreciation of this knowledge is
the pivot upon which move right and wrong, good
fortune and bad, as the direct reaction of righteous
or evil acts. And at the end, after the enjoyment
of a satisfied life, he is brought to the rest of the
grave like the wheat which is gathered to the garner
after it has reached the end of its being. Such a view
tells of a simple mode of life in a primitive com
munity, where the paterfamilias is directly respon
sible to God for his household and its ordering, and
where the complexities of later society and world
empire had not yet entered. Judgment is drawn
from standard facts and concatenations of circum
stances as to the rule of God over man. Man the
individual is brought into connection with his suc
cessors in life, and thus the time period in which
the heaven of divine righteousness returns is pro
longed beyond the death of the individual. The
present good fortune of the evil is balanced by the
greatness of final loss, the sorrow of the good
is compensated by the overbalancing good of man's
final end. This conception has close relations with
the religion of Israel, and the speeches of the three
friends may be put alongside the didactic Psalms.
But great elements of the religion of Israel are lack
ing, those which relate to the world‑purpose of
Israel's being and the full balancing of the great
day of Yahweh. Still there is to be discovered the
firm grip of the idea of God as a living personality
and of man as being so related to him as to find
therein possibilities of joy; there is also a firm
faith in God as the one in whom the course of nature
is fixed. A limitation which must be observed,
however, is the view of death and the life beyond,
which seems to place the soul deprived of God for
endless time in absolute darkness. Though even
here the trust in God which shines through the book
points to a possibility of the developments which
were reached in other parts of Scripture.
But how shall the primitive irrational dogma of the end of man's relationship with God at death be shaken and faith be raised to a basis of confident verity? Clearly by presenting the case of one who has faith, whose conduct in the fear of God, in selfinstruction, righteousness, and charity is univer‑

Job, Hook of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG ~	190
sally known, but who, in the midst of an unwonted accumulation of misfortunes inflicted by divine decrees which deprive him of his dearest and beat, after he has bowed to the stroke and has been afflicted personally with a terrible illness, appears to man to be delivered over to judgment, whose faith even brings a conflict into his own soul, which faith, short and defective as it was, is given up for a better. The problem before the author therefore took flesh and blood; Job appears as the
¢. Genu‑ hero and is himself the problem. Who‑
fineness ever has caught the connection of the
of the seven days of silence of the introduG Prologue. tion and the seven days of the dialogue will be prepared to see in the introduction and in the poem the work of a single hand. A recent hypothesis sees in chaps. i.‑ii. and xlii. the remains of an independent " folk‑book." And this view has led to interesting developments, in the course of which attempts were made to discover how this book handled the problem. It has been thought that Ezekiel knew it, while it was held that the poet of the dialogue was later than Ezekiel. Parts of this theory are not entirely new. While Pseudo‑Origen regarded the poem as older than Moses, who (according to him) wrote the prologue, it was probably the authority of Theodore which led Junilius to place Job among the historical books. Theodore thought that the historical Job could not have spoken the irrational curses of chap. iii, nor have given to his daughter the heathen name Kerenhappuch. Yet it seems impossible for a right understanding of the speeches to take the two parts for anything but the necessary work of the same author. The opening of the drama in the changing of scene between heaven and earth, the presentation of the secret divine counsel preceding the events, and the conduct of men following them betray the same hand as the dialogue. Evidences of the intent of the author to model the narrative after the mashal exist in the monotony of the reiteration of the four misfortunes by the messengers (i. 13 sqq.), and in the repetitions o€ i. 6, and ii. 1, of i. 11, and ii. 5, of 1, 7, and ii. 2, while the introduction of the reader to the scenes in heaven serves the same purpose as the prologues of Euripides in giving him the key to the action of the persons in the drama. There is a correspondence also in the religion of Job and his friends in the dialogue and the position assigned them as Edomites, therefore nearly related to Israel, with an ancestor brother to Jacob, consequently heir of Abraham and his religion, but without the special promises which were Israel's, while the hero as a shepherd‑prince reproduces the life of the patriarchs. Further correspondence is found in particular incidents, such as the sin‑offering of Job for his children (i. 5) and the curt rejection by Job of his wife's advice to curse God and die (ii. 9), with Job's reiterated claim to right speech (vi. 10, xxiii. 11‑12) and with Bildad's statement that the death of Job's children was punishment for the sin they had committed (viii. 4).
A large element in the supposition that prologue and epilogue are from a folk‑book is doubtless the figure of Satan which corresponds to the Satan of folk‑lore, the thought that as Goethe drew his Faust
from the book of Dr. Faustus, so our poet borrowed his figure. But the analogy does not hold. Job and his friends know nothing of a Satan or that he is Job's foe. The friends think that God is Job's foe, and so thinks Job; they know nothing of the council in heaven. But the heavenly council and the figure of Satan correspond to the representation of Hebrew prophecy, while the relations of God to man, spirit, and the world at large are those of the Old Testament. Not folk‑lore, but the current ideas of revelation in Israel are the basis of the presentation. So the creation of man and his expulsion from Eden were the result of a heavenly council (Gen. i. 26, iii. 22). But Job and Adam may be regarded as counterparts. Job recognizes that God has simply used the rights of a creator in depriving him of the free gifts bestowed (i. 21); Adam yielded
td his wife's suggestion, Job refused
g. Satan the leading of his wife toward the same
in the end (ii. 10). The Fall was the work of Prologue the serpent who would persuade man
and in that the creator was a jealous tyrant Other and would also destroy God's pleasure Scripture. in his creation; in Job Satan begrudges
Yahweh the joy he has in his pious servant and seeks to produce in Job the same idea of God as a tyrant; the purpose, however, is exposed in the prologue in the part Satan takes in the heavenly council. In any case the magnificent view of the world, one which entirely lacks the qualities of folk‑lore presentations, which makes God's manyaided wisdom crown the climax of creation in the creation of man, which he justifies to the spirits who watch the work in wonder, is rooted in Gen. i.‑iii. Inherent in the contest between Satan and God is the assumption of partiality in deity in that he sought by unearned gifts to win man for himself (Adam), in that he guards from attacks of misfortune by prosperity the man represented as pious (Job), when man has fallen he saves him as a brand from the burning (Joshua in Zech. iii.), and that now his impartiality must come out in the calamities of Job that the enemy may be silenced. Indeed there is a reminiscence of the creation story in the " enmity " between the seed of the woman and of the serpent in the play upon the name of Job (311it) and z41M, "enemy " of Job xiii. 24 (cf. xix. 11); but the prologue shows that the enemy is not God but Satan. The marks of derivation of the prologue from folk‑lore are wholly lacking.
Are the sorrows of Job a punishment, a chastisement, or a trial ? and what would the poet teach by them? Since the prologue ascribes to God knowledge of Job's purity, to Satan doubt of it, it
might be held that the purpose is t0 use Job 88 a
witness to show the lying nature and impotence of Satan (cf. Budde). It is a curiosity that some have seen in the book of Job the question opened whether there is an unrewarded piety. But men believe in
God because faith makes them blessed; blessedness, is not the wages of faith, but the living
6. Theactivity of the God set forth in faith,
	Purpose. the very essence of which is that he is
	the cause of blessedness in man. It is
	the greatest folly to speak of an uninterested piety,
	since piety is the prophecy of the highest interest of

191	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	Job, Book of
the soul which is created by and for God. Job does not regret his lost sheep and camels as if they were the due of his piety; but he longs for a gracious God. The poet has placed Job outside the region where God's promises held and in a realm where individual faith was compelled to overcome the obstacles of experience and a view beyond death was not possible. Satan's plea is that if God cuts Job' loose from ancestral rules of guidance, Job will cast God under ‑his feet. But Job's entire course of action proves that his fear of God was rooted in his inner life. The death of Job would have convicted Satan of lying, but would have left a puzzle for Job's contemporaries. But the poet has not introduced a third scene in heaven corresponding to the two first in which Satan might be represented as saying that a living dog is better than a dead lion (Eccles. ix. 4). The poem would have needed then to deal with the world beyond the grave, which would have been against poetic canons. The makers of the ca, tenEe remarked that God had left room on this aide for the rehabilitation of his pious sufferer before the resurrection.
The trial of Job is not in order that he may turn away from his wife's suggestion of impiety and pa, tiently depend upon the divine, nor that he may disown his first outbreak of impatience. A severer trial comes when authorities upon faith and religion, teachers of it as he had been a teacher (iv. 3), decide that his sorrows are the result of his own wrong‑doing; the very faith in which he had lived and of which he had been an exponent is turned against himself as a proof of his own
q. Organic impiety. According to the common
Intercon‑ belief implied in the poem, the narrow
nection of part of the universe within the ken of
Dialogue mortals makes clear the righteousness
and of the world‑ruler, while the result of Narrative. man's life is the expression of man's worth before God. Job could not deny his own godly fear and fidelity; similarly God had not changed without right reasons. If, as the friends might maintain, God had formerly seemed favorable, only to emphasize and intensify his real disfavor to be manifested later, Job only sighed the more for a gracious God whose image he cherished in his heart, whose truth had been his guaranty in Job's early blessedness. He can not dismiss the idea of a righteous God who knows his innocence; the sharper the argument of his adversaries, the more necessary that idea became. It is incomprehensible how one can assert (with Laue) that in his speeches Job has completed his apostasy in view of the fact that when, at the end of the dialogue, the friends are confounded, the poet has put into Job's mouth a solemn oath that he will hold fast to that virtue and righteousness in which he had felt himself blessed, even though he had not solved the riddle of his suffering (xxvii. 2 sqy.).
The prophetic idea of a theophany or vision is employed by the poet to exhibit the divine counsel in intelligible form. Job lives in a region not of revealed but of natural religion where man sees in a glance the totality of natural phenomena in their living eternal basis, and uplifted by this intuition of the movement of these phenomena, becomes
aware of the voice of God. But this could not explain Job's experience; the plot forbade this, since
Satan must not be permitted to call 8. Result "foul play." Job's sufferings mist be of the endured under the same conditions as Divine Ad‑ those in which his aspersed piety had monitions. existed. He experienced nothing which might not have come in the natural course of things; but the combination of events brought before him God's all‑power in the world (xlii. 2 aqy.). Then God reestablished him in the position of a servant and witness of the truth, with which fact and with Job's intercession he bound up the exemption of the three friends from punishment, a significant indication that their sin consisted in their persecution of Job. Job acted as the intimate friend of God when he prayed for the friends; as such they recognized him whom they had previously regarded as a rebel from God. Job, too, learned that God was far greater and mightier and more an object of faith than he had supposed in the exercise of his earlier faith.
In chap. vi. Job explains his wild outburst in chap. iii. as due to the unendurable weight of his visitation which robe his soul of peace because the hope of coming alleviation which belongs to faith is made impossible by the unchecked diminution of his physical strength. He can not therefore regard his sorrows as those of a short period which will be superseded by a period of restoration, as his piety had hitherto bidden him do. To the impossibility of restoration on this side the grave is added the consideration that death withdraws man from the eye and hand of God (vii. 6‑10). Yet the experience of faith teaches that God's wrath exhausts itself and the mood of pity for the creature finds place. Will not the approach of death wake up this pity in God (vii. 8, 21) for the work of his hand (x. 8‑13)7 Can God, who has created man
and who knows him thoroughly and g. Job's his sin, refuse to exercise forgiveness Attempt (vii. 21), and will he demand absolute to Compre‑ responsibility (xiv. 3) of so poor a head His creature? What value for God must Misfor‑ a being have for whose purification he tunes. has so great concern? Shall not man think that, when death has completed his penance and God's wrath is exhausted (xiv. 13), God's yearning for his creation will cause him to awaken that creation to new life in communion with him (xiv. 7, 8, 13‑15)? In that case Job's hope would make him endure to the very end (xiv. 14). It may be thought that Job is on the way here to extend his old faith to the point where death itself is included in the region of suffering after which God's help comes, and not merely in his particular case, but as a general fact (cf. xiv. 10, 12 with 14a). But this idea must give way in the face of his postulate that death is a final judgment which excludes man from fellowship with God (xiv. 20, cf. Gen. iii. 23). The poet has let Job discover a better ground of hope for the conquest of death than the thought of the philosophers from Plato to Leibnitz, who found basis for such a hope in the indestructibility of the indivisible and immaterial soul. Job's reason is the ethical yearning

Job Book of	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	192
of God for man, who is worthful to God as the work of his hand.
The vexed soul of Job makes still other attempts in the consciousness that he may not hope for restoration here, since he counts himself as already belonging to the world of the dead whither his hopes and his expectations may not accompany him (xvii. 13‑1G). His friends charge him with demanding that the course of nature be changed for his benefit (xviii. 4), but his thoughts, when allowed full course, do change night into day. He protests anew his innocence, while exhausting the category of his sufferings in which nevertheless he seems to have been treated as actually the sinner his friends believe he must be (xvii. ?‑17 ), in spite of the witness he has within the mystery of heaven (19‑21).
God might, he thinks, at the end of
:o. Job's life, halt the processes of decomposi‑
Ultimate tion and disintegration in order by
Position. this unusual phenomenon to arouse
the thought that Job's case was spe‑, cial and so an explanation of his lot be brought about. But he remembers that he has already become to mankind a sort of monstrosity which confounds the pious (xvii. 6). His final appeal must be to God, confidence in whom still remains in his breast (xix. 23‑27). A connection is conceived between what God does here on earth in order to purify the thought of the pious and the state of the soul abiding in Hades (verses 28‑29). There is a living religious certainty of a righteous God and of a personal relationship to him possessed by the pious. Account must be taken of the criticism which is exercised upon the dogma of a visible justification of a righteous God on this side of death. The apparent good fortune of the wicked is not requited through the eventual misfortune of his descendants; he himself ought to bear his punishwent, but he is snatched away before evil comes upon his children (axi. 7‑21). When the same lot of death befalls the lucky tyrant and the unfortunate poor, how can man affirm that through their hap God teaches men what is right (xxi. 22‑34)? By the question in xxiv. 1 and in the reflections suggested Job intimates that he would be able to understand the inactive watching by deity of the raging of tyrants and the suffering of the innocent if human history ran in cycles in which exact requital was discerned. But this the Israelite could do, having the compensations of the " day of Yahweh " in view‑a thought to which Job's heart instinctively turns. And the poet attempted to widen and deepen the old faith in God when he allowed God to decide that Job, in contrast with his friends, had spoken the thing that was right, meaning by this not Job's affirmations of innocence, II but the considerations which led him to hold .that not even the world of the dead and the burial of man therein could deprive man of the proof of that God who is man's final blessedness.
IV. The Author and the Time of Composition: The book neither names its author nor gives data regarding its authorship, and there is no independent tradition respecting either. Its date has been placed all the way along the ages from Moses to the Persian times. The apocryphal conception made
Job and the Edomitic king Jobab the same person and made Moses the author. The thought that the book belonged to Solomonic times, entertained from Chrysostom to Delitzsch, rests upon the statement that the wisdom of the Israel of that time exceeded the wisdom of the East with which Job is connected (i. 3) and upon correspondences between Job's thought and that of Solomonic proverbs; but such wisdom did not die with Solomon. Attempts have been made to prove Job the personification of suffering Israel in Assyrian times or under Manasseh. Neither the orthography of the book nor the linguistic features give sure indications of the date, since emendations and changes have appeared in so great numbers as to vitiate the argument, and there is also no history of the Hebrew language sufficiently minute to make the language a criterion. And the relation of the religious ideas of the book afford no better test, since the date when certain notions became dominant does not exclude the possibility that such ideas were held at other times. The supposed datum, given by the connection of the idea of Satan with the same idea in two other passages of Scripture, loses sight of the fact that Biblical literature is the remains of a larger literature which, if extant, might give a different basis. The only means which might enable one to fix the date of the book would be its literary relationship to other dated books. Undated Scriptures, like the introduction to Proverbs or the Hexateuch or its parts, must be left out of account. To the dated books belong Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Between the way in which Jeremiah curses his birth (xx. 14) and the expressions in Job iii. there is an indisputable connection. But the decision as to 'priority may lie in subjective considerations. Note, however, that Ezekiel speaks of Job as being as well known to his companions as Noah and Daniel. Here again some say that not our book but a Job of folk‑lore is referred to. It is noticeable, however, that Ezekiel is concerned with the problem of the righteous judgment of God, which is one of the problems of Job. In any case it is not forbidden to assume that Malachi had this book in his eye (iii. 16), that Ezekiel knew it, and that Jeremiah had the bitter complaint of Job in his mind. Delitzsch has emphasized the touching wail of the leper of Ps. lxxxviii. (cf. Job vi. 8) ascribed to Heman of whom I Chron. xxv. 5 says that he was seer to the king and that God gave him fourteen sons and five daughters. It has seemed strange that those who argue for an old folk‑book have not connected the two, especially since the doubling of Job's possessions implied fourteen and not seven sons. But the Chronicler has made no such connection, and the fact that Heman wrote a poem which strikes the same note as the book of Job does not warrant the assumption that our book is the expansion of it. It may be said, however, that the origin of the book of Job lies on this side of Heman and in close relationship with that which is said of him; nothing further can be affirmed respecting the author nor can the time of its origin be closely defined.
(AUGUST KLOBTE&MANN.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Texts of value are by A. Merx, Jena, 1871;
8. Baer, Leipaic, 1875; G. Bickel], in Carmina veterte

testamenti, pp. 150‑187, Innsbruck, 1882 (goes into metrody and atrophical structure); G. Hoffmann, Kiel, 1891; C. Siegfried, in BBOT, 1893; G. Beer, 2 vole., Marburg, 1895‑97 (critical and of great value); B. Duhm, Gottingen, 1897; Wiener Zeitachrift far die Kunde des Morpenlandea, vole. vi.‑vii. (critical unpointed text, with directions for reading in Latin); sad in the new Bibdia Habraica of R. Kittel, Leipsic, 1905‑08. The $ahidic version was edited 'i by Ciasea in Sacrorum bibliorum frapmenta Copto‑Bahidic0. I Rome, 1889 (has a rich introduction; cf. Amdlineau in TSBA, is. 2, 1893, 5 eqq.). A Greek edition is by P. de Lagarde in his Miltheitungen, ii. 189 eqq., Gottingen, 1887.
Earlier commentaries are by Brentius, Halls, 1548; Johannes de $pineda, Madrid, 1597; A. $chultene, Leyden, 1737; C. F. Houbigant, Notae cribotae in univeraoa veteria leatamsnt% libroa, Frankfort. 1777; T. J. Reieke, Leipsic, 1779; M. H. $tuhhnann, Hamburg, 1804; J. W. C. Umbreit, Heidelberg, 1824; E. B. Koster, Schleswig, 1831. More modern ones are by A. Ewald, Dichter des allen Bundes, vol. iii., Gottingen, 1838, Eng. trsnel., London, 1897; $. Lee. London, 1837; J. G. Stickel, Leipsic, 1842; K. $chlottmann, Berlin, 1851; L. Hirzel, ed. Olahauaen, Leipsic, 1852; J. G. Vaihinger, Stuttgart, 1858; T. J. Conant, New York, 1857; E. Renan, Paris, 1859, Eng. trans]., London, 1889; A. B. Davidson, vol. i., London, 1802 (never completed, philological, an excellent piece of work); idem, in Cambridge Bible 1884 (perhaps the beat in English); Frsiza Delitzech, Leipsic, 1878, Eng. transl. of l at ed., Edinburgh, 1889 (the introduction is very valuable, gives a history of the exegesis of the book); F. C. Cook, in Bible Commentary, London, 1873: O. ZOekler, in Lange's Commentary, Eng. tranel., New York, 1874; E. W. Hengetenberg, Leipsic, 1875; C. P. Robinson, London, 1870; D. Thomas, ib. 1879; $. Cox, ib. 1880; G. H. B. Wright, ib. 1883; G. G. Bradley, Lectures on the Book of Job, Oxford, 1887; W. Volek, Munich, 1889; A. Dillmann, Leipeic, 1891; R. A. Watson, in Expositor's Bible, London, 1892; K. Budde, Gottingen, 1898; B. Duhm, Freiburg, 1897; E. C. $. Gibson, London, 1889; Friedrich Delitzsch, Leipsic, 1902; M. Pritchard, London, 1903; D. Davies, vol, i., London, 1909.
On the metrics consult: J. H. A. Ebrard, Dae Buck Hiob ala ;ooetiachae Xunatvxrk, Landau, 1858; . P. Vetter, Die Medrik des Buehae Hiob, in Bardenhewer'e Biblische Studien, ii. 4, Freiburg, 1897; J. Loy, Die metriaehe Beacha8'enheit des Bathes Hiob, in TSK, 1895, 1899; E. Ksutaeeh, Die Poeaie and die yoetiechen Bather des A. T., Tiibingen, 1902.
On critical and other questions related to the book consult: G. Bickel], De %udole ac ratfone veraion%a AZexandrinae, Marburg, 1802; J A. Fronde, in Short Studies on Great Subjects London 1867; W. H. Green, Argument of the Book of Job, New York, 1874; K. Budde, Badtrdpa zur Kritik des Bathes Hick Bonn, 1870; F. Giesebreeht, Der WendePunkt des Bathes Hiob. Greifewald, 1879; T. K. Cheyne, Job and Solomon, London, 1887; E. Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek, ib. 1889 (on the Septuagint): J. F. Genung, The Epic of the Inner Life, the Book of Job, Boston, 1891; W. T. Davison, in Wisdom Literature of the O. T., London, 1893 (a luminous treatment); L. Lane, Kompoa%Eion des Bathes Hiob, Halls, 1895; G. Beer, in ZATW, xvi (1890), 297 eqq., xvii (1897), 97 eqq., xviii (1898), 257 eqq. (deals with all the versions); J. Owen, Five Great Skeptical Dramas, New York, 1898; G. V. Garland, Problems of Job, London, 1898 R. G. Moulton, in Literary Study of the Bible, Boston, 1899; M. Jaetrow, Babylonian Parallels to Job in JBL, zxv. 2 (1908); DB, ii. 880‑871; EB, ii. 2484‑2491; JE, vu. 193‑200.
JOBSON, FREDERICK JAMES: English Wesleyan; b. at Northwich (17 m. e.n.e. of Chester), Cheshire, July 8, 1812; d. in London Jan. 4, 1881. He served an apprenticeship to an architect of Norwich, but in 1834 entered the Wesleyan Ministry. He was located at Patrington Yorkshire, in 1834, and at Manchester 1835‑37. In the latter year he went to London as assistant at the City Road Chapel. In 1858 he was sent by the British conference to the Methodist Episcopal Conference at Indianapolis, Ind., and in 1860 to the conference at Sydney, Australia. As book steward of the VI‑13
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
JobJ Hook of
Wesleyan Methodist organization 1864‑79 he greatly extended the publishing‑business of his denomination. For twelve years he superintended the Methodist Magazine. In 1889 he was elected president of the Wesleyan Methodist conference. His principal works are, Chapel and School Architecture (London, 1850); A Mother's Portrait (1855); America and American Methodism (1857); Australia, with Notes by the Way on Egypt, Ceylon, Bobay, and the Holy Land (1862); Perfect Love for Christian Believers (1864); Serious Truths for Consideration (1884); and Visible Union tvith the Church of Christ (1864). A number of his sermons were printed in B. Gregory's Life of F. J. Jobeon (London, 1884).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Besides the Life by Gregory, ut sup., consult the Wesleyan Methodist Magazine, Sept. 1844, June 1871, and 1881, pp. 150‑157, 178‑18b, 285‑294, 897; DNB, xaix. 390.
JOCELIIY, jes'e‑lin: A Cistercian monk of Furness Abbey (in northwestern Lancashire, west of Morecambe Bay) and later of Down in North Ireland. He flourished about 1200 and is noteworthy for his lives of saints, especially his Life of St. Rentigern (ed. A. P. Forties, Edinburgh, 1874) and the Life and Miracles of St. Patrick (published by Colgan in the Trial thaumetxtrga, Louvain, 1847, 84‑116, and in the ASB, Mar., ii. 540‑580; Eng. tranal. by E. L. Swift, Dublin, 1809).

JOCH, y8a, JOHANN GEORG: German Protestant theologian; b. at Rothenburg (31 m. s.s.e. of Wiirzburg) Dec. 27, 1677; d. at Wittenberg Oct. 1, 1731. He is noted in the ecclesiastical history of his time as an ardent champion of pietistic teachings in the two strongholds of orthodox Lutheran theology, Dortmund and Wittenberg. At Jena, where he studied from 1897 to 1709, he became an enthusiastic follower of Spener, and when he was made superintendent and gymnasiarch at Dortmund in the latter year, he applied himself to the performance of his duties in the spirit of pietism. He found a demoralized and materialistic clergy, devoted solely to dogmatism and polemics, and at once began a struggle for regeneration by means of pietistic assemblies and the institution of catechism classes. This brought him into conflict with his clerical colleagues, but he enjoyed the support of the municipal authorities until he alienated them by his attacks upon them. In 1722 he became head preacher at Erfurt, and in 1726 was appointed professor of theology at Wittenberg, where his advent was the signal for the outbreak of a long controversy in which the cause of Pietism made little headway. Joch was a prolific writer in various
I	fields, but his productions, almost without excep
	tion, were pamphlets of little permanent value.
(E. IDELER,)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. W. F. Waleh. Historic der Ketureian, vi. 238; 473 eqq.. 11 vole., Leipsic, 1702‑86; J. C. w.
Auguati, Be%tritpe zur Ceachichte and 3tatietik der evan. gelutchen Karche, i. 184‑231, Jena, 1837.
JOEL: The second of the Minor Prophets in the arrangement of the English version. Little is known of the prophet; he was the son of Pethuel, probably a Judahite, and prophesied in Jerusalem; but that he was a Levite does not follow from i. 9,

J.T ahamnes oel	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	194
13, ii. 17. By most scholars his date is placed in the reign of Joaeh between 875 and 845 B.C. on the ground that Amos used his book, that the descent of the Edomitea upon Judah under Joash was fresh in his memory, and that his mention of temple, priests, and ritual necessitates that early date. Others place him in the times of Jeroboam II. and
Uzziah, others under Ahaz and HezeDate. kiah, still others in the last years of
Josiah, while several recent critics put him in Persian or Greek times. Against a postexilic dating are the following considerations: The position of the book in the Hebrew and Greek canon is among the early prophets and before those of the Chaldean period. Among the peoples named in the book there appear neither Syrians, Greeks, Persians, Babylonians, nor Assyrians, not even Moabitea or Ammonites, but only Philistines, Phenicians, Egyptians, and Edomitea. Nothing follows from silence respecting a king and the northern kingdom. Against the assertion that iii. 2 and 6 imply the Babylonian or an Assyrian captivity, it is to be noted that neither Babylonians nor Assyrians are mentioned; Philistines and Pheniciana are the chief foes in iii. 4 (cf. II Chron. axi. 16‑17, where Philistines and Arabians are said to have aided Jerusalem in the time of Jehoram, and II Kings viii. 22). Characteristic are the "parting of the land " and the selling of Judean prisoners of war to foreign peoples, a practise of the Phenieiana (F. C. Movers, Die PhSnizier, ii. 3, 70 sqq., Bonn, 1845), who, by the ninth century, were in commercial contact with the Greeks. The mention of Egypt in iii. 19 may be connected with the expedition of Shishak of I Kings xiv. 25 under Rehoboam. Against this the " bring again the captivity " of iii. 1 can not be urged, since in postesilic times this phrase means to restore and not to return captives; and that Judah and Jerusalem needed restoration when the northern tribes had revolted, had assailed the capital, annexed Judean territory, and sold captives into slavery no one will deny. The conception of the book that Jerusalem was the legitimate sanctuary is no proof of late origin, since Isaiah and Micah have the same idea (Isa. ii. 2; Mic. i. 2). Similarly, Joel's attitude to the priesthood finds analogies in early prophetic books. The linguistic teat can not be employed, since it gives no sure results. But more decisive is the unquestionable dependence of Amos on Joel (cf. Amos i. 2, 9, 13 with Joel iii. 16, 18), while the gazam of Amos iv. 9 is repeated only in Joel i. 4, ii. 25, and is not dependent in Joel upon Amos. If Joel is placed in the early years of Joash when Jehoiada was influential, the attitude toward the priests is fully explained.
The occasion of the book was a dire plague of locusts, accompanied by a severe drought, the results and course of which are described i. 2‑ii. 17, resulting in the prophet's call to fasting and repentance. This fast must have been observed,
since in the second and remaining part
Contents. of the book promises of good abound,
relating to the immediate and the distant future. The immediate outlook is the defeat of the foe, healing and good fortune, so that Zion
rejoices in its God; in the distant future (ii. 28) Yahweh's spirit is to come on all flesh, making all prophecy superfluous, while Zion is to dwell in security. Its foes are to be gathered, a hostile army, for judgment, and amid terrifying upheavals of nature are to be reaped like a ripe harvest. The book closes (iii. 18‑21) with blessing upon Judah and Jerusalem and promise of destruction for their foes. The articulation of the book is good and its parts are well related. The Day of Yahweh, which in the first part appears as one of terror unless repentance supervenes, is in the second part a day of grace because that repentance has come. Against Merx, the hostile peoples are not all mankind, but the immediate neighbors of Judah, those who, in accordance with the law of, prophecy, were in the ken of the prophet, viz., Tyre, Sidon, and Philiatia. This issues, however, in chap. iii. in the distinction between Israel as God's people and the people of the world who are foes of God, a representation which is repeated in Zech. xiv. 2. The place of judgment of the world is the Valley of Jehoshaphat, made memorable by the event narrated in II Chron. xx. 22‑26, a place which recalled not only Jehoshaphat but a noted judgment upon Judah's foes.
	The plague of locusts is to be taken literally, not
metaphorically. The metaphoric interpretation de
pends largely upon the fact that one of the names
for locusts in the Maaoretic pointing means " north
ern," and Judah's enemies were northern, while the
locusts usually came from the south. But swarms
are sometimes brought from the northern Syrian
desert by a northeast wind. Moreover, the predic
tion in ii. 20 is applicable to a swarm of locusts
driveni nto the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean,
not to a human enemy. There is no ground for
denying to the prophet the composition of the book
as a whole; the unity becomes clear when it is seen
that the phenomena of the first part are the basis
of the rest (ii. 28‑iii. 21). 	(W. Vorcgt.)
It is now no longer possible to say, with the late writer of the above article, that most scholars place the date of Joel " in the reign of Joash between 875 and 845 B.C." [Joash of Judah really reigned from 836 to 797 B.C.] It has been well said that " the book is either very early or very late," and recent critics almost unanimously place it in the fourth century B.C., though a few still regard it as the earliest of the prophetical writings. In answer to the arguments for the older view it may be said: (1) It is more likely that Joel, e.g. in iii. 16, 18, borrowed from Amos than that Amos, e.g., in i. 2, ix. 13, borrowed from Joel, for the former passages are brought close together as would naturally be done in a reproduction of earlier thoughts. (2) The attacks of the Edomites upon Judah (cf. iii. 19), during the helplessness of the latter just before and for centuries after the exile, finally resulted in their actual annexation of the country even to the north of Hebron; and it is these relations with Edom which form the chief subject of prophetic references (see Ob. i. 8; Jer, xlix. 7, 17, 20; Ezek. xxv. 12, 14, xxxii. 29; Mal. i. 4) to that inveterate enemy of Judah. (3) There is no allusion to the kingdom of northern Israel. (4) The detailed references to the priesthood and the temple offerings

196	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Jo°°hsnnss
and services (i. 9, 13, 14, ii. 14‑17) suggest the later period of Jewish church influence rather than the days of prophetic independence. (5) The exile and dispersion and foreign occupation seem to be presupposed in iii. 2, 17. (6) The allusion to the " Grecians " (iii. 6) is best accounted for by the effects of the Macedonian regime in Asia. (7) The strongest argument for a late date is the apocalyptic character of the book from ii. 2$ to the end, the general indefiniteness of the historical background, and lack of specific allusion to contemporary events and situations which forms such a striking feature of the earlier prophets.
J. F. McCuxny.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The two best commentaries are by S. R. Driver, in Cambridge Bible, 1897, and G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve, London, 1898. Other commentsriesare by: A. F. Holzhauaen, Hanover, 1829; C. A. Ctedner, Halls, 1831; E. Meier, Tiibingen, 1841; A. wiinache, Leipsic, 1872 (gives bibliography of Joel to 1872); E, Montet, Geneva, 1877; A. Marx, Halls, 1879 (gives history
*
of interpretation down to Calvin); F, Hitzig, ed. J. Stener, Leipeic, 1881; A. Scholz, wiirzburg, 1885; C. F. Kell, Leipsic, 1888; E, le Savoureux, Paris, 1888; G. Preuas, Halls, 1889; J. R'ellhauaen, Die kleinen Propheten, pp. 58 sqq., 207 sqq., Berlin, 1892; C. von Orelli, in Rurzgefaaster Kommentar, 3d ed., Munich, 1908, Eng. transl. of earlier ed., The Twelve Minor Prophets, Edinburgh, 1893; w. Nowack, Gottingen, 1897; I. T. Beck, ed. J. 1.indenmeyer, Giitereloh, 1898; J. Hyde, London, 1898; E. B. Pussy, Miner Prophets, reissue, London, 1906; A. C. Gaeberlin, ib., 1909.
Questions of date, unity, genuineness, etc, are treated in the works on Biblical Introduction, such as Driver's, and in the commentaries. Special treatises are: H. Gr9ta, Dar einheitliche Charakter der Prophetic Joela, Breslau, 1873; w. L. Pearson, The Prophecy of Joel: its Unity, its Aim, and the Ape or its Composition, New York, 1885; G, Kessner, Dae Zeitalter des Propheten Joel, Leipaic, 1888; H. Holzinger, in ZATW, 1889, pp. 89‑131; F. w. Farrar, The Minor Prophets, London, 1890; G. B. Gray, in Expositor, Sept., 1893; G. G. Findlay, Books of the Prophets, London, 1898; DB, ii. 672‑878; BB, ii. 24922497; JE, vii, 204‑208,
JOHANN, yo'h8n, JOHANNES, yo'h8n‑n5z. See JOHN.

JOHANNES III. SCHOLASTICUS: Patriarch of Constantinople; b. at Sirimis (near Antioch); d. probably Aug. 31, 577.
The Patriarch Eutychius (q.v.) having been banished on account of his firm attitude against Aphthartodocetism (see JUSTINIAN), Justinian appointed to succeed him, in Jan., 565, Johannes, deputy of the Patriarch Anastasius of Antioch. Before becoming a cleric, Johannes had been a lawyer. Aocordiag to John of Ephesus (Hist. Eccl., i. and ii.), he was an unsparing oppressor of the Monophysites of the capital. After severe illness, he died in the twelfth year of the Emperor Justin IL, whose favor he had enjoyed. Johannes was the author of (1) a " collection of canons," and this while still a presbyter of Antioch; also (2) a legal canon (Justellus, Bibliothera Juris carlonici txteris, 2 vole., Paris, 1661, ii. 499‑672). The former treatise contains the canons of church councils down to Chaloedon; the latter, the ecclesiastical legislation of the emperors; and both collections are treated systematically. According to Photius (B2bliotheca, cod. lxxv., p. 52, ed. Bekker, 2 vole., Berlin, 1824), Johannes wrote a " eatechetical discourse " against the tritheism of Johannes Philoponus (q.v.); so‑
cording to John of Nikiou (ed. by Zotenberg in JA 1878, ii. 344), also an " initiation." G. K1:f7oE11.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: ASB, Aug. 1, 'tt<7; DCB, 111. 388‑387; Fabrieiue‑Harlea, BrobZiotheca Graeca, ai. 101, aii. 148, 193,
201, 209, Hamburg, 1803‑09.
JOHANNES IV. JEjUNATOR: Patriarch of Conatantinople; b. in Constantinople; d. Sept. 2, 595. He was a deacon at St. Sophia under the Patriarch Johannes III. Scholasticus (q.v.). While not a learned man, he was distinguished for devout works and for his extended fasts, whence his name Jejunator. On April 12, 582, he succeeded Eutychius (q.v.) as patriarch of Constantinople, and stood in high esteem with the Emperors Tiberius and Mauritius. He is commemorated as a saint by the Greek Church on September 2.
He is known in ecclesiastical history for his controversy with Popes Pelagius II. and Gregory I. In the proceedings of a synod held at Constantinople in 588, under his presidency, he is called archbishop and ecumenical patriarch. The first protest against this title was urged by Pelagiua (cf. Gregory, Epist. v. 41 and v. 44). Some years later Gregory took occasion to rebuke the patriarch's insolence and haughtiness because, by usurping that title, which nobody, not even the Roman pontiff, had ever assumed, he exalted himself above the other bishops. The remonstrance passed unheeded, even when Gregory also addressed the Emperor Mauritius in the matter (Gregory, Epist., v. 37; cf. v. 39). At all events, Gregory's strict decision continued binding for the Church of Rome, which denied to the devout faster the veneration due to a saint.
Gregory was in error if he supposed that Johannes undertook an innovation, for the title was used in the time of Johannes II. the Cappadocian in 518. Still again, Gregory erred in the assumption that his own predecessors had refused the title of universal bishop or patriarch; for the contrary is true in respect to Leo L, Hormiedas, Bonifaoe IL, and Agapetus I. Gregory was also probably wrong in construing the title to mean an exaltation of the Byzantine patriarch over all other bishops, including the bishop of Rome, for there are still good reasons for the hypothesis that "ecumenical patriarch" meant " imperial patriarch."
	The following writings are extant under the name
of Johannes, although none of them date back to
him: (1) " Rules and guide in the case of those
who make confession" (MPG, lxxxviii., 1889
1918; cf. 1931‑36); (2) " On repentance, self
control, and virginity" (MPG, Ixxcviii. 1937‑78),
also ascribed to Chrysoatom; (3) " On false proph
ets," (among Chrysostom's works, MPG, liv., 553
568); (4) "Instruction for none and reproof of
every kind of sin" (J. B. Pitra, Spicilegium Solea
mense, 4 vols., iv., 416‑435, Paris, 1858). Accord
ing to K. Holl (Enthttsioamua urtd Bussgeitialt beim
griechischen MBnchtum, pp. 289 eqq., Leipsie, 1898)
the first one was composed by a Cappadocian monk,
Johannes, who lived in the Petra cloister at Con
atantinople about 1100. 	G. KRf1GEli.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: ASB, Aug. 1, X69‑X74; Fabricius‑Harlea, BibZiothaca Gsaeea, xi. 108‑112. Hamburg 1808; A. J.
Binterim, Dsnkwtirdigkeiten, v. 3, pp 383‑390, Mainz,
1829; A. Pichler, Gsechichfe der kirchlidecn Trennunp
surixhen Orient and Occident, ii. 847‑888. Munich, 1885:

Jo~tutnes	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	198
J. Hergenrother, Photiw, i. 178‑190, Regensburg, 1887;
J. Langan, Geschichte der ramischen Kirehs, ii. 448 eqq., Bonn, 1885; F. Ksttenbuaoh, LahrbucA der vergteichenden Konjssaionekunde, i. 111‑117, 282, Freiburg, 1892; K. Holy Enthuaiasmw and Buaapewalt brim gnachiachen Mlinchtum, pp. 289‑298, Leipeic, 1898; DCB, iii. 387‑388; and liters, lure under Pausarua IT., and Garcaoay 7.

JOHANNES ASKUSRA(iES, as‑kos'nd‑jiz: Greek theologian of the sixth century. He was a pupil of the Syrian Peter of Rhesina, whom he succeeded as teacher of philosophy at Constantinople during the reign of Justinian I. In s conference held in the presence of the emperor, Johannes declared him‑. self not only a monophyaite, but a tritheist, and he was accordingly banished as a heretic. Abulfaraj makes Johannes Askuenages the founder of tritheiam, but the Greek sources, which ignore this theologian, assign this plaee to Johannes Philoponoa (q.v.), the discrepancy being apparently due to the fact that the latter was the most distinguished representative of the tritheistic doctrine.
(PHILIPP MEYER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. W. F. Walob, Hietoris der Kdaereien, viii. 884, 11 vole., Leip®a, 1782‑Sb; Neander, Christian Church, ii. 813.
JOHANNES BE>EKOS: Patriarch of Constantinople; b. at Constantinople in the early part of the thirteenth century; d. in the castle of St. Gregory in Bithynia 1293. He first became important in the unioniatic synod of 1274, when the Emperor Michael Palaeologus, a zealous advocate of union, sought his aid as a scholar and orator. Johannes, however, after some hesitation declared the Latins heretics, and was accordingly imprisoned. During his confinement he read the older Greek literature on the controverted points and became convinced of the truth of what he had hitherto rejected. The consequence was his elevation to the patriarchal throne, but the change in ecclesiastical policy resulted in his deposition in 1282 and his banishment in the following year. His final years were spent in prison. The Greek Church has stricken the name of Bekkos from the list of the orthodox, but his polemical writings were included in the Graecia orthodoxy of Leo Allatiua (Rome, 1652‑59). His theological works were chiefly in defense of the union, the moat important being " On the Union and Peace of the Old and New Churches of Rome."
(PHILIPP MEYER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Krumbacher, Geeehiehte, pp. 98‑97 (where
the literature is indicated); Fabricius‑Harles, BiSliothsca Graeca, xi. 344‑349, Hamburg, 1808.
JOHANNES CLIMACUS (SCHOLASTICUS, SINAITA): Monk of Mount Sinai. From the "Narratives " of Anastasius, a monk of Mount Sinai (cf. F. Nau, Les recite inedits du moine Anaataae, Paris, 1902; and Orierta Christidrttts, ii., 1902, 58‑89), it appears that Johannes Climacus died about 649. He was presumably born before 579, and became a monk in the Sinai cloister about 600, being abbot of the same before 639. If these data be correct, then this Johannes can not be identical with Johannes, the abbot of Mount Sinai to whom Gregory I. addressed a letter dated Sept. 1, 600 (Epiat. xi. 1; NPNF, xiii. 52). Johannes was called Climscus on account of his book, " The Ladder to Paradise," so termed with reference to Jacob's ladder. In this
book the spiritual conditions by which men are purified in preparation for the divine life are described in thirty steps. The process begins with renunciation of the world. The spirit turns to penance. Salutary tribulation softens the heart, and removes the dross. Presently the penitent finds words only for prayer, song, and the manifestation of love. Blessed humility leads to the imitation of Christ, and unlocks the gates of heaven. The highest estate is that of a divinely patterned apathy and rest where one beholds, in an undimmed mirror, the excellences of Paradise. However, only he who has first endured and overcome the storms of this world, will attain to that stage of blissful calm. Among the Greek monks, this tract, reinforced with notes, was for centuries in use as a guide to .perfection (cf. the Scholia of Abbot John of RaYthu; MPG, lxxxviii. 1211‑48). v
G. KR$(3EA.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The editio princepa of the " Ladder " was by M. Radar, Paris, 1833, reproduced in MPG, lxxaviii. 583‑1248; the Vito by Daniel is in the latter, columns 598‑808. A later edition of the work is by $. Eremites, Constantinople, 1883. A very full bibliographical apparatus is to be found in Krumbacher, Geachichte, pp. 143144. Consult further: J. Feeder, Inatitutiowa pabolopiae, ed. B. Jungmann, ii. 890,897, Innsbruck, 1898; DCB, iii. 405; KL, vi. 1840‑1841; P. Labbe in MPG, Izxaviii. 579‑582.
JOHANNES ELEEMOft: Patriarch of Alexandria; b. at Amathus (on s. shore of Cyprus); d, there probably Nov. 11, 619. He was installed as patriarch by the Emperor Heraclius, in deference to the Alexandriane, at the close of 610 or beginning of 611. His administration meant a powerful reinforcement of the orthodox cause in Alexandria. The policy of uniting the orthodox party with the Monophysites, as fomented by Heraclius and by Sergius of Constantinople, encountered in Johannes an outspoken opponent. He was famed for his great charity, whence his name, Eleemon, and his good deeds won for him the hearts of the people. When the Persians approached Afessndria in 619(?), Johannes fled to Cyprus, where he died. His anniversary day is November 12. G. KRtYaER.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The life by Leontiua is in MPG, xciii. 1813 eqq., in Lat. tranal., with notes in MPL, Ixxiii. 337‑384; the Lat. tranel. of Leontius and of the life by $imeon Metaphraetea, with comment, is in A3B, Jan., ii. 495‑535. H. Geiser edited the life by Leontius, Freiburg. 1893. Consult: H. Gelzer, Ein priechischer YolksachriJtatsll4r des 7. Jahrhunderta, Munich, 1889; F. PSeI, Die reins . . , Liebe darpestellt in dam Leben des . . . Johannes du Almoaengebera, Regensburg, .1882; A. von Guteohmid Kleine Schriften, ii. 471‑475, Leipeic, 1890; H. T. F. Duck' worth, 8E. John the Almapiver, Patriarch of Alexandria, London, 1901; DCB, iii. 348.

JOHANNES PHILOPONOS: Greek philosopher, philologist, and theologian of the sixth century. Of his life few details are known, except that he was born at Alexandria and was a pupil of the Aristotelian exegete Ammonius and the grammarian Romanos. He was a man of learning, versatility, and restless energy, but, adhering fully neither to tradition nor to dogma, his fondness for a philosophical treatment of Christian dogma, to which he subscribed in general, frequently placed him in a dubious position. He won disapproval, moreover, by his interpretation of the Trinity in his "Arbitrator," a

197	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Job °°
dialogue in ten books but now extant only in fragments, since he asserted that hypostasis and nature are the same, so that Christ could have but one nature, unless two hypoatasea were to be assumed. In the Trinity he postulated three independent hypoatasea comprised under a unity, which was such merely in virtue of being a generic concept. There was, therefore, no unity in the Trinity except that which presupposed the triad of hypostasea and was inferred from their common predicates. The teaching here summarized brought upon Johannes the charge of tritheiam, and with some show of reason, although he was not, as Leontius alleged, the founder of tritheism, but merely one of its chief representatives.
The chief work of this author still extant is his De aeternitate mundi (ed. V. Trincavellus, Venice, 1535), assailing Proclus, Aristotle, and Plato, and seeking to explain the creation rationally without the aid of the Bible. In his " On the Resurrection," known only from excerpts in Photius, !Vicephorus, and Timotheus, he again made a concession to philosophy by his distinction between a sensuous and aupersenauous creation. The second work still preserved is his Commentaritrrum in Mosaicam mundi creationem libri septem (ed. B. Corder, Vienna, 1630), based on older writers on the hexameron, especially Basil, but enriched with a mass of theories of nature and philosophy developed by the author. Mention should also be made of his Disputalio de ptaschate, printed together with the foregoing work, in defense of the thesis that on the thirteenth day of the month and on the day before the legal Passover Christ celebrated a mystic meal with his disciples, but did not actually eat a Passover‑lamb. (PHILIPP MEYER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY. Fabricius‑Harlee, Bibliotheca Graeca, x. 839 aqq., Hamburg, 1807; F. Trecbeel, in TSK, viii (1835), 95‑118; J. M. Se65nfelder, Die Kirchenpeechichte des Johannes van Ephesus, pp, 288‑297, Munich. 1892; Byzantiniache Zeitachrifl, viii (1899), 444 eqq.; Krumbacher, GeachicAte, p. 53 et passim; KL, vi. 1798‑17b4.
	JOHANNES SCHOLASTICUS OF SCYTHOPOLIS:
Bishop of Scythopolis. According to Photius (Bib
liothecs, cod. xev., p. 78, ed. Bekker, 2 vols., Berlin,
1824), a certain Johannes Scholssticus of Seytho
polia wrote twelve books against the separatists of
the Church; that is, the Eutychian party. Photius
(cod. cvii., p. 187) doubtless correctly identified
him with that Johannes Scholasticus against whom
Basil the Cilician wrote an apology in the time of
the Emperor Anastasius (491‑518). The same
author also wrote a commentary on the pseudo
Dionyaian writings, about 532. According to Loafs
(Leontius of Byzantium, pp. 269 sqq., Leipsic, 1887)
he is also identical with Bishop Johannes of Scy
thopolis, who was in office about 540, and wrote
against Severus of Antioch (cf. Dodrina palrum,
ed. Diekamp, p. 85, Munster, 1907; and Photiua
cod. ccxxxi., p. 287). Possibly, too, the Johannes
Scholasticus whom St. Sabas encountered at Scy
thopolis about 520 (Cotelerius, Ecclesiae Graecae
monuments, iii. 327, 4 vols., Paris, 1677‑92) is the
same man. 	G. KRtYGER.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Krutnbaeher. Geachiekte, p. 68; F. Loofa, Leontiua van Byaanz, pp. 289‑272, LeiPaio, 1887: DCB, iii. 394, 427 (nos. 383, 585, 588).
JOHANNES SCOTUS ERIGERA. See SCOTUS ERIt1ENA, JOHANNES.
JOHANNES, ADOLF: German Roman Catholic; b. at Brendlorenzen (a village near Neustadt‑ander‑Saale, 40 m. n.e. of Wiirzburg), Bavaria, Nov. 21, 1855. He was educated at the universities of Wiirzburg, Vienna, Innsbruck, and Munich, and was ordained to the priesthood in 1881. After being curate at Heidingsfeld and Hassfurt, as well as prefect of the Julianum at W iirzburg, he was appointed professor in the Lyceum of Dillingen in 1886. Since 1900 he has been professor of OldTestament exegesis, Biblical introduction, and Oriental languages. He has written Commeretar zu den Weisaagungen des Propheten. Obtldja (Wiirzburg, 1885); CommenUar zum ersten Brief des Alooatels Paulus an die Theaaaloytieher (Dillingen, 1898); and minor contributions.
JOHN: The name of twenty‑two popes. The inconsistency in the numbers of the later ones is due to the fact that after Boniface VII. a John XV. is described in some lists as having occupied the see for four months. According to some early writers he was only elected, not consecrated, while others say that he was put forward as a candidate by the party of Boniface; but modern investigation shows that he has no claim even to the name of antipope.
John L: Pope 523‑526. He was consecrated
Aug. 16 (or 13), 523. When in that year the Emperor Justin I. ordered a general persecution of heretics, the Arian Goths of the Danube province appealed for help to Theodoric, who conceived the idea of sending to Justin an embassy of prominent Romans, and John was forced to take part in it. Arriving in Constantinople at the end of 525, he achieved the purpose of his mission, but was thrown into prison on his return by Theodoric, who apparently considered him a supporter of the Byzantine party, and died there May 18, 526.
(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liber pontifkalia, ed. Mommeen, in MGH: Geat, pant. Ram., i (1898), 133‑137; T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, iii. 510‑b20, Oxford, 1885; F, Gregorovius, Hiat. of the City of Rome, i. 322, 328‑329, London, 1894; G. Pfeilaehifter, in KirchenpeacAichUiehe Studien, iii. 15b‑202, MBnater, 1898; H. Griear, Geachichfa Rom and der Pupate, i. 48193, Freiburg, 1898; Bower, Popes, i. 324‑327; Milman, Latin Christianity, i. 440‑442; B. Plating, Lives of as Popes, i. 120‑122, London, n,d.; DCB, iii, 389‑390.
John II.: Pope 533‑535. He was elected by the influence of the Ostrogothic court, and consecrated Jan. 2, 533. The most important event of his pontificate was the settlement of the Theopaschite controversy (see THEOPABCHITES). On June 6, 533, the Emperor Justinian laid before him a confession containing the disputed formula for confirmation. He hesitated a long time, but finally, on Mar. 24, 534, issued an approving document which with the emperor's letter, was included in the Code of Justinian. He deposed the adulterous Bishop Contumeliosus of Riez, and named Caesarius of Arles administrator of the diocese‑the first act of jurisdiction of this kind recorded of a pope.
(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liber pontifioaLia, ed Ducheane, i. 28b‑288, Paris, 1888, ed. Mommaen, in MGH, Geat, pout. Ram.,

John III‑X3:1	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG .	198
i (1898). 141; Ceesiadorue, Yariae, ed. Mommsen, in MGH, Acct. Ant., ail (1894), 279 eqq., 331‑332, sad pp. xxix.xza.; T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, iv. 87 eqq., Oxford, 1885; J. Langen, Guchickte der r6minehen Kirche, ii. 313‑324, Bonn, 1885; F. Gregoroviue, Hiat. of as City of Rome, ii. 194‑198, London, 1894; H. Grisar, Guchichtc Rams and der Ptlpsts, i. 497‑498. Freiburg, 1898; Bower, Popes. i. 333‑338; Milman, Latin Christianity, i. 458; B. Plating, Lives of the Popes, i. 124‑12b, London, n.d.
	John III.: Pope b81‑574. He was the son of
Ansatasiua, s prominent Roman, and was elected
after a long interregnum July 17, 561. He quo
seeded in bringing about the return to the Roman
obedience of the revolting provinces of Italy. Rar
venna submitted Sept. 15, 568, and in 571 Arch
bishop Laurence II. of Milan entered into negotiar
tiona with Rome. His influence was also felt in
the Frankish kingdom in the restoration of the de
posed bishops of Embrun and Gap, who had ap
pealed to him. 	(H. BoEHmzR.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Libsr pontifirnlia, ed. Duchesne, i. 306‑308, Paris, 1888, ad. Mommeen, in MGH, Gut, poet. Ram., i (1898), 1b7‑1b8; JaffB, Reputa, i. 138‑137; J. Langen, Guchichte der rdmiachsn Kirche, ii. 401‑403, Bonn, 1885; T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, v. 86, Oxford, 1895; DCB, iii. 891; Bower, Pope&, i. 374‑380; Milman, Latin Christianity, i. 475; B. Platim, Lives of the Popes, i. 132134, London, n,d.
	John IV.: Pope 840‑842. The son of Venautius,
a Dalmatian teacher, he was elected Aug. 2, 640,
and consecrated September 22. Soon after he held
a synod at which he condemned Monothelitism;
and when Pyrrhus, patriarch of Constantinople, do
fended this heresy by appealing to the decisions of
Honorius, John addressed a strong letter to the
eons of the Emperor Heraelius in which he asserted
the complete orthodoxy of Honorius and demanded
the condemnation of Pyrrhus' teaching. He died
Oct. 12, 842. 	(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liter pontiJkaLis, ed. Duchesne, i. 330, Paris, 1888, ed. Mommeen, in MGH, Gut, poet. Ram., i (1898), 177; Jaff6, Reputa, i. 227‑228; J. Langen, Geachichte der rdmischen Kirche, ii. 517‑520. Bonn, 1885; R. Baxmann, Die Polit%k der Pdpate, i. 171 eqq.. Elberfeld, 1888; T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, vi, 18, 172, Oxford, 1895; Mann, Popes, i. 351, 354, 387; Bower, Popes, i. 438‑441; Milman, Latin Christianity, ii. 272; B. Platins, Lives of the Popes, i. 150‑1b2, London, n.d.; DCB, iii. 391‑392.
John V.: Pope 685‑688. He was a Syrian by birth, who, in accordance with the constitution of Constantine VI., was consecrated immediately after his election (July 23, 885) without waiting for imperial confirmation. His only known official act was the bringing of the Sardinian church once more into subjection to Rome. He died Aug. 2, 686.
(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liter pontiJtealia, ed. Duchesne, i. 386‑387, Paris, 1888, ed. Mommeen, in MGH, Gcat, pant. Rom" i (1898), 205‑20fS; Jsff6, Repeats, i. 242; Mann, Popes, i., 2, pp. 84‑87; Bower, Popes, i. 489‑490; Milman, Latin Christianity, ii. 287; B. Plating, Lives of the Popes, i. 188187, London, n,d,; DCB, iii, 392.
John VL : Pope 701‑705. A Greek by birth, he watt consecrated October 30. The Emperor ApsimarTiberius, disapproving his election, sent the exarch Theophylact to Rome to procure his deposition; but the military force of all Italy is said to have assembled around Rome in his defense. He was in greater danger from the Lombard Duke Gisulf of
Benevento, but by means of gifts warded off this attack also. He died Jan. 11, 705.
(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liter poratiJicalia, ed. Duchesne, i. 383, Paris, 1888, ed. Mommsen, in MGH, Geat, poet. Rom., i (1898), 217‑218; JaffE:, Reguta, i. 242; Mann, Popes, i. 2, pp. 105‑108; Bower, Popes, ii. 9‑12; B. Platma, Lives of as Popes, i. 172‑173, London, n.d.; DCB, iii. 392‑393.
	John VIL: Pope 705‑707. He was a Greek, re
nowned, according to the Lfber poretificalis, for his
eloquence, education, and taste for art. He showed
little firmness in his dealings with Justinian II. in
regard to the confirmation of the Quinisext Council.
He maintained friendly relations with the Lom
barda. 	(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liter pontiflcaZie, ed: Duchesne, i. 384, Paris, 1898, ed. Mommsen, in MGH, Geat. pant. Rom., i (1898), 219‑220; JaV, Reputa, i. 248‑247; Mann, Popes, i. 2, pp. 109‑123: J. Laiigen, Guchichte der rt3m%achan Kirchc, ii. 595‑b98, Bonn, 1886; F. Gregorovius, Hint. of the City of Rome, ii. 194‑198, London, 1894; Bower, Popes, ii. 12‑13; B. Plating, Lives of the Popes, i. 173‑17b, London, GA.; DCB, iii. 393.
John VIII.: Pope 872‑882. He was a Roman by birth. On being elected pope Dec. 14, 872, he took up with alacrity the task of ruling in the spirit of Nicholas I. He had many qualities necessary for success, including a genius for financial and military organization and for promptly turning to advantage each change in the political situation. His whole force was devoted to two purely political aims, the liberation of Italy from the Saracens and its subjection, together with that of the empire, to the over‑lordship of the papacy. The first, a necessary preliminary to the second, he pursued in alliance with the Emperor Louis IL, but on his own account he built a fleet, organized a standing militia and completed the fortification of Rome. The greatest obstacle to the success of his plans was the impossibility of detaching the princes of Palermo, Naples, and Capua, and the maritime power of Amalfi, from their alliance with the Saracens, to whom he was himself forced toward the end of his reign to pay a yearly tribute. His natural unfriendliness to the Germans and the Carolingian dynasty showed itself on the death of Louis (Oct. 12, 875), when he invited not Louis the German but Charles the Bald to Rome to receive the imperial crown, which he placed on his head at Christmas. When Charles the Bald died in the next year, John had to reckon with the claims to the empire of his nephew Carloman, whose adherents appeared in Rome in the spring of 878, imprisoned John, and took an oath of the leading citizens to support Carloman as emperor. As soon as the pope was released, he went by sea to France and held a council at Troyes, where he crowned Louis the Stammerer (Sept. 7, 878); but as Louis showed little inclination to be mixed up in the Italian troubles, John had another candidate, Count Boso of Provence, who followed him back to Italy and was to have been crowned king in Rome. The plan failed because the German Carolingians had gained too much ground in northern Italy. In August, 879, John was forced to acknowledge Charles the Fat at Ravenna as king of Italy, and some time before Feb. 9, 881, to crown him as emperor, and

199	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	John M‑3m
thus bid farewell to any hope of realizing his Italian plane. In the controversy between Methodius and the Bavarian episcopate, he took the side of the former, although in 879 be summoned him to Rome to answer a charge of heresy. But John's attempts to please both parties sowed the seeds of future discord in the young Moravian church. He carried I on his predecessors' policy more consistently in the Bulgarian question, but gained nothing except vague promises, while the Greek clergy and liturgy remained in possession. This question had troubled the relations of Rome with Ignatius, patriarch of Constantinople. After his death in 877, Photiua (who had been deposed by the fourth council of Constantinople in 869) was reinstated. In 879, in order to win the Emperor Basil's support against the Saracens, John expressed his readiness to recognize him on certain conditions, and though Photius grossly falsified the terms when be recited them in the council of 879, John disavowed the action of his protesting legates and still sought for union. The assertion of later historians that he reversed this policy before his death (Dec. 15, 882) and once more deposed Photius finds no support in his letters.
(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The letters of this pope may be found in Manei, Concilia, avii, 1 eqq.; 8. LSwenfeld, Epiatolae Romanorum pontiJicum ineditae, pp. 24‑34, Leipsie, 1885; and Jaff6, Repasts, i, 378‑422. Consult: Hincmar. Annalea, ed. G. H. Perta, in MGH, Script., i (1828), 495 eqq.; Iriber pontifiralis, ed, Ducheane, ii. 121‑122, Paris, 1892; Mann. Popes, iii, 231‑353; J. Hergenr5ther, Photiua, 3 vole., R.egenaburg, 1887‑89; B, Jungmann, Disaertationea aeIedae, iii. 419‑43b, Regensburg, 1882; ‑A. Gasquet, L'Empire bysantin et la monarchic franque, pp. 432‑482. Paris, 1888; J. Langen, Geachichte der rtimieehen Kirehe, iii. 170‑275, Bonn, 1892; A. LapAtre, L'Europe et k Saint‑Sippe h lWoqae caroliHpiennt, vol. i., Paris, 1895 (I1ltramontane); F. Gregorovius, Hist, of the City of Rome, iii. 171‑203, London, 1895; Hauck, KD, ii. 558 sqq., 702 eqq.; Hefele, Conciliengeachichte, iv. 447 sqq., 514 eqq.; Bower, Popes, 283‑292; MHman, Latin Christianity, iii. 37, 81‑100; B. Plating, Lives of the Popes, i. 232‑233, London, n.d.
John I%.: Pope 898‑900. He was a Benedictine, and was elevated to the papacy after the expulsion of Sergius III. At a synod in St. Peter's he reversed the proceedings of the synod of Stephen VI. (q.v.) which had condemned Formosan (q.v.), and reaffirmed the validity of the orders conferred by the latter. He revised the provisions for papal elections, recognized Lambert of Spoleto as emperor, and declared the coronation of Arnulf null and void. At first he confirmed the decrees of his predecessors in regard to Photius, but just before his death he seems to have succeeded in reaching some understanding with the Greeks at a synod.
(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liber pontifical%e, ed. Duchesne, ii. 232, Paris, 1892; J. M. Watterich, Rmnanorum ponEiftcum vitae, i. 658 sqq., Leipsic, 1882; JaVRepeats, i. 442‑443; J. Langen, Gcarhichte der romiachen Ksrche, iii. 307‑311, Bonn, 1892; F. Gregoroviue Hiat. of the City of Rome, iii. 231‑238, London, 1895; Mann, Popes, iii. 245, 370, 384, 394; Bower, Popes, ii. 302‑304; Milman, Latin Christianity, iii. 112; B. Plating, Lives of the popes, i. 240‑241, London, n.d.
John %.: Pope 914"‑928. He is said to have been born at Toffignano in Romagna, to have been first a deacon in Bologna, and then to have risen to the bishopric of that see, which he immediately exchanged in some uncanonical manner for that of Ravenna, whence he ‑ called, again uncanoni‑
tally, by the primates of Rome‑meaning notably Theodore, to whom he seems to have been related ‑to the papacy about March, 914. He displayed some zeal and ability in ecclesiastical affairs, maintaining close relations with Germany and France; the instructions sent to the archbishop of Reims for dealing with the newly converted Normans are notable. He was, however, more important as a politician and military commander, succeeding in uniting the principal Italian princes and the eastern emperor against the Saracens, and personally winning a brilliant victory over them on the lower Garigliano in August, 916. But the league soon fell a prey to the spirit of faction, the Emperor Berengar was murdered at Ravenna in 924, and John had a powerful foe in Rome in the person of the intriguing Marozia. In June, 928, his brother Peter, prefect of the city, was murdered and he himself was thrown into prison, where he soon died.
(H. BOEBMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are: Liudprand, Antapodoaia, ed. E. Dflmmler, pp, 44‑47, 81, 73, Hanover, 1877; Benediotue. Chronicon, ed. G. Waits, in MGH, Script. :dii (1881), 714‑715. Consult further: Liber pontiJtealia, ed. Duchesne, ii. 240‑‑241, Paris, 1892; Jaffd, Repeats, i. 447‑4b3; J. M. Watterich, Romanorum pontiJicum vitae, i. 35‑38, 881 sqq., LeiPeig 1882; B. Jungmann, Diaserfhtiones select", iv. 48‑82, Regensburg, 1884; J. Langen, Geachichtt der rSlniachen Kirche, iii. 319‑328, Bonn, 1892; F. Gregorovius, HiaE. of the City of Rome, iii. Zq9‑279, London, 1895; Bower, Popes, ii, 308‑311; Milman, Latin Christianity, iii. 180‑188; B. Plating, Lives of the popes, i. 24b247, London, n.d.
		John %L: Pope 931‑936.	A natural son of
	Sergiys III. by Marozia, he was elevated to the
	papacy about 931 by his mother's influence, and
	was involved in her fall when his half‑brother Al
~ 	beric gained power a year later. It is not known
	whether he ever regained his freedom, but it was
I	undoubtedly Alberic who decided all the more im
	portant acts of jurisdiction. John died in January,
	936. 	(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liber pontiftcalia, ed. Dueheane, 1243, Paris, 1892; Jaffd, Repeats, i. 454‑455; J. M. Watterieh, RomsnArum pontiflcurn vitae, i. 38. 689 sqq., LeiPsic. 1882; J. Langen, Geachichte der rDmiachen Kirche, iii. 329‑331, Bonn, 1892; Gregorovius, Hint. of the City of Rome, iii. 283‑305, London, 1895; Bower, Popes, ii. 311‑312; B. Plating, Liven of the Popes, i. 248‑249, London, n.d.
John %II. (Octavian): Pope 955‑964. He was the illegitimate son of Alberic, and was elected Dec. 16, 955. The most shocking moral scandals were rife; but with all his vices he combined the soaring ambition of his house. First he tried to extend his power in the south, and then to deal with King Berengar, both without success. Berengar's son Adalbert was occupying Roman territory when John decided to appeal to Otto L, possibly under pressure from the reforming party among the Roman clergy. After enacting guaranties for his own position, he admitted Otto into the city and crowned him emperor (Feb. 2, 962); but hardly had Otto left Rome when John entered into relations with Adalbert and attempted to do so with the Byzantine empire. Becoming aware of his treachery, Otto marched back to Rome. John and Adalbert fled to Tivoli. A synod met in St. Peter's under the emperor's presidency, which after nearly a month's debate declared John guilty

John SaI‑gBII	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	900
of perjury, murder, sacrilege, and incest, deposed
him, and elected the protoacriniarius Leo, who was
then only a layman, in his place. After the em
peror had left Rome, John's friends rose and ex
pelled Leo. John returned to the Lateran, and
held a council of his own (Feb. 26) at which he
annulled the acts of the previous one and declared
Leo deposed. Stern vengeance was taken upon the
reforming leaders, but before Otto could return
John was struck down either by a stroke of apo
plexy or by an injured husband, and died May 14,
964. 	(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Epietoiae et priviZepia are in MPL,
	oax:tiii. Sources are: Liudprand, De rebus peatia O#onis,
	ad. E. DBmmler, pp. 124‑138, Hanover, 1877; Libor
	pontiJkaiie, ad. Duaheane, ii. 248 eqq., Paris, 1892. Con
	sult further: Jeff', Rapeata, i. 483 187; J. M. Watterieh,
	Romarwrum pontificum vitae, i. 41‑83; F. Gregoroviue,
	Hint, of the City of Rome, iii. 32851, London, 1895; B.
	Jungmann, Diaaertationas aeiectae, iv. 449 eqq., Regena
	burg, 1884; Hauck, KD, ii. 222‑238; Bower, Popes, ii,
	315‑319; Milman, Latin Christianity, iii. 175‑184; B.
	Plating, Lives of the Popes, i. 252‑254, London, n,d.
	John XIII.: Pope 965‑972. Formerly bishop of
Narni, and apparently a son of the younger Theo
dots, he was elected under the influence of Otto I.
and consecrated Oct. 1. In December the citizens
rose and imprisoned him. He escaped, but was
unable to reenter Rome except with the help of the
emperor, to whom he remained in absolute subjec
tion. This relation, however, increased his con
sideration in the West, and from countries as dis
tant as Spain, England, and Scotland questions
were referred to him for decision. He died Sept.
6, 972. 	(H. BOEHIIZZR.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Epfiatolae et privitepia are in MPL, czxxv. Consult: Liter pontifkalie, ad. Duchesne, ii. 252, Paris, 1892; Jaff6, Repasts, i, 470‑477; J. M. Watterich, Romanarum pontiJkum vitas, i. 44, 86, 885‑888, Leipsic, 1882; B. Jungmann, Diaeertationsa seleetae, iv. 493 eqq., Regensburg, 1884; J. Langan, OeachichEt der rcmiachen Kirche, iii. 354‑383, Bonn, 1892; Hauck, KD, iii. passim; F. Gregorovius, Hiat. of the City of Rome, iii 35777, London, 1895; Bower, Popes, ii. 321‑323; B. Plating, Lives of the Popes, i. 255‑258, London, n,d.
	John %IV.: Pope 983‑984. Formerly known as
Peter, bishop of Pavia and chancellor of Italy,
he was elected in Nov. 983, by the influence of
Otto II. After Otto's death the rival claimant,
Boniface VIL, returned from Constantinople and
imprisoned John in the Castle of Sant'Angelo, where
he died Aug. 20, 984. 	(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jaff6, Repeats, i. 484; J. M. Watterieh, Romanorum pontiJlcum roitae, i. 88, 888‑887, Leipsic, 1882; Bower, Popes, ii. 325; B. Plating, Lives of the Popes, i. 280, London, n.d.; F, Gregorovius, Hiat. of the City of Rome, iii. 393, 397, London, 1895.
	John %V.: Pope 985‑986. During his pontificate
the political power in Rome was in the hands of
John Crescentius IL, and the papacy enjoyed little
consideration abroad, as is shown by the history
of the Reims contest (see SYLVESTER IL). His
relations with Germany, however, were relatively
close, and he acted (through his legate Leo of
Trevl) as mediator between Ethelred of England
and Richard of Normandy, sanctioning the peace
of Rouen (Mar. 1, 991). He died early in April,
996. 	(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liter pontiJlcalia, ad. Duchesne ii, 280, Paris, 1892; J. M. Watterieh, Romanorum pm.. vitae i. 887. 887‑888, Leipsic, 1882; J. Langan, Oeachichte I
der rbmischen Kirche, iii. 389‑380, Bonn, 1892; F. Grego‑
rovius, Hiat. of the City of Rome, iii. 398‑408, London, 1895; Bower, Popes, ii. 328‑329.
John %VL: Pope 997‑998. A Greek of low extraction from Roseano in Calabria, he was made abbot of Nonantula by the favor of the Empress
I	Theophanu, who, as regent after Otto IL's death,
	procured his elevation to the bishopric of Piacenza.
	When John Crescentius expelled Gregory V. from
	Rome, he assumed the papacy; but Otto III. re
	stored Gregory, and John was captured in March,
	998, deposed, mutilated, and imprisoned in a Roman
	monastery, where he lived apparently until April
	2, 1013. 	(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: JaffB, Rcpeata, i. 495‑496; J. M, Watterich, Romanorum pontificum vitae, i. 88, 889 eqq., Leipsic, 1882; J, Langan, Oeschichte der rtimiachen Kirche, iii. 38b‑387, Bonn, 1892; F. Gregorovius, Hint. of the City of Rome, iii. 422‑427, London, 1895; Bower, Popes, ii. 330; B. Plating, Lives of the Popes, i. 283‑284, London, n.d.
	John %VII.: Pope 1003.	He was a Roman
named Sicco, who was elected June 13 by the will
of Crescentius, and died Dec. ?. The only thing
known of him is that he was married before his
elevation. 	(H. BOEHMER.)
B113LIOGRAPHY: Li(xr pontiJicaiis, ad. Duchesne, ii. 265, Paris, 1892; Jaff4, Repasts, i. 501; Bower, Popes, ii. 333; B. Plating, Liven of the Popes, i. 285.
John %VIIL: Pope 1003‑09. He was another creature of Creacentius, named Fasanus or Phasianus, son of a Roman presbyter Leo. That he was not lacking in energy is shown by his vigorous proceedings against the bishops of Sens and Orleans, who had required Abbot Gauzlin of Fleury to burn the papal privileges of exemption; and he seems to have had some success against his Byzantine opponents. He died in June, 1009.
(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liter Pontiltcalia, ed. Duohesne, ii. 288,
Paris, 1892; Jaff6, Repeeta, i. 501‑503; J. M. Watterieh,
Romanonam pond ficum vitae, i 89. 899‑700. Leipsic, 1882;
Mary Bateeon, in Hiatordcal Review, 1895, pp. 728‑729;
F. Gregorovius, Hint. of do City of Rome, iv. 7‑10, London,
1898; Bower. Popes, 1334; B. Plating, Lives of the Popes,
i. 288, London, n.d.
John %I%.: Pope 1024‑32. He was the brother of Benedict VIII., Romanus by name, and was elected by the Tuaculan party between April 12 and May 10. The eastern Emperor Basil II. requested him to acknowledge the patriarch Eustathins of Constantinople as " ecumenical bishop," or practically as an eastern pope. John was disposed to accede, but the monastic reformers raised such a storm of protest that the negotiations were broken off. After crowning Conrad II. (Mar. 26, 1027), John was completely under his power, and his decrees were treated with dontempt by the emperor in Germany. In France, however, his authority seems to have been respected, and King Canute of England paid him a visit in 1027. Apparently without much protest, he conducted a simoniacal traffic; the only objection raised by Canute to the demand of mosey for conferring the pallium was to the largeness of the amount. He seems to have died Nov. 8, 1032.
(H. BOEHMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: JaffE, Repeats, i. 514‑519;‑ J. M. Watterieh,
Romaiwrram pontifieam vitae, i. 70. 708‑711 Leipaie 1882;
J. Lsngen, (isschiehte der riimiachen Kirehe, iii. 418‑i.'.8,

1101	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	John 3=‑8IM
Bonn, 1892: F. GregorovIu0. Hint. of the City of Rome, iv. 31,39, London, 1898; Bower, Popes, ii. 33739; B. Plating, Lives q/ the Popes, i. 289‑270. London, n.d.; Hauck. RD, iii. 496, Sbb‑bb8, 559, 561.
John %%I. (Pedro Juliani): Pope 1276‑77. A native of Lisbon, he became cardinal‑bishop of Tusculum in 1273, and was elected pope at Viterbo Sept. lb or 16, 1276, taking the title of John XXL, though he was in reality the twentieth pope of thin name. He was a man of great learning, though apparently of equal eccentricity; since the fourteenth century it has been usually believed that he was identical with "Petrus Hispanus," the author of a number of medical works and a popular compendium of logic. His pontificate was without influence on the development of the church. He was injured by the fall of a ceiling in the papal palace at Viterbo, and died May 20, 1277. (A. Hsi7cs.)
Brarxooawrav: J. Giurand and E. (:adier, Les Repistru de Qrepoin %. et Jean %%1., Paris, 1898; R. 8tapfer, Papat Johannes %%1., MVneter, 1898: Bower, Popes, iii. 2b‑28; F. Greeoroviu0. Hiet. o,/ the City of Rome, v. 47b‑X177, London, 1897; B. Plating, Lieu of the Pope#, ii. 108‑108, ib. n.d.: Milman, Latin Christianity, vi. 134‑13b.
John %%II. (Jacques Dueza): Pope 1316‑34. He was born at Cahors, France, about 1244, became bishop of Avignon in 1310 and cardinal bishop of Porto in 1312, and was elected pope at Lyons, after an interregnum of more than two years, on Aug. 7, 1316, taking up his residence at Avignon. The main object of his policy was to get rid of the remains of imperial power in Italy, in the interests of the papacy. He took advantage of the contested election to the empire in 1314 to declare on Mar. 31, 1317, that upon a vacancy in the imperial office its jttrisdictio, regimen, et disPoaitio passed to the pope; and on this ground he forbade the imperial vicars and other officials named by Henry VII. to retain their offices, himself appointing Robert of Naples, as his predecessor had done, imperial vicar for Italy. He maintained s more or leas neutral position between the rival claimants in Germany. The case was altered when Louis the Bavarian's victory over his competitor at the battle of Milhldorf (Sept. 18, 1322) made it possible for him to take hold of Italian affairs, and his nomination of Berthold of Neiffen as imperial vicar showed that he was disposed to do so. In a public conaistory (Oct. 8, 1323) he brought charges against Louis (the so‑called " first process "), his action being based on the claim first made by Gregory VII. and renewed by Innocent III. that to the pope belonged the right of examining and approving or rejecting the candidate elected to the imperial throne. Louis was accused of disregarding papal rights by taking the title of emperor without confirmation and assuming to administer the empire before he had received it, as well as of favoring and protecting the Visconti, who had been condemned for heresy. He was summoned, on pain of excommunication, to lay down the reins of government and annul his previous acts, and his subjects were released from their allegiance. ~ John probably did not expect Louis to yield obedience; what he hoped to gain was a renewal of the conflict in Germany. After a momentary hesitation (second process, Jan. 7, 1324), the sentence of excom‑
munication was pronounced against Louis Mar. 23, and a like penalty threatened against all who should continue tp render obedience to him (third process). On July 11 he was declared deprived of all rights supposed to follow from his election, and once more summoned to answer at the bar of Rome before Oct. 1, while his adherents were excommunicated (fourth process).
In reply to the first process, Louis had made a declaration which asserted the validity of an election independent of papal confirmation, raised the charge of heresy against John himself, and appealed to a general council. This declaration appears not to have been published; but on May 22, 1324, he came out publicly with a renewed appeal to a council. The attempt to set up a rival emperor failed, and the menace of excommunication and interdict had but little effect in Germany. Early in 1327 Louis came down to Italy with unexpected success, had himself crowned in Rome (Jan. 17, 1328) by four syndics elected by the people, and brought about the election (May 12) of an antipope, known as Nicholas V. John met these proceedings by declaring that Louis had forfeited all fiefs which he held from either Church or empire, especially the duchy of Bavaria (fifth process, Apr. 3, 1327); by condemning him as a heretic (Oct. 23); by proclaiming a crusader's indulgence for all who should bear arms against him for a year (Jan. 21, 1328); and by ordering a new election to the empire later in the spring. Louis was not strong enough to keep the control of Italy, and was obliged to leave it in the winter of 1329‑30, after which his antipope made his submission. In a sermon on All Saints' Day, 1331, the pope declared that the beatific vision of God was not granted to the saints until after the resurrection. Doubts had already been expressed as to his orthodoxy, and this statement gave fresh offense, all the more that the Italian cardinals were unfriendly to the Gascon pope. Taking advantage of this situation Louie, in concert with Cardinal Napoleons Orsini, addressed a formal request to the sacred college in 1334 for the summoning of a general council; but before any result could follow this new attack, John died on December 3 of that year.
John is described as a small, thin, ugly, bald, headed man. He was incessantly busy without accomplishing anything worth while. Germany I was injured, Italy distracted, and the Church sad papacy lowered in the general esteem by his pontificate, which earned a bad name also by the financial methods developed by him. He needed money to enrich his relatives, and he delighted in amassing it for its own sake. Giovanni Villani estimated his fortune to be 25,000,000 florins (over X6,000; 000); but about 800,000 florins is probably much nearer the mark. As a means of money‑gett10g he made wide use of reservations (see R&gERVATIONg, PAPAL). Immediately after his election he reserved all benefices whose previous holders had
I received another position from the pope, and a year later, by declaring that no one might hold
~	more than two benefices, he created a large number of other vacancies, which he likewise reserved to himself. In 1322 he reserved all the benefices

John gaIII
John the Apostle	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	202
in the patriarchate of Aquileia and the archbishoprics of Ravenna, Milan, and Genoa. The same purpose was served by the foundation of a large number of new dioceses by division of the older ones. For John's relation to the Franciscans, see FRANCIS, SAINT, of Assisi, III., §§ 5‑7; for his activity in the field of canon law, see CANON LAW, IL, 6, § 3. See also BEGHARDa, BEGUINEB, § s. (A. HAUCg.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The weightiest documents of John's reign are published in the Annalea ecclesiastic! of O. Raynaldus ed. A. Themer, vol. xxiv., Bar Is Due, 1872; in AMA, xv. 2, 81 eqq, xvi. 2, 158 eqq., xvii. 1, 159 eqq., 1880‑88; in Vat%kaniache Studien, Innsbruck, 1890; w. H. Bliss, Calendar , . Papal Letters, ii. 123 aqq., in Rolls Series, London 1$95; the bull Licel juxta doclrinam is quoted in Mirbt, Quellen, pp, 152153; important also are LetErea du page Joan XXIL, 1318‑31,, relatives d la France, Athens, 1900 eqq. The earlier lives are collected in S. Baluze, Vitae paparum Avenionenaium, i. 113 aqq., Paris, 1893, and in G. Villani, Cronica, books ix.‑xi., Florence, 1823. Consult: Pastor, Popes, i. b8‑83; C, Mailer, Der KampJ Luduripa . , mit der rsmiachen Kurie, Vol. i., TObingen, 1879; S. Riezler, Geachichte Baierna, ii. 348 aqq., Goths, 1880; W. Felten, Die Belle Ne grretereat, 2 vole., Treves, 1885‑87; B. Jungmann Diaeertationea selectae, vi. 158 eqq.. Regensburg, 1886; M. Faueon La Librairie des yapea d'Avipnon, 2 vole., Paris, 1888‑87; Reptslae canaeRariae apoatolicae, Innsbruck, 1888 L. Konig, Die pHpatliche Kammer enter . . . Johann XX11., Vienna, 1894; Neander, Christian Church, iv. 358 et passim; Hefele, ConctlienpeachichEe vi. 575 aqq : Bower. Popes, iii. 73‑78: B. Plating, Lives of the Popes, ii. 140‑147, London, n.d.; Milman, Latin Christianity, vu. 18‑120.
John %%III. (Baltasare Cossa): Pope 1410‑15. He came of a noble Neapolitan family. At first
I. The Man.
His Position Among the Apostles (¢ 1).
His Family ($ 2).
His Character (¢ 3).
II. The Writings Attributed to John.
1. The Apocalypse.
I. The Man: The picture which the name of John calls up in the mind of every educated Christian is a reflection of the traits apparent in the writings transmitted under his name; but whether he was the author of those writings has been for a hundred years a question to which diverse answers have been given, many denying his authorship absolutely, while others regard it as uncertain. The attempt must be made to arrive at the historical position of the apostle from these writings and from the traditions as to his later life which are so closely connected with them.
In nearly all the lists of the apostles, after the names of Peter and Andrew come those of James and John, the sons of Zebedee. That in Acts i. 13
John comes before James, and both r. His before Andrew may be explained by
Position the fact that in this book John was to
Among the be frequently named as a prominent Apostles. man in the apostolic circle, while James appears only once, in the mention of his martyrdom (xii. 2). On the other hand, it may be concluded from the almost constant precedence given to James in the Gospels that he was the elder brother, for the greater historical importance of John was well known by the time the Gospels were
he took up the profession of arms, but later he
studied at the University of Bologna and became
cardinal in 1402 and legate of Bologna in 1403.
In this position he rendered distinguished services
for the restitution and protection of the Papal States
(q.v.) and for the increase of the papal finances.
He fell out with Gregory XII. and became the
leading spirit of the Council of Pisa (q.v.); the
newly elected pope, Alexander V., was only an in
strument in his hands. After the death of Alex
ander, John himself was elected pope May 17, 1410.
He carried on a successful war against Ladislaus of
Naples (battle of Roccasicca, Apr. 29, 1411), but
was forced to flee and throw himself into the arms
of the Roman King Siegmund. By his ignominious
flight from the Council of Constance (Mar. 20 to
21, 1415), John incurred the hatred of the whole
assembly. On May 29, 1415, the council deposed
him and delivered him into the hands of Count
Palatine Louis of Bavaria. He was then impris
oned in Radolfszell, Gottlieben, Heidelberg, and
Mannheim till 1418, when he was released by Martin
V. and made cardinal bishop of Tusculum. He died
Dec. 22. 1419. 	(B. BESS.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pastor, Popes, i. 191‑199; Creighton, Papacy, i. 287‑344; C. Hunger, Zur Geachichte Papal Johannea XXIIL, Bonn, 1876; J. Schwerdfeger, Papal Johann XXIII. and die Wahl Siegmunda, 1/,i0, Vienna, 1895; H. Blumenthal, in ZKG, xxi. 1900; Neander, Christian Church v. 90 aqq.; Bower, Popes, iii. 171‑201; E. J Kitts, In the Days of the Councils‑ a Sketch of the Life and Times of Baldassare Coaaa, Edinburgh, 1909.
JOHN THE APOSTLE.
Preliminary Considerations (¢ 1). External Testimony (¢ 2). John the Presbyter (¢ 3). The Date of Composition (¢ 4).
2.	The Epistles.
	T John (§ 1).
	II and III John (¢ 2).
3.	The Gospel.
Its Character (¢ 1).
Internal Testimony to Authorship (¢ 2).
Objections to Johannine Authorship (¢ 3).
John's Residence at Ephesus (¢ 4).
Conclusion (¢ 5).
written. According to an old and wide‑spread tradition, John was the youngest of all the apostles. If this is accepted, it adds to the probability of the assertion that he died a very old man after the accession of Trajan, 98 A.D.
The father of James and John pursued with them and with several hired men (Mark i. 20) the trade
of a fisherman at Capernhum. More a. His is known of the mother; she secom‑
Family. panied Christ on his last journey to
Jerusalem, and by her request for places of honor in the Messianic kingdom for her sons showed not only her own ambition but her firm belief in the coming of that kingdom; she was seen again at the cross and appears as one of the women who had helped to support the Savior in Galilee and on this last journey, and cared for the proper burial of his body after the crucifixion. Her name, Salome, is preserved by Mark (xv. 40 xvi. 1; cf. Matt. xxvii. 56). The comparison of John xix. 25 with this last passage and Mark xv. 40 leads to a tempting hypothesis that she was the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would tend to explain more than one traditional statement about the boldness of her demand for her sons. Their call, as well as that of Peter and Andrew, is

908	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Sohn %X
		John the Apostle
placed by the Evangelists among the first acts of
the ministry of Jesus in Galilee after the imprison
ment of John the Baptist, whose disciples they had
	apparently been, therefore being fully acquainted
with the personality and teaching of Jesus.
	With Peter the two brothers formed the inner
circle of his associates, whom he took with him to
the house of Jairus, to the mount of the transfig
uration, and to Gethsemane. A comparison of
Mark x. 35 with Matt. xx. 20 shows that they
	shared their mother's ambitions for
3. His	their future; though it must not be
	Character. forgotten that in reply to the search
	ing question of Jesus, they declared
	their readiness to go through all the trials and suf
	ferings which must precede his glorification. It is
	they, with Peter, who come to the mind in reading
of strife as to precedence among the apostles (Matt.
	xviii. 1; Mark ix. 33; Luke xxii. 24). In connec
	tion with one of the admonitions of Jesus on these
	occasions occurs the account of John's complaint
	of the man who worked wonders in his name with
	out being his avowed disciple (Luke ix. 49). It
was not their own honor, however, that they wished
	to see avenged by a divine judgment upon the
	Samaritan village in the following passage (ib.
	verses 51‑56). It can scarcely be doubted that it
	was such expressions of an unchastened spirit that
	caused Christ to give them the name of Boanerges
	(Mark iii. 17). That both the brothers afterward
	learned to master their impetuous wrath and their
	jealous ambition is amply attested. A story of
	James preserved by Eusebius (Hist. eccl., IL, ix.
	2, 3) gives a touching evidence of it; and the whole
	history of John speaks for it, though his natural
	disposition appears not extirpated but purified and
	regulated in the words and actions of his old age.
	It moat have been his natural gifts and fiery zeal
	which procured for him, even in the lifetime of his
	elder brother, so commanding a position among the
	apostles and in the church of Palestine (Acts iii.
	I‑11, iv. 13, 19, viii. 14). In Acts xv., indeed, he
	does not appear so prominently as Peter and James
	in the discussions of the council at Jerusalem; but
	Paul names him with them as a pillar of the Church
	(Gal. ii. 9). Paul refutes the assertions of his Gala
	tian opponents by facts which he could not have
	invented and would not have adduced if they were
	not demonstrable; all that those assertions prove
	is that John, like Peter and James, continued to
	live, with the churches immediately subject to their
	guidance in Palestine, according to the forma of the
	Jewish law, while they solemnly declared them
	selves satisfied with the missionary vocation of
	Paul and the independence of his non‑Jewish con
	verts. The position of John in regard to these
	burning questions of the middle of the first century
	is the last historical notice of him in the New Tes
	tament, outside of the Johannine writings them
selves.
	II. The Writings Attributed to John: The works
	to be discussed under this heading are five books
	of the New Testament, viz., the Fourth Gospel,
	three Epistles, and the Book of Revelation or
Apocalypse.
	1. The Apocalypse: This comes first in order
because it is the only one which bears John's name upon its face. If the author of such a pastoral
letter to the seven churches of Asia
1. Prelim‑ did not think it necessary to identify inary Con‑ himself any further than by the bare siderationa. mention of his name and his designa‑
tion as a servant of God, it follows that his personality must have been well known to all these churches, somewhat widely scattered throughout Asia Minor, and that at the time of its composition there was no other John in those parts with whom he could be confused. It follows, again, from the addresses to the individual churches that the writer was as well acquainted with the circumstances of these churches as the churches were with him. A third fact to be borne in mind is that the book was not only destined originally to be read in their gatherings, but that in these very churches it was actually received from the beginning of the second century as a divine revelation.
Papias, bishop of Hierapolis near Laodicea, attests its credibility about 125; Justin includes in his "Dialogue with Trypho" (written about 155 A.D.)
a report of a discussion held at Ephesus 2. External to prove that the gift of prophecy had Testimony, passed over from the synagogue to the
Church; the " presbyters in Asia," whom Irenaeus reveres as disciples of John, taught by his own lips, occupied themselves with a discussion of the number of the beast (Rev. xiii. 18); the " Acts of John," composed in the same province hardly later than 160‑170 by one " Leucius " of the school of Valentines, attributes the order of the seven churches to the successive migrations of the apostle. About the same time the Alegi (q.v.), who, in their opposition to Montaniam, wished to see all prophecy, and thus the Apocalypse with the other Johannine writings, banished from the Church, could press this demand only by the assertion that the heretic Cerinthus, John's contemporary at Ephesus, had foisted the Apocalypse on the Church under John's name. Baur and his school held to Johannine authorship, and, in fact, considered the Apocalypse the only authentic work of the apostle.
Those who could not accept the book as written by the brother of James, and yet shrank from the
pseudonymous theory, at leant in the
8. John the startling form in which it was held by
Presbyter. the Alegi and Caius of Rome, cast
about to find another John who would serve the purpose. Thus Dionysius of Alexandria (c. 260) attempted to support the possibility of there having been such a man, at the time and place, by the fact of the existence of a twofold tradition as to the burial‑place of John at. Ephesus. Eusebiua followed him, and discovered the other John in the prologue of Papias (Hist. eccl., III., xmrix. 5, 6), calling him " John the Presbyter." This view has been taken by Lucks, Bleek, Ewald, and others in modern times; and recently a strong tendency has shown itself to make this " John the Presbyter" responsible for all that bears the name of John (Meyer‑Bousaet Harnack). Even John Mark, who was set aside by Dionysius as out of the question, has been taken up by Hitzig as the author of the whole Apocalypse, and by Spitta as the

John the Apostle	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	204
author of what he considers the original nucleus (i. 4‑vii. 17, xxii. 8‑21).
Space forbids going into the long history of the hypotheses which have been set forth as to the growth of the book, which is frequently held to
have been a lengthy process. The fol4. The Date lowing conclusions, however, seem safe.
of Com‑ The assertion of Irenaeus (Haer., V.,
position. xxx, 3) that the visions were seen and
the book written toward the end of the reign of Domitian, or about 95, finds support in the numerous historical data of the opening chapters. The designed and immediately accomplished introduction of the book into public liturgical use precludes the possibility of any notable alterations in it between 100 and 150. The author, as his name and idiom show, is of Hebrew birth, and about 95 had a recognized position of authority over the church of the province, without having any contemporary rival of the same name. He is the only John of Ephesus of whom anything is known from a tradition reaching back into his lifetime and in decisive points independent of his own writings. That be does not call himself an apostle is no proof that he was not one; his apostleship had no immediate connection with his apocalyptic purpose, and he does not describe himself at all.
2. The Epistles; Of the Epistles, the first, which Papias cites and Polycarp obviously imitates, is not in form a letter. Not only is the introduction
(i. 1‑4) unlike the ordinary beginning 1. I John. of a letter, but it lacks at its close, too,
what would be expected. There is almost no allusion to any local conditions of the readers. From v. 21 it may be inferred that the readers lived amid pagan surroundings; the repeated " I write unto you " shows that it was not a homily delivered before an assembled community, but rather a treatise addressed from a distance to a number of local churches of non‑Jewish origin. The tone is that of an aged man who enjoyed high consideration as a teacher, and who spoke not only in his own name but in that of others who have likewise seen and heard Christ on earth, and stood as witnesses to a great fact. (i. 1 eqq., iv. 14). A personal follower of Christ (named John, according to all tradition except that of the Alogi), who, with his colleagues of similar qualifications, had been occupied in other fields, in his old age addressed himself to some communities of Gentile converts as a teacher possessing great authority, presumably superior to that of others laboring among them. History knows of no one who fulfils all these conditions except the John who at the end of the first century ruled the Church of Asia Minor from Ephesus. That the writer was an apostle, as in the second century not only his disciples but (in their way) his opponents admitted, is rendered extremely probable by the strong expressions of the opening verses.
The second and third Epistles are intimately connected with the first by their language and line of thought, by the combating of the same errors (I John ii. 18‑26, iv. 1‑3, v. 5‑12; II John 7‑11), and by the position of the writer, which stands out even more clearly from them than it does from the
first Epistle and the Apocalypse. That this position was not unquestioned appears from I John iv. 6; and in II John 8‑11 the author
2. II sad charges the churches to have nothing
	III John.	to do with those who refused to re
		ceive his teaching. From III John 9,
10 it appears that a leader of the Church has not
only employed " malicious words " against John
but has renounced communion with John's asso
ciates and attempted to cut off those who received
them. Asserting his authority, John writes not
to the insubordinate Diotrephes, but to one Gains
who is in close relation with himself, sending a
letter at the same time to the whole Church of the
region‑for there should be no doubt that the refer
ence in III John 7 is to II John. In II John 12
and III John 13, 14, the intention is expressed of
coming to call Diotrephea to account. John's con
fidence in his own position is noteworthy, especially
in connection with the question why and in what
sense he designates himself (II John 1; III John
1) as " the elder." Since in the province there
were certainly far more than the seven churches
of Rev. i., each with its own local presbyter, be
could hardly, writing to another church (II John
13) as one of the elders of his own community, have
called himself simply " the elder," even if (as
III John and Rev. i.‑iii. seem to show) the monar
chical episcopate had already developed in that
region. It is more probably a title of honor, not
chosen by himself but open to him to use after it
had become customary in the churches to call him
by it in the sense of the venerable teacher of the
whole region, the father who calls all the Christians
in it his children. That there was such a vener
able old man in Asia Minor at that time, who
would be designated with quite sufficient clearness
by the title " the elder," and that his name was
John, is known from Papias, who was a disciple of
his (Euaebius, Hiat. eccl., III., xxxix. 15), and so
return is made to John of Ephesus as the assumed
or actual author of the two short letters. That
elsewhere, in places where this designation was not
familiar, doubts were raised as to the identity of
authorship with I John precisely on the ground of
this peculiar designation, can be readily understood,
se also that after the discovery of a " John the
Presbyter " these epistles were ascribed to him, as
by Jerome (De vir, ill., ix., xviii.) after the sug
gestion of Eusebius (Hiat. eccl., III., xxv. 3).
S. The Gospel; This resembles the works already discussed in being directed not to a general public but to a definite circle of read‑
1, its era, whom the author twice addresses Character. (six. 35, xx. 31) as a preacher might his hearers. By this fact and by tradition the view is supported that the author of the Apocalypse and the Epistles is here addressing the same churches; and it is confirmed by the undeniable likeness of both language and religious views, to say nothing of the obvious fact that the Gospel is destined for readers unfamiliar with the speech and customs of the Jews. In i. 14, 16, as well as in xix. 35, he reckons himself, precisely as in the Epistles, among the eye‑witnesses of the facts which he relates.

206 ,	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	John the Apostle
Note must be taken, however, of the theory of Weizsacker, that the book is a product of the school of John the apostle, written in g, Internal the spirit and the name of the master, Testimony and that of Renan (from the thirteenth to An‑ edition of his Vie de JEsus on; folthorehip. lowed, though a little leas definitely, by Harnack) that "John the Presbyter," a disciple of the apostle and depending on his narrative, wrote it. If it be noticed that throughout the whole Gospel the two apostles who with Peter stood next to Jesus are never once named, it appears that this is too constant an attitude to be fortuitous, and that it can be explained only by the author's feeling that it was unfitting to introduce into the sacred history his own and his parents' names. The " disciple whom Jesus loved " of the last supper (xiii. 21‑25) must have been an apostle, and one of the inner circle even among the apostles. That he was the author of the book is expressly stated in the supplementary chapter xxi. The solemn close of chapter xx., looking back I upon a completed work, shows that this was not written at the same time with the rest; but the fact that neither in the Fathers nor in the oldest versions and the extant Greek manuscripts is there any trace of an existence of the book without this chapter shows that it must have been added before the Gospel had been widely circulated, or soon after the composition of the first twenty chapters. Whoever, then, wrote xxi. 24 testified in the apostle's lifetime that he was the author of the book; and the internal evidence for its authenticity is supported by a unanimous tradition which apparently can be traced up to his very friends and disciples. If the relation between the writer and the first readers was as close as it appears to have been, there is no room for deliberate deceit on the part of the former or for unconscious error of the latter. Those who have upheld the opposite theory have depended far too little on positive study of the text and positive information to assert that the book was written by Cerinthus, or by a second‑century Gentile Christian with Gnostic tendencies, or by a Jewish Christian who had never been outside of Syria, or by a disciple or disciples of John at Ephesus, or by a " Presbyter John."
The upholders of these various views have agreed only in the negative judgment that an immediate disciple of Christ can not have written the book,
for the reason that its contents are S. Objec‑ incredible on historical, psychological,
bone to or philosophico‑dogmatic grounds. Of Johannine these grounds the following brief
Author‑ sketch will suffice: (1) On account of ship‑ the great difference in language and
manner of thought it seems impossible, they say, that the same man (even at different periods of his life) could have written the Gospel and the letters on one side and the Apocalypse on the other. (2) If the synoptic Gospels are older than the fourth, as both tradition and criticism show, and are a trustworthy reproduction of the general tradition of the years 60‑100, then the incompatibility of their narrative with John's in the whole plan of the story and in certain important
details (for example the chronology of the Passion) will render impossible a belief in the composition of the Fourth Gospel by an eye‑witness. (3) Still more, the picture given in it of the person of Jesus, his relation to his disciples, and the tone of his reputed speeches differ fundamentally from these given by the synoptics; and this difference leads to the belief that the Fourth Gospel was written by a man of the second or third generation, under the influence of speculative and churchly ideas. (4) One of these ideas is the doctrine of the Logos, which comes from Phi1o or the Alexandrian philosophy and can not have been known by the Galilean fisherman. (5) The way in which the writer introduces himself with apparent unconsciousness, at the same time putting himself forward as the favorite disciple, is morally more conceivable in a later writer who more or less assumed the character of the apostle than in the latter himself. (6) Evidences of ignorance of the historical and geographical conditions of Palestine in the time of Christ are adduced, though leas confidently in modern times than was formerly the ease. (7) The tradition as to the residence of the apostle John at Ephesus is partly uncertain, because depending on the testimony of writings bearing his name; partly equivocal in that the apostolic character of the John who lived there between 70 and 100 is not clearly shown; and partly unfavorable to the composition of the Fourth Gospel by this John, of whom words and acts are reported (e.g., in conneotion with the Quartodeciman controversy) which do not harmonize with the thought of the evangelist. While a discussion of the first six points is impossible here, the last moat be dealt with at some length, because it relates to the last period of the apostle's life and because the whole historical foundation for his literary activity is involved in it.
Even if the Apocalypse is pseudonymous, which few nowadays maintain, it still teaches that at the date of its composition (about 95 A.D.) there was a well‑known and revered Christian of
4. John's Jewish birth named John, whose per‑
8esidenne manent home was on the mainland
		at	and his enforced habitation at that
	Ephesus‑ tie the island of Patmos. As far as
			tradition speaks clearly, it constantly
designates him as an apostle, whether it mentions
him as the author of the Johannine writings, or as
a teacher in the province of Asia, or as an author
ity for the ecclesiastical usages prevalent there.
There has been much discussion of the passage in
Eusebius where he cites Papias, and apparently in
part at least misunderstands him. Without dis
cussing this at length, it is safe to say that the
" Presbyter John " is a product of the critical and
exegetical weakness of Euaebius; and the cjueatipu
becomes merely who was the John who (according
to the testimony of the Apocalypse and of his dis
ciples Polycarp, Papias, and the other " presby
ters " mentioned by Irenaeus) lived at Ephesus in
the closing years of the first century, exercised a
predominant influence on the Church of the prov
ince, died attar the accession of Trajan or about
100, and (by the testimony of Polycrates, bishop

John the Apostle John the Baptist
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
• 208
of Ephesus, who was baptized about 125‑130) was buried there. All clearly intelligible tradition says that he was the son of Zebedee chosen by Christ as an apostle. There is not a counter‑statement to be found in the first eight centuries; an apparent assertion of Papias that the apostle John was put to death by the Jews in Palestine is seen when investigated to refer to John the Baptist.
	It is safe, then, to say that the apostle John,
with other disciples of Christ, came from Palestine
to Asia Minor. If Polycarp, on the day of his death
		(Feb. 23, 155), was looking back on
	6. Qon‑	eighty‑six years of life as a Christian,
	oluaion. not as a man, and was thus baptized
		in 69, and if his conversion (according
to Iren>3eus, Haer., Ill., iii. 4) was the work of an
apostle, this migration to Asia Minor must have
occurred before that date, possibly as a result of
the outbreak of the Jewish war. John, then per
haps not more than sixty or sixty‑five, would thus
have been able to devote some thirty years to the
fostering of Christian life in the province. His
image as a priest in pontifical garments long lived
in the memory of the Christians of Ephesus (Euae
bius, Hist. acct., V., xxiv. 3). The whilom "Son
of Thunder " was not in his old age a subtle phil
osophical disputant nor the soft‑hearted preacher
of a weak tolerance, but stands out a sharply de
fined character, his own position firmly taken and
earnestly pressing others to decide between light
and darkness, Christ and Antichrist. The John of
the years between 27 and 52 pictured in the older
New‑Testament writings, stands out less clearly in
the Apocalypse, in which his task was merely to
reproduce what had been given him, than in the
Epistles, in which he exercised his office as teacher
and head of the Church of Asia Minor with unex
hausted power. He is recognized again in the story
left by his disciple Polycarp (Iren>eus, Haer., Ill.,
iii. 4) of his encounter with the heretic Cerinthus
in the public bath at Ephesus, and in the account
(Eusebius, Hist. ecd., V., xxiv. 3, 16) of his cele
bration of the Christian Passover in the form bor
rowed from the old covenant and familiar to him
in Palestine. 	(T. ZAHN.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Various phases of the subject are discussed in the treatises on the Church history of the period, e.g. Schaff, Christian Church, i. 408‑431; in works on the theology of the Bible and the N. T. (so particularly Beyechlag): and in works on introduction to the Bible and the N. T. Some of the moat elaborate introductions are prefixed to the commentaries, e.g., to Westcott's treatment in the Bible Commentary.
On the life of St. John consult, besides Schaff, ut sup., and McGiffert, as below: F. Trench, The Life and Character of St. John, London, 1850; M. Krenkel, Dar ApoateZ Johannes, Leipsic, 1871; J. M. Macdonald, The Life and Writings of St. John, New York, 1880; P. J. Gloag, Life of St. John, London, 1892.
General commentaries on the Johannine writings are H. Ewald, Die yohanniaehen Schriften, 2 vole., GSttingen, 1881: J. T. Harris, The Writings of the Apostle John, 2 vols., Lon3on, 1889; H. J. Holtamann, Evangelium, Briefs, and 08snbarung des Johannes, Tilbingen, 1908. An excellent review of recent Johanneaa literature is furnished in the Thandogiache Rundachau, Sept.‑Oct., 1908, Apr.‑May, 1907 (all of these very valuable to the close student).
Questions of introduction to the Apocalypse are discussed in: F. Liicke, Ein7,eiCung in die O,fl'enbarung Johannea, Bonn, 1852; H. Gebhardt, Der Lehrbepriff der Apokalypae and aem Verhliltniae sum Lehrbeprijf des Evangeliuma and der Epiatel des Johannes, Goths, 1873, Eng.
tranal., Edinburgh, 1878; D. V51ter, Die Entatehunp der Apokalypae, Freiburg, 1885; idem, Daa Problem der Apokalypae, ib. 1893; E. Vieeher, Offenbarung Johannia, in TU, ii. 3 (1888); H. Sch6n, L'Origine de L'Apocalypae, Paris, 1887; P. Schmidt, Ueber die Composition der Ojjenbarunp, Freiburg, 1891; W. Bousaet, Der Antichrist in der Ueberlieferung des Judentuma, des N. T., and der alter Kirche, GSttingen, 1895; H. Gunkel, Schi;pfung urd Chaos in Urzeit and Endzeit, ib. 1895; J. Wellhausen, Analyse der OJTenbarunp Johannis, Berlin, 1907.
The exegetical literature on the Johannine writings is exceedingly voluminous; the following is a selection of that on the Apocalypse: H. B. Swete, London, 1909 (beat); A. Ewald, Leipsic, 1828; M. Stuart, 2 vole., Andover, 1845; E. W. Rengatenberg, 2 vols.. Leipsic, 1881‑62, Eng. tranal., Edinburgh, 1851‑b2; J. H. A. Ebrard, KSnigeberg, 1853; F. Bleak, Berlin, 1862, Eng. trans]. London, 1875; E. B. Elliott, 4 vole., ib. 1882; G. Volkmar, Zurich, 1882; H. Kienlen, Paris, 1870; E. Reran, L'Antechriat, Paris, 1873, Eng. tranal., London, 1897; T. Kliefoth, Leipsic, 1874; F. Diisterdieck, GSttingen, 1877; W. Lee, in Bible Commentary. London, 1881; C. J. Vaughan, ib. 1882; J. T. Beck, Giitereloh, 1884; J. Walter, Freiburg, 1885; E. Viecher, Leipsic, 1888; A. Chauffard, 2 vols., Paris, 1888; G. Spitta, Halle, 1889; W. H. Simeox, in Cambridge Bible, Cambridge, 1890; D. Brown, London, 1891; B. Weirs, Leipsic, 1891; W. Milligan, London, 1892; W. Bousaet, GSttingen, 1895; J. M. Gibeon, Apocalyptic Sketches, London, 1901; E. Huntingford, ib. 1901; J. A. Petit, Paris, 1901; L. Pragen, 2 vole., Leipsic, 1901; A. Raymond, Laueanne,1903; J. B. Knappenberger, Syracuse, N. Y., 1908; J. J. L. Ruttow, Essays on the Apocalypse, London 1908; J. L. Scott, ib. 1909.
Commentaries on the Epistles are: B. F. Westcott, London, 1892; W. Auguati, Die katholiaehe» Briefs. 2 vole., Lemgo, 1801; J. W. Grashof, Essen, 1830; J. H. A. Ebrard, KSnigaberg, 1859, Eng, transl., Edinburgh, 1880; W. Alexander, in Bible Commentary, London, 1881; idem, in Expositor's Bible, ib. 1889; A. Plummer, ib. 1888; J. J. Lies, The First Epistle of St. John, ib. 1887; E. Dryander, The First Epistle of St. John, ib. 1899; J. E. Belser, Freiburg, 1908; R. Law, The Teats of Life. A Study of I John, Edinburgh, 1909; G. G. Findlay, London, 1909.
Critical discussions concerning the Gospel may be found in: F. C. Baur. Kritiache Unterauchungen i16er die kanoniachen Evanpetien, Tiibingen, 1847; A. Hilgenfeld, Die Evangelien narJs ihrer Entatehung. Leipsic, 1854; A. 8abatier, Esaai our lea sources de la vie de Jbsua, Paris, 1888; G. Volkmar, Der Uraprunp unaerer Evangelien, Zurich, 1888; G. Miiller, Die Entstehunp der vier Evangelien, Berlin, 1877: C. Tiaehendorf, Wann warden unaere Evanpelien verjaast f Leipsic, 1880; B. F. Westaott, Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, London, 1895; C. Weizeaaker, Unterauchunpen ilber die evangeliache Geachichte, ihre Quellen and den Gang ihrer Enturicklung, Tiibingen, 1901. Consult also the special discussions: B. Bauer, Kritik der evangeliachen Geachichte des Johannea,~Bremen, 1840; C. Wittichen, Dar peachichtliche Charakter des Evanpeliuma Johannes, Elberfeld, 1888; J. Orr, Authenticity of St. John's Gospel, London, 1870; C. E. l.uthardt, Der johann%achs Uraprung des 4. Evangeliuma, Leipsic, 1874, Eng. travel., Edinburgh, 1885; W. Beyachlag, Zur johanniachen Frage, Goths, 1878; W. Sanday, Authorship and Historical Character of the Fourth Gospel, London, 1876: idem, Criticism of the Fourth Gospel, ib. 1905; E. Abbot, Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, Boston, 1880; A. Thoma, Die Genesis des johanniachen Evangeliuma Berlin, 1882; F. Godet., Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, London, 1884; H. H. Evans, 3l. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel, ib. 1888; H. W. Watkins, Modern Criticism in its Relation to the Fourth Gospel, ib. 1890: P. J. Gloag, Introduction to the Johannine Writings, Edinburgh, 1891; G. W. Gilmore, The Johannean Problem, Philadelphia, 1895; A. C. MeGiffert, Hiat. of Christianity in the Apoatodic Age, pp. 606‑635, New York, 1897; J. Reville, Le QuaE. rib,„e Evanpile, Paris, 1900; H. T. Purehae. Johannine Problem, London, 1901; J. Grill, Die Entatehung des #. Evangeliuma, Tiibingen, 1902; W. Wrede, Charakter and Tendenz des Jahanniaevangeliuma, ib. 1903; J. Drummond, The Character and Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, London, 1904; H. L. Jackson, The Fourth Gospel and Some Recent German Criticism, New York, 1906; K. Meyer, Der Zeugniazmeck des Evanpeliaten Johannes, Giiteraloh, 1908; W. Richmond, The Gospel of the Rejection: a Study of the

20^I	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	John the Apostle
John the Baptist
Relation of the Fourth Gospel to the Three, London, 1908; E. F. Scott, The Fourth Gospel, its Purpose and Theology, Edinburgh, 1907; E. A. Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, London, 1905; idem, Johannine Grammar, ib. 1900; J. d'Alma, La Controverae du Quatri~me tvangi,Ze, Paris, 1907; H. P. Forbes, The Johannine Literature and the Ads of the Apostles, New York, 1907; J. A. Robinson, The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel, London, 1908; J. Wellhausen, Das EvanDelium Johannis, Berlin, 1908; F. W. Woraley, Edinburgh, 1909.
	Commentaries on the Gospel are: H. Klee, Mainz, 1829;
F. LOcke, 4 vole., Bonn, 1843; A. Maier, 2 vols., Freiburg,
1843‑45; A. Tholuck, Hamburg. 1857, Eng. transl.,
Edinburgh, 1870; S. J. AatiF, Geneva, 1864; E. W.
Hengstenberg, Berlin, 1867, Eng. transl.. Edinburgh, 1885;
E. H. Sears, Boston, 1874; C. E, huthardt, Nuremberg,
1875, Eng. transl., 3 vols., Edinburgh, 1876‑79; D. B.
von Haneburg, 2 vols., Munich, 1880; A. Plummer, in
Cambridge Bible, Cambridge, 1881; F. Godet, 3 vole.,
Paris, 1881‑85, Eng. transl., 2 vole„ New York, 1885;
B. F. Westcott, new ed., London, 1908; P. Schanz, Tii
bipgen, 1885; A. Hovey, Philadelphia, 1886; R. GovettLondon, 1887; O. Holtzmann, Darmstadt, 1887; G. F,

Wahle, Goths, 1888; T. Whitelaw, Glasgow, 1888; W. Bruce, London, 1891; M. Dods, 2 vole., London, 1890‑92; W. Milligan and W. F. Moulton, Edinburgh, 1898; J. C. Ceulemans, Molines, 1901; A. E. Hillard, London, 1901; E. W. Rice, New York, 1902; A. Loisy, Paris, 1903: A. Plummer, in Cambridge Greek Testament; J. E. Belser, Freiburg, 1905; W. Kelly, London, 1908; T. Zahn, Leipaic, 1908.
JOHN OF AVILA. See AVILA, JUAN DE.
JOHN THE BAPTIST: The forerunner of Christ. The date and place of his birth are uncertain, possibly at Hebron, six months before Christ (cf. Luke i. 36); d. c. 29 or 30 A.D. He was the son of the priest Zacharias and of his wife Elizabeth, of Aaronio descent, born in their old age. His birth was announced by an angel (Luke i.
Life and 13). The angelic injunction that he Preaching. should drink neither wine nor strong drink points to his taking the vows of a Nazarite. Luke i. 80 does not definitely indicate a priestly education, but his familiarity with the prophets, especially with Isaiah, must have had some basis in instruction. His early retirement into the desert of Judah may be connected with the death of his aged parents and also indicates a break with Pharisaic conceptions. His appearance was that of an ascetic: his clothing consisted of a garment of camel's hair bound by a leathern girdle; his food, locusts and wild honey (Matt. iii. 4; Mark i. 6); indeed, John shared with the Essenea and related spirits the ascetic tendency which had its basis in the earnestness of the time. The ideals of the independent tendency of his spirit were the prophets of Israel, Elijah, the man of aetionp, and Isaiah, the man of words. The central theme of his preaching was, in opposition to the righteousness of works repentance because of the near approach of the kingdom of God; but God's kingdom and God's judgment were in the eyes of this greatest of prophets, as well as in those of his predecessors, inseparably connected. In the coming judgment God's wrath will reveal itself; whoever intends to escape it must make mighty efforts (Matt. iii. 7, 8); the announcement of the kingdom and of the judgment involves the Baptist's Messianic
preaching. The Messianic salvation is for him so near that he considers himself the herald who precedes the appearance of the king. He was in reality the second Elijah, although in his humility he re‑
jected this claim. There is an important distinction between John's Messianic preaching of judgment (as compared with the earlier prophets) and the expectation of the people. According to the latter, the judgment spares the people of Israel; according to John, Israel is affected first by it. Here is that break with narrow nationalism which was developed more fully in Paul. The preaching by John of the kingdom, the judgment, and repentance created a sensation in the land. His fame extended far and wide and among all classes, publicans and soldiers, Pharisees and Sadducees (Matt. iii. 7, xi. 7); but these representatives of official and pious Judaism he greeted as a " generation of vipers " (Matt. iii. 7) of whom the first requirement was renewal of the heart. John represented himself, in accordance with Isa. xl. 3, as a " voice crying in the wilderness " (John i. 23).
In accordance with the words of Isa. i. 16, " Wash ye, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings," he introduced baptism as an action sym‑
bolic of his spoken word. He bapHis tized all who came receptively to hear Baptism, him at Bethabara, of the Jordan (Matt.
Teaching, iii. 6; Mark i. 5), connecting with the
and Death. rite a confession of sins, and the purpose was forgiveness of sins. John gathered his disciples from all sides, and, according to Luke xi. 1 and Mark ii. 18, taught a definite form of prayer, inducing them not only to adopt an ascetic mode of life, but also to engage in regular fasts. It was at Bethabara that the meeting of Jesus with John and his baptism took plate. Josephus mentions John the Baptist in connection with the war between Aretas, king of Petra, and Herod. The Jewish people, according to Josephus (Ant., XVIIL, v. 2), saw in the defeat of Herod a just divine punishment for having unjustly killed John " called the Baptist." Herod, he continues, killed him because of fear that his powerful influence upon the people might lead to rebellion. John was cast into the prison of Machaerus and then beheaded. Josephus describes John as an excellent man, who admonished the Jews to come to baptism, practising virtue and justice toward each other and piety toward God. To Josephus John was only a preacher of morale; the political historian could not do justice to John's religious and Messianic importance. The accounts of Josephus and of the Gospels, Matt. xiv.; Mark vi.i Lpke X11 Ed in
gard to the motive for the execution of John; Josephus considers it merely political, while the Gospels positively connect it with Herod's marriage with his sister‑in‑law contrary to Levitical law (Lev. xviii.16).
The time of the death of John can not be definitely decided. Herod's journey to Rome with the following marriage of Herodias must have taken place before the overthrow of Sejanus, 31 A.D. If
John appeared publicly in the fifteenth Chronology year of Tiberius and labored about six
and Sig‑ months, and if there followed an im‑
nificance prisonment of several months, his exe‑
ot John. cution may have occurred in the fall
of 29 or in 30. Jesus praised John for

~i~ indomitablt e a ~~hestMrank in these economy of

John ofBasel	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	BOB
John of Damascus
	the old covenant (Matt. xi. 11). But at the same
	time he did not fail to define his limitations in that
	the trend of his teaching was Pharisaical, concerned
	with the covenant of the law and with a legal jus
	tice that could not dispense with fasting (Mark ii.
	18 eqq.) and therefore did not lead further than to
	the baptism of water. Yet a large number of pas
	sages in the Gospels make clear John's importance
	in relation to the Messianic kingdom, the immediate
coming of which he was able to announce.
	(A. R1JE0(i.)
	BIBLIOGRAPHY: The subject is discussed with fulness in
	many of the works on the life of Chris‑this literature is
	often especially rich‑‑and in the works on the Apostolic
	age of Christianity. Special treatment is to be found in:
	R. Holmes, On the Prophecies and Testimony of John the
	Baptist, London, 1788; W. C. Duncan, The Life, Character,
	and Ads of John the Baptist, New York, 1853; E, Haupt,
	Johann" der Tltufar, Giitereloh, 1874; E. Breech, Johannes
	der Ttiufer, Leipeic,1881; A. M. Rymington, Voz clatnantia;
	Ly/e and Ministry of John the Baptist, London, 1882; H.
	KShler, Johannes der Ttiufer, Halle, 1884; A. MeGSillagh,
	The Peerless Prophet; or, The Lkfs and Times of John the
	Baptist, New York, 1888; R. C. Houghton, John the Bap
tist, .	. his Life and Work, ib. 1889: R. H. Reynolds,
	John the Baptist, London, 1890; E. Bards, Jean‑Baptists,
	Paris, 1892; A. C. MaGiBert, Hid. of Christianity in the
	Apostolic Ape, passim, New York, 1897; P. A. E. 3illevis
	Smith, Johannes de Doopar, de Wepbereider dsa Heersrt, Am
	sterdam, 1908; T. Innitmer, Johannes der TBufer, Vienna,
1908; 8chiirer, Oeachichte, i. 938 eqq.. Eng. travel.. L. ii.
23‑29: DB, ii. B77‑680; EB, ii. 2498‑2504; JE, vii. 218
219.
JOHN OF BASEL. See HlvrelINaES, Jossrrrl.

Jew of CAPISTRANO. See CAPisTR&No, GIOVANNI DI.

JOHN of cH17xx (coIRE), surnamed RuETBERG. See FRIE14DS OF GOD.

JOHN OF THE CROSS. See CARMELffES, 13.

	JOHN OF DAMASCUS (called Chryeorrhoas,
"streaming with gold," i.e., the golden speaker):
The last of the Greek Fathers and the most author
itative theologian for the whole Eastern Church; b.
presumably in Damascus and before 700; d., in
all probability at the monastery of Mar Saba (8 m.
s.e. of Jerusalem), shortly before 754 (of. acts vi. and
vii. of the Second Council of NitEea, ?87, in Mansi,
		Concilia, siii. 356, 400). His family,
	Life. though Christian, held a high heredi
		tary public office under the Moslem
rulers of Damascus, apparently that of head of the
tax department for Syria. John's father filled this
position, as did John himself for a time. The Arabs
gave to the family the surname Mansur, which was
also borne by John. Shortly after 730 he became
a monk and went to Mar Saba, whither his brother
by adoption, the poet Cosmas, and his teacher
had preceded him. The latter was an Italian monk
who had been brought to Damascus a prisoner of
war and was freed by John's father. To him John
owed his introduction into theology and philosophy
and his comprehensive knowledge of secular science.
He was ordained priest by Patriarch John V. of
Jerusalem shortly after entering the monastery, but
declined further advancement in hierarchical rank.
When called to Jerusalem as priest of the Church
there he soon returned to Mar Baba. There he
wrote his chief works. Toward the end of his life he gave his writings a careful revision. His grave was shown at Mar Saba in the twelfth century, but is the fourteenth his body is said to have been transferred to Constantinople. He is honored as a saint by the Greek Church on Dec. 4, by the Latin on May 6.
Probably the earliest of John's writings, at any rate those which made his reputation, are the three " Apologetic Treatises against those Decrying the Holy Images " (Eng. trans]. by Mary H. Allies, St. John Damascene on Holy Images, Followed by Three Sermons on the Assumption, London, 1899), called forth by the vigorous measures of the
	Writings	Emperor Leo III. (see IMAGES AND
	in Defense	IMAOE‑WORSHIP, IL). The first; (MPG,
	of Images.	xciv. 1232 eqq.), written while John
		was still in public life in Damascus, is
complete, learned, and skilful, and straightway put
a good literary defense in the hands of the friends
of images. Since John was out of his power, Leo
attempted to bring him under suspicion of treason
to the caliph (of. " Life," ut inf., chaps. xv.‑xvi.).
Addressing himself to the people and patriarch of
Constantinople, John professes to write reluctantly,
from a sense of duty, wishing only " to reach a
helping hand to truth when attacked." His man
ner is definite and incisive, yet restrained and dig
nified, that of a man of good breeding, inflexible
energy, and knowledge of ecclesiastical matters.
Images are justified on the ground that God, who
is " not to be attained unto, without body, invis
ible, not circumscribed in space, and without form,"
yet has become visible in the Logos, which was
made flesh. 'Therefore an image of "the flesh of
God which has been seen " can be made, and in
making it there is nothing forbidden or unchristian.
The Mosaic prohibition was directed against some
thing quite different. " Worship" (proakurteafa) is
a symbol of dependence and reverence; it has many
forms, the highest being latreia,, which is due to
God alone; elsewhere for Christians it is merely an
expression of reverence (sebeia.), and is properly
accorded to everything connected with salvation
‑the cross, the Gospels, the altar, etc. " I wor
ship not the material [hylz]," he declares, " but I
worship the fabricator [dgmiourgon] of the material,
the one who . . . through the material 'has wrought
my salvation." The image becomes for him one of
the means of salvation, and it and the God‑man
approach so close together that there is little prao
tical difference between them. Refined specula
tions, like the attempt to measure the extent of
the consonance, belong to a later stage of the con
troversy. Furthermore, John does not attempt to
brand the Christology of the iconoclasts as heretical.
Images of the " mother of God " are to be tolerated
beside those of Christ, and also of the saints.
Finally, he cites passages from the Fathers with
comments to show that the entire doing away with
images would be a sad departure from tradition.
The second and third treatises (MPG, xciv. 1284
sqq.) contain nothing essential which is not also
in the first. The second is the most popular and
vehement, the third the moat formal and theolog
ical. The second presupposes the situation of 730

209	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	John of Hssel
		John of Dsmasous
when Leo had deposed the Patriarch Germanus, the third may have been written or revised after John became a monk; it is to some extent a compilation of the other two. The " Demonstrative Treatise about the Images " (MPG, xcv. 309 sqq.), the " Letter to Theophilus " (MPG, xev. 345 sqq.), and the tract in MPG, xcvi. 1348 sqq., are not genuine.
John was no mystic, and he hardly touched the problems which later agitated the mystagogic theology (see MYSTAQOQIC TaxoroaY); but nearly all
fruitful and instructive theological Chief questions were treated by him, and his
Dogmatic treatment is definitive for the East.
Work. In the West, too, his influence has been
considerable, but here men like Peter Lombard and Thomas Aquinas surpassed and displaced him. For the East his great work, the " Fount of Knowledge " (MPG, xciv. 621 sqq.) became the standard. It is commended by substantial merits in the author. He is pious and scientific, deferential to authority but learned and acute, able to accept the current body of dogmas and yet give it new significance and spiritual vitality. If he never rises above the level of a good average excellence, he never falls below it. He had no ideas of his own and so never disturbed the peace of the Church or fell under suspicion as an unsafe leader. For modern times he presents a convenient and instructive summary of what the ancient Greek Church accomplished in the field of dogma‑‑a sum total of holy concepts enigmatical in character and supernaturally perceived. The work is dedicated to John's brother by adoption, Cosmas, at one time a monk of Mar Saba, later (743 ?) bishop of Majumas (the port of Gaza). John explains this plan as threefold. First, he will present " the best things of the wise among the Greeks " and, like a bee, " will gather salvation from the enemy " (i.e., the philosophers, especially Aristotle). Then he will set forth " the vaporings of heresies hated by God." Thirdly, he will exhibit the truth in the words of "the God‑inspired prophets and the God‑taught fishermen and the God‑filled [theophoros] shepherds and teachers "; that is, by quotations from the Bible and the Fathers, the latter receiving much the greater consideration. The "Philosophical Chapters" (part i.; 68 chapters in Le (qluien and bfigne; a shorter edition in 15 may be earlier) comprise a comprehensive treatise on dialectics and are cited under this title. In the second part John follows Epiphaniue for the older time (the first 80 heresies), then Theodoret and others, and finally makes some independent remarks, especially concerning Mohammedanism. Some codices give 100 heresies, others a few more. The third part (" Exposition of the Orthodox Faith "; Eng. transl. in NPNF, 2d eer., ix.) was divided by John himself into 700 Chapters. Later and in the West it was made up in four books, of which the first treats of the God‑head (the Trinity), the second of the created universe (heaven and earth, angels, devils, mankind freedom of the will, providence), the third chiefly of the person of Christ, then the mysteries, images, church festivals and customs, and the like, finally of Antichrist and the VL‑14
resurrection. Manuscripts often contain only parts i. and iii., part ii. being less important and copied separately.
John writes clearly and concisely, speaking for the most part in the words of his sources, but seldom names his authorities, the chief His of whom are Gregory Nazianzen, Basil,
	Teaching.	Dionysius the Areopagite, and Leon
		tius. As philosopher he is an Aris
totelian of the fifth and sixth centuries, that is, with
a strong infusion of Neoplatonism. Philosophy
furnishes the first principles, but it is unable to ap
prehend and develop them aright especially as con
cerns the true knowledge of God, being but the
handmaiden of faith, which is the queen. In final
analysis, philosophy for John is merely the teacher
of the right terminology, theology is nothing more
than a working over of the opinions of " the holy
fathers," who have first been able to understand
the terms correctly. It is the juristic method ap
plied to dogmatica‑in fact, scholasticism in gen
eral is the incursion of jurisprudence into the field
of theology. John's conception of God stops short
of making him a person. It is true he ascribes
personal attributes to the supreme being and here
in influenced appreciably the Eastern Church; but,
notwithstanding, he attained to no other idea of
fellowship and communion with God than a phys
ical blending through thedria, " vision." Herein
is the religiously significant motive of the image
question. More extended analysis of John's idea
of God will be found in F. Kattenbusch, Vergleich
ende Konfesaionakunde, i. 310 sqq., Freiburg, 1892.
For his doctrine of the Trinity and Christology the
histories of dogma mentioned in the bibliography
must be consulted; that by Bach (i. 49 sqq.) is
particularly instructive. John does not allegorize
the Scriptures, and he propounds no doctrine of the
Church or the hierarchy. He refrains from discus
sion of the creed and characterizes the formula of
faith (" Orthodox Faith," iv. 11) as a simple and
inartistic composition, showing that he had the
creed before him. His section on the creation (" Or
thodox Faith," ii.) is a whole treatise on astronomy
and geography with the science of water, air, and
fire. His doctrine of the Eucharist deserves men
tion because it is one of the few vital questions on
which he did not speak the final word for his
Church, although he gave the direction to later
thought (cf. Steitz, Die Abendmahlalehre der griecJt
iachen Kirche in Jahrbiicher fur deutsche Theotogie,
xii. 275 sqq., Goths, 1867; Kattenbusch, Koiyea
sionakunde, ut sup., i. 415 eqq.). The. chief points
are three: (1) that there is a real change (bdl)
and remaking (metapoieaia); (2) that the eucharis
tic body which results from the change is that born
of the Virgin Mary; (3) that the change is analogous

to that by which food i6 a9gjmj]8,W and einto our flesh. He disclaims the doctrine that Christ's body comes again to earth in any manner in the eucharistic form, and teaches not transubstantiation, but " transformation " through " assumption." The " Fount of Knowledge " was brought to the West in the twelfth century and was translated into Latin by Burgundio of Pisa in the time of Pope Eugenics III. (1144‑53). Neither

John of Damascus	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	210
John Frederick
Burgundio's translation nor another by Panetius,
a Carmelite, has been printed.
	A counterpart to the " Fount of Knowledge " is
furnished in the " Sacred Parallels " (MPG, acv.
1040‑xcvi. 544), ascribed to John of Damascus, but
not universally accepted as his work. As printed
in Le Quien and Migne it has two prefaces, of which
			the second outlines a collection of
		The	ethical and hortatory maxims from the
" Sacred	Bible and the Fathers arranged alpha
	Parallels." betically under titles. There are to
			be three books treating respectively
of God, human things, and virtue and vice. The
title is given simply an " the Holy Things " (ta
hi.era), and, indeed, it is hard to nee how the matter
of books i. and ii. could be arranged in parallels.
The first preface, however, which is much shorter,
gives a description for the entire work applicable
only to the third book of the second preface, and
promises to set " the virtues and the correspond
ing vices " as " parallels." Quotations from Philo
and Josephus are to be added to those from the
Fathers. The work which follows in Le Quien and
Migne in not in three parts, but is a single book,
although it contains material which fits the plan
of the second preface and is alphabetically arranged.
It is very evidently a revision of another and more
extensive writing, made, presumably, by combi
ning and compressing the three books into one and
arranging the matter alphabetically. The manu
scripts differ widely. Loofa showed that the two
manuscripts known to Le Quien are both based
upon an original work in three parts, two of which
are preserved independently and separately and
the third in a revision by the so‑called Antoniua
Melissa (more correctly in the Melissa of the monk
Autonius) of the eleventh century. The conclu
sions of Holl are to be accepted in the main as cor
rect. He says: " The Hdera comprised originally
three books . . . . In each the matter wan arranged
in a long list of chapters (titlm), some more com
prehensive, home more coy. :iae. . . . The chapters
of the first and second books were arranged alpha
betically according to the catch‑words; in the third
book the author abandoned this arrangement and,
following a favorite method, chose to set a virtue
and a vice one against the other, whence he named
thin book ` the Parallels.' . . In richness and
copiousness the work surpassed all similar collec
tions; the citations reached to the thousands and
included parts of sermons of Basil and Chrynostom.
To this great extent of the work is it due that it
has not been preserved entire . . . . Neither of the
two extant codices of books i. and ii. is a faithful
copy, but each is an abridgment of the correspond
ing book of the original work." Concerning the
author, Holl pronounces decidedly for John of
Damascus, arguing from the very good tradition
which ascribes the work to him and a comparison
of the " Sacred Parallels " with the " Fount of
Knowledge." Loofa, relying on a acholium to the
manuscript of the second part, suggested Leontius
of Byzantium (d. 543). Holl finds that John was
largely dependent on Maximus Confessor, from
whom he borrowed the ides of an edifying book
made up o£ sentences from the Bible and the Fa‑
thers, even incorporating a work of Maximus in
his own. However, in the number of themes treated
and authorities cited, as well as in the length of the
passages quoted, he greatly surpassed Maximus;
and he attempted to give an orderly arrangement
to his work as Maximus did not. " It is surprising,"
Holl continues (p. 392), " what antitheses are set
aide by aide‑motives of the most paltry worldly
wisdom by the aide of ideas of the highest moral
import; and there is as great lack of connection
between the individual ethical problems as of effort
to solve them by any principle." The explana
tion is not far to seek. " There is no close conneo
tion between dogma and moral duty. Only two
dogmas enter at all‑the doctrines of the Trinity
and of the last judgment form the framework in
which the whole is enclosed." The " Parallels "
are a true picture of the type of moral thought
which remains peculiarly that of the Greek Church.
	John is not only the moat renowned theologian
of the Eastern Church, but, with his brother Cos
mas, he is also its moat esteemed hymn‑writer. He
was formerly thought to be the originator of the
		oktoichos (the hymn‑book for the daily
	Hymns service), but more probably he only
	and Minor revised and improved it. Like East
	Writings. era hymn‑writers in general he com
		posed both words and music. His
" canons " (compositions of highly complicated
structure consisting of eight or nine hymns, each of
three or four strophes and each having its own form
and melody) reached the highest point of art and
skill. Those in iambic meter for Christmas, Epiph
any, and Pentecost are peculiar in that they are
both quantitative and rhythmical; they are also
very difficult acrostics and two have each 130 lines
and the same number of letters in the distichs.
Of minor writings ascribed to John, the early " Tract
on Right Thinking " (MPG, xciv. 1421 eqq.) is
genuine. It is a. reverent and submissive apology
for everybody under the metropolitan of Damas
cus, treating first of the creed, then naming all
heresies which were to be rejected. A dislike, even
contempt, for Origen, is evident (vi.). Theolog
ically the tract has little significance. But it shows
the regard felt for John in Damascus. Perhaps
the same may be said of the " book " which .im
mediately follows in Migne (xciv. 1436 aqq.), raid
to have been written at the request of Peter, met
ropolitan of Damascus, for an exposition of the
faith. Other tracts are interesting because of their
form (some of them dialogues) or because they are
designated as " dictated " by John and so present
him answering questions propounded by disciples
(e.g., the " Dialogue against Msnicheans," MPG,
xciv. 1505 sqq.; the " Conversation between a
Saracen and a Christian," MPG, aoiv. 1585 eqq.;
the " Introduction to Elementary Dogmatics,"
MPG, xev. 99). For other dogmatic tracts, con
sult Langen, 161 aqq., 173 eqq. The contents of
John's ascetic writings are important for the Greek
Church. Langen gives summaries of them, an of all
of John's writings (for " On the Fasts," MPG, acv.
64 sqq., cf. Langen, 166 eqq.; for " On the Eight
Spirits of Vice," MPG, acv., 80 eqq., cf. Langen,
169 aqq., and O. 7.tSekler, Daa Lehratiick von den

211	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	John of Damasou*
		John Frederick
Sieben Hattptaiinden, pp. 53 aqq., Munich, 1893).
The " On Dragons " and " On Witches " (MPG,
xciv. 1800 aqq.) are only fragments of a larger work.
The two short expositions of the Eucharist (MPG,
xev. 401 sqq.) and the tract " On the Unleavened
	Bread " (MPG, xcv. 388 aqq.) are of doubtful au
	thenticity. The great commentary (on all the
	Pauline epistles and the Hebrews) ascribed to John
	(MPG, xcv. 441 aqq.) needs further investigation.
	For the many homilies which go under his name
	(MPG, xcvi. 545‑814; Eng. tranal. of three on the
	Assumption in Allies, St. John Damascene, ut sup.),
	consult Langen, 213 aqq. For the " Barlasm and
	Josaphat," see the article under that title. The
" Letter on Confession and on Binding and Loos
	ing " (MPG, xcv. 284 aqq.) belongs to Symeon the
	New Theologian (cf. K. Holl, Enthvsiaamus and
	Buasgewalt im griechischeraMonch,ttTtTm~, Leipaie,1898).
	(F. 11ATTENBUaCA.)
	BIBLIOGRAPHY: The indispensable edition of the works of
	John is by M. Le Quien, 2 vole., Paris, 1712, Venice, 1748,
	practically reproduced in MPG, aciY.‑xcvi. The prole
	gomena to Le Quien are excellent. There is an Eng. tranal.
	of the De fide orthodoxa in NPNF, 2 ear., vol. ix. His work
	on " Holy Images " and three " Sermons on the Assump
	tion " are translated by Mary $. Allies, in St. John Damaa
	eene, ut sup. The early life, by " John, Patriarch of Jeru
	salem " (possibly the one who died c. 970, cf. Le Quien,
	Oriena Chrietianua, iii. 488 eqq., Paris, 1740) and based
	upon an older lost Arabic work, is in MPG, xciv. 429‑489.
	It is hagiographic in style and selection of facts. The beat
	modern treatise is J. Langen, Johannes van Damaskus,
	Goths. 1879, in which summaries of the writings of John are
	given. Other monographs are: F. A. Perrier, Strasburg,
	1881; J. D. Grundlehner, Utrecht, 1877; J. H. Lupton,
	London, 1883. On the theology of John consult the works
	on the history of doctrine (Dogmeupeachichte) of F. A. B.
	Nitzsch, Berlin, 1870; J. Bach, Vienna, 1873; G. Thoma
	sius, ed. Bonwetsch, Leipsic, 1888; F. Loofa, Halls, 1893;
	R. Seeberg, Yol. i., Erlangen, 1895; A. Darner, Berlin,
	1899, and Harnack, Dogma, vole. iii.‑vii., passim. Further
	references are F. N~Ye, in Revue beige et ktrangere, xii
	(1881), i. eqq., 117 eqq.; DCB, iii. 409‑423 (an elaborate
discussion); Krumbacher, Geachichte, pp. 88 eqq.. 874 sqq.;
O. Bardenhewer, Patrolopie, Freiburg, 1894; and especially
F. Kattenbuseh, Vergleichende Konfeaaionakunde, Yol. i.,
Freiburg, 1892. On the " Sacred Parallels " consult
Krumbacher, ut cup., pp. 218 aqq., 800 eqq.; F. Loofa,
Studien Off die dam Johannes von Damaekua aupeachriebenenParatleZen, Halls, 1892; K. Boll, in TU, xvi. 1 (1897), xx. 2 (1899). On ,John as a hymnologist and for specimens of his hymns consult: MPG, xevi. 817‑858, 13841408 (the canons at 1372‑1408 are for the most part erroneously ascribed to John); Anlhologia Graeca, ed. W. Christ and M. Paranikas, pp, xliY.‑xlY., 117 eqq.. 205 eqq., Leipsic, 1571; Kattenbuech, ut sup., i. 484 eqq.; Krumbacher, ut sup., pp. 674 aqq., 890 eqq.; J. JakObl, in ZKG, Y (1882), 177 aqq.; A. Nauck, Melanges grecoromain, vi. 2 (1894); Julian, Hymnology, pp.803‑804; Eng. tranal. of nineteen pieces in B. Pick, Hymns and Poetry of the Eastern Church, pp. 111 sqq.. New York. 1908. Consult also W. F. Adeney, The Greek and Eastern Churches, pp. 211, 284, New York, 1908.
JOHN OF DARA: Jacobite bishop of Dares, in Mesopotamia, in the first half of the ninth century. He was a contemporary of Dionysiua of Telmera (d. 845), who dedicated to him his great chronicle. Four of his works are known: (1) "On the Resurrection of the Bodies," in four books: (2) " On the Heavenly and Ecclesiastical Hierarchy," two books, based on the pseudo‑Dionysius Areopagita (cf. Frothingham, Stephen bar Sudaili, Leyden, 1886, p. 66) : (3) " On the Priesthood," four books (fragments in Overbeck, Opera Ephraemi Syri, Oxford, 1865, pp. 409‑413, and Monuments Syriaca, i., Inns‑
bruck, 1889, pp. 105‑110; of . notice by Zingerle in
TQ, 1867‑88); (4) a book on the soul (extracts in
Codex Vatican= Syriacua 147). There is also an
anaphora. 	E. NESTLE.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. 8. Aesemsni, Biblrootheca orientatia, ii. 118, 219, 347, Rome, 1719‑28; G. Bickell, Conspectus rei Syrorum literarine, p. 42, Monster, 1871; W. Wright, Short Hiat. of Syriac Literature, London, 1894; R. Duval, LittEratura avriaque, Paris, 1899: DCB, iii. 389.
	JOHN OF EPHESUS (JOHN OF ASIA): Mono
phyaite church historian of the sixth century; b.
at Amida in Mesopotamia early in the math cen
tury; place and date of death unknown. He be
came deacon in Amida in 529, was in Palestine at
the outbreak of the plague in 534, and from 535
was in Constantinople, where the Monophyaitea
had a monastery near the Golden Horn. For thirty
years he was s favorite of the Emperor Justinian,
who from 546 employed him to combat heathenism
in Asia Minor and the capita(. He styles himself
" the teacher " or " overseer of the heathen " and
" the destroyer of idols." He is said to have con
verted 70,000 and to have built ninety‑six churches.
He was interested in the missions to the Nubians
and Alodes and recommended not to trouble them
with the Chriatological controversies. After the
death of Justinian, John suffered in the persecution
of the Monophysitea and excused the confused state
of his church history by the incidents of his life,
which forced him to write it in single leaves and to
keep it concealed for several years. The first two
parts, each in six books, extend from Caesar to the
sixth year of Justin (571); part. i. is entirely lost;
a good portion of part ii. is preserved in the so
called " Chronicle " of Dionysiua of Tehnera. The
third part, containing biographies of men personally
known to the writer‑Jacobus Baradaeus, Severus,
Theodosius, Anthimus, and others‑collected about
569, is a source of first‑rate importance for the time.
		E. NESTLE.
BIPLIOOftAPHY: The third part of the "Ecclesiastical History" was edited by W. Cureton, Oxford, 185.9, Eng. trend. by P. Smith, ib. 1880; the rest of his writings were edited by J. P. N. Land, in Anecdotes Syriorn, vol. ii., 4 vole.. Leyden, 1582‑7b, and translated into Latin by W. J. van Dowen and J. P. N. Land, Amsterdam, 1889. An analysis of the second part of the "History" by F. Nan is in Revue de t'orierU chrktien, ii (1897), 4 aqq. Consult: d. S. Aseamani, Bi6tiotheca orientatie; i. 359, 148, 84, Rome, 17191728; Gregory bar Hebraeus, Chronicon ecclsaiaaticum, i.19s; J. p. N. Land, Johanna von &pllcaue, Leyden, 1858;
idem, in YereLagert en Mededeetinpen der Koninkliike Akademie, Letterkunde, Vol. iii., part v., Amsterdam, 1888; w. Wright, Snarl Hiat. of Syriac Literature, London, 1894;
R. Duval, Litt&ature ayriaque, Paris, 1899; DCB, iii.
370‑373.

JOHN FREDERICK( THE MAGNANIMOUS: Son of John the Steadfast and elector of Saxony, 15321547; b. at Torgau June 30, 1503; d. at Weimar Mar. 3, 1554. He received his education from Spalatin, whom he highly esteemed during his whole life. His knowledge of history was comprehensive, and his library, which extended over all sciences, was one of the largest in Germany. He came early into
personal relations with Luther, beginning to correspond with him in the days when the bull of excommunication was hurled against the Reformer, and showing himself even then a convinced adherent of the Gospel. With vivid interest he observed

John Frederick	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	212
John of Nepomak
the development of the reformatory movement.
He eagerly read Luther's writings, urged the print
ing of the first complete (Wittenberg) edition of his
works, and in the latter years of his life promoted
the compilation of the Jena edition. His father
introduced him into the political and diplomatic
affairs of the time, and he conducted the first nego
tiations of a treaty with Hesse in Kreuzburg and
Friedewald. He took an active part in the dis
turbances caused by the Pack affair (see Jour THE
STEADFAST), and Luther was grateful to him for his
exertions, in spite of his youth, for the mainte
nance of peace. During the second diet of Speyer
(1529) he temporarily assumed the reins of govern
ment in place of his father. The intrigues of Arch
duke Ferdinand induced him after the diet to draw
up a federal statute for the Evangelical estates, which
shows that he was more decidedly convinced of the
right and duty of defense than his father. He accom
panied the latter to the diet of Augsburg in 1530,
signed with him the Augsburg Confession and was ac
tive in the proceedings. His attitude did not remain
unnoticed, and won him the emperor's dislike.
	At the age of twenty‑one John Frederick suc
ceeded his father. In the beginning he reigned
with his stepbrother, John Ernest, but in 1542
became sole ruler. Chancellor Briick, who for
years had guided the foreign relations of the coun
try with ability and prudence, remained also his
councilor, but his open and impulsive nature often
led him to disregard the propositions of his more
experienced adviser, so that the country was in
frequent danger, especially as John Frederick was
not a far‑sighted politician. He consolidated the
State Church by the institution of an electoral con
sistory (1542) and renewed the church visitation.
He took a firmer and more decided stand than his
father in favor of the Evangelical league, but on so
count of his strictly Lutheran convictions was in
volved in difficulties with the Landgrave of Hesse,
who favored a union with the Swiss and Strasburg
Evangelicals. He was averse to all propositions of
Popes Clement VII. and Paul III. to win him for a
council, because he was convinced that it would
only serve " for the preservation of the papal and
anti‑Christian rule "; but to be prepared for any
event, he requested Luther to summarize all arti
cles to which he would adhere before a council, and
Luther wrote the Schmalkald articles. At the diet
of Schmalkald in 1537 the council was refused, and
the elector treated the papal legate with open dis
regard and rejected the propositions of Dr. Held,
the imperial legate.
	He followed the efforts at agreement at Regena
burg in 1541 with suspicion and refused to accept
the article on justification which had been drawn
up under the supervision of Contarini to suit both
parties, and Luther, his steady adviser, confirmed
him in his aversion. The efforts at agreement
failed, and the elector contributed not a little to
broaden the gulf by his interference in the ecclesi
astical affairs of Halls and by aiding the Reformation
which had been introduced there by Justus Jonas.
His attitude became more and more stubborn and
regardless of consequences, not to the advantage
of the Protestant cause. In spite of the warnings
of the emperor, of Briick, and of Luther, he arbitrarily set aside in 1541 the election of Julius von Pflug to the episcopal see of Naumburg, instituted Nicolaus von Amsdorf as bishop, and introduced the Reformation. In 1542 he expelled Duke Henry of Brunswick‑Wolfenbiittel from his country to protect the Evangelical cities Goslar and Brunswick and introduced the Reformation there. New war‑like entanglements hindered Charles V. from interfering and by apparently yielding he succeeded in concealing his true intentions. The elector appeared personally at the diet of Speyer in 1544. The harmony of the emperor with the Evangelicals appeared never greater than at that time. He permitted the Regensburg declaration of 1541 to be embodied in the new recess and acknowledged all innovations which the Evangelicals had made between 1532 and 1541 because he needed the aid of the Protestants against France (see SPEYER, DIETS OF). John Frederick actually thought that peace had come and continued the ecclesiastical reforms in his country. Even the growing discord among the allies did not disturb him.
When the Schmalkald War broke out (1546) he marched to the south at the head of his troops, but the unexpected invasion of his country by Duke Maurice compelled him to return. He succeeded in reconquering the larger part of his possessions and repelling Maurice, but suddenly the emperor hastened north and surprised the elector. The battle of Muhlberg, Apr. 24, 1547, went against him and dispersed his army; being wounded, he fell into the hands of the conqueror. The emperor condemned him to death as a convicted rebel; but, not to lose time in the siege of Wittenberg, which was defended by Sibylla, the wife of the elector, he did not execute the sentence and entered into negotiations. To save his life, John Frederick conceded the capitulation of Wittenberg, and, after having been compelled to resign the government of his country in favor of Maurice, his condemnation was changed into imprisonment for life. He was never greater and more magnanimous than in the days of his captivity, as is evident from the correspondence with his children, his wife, and his councilors. Friends and foes were compelled to acknowledge his calm behavior, his unwavering faith, and his greatness under misfortune. He steadfastly refused to renounce the Protestant faith or to acknowledge the Interim, declaring that by its acceptance he would commit a sin against the Holy Ghost, because in many articles it was against the Word of God. The sudden attack upon the emperor by Elector Maurice made an end of his imprisonment, and he was released on Sept. 1, 1552. He firmly refused to bind himself to comply in matters of religion with the decisions of a future council or diet, declaring that he was resolved to adhere until his grave to the doctrine contained in the Augsburg Confession. His homeward journey was a triumphal march. He removed the seat of government to Weimar and reformed the conditions of his country, but died within two years. A special object of his care was the University of Jena, which he planned while a prisoner in place of Wittenberg,
which he had lost (1547).	(T. BornE.)

213	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	John Frederick
		John of Nepomnk
BIBLIOGRAPHY‑. A. Beck, Johann Priedrich der Mitflcre,
	2 vole., Weimar, 1858; F. von Be:old, Oeschichte der
	deutachert Reformation. Berlin, 1888; and literature under
LUTARR; R&FORMATION.
JOHN OF GOD. See CHARITY, Baomazcxa oh.
	JOHN OF GORZE: A monastic reformer of the
	tenth century; b. at VendWe (near Pont‑A‑Mous
son, 18 m. s.a.w, of Metz); d. at Gorze (9 m. w.s.w.
	of Metz) Mar. 7, 974. His tastes early led him in
the direction of theological study and asceticism,
	but when he wished to retire from the world he
	could find no monastery near him in which strict
	discipline was maintained. After a visit to Rome
	and Monte Camino, he drew still closer the relations
which had bound him to several men of like aims,
	especially Einald, formerly archdeacon of Toul;
	and in 933 they were charged by Bishop Adelbero
	of Metz with the restoration of the decayed monas
	tery of Gorze, of which Einald became abbot, with
	John as his principal assistant. The number of
	monks soon became considerable, and the influence
	of the movement wide‑spread. Gorze became a
	model for the reform of all the monasteries of the
	diocese, and in 950 Pope Agapetus II. sent thither
	for monks to restore discipline in the monastery of
	St. Paul in Rome. After many years of zealous
	activity at Gorze, John was sent to Cordova by
	Otho III. on a mission to the Calif Abdalrahman
	III., and spent several years in Spain. Returning
	to Gorze, he was elected abbot on Einald's death in
	960. The life of Gorze by his friend John, abbot of
	St. Arnulph at Metz (MGH, Script., iv (1841), 335
	377) takes a high rank among historical documents
of the tenth century.
	BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Vita by John, ut sup., with commen
	tary, is also in ASB, Feb., iii. 888‑71b. Consult: W.
	Gieaebreeht, Geachichte der deutadun Kazserzeit, i. 745,
	785, Brunswick, 1855; Wattenbach, DGQ, i (1885), 344,
i (1893), 370.
	JOHN, GRIFFITH: Welsh Congregational mis
	sionary; b. at Swansea, Wales, Dec. 14, 1831. At
	the age of fourteen he began to preach in Welsh,
	and from 1850 to 1854 studied at Brecon College,
	after which he spent a few months at the Mission
	ary College at Bedford, England. In 1855 he was as
	signed by the London Missionary Society to China.
	Until 1861 he lived in or near Shanghai. Then he
	removed to Hankow, being the first Protestant
	missionary in Central China, and made that city
	his headquarters until 1906. As at Shanghai, he
	made numerous journeys into the surrounding
	country, and established many churches and mis
	sions in neighboring provinces. He was in Great
	Britain on furlough in 1870‑73 and again in 1881
	1882, the latter time visiting the United States, where
	he has resided since 1906, when failing health ob
	liged him to retire from active missionary life. He
	is the author of a large number of tracts in Chi
	nese, and also translated the New Testament and
	a portion of the Old into both easy Wen‑li and
Mandarin colloquial.
	BIBLIOGRAPHY: R. W. Thompson, Grtfflth John., the story
of Fifty Years do China, New York, 19Q8.
	JOHN OF LEYDEN: The common designation
	of Jan Beukelszoon, the leader of the Anabaptists
	in Munster. See ANABAPTISTS; Mf)NSTER, ANA
BAPTISTS IN.
JOHN THE LITTLE (Johannes Parvus, Jean Petit): French theologian; b. in Normandy; d. 1411. He became known in 1394 by the publication of Complaints de l'eglise, a French poem discussing the ecclesiastical schism and the remedies recommended in 1394 by the University of Paris. He represented the Norman people at the university and was professor of theology there 1400. He treated of the church politics of Burgundy at the national council of 1406 with unusual rigor, and on Mar. 8, 1408, defended the murder of Duke Louie of Orl6ana, committed at the instigation of John the Fearless of Burgundy. In this he appealed to the scholastic doctrine of tyrannicide regnant since John of Salisbury; but a council of Paris condemned the doctrine (Feb. 23, 1414). A commission of cardinals instituted by John XXIII. reversed the decision on Jan. 15, 1416; moreover, after the death of John, the rising power of Burgundy so tied the hands of Martin V. that there followed a vindication of the theologian.
(B. BE88.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. B. Schwab, Johannes Gerson, pp. 429
aqq., 808 eqq., Wi3rzburg, 1858; P. Tachackert Peter von Ailli, Goths, 1877; M. D. Chapotin, La Guerre de cent ana, Paris, 1889; B. Bess, Studien zur Geachichte des Konatanzer Konzi7a, Marburg, 1891; M. Loesen, Die Lehre vom Tyrannenmord in der rhristti,chen Zeit, Munich, 1894; H. Denifle and E. Chatelain, Clutrlularium uniroeraitataa Pariaienaie, vole. iii., iv., Paris, 1894‑97; KL, vi. 1748‑1748.
JOHN OF MONTECORVINO: Franciscan missionary in China.; b. at Montecorvino, Rovella. (14 m. e. of Salerno), Italy, 1247; d. at Khanbaligh (now Peking), China, 1330. In 1272 he was sent by the Byzantine Emperor Michael Palfeologus to Gregory X. in the matter of the union of the Greek with the Roman Church. Subsequently be visited Mongolia. On his return in 1288 he reported to Nicholas IV. the willingness of the Tatar princes to receive Christian teachers, and in 1289 he was sent by Nicholas as a missionary to the Mongolian empire. After laboring for a time in Persia and India he settled at Peking about 1292. Until 1303 he carried on his work alone. He won the friendship of the Great Khan, enlisted his interest, and, despite the determined opposition of the Nestorians, by 1305 he had built two churches and baptized 6,000 heathen adults, besides 150 boys, whom he had bought of heathen parents and collected into a school. He taught them Greek and Latin, and wrote for them psalteries, hymnariea, and breviaries. He also translated the Psaltery and the whole of the New Testament into Tatar. On hearing of the great work accomplished by him Clement V., in 1307, made him archbishop of Khanbaligh (Peking) and gave him a number of suffragans. His work was continued by his successors till 1368. His two letters are in Wadding, Annal. Prat. Min., for year 1305, one in Eng. transl. in Yule's ed. of Marco Polo (London, 1875).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: KL, vi. 1719‑1721, ix, 292.
	JOHN OF NEl?OMUg: The most popular na‑
tional saint of Bohemia, considered the protomartyr of the seal of confession and a patron against calumnies and floods. The historical startingpoint of the Nepomuk‑legend is the person of John of Pomuk Or Nepomuk, a city of Bohemia (5:i m.

John of Nepomuk
John of Salisbury
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
s.w. of Prague). He was born probably about 1340 and studied at the new university in Prague. In 1393 he was made vicar‑general of Archbishop John of Jenstein. In the same year, March 20, he became a martyr to the cause of clerical immunity, being thrown into the River Moldau at the behest of King Wenceslaus IV., who was at variance with the clergy, as a penalty for his confirmation, against the king's will, of a new abbot for the Benedictine monastery at Khldrau. Dr. Johanek, as he was called because of his small stature, enjoyed no special reputation; be was rich, possessed houses, and lent money to noblemen and priests. The development and transformation of the legend can be traced through successive stages. The archbishop, who hastened to Rome soon after the crime, in his charge against Wenceslaus, called the victim a martyr; in the biography written a few years later miracles are already recorded by which the drowned man was discovered. The uncritical Bohemian annaliata from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century fostered the fable. About the middle of the fifteenth century the statement appears for the first time that the refusal to violate the seal of confession was the cause of John's death. Two decades later (1471), the dean of Prague, Paul Zidek, makes Johanek the queen's confessor. The unscrupulous chronicler Wenceslaus Hayek, the " Bohemian Livy," speaks in 1541 (probably owing to carelessness in the use of his sources) of two Johns of Nepomuk being drowned; the first as confessor, the second for his confirmation of the abbot. The legend is especially indebted for its growth to the Jesuit Balbinus, the " Bohemian Pliny," whose services to the history of his country were so conspicuous that he was persecuted by the government, which preferred oblivion and silence. He was, however, as credulous as he was patriotic, and even became a forger to honor his saint. Although the Prague metropolitan chapter did not accept the biography dedicated to it, "as being frequently destitute of historical foundation and erroneous, a bungling work of mythological rhetoric," Balbinus stuck to it. In 1683 the Prague bridge was adorned with a statue of the saint, which has had numerous successors; in. 1708 the first church was dedicated to him at Kbniggr5tz. Meanwhile, in spite of the objection of the Jesuits, the process was inaugurated which ended with his canonization. On June 25, 1721, he was beatified, and on March 19, 1729, he was canonized under Benedict XIII. The acts of the process, comprising 500 pages, which coat more than 180,000 crowns, distinguish two Johns of Nepoluuk and sanction the cultua of the one who was drowned in 1383 as a martyr of the sacrament of penance.
The ingenious suggestion has been made that the historical kernel of St. John Nepomuk is really Hues, who was metamorphosed from a Bohemian Reformer into a Roman‑Catholic saint; and that the Nepoaiuk‑legend is a Jesuit blending of the John who was drowned and the John who was burned. The resemblances are certainly striking, extending to the manner of celebrating their commemorations. But when the Jesuits came to Prague, the Nepomuk‑worship had long been wide‑
214
spread; and the idea of canonization originated in opposition not to the Hussites, but to Protestantism, as a weapon of the Counter‑Reformationthough his cultua was also intended to supplant Hues in the hearts of the Bohemian people. In the image of the saint which gradually arose the religious history of Bohemia is reflected. This much is historically certain, that the Vicar‑general John of Pomuk was drowned in 1393 because of the choice of the abbot, and that Rome, making use of a forged biography, has canonized a man whose very existence can not be demonstrated.
GEORG LoESCHE.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Vita by Bohuelav Balbinue is in ASB, May, iii, 888‑680. The Acta leading up to the canonisation were published at Verona, 1725, and the Acts oanonizationia at Rome, 1727. Naturally a large part of the literature on the subject is in Bohemian‑for a list consult Potthaet, Weguxiaer, pp. 1400‑1401. Consult O. Abel, Die Lepende vont heildgen Johann von Nepornuk, Berlin, 1855; A. W iirfel, Legends den heilipen Johann von Nepomuk, Prague, 1882; A. Frind, Der geschichtliche ... Johannes von NePmnuk, Prague, 1871; A. H, Wratialaw, Life, Legend and Canonization q/ St. John Nepomueen, London, 1873; Die FraDe fiber . . . Johann von Nepomuk, in Der Katholik, i (1882), 273‑300, 390‑414; T. $chmude, in ZKT, vii (1883), b2‑123; KL, vi. 1725‑1742.

	JOHN OF SALISBURY: English ecclesiastic, and
bishop of Chartres; b. at Salisbury between 1110
and 1120; d. at Chartres (54 m. s.w. of Paris) Oct.
25, 1180. He was of humble Saxon origin, but
in 1136 left his native land to study in France, es
pecially in Paris. Among his teachers there were
the famous Abelard, Robert of Melun, and Alberic
of Reims. After studying dialectics at Paris for
		two years, he went to Chartres, where
	Life. for three years he heard the lectures of
		William of Conches, and later studied
under Richard f1J0que, Hardewin the German,
Theodoric, Peter Elias, and others. He returned
to Paris and began the study of theology, his teach
ers being Gilbert de la Porr6e, Robert Pulleyne, and
Simon of Poissy. Despite bitter poverty, he spent
twelve years in France, passing the latter portion
of the time with his intimate friend Peter, abbot of
the Cistercian monastery of Moutier hl, Cells near
Troyes, through whom he became acquainted with
Bernard of Clairvaux. This powerful head of the
Cistercians brought John to the attention of Theo
bald, archbishop of Canterbury, who had fled from
England to escape Stephen. When the archbishop
was able to return to his see, John was invited, in
1148 or the beginning of 1149, to act as his chan
cellor or secretary. He was a firm defender of the
spiritual and secular supremacy of the pope and
of the independence of the clergy, regarding these
principles as the means of protecting mankind
against the injustice of the secular arm and the con
sequences of sin. He sought to carry out his doc
trine in practical ecclesiastical life, even though
his views that only the Roman Catholic hierarchy
could unfold the blessings of Christianity aroused
the opposition of the court and of the bishops, the
latter regarding themselves as peers of the realm
rather than as subject to a distant pope. The in
creasing age and infirmity of the archbishop brought
additional ecclesiastical responsibilities upon John,
while he was able to render many important polit‑

'alb	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	JohnoiNepomuk
		John of 8alisbnry
ical services to Henry II. after the death of Stephen
in 1154. Sent on repeated missions for both prel
ate and king, he crossed the Alps, according to his
own statement, ten times, visiting the Curia dur
	ing the reign of Pope Eugenius III. and living for I
	three months at Benevento with Adrian IV., with 'I
	whom he was on terms of personal friendship. His I
	position became difficult, however, after the death
	of Adrian in 1159, when he took sides with Alexan
der III. against the antipope Victor IV. He se‑ '
	Cured the recognition of Alexander in England, but
Came in conflict with the king and the royalist
	bishops as the exponent of the Roman Catholic
	hierarchy. He was deprived of his preferments
	and emoluments, and was even in peril of his life,
so that he contemplated flight from England,
	but was rehabilitated at the petition of the pope,
	the archbishop, and Thomas Becket. His power
	reached its climax when the latter, his close per
	sonal friend, succeeded Theobakl as archbishop of
	Canterbury in 1162. Throughout the struggle be
	tween the archbishop and the king, John remained
	the faithful friend of the former, whom he pre
	ceded into exile in 1163. When a nominal peace
	was patched up between the archbishop and Henry
	in 1170, John returned to England, and, though he
	was not present at the actual scene of the arch
	bishop's murder, he hastened there soon enough
	to receive some of the martyr's blood se s relic. A
	time of peril followed until the papal influence and
	popular opinion forced the king to change his
	course. John, who had fled from Canterbury, again
	received his preferments, and cooperated zealously
	with Richard of Dover, the successor of Thomas.
	He was likewise active in the canonization of the
	murdered prelate. In 1176 he was unanimously
	chosen bishop of Chartres, and was consecrated in
	August of the same year. There, however, he was
	obliged to struggle against all manner of opposi
	tion, although he enjoyed the support of the pope,
	and in 1179 attended the third Lateran Council,
	where he uttered a solemn warning against unjusti
	fiable innovations and urged the clergy to conform
	to the Gospel.
		The most important and comprehensive work of
	John of Salisbury was his Policraticrta rive de nugia
	curalium et vestigiia philoaophorum, written is 1159
	and dedicated to Thomas Becket. It is a system
			of ecclesiastical and political econom
		Writinge. ica and ethics based on Christianity
			and the wisdom of the ancients, and
	designed to lead from the triviality of secular and
	court life to a true knowledge and government of
	the world. In his book the author wove from his
	wealth of experience both a picture of actual life
	and the ideal of true Christian living, in which the
	Church should rule and lead all mankind as the
	guardian and representative of divine law and
	true human justice. The Policraticue, the first
	great theory of the State in the Middle Ages, exer
	cised an influence on Thomas Aquinas and Vin
	cent of Beauvais. It was first edited, apparently
	by the Brethren of the Common Life, at Brussels
	about 1480. Immediately after the Policraticua
	John wrote the MW alogicus, which may be regarded
	as its continuation; this was also dedicated to
Thomas Becket. This work, which is in four books and which was first edited at Paris in 1610, is a presentment of true and false science, in which the author castigates not only contempt of science, especially of laic, but also false and sophistic scholasticism. These aberrations of his contemporaries were compared with the sound views of Plato and the academic school, and especially with Aristotle, whose Organan John of Salisbury was the first in western Europe to know and use. His earliest work was his EmtheEieue (Eutheticus, Nxe‑
), sive de dogmote philosophorum, written about 1155, and consisting of a philosophical and satirical poem in 928 distichs, dedicated to Thomas Becket. The first part contains a critical presentation of the basal concepts of the Greek and Roman philosophers, who are unfavorably contrasted with the higher truth of Christianity. The second part exhorts Thomas to consider the plight of the threatened and afflicted Church, and describes the lamentable condition of England. The poem is extant in only two manuscripts, and was first edited by C. Peterson at Hamburg in 1843. John was likewise the author of a Histarua gorttificalia, embracing the years 1148‑52 and written about 1185 as a supplement to the chronicle of Sigibert and his immediate successors. The fragment begins with the Council of Reims, which John attended, and breaks off abruptly in the middle of a sentence discussing the events of 1152. The only edition is that by W. Arndt in MGH, Script., xa (1868), 515545.
The minor works of John of Salisbury were his Vita Sancti Anselmi, written in 1163 as a supplement to Eadmer's larger biography of Anaehn and designed as an aid in the projected canonization of the saint at the Council of Tours, and his Vita et pasaio Sandi Thomas, composed shortly after 1170 as an argument for the canonization of Thomas Becket. His letters, collected by him in four books, although the present collection of 327 is contained in two parts, are of great importance both for his biography and for the ecclesiastical history of his time, since they are addressed to popes (Adrian and Alexander III.), to princes, and to many ecclesiastical and secular potentates. The first edition
i	of J. Masson (Paris, 1811) contained only 302
I	letters, but others have since been discovered. A
	number of additional works have been ascribed to
	this author. Some titles may refer to treatises
	now lost, while certain others may represent indi
	vidual chapters of the Polin~. A complete
i	edition of the works of John of Salisbury (not with
,	out flaws) was published by J.. A. Giles (5 vo1s.
	PEA, Oxford, 1848) and reprinted in MPL, xeia.
(K. ScaseRSCH>tlllyr.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The beet sources of knowledge ate his own works, particularly his letters in vol. i. of Giles, edition, ut sup. Two lives are those by H. Reuter, Johannee von Salisbury, Berlin, 1842 $, 9chaareohmidt, Johannes Saresbarienais raorh Leben and Studien, Sduxften and
PMtosophie, Leipeio, 1882. Consult further: K. Pauli, in Zsitechrift far Kirchenrecht, 1881, pp. 286 eq9.: R. L. Poole. IlZusdationa o,/ the History of Mediaeval Thought. chaps iv.‑vii., London 1884; W. Stubbs, Seventeen Lecture& on the Study o~ . History, loots. vi.‑vii., ib,
1888; P. Gennrioh, in ZKG, oii (1893), 644‑661: J. H. Overton. The Church in England, i. 207, 217. 218, London,

Doha, Saint	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	218
1897; Histoire tittEraire de la France, xiv. 89‑181; Ceillier,
Auteura eacrba, aiv. 878‑880; Neander, Christian Church,
iv. 194‑19b, 3b7‑3b8, 415 et paeeim; DNB, amx. 439‑448.

JOHN, SAINT, CERML43S OF. See MAN‑DMANB.

JOHN, SAINT, FIRE OF (SAINT JOHN'S FIRE)
A fire lighted in accord with ancient custom in various countries, especially in southern Germany, on the evening or eve of the day of St. John the Baptist (June 24) in the open air on hills and mountains, or in the streets and villages. It must be needfire, and the ceremonies attending it are the dancing of the young around it, the throwing of all sorts of flowers, herbs, and garlands into it, the priestly blessing of the fire, the kindling and rolling of a wheel wrapped with straw (" St. John's wheel ") the erection of a tree, the driving of cattle through the fire, the carrying of torches and fire‑brands, and the like. All manner of healing and beneficent 'i properties are ascribed to the fire, such as protection I against sickness, cure of all diseases (especially epilepsy), fertility, exemption from fire and storm, and safety against witchcraft. Although the origin, extension, and significance of these customs are uncertain, it is at least clear that they are survivals of a primitive cult of the light, fire, and sun, current throughout the Indo‑Germanic peoples. Parallels are accordingly found not only in the GrecoRoman world, as in the Vesta‑cult and the Palilia, but also among the Celts, Germans, and Slavs, though there is no evidence that one people borrowed from another. The festival was obviously a celebration of the summer solstice. The garlands, like the rolling of the wheel and the dancing round the fire, symbolize the sun, but the so‑called " solstice‑girdle," as the ironwort and wormwood hallowed in ancient custom are called, represent the girdle bound about his loins by the Apostle John lest he should become weary in his wanderings. The fire of St. John celebrates the solstice, the time when the days are longest, and also the time when the bloom of spring passes over to the harvest. At that period the heat of summer threatens sickness, so that the blessings of fertility must be assured, and all impending danger be averted. It is the time when lost treasures rise and are exposed to the light of the sun, and spirits seeking release wander about. All plants then develop especially healing properties, and water is then particularly good both for bathing and drinking. This is explained by the ancient Germanic belief in Baldur, the god of light, whose place is here taken by John the Baptist. The fire of St. John thus represents victory of light over darkness, the shortest night of the year, on which in the far north the sun does not set, being transformed into day by the fires. The Church was fully conscious of the relation of the feast of St. John to the summer solstice, and endeavored to suppress the custom of kindling fires; but it was forced to yield to popular usage, so that finally the fire was not only tolerated, but the clergy and the nobility took part in the celebration. Attempts were made at an early time, however, to give the fire of St. John a Christian interpretation, and medieval theologians of the twelfth and thir‑
teenth centuries interpreted it with reference to
John i. 8. Others sought to explain the fire from
the legend of the burning of the Baptist's bones at
Sebaste, while the dance was supposed to be a rem
iniscence of the dance of the daughter of Herodias,
all efforts being made to avoid any allusion to pa
ganism. In many placers, especially in Evangelical
countries, the fires of St. John have been forbidden
in modern times, or have become obsolescent of
themselves. 	(A. Fx>Jysx.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: P. M. Paciandi, De cotta S. Joannia Baptistae aatiquitatea Chriatianae, Rome, 1758; C. F. de Khautz, De rite ignia in natali S. Johannia auensi, Vienna, 1759; kitsch and Gruber, Atl9emeane Encyclopadie, section 1T., vol. aaii., P. 265; F. Nork, Featkaknder, pp. 408 eqq., Stuttgart, 1847; J. Grimm, Deutsche MytMogie, p. 578 aqq., Gottingen, 1854; R. Chambers, Book of Days, under June 24, 2 vola., London, 1882‑84.

JOHN, SAINT, OF BEVERLEY: Bishop of Hexham and of York; d. at Beverley (27 m. e.s.e. of York) May 7, 721. He was born in Northumbria of noble parentage, studied at Canterbury under Archbishop Theodore, and was an inmate of Hilda's monastery at Streanaeahalch (Whitby). In 687 he became bishop of Hexham, and on the death of Boss in 705 was transferred to York. He established a convent at Beverley, and in 718 gave up his bishopric and retired thither. He was eloquent, learned, and holy, a founder of schools, and a famous teacher. Beds was ordained by him and may have been his scholar. After St. Cuthbert, he was the greatest of the North English saints and the miracles related of him rival those of Cuthbert and Aidan. Henry V. attributed the victory at Agincourt to his intercession, the battle being fought on his day.
BisLioosweay: The fundamental source is Beds, Hint. acct., iv. 23, v. 2‑8, 24. Consult also: Posh Eboraanaea, ed. W. Ii. Dixon and J. Maine, i. 84‑92, London, 1883; J. Rains, The Historians of the Church of York, i., pp, Iii. ‑Ix., 239‑348, b11‑541 (no. 71 of Rolls Series, ib. 1879); W. Bright, Early English Church Hiat., pp. 398‑399, Oxford, 1897; DNB, xxix. 435 138; DCB, iii. 377‑378.

	JOHN, SAINT, ORDER OF HOSPITALERS OF:
One of the most famous of the so‑called military
orders of the Middle Ages (see MILITARY RELIGIOUS
ORDERS). They are known by various names: the
Knights Hospitalers of St. John of Jerusalem, Mil
ifCB hO3ptfltZiB S. Joannis Hieroaolymitdni, Johan
nitae, etc.; later, from their chief seats, Knights of
Rhodes and Knights of Malta. The origin of the
order is obscure, but it was evidently based on an
		older foundation, a "hospital of Jeru
	Origin salem," which seems to have been an
and Devel‑ independent establishment of the citi
	opment zees of Amalfi. Previous to the capture
	into a of Jerusalem by the Crusaders (1099)
	Military the rector of the hospital was a Brother
	Order. Gerhard (or Gerald; in later time the
		name Tune or Tonque was added), who
enlarged the institution after the city was taken
and reorganized it. With the cooperation of the
Crusaders the hospital increased in importance, and
Gerhard may thus be regarded as the founder of
the Hospitalera of St. John. He was succeeded by
Raymond du Puy, who gave the brothers a rule
which was approved by Innocent IL, Eugene III.,

217	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Doha, Saint
and Lucius III., and in 1287‑90 William of Stefano made the first collection of statutes; a second was made in 1303 and there two collections formed the basis of all subsequent ones. At first all members wore a black robe with a cross of eight points of white linen affixed to it, worn on the left breast. In 1259 Alexander IV. granted to members of the first class a red mantle with a white cross.
In hospital service the order was moat active; its institutions were models for the age, and its rules and regulations formed the patterns for the other orders of Hospitalers (q.v.). The chief hospital at Jerusalem was built opposite the Holy Sepulcher and was a large structure with wide colonnades, in which hundreds of pilgrims and invalids found welcome and assistance. This institution continued its activity even after the capture of Jerusalem by Saladin, while the order supported hospitals in numerous other places, particularly in Acre, Cyprus, Rhodes, and Malta. Skilled physicians were soon found in the hospitals, and i all clothing, food, wine, and other necessities for i the sick were furnished by the various houses. Gradually, however, as the struggle against the infidels claimed every energy, the knights were released from the care of the sick, and complaints were soon heard, especially in the East, that invalids were neglected by many houses. The order became more and more knightly, and steadily lost its monastic character, whereas originally the monks had almost outnumbered the knights in the membership of the order. With surprising rapidity valuable possessions and privileges were acquired both in the Orient and in the Occident. In Palestine the castles of the knights stretched from north to south, especially along the threatened frontier from Hebron to Ascalon, on the eastern shore of Lake Tiberias, and in the vicinity of Tripolis and Antioch. The rest of the grand master, after the fall of Jerusalem, was the citadel of Margat, which was supposed to be impregnable, until it was taken by Sultan Kalaun in 1285, Acre, the last possession of the knights in Palestine, being captured six years later.
A scanty remnant of the order fled to Cyprus, where the king provided them a refuge in the city of Limiaso. In 1309, so speedy was its revival, the Grand Master Foulquea de Vil‑
	The	laret captured the island of Rhodes
Knights and founded a kingdom which lasted
is Rhodes for two centuries, was a bulwark of
and Malta. Europe against the Turks, and only fell through treachery in 1522. This was the period of the order's great prosperity. Its wealth was increased by the greater portion of the estates of the Knights Templara (q.v.) after their suppression in 1311, and the income of the Knights of St: John was at least 36,000,000 franca annually, eighteen or twenty times that of the king of France. The order was divided into eight " languages," Provence (always considered the first), Auvergne, Franoe, Italy, Aragon, England, Germany, and Ceatile. Each "language" was subdivided into grand priories and these into commaaderies, the latter visited periodically by the grand prior. At the head of the entire order stood the grand master,
aided by the chapter‑general which convened at stated intervals and had legislative power.
After the loss of Rhodes the knights had no home until 1530, when Charles V. gave them the island of Malta (whence the name " Knights of Malta"), which they defended courageously against the Turks. With the grand‑masten3hip of Jean de la Valetta (15578) the order reached its climax, but the Reformation brought them one disaster after another, while internal dissension added to the calamities, and the knights became mere' profactors of merchantmen against pirates. Under the Grand Master Ferdinand von Hompesch, the'island was betrayed to Bonaparte and on Sept. 4, 1800, it was seized by the English. The order was suppressed in Bavaria and Spain, while Paul I. of Russia, who had been elected grand master in place of Von Hompeach, was not recognized by the pope. The Roman Catholic remnants were collected under the administration of a grand master who is appointed by the pope and who has resided in Rome since 1834.
In Prussia the commandery of Brandenburg preserved its existence as the Protestant part of the order, although its property was confiscated
in 1810 and it became a meaningless Modern Af‑ decoration. In 1852, however, it was filiations. reorganized by Frederick William IV., and has since been extremely active as a hospital order. It has founded some fifty hospitals, including one established at Beirut during the persecutions of the Christians by the Druare of Lebanon in 1860. In the ware of 1864, 1866, and 1870 the Hospitalere gave invaluable aid to the sick and wounded. In like manner the RomanCatholic Hospitalers, called distinctively Knights of Malta, have revived the original functions of the order, at least in Germany. (G. Urff.HOailt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A very complete review of the literature of
	the subject is given by F, de Hellwald, Bi6liopraphie
	methadique de l'ordra' . . . de Bt. Joan do Jerusalem,
	Rome, 1885. The sources are collected in Codtce dipZom
	deL sacro military ord£ne GerosolimiJano, Lucca, 1733, and
	in the great work begun by J. Delaville de Roulx, Cartu
	laire phngraZe de l'ordre des hoapitaliera S. Jean de Jeruaafern,
	of which 2 vole. have so far appeared, Paris, 1894 eqq.,
	with which cf. the same author's Ds prima origins hoe
	pitaliorum Hierosolymitarum, Paris, 1885. and his Lea
	Statute de l'ordre . in BibZioth6que de 1'Ixole du
	chartea, aviii., pp. 341‑358. Consult: R. Aubert de Verto;
	d'Aubeuf. Hiat. des cheualiera hoapitadiere, Paris, 1728;
	A. von Winterfeld, (3eacAichta des rittertichen Ordsna St.
	Johannia vona Spital zu Jarusalem, Berlin, 1859; M. J. J.
	G. $aige, De l'anci~nnim de 1'hBpital St. Jean de Jerusalem,
	in Bibliofh4ue de l'4cola des ehartes. 1883. P• 552: H. von
	Ortenburg, Dar Ritlerordsn des ‑heiligen Johannes von
	Jerusalem, Regensburg, 1886; J. Wilson, Concise Account
of sh John's cak, carkcnvu, and d 16 Kn;Aj. a> st.
John q/ Jerusalem, London, 1889 F. C. Woodhouse, The
M' slitary Religious Orders of the Middle Apes, New York,
1879 A. T. Drane The Knights ojS't. John, London, 1881;
W. K. R. Bedford, The ltepula:iona of the Old Hospital of the Knights of St. John at Valetta, ib. 1882; G, Uhlhorn, in ZRC, vi (1882). 48; $. Pruta, Kuttder K. PP. 235 sqq., Berlin, 1883• F, von Fiaek, Ueberticht ilbar die Oeachichts do, ritlerliclun Ordena 3t. Johannie, Berlin, 189p• C. Herrlieh, Die Ballet' Brandenbur0h des Johanniterardsaa ib.1891; J. von Pflug‑Hartung, Die AnjOnps des Johannitaordana in Deatachland, ib. 1899: Helyot, Ordrsa rnonaap;q„ff, iii. 72 eqq.: Heimbuoher, Order and Konprepationen; KL, vi. 1791‑1803; $. F. A. i Caulfield, Dawn of Christianity in Modern Europe . ,
Knights of the Hospital . ‑ . , London, 1909,

John the Steadfast
Johns, John
JOHN THE STEADFAST: Elector of Saxony 1525‑32, brother of Frederick the Wise (q.v.); b. at Meissen (15 m, n.w. of Dresden) June 30, 1468; d. at Schweinitz (54 m. n.e. of Merseburg) Aug. 16, 1532. He received a scholarly education, was trained in the arts of knighthood, and is said to have distinguished himself in the struggle against the Turks. Luther's writings soon won his heart, and he followed the development of the reformatory movement with ever increasing interest. It was he who, in the absence of the elector, omitted to publish the boll directed against Luther. In his letters to his brother he warmly recommended Luther and admonished the cautious elector to adopt more decidedly the reformer's cause and to influence other princes in the same direction. His influence decided Frederick to protect Luther in the Wartburg. During the printing of his New Testament, Luther sent John the single sheets, and thenceforth he read the Bible daily. In October, 1522, Luther came for the first time, as it seems, on his journey to Erfurt to the court of Weimar and preached several times. His sermons on the limitations of secular authority caused John to dosire further discussion of the subject, and Luther published his treatise Von zceltlicher Olmigkeit, the principles of which John conscientiously tried to carry out throughout his life. Too ono‑sided emphasis of these principles and his anxiety not to interfere improperly in spiritual matters, seem to have been the reason why he tolerated for a long time the agitation of Miinzer and Carlstadt. Similarly he did not interfere with the abolition of the Corpus Christi procession, and allowed the reading of the mass and the celebration of the Lord's.Supper after the Protestant fashion.
When he became sole ruler, after the death of Frederick (May 5, 1525), he announced to the clergy that in future the pure word of God should be preached without human addition, and that all useless ceremonies should be abolished. He resolutely refused an agreement with his cousin, George of Saxony, and with the landgrave of Hesse openly confessed the Evangelical doctrine. To be prepared against machinations of his opponents, a treaty was ratified Feb. 27, 1526, between him and Philip of Hesse, which was soon joined by other Evangelical estates, so that John became the leader of the Evangelical party. As such he appeared at the Diet of Speyer in 1526 (see SPEYER, DIETa OF). Difficult problems awaited him at home. Before he had become elector, Nicolaus Hausman, preacher of Zwickau, had called his attention to the miserable condition of the Church and advised him to undertake a general visitation, pointing to Luther as the most suitable man for that purpose. Luther now proposed to institute four or five commissions of visitation for the whole country, and there followed a demand of the visitators that the privilege to install or depose clergymen should belong exclusively to the sovereign. It was a step in the development of the State Church, and the acknowledgment of the secular ruler as the protector of the Church.
Owing to the influence of Luther, John reorganized the University of Wittenberg and checked the
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
greed of the nobility in appropriating the pos
sessions of the Church, which had become a real
danger for the country. During this constructive
activity of the elector the rumor spread of the
formation of a league of Roman Catholic princes
at Breslau (1528) for the annihilation of the Evan
gelical estates and the extirpation of the new her
esy. Otto von Pack reported to Landgrave Philip
of Hesse that he and the elector were required to
reestablish the Roman religion in their countries.
Both were convinced of the genuineness of the re
port and prepared for defense by trying to gain
new allies in the north and south. At the advice
of Luther and contrary to the wish of Philip, John
desisted from assuming the offensive. In full con
fidence of the justice of his cause he went again to
the Diet of Speyer in 1529, and, by openly avowing
his Evangelical convictions, incurred the enmity
of the majority. He defended the Evangelical in
terpretation of the Recess of Speyer of 1526, so
cording to which the privilege of ecclesiastical ren
ovation had been granted, and protested against
the resolution of the majority, which threatened
the further existence of the new Church. At first
he was inclined to meet the efforts of the Strae
burg Evangelicals who tried to unite the Protes
tants on the question of the Lord's Supper, but
Luther dissuaded him. His acceptance of the
Schwabach Article (q.v.), drawn up by Luther,
showed his determination to renounce even his league
with the la,ndgrav e, if the latter would not separate
himself from the union efforts of Switzerland and
Upper Germany. Although he had sustained many
an insult from the emperor, he acknowledged obe
dience to him, except where it conflicted with the
honor of God and his soul's welfare. At the Diet
of Augsburg, in 1530, his conduct was heroic. He
firmly maintained his Evangelical position, and
refused to forbid Evangelical preaching at the de
mand of the emperor. The great services he ren
dered to the final suttees, of the Augsburg Confes
sion are well known. On his homeward journey
he learned of the warlike preparations of his ene
mies, but his interpretation of the Word of God
withheld him from opposing an attack of his em
peror. After some weeks, however, he, as well as
Luther, was convinced by jurists that the relation
of the emperor to the estates was not strictly mo
narchical, both parties being bound by law and
right, and that the emperor, in attacking the Evan.
gelicals, acted not only against God, but against
his own imperial rights; therefore a defense of the
Evangelicals would be justified, and in 1531 the
Protestants formed a defensive league tinder the
leadership of John. On the question of the elec
tion of Ferdinand as Roman king, he took a much
firmer stand. At the beginning of the Diet of
Augsburg he had been determined to oppose it for
legal reasons, and what he heard later of the prao
tiles of the emperor and Ferdinand confirmed him
in his opposition. Luther advised him, though
hesitatingly, to concede the election, but in this
point John followed his chancellor, Brack, who
asked him to protest against it. The elector was
declared disobedient because he did not appear
personally at the election, and thus the rupture

819
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
between him and the emperor was decided. Polit
ical conditions, however, forced the emperor again
to approach the Evangelical estates, and on July
23, 1532, the religious peace of Nuremberg (see
NUREMBERG, RELIGIOUS PEACE OF) was ratified. i
John had not the gifts of statesmanship which his
brother Frederick possessed, but he was a man of
fearless courage, deep Evangelical convictions, and
unsullied life. 	(T. KOLDE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are: Espalatlil'9 BiPgTaPhie, in J. B. Mencke, Conspectus script, rer. Germ., ii. 1123 eqq., Leipaie, 1728; C. E. FSratemann, Urkunalenbudt zur Geschichte dew Reichetapa zu Augsburg, 2 vols., Halle, 1833‑3b; idem, Archiv far die Geschichte der Irirchlichen Reformation, i.. part 1, ib. 1833; idem, Neaea Urkundenbuch zur Geschichte der . . KirchetrReformation, vol. i., Hamburg, 1842; C. G. Neudeeker, Aktenatitcke sue dem Zeitalter der Reformation, Nuremberg, 1839‑40; and the various editions of Luther's correspondence. C. A. H. Burekhaxdt, Geachichte der adchaischen Kirchen‑ and Schulviai(ationen, Leipeie, 1879; H. Schwarz, Landgraf Philipp von Hessen and die Packiadven‑Handel, Leipeic, 1884; O. Winckelmann, Der achmalkaldiache Bund and der Marburper Religiouefiitdt, Strasburg, 1892; L. von Ranks, Deutsche Geachiehte, vole. iii.‑iv.. Leipeic, 1894; Cambridge Modern History, ii. 233278, New York, 1904; and the literature under LUTHER; REPO$aIeTIOar.
JOHN OF THESSALONICA : Archbishop of Thessalonica. He was delegate of the pope at the sixth ecumenical council (Constantinople, 680). In the proceedings of the second synod held at Nima (Ma,nsi, xiii. 164) occurs a fragment of his dialogue between a Christian and a pagan, in which imageworship is justified. Image‑worship, he says, relates to the saints and not to the pictures, to God as he used to walk among men; even the angels have a certain corporeality. There has also been handed down a speech of John entitled " On the death of the most holy . . . Mother of God and ever virgin Mary." It is complete only in au old Slavonic translation (in Popov, BibZiografiLYeskija materialy, pp. 40‑65, Moscow, 1879); fragments of the original are in Tisehendorf, Apocalypses apocryphae (Leipsic, 1886). The speech follows closely the De dormitione Mariae of Pseudo‑John and has been ascribed to him. There is also extant a writing entitled " On the glorious, victorious Demetrius" (ASB., Oct., iv. 104‑160) which bears the name of John of Thessalonica.
(N. BONwETBCH.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Leo Allatiua De Symeonum acriptia, pp. 105.
110. Papa, 1884• M. Le Quien Oriene Chriatianua, ii. 42,
3 vole.. Paris, 1740; W. Cave Scriptorum eccleaiaeticorum hiaWrin literaa, L 597, Oxford, 1740; Fabricius‑Harlea, Biblnotheca Greece, x. 219, 250, 285, Hamburg, 1807; Krumbaeher, Geachichte, p. 192; DCB, iii. 396.
JOHN‑BOftITES: An order of hermits, founded by Giovanni Buono (b. at Mantua 1168; d. Oct. 23, 1249), who, after long years as a strolling jongleur, was converted in 1208. Retiring to a lonely spot near the church of Santa Maria di Budriolo, not far from Cesena, be is said to have lived first as an absolute hermit, but about 1217 began to gather companions around him. Although he never took orders and could neither read nor write, the fame of his extraordinary mortifieationa wrought marvellous conversions, both among his immediate followers and among the heretical Lombard Pata_ renew, many of whom he restored to the Church. Without formulating a written rule, or even a defi‑
John the $teatlfast Johns, John
nits mode of life, for his spiritual children, com
munities of hermits are said to have originated in
his own lifetime, located at Bertinoro (near Forli),
Mantua, Venice, Bologna, Parma, Ferrara, Pog
	giolo, Faenza, Poncelia, and Rimini. A few years
	before Buono's death, the John‑Bonites (Johant
	bonitax, Jambonitae), whom their founder had vested
	with a gray habit, were bound by Innocent IV. to
	the Augustinian rule. Alexander IV., by bull of
	Aug. 13, 1256, forced them to enter his newly
	founded order of Augustinian hermits, thus ter
	minating their independent existence. The efforts
	to canonize Giovanni Buono, originating chiefly
	from Mantua and begun as early as the middle of
	the thirteenth century, resulted only in his beatifi
	cation by Sixtus IV. in 1483; nevertheless, he is
	the chief patron of Mantua, where his remains have
	reposed in the church of Santa Agnese Nuova since
1451. 	(0. ZlSCKLERt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Vita of the founder, by A. Calepino,
	with commentary, is in ASB, Oct., ix. 893‑888; Helyot,
Ordrea mottastiqaes, iii. 8 eqq.
JOHNS, CLAUDE HERMANN WALTER: Church I of England; b. at Banwell (22 m. s.w. of Bath), Somersetshire, Feb. 20, 1857. He was educated at Queen's College, Cambridge (B.A., 1880), and was second master successively at Norton College, Tasmania, in 1880‑84 and Paston Grammar School, North Walsham, Norfolk, in 1884‑86. He was ordered deacon in 1887 and ordained priest in the following year, and from 1887 until 1892 wastutor in St. Peter's Training College for Schoolmasters, Peterborough, as well as curate of St. Botolph's, Helpston (1887‑8R), and of St. John's, Peterborough (1888‑91). Since 1892 he has been rector of St. Botolph's, Cambridge. He was also chaplain of Queen's College from 1893 to 1901, and since 1897 has been lecturer in Assyriology in Cambridge University, as well as in King's College, London, since 1902. He has likewise been Edwards fellow in the former university since 1900, and was honorary secretary of the Cambridge Pupil Teachers' Centre in 1894‑1900. In theology he is a moderate Anglican. He has written Assyrian Deeds and Documents (3 vola., Cambridge, 1898‑1902); An Assyrian Doomsday‑Book, or Ltber Censz<alis of the District round Harran (Leipsie, 1901); The Oldest Code of Laws in the World, Promulgated by Hammurabi (Edinburgh, 1903); and Babylonian arid Assyrian Laws, Contracts, and Letters (New York, 1904).
JOHNS, JOHN: Protestant Episcopal bishop of Virginia; b. at New Castle Del., July 10, 1796; d. at Alexandria, Va., Apr. 5, 1876. He studied at Princeton (B.A., 1815), and subsequently spent two years in the theological seminary there. In both college and seminary he was a classmate of Charles Hodge, with whom he formed a lifelong
I	intimacy. He was ordained deacon in 1819, and
	priest in 1820. His first parish was All Saints,
Frederick Md,l where ho Tmaimd U 106 , when
~~	be became rector of Christ Church, Baltimore. This charge he held till he was elected assistant bishop of Virginia in 1842. He became bishop in 1862. He was for a number of years the head of the Protestant Episcopal Theological Seminary of

dohaeon	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	220
Virginia. He wrote A Memoir of the Life of the Right Rev. William Meade (Baltimore, 188?).
BIBLIOGRAPHY. w. 6. Perry, The Episcopate in America, p. 87, New York, 1895.

JOHNSON, ELIAS HENRY: Baptist; b. at Troy, N. Y., Oct. 15, 1841; d. at Chester, Pa., Mar. 10, 1908. He was educated at the University of Rochester (A.B., 1862), and from 1862 to 1864 continued his studies, a part of the time at Rochester Theological Seminary. After being acting assistant paymaster in the United States Navy in 18641866, he entered the Baptist ministry in the latter year, holding a pastorate at Le Sueur, Minn., in 1886‑68. He then reentered Rochester Theological Seminary, from which he was graduated in 1871, spent two years in travel in Europe, the Holy Land, and Egypt, after which he was pastor at Ballston, N. Y., from 1873 to 1875 and at Providence, R. L, from 1875 to 1883. From the latter year until his death he was professor of systematic theology at Crozer Theological Seminary, Chester, Pa. He edited Songs of Praise for Sunday Schools (Philadelphia, 1882); Our Sunday School Songs (1885); and the hymnal Suraum Cords (1898); besides being associate editor of The Baptist Hymnal (Philadelphia, 1883). He also wrote Uses and Abuses of Ordinances (Philadelphia, 1890); Outlive of Systematic Theology (1892); Review of Ethical Monism (New York, 1895); Ezekiel Gilman Robinson (1896); Religious Use of Imagination (1900); The Highest Life (1901); The Holy Spirit Then and Now (Philadelphia, 1904) ; and the posthumous Christian Agnosticism as Related to Christian Knowledge, ed. with Biographical Sketch, H. C. Vedder (1907).

JOHNSON, FRANCIS: English Separatist; b. at Richmond (42 m. n.w. of York), Yorkshire, 1562; d. at Amsterdam Jan. 10, 1618. He studied at Christ's College, Cambridge (B. A., 1581), and became fellow. In 1589 he was expelled from the university for preaching in favor of Presbyterian polity, went to Zealand, and became minister of the English Church at Middelburg. In 1591 he was instrumental in destroying the entire edition of a book by Barrow and Greenwood (A Plain Refutation of 11‑1. Gi, ford's Book Entitled " A Short Treatise against the Donatists of England": wherein is discovered: (1) the forgery of the whole ministry; (2) the confusion; (3) false worship; and (/) anlichristian disorder of those parish assemblies called the Church of England; reprinted Amsterdam, 1605), saving, however, two copies for his own use, and by reading them was converted. In 1592, with Greenwood, he organized a congregation in London and was imprisoned in consequence ; in 1597 he settled in Amsterdam and became minister of the Separatists living there; because of disagreement with Henry Ainsworth concerning the authority of elders he went to Emden about 1612, but later returned to Amsterdam. He wrote several controversial treatises.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: p, Neat, Hiat. or the Puritans, ii. 40‑41, London, 1822; B. Brooke, Lives of !he Puritans, i. 398397, ii. 89‑90, ib. 1813; . M. Dexter, Congregationalism of the Last Three Hundred Years, New York, 1880; w. Walker, Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalism, p. 41. n. 4, New York, 1893; DNB, xxx. 9‑11.
JOHNSON, FRANKLIN: Baptist; b. at Frankfort, O., Nov. 2, 1838. He was educated at Colgate University, but left before taking his degree, and at Colgate Theological Seminary, from which he was graduated in 1881. He held successive pastorates at the First Baptist Church, Bay City, Mich. (1862‑84), Lambertville, N. J. (1884‑66), Passaic, N. J. (1886‑72), and the Old Cambridge Baptist Church, Cambridge, Mass. (1872‑88), interrupted only by a year of study in Germany and travel in Egypt and Palestine in 18689. He was president of Ottawa University in 1890‑92, and since the latter year has been professor of church history and homiletics in the University of Chicago. In addition to being associate editor of The Watchman. in 1876, his writings include: The Gospel According to Matthew, with Notes (New York, 1873); Moses and Israel (1874); Heroes and Judges from the Low‑Crivers to the King (1875); The Dies Irae (Cambridge, Mass., 1880); The Stabat Mater Dolorosa and the Stabat Mater SPeeiosa (Boston, 1886); The New Psychic Studies in their Relation to Christian Thought (New York, 1886); The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old Considered in the Light of General Literature (Philadelphia, 1898); The Home Missionaries (Chicago, 1889); Have We the Likeness of Christ t (1902); and The Christian's Relation to Evolution (1904).

JOHNSON, FREDERICK FOOTE: Protestant Episcopal bishop coadjutor of South Dakota; b. at Newtown, Conn., Apr. 23, 1886. He was graduated at Trinity College, Hartford, Conn., in 1894, and at Berkeley Divinity School, Middletown, Corm., in 1897. After being minister at Glenwood Springs, Col., 1896‑97, and curate of St. Stephen's, Colorado Springs, 1897‑99, he was rector of Trinity, Redlands, Cal., 1899‑1904. He was then diocesan missionary in Western Massachusetts for a year, and in 1905 was consecrated bishop coadjutor of South Dakota.
JOHNSON, GISLE CHRISTIAN: Norwegian theologian; b. at Fredrikshald (58 m. s.s.e. of Christiania) Sept. 10, 1822; d. at Christiania July 17, 1894. He was educated at the cathedral school of Christiansand and at the University of Christiania, after which a scholarship enabled him to travel and study in Berlin, Leipsic, Erlangen, Heidelberg, Tiibingen, and Paris. He returned to Norway in the fall of 1847, and was appointed Leoturer in theology at the university two years later, becoming professor in 1860. He lectured on systematic theology, history of doctrine, theological encyclopedia, and, after 1877, on church history.
Johnson exercised an important influence on Christian life in general as well as on his students by his devotional lectures in Christiania and elsewhere. He spent many of his vacations in traveling through the country in search of health, and in these travels, which were generally on foot, he visited awakened Christian laymen. His theological standpoint was strict orthodoxy of the old Lutheran type, and be worked for the home missions in Christiania, the Norwegian Luther‑foundation, the students' home, and similar institutions. Despite his thorough learning, he was not a pro‑