201	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	~~y sanaH°n
in 1831 he was ordained to the priesthood of the Roman Catholic Church, and three years later was appointed professor of philosophy and theology at Genoa, where he manifested great heroism in the care of the sick during an epidemic of cholera in 1835. In 1837 he received an appointment in the Holy Office, only to have his faith gradually but surely undermined by the books which his position compelled him to read. Nevertheless, he gained a high reputation as a pulpit orator, and from 1840 to 1847 was at the head of the parish of Santa Maddalena alla Rotonda in Rome; but the doubts already engendered were complicated by his sympathy with the movement for the unification of Italy and the overthrow of papal control, and in 1843 he was condemned to ten days' imprisonment in the monastery of San Eusebio. The accession of Pius IX. June 21, 1846, and the policy at first adopted by the new pontiff, filled De Sanctis with hope, which was speedily crushed by the encyclical of Nov. 9, 1846, exalting the cult of the Virgin. De Sanetis was now obliged to conceal his ever‑increasing doubts, both family ties and official position combining to prevent him from openly breaking with his church. At this juncture he came in contact with a Scotch clergyman named Lowndes, then resident in Malta, who brought him greetings from the ex‑monk Giovanni Giacinto Achilli, who was endeavoring to propagate Protestantism in Malta under British protection (see NEwMAN, JOHN HENRY). A second interview with Lowndes led De Sanctis to gain permission to visit Ancona, whence he surreptitiously sailed for Corfu, soon leaving that island for Malta. Refusing every inducement to return to Rome, he now passed two years preaching in an Italian church in Malta, but with the change of conditions in Italy he accepted an invitation to visit Tuscany, where he preached in Florence, Leghorn, and the vicinity of Lucca until ordered by the police to desist. He then returned to Malta, where, on Nov. 1, 1848, he began the publication of Il Caltollico cristiano, a sheet filled with denunciation of Roman Catholicism and defense of Protestantism. In 1849 he married, and in the same year published his La Confessione (Malta, 1849; Eng. transl. by M. H. G. Buckle, London, 1878), and in 1850 he accepted a call to Geneva to preach among the Italian political refugees, workmen, and ex‑priests. He soon after made a tour of Italian Switzerland, meeting with special success in the Protestant Val Bregaglia. The growth of the Waldensian community in Turin (see ITALY, II., § 1), however, led to the call of De Sanctis to that city in 1853, and he was formally ordained to the Waldensian ministry on Aug. 31 of the same year. ‑ But a split soon arose among the Waldensians, one faction adhering to their original principles, and the other, supported largely by funds supplied by Baptists and Plymouth Brethren, terming themselves "Free Italian Churches" (see ITALY, II., § 2) and claiming that they would quickly turn all Italy to Protestantism. It was with this radical wing that De Sanetis threw in his fortunes, and in 1855, at the Paris conference of the Evangelical Alliance, he secured recognition and financial aid for his party. He also visited London in quest
of funds and was cordially received, and after a tour of Piedmont took up his residence at Genoa, where he and his friends established a Protestant school. During this period he employed himself in writing, the chief results being his Si pub leggere la Biblia? (3d ed., Florence, 1866); La Religiaree degli avi (1861); La Messa (Turin, 1862); and Discuasione pacifim (1863). He did not, however, approve of the hostility of the "Free Church" to the Waldensians, and in 1863‑64 events forced him to protest publicly against an attack on Roman Catholicism and Protestantism alike in favor of the exclusive claim of the Plymouth Brethren to true Christianity. The result was a fresh split in the "Free Church," and De Sanctis withdrew to Florence, where he was soon appointed professor of apologetic, polemic, and practical theology in the Waldensian seminary, a position which he held until his death.
	The list of De Sanctis' writings is a long one.
His principal productions, in addition to those
already mentioned, are as follows: Il Celibato dei
preti (n.p., 1850) ; Popery and Jesuitism at Rome in
the Nineteenth Century (London, 1852); Lettera a
Pio mono, vescovo di Roma (Turin, 1854); Il Primato
del papa (Florence, 1861); Osservozioni dottrinali e
storiche (1865); Compendio di eontroversie tra la
parola Dio 6 la teologia romance (4th ed., 1870); ll
Papa non b successore di san Pietro (4th ed., 1887);
Il	Purgatorio perchb non b ammesso dagli evan
gelici (1898); and the most important of all, Roma
pqpale (1865). 	(PAOLO CALVINO.)
SANCTUARY, RIGHT OF. See AsYLum, RIGHT OF.
SANDAY, WILLIAM: Church of England; b. at Holme Pierrepont (20 m. n.e. of Nottingham), Nottinghamshire, Aug. 1, 1843. He was educated at Balliol College, Oxford, and Corpus Christi College, Oxford (B.A., 1865), and was ordered deacon in 1867 and ordained priest two years later. He was fellow of Trinity College, Oxford (1866‑73); in charge of Navestock, Romford (1869‑71), lecturer of St. Nicholas, Abingdon (1871‑72); vicar of Great Waltham, Chelmsford (1872‑73); rector of Barton‑on‑the‑Heath, Warwickshire (1873‑76); principal of Hatfield Hall, Durham (1876‑83); Dean Ireland's professor of the exegesis of Holy Scripture in the University of Oxford and tutorial fellow of Exeter College, Oxford (1883‑95); and since 1895 he has been Lady Margaret professor of divinity and canon of Christ Church, Oxford. He was also examining chaplain to the bishop of Durham (1879‑.81), select preacher at Cambridge in 1880, 1892, and 1903, Whitehall preacher in 1889‑90, and Bampton lecturer in 1893. He has been honorary fellow of Exeter College since 1898; chaplain in ordinary to the king, and a fellow of the British Academy since 1903. Besides being joint editor of the Variorum Bible (London, 1880); Old Latin Biblical Texts, ii. (in collaboration with Bishop John Wordsworth; 1886); Studia Biblica et Ecclesiostica (Oxford, 1891); Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (in collaboration with A. C. Headlam; London, 1886; 5th ed., 1909); and editing the translation of select writings of

S~1°"s
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	802
Hilary of Poietiers for the Library of Nicene and Post‑Nicene Fathers (New York and Edinburgh, 1898); he has written The Authorship and Historical Character of the Fourth Gospel (London, 1872); The Gospels in the Second Century (1876); the sections on Romans and Galatians in Bishop C. J. Ellicott's Handy Commentary (London, 1878); Appendices ad Novum Testamentum Stephanieum (1889); The Oracles of God (1891); Two Present Day Questions (1892); Inspiration (Bampton lectures; 1893); The Conception of Priesthood in the Early Church and in the Church of England (1898); An Examination of Harnack's "What is Christianity?" (1901); Criticism of the New Testament (1902); Divisions in the Church (1902); Sacred Sites of the Gospels (in collaboration with P. Waterhouse; 1903); Outlines of the Life of Christ (Edinburgh, 1905); The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel (London, 1905); The Life of Christ in Recent Research (1907); and Christologies, Ancient and Modern (1910).
SANDEMANIANS, san‑de‑m66'ni‑ans or man'i‑ans (GLASSITES): A sect founded in Scotland c. 1730 by John Glas (q.v.). The basal idea of the founder was the restoration of the apostolic Church, realizing the complete independence of each local church from every other and from the State. Chief emphasis was laid upon the Lord's Supper, while feet‑washing, the kiss of charity, the lovefeast, and a limited community of goods were introduced; games of chance, eating of blood and things strangled, and the use of the lot were forbidden, and church government was placed in the hands of bishops, elders, and teachers. The name came from the son‑in‑law of Glas, Robert Sandeman (b. at Perth, Scotland, 1718; d. at Danbury, Conn., Apr. 2, 1771), who was appointed an elder in the new organization, exercised his ministry at Perth, Dundee, and Edinburgh, and sailed in 1764 to America, where he founded churches. The denomination is now nearly or quite extinct.
(C. SCHOELLt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Works of John alas, especially his Treatise on the Lord's Supper, Edinburgh, 1743, reprinted, London, 1883; the literature under GLAs, JOHN; J. Bellamy, Essay on the Nature and Glory of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, i. 85‑125, London, 1781, reprint 1841; A. Fuller, Strictures on Sandemanianism, in his Complete Works, ib. 1853; J. B. Marsden, Hist. of Christian Churches and Sects, ii. 297 sqq., ib. 1858; J. E. Ritchie, Religious Life of London, ib. 1870.
SANDER, IMMANUEL FRIEDRICH EMIL:
Pulpit orator and polemist; b. in Saxony in 1797; d. at Wittenberg Apr. 28, 1859. In early life he was repelled by the current rationalism, and as a minor official of St. Paul's Church in Leipsic, in the first part of his career, he began to preach with emphasis the Gospel of the Crucified One. In 1822 he was called to Wichlinghausen in Wupperthal, where he exerted his activities in the same direction, translating into German, in collaboration with C. H. F. Bialloblotzky, Pusey's Enquiry into the Probable Causes of the Rationalist Character lately Predominant in the Theology of Germany (Elberfeld, 1829), and following this up with his own Theologisches Grutachten (Barmen, 1836), which was preceded and followed by several volumes of sermons and by Beleuehtung (1836) aimed at the Prediger‑Bibel of
Eduard Hillamann (1835), which last brought him into court on charges of libel. He also attacked Droste‑Visehering (q.v.) in Ueber den Frieden unter der Kirche and den Staaten and Das Papatthum in seiner heudgen Gestalt, in seinen Ursprt4ngen and endlichen Ausgangen (Elberfeld, 1845). To this period belongs also his treatise on Gal. iii. 20 (1840) and Der Romanismus, seine Tendenzen and seine Methodik (Essen, 1843). About this time he accepted the ideas of Johann Tobias Beck (q.v.), and placed the beginning of the parousia (see MILLENNIUM, MILLENARIANIsM) in 1847. In 1854 he accepted a call to Wittenberg, where he came to occupy the positions of city preacher, superintendent, and director of the preachers' seminary till his death. He continued to issue sermons, occasional and others, the most significant based upon the Revelation of John.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. W. Krummacher, Immanuel Friedrich Sander, Cologne, 1880.
SANDERS, FRANK KNIGHT: Congregationalist; b. at Batticotta (a village near Jaffna, 190 m. n. of Colombo), Ceylon, June 5, 1861. He was educated at Ripon College, Wis. (A. B., 1882); was instructor in Jaffna College, Ceylon (1882‑86), and continued his studies at Yale (1886‑89). He was then successively assistant in Biblical literature (188990), instructor in Semitic languages (1890‑91), and assistant professor of Biblical literature on the Woolsey foundation (1891‑93)‑‑all at Yale. In 1893 he was appointed Woolsey professor of Biblical literature in Yale, a position which he retained until 1901, when he resigned it to become professor of Biblical history and archeology and dean of Yale Divinity School, both which offices he held until 1905, when he became secretary of the Congregational Sundayschool and Publishing Society. He has been president of Washburn College, Topeka, Kan., since 1908. He has edited in collaboration with C. F. Kent The Historical Series for Bible Students (10 vols., New York, 1897‑1906) and The Messages of the Bible (12 vols., 1898 sqq.), and together with the same scholar has written The Messages of the Earlier Prophets (New York, 1898) and The Messages of the Later Prophets (1899). He has also written Outlines for the Study of Biblical History and Literature (in collaboration with H. T. Fowler, New York, 1906); A Student's Life of Christ (1906); Historical Notes on the Apostolic Leaders (1907); and Higtorkal Notes on the Life of Christ (1907).

SANDERSON, JOSEPH: Presbyterian; b. at Ballybay (60 m. n.w. of Dublin), County Monaghan, Ireland, May 23, 1823; graduated at the Royal College, Belfast, 1845; emigrated to America, 1846; was classical teacher in the Washington Institute, New York, 1847‑49; studied theology and became pastor of the Associate Presbyterian Church, Providence, R. I., 1849; at New York, 1853‑69; acting pastor of Saugatuck Congregational Church, Conn., 1872‑78; assistant editor of the Homiletic Monthly, New York, 1881‑83; editor of the Pulpit Treasury, New York, after 1883; and from 1895, secretary of the Church Extension and Sustentation Committee, New York Presbytery. He is the author of Jesus on

208	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8andemaniana
8anhedrin
the Holy Mount (New York, 1869); Memorial Tributes (1883); The Story of Saint Patrick (1895) ; and Man's Seal to God's Word (1902).

SAN DOMINGO. See WEST INDIES.

SANDYS, EDWIN:. Church of England, archbishop of York; b. near Hswkshead (24 m. n.w. of Lancaster), Lancashire, 1516; d. at York July 10, 1588. He was educated at St. John's College, Cambridge; was converted to Protestantism; elected master of Catherine Hall, 1547; became vicar of Caversham, 1548; canon of Peterborough, 1549; prebendary of Carlisle, 1552; and vice‑chancellor of Cambridge, 1553. He was imprisoned in the Tower for espousing the cause of Lady Jane Grey, escaped, and went into voluntary exile until Elizabeth's accession; became bishop of Worcester, 1559; of London, 1570; and archbishop of York, 1576. He took part in the preparation of the Bishops' Bible (see BIBLE VER$IONs, B, IV., § 4) in 1565; translated Hosea, Joel, Amos, and Malachi in the version of 1572; and assisted in the revision of the Liturgy, 1559. A volume of Sermons (London, 1585; 1616) contains in its newer issue (by T. Whitaker, 1812) a life; this volume was reedited with life for the Parker Society by J. Ayre (Cambridge, 1841).
BxsmroosArar: William Thomas, Survey of the CathedralChurch of Worcester; with an Account of the Bishops, pp. 210‑214, London, 1736; C. H. and T. Cooper, Athena Cantabrigienaes, ii. 24, 543, ib. 1861; F. G. Lee, The Church under Queen Elizabeth, ib. 1896; W. Clark, The Anglican Reformation, New York, 1897; W. H. Frere, The English Church . . . (1668‑1625), London, 1904; H. N. Birt, The Elizabethan Religious Settlement, ib. 1907; DNB, 1. 283‑286.

SANDYS, GEORGE: English poet and pars, phrast; b. at Bishopthorpe (2 m. s. of York) Mar. 2, 1577‑78; d. at Boxley (32 m. s.e. of London), Kent, Mar., 1644. He was educated at Oxford; traveled in the East, 1610‑12; was in Virginia, 1621‑24, as colonial treasurer; nominated to the colonial council, 1624, 1626, and 1628, building there "the first water‑mill, the first iron‑works, and the first ship," but, involved in quarrels and disappointed in not securing the appointment of secretary in 1631, returned to England; and was for some years an attendant of Charles I., and ended life in scholarly retirement. He published a much‑valued Relation of a Journey (London 1615) ; translated Ovid's Metamorphoses (1626), partly at Jamestown, Va.; and G. Grotius' Christ's Passion (1640); and paraphrased the Psalms, Job, Canticles, Ecclesiastes, and Lamentation (1636‑11). In James Montgomery's opinion "his psalms are incomparably the most poetical in the English language, and yet they are scarcely known." Fragments of one or two of them may be found in some of the hymn‑books. The paraphrases were nearly inaccessible until H. J. Todd's Selections from the Metrical Paraphrases on the Psalms and Other Portions of Holy Scripture by G. Sandys with a Memoir (1839) appeared. The Complete Poetical Works (1872) was published with Memoir by R. Hooper in Library of Old Authors (London, 1856‑72).
BYBLIOGRAFHY: Besides the Memoirs named in the text, consult: Julian, Hymnology, pp. 918, 994; DNB, 1. 290293.
SANFORD, ELIAS BENJAMIN: Congregationalist; b. at Westbrook, Conn., June 6, 1843. He received his education at Wesleyan University (A.B., 1865; A.M., 1869) and Yale Divinity School; served as pastor at Cornwall (1869‑71), Thomaston (1873‑81), and Westbrook, all in Connecticut (18821895), during this period being a contributor to religious publications on subjects of importance; he was corresponding secretary of the Open and Institutional Church League (1895‑1900); was the organizer of the National Federation of Churches (see CHuRcH FEDERATION) and general secretary of the same since its founding (1900). At his suggestion this organization took action that secured the appointment of delegates from the highest judicatories and national conferences of thirty denominations representing the larger part of the Evangelical church membership of the United States. These delegates came together in an inter‑church conference held in New York, Nov. 8‑15, 1905, and adopted the plan of federation described in the article referred to above. Since 1903 Dr. Sanford as corresponding secretary has had in charge the correspondence and office details, under direction of the executive committee, of the several conferences. He is the author of History of Connecticut (Hartford, 1881); Concise Cyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1890); Church Federation. Report of Inter‑Church Conference on Federation (New York, 1905); and Federal Council of the Churches. Report of the First Meeting of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America (Philadelphia, 1908).

SANHEDRIN, san'he‑drin, SANHEDRIM: The term usually applied to the highest Jewish judicatory in Jerusalem at the time of Christ. The New Testament in the Greek usually employs the term synedrion to designate the court in which the judicial process against Jesus Christ was carried on (Matt. xxvi. 59; Mark xiv. 55, xv. 1; Luke xxii. 66), before which the apostles (Acts v. 21, 27, 34, 41), especially Peter and John (Acts iv. 15), Stephen (Acts vi. 12, 15), and Paul (Acts xxii. 30, xxiii. passim, xxiv. 20), had to answer for their faith in the Risen One. In John xi. 47 the term is applied to a session of this court. [In the English version the term "council" is usually applied to this court, and generally with additional phrases, such as "elders, scribes and the whole council," "° elders, chief priests, and scribes," "council and senate."] In the passages cited above the reference is to one court alone. But the plural form in Matt. x. 17; Mark xiii. 9; cf. Matt. v. 22, refers to smaller judicatories. These bodies had the right to make arrests (Matt. xxvi. 47 sqq.; Mark xiv. 43 sqq.; cf. Acts v. 18, ix. 2), to pronounce decision and to punish, except that capital punishment required the confirmation of the Roman procurator, by whom it seems to have been executed (John xviii. 31); the only case of capital punishment mentioned in connection with this judicatory in the New Testament is that of Jesus. Acts ix. 2 indicates that the mandates of the great sanhedrin was recognized wherever Jews dwelt‑the high priest's directions reached at any rate to Damascus. The great sanhedrin was composed of elders (see ELDERS IN ISRAEL), Scribes

Sanhedrin
Barabaitee	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	204
(q.v.), and the most eminent members of the highpriestly families. Joseph of Arimathea is called a counselor (Mark xv. 43; Luke xxiii. 50; Gk. bouleutes; boula occurs in Josephus, Ant., XIX., iii. 3 for the council itself). The high priest Caiaphas appears as president in the process against Jesus (Matt. xxvi. 3, 57) and the high priest Ananias (Acts xxiii. 2, xxiv. 1) in the time of Paul.
The traditional Jewish view was that a supreme court was created in the time of Moses, and that the great sanhedrin was its legitimate successor; but, though learned and diligent attempts have been made in modern times to defend this view, success has not attended them. Even if Jehoshaphat erected a supreme court which lasted till the exile (a doubtful fact; II Chron. xix.), such a judicatory did not exist in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, or it would have left some traces in the reports concerning the activities of these men. At the head of the community then were the "elders of the Jews" (Ezra v. 5, vi. 7, 14), also known as "princes" (Ezra ix. 1, 2, x. 8; Neh. ix. 38). From these "princes" was formed an aristocratic senate, at the head of which stood the hereditary high priest; and this body was known as the gerousia (from Gk. ger6n, "old man"), which appears under this name first in a writing of Antiochus the Great (Josephus, Ant., XII., iii. 3). The letter of Jonathan the Maccabee to the Spartans (I Mace. xii. 6) begins: "Jonathan the high priest, and the gerousia (senate) of the nation," etc., while I Mace. xii. 35 speaks of "the elders of the people" as called together. But there is no testimony as to the exact significance of the gerausia under the Maccabean kings, though it is probable that it continued to exist. Such continuance would easily explain the division by Gabinius (57‑55 B.c.) of the Jewish territory into five districts ruled by synedria or synodoi (Josephus, Ant., XIV., v. 4; War, I., viii. 5), a division set aside by Caesar in 47, when to the sanhedrin at Jerusalem was given general jurisdiction over the entire land (cf. Josephus, Ant., XIV., ix. 3‑5), before which Herod appeared and on which he afterward took bloody vengeance, although the sanhedrin continued to exist under his rule (Josephus, Ant., XV., vi. 2). Under Roman rule through procurators the sanhedrin had naturally great importance, receiving recognition even from Jews not in Palestine. Because of the singular significance, after the exile,of the law for Jewish life, the importance of the sanhedrin as the highest theological and national court of justice continually increased, and before it were decided causes which affected the entire civil life of the Jews.
Jewish tradition is summarized in the Talmudic tract Sanhedrin, the data from which supplement well the scanty data obtainable from other sources. It makes clear that the membership was seventyone, and it seems probable that the lesser sanhedrin had a membership of twenty‑three. The place of session seems according to some reports to have been a hall inside the fore‑court of the temple (Sanhedrin, xi. 2), but was really outside the court and to the west, as described by Josephus (below)
members are called bouleutai, "counselors," and the body itself bolds, "council." Josephus calls the
place of assemblage boule or bouleuterion (War, V., iv. 2, VI., vi. 3). The tract Chagiga, ii. 2, makes two Pharisees, heads of schools, normally the president and vice‑president, and J. Levy and D. Hoffmann (see bibliography) have defended this view. But the testimony of the New Testament and of Josephus is decisive that the high priest was always the presiding officer. (H. L. STltnc$.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Jewish sources are the tracts San
	hedrin and Makkoth in Mishna, Tosephtha, and Talmud.
The Mishns text with Lat. tranal. and notes is in the
Amsterdam ed. by Surenhuysen, iv. 205‑291, published
1702; with Germ. tranal. in D. Hoffmann's Miachnajot,
iv. 145‑219, Berlin, 1898; the Palestinian form with Lat.
introduction is in Ugolini, Thesaurus, xxv. 1‑338, Fr.
transl. in M. Sehwad, Le Talmud de Jkrusalem, vols. x.‑xi.,
Paris, 1888‑59; the Babylonian Talmudic tract San
hedrin is in Ugolini, ut sup., xxv. 339‑1102; both forms
with Germ. tranal. are in L. Goldschmidt, Der babylon. Talmud, vii. 1‑610, Berlin, 1903.
	Consult: A. Biiehler, Daa Synedrion in Jerusalem,
Vienna, 1902; J. Selden, De aynedriia, London, 1650‑55;
Ugolini, Thesaurus, xxv. 1103‑1234; A. T. Hartmann,
Die enge Verbindung des A. Ta. mit dem Neuen, pp. 166
225, Rostock 1831• L. Herzfeld, Geschichte'des Volkea
Israel, ii. 380‑396, Leipsic, 1855; J. Levy, in Monataschrii/t fur Geschichte and Wisaenaehaft des Judentums, 1855, pp. 266‑274, 301‑307, 339‑358; J. M. Jost, Geachichte des Judenthuma, i. 120‑128, 270‑285, 403 sqq., ii. 13 sqq., 25 sqq., Leipsic, 1857‑58; J. Langen, in TQ, 1862, pp. 411463; A. Kuenen, Over de SamenRelling van hel Sanhedrin, Amsterdam, 1866; J. Derenbourg, Hiat. de la. Palestine, pp. 83‑94, 465‑468, Paris, 1867; D. Hoffmann, Der oberate Gerichtahof in der Stadt des Heiligthuma, Berlin,
1878; Stapfer, in Revue de th6ologie et de philosophie, 1884, pp. 105‑119; H. Gritz, Geschichte der Juden iii. 100 sqq., Leipsie, 1888; Blum, Le Synhedrin ou grand conseil de J&uaalem, Strasburg, 1889; I. Jelski, Die innere Einr(ehtung des groasen Synedriona zu Jerusalem, Breslau, 1894; A. Hausrath Neuteatamentliche ZeitgescichEe, i. 63‑72, Heidelberg, 1873, Eng transl., Hiat. of N. T. Times, London, 1895 M. Sulzberger, The Am ha‑Aretz, the Ancient Hebrew Parliament; a Chapter in the constitutional History of ancient Israel, Philadelphia, 1910; Scharer, Geaehichte, ii. 188‑214 Eng transl., Il., i. 163 sqq.; DR. iv. 397 102; BB, iv. 484014; JE, xi. 4114.

SANKARACHARYA. See INDIA, I., 2, § 2.

SANKEY, IRA DAVID: Methodist lay evangelist; b. at Edinburgh, Lawrence County, Pa., Aug. 28, 1840; d. in Brooklyn Aug. 14, 1908. He entered business at New Castle, Pa., 1855‑71, and was active as choir‑leader, Sunday‑school superintendent, and president of the Young Men's Christian Association; met D. L. Moody (q.v.) in 1870 at the international convention of that body at Indianapolis. He joined Moody in 1871 at Chicago and for years was associated with him in joint revival work in the United States and abroad, his part being singing solos, conducting the singing of the assembly, composing "Gospel hymns," and rendering assistance in the inquiry‑meetings. In later years he also lectured. In 1903 he lost his eyesight. He compiled Gospel Hymns (1875‑95), and Sacred Songs and Solos (London, 1873, and often), of which over 50,000,000 copies were sold; translations have been made into many languages. He composed also many popular songs, of which are "There were ninety and nine," and "When the mists have rolled away." He is author of My Life and the Story of the Gospel Hymns and of Sacred Songs and Solos (Philadelphia, 1907).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The literature is to be sought under MOODY,
DWIGHT LYMAN (RYTRER), as the sketches of the life of
Moody invariably treat of his fellow‑laborer. Note par‑

205	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	tahedrin
8arsbaites
tieularly E. Nason, Lives of the Eminent American Evangelists, D. L. Moody and Ira D. Sankey, Boston, 1877. Also see under REVIVAI6.
SANMINIATELLI, san‑min‑ya‑tel'li, ZABARELLA, ALESSANDRO: Cardinal; b. at Radicondoli (14 m. s.w. of Sienna), Tuscany, Italy, Aug. 4, 1840. He was educated at the Collegio Romano and the Accademia dei nobili ecclesiastici, and was ordained to the priesthood in 1863. In 1868 he was appointed chamberlain to the pope, and in 1874 became grand almoner and titular archbishop of Tyana. In 1887 he was made auditor general of the Apostolic Chamber, and in 1899 was created cardinal priest of Santi Pietro a Marcellino.
SAMSON, sdn‑ssn' (SAMSON), BERNHARDINO: Commissary of indulgences in Switzerland in 15181519. He is said to have come from Brescia. He was guardian of the Observantist Franciscans at San Angelo, Milan, when he was commissioned, in 1517, to preach indulgences in the Swiss cantons, among their confederates, and in the dioceses of Valais and Chur. His course through Lugano, Uri, Schwyz, Lucerne, Bugdorf, Bern, Solothurn, and Freiburg, June, 1518, to Jan., 1519, met with much success. In eastern Switzerland, however, he was less successful; Zwingli directed sermons against him and his practise, which in the more enlightened quarters was regarded as both ridiculous and outrageous. The bishop of Constance and his vicar, Johannes Faber (q.v.), resisted Sanson, who was forbidden to enter the churches in Aargau, Feb., 1519. In Baden he succeeded, but was refused admission at Staufberg and Brengarten. He then went to Zurich, where the diet of the federation had convened. Here he met the united hostility of Zwingli, Faber, and the bishop of Constance. The diet took recognition of the complaint, which Sanson met with his credentials and the request to ascertain his authority at Rome at his expense. The diet did not interpose any impediment and Sanson appeared at Sofingen, Apr. 18. But the diet asked the knight Felix Grebel of Zurich, who was about to journey to Rome, to lay certain grievances before the pope and make a thorough investigation. Before Grebel's arrival, the pope had appointed Sanson commissary of indulgences to the end of October, but upon taking knowledge of the missive of the diet, he revoked the commission, and the diet was privileged, if Sanson was objectionable, to request his peaceable return to Italy, to be examined and punished, if he exceeded his powers and committed errors in the announcing of indulgences. The matter of indulgences, although a factor in the rise of the Reformation in Switzerland, played a less important part than in Germany.
(EMIL EGLIt.)
BIBLIoaHAPHY: L. R. sehmidlin, Bernhardin Saneon, der Ablasaprediger in der Schweiz, 1618‑19, Solothurn, 1898; Schaff, Christian Church, vii. 31, 42‑43.
SAPHIR, sd'fir, ADOLPH: Presbyterian; b. at Budapest, Hungary, Sept. 26, 1831; d. at London Apr. 3, 1891. Son of a Jewish merchant he, with the rest of his father's family, was converted to Christianity by the Jewish mission of the Church of Scotland; he studied at the Gymnasium of the Graue Kloster, Berlin, 1844‑‑48; at
Glasgow University, 1848‑49 (M.A., 1854), at Marischal College, Aberdeen, 1849‑51, and was a student of theology at the Free Church College, Edinburgh, 1851‑54. He was licensed in 1854, and sent as missionary to the Jews at Hamburg, Germany; was German preacher at Glasgow, 1855; minister of the English Presbyterian Church, South Shields, 1856‑61; at Greenwich, London, 1861‑72; at Notting Hill, London, 1872‑80; and of Belgrave Presbyterian Church, London, 1881‑88. In later life Saphir took much interest in the efforts for the conversion of the Jews in Hungary and southern Russia, being president of the auxiliary in London, the Rabinowich Council. In theology he was Evangelical. He was the author of From Death to Life (Edinburgh, 1861; revised and published under the title Conve‑sion, London, 1865); Christ and the Scriptures (1864); Lectures on the Lord's Prayer (1870); Christ Crucified (Lectures on I Cor. ii., 1873) ; Expository Lectures on the Epistle to the Hebrews (1874‑76); and The Divine Unity of Scripture (1892); and of numerous tracts employed in the mission to the Jews.
BIBLIoaHAPHY: G. Carlyle, Mighty in the Scriptures. A
Memoir of A. Saphir, London, 1893; DNB, 1. 299.

SARABAITES, sdr'a‑baits (SARABITES): A class of Egyptian hermits, mentioned by Jerome (Epist., xxiii. 34) under the name of Remoboth. The appellation Sarabaites is of unknown connotation, although Cassian (Collationes patrum, XVIII., iv. 7‑8) declares it to be Egyptian, and names three classes of monks, cenobites, anchorites, and Sarabaites. After Cassian, who thoroughly disapproved of the Sarabaites, the only independent sources for a knowledge of these hermits are Benedict of Nursia (Regina, i.), who states that they were to be found in Italy, and possibly the Dialogus Zachaei Christiani et Apollonii philosophi of the late fifth century. In the Middle Ages the epithet Sarabaites (translated Renuitte by Isidore of Seville, De ofciis ecclesiastieis, ii. 15) was frequently applied to disobedient or turbulent monks, since their prototypes lived without teacher and without discipline; and they were likewise often confused with the Gyrovagi (q.v.).
The earliest sources concerning the Sarabaites are invariably prejudiced against them and desired to replace them by those following the cenobitic life. Nevertheless, the distinctive characteristics which separated them from hermits and cenobites are clear. They were generally considered monks, like whom they were celibate, fasted, sang in choir, and wore habits. On the other hand, they did not live in monasteries or deserts, but in towns or fortified places, sometimes in their own houses. Neither did they form communities like the cenobites, but lived alone or in groups of two or three without any superior; nor were they rigidly separated from the world like hermits and cenobites. Like other monks, they earned their livelihood by manual labor, but sold the products independently. In the time of Cassian the Sarabaites of Egypt equalled the cenobites in number, but in other lands were far more numerous, so that they were almost the only class of monks, a statement which also

Saravia Sardica
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
holds true for the days of Jerome. By the middle of the sixth century their number had declined in Italy.
The Sambaites were essentially the successors of the primitive ascetics, and long maintained their existence in the West despite the spread of anchoritism and monasticism from the East, especially from Egypt, thus explaining the intense hatred felt by hermits and monks for them. Their freer mode of life doubtless gave some ground for the charges alleged against them, probably with some exaggeration, by their opponents; and in the course of time they sank before the more rigid ascetic ideals of monasticism. See MONAt3TICICSM.
(G. GRCTZMACHER.)
BiswooR"Hx: C. W. F. Walchq in Novi commentarii so‑
cietatia . . . eeientiarum GoUingemie, vi. 1‑34, Gottingen,
1776; Neander, Christian Church, ii. 283‑284.
SARAVIA, ADRIAN: Reformed (afterward Anglican) theologian; b. at Hesdin (35 m. n. of Amiens), France, in 1531; d. at Westminster, London, Jan. 15, 1612‑13. His father was a Spaniard, his mother a Fleming, and both became Protestants; he was trained for the Reformed ministry, and became pastor at Antwerp, and later formed a Walloon church at Brussels; he removed after 1560 with his family to the Channel Islands, where he first acted as schoolmaster, and then in 1564 became assistant minister of St. Peter's, Guernsey; he next because schoolmaster at Southampton, and, in 1582, professor of divinity at the University of Leyden; because of complicity in a political plot he was forced in 1587 to flee to England, where he became rector of Tattenhill, Staffordshire; his De diversis gradibus ministrorum (see below) in 1590 brought him honor there, and in 1591 he was made prebendary of Gloucester, in 1595 of Canterbury and vicar of Lewisham, Kent, and in 1601 of Worcester and of Westminster; he was nominated in 1607 one of the translators for the new version of the Bible; and in 1609‑10 exchanged Lewisham for Great Chart, which he retained till his death. He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral. His promotion in England was no doubt due in part to his vigorous assertion and defense of episcopal church government, in his De diversis gradibus (London, 1590; Eng. tranal., 1592, reissued 1640), in his Defensio traetatus de . . . gradibus (1594), and Examen Tractatus D. Bezw de triplici episcoporum genere (1594), againAt the arguments of Theodore Beza, who sought to secure its abolition in Scotland. He is best known as the earliest modern advocate of worldwide evangelization, which most of the Reformers thought either impracticable or unauthorized. In his first work he devotes a chapter (xvii.) to establishing the thesis "that the command to preach the Gospel to all peoples is obligatory upon the Church Since the Apostles were taken up into Heaven, and that for this purpose the apostolic office is needful." He maintains that the obligation to evangelize all peoples rests upon the Christians of every century to the end of the world on the ground that Christ in giving the commission promised to be with his disciples all the days to the end of the world, that the apostles left the work incomplete and provided for its extension, that after the apostolic age the
Gospel was successfully preached to many new
peoples, etc. He insists that it is not fanaticism
but simple duty to try to carry out Christ's great
commission. Beza (1592) and Gerhard (1617)
sought by elaborate argumentation in opposition to
Saravia to prove that the commission of Christ
expired with the close of the apostolic age. In
the opinion of contemporaries they succeeded and
Saravia's plea made little impression. His Treatise
on the Christian. Priesthood was republished in Lon
don, 1845; and a Latin manuscript was translated
and published by Denison as Treatise on the Eucha
rist (London, 1855). See MISSIONS TO THE HEATHEN,
B, li., 1, j 2. 	A. H. NEwMAN.

BIHLI06HAYnr: DNB, 1. 299 301, where are given references to scattering notices.

SARCERIUS, stir‑sfr't‑us (SORCg), ERASMUS:
German Lutheran; b. at Annaberg (18 m. s. of Chemnitz) probably Apr. 19, 1501; d. at Magdeburg Nov. 28,1559. He was matriculated at Lespsic in 1522, but in 1524 seems to have migrated to Wittenberg, and in 1528 was a teacher at Lubeck and a firm supporter of Protestant tenets. He likewise taught in Graz, and apparently received his master's degree at Vienna, but was forced to leave because of his religious convictions and in 1530 was matriculated at Rostock. Finally completing his studies, he was recalled to Lubeck, where he remained until 1536, when Count William of Nassau called him to Siegen as rector of the Latin school. In the following year he was appointed superintendent and chaplain to the count, and henceforth all his energies were devoted to the cause of Lutheranism. He at once began a system of frequent visitations and regular pastoral synods according to the plan outlined in his Dialogus . . . reddens rationem veterum aynodorum . . . item visitationum (n.p., 1539), likewise promoting his cause not only by his Catechismus of 1537, but also by his commentaries on Matthew (Frankfort, 1538), Mark (Basel, 1539), Luke (1539), John (1540), Acts (1540), Romans (1541), Galatians and Ephesians (1542), Corinthians (154214), Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians (1542), and Ecclesiasticus (1543), as well as by his Methodus in preeeipuos Scriptures locos (2 parts, Basel, 1539‑40), Nova methodus (1546), ExPositiones in epistolas dominicales et festivales (1540), In evangelia dominicalia postilla (1540), and Concione8 annum rhetorica dispositions eonacriptce (4 vols., 1541). In 1541 Sarcerius was called to Dillenburg as court chaplain and preacher at the city church, besides being superintendent of the county. In Mar., 1540, he had taken part in the Schmalkald conference, and in 1542‑46 he promoted the cause of the Reformation in the archdiocese of Cologne. He also came into momentary contact with the English movement against the Roman Church, this being the occasion of his Loci aliquot communes et theologici (Frankfort [ 1538]; Eng. transl., under the title Comon places of scripture ordrely and after a cbpendious forme of teachyng set forth," by R. Taverner, London, 1538).
As a distinguished theologian Sarcerius could boast that he had framed church orders for twentyfour counties, and in 1541 he was obliged to decline

207	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
		Sardioa
the invitation to become professor of theology at Leipsic. But the Interim ended his activity in Nassau in 1548, and he then went first to Annaberg, where he wrote his Creutzbuchlein, after which he became pastor at the Thomaskirche in Leipsic, publishing four volumes of sermons in 1551‑52, and his Von Synodis and Buch vom heiligen Ehestand in 1553. In 1551 he was one of the theologians to whom the Saxon Confession was submitted for approval and subscription, and in the following year was a member of the unsuccessful delegation to the Council of Trent, which got no further than Nuremberg. In 1553 he published his Hausbuch fur die einfaltigen Hausvater, which is of interest for a history of Lutheran confirmation, and in the following year he was chosen superintendent of Eisleben as the successor of the adiaphoristic Georg Major (q.v.). He now necessarily adopted an attitude of opposition to the teachings of Melanchthon and completely accepted the tenets of the Gnesio‑Lutherans, being active at the same time both in visitation and in writing a number of treatises on church government and discipline, the most of which were collected by his son, Wilhelm Sarcerius, in the second edition of his Pastorale oder Hirtenbuch von Amt, Wesen and Disziplin der Pastoren, published in 1562. Meanwhile the course of events was leading him further and further away from Melanchthon, and at the colloquy of Worms in 1557 be was on the side of the Weimar theologians. From Worms he hurried to Heidelberg to prevent the threatened schism in Protestantism, only to take part in the fatal protestation which broke off the conference. In the following year he was one of those called to Weimar to make the final revision of the Weimar Confutation, but his position in Mansfeld was becoming increasingly difficult and he was exposed to ceaseless official interference. Nevertheless, in 1559 he presided. over a synod which formulated the interesting Bekendnis der Prediger in der Grafschaft Mansfelt . . . wider aller Seeten, Rotten and falsche Lere‑n (Eisleben, 1560), and almost immediately afterward he accepted a call to Magdeburg as pastor of the Johanniskirche and senior of the ministerium, but lived only long enough to deliver four sermons. (G. KAwERAU.)
BIBL70a&APHY: The funeral sermon was by J. Wigand, Magdeburg, 1560, and Pieu lamentationea by Z. Priitorius, W. Sarcerius, and P. Spenlin, Eisleben, 1560; two monographs are A. W. R8selmaller, Leben and Wirken des Eraemua Sarcerius, Annaberg. 1888, and G. Eakuche, Sarceriua ale Erzieher and Schulmann, Siegen, 1901 (worthful). Compare further H. L. J. Heppe, Dogmatik des deutschen Proteatantismus, i. 49 eqq., Goths, 1857.

SARDICA, SYNOD OF: A synod held in 343‑34‑1 at Sardica (the modern Sophia, capital of Bulgaria). The date given above is not that of the historians Socrates (Hist. ecd., ii. 20; NPNF, 2d ser. ii. 4617) and Sozomen (Hilt. eccl., iii. 11‑12; NPNF, 2d ser., ii. 289‑290), who assign the year 347. But the Historic acephala (discovered in the eighteenth century, ed. S. Maffei in Osservazioni litterarie, vol. iii., Verona, 1738) showed that Athanasius returned to Alexandria from his second exile in 346 (see ATHANASIU$ I., § 4) and this is corroborated by Jerome (MPL, xxix. 682), who places this return in the tenth year of Constantius. The "Paschal Letters" of
Athanasius prove that the synod was held at least two years before his return. The synod may have met late in 343; it was in session in 344, for two envoys sent by Conatans arrived in Antioch at Easter of that year (Athanasius, "Arian History," xx.; NPNF, 2d ser., iv. 276‑277, footnote). It was summoned by Conatans and Constantinus (Athanasius, "Defence against the Arians," xliv.; NPNF, 2d ser., iv. 123) with the threefold object of removing causes of dissension in the Church, rooting out false doctrine, and confirming the tradition of the true faith in Christ.
There is some debate as to the number of bishops who attended. Two parties were represented, Eusebians and the orthodox. The former in their synodal letter (Mansi, Concilia, iii. 132) claim to be eighty in number, but seventy‑six is given by Socrates and Sozomen (ut sup.) and this seems to be right. Athanasius in his "Arian History" (xv.; NPNF, iv. 274) reckons the entire attendance at 170 "more or less," which leaves ninety‑four for the orthodox party. The Eusebians were a compact party, whose principal animus was against Athanasius. When they learned that he was to be present and was expected to take part, they recognized that the logic of events would lead him to take the aggressive and to bring charges of unseemly conduct against them. They therefore demanded on the basis of the findings of the synods of Tyre and Antioch that Athanasius be excluded. The presidency of the synod, in the absence of the bishop of Rome, fell to Hosius of Cordova (q.v.) through whom negotiations were conducted. Hosius warned the Eusebians that their threat to abstain from participation might prove dangerous to them, and advised them to submit their proofs against Athanasius to him alone if they were unwilling to bring them before the synod, promising that if they were conclusive, Athanasius should be excluded. But this advice was rejected, and the Eusebians left the city by night.
The synod proceeded to investigate the charges of the Eusebians (1) against Athanasius and found them baseless; (2) against Marcellus of Ancyra (q.v.), and pronounced him orthodox; (3) against Asclephas of Gaza (whom the Eusebians at Antioch had deposed), and proved him innocent, acquitting of blame also certain minor officials who were involved in the major charges. Certain heads of the Eusebian party were deposed and excommunicated, viz., Theodore of Heraclea, Narcissus of Neronias, Acacius of Cxsarea, Ursacius of Singidunum, Valens of Murcia, Menophantes of Ephesus, and George of Laodicea. The alleged "creed of Sardica " rests upon a misunderstanding of a sketch of such a creed by Hosius which was not adopted by the synod, but came to be included in the Acta. The twenty canons were drawn up in Greek and Latin, were adopted by the second Trullan synod, and are usually appended to those of the council of Nica?a, though they are not recognized as ecumenical. The canons have to do with the rights and duties of bishops, w i#l the filling of vacant bishoprics, the'rights and duties of lower clergy, and make an attempt to arrange for union on the date of Easter.

tidsotion	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	1408
BrBraoaRAPar: Original documents are the canons, with history of the synod and discussion, in Hefele, Coneilienpeachiehta, f. 533 sqq•, mg. trand., ii. 88 sqq., Fr. trend., i. 2, pp, 737 sqq. (espeoiallyvaluable for the notes); the socount of Athanesius in Defenoe against the Arians; ' Eng. tranal., NPNF, 2d sir., iv. 100 eqq.; three letters to the synod, summarized in Hefele, ut sup., given in Athsnasius, .. Defence„ chap. iii., Eng. trawl., ut sup., pp. 119 sqq. The documents appear also in Manai, Concilia, Vol. iii. (important) and Haxduin, Concilia, vol. i. Consult further: W. Beveridge, Synodicon, Oxford, 1872; Z. B. van Eepen, Commentarius in canons* d decrda juris vderis ac novi, Cologne, 1755; idem, Jus eedeaiadicum univeraum, iii. 284 sqq., ib. 1777; L. T. von Spittler, Sammtliche Were, ed. K. Wachter, viii. 128 eqq., 15 vole., Stuttgart, 1827‑37; F. Maeswn, Geschichte der Quellen and der Literatur des canonishen Reehts, i. 50 sqq., Leipsie. 1870; %L, x. 1705‑11; Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 310‑314.
SARDIS. See AsiA MirroR, IV.
SARGON. See AssyRiA, VI., 1 11; BABYLONIA, VI.,3,11.
SARPI, s3r'pf, PAOLO (FRA PAOLO): Venetian patriot and opponent of the Jesuits; b. at Venice Aug. 14, 1552; d. there Jan. 14, 1623. He obtained his education in his native city, and in 1566 entered the order of the Servites. After an activity of two years as teacher in Mantua he became priest, in 1579 was made provincial of his order in the republic of Venice, and subsequently became general procurator of the order with seat at Rome (15851588). But for a long time his mind had been growing increasingly hostile to the Jesuits, and he had consequently come under suspicion of the Inquisition. After 1606 his views found expression in the famous struggle of Venice with Pope Paul V. The pope in his blindness tried for the last time to gain supremacy over Venice by using the mightiest weapon of medievalism, the interdict. The consequence was that the Jesuits were expelled from the republic, while the remaining clergy were induced to continue the church services. This unexpected victory of the republic would have been impossible if public opinion had not been influenced in its favor by Sarpi, whom his native city had retained in its defense. Induced by patriotism and by hatred of the Jesuits, Sarpi published masterworks of polemics. The attempt to assassinate Sarpi on Oct. 5, 1607, shows that the authorities at Rome knew to whom their defeat was due. His principal work is Istoria del concilio Tridenttno di Pietro Soave Polano (London, 1619; Eng. transl., History of The Council of Trent, 1676). Its hostility to the popes is extreme; it has been translated into the principal European languages. Other works of his which have been translated into English from his Opere or from separate publications are: A Treatise of Matters Beneficiary (London, 1680; later editions with slightly variant titles, 1727, 1730, 1736); The History of the Inquisition (1639); and The Rights of Sovereigns and Subjects (1722). His Opere were issued in 5 vols., Venice, 1677, better edition, 8 vole., a Hehnetadt" (i.e., Verona), 1761; and his Lettere at Verona, 1673; Lettere inedate, 1833, and ed. S. and A. S. Contarini, Venice, 1892; and Letters raocolte, Florence, 1863. An Eng. transl. of the Letters appeared London, 1693. (P. TsCHACBERT.)
$rnwooRAPRY: A. Robertson, Fro Paoli Sarpi, the Greatest of the Vendians, London, 1894; F. Micansio, La Vie du Pdre Paul, Leyden, 1881; A. Bianchi‑Giovini, Bioprafia di Fra P. Sarpi, 2 vole., Brussels, 1838; J. N. Brischar, Beurteilung der Kontrovasen Sarpis and Pallavicini, 2 parts, TObingen, 1844; J. Kraenker, Essai our la vie d lea icrita de Fro P. Sarpi, Strasburg, 1857; Ambella Georgina Campbell. The Life o) Fro Paolo Sarpi, London, 1889; L. Lavi, Fra Paolo Sarpi, Bergamo, 1873; M. Broach, Geschidte des Kirchenstawes, i. 354 eqq., Goths, 1880; P. Balan, Fro P. Sarpi, Venice, 1887; A. Pascolato, Fra P. Sarpi, Milan, 1893; G. Rein, Paoli Sarpi and die Protedanten, Helaingfors, 1904; A. D. White, Seven Grant Statesmen, New York, 1910; %L, x. 1720‑28.
SARTORIUS, sdr‑t5'rf‑us, ERNST WILHELM CHRISTIAN: German Lutheran; b. at Darmstadt May 10, 1797; d. at Konigsberg June 13, 1859. He was educated at the University of Gottingen (18151818), where he became lecturer in 1818. Three years later he was called to Marburg as associate professor, being promoted to a full professorship in 1823. He had already written Drei Abhandlungen fiber wichtige Gegenstande der ezegetischen und 8ystematischen Theologie (Gottingen, 1820), which was quickly followed by his Die lutherische Lehre vom Unvermtigen des freien Willem zur hbheren Sittlichkeit (1821), a work strongly emphasizing the Augustinian concept of grace and criticizing Schleiermacher's theory of election. During his Marburg professorship he also wrote his Ueber die Lehre der Protestanten von der heiligen Wazrde der weltlichen Obrigkeit (Marburg, 1822) and Die Religion ausserhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft nach den Grundsdtzen des wahren Protestantismus and gegen die sines falsehen Rationalismus (1822). In 1824 Sartorius was called to the University of Dorpat, where he remained until 1835, vigorously combating rationalism, a tendency which he also assailed in his Beitr4ge zur Verteidigung der evangelischen Rechtgldubigkeit (2 parts, Heidelberg, 18251826). During this period he also delivered a eulogy on the Augsburg Confession which was later revised and enlarged as the Beitrdge zur Apologie der augsburgischen Confession gegen alte and neue Gegner (Goths, 1853), and in 1831 he published at Hamburg his Lehre von Christi Person and Werk (Erg. transl., Doctrine of the Person and Work of Christ, London, 1838, and Boston, 1848), which led to his call as general superintendent of the province of Prussia and as first court chaplain of the castle church at Konigsberg. In these capacities he strove earnestly for the defense of true Lutheran principles and sturdily opposed rationalism and kindred developments, as in his Ueber die Notwendigkeit and Verbindlichkeit der kirchlichen Glaubensbekenntnisse (Stuttgart, 1845). The most noteworthy work of Sartorius, however, was his Lehre von der heiligen Liebe, Oder Grundztage der e;angelisch‑kirchlichen Moraltheologie (2 parts, Stuttgart, 1840‑44; Eng. transl., Doctrine of Divine Love; or outlines of the Moral Theology of the Evangelical Church, Edinburgh, 1884), which was followed by his Ueber den alt‑ and neutestamentlichen Cultua, insbesondere Sabbath, Pri,estedum, Sacrament and opfer (Stuttgart, 1852). The dissensions arising within his communion in the latter years of his life called forth his Meditationen fiber die Ofenbarung der Herrlichkeit Gotten in ae$ner Kirche and besonders fiber dic

209	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Sardis
Satisfaction
Gegenwart des verkllirten Leibes and Blutea Christi im heiligen Abendmahl (Stuttgart, 1855), and his polemic attitude toward the RomanCatholic Church, particularly in regard to justification, found expression in his last work, the Soli Deo gloria! vergleichende W6rdigung evangeliachlutheriacher urtd r6mwhrkatholmcher Lehre nach dam augsburgischen and tridentinischen Bekenntnis (Stuttgart, 1859). (DAVID ERDMANNt.)
BrsTdoaRAPBT: K. F. A. Kahnis. Lutheriache Dopmatik. 3 vols., Leipsie, 1861‑68; G. W. Frank, Geachichte der proteatantiechen Theologie, ib. 1862‑75; A. Meeke, Die Dopmatik des 19. Jahrhunderta, Gotha, 1867; 1. A. Dorner, System der chriatl"en Glaubenalehre, 2 vols., Berlin, 1879‑81, Eng. tranal., 4 vols., Edinburgh, 1880‑82; M. A. von Landerer, Neueste Dopmenpexhiehte, Heilbronn, 1881.

SARUM USE: The name given to the liturgy in use in the diocese of Sarum (i.e., Salisbury) before the Reformation of the Church of England. It consists of several books, the direct or mediate work of Saint Osmund (q.v.), bishop of Salisbury, via., the Portiforium or Breviary of Sarum (containing the Daily Services), the Sarum Missal (containing the Communion Service), and possibly the Sarum Manual (containing the Baptismal and " Occasional " Offices). The Sarum use was adopted in Salisbury in 10$5, and by the middle of the thirteenth century was the form of liturgy most used in England. The Portiforium was the basis of the Book of Common Prayer (see COMMON PRAYER, BooK oh, 11 1). Other "uses " were those of Lincoln, Hereford, Durham (7), Bangor, and York.
BaLIOas"Rr: F. Procter and C. Wordsworth, The Sarum Breviary. Cambridge, 1882; F. Procter and W. H. Frere, New Hist. of the Book of Common Prayer, passim, London, 1905; J. H. Blunt, Annotated Book of Common Prayer, pp. 2‑3, 361‑363, et passim, New York, 1908.
SATAN. See DEVIL.
SATANAEL. See Nxw MAwICHEANe, I.
SATISFACTION: A doctrine which seeks to explain how the justice and the mercy of God are reconciled. The term "satisfaction" is traced to Tertullian, although its reference was to the penitence of man rather than the death of Christ. Man is "released from penalty by the compensating exchange of repentance." Origin held Various that God was rendered propitious by Theories. Christ's offering of himself. Gregory the Great taught that Christ assumed the penalty of sin and so appeased the wrath of God. Not until Ansehn (q.v.), however, does the idea of satisfaction become a dominant principle of religious thought. According to him (Cur Deus homo) the honor of God, immeasurably injured, demanded satisfaction‑either punishment of the sinner or an equivalent. God chose the latter alternative. Wherefore, the God‑man who alone could fulfil the perfect obligation and who needed not to die for his sins, could and did die in behalf of men and thus satisfied God for their debt and merited the salvation which God offers. Thomas Aquinas (1274), with other Seboolmen in distinction from Anselm, denied that satisfaction was the sine qua non for the forgiveness of sins; God might have redeemed men X.‑14
in some other way than by the death of his Son, yet he adopted this method as more fitting. On account of the greatness of Christ's love, the dignity of his person, and the scope of his passion, the satisfaction was superabundant (Summa, pars. iii., qu. 46‑49). Duns Scotus (d. 1308) argued that, since the merit of Christ belonged to his human nature, it was not infinite, yet it availed for as much as God was pleased to accept it (" Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard," lib. iii., dist. 19‑20). According to‑ the authoritative Roman Catholic doctrine, Christ merited j ustificatibn for us by his holy passion on the tree and made satisfaction to God the Father for us. This satisfaction extends, however, only to those sins committed before baptism and to those committed afterward which deserve eternal punishment. Christians themselves make satisfaction for sin as regards temporal punishment by punishments either inflicted by Christ, or voluntarily undertaken, or else enjoined by a priest according to their ability or the quality of their sins, the aim of which is to reduce the punishment which awaits the soul in Purgatory (Decrees and Canons of the Council of Trent, sess. VI., chap. vii., sesa. XIV., chap. viii.‑ix.; cf. J. S. Hunter, Outlines of Dogmatic Theology, iii. 334‑337). Faustus Socinus (1604) and the Socinians (Racovian Catechism, 1605) rejected the idea of satisfaction, on the ground of the mutual contradiction involved in satisfaction and remission, of the incompatibility of punishment with debt or with sufferings of the innocent, of the personal and non‑transferable nature of obedience as well as of guilt and punishment, and of redemption as not satisfaction but emancipation. The death of Christ was only an example, a confirmation of divine promises, a condition of his entering into glory. In opposition to this view, Hugo Grotius (1645), in his "Satisfaction of Christ," declared that God who was the source of the law could not let its violation go unpunished. If, however, he rigorously and exactly enforced punishment upon sinners, he would destroy mankind from the face of the earth. In order, therefore, to maintain "rectoral justice," he sets forth a penal example in which he exhibits his judgment against sin, which, for the preservation of his government, is of equal value as the punishment of the sinner and is substituted for this. By this "singular method of relaxation" God is enabled to forgive sin. According to Curcellmus (d. 1659) in Institutio religionis Christian&,, V., xix., and Limborch (1712) in Theologia Christiana, III., xxii., Christ's oblation was not a full satisfaction for sin; he did not suffer all the punishment which we deserve. Sacrifice does not liberate from debts; but God graciously estimates Christ's sacrifice as sufficient, and on this ground remits the punishment due us.
The theory of penal satisfaction has had a long history. It differs from the view of Anselm in several particulars. The satisfaction was public or juridical, rather than offered to a person. The righteousness involved was the penal righteousness of God. Instead of the Anselmic alternative‑satiafaction or punishment‑satisfaction is by punishment. As far back as Wyclif (d. 1384) it was asserted that God's justice demanded that each

8atisfaation
$atarninus
trespass be punished either on earth or in hell. Calvin (d‑ 1564) held that Christ satisfied the justice of God by suffering the punishment of
Penal our sin. Gerhard (d. 1637) affirmed Satisfaction. that Christ effected the perfect satisfaction by experiencing the wrath of God, the curse of the law, and the penalties of hell (Loci theolici, locus xvii., chap. ii. 54). Tobias Crisp (d.1643; Christ Made Sin, London, 1691, new ed., ib. 1832) and John Owen (q.v.; "The Death of Death in the Death of Christ," in Works, vol. v., London, 1826) claimed that Christ satisfied for our sins by suffering the punishment and death our sin deserved‑"ejusdem." According to Quenstedt (1688) Christ was substituted for debtors and " in his satisfaction . . . felt even the very pangs of hell, although not in hell or eternally " (Theologia didactico‑Polemics, i. 39). Jonathan Edwards (d. 1758), who marks the dividing line between the penal and the New England view of the atonement, declared that Christ made satisfaction for sin not by reason of any excellency in his sufferings, but by the fulfilment of the law in him whereby through his death the nature, design, and perfection of the law, together with the authority and truth of the law‑giver, were maintained (Works, vii. 512‑516, NewYork, 1830). The more recent advocates of the penal satisfaction theory are: T. J. Crawford (The Doctrine of the Holy SeripturesRespeetingtheAtonement, London, 1871),George Smeaton (Doctrine of the Atonement as Taught by Christ Himself, Edinburgh, 1868; and . . . AsTaughtby theApostles, Edinburgh, 1870), Charles Hodge (Systematic Theology, New York, 1871‑73), and W. G. T. Shedd (Dogmatic Theo'ogy, New York, 1889). The following characteristic features of their presentation are to be noted: (1) a technical meaning is assigned to the terms employed. Our "sins" and our" Guilt" (q.v.) were transferred to Christ by "Imputation" (q.v.); on him was inflicted the "punishment" which belonged to us. (2) The relative values given to justice and love: justice is "a principle of God's nature, not only independent of love but superior to love." (3) The satisfaction while sufficient for all is efficient for the elect only. J. McL. Campbell (d. 1872), taking a hint from Jonathan Edwards (Works, vii. 505), that satisfaction may be made for sin either by an adequate punishment or by an "answerable repentance," declared that Christ, the "great Penitent in humanity," made a perfect confession for human sin; hence that is accorded to divine justice which is its due and could alone satisfy it (Nature of the Atonement, pp. 117‑118, London, 1873). The New England theory of the atonement (see ATONEMENT; NEW ENGLAND THEOLOGY) held that the sufferings of Christ satisfied the general or public, but not distributive or individualizing, justice of God (E. A. Park; The Atonement, Introductory Essay, Andover, 1859).
Satisfaction has, however, been differently conceived. The point of 'view is love instead of justice. This presents love as the central principle of God, by which he both affirms his own perfection and blessedness and wills that all his creatures and especially man shall share his love in the measure of their capacity‑a purpose which is perfectly
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
210
disclosed in his revelation of grace in Christ. Hare love is absolute and justice relative; or love and justice are regarded as complementary Satisfaction aspects of the same gracious will. from the Abelard (1142) maintained that Christ View‑point satisfied the divine benevolence by of Love. overcoming the rebellion and the guilty fear of sinners by his immeasurable love. Schleiermacher (d. 1834) conceives of Christ as our " satisfaction‑making substitute " (Der Chrisliche Glaube, ii. 103 sqq., 128‑129, Berlin, 18311832). According to Albrecht Ritschl (1889), since God's righteousness is essentially identical with his grace, satisfaction can only signify the fulfilment of his eternal purpose of love (Rechtfertigung and Verstihnung, p. 474, Bonn, 1888‑89; Eng. transl., Edinburgh, 1900). Samuel Harris (d.1899) presents the satisfaction of God as the normal consummation of all his revealed action rendering service in conformity with the law of love (God, the Creator and Lord of All, p. 375, New York, 1896). William Newton Clarks (q.v.) affirms that God is eternally satisfied with the suffering of love in behalf of sinners (Outline of Christian Theology, p. 348, ib., 1898). According to John Scott Lidgett, satisfaction is defined in terms of fatherhood; the fatherly is satisfied in perfecting the filial (The Spiritual Principle of the Atonement, p. 301, London, 1898).
	In all the above‑mentioned theories the interpre
tation of the ethical nature of God and that of satis
faction go hand in hand. The following statement
contains, therefore, the truth which they endeavor
to present: "the satisfaction of God's ethical nature
is realized in three respects: (1) so far as there has
been made in Christ an adequate expression of the
divine character and of the divine love in relation
to sin, as well as a disclosure of the nature of sin
and of God's hostility to it; (2) not when the Father
can see in another than the sinner the suffering and
death which belong to sin, but when he can forgive
and restore the child to his loving fellowship; (3)
God will be perfectly satisfied when the divine pur
pose of grace manifested through the death of Christ
shall have found in all souls a perfect Amen" (Isa.
liii. 11; cf. II Cor. i. 20; C. A. Beckwith, Realities
of Christian Theology, pp. 228‑229, Boston, 1906).
See ATONEMENT, § lO. 	C. A. BECKWITH.
BIBL206RAPHY: For the development of the doctrine readers are referred to the works named in and under DocTarxE, HISTORY or'‑‑e.g., Haraack, Dogma, vi. 54‑78, 190 eqq., 257 eqq. et passim. As a theme in systematic theology the subject is discussed in the works named in and under DOGMA, DOGMATICS, e.g., W. G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, ii. 433‑434, New York, 1889. The literature under ATONEMENT, with that already noted, gives practically all that is necessary. Special mention may be made of: F. C. Baur, Die ehasUiche Lehre von der Verashnung, TObingen, 1838; G. B. Stevens, The Christian Doctrine of Sacrifice, New York, 1905; K. Staab, Du Lehre von der atellroertretenden CJenuptuuup Christi, Paderborn, 1908.
SATOLLI, sti‑011t, FRANCESCO DI PAOLO:
Cardinal; b. at Marsciano (14 m. s.w. of Perugia), Umbria, Italy, July 21, 1839; d. in Rome Jan. 8, 1910. He was educated at the seminary of Perugia, the Roman Seminary, and the College of the Propaganda; after which he was professor, and later rector, of the Greek College, Rome, and later still president of the Accademia

211	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Satisfaction
		8aturninus
dei nobili ecclesiastici. Appointed domestic prelate
to the pope and consecrated titular archbishop of
Lepanto, Satolli was sent to the United States in
1890 as the papal representative at the dedication
of the Catholic University of America, Washington,
D. C., and in 1892 again visited America, where he
was appointed papal delegate of the Propaganda at
Washington. In 1895 he was created cardinal priest
of Santa Maria in Araceli and shortly afterward re
turned to Rome, and was created cardinal bishop of
Frascati, archpriest of the Basilica of San Giovanni
in Laterano, prefect of the Congregation of Studies,
and president of the Theological Academy.
	SATORNILOS. See SATUANINUS.
	SATTERLEE, HENRY YATES: Protestant Epis
copal bishop of Washington; b. in New York
City Jan. 11, 144; d. at Washington, D. C., Feb.
22, 1908. He was graduated from Columbia
College (A.B., 1863) and the General Theological
Seminary (1866); was ordered deacon in 1865 and
advanced to the priesthood in 1867. He was as
sistant minister of Zion Church, Wappinger's Fall,
N. Y. (1865‑74), and rector (1874,82); rector of
Calvary Church, New York City (1882‑96); and
was consecrated bishop of Washington, D. C. (1896).
Among his writings special mention may be made of
A Creedless Gospel and a Gospel Creed (New York,
1894) and The Calling of a Christian (1902).
	SATTLER, MICHAEL: Leader of the South
German Anabaptists; b. at Staufen (10 m. s.s.w. of
Freiburg‑im‑Breisgau) about 1500; executed at
Rottenburg (23 m. s.w. of Stuttgart) May 20 or 21,
1527. He apparently studied at Freiburg, and then
entered the monastery of St. Peter in the vicinity
of the same city. Here diligent reading of the
Pauline epistles led him to conclude that true
righteousness was to be attained in ways far different
from those taught by the Roman Catholic Church
and by monasticism, and, leaving the monastery in
1523, he went to Zurich, where he joined the Ana
baptists and became a zealous proselytizer in 1525.
He was banished on Nov. 18 and retired to his native
town, only to be expelled by the Austrian govern
ment, whereupon he was kindly received by Capito
at Strasburg. In 1526 he went with Wilhelm Reub
lin (q.v.) to the latter's home in the district of
Hohenberg, south of TObingen, and developed great
activity in the vicinity of Horb. At Schlatt‑on‑the
Randen he participated, on Feb. 24,1527, in a great
meeting at which he formulated in seven articles the
doctrines and the constitution of the South Ger
man Anabaptists, who were to form a holy com
munity without association with other sects, and
who were also to refrain from taking oaths, holding
office, or engaging in military service, the entire
scheme being one of high ideals but thoroughly im
practicable. Returning to Horb, Sattler and his wife
were arrested and imprisoned at Binsdorf, whence
they were taken to Rottenburg and there executed,
Sattler at the stake and his wife by drowning. His
death created a wide‑spread sensation and evoked
the sympathy of both Capito and Butzer, as well as
of some less well‑known Protestants. The pam
phlet 1Vie die Gschrift verstendiglich soll anaterachieden
and erkldrt werden (n.p., n.d.) has been attributed to him, as has the hymn Ala Christus mit seiner wahren Lehr, but the latter is certainly not his work. G. BossaRT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are: J. Beck, in Fontes rerum Aus
	triacarum, vol. xliii., the series published at Vienna, 1849
	sqq.; the Werke of Zwingli, iii. 357 eqq.; E. Egli, Akten
	sammlung zur Geschichte der Zurcher Reformation, Zurich,
	1879; and Bin Sendbraef Michael Sattlera an eine Gemeinds
	Gottes, ed. W. K6nler, Halle, 1905. Consult: G. Bossert,
	in Bldtter fur wurttemburgische Kirchengeschichte, 1891,
	passim, and 1892, pp. 1‑4, 9‑10; idem, in Christliche Welt,
	1891, pp. 22 eqq.; A. H. Newman, Hist. of Anti‑Pedo
	baptism, pp. 137, 243 eqq., Philadelphia, 1897; C. Ger
	bert, Geschichte der Serasaburger Seetenbewegung zur Zeit
	der Reformation, Strasburg, 1889; idem, in W. Kohlham
	mer, Beschresibung des Oberamta Rottenburg, i. 409 aqq..
	Stuttgart, 1900; R. W olkan, Der Lieder der Wiedertdufer,
	Berlin, 1903; Flugachriften aus den ersten Jahren der Re
	formation, vol. ii., part 3, Leipsic, 1908.
SATURDAY, HOLY. See HOLY WEEK, § 6.
SATURN. See REmPHAN; and STAB, II.
SATURNINUS, sa‑tiu°ni‑nus (SATORNILOS): The head of a Gnostic school of the second century. Little is known of his sect, but the infrequency of polemic against it and the fact that it is scarcely more than an item in the catalogue of heresies imply that it was of secondary importance. Saturninus distinguished a supreme God, or "one unknown Father," and his creations, the lower "angels, archangels, powers, and potentates," chief among whom were the seven demiurges, including the God of the Jews, who sometimes appeared as hostile to the Father and sometimes midway between him and their adversary, Satan, but whose part in the cosmic process is unclear. The sole innovation known in the system of Saturninus is his concept of the creation of man. For an instant the demiurges perceived an image of the Father from the upper world of light. This awakened their longing for the higher spheres, and they sought to preserve their memory of the vision by creating man, but though he was formed in the image of the Father, he could only crawl on the earth like a worm until the Father, taking pity on him, gave him a scintillation of life. At death this scintillation returns to its home, while the earthly components of man are resolved into their original elements.
The account of Irenaus is too meager to permit of a clear knowledge of Saturninus' soteriology. It is evident, however, that he taught that the demiurges created two sorts of men, good and bad. The latter were aided by the demons, whereupon the Savior (whose merely apparent humanity is stressed) came to render them and the demons harmless and to save the good, those who, possessing the scintillation of life, believed on him. The sect is also described as ascetic; marriage and generation were traced to Satan; and some of the school were vegetarians. Prophecy (i.e., the Old Testament) was regarded as given partly by Satan and partly by the demiurges, although this statement does not exclude the possibility that Saturninus also found divine elements in it.
The data concerning Saturninus are too scanty to trace either his sources or his influence; only a fuller knowledge of the nature of his dualism would

saturninns savage
permit even an approximate conclusion as to whether it was derived from Zoroastrianism or from Platonism or from some syncretism in which both elements had already been blended.
R. LIECHTENHAN.
$IHLIOoHAYHY: The sources are: Irenmus, Hair., I., xxiv. 1‑2, Eng. transl. in ANF, i. 348‑349; Tertulliaa, De anima, xxiii., in ANF, iii. 203; Hippolytus, Har., VIL, xvi„ in ANP, v. 109‑110; Eusebius, Hint. sect., IV., vii. 3‑4, in NPNP, i. 178; Epiphanius, Her„ xxiii. Consult further: DCB, iv. 587‑588; and the literature under GNosncissI.
SATURNINUS, SAINT: Missionary and martyr of the third century. He was a native of Italy and was sent as a missionary to Gaul by Pope Fabian (c. 245). He settled at Toulouse and there labored with considerable success, becoming first bishop of the town. Later his preaching infuriated the mob, and he was martyred by being bound to a bull which was maddened by goads. He became the patron saint of Toulouse, and ‑is commemorated on Nov. 29.
SAUER, sau'er, JOSEPH: German Roman Catholic; b. at Unzhurst (a village near Bahl, 25 m. s.s.w. of Carlsruhe), Baden, June 7, 1872. He was educated at University of Freiburg (1891‑94, 1890‑97; D.D., 1900), and, after being a parish priest and teacher at Sasbach, Baden, in 1898‑99, studied in France and Italy in 1900‑02, devoting himself especially to Christian archeology. In 1902 he became privet‑docent for church history and archeology in the theological faculty of the University of Freiburg, where he was promoted to his present position of associate professor of the same subjects in 1905. In addition to editing the Literarische Rundschau fiir das katholische Deutschland since 1905 and preparing and editing the second part of the second volume of F. X. Kraus' Geschichte der christlichen Kunst (Freiburg, 1907), he has written Symbolik des Kirchengebdudes and seiner Au8stattung in der Aufassung den 11‑littelalters (1902).
SANKARACHARYA: Hindu philosopher. See INDIA, L, 2, J 2.

SAUL, s81: First king of Israel. His dates, according to the old chronology, are 1099‑1059; later chronographers bring down the end of his reign to 1017, and give much less than the forty years ascribed to him (Acts xiii. 21). His dates are in confusion; in his third year his son Jonathan was old enough to have command of a body of men (I Sam. xiii. 2); Josephus (Ant., X., viii. 4) gives the length of his reign as twenty years; modern scholarship reduces even this to ten or nine years.
Saul was the son of Kish, a Benjaminite of Gibeah. The sources describe him as of unusual height and of prepossessing appearance, while in the first years of his reign he distinguished himself by his modest bearing, ability, and courage. In obedience to a divine revelation Samuel secretly anointed him king, and had this ratified at a later assembly of the people at Mizpah, where the use of the lot resulted in the choice of Saul. The latter continued for a time his residence in Gibeah, accompanied by a small volunteer guard. When the Ammonites assailed Jabesh‑gilead, he summoned all Israel to the
THE NEW scHAFF‑aERZOa
defense and utterly defeated the assailants. The kingdom was thus securely established, and Samuel retired (see SAmuEr.).
Nearly the whole of Saul's reign was filled with ware, particularly against the Philistines who had attained such supremacy that the Israelites were not permitted to bear arms. Saul assembled an army of 3,000 men, 2,000 of whom he took with him to Mishmash, and 1,000 he sent under Jonathan to Gibeah. Jonathan began the war by assaulting the garrison of the Philistines at Gibeah. When the Israelite army was assembled at Gilgal awaiting the appearance of Samuel, who was to offer the sacrifice, Samuel did not appear at the time he had set and Saul became impatient and himself offered the sacrifice. For this he was sternly rebuked by the prophet and the end of his reign foretold. Saul on this occasion for the first time showed his aelfwilled character, which was incompatible with the position which the anointed of the Lord was to take is Israel. There are some difficulties in the
text, no directions appearing to have issued from Samuel before I Sam. iii. 8 to the effect that Saul was to await him (cf. I Sam. x. 8). The moat likely solution is that the latter passage has been tranapoaed in editing sad properly belongs immediately before siii. 7. The war was continued by a bold feat of arms on the part of Jonathan, which came near coating him his life because of an imprudent oath of Saul's. Another act of disobedience to the voice of God was committed by Said in the war with the
Amalekites. This war was to be a holy war of
vengeance for old acts of aggression and for new
insults. Saul was victorious and took Agag prisoner,
whereby Num. xxiv. 7, 20 was fulfilled; but he
failed to carry out the command of extermination.
Samuel met him again at Gilgal and foretold the
loss of his kingdom (xv. 22 23).
After this second conflict Saul's degeneration was rapid. Samuel secretly anointed David king, and
a melancholy fell upon Saul which could be dispelled only by David's playing. Driven by jealousy,
Saul sought to destroy David. He refused to fulfil his promise to give him his daughter Mirab in marriage but gave him her sinter Michal. David then had a narrow escape with the help of Michal from the emissaries of Saul, and Saul pursued the fugitive as far as Ramah, the home of Samuel. There, the spirit of the prophetic school that had settled in the place seized upon him as it had once
before his accession to the throne. But the bitterness of Saul's spirit is shown by his slaughtering the eighty‑five innocent priests of Nob. During his subsequent pursuit of David he was forced in shame to endure the letter's magnanimity, but his repentance was only transient.
Saul's end was sad. Abandoned by all good spirits, he sought out the witch of Endor to learn from the lips of the departed Samuel what his fate was to be. Hostilities had again broken out with the Philistines, and Saul learned that he and his sons were to perish the next day on the battle‑field. The prophecy was fulfilled. Saul's sons were slain and he fell on his own sword. David recovered his '~ body and buried it in the family tomb.
The personality of Saul rests on the firm basis of

213	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Ssaa ~nianr
history. The narrative is supported by contemporary songs like those given or suggested in I Sam. xviii. 7; II Sam. i.17 aqq., and it is a misapprehension of its realistic character to assert (Winekler) that the name Saul is not the name of a man but of a moongod. Cheyne's fantastic assertion (EB., iv. 4305) that Saul was a Jerahmeelite is just as unfounded. Saul's reign began promisingly and remained powerful to the end. He secured Hebrew independence and fought victoriously against Philistines, Amalekites, Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, and Aram Zoba. He also did good service in rooting out heathen practises (I Sam. x$viii. 3). His downfall was due to the loss of that humility with which he began hiss reign and to his growing self‑will. His degeneration can be traced step by step, although he was not wanting in greatness of soul even to the end. ' (C. VON 0$ELM.)
BIBLIoaasra:: The commentaries and other works on I Samuel; the literature under DAvm; and the works on that period of Hebrew history cited under Asses; IasAAL, HIsToR: or; and SAMUEL. Consult further: J. A. Miller, Saul the First King of larael, London, 1888; W. J. Deans, Samuel and Saul, ib. 1888; T. K. Cheyne, Aide to the Devout Study of Criticism, pp. 1‑128, ib. 1892; F. $chwally, SemitiwAe KrWaaltertfamer, Leipsie, 1901; H. P. Smith, Old Testament History, chap. vii., New York, 1903; G. Beer, Saul, David, Solomon, Tubingen 1908; 8 A. Cook Critical Notes on O. T. History; the Traditions of Saul and David, London, 1907; DB, iv. 412‑415; EB, iv. 4302‑14 (elaborate); JE, xi. 74‑78; Vigourou:, Dictionnaire, faso. zuv. 1500‑07.
SAUM, KONRAD. See SAM.
SAUMUR, sS'mur: A town of France (155 m. s.w. of Paris) on the Loire, famous as the seat of the Protestant academy founded in 1598 by the national synod of Montpellier, and suppressed by royal edict Jan. 8, 1685. The academy, which developed the first fertile school of criticism in modern theology, owed to a certain extent both its existence and its scientific character to Philippe Duplessis‑Momay, the governor of the place, who watched the young institution with great tenderness (see Du PLESsisMORNAY, PHILIPPE, 1 5). The Scotchman John Cameron (q.v.) became one of its first professors, and brought with him that spirit of free and independent research which afterward characterized the academy. Three of his disciples became professors there nearly at the same time, Morse Amyraut (q.v.), Josu6 de la Place (see PLACEUB), and Louis Cappel (see CAPPEL, 3). The theological significance of the school is in large part due to the theory of hypothetical universalism connected with the name of Amyraut, and the Biblical researches of Cappel.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Schweizer, Die proteatantixAs Cotraldopmen in ihrer Entwicklunp innarhalb der reformirten Kirche, ii. 439‑583, Zurich, 1858; Schaff, Creeds, i. 478 sqq.; Lichtenberger, ESR, xi. 487‑472.
SAUR, CHRISTOPH. See SowER.

SAURIN, sb‑ran', JACQUES: The greatest pulpit orator of French Protestantism; b. at Nliles Jan. 6, 1677; d. at The Hague Dec. 30, 1730. He was educated at Geneva, to which he had been taken as a child on the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, .and in 1701 was ordained to the ministry. He immediately went to England, and for four years was pastor of the Walloon congregation in London, until a
position was especially created for him at The
Hague in 1705, which he filled until his death.
Through all these years his fame as a preacher
steadily increased, and multitudes listened to his
sermons, attracted not only by the diction, logic, and
delivery of his addresses, but even more by the deep
religious conviction and adherence to the Gospel
which pervaded him. Apart from his sermons, his
two chief works were his Discours historiques, cri
tiques, th6ologiques et moraux sur les gvfxments les
plus memorables du Vieux et du Nouveau Testament
(4 vols., with 7 vols. of continuations by P. Roques
and C. S. de Besusobre, Amsterdam, 1720‑39;
Eng. tranal. of Vol. i., on the Pentateuch, by I.
Chamberlayne, London, 1723) and LItat du Chris
tianisme en France (part i., The Hague, 1725‑27).
By far his most important productions, however,
were his sermons, of which he himself published
five volumes, and his son, Philippe Saurin, seven
(best ed., The Hague, 1749; Eng. transl. by R.
Robinson, H. Hunter, and J. Sutcliffe, 7 vols.,
Blackburn and London, 1800‑06, and by S. Burder,
6 vols., London, 1824). These addresses, many
of which have also been published individually
and in selections, both in the original and in trans
lation, range over the most diverse themes, from
dogmatic theology to Christian social life. The
underlying spirit in them all is essentially that of
the French Reformed type of Biblical Christianity,
though with a strongly ethical and practical, even a
subjective and mystical, strain, while the apologetic
element is also often present. The sermons are of
great length, many of them doubtless requiring two
hours to deliver; yet they are so compact that even
their minutest subdivisions would frequently
furnish material for a large number of sermons of
ordinary preachers. On the other hand, both style
and diction are often careless and hasty, and his
sermons share the common fault of the time in the
display of learning which burdens them, especially
in the opening portions. In the exposition, however,
and still more in the peroration, Saurin's genius
reaches its climax, but in form and taste he is in
ferior to Bossuet, in delicacy and depth he falls be
low Bourdaloue, and in pathos he can not compare
with MAssillon. His worst fault, however, was lack
of sympathy, despite his loftiness, his intellectuality,
and his earnestness, and it was due to this deficiency
that he never became popular and that he is now
little read. 	(C. PFENDER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Biographies are by: J. J. van 0osteraee, Brussels, 1858; J. P. Gaberel and Des Hours‑Farel, Geneva, 1884. Consult further: C. A. Coquerel, Hint. des Mine du dhert, i. 241 eqq., Paris, 1841; P. A. Bayous, Hint. de la litdirature franfaiae, ii. 108 sqq., Paris, 1853; C. Weiss, Hid. des rQuoies Protestantes de France, ii. 83 eqq., Paris, 1853; A. R. Vinet, Hid. de la pr6dication parmi les r6formea de France au 17. aidcle, pp. 597‑714, Paris, 1880; E. A. Berthault, Saurin d la pridication proteatante, Paris, 1875; E. Lambert, Basai homilftique sur la pr6dioation de Saurin, Montauban, 1892; Lichtenberger, ESR, u. 472‑475.
SAUSSAYE, PIERRE DANIEL CHANTEPIR DE LA. See CHANTEPIE DE LA SAUSBAYE.
SAVAGE, MINOT JUDSON: Unitarian; b. at Norridgewock, Me., June 10, 1841; ‑ graduated at Bangor Theological Seminary, 1864; became Con‑

8avonarola
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
gregational home missionary in California;1864; was pastor at Framingham, mass., 1867‑69; at Hannibal, Mo., 1869‑7 3; Unitarian pastor in Chicago, 1873‑74; of the Church of the Unity, Boston, 18741896; and of the Church of the Messiah, New York, 1896‑1906, when he retired from the ministry on account of the failure of his health. He is the author of Christianity the Science of Manhood (Boston, 1873); The Religion of Evolution (1876); Light on the Cloud (1876); Blufton, a Story of To‑Day (1878); Life Questions (1879); The Morals of Evolution (1880); Talks about Jesus (1880); Minister's Handbook (1880); Belief in God (1881); Beliefs about Man (1882); Poems (1882 and 1905); Beliefs about the Bible (1883); The Modern Sphinx (1883); Sacred Songs for Public Worship, edited with H. M. Dow (1883); Man, Woman, and Child (1884); The Religious Life (1886); Social Problems (1886); My Creed (1887); Life (1890); Four Great Questions Concerning God (1891); The Irrepressible Conflict between Two World Theories (1891); The Evolution of Christianity (1892); Jesus and Modern Life (1893); Life beyond Death. (New York, 1901); and Life's Dark Problems (1905).
SAVONAROLA, sd‑v6"n8‑ro'la, GIROLAMO
(HIERONYMUS).
Life till 1491 (§ 1). His Preaching (§ 2). His Prophecies (§ 3). As a Reformer of the Church (§ 4). Lorenzo de Medici; Charles VII. (§ 5). The Florentine Theocracy (§ 6). Relations with Alexander VI. (§ 7). Turn of Sentiment against Savonarola (§ 8). The End (§ 9). His Character and work (§ 10).
	Girolamo (or Hieronymus) Savonarola, Italian
Roman Catholic, origniator and victim of an eccle
siastical‑political reform, was born at Ferrara Sept.
21, 1452; d. at Florence May 23, 1498. He has
been variously represented as an inspired prophet,
as a precursor of the Reformation, and as an ambi
tious demagogue and deluded fanatic. His right
		place is among the fearless preachers of
	r. Life till righteousness and moral reform at the
	1491. side of Nathan, Elijah, John the Bap
		tist, and John Knox. Destined by his
parents for the study of medicine, he was led to seek
a religious life in the seclusion of the convent through
a deepening sense of the corruption of society and the
refusal of a family of the Strozzi living in Ferrara
to give him their daughter in marriage. In 1475 he
secretly left the parental home and betook himself
to Bologna, where he entered the Dominican con
vent. His subsequent letters to his parents were
full of filial affection and begged forgiveness for the
suddenness of his flight and his failure to make
known his intention. To the usual routine of con
ventual life, he added the study of Augustine and
the great Dominican, Thomas Aquinas, and also
of the Bible, with which he became thoroughly
conversant. In 1481 he was sent to Ferrara, where
he discovered that a prophet may not expect honor
in his own country. The same year he went to
Florence and became an inmate of the convent of
St. Mark's. His preaching attracted no attention
in Florence, and his audiences during Lenten season
214
in San Lorenzo were reduced to twenty‑five persons. Suddenly in 1486, while preaching in Brescia, his eloquence broke forth in all its wealth. In 1489 he returned to the convent in Florence, Lorenzo de Medici, at the representation of Pico dells Mirandola, urging his return. In 1491 he became prior of St. Mark's.
During the next nine years Florence was filled with Savona,rola's personality, and he became the most conspicuous religious figure in Italy. During the first part of this period, he had conflicts with
Lorenzo de Medici, the political despot s. His of the city, and during the second part Preaching. with Alexander VI., all the while seeking by his exhortations and startling prophecies to bring about the civic and moral regeneration of the city. He preached first in St. Mark's and then in the cathedral, immense audiences pressing to hear him expound the Hebrew prophets and the Book of Revelation. At the time of his greatest popularity throngs waited hours for his appearance and his biographer Villari estimates his audiences at from 10,000 to 12,000. "Your sins make me a prophet," he cried out, and from the depths of that stirring, brilliant half‑pagan life which the Medicis had fostered in Florence he conjured up a stinging sense of its emptiness and desolation. His message was addressed to the clergy as well as to the people, and the flashes of his indignation often fell upon the palace of Lorenzo. In the last sermon he preached during Advent season, 1492, he portrayed a vision he had had the night before of a sword held by a hand in the heavens and bearing the inscription "Behold the sword of the Lord will descend quickly and suddenly upon the earth." He heard many voices proclaiming mercy for the good and judgment for the wicked. Then suddenly the sword was turned toward the earth, the sky was darkened, and swords, arrows, and flames rained down. The preacher was commanded to preach these things. This was one of those visions the description of which from the pulpit of the cathedral impressed and terrified the great audiences. The severity of his warnings upon the pleasurelovng city was at times so fearful that SavonaroLa himself shrank back from delivering them.
To his gifts of vivid description, pure language, and fervor of heart he added as a chief element of his power unshaken confidence in his divinely appointed mission. He felt that he received communi‑
cations directly from God, and he g. His stood forth as a divinely commissioned Prophecies. prophet. His prophecies of future
events were the amazement of Florence, though not all joined in accepting the preacher as an inspired seer. He, however, applied to these prophecies the words of Scripture that not one jot or tittle of them should fail till they were fulfilled. These prophecies were usually given to him in visions or transports of the soul. His views on prophecy in general and on his own prophetic endowment found utterance from the pulpit and also in two works, Compendium revelationum (1495) and Dialogusdeverwtateetprophetica(1497). Savonarola's most famous prophecy was of the coming of a new Cyrus from across the Alps who should bring about

215	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Savonarola
the political emancipation of Florence and Italy. Most of the prophecies were in general terms and predicted times of dire chastisement for Florence, followed by a time of righteousness and extension of the Church. One of the proofs Savonarola gave for his prophetic gift was the fulfilment of his predictions. On this very point, however, there is doubt. In certain cases, his prophecies were certainly not fulfilled, such as his prediction of the speedy conversion of the Jews and Moors. As to whether other so‑called prophecies were real is open to question. The Cyrus from the West came into Italy, Charles VIII. of France, but it is a question whether Savenarola's prediction was anything more than the forecast of an observer carefully watching the progress of political movements in Italy and alert to detect the signs of impending events. Certain it is that, while Charles' advent was followed by the expulsion of the Medicis from Florence, his Italian campaign ended in failure and the independence of Florence lasted but a short period. Another consideration that casts suspicion upon the prophetic nature of his predictions is that many of them concerned political events such as belong to the selfish policy of nations, as when he predicted that Florence would again secure sovereignty over Pisa. A large party in Florence held Savonarola to be a prophet. Men like Landucci, the apothecary, fully accepted his prophetic endowment. Some of the distinguished men of the age, like the Frenchman Commines, either accepted it or acknowledged their inability to account for the forecast. The judgment of most of Sav onarola's recent biographers, such as Villari and Lucas, and of historians, such as Pastor and Creighton, Roman Catholic and Protestant, is that Savenarola was self‑deceived. But while his prophetic claims were a delusion, he had none of the spirit of the impostor. '"hat men moving amidst the common realities of life called dreams of fancy, Savonarola, longing with all the intensity of his being for the reformation of Florence, took for real visions of the soul. Much as he impressed his own age with the reality of his prophetic endowment, to modern times his glory consists in his being a preacher of righteousness in an age of deep dissoluteness and religious effrontery.
As a reformer, his vision ended with the moral reform of the city and of Italy and its adoption of righteousness in private conduct and
4. As a in civil management. A radical doc‑
Reformer trinal reform such as was achieved by of the Luther and Calvin was not in Savo‑
	Church.	narola's program. In all essential
		points of doctrine he agreed with the
medieval Church. He did not call in question a
single one of its dogmas (cf. Pastor, Popes, vi.
51). His only departure from the ecclesiastical
belief of his time was his denial of the pope's
infallibility and his appeal to a council as the final
court of arbitrament in Christendom.
The internal history of Italian affairs in 1492 was marked by the death of Lorenzo the Magnificent (the most accomplished diplomat of his time) and the elevation of Alexander VI. to the pontifical throne. When Lorenzo knew that he was dying, he sent for Savonarola. The monk had kept at a
distance from the prince, and Lorenzo had said with
reference to	him, "a stranger has come into my
	house, yet he will not stop to pay me a
5. Lorenzo visit." Rich gifts sent to the convent of de Medici; St. Mark's failed to win its prior. Now, Charles VIL facing the issues of eternity, Lorenzo sent for Savonarola as "the only honest friar" he knew. He wanted to make confession of three crimes. The spiritual adviser instead proposed three terms of shrift. The first was a confident trust in God's mercy. To this the dying man assented. The second was the restoration of his ill‑gotten wealth. To this also assent was given: The third required that he give back to Florence her liberties. To this Lorenzo gave no response and turned his face to the wall. The priest passed out without giving absolution. The account as thus given is based upon the earliest lives of Savonarola, by Burlamacchi and Mirandola. A different account was given by Politian in a letter to Jacopo Antiquario. Politian makes no mention of the third condition and reports that Savonarola left the dying man after giving his blessing. This version is accepted by Roscoe, Creighton (Popes, iv. 172 sqq.), and Lucas (pp. 83‑84) . The version adopted here is accepted by Villari (i. 168‑169), Hase (p. 20), Clark (p. 116); Pastor (Popes, v. 92) seems to proceed upon the theory of its truth. Ranke wavers, but declared he did not see his way clear to deny it. During the three years 1494‑97, Savonarola's ascendency was at its height. According to Guicciardini, his influence was most extraordinary. During this period Charles VII. came into Italy, Lorenzo's son Piero and the Medicis were banished from Florence and a theocratic government was established in the city. Fra Girolamo thundered from the pulpit against the rule of the Medicis and pleaded for their expulsion. When Charles was encamped near Florence, Savonarola, by the appointment of the Florentine seignory, met him and made a deep impression upon the monarch. The French army, through the monk's appeals to the king and his threats, restrained themselves from their usual violence in Florence, and Charles left the city, and pursued "his onward journey without delay." On the king's return from Naples to upper Italy, Savonarola again communicated with him in five letters, bidding the sovereign grant her liberties to Florence, a city of which he said " God had chosen her and had determined to magnify her so that who dared to touch her, touched the apple of His eye." No city ever had a more ardent lover than Florence had in Savonarola.
The expulsion of the Medicis involved a reorganization of the state, and in this work Savonarola had a part of prime importance. He was called upon as the chief citizen of Florence by the seigniory to propose a new constitution. Reluctantly
6. The he set himself to the task and took
	Florentine	the government of Venice as his model.
	Theocracy.	The supreme official, the doge, was
		left out, that place being given to
Jesus Christ. "The government of the one in
Florence," so he cried out in the pulpit, "could re
sult only in despotism." "God alone shall be thy
king, 0 Florence, as He was king of Israel under the
old covenant." Savonarola's government was a

6avonarola	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	alg
theocracy; "its new head shall be Jesus Christ" was the ringing cry with which he closed his sermons on Haggai. Depicting this time of crisis, Guicciardini called the prior of St. Mark's the savior of his country (cf. Villari, i. 268, 298). The whole social fabric of Florentine society seemed for the moment to have undergone a change, and a millennial reign of order and good‑will seemed to be impending. Love to Christ seemed to have become the predominant impulse. Deadly foes fell upon each other's necks; property illegitimately acquired was returned; the churches overflowed; the convents were filled up; profane amusements ceased. Indeed, says a contemporary writer, "the people of Florence seem to have become fools for Christ's sake."
But while Savonarola's influence over the people maintained itself for several years, the ideal elements of his government exposed him easily to attack. In the latter part of the fifteenth century its provisions seemed to be most impracticable. Besides, the Medicis were pressing to re7. Relations turn to Florence as their rightful herit‑
with	age, and their party and other enemies
Alexander found abundant opportunity in Savo‑
	.VI.	narola's unworldly peculiarities to in
		crease the disaffection in Florence.
Alexander VI. was the chief factor in the last stage
of Savonarola's career. The contrast between these
two men has been compared with the contrast be
tween Christ and Herod and between St. Paul and
Nero. Moved by representations, reaching him
from Florence itself, and by appeals of the Medicean
princes, the pope summoned Savonarola to Rome
July 25, 1495, and promised to "welcome him with
love and fraternal affection." Savonarola refused,
alleging sickness and the dangers by the way. Then
followed papal briefs, Sept. 8, Oct. 16, inhibiting
him from preaching. , For five months Savonarola
refrained from preaching, but on Feb. 17, 1496,
at the call of the seigniory he again ascended the
pulpit. He took the bold position that the pope
might err, and that when he spake as a man and
erred no man was bound to obey him. He entered
upon a course of severe denunciations upon the
Church and its representatives in Rome. Alexander
tried bribery and offered Savonarola the red hat if
he would keep silence, but in vain. Savonarola
'stood in the pulpit and declared' he would not have
mitres nor a cardinal's hat but only the red hat of
martyrdom which God gives to his saints. His
wonderful influence with the people had illustra
tion in the carnival season of 1494. Boys who had
been brought under the new religious movement and
were grouped in brigades went from house to house,
calling upon the occupants to give up their cards,
dice, erotic books, and articles of adornment. They
marched up and down the streets singing hymns
which Savonarola had composed. In 1497, similar
scenes were enacted, and on the last day of carnival
week a great bonfire was made on the public square,
of a pyramid of such articles, the pile being sixty feet
high with a base of 240 square feet. This was known
as the "burning of the vanities." At these times,
Florence seemed to be going altogether to religion.
Wives left their husbands and betook themselves
to convents. Others, who were married, took the vow of continence, and Savonarola even dreamed the city might reach so perfect a condition that all marriage would cease. People took the communion daily. Fra Bartolomeo threw his studies of naked figures into the fire and for a time thought it sinful to use in painting hands which should be continually folded in prayer.
With the year 1497 the troubles thickened around the Florentine reformer. Insulting placards were posted on the walls of his convent and distributed
through the city. Assassins moved by
8. Turn of political rancor and ambition gathered
Sentiment in the cathedral to take his life. SavoAgainst narola intensified his denunciations of
Savonarola. the "fornications in Italy, France,
Spain, and all other regions." Lust had made of the Church a shameless courtezam Priests openly acknowledged their bastards as sons. Alexander was evidently aimed at, and such open arraignment the pope could not safely tolerate. On May 12, 1497, Alexander declared Savonarola excommunicate as "one suspected of heresy." The seigniory was still on Savonarola's side and espoused his cause in letters to the Apostolic See. On Christmas Day, 1497, the prior violated the papal curse and celebrated mass three times, and on Feb. 11, 1498, he stood again in the pulpit and preached to an immense concourse of people declaring that popes might err as Boniface VIII. had erred. The heat of his utterance increased, and frequently, from this time on, he appealed to heaven as his witness that he was willing to go into fire of hell, if his motives were not pure, or to be struck dead on the spot if he were not sincere. The pope had one more weapon, the interdict, and this he threatened to hurl against the disobedient city. The seigniory sought to negotiate, but its membership became divided and decided it expedient that Savonarola should keep silence and the good‑will of the Apostolic See be retained with an eye to future favors. It, however, refused to deliver up Savonarola to Alexander as he had requested. Savonarola preached for the last time Mar. 18,1498. He in turn now determined to secure, if possible, the adjudication of an ecumenical council. The letters to the kings of France, England, and other countries, appealing to them to convoke such a council, were written but never sent.
At this juncture a completely new turn was given to Savonarola's career. Florence was suddenly startled with the report that an ordeal of fire was impending to test the prophet's supernatural claims.
The Franciscan monk Francesco da The Puglia, in a sermon in S. Croce, issued
	End.	the challenge. Savonarola hesitated
		and declared that he did not depend
upon a miracle to attest his claims. Righteous
lives were the test. But the popular demand
forced him to accept the challenge. Fra Domenico,
his intimate friend and a monk of St. Mark's,
offered himself for the ordeal as did also many
otbers. The seigniory appointed a day and the two
parties filed their statements with this tribunal.
The place fixed was the public square, where two
pyres seventy feet in length, of inflammable mate‑

217	RELIGIOITS ENCYCLOPEDIA	9avonsrola
rials, were built. All Florence was present to witness the spectacle. The Franciscans and Dominicans marched in solemn processions to the spot. The ordeal was set for eleven o'clock, but there was delay. Objection was made to Domenico's going through the fire wearing his priestly garments, on suspicion that they had been bewitched. The Dominicans yielded. The second objection was made that Domenico should not carry a crucifix or the host with him. The parleying was protracted. Rain fell, the day was declining, and the Franciscan challenger did not appear. The seigniory declared the ordeal abrogated. The spell of Savonarola's influence was gone. The mob now treated him as a coward or an impostor. Florence was mad with anger. A few, like Landucci, were bowed with disappointment and sorrow. The neat day St. Mark's was assaulted. The resistance offered by the monks, even with firearms, staved off the end at best for a few hours. Savonarola and two of his chief supporters, Fra Domenico and Fm Silvestro, were imprisoned. Their first trial was before the seigniory. Alexander wrote that they should be sent to Rome but, if not, they should be tried "with torture." The agonies of the torture induced Savonarola to make confessions of imposture and other ill‑doing, which he denied as soon as the delirium of the pain wore off. It was hard to manufacture, against the monk, charges deserving death. Savonarola was no heretic. But a commission sent by the pope‑Turriano, the Venetian Dominican general, and Bishop Francesco Romelino, afterward cardinal‑were equal to the task of finding the prisoners guilty of rank heresy. Letters came to Florence stating that Alexander had declared Savonarola should "be put to death even if he were another John the Baptist." The garbled records of the trial make it uncertain what the exact process was. Romelino's letters to Alexander show that the prisoners were to be treated as pernicious heretics. The intervals between the applications of torture the prisoners spent in comparing expositions on Pss. li. and xxxi. The three friends met and prayed on the morning appointed for the execution, May 23, 1498. Their bearing, that of humble trust in Christ, was adapted to win universal sympathy. The sentence ran that they should be hanged and their bodies burned. Absolution was pronounced. The bishop of Vasona in pronouncing the sentence of deposition upon Savonarola said, "I separate thee from the Church triumphant and the Church militant." Savonarola replied, "Not from the Church triumphant. That is not in thy power to do." The ashes of the three monks were cast into the Arno.
Savonarola will be judged by the righteousness of his message, the calm stability of his last hours, and the environment in which he was placed. He stands
forth as the greatest master of pulpit ro. His eloquence Italy has furnished. In an Character age when the classical renaissance inand Work. troduced or fostered moral corruption,
he represented moral righteousness in private life and in civil government. Lacking the sagacity of the statesman, he was inspired with patriotism and the devotion of the religious reformer.
In appealing from the decision of Alexander VL, he was taking the position which Julius II., in his bull Cum tanto divino, 1505, justified. That bull pronounced papal elections secured by bribery void. If the bull was retroactive then Alexander was no pope. He had secured his election by shameless bribery. The world was at once divided between admiration for, and condemnation of, Savonarola. Even within the Dominican order the monk's memory was for a long time disparaged, and the Dommican general Sisto Fabri of Luce&, 1585, issued an order forbidding monks and nuns of his order to mention his name or retain any relic or book that could remind them of him. But the feeling in the Dondnican order has changed and a warm and persistent effort has been made by Dominicans to prepare the way for the canonisation of their most eloquent preacher. Protestants are inclined to regard him as in a sense a precursor of the Reformation, a seer of a new era in the Church. So Luther regarded him, and wrote a preface to an edition of his Meditation on Pss. li. and xxxi. (1523). Rietschl included him in the monument at Worms commemorating the Reformation, and placed him in company with Wyclif and Hues as forerunners of that great movement. Savonarola's expositions of the two Psalms composed duriag his imprisonment show him as a member of the Church universal. Here he appeals as a sinner directly to God's mercy. But in his "Triumph of the Gross," he accepts the seven sacraments and the other distinctive marks of the medieval Church. Schnitzer, the leading contemporary authority on Savonarola in Germany, gives him unstinted admiration. Pastor joins in admiring the purity of his purpose but condemns him as an unfaithful Roman Catholic in refusing obedience to the Apostolic See. The general sentiment in the Roman Catholic Church is represented by the judgment of Hefele‑Kn6pfler (Karchengeschichte p. 503), that Savonarola's execution was a judicial murder. Florence regards the memory of her adopted citizen with love and has made every attempt to offer reparation for his exccution. In 1882 the seigniory placed Girolamo's statue in the Hall of the Five Hundred and again, 1901, honored him by placing a tablet on the spot of execution with a statement that there "by unrighteous sentence" he and his two companions "were hanged and burned." On the wall of his cell in St. Mark's a medallion has been placed containing a head of the prior, and opposite the place where he was seized another memorial has been erected which the visitor often finds hung with wreaths of fresh flowers.
(PHILIP SCHAFFt.) D. S. ScHAFF.
BIHLi06HAPHT: On bibliography consult: A. Audin de Runs, Bsbliopraphia dells opere a deU' edisioni di fm J. Savonarola. Florence, 1847; Potthast, Wepweiser, pp. 1384‑88.
Sources for a life are: Savonarola's Latin and italian writings, consisting of sermons, tracts, letters, and a few poems. The largest collection of MSS. and original editions is preserved in the Central National Library of Florence. Printed works are: Epistolar apiritvales et awatice, ed. Qu6tif, Paris, 1874, Eng. travel., Spirsaual and Aseetic LeUers of Savonarof, ed. B. W. Randolph, London. 1907, new ed., 1909; the sermons were collected by a friend. Lorenw Vivoli, and published as they came fresh from the preacher's lips‑beat ed. Sernwni e

Bavonarola
Saxony	W SCHAFF‑HERZOG	1318
9redithe, Prate, 1846; also ed. G. Baccini, Florence, 1889; a selection ed. Villari and Casanova, Scotto, di prediche et acritti di G. Savonarola, Florence, 1898; Germ. tranal. of twelve sermons and of the poem Ds ruins mundi by H. schettmiiller, Berlin, 1901; A. Gherardi, Nuovi documenti a studi interno a G. Savonarola, 2d ed., Florence, 1887. " The Triumph of the Cross," ed. in Lat. L. Ferretti, Siena, 1899, Milan, 1901, Eng. transl. from this ed. by J. Procter, London, 1901, St. Louis, 1902. " Exposition of Pas. li., xxxi.," Lat. text with Eng. transl. by E. H. Perowne, London, 1900; Savonarola's poetry, ed. C. Guasti, Florence, 1862; E. C. Bayonne, (Euvres spirituellea choisies de Savonarola, 3 vols., Paris, 1880.
An extended list of works is given in Potthast, Wepweiser, pp. 1564‑66; other lisle are noted in the literature given below. Basal accounts are: P. Burlamacchi (d. 1519), Vita Hieronymi Savonarolm (founded on an older Latin life by an eye‑witness), ed. Mansi, Lucca, 1761; G. F. Pica dells Mirandola (nephew of the celebrated litterateur), completed 1520, published, Mirandola, 1530, ed. Qu6tif, 2 vols., Paris, 1674; J. Nardi (a contemporary), Le Stores della citta di Firenze, 1484‑1631, Florence, 1684; Luca Landucci (an ardent admirer of Savonarola and & Florentine apothecary), Diario Florentine. 1/,60161&, Florence, 1883.
Of later accounts the three biographies which have made notable advance are: F. K. Meier, Berlin, 1836; F. T. Perrens, 2 vols., Paris, 1852, 3d ed., 1859; P. Villari, Florence, 1859, 2d ed., 1887, Eng. transl., 2 vols., London, 1888, 1 vol., 1899 (combines results of previous study with new material); idem, Studies Historical and Critical, ib. 1907. Other biographies are: F. C. Bartoli, Florence, 1782; A. G. Rudelbach, Hamburg, 1835; K. Hase, Neue Propheten, Leipsie, 1851; F. T. Perrens, 2 vols., Paris and Turin, 1853, 3d ed., 1859; R. Madden, 2 vols., London, 1854; V. Marchese, Florence, 1855; B. Aquarone, 2 vols., Alexandria, 1857; s. de Rorari, 2d ed., Legnago, 1868; E. C. Bayonne, Paris, 1879 (worthy); E. Warren, London, 1879; W. R. Clark, Chicago, 1890; A. G. Haygood, The Monk and the Prince, Atlanta, 1895; J. L. O'Neil, Boston, 1898 (has extended bibliography); G. McHardy, Edinburgh, 1901, New York, 1902; E. L. S. Horsburgh, London, 1901; N. Howard, ib. 1904; H Lucas, ib., rev. ed., 1906 (has full bibliography); W . H. Crawford, Cincinnati, 1907; W. E. Oliphant, London, 1907; H. Bergmann, Stockholm, 1909.
Other discussions, not simply biographical, but taking up various phases, literary or critical, are: W. Roscoe, Life of Lorenzo de Medici, London, 1795, new issue, 1885; L. van Ranke, Historisch‑biographische Studien, pp. 183‑257, Leipsic, 1877 (discusses the interrelations of the works by Burlamacchi and Pica della Mirandola); C. Sickinger, Savonarola, rein Leben and seine Zeit, WOrzburg, 1877; E. Comba, Storia delta Riforma in Italia, Florence, 1881; Margaret Oliphant, Makers of Florence, London, 1881; Pastor, Popes, vi. 3‑54; idem, Zur Beurtheilung Savonarolas, Freiburg, 1896 (answers criticisms by Luotto and Feretti); P. Luotto, Dello Studio di Serittura sacra secondo G. Savonarola e Leon XIII., Turin, 1896; idem, It vero Savonarola ed it Savonarola di L. Pastor, Florence, 1897; Feretti, Per la causa di Fra G. Savonarola, Milan, 1897; M. Glossner, Savonarola als Apolopet and Philosoph, Paderborn, 1898; J. L. O'Neil, Was Savonarola really excommunicated f Boston, 1900; J. Schnitzer, Quellen and Forachungen zur Geschichte Savonarolas, vo19. i.‑iv., Leipsie, 1902‑10; G. Biermann. Kritische Studie zur Geschichte des Fra G. Savonarola, Rostock, 1901; E. S. Godkin, The Monastery of San Marco, London, 1901; Cambridge Modern History, chap. v., New York, 1902; Creighton, Papacy, iv. 163 sqq. (discussion of the authorities, p. 351; the student should not omit study of this useful note); Schaff, Church History, v., 2. ¢ 76 (good list of. literature, pp. 660‑661).

SAVOY CONFERENCE: A conference between twelve bishops and twelve Puritan divines, with nine assistants on each side, at the Savoy Palace, London, Apr. 15‑July 25, 1661, the object being to revise the Prayer‑Book. The conference was necessitated by the events leading to the Restoration and the dissatisfaction of the Puritans with the service as it stood. But after the Restoration the
sentiment of the country was strongly royalist, and consequently the bishops were able to resist, in their reliance upon popular feeling, the attempts of the Puritans to do away with parts of the service and with observances which to them savored of Roman Catholicism, and the Conference had as a result only the continued use of the Prayer‑Book. The proposals desired by the Puritans were embodied by Baxter in his hastily compiled liturgy, which never came into use, but was republished by C. W. Shields, Philadelphia, 1867, New York, 1880.
BIBLIOGRAPHT: D. Neal, History of the Puritans, ed. J. Toulmin, part iv., chap. vi., Bath, 1793‑97; W. H. Hutton, The English Church 18,26‑1714, pp. 185‑186, London, 1903; F. Procter and W. H. Frere, New Hist. of the Book of Common Prayer, pp. 169‑193 et passim, ib. 1905; J. H. Blunt, Annotated Book of Common Prayer, pp. 30, 32, 9798, 183, New York, 1908.
SAVOY DECLARATION. See CONGREGATIONALISTS, III., J 1.
SAXON CONFEDERATION, LOWER. See
LOWER SAXON CONFEDERATION.
SAXONS, CONVERSION OF THE: Of all the German tribes the Saxons longest preserved both their independence and their national religion. It is true that there are records of attempts to introduce Christianity among them before the time of Charlemagne, but these are either legendary, as the account of the baptism of Saxon envoys by Bishop Faro of Meaux at the court of Lothair II., or else were frustrated by the disinclination of the Saxon people to accept Christianity, as was the case with the efforts of the Hewald brothers (see HEwALD). St. Boniface (q.v.) obtained a letter of recommendation to the Saxons (Epist., xxii.), but his biographers do not relate that he worked among them. It was only the Saxon wars of Charlemagne that rendered a conversion of the Saxons both possible and necessary. Whether Charlemagne intended to incorporate Saxony in the Frankish empire when he began his Saxon campaigns is doubtful, but at all events he followed this course after 776, and he was therefore forced at the same time to undertake the Christianization of the people because of the close connection between Church and State in h1s domains. In his very first campaign (772) the destruction of the Irmensul accompanied the capture of the Eresburg, whereupon the Saxons retorted by attacking a church in Fritzlar and destroying the church at Deventer. The religious question was first treated in the peace of 776, when the Saxons, probably as a proof of the sincerity of their subjection, agreed to accept baptism. In the following year Charlemagne assembled an imperial diet at Paderborn, in Saxon territory, and Saxony was divided into missionary districts which were assigned to various Frankish dioceses and monasteries, Cologne receiving the land of the Boructeri, Mainz the districts of southern Saxony, bordering on its own territory, Wilrzburg the region about Paderborn, Abbot Sturm of Fulda the districts on the Diemel, and the monastery of Amorbach in the Odenwald the region about Verden. West Frankish bishoprics, such as Reims and Chalons, seem also to have shared in this missionary activity.

RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
8avonarola Saxony
Although the task thus systematically undertaken was impeded by ever‑recurring revolts against foreign rule (778, 782, 783, 784), each new victory of the Franks became the occasion for wholesale baptisms. The most dangerous insurrection was that of 782, which threatened the very existence of the Saxon Church and was suppressed only through the victories won by Charlemagne at Detmold and on the Hase in 783. When, two years later, Widukind and Abbio were baptized, the pacification and Christianization of the land were regarded as assured. Charlemagne sent word to Rome that the Saxons were converted and sought by promulgating the Capitulatio de partibus Saxonice (probably in 787) to secure the position he had won. The punishment of death, decreed by the old Saxon laws against violators of the heathen sanctuaries, but a penalty unknown to Frankish law, was now adopted for the protection of the new faith, and this penalty was decreed not only for the murderers of ecclesiastics, but also for all who conspired against Christians, damaged churches, observed the heathen custom of burning the bodies of the dead, contemptuously broke the commandment of the Church concerning baptism, or avoided baptism. Each church received rich allotments from the lands of its parishioners, tithes from private and royal property, and also the right of Asylum (q.v.). Besides this, it was decreed that the death penalty might be remitted in case of voluntary confession of guilt, that children ehould be baptized before reaching the age of one year, that the Sabbath should be observed and mass attended, and that Christians should be buried in consecrated ground.
	Nevertheless, a new revolt in 792 was followed
by a relapse into heathenism, the destruction of
churches, and the murder of many of the clergy.
Alcuin, writing to Megenfrid in 795 (Epist., lxix.),
laid the blame, at least in part, on the execution of
tithes and extreme legal penalties, even while
doubting whether the Saxons had really been elected
into faith (Epist. lxvii.), but finally Charlemagne
succeeded in pacifying the land, largely by deport
ing thousands of Saxon families to various parts of
Franconia and Swabia (795, 797‑799, 804). At the
same time the severity of the law was modified, and
at the imperial diet of Aachen (Oct. 28, 797) the
death penalty was abolished and replaced by the
wergild of sixty soldi, usual among the Franks.
By 802 the land was considered to be entirely
Christianized. As early as 787 the missionary dis
trict of Willehad (q.v.) at the mouth of the Weser
had been created a diocese, of which Willehad him
self had been consecrated bishop; the dioceses of
Verden and Minden seem to have been organized
about the same time; the bishopric of Munster was
formed between 802 and 805; toward the close of
Charlemagne's reign the bishopric of Paderborn
was erected, the first bishop being Hathumar, a
Saxon educated at W1rzburg; and the remaining
dioceses, Osnabriick, Hildesheim, Halberstadt, and
Hamburg, were formed in the reign of Louis the
Pious. 	(A. HAUCK.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Original sources are: Repeats hiatortae wed. falim, ed. H. A. Erhard, 2 vois., Monster, 1847‑51; Ge‑
schichtsquellen des Bisthums Mfnster vols. i. and iv., ib.
1851 sqq. Kaiserurkundea der Provinz Westfalen, E,1. R.
WOmans and F. Philippi, 2 vols., ib. 1867‑81; Brew isches Urkundenbuch, ed. D. R. Ehmek and W. von Bippen, Bremen, 1873 sqq., F. A. Ogg, Source Book of Meths. roar History, pp. 114‑123, New York, 1908. Consult: C. Stuve, Gssehickte des Hochatifte osnabrfick, Jens, 1853; B. Simeon, Jahrbtichw des frtinkischen Reiche unter Ludwip, 2 vols., Leipsie, 1874‑76; G. Dehio, GeschicUe des Embistums Hamburg‑Bremen, vol. i., Berlin, 1876; W. von Giesebrecht, GescAichte der deutschen Kaiserzeit, i. 110 aqq., Brunswick, 1881; S. Abel and B. Simeon, Jahrbtlcher des frankischen Reichs unter Karl dem Grosse, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1883‑88; C. Ritter, Karl der Grosse and du Sachsen, 2 parts, Dessau, 1894‑95; G. Hiiffer, Korueyer Studien, Monster, 1898; Robinson, European HistoM, i. 129 sqq., 150 aqq.; Rettberg, KD, vol. ii.; Hauck, KD, ii. 360 sqq.; the literature under CHARLEMAGNE.
SAXONY: A kingdom of Germany, bounded on the north and east by Prussia, on the south by Bohemia, and on the west by the Thuringian states, with two small exclaves, Ziegelheim and Liebschwitz; area 5,856 square miles; population (1900) 4,202,216. Of this there were 3,954,132 Lutherans; 16,080 Reformed; 197,005 Roman Catholics; 2,028 German Catholics; 1,260 Greek Catholics; 12,416 Jews, and 19,295 others, including members of the fourteen Irvingite and fourteen New Apostolic churches, as well as of the twelve Methodist and four Baptist congregations. In 1905, of a population of 4,508,601, there were 4,250,659 Lutherans, Reformed, and Unionists; 218,275 Roman Catholics; 266 Russian Orthodox; 1,331 Greek Catholics; 22,858 other Christians; and 14,697 Jews. In recent years there has been a notable increase of accessions from the Roman Catholic Church to the Lutheran, the number advancing from 508 in 1899 to 1,266 in 1903, while conversions from Lutheranism to Roman Catholicism increased from 41 to 52 respectively. The Roman Catholic Church increase is due almost entirely to the immigration of laborers from Bohemia, Poland, Italy, and other Roman Catholic countries. Roman Catholic districts are found only in Saxon Upper Lusatia, about the nunnery of Marienstern east of Kamenz, and in the vicinity of the nunnery of Marienthal near Ostritz. On the increase is the influence of various sects not only in the vicinity of Zwickau (see ZWICKAU PROPHETS), a hotbed of sects since the Reformation, but over all the kingdom. Particularly aggressive in recent years has been the New Apostolic Church (Geyerites and Krebsites). Included in the statistics of theMethodist Episcopals are the Albrechtsleute (see EVANGELICAL AssocIATION), whose chief attraction is their close fellowship.
The established Church of Saxony is Lutheran. So long as the royal house is Roman Catholic the four ministers of worship, justice, interior, and finance must be of the State Church. Since 1874 its control has been vested in the national consistory, composed of a judicial president and an equal number of theological and judicial councilors, with the first court preacher as vice‑president, and with a number of extra members. Between this consistory and the individual congregations stands the "inspection," consisting of the superintendent (ephorus) of the diocese and the chief civic official of the district. Upper Lusatia, which has no superintendent, is controlled (subject to the national consistory) by the prefecture of Bautzen. Since 1868 the laity have been permitted to represent individual con‑

Saxony
gregations, and quinquennial national synods have been held, the latter composed of 34 clergy and 43 laymen. In 1903 there were 1,46.9 clerical positions, 619 being under royal patronage, 832 controlled by private patrons, and 18 alternating in patronage. In 1903 the births of Evangelical parentage numbered 142,641 and the baptisms 138,606; in the same year there were 32,416 marriages, and 32,047 betrothals of wholly Evangelical pairs. By the law of Dec. 1, 1876, omission of baptism or betrothal involves loss of the right to be a godparent, or to have either an active or a passive vote in church affairs. The church attendance is, in general, satisfactory; and there is an increasing interest in missions and other forms of practical religion. On the other hand, the number of communicants is unmistakably declining. Besides the Evangelical Lutherans, official recognition has been accorded since 1818 to the Evangelical Reformed, represented by churches at Dresden and Leipsic.
The Roman Catholic Church in Saxony, which has enjoyed freedom of worship and complete civil equality with the Protestant denominations since 1807, has been controlled since 1763 by a vicar apostolic and by a Roman Catholic consistory under him. He resides in Dresden, but is at the same time dean of the chapter of Bautzen, and is a bishop in partibus. The State requires all measures, even those bearing simply on internal administration, to be submitted to itself; and such changes as touch in the remotest degree civil relations must be approved by the civil authorities. The Roman Catholics have in Saxony' seventy‑five places of worship and ninety‑seven clergy. In Upper Lusatia are the two Cistercian nunneries already mentioned, but the foundation of additional religious houses is forbidden, and every religious order is prohibited from entering the country. The only exception to the latter restriction is that of the law of Aug. 23, 1876, which admits, after approval by, and under supervision of, the civil government, such sisters as belong to orders settled in the German Empire and devoting themselves exclusively to the care of children and of the sick. The German Catholic congregations in Dresden, Leipsic, Chemnitz, and Gelenau, recognized since 1848, are now controlled by the Landeskirchenvorstand in Dresden, which convenes a synod triennially, and by the elders of each congregation. They are rapidly declining because of their increasing tendency to free thought, and are so lax that, in case of conversions to the Lutheran Church, baptism is required. In case of change of confession among the recognized bodies, the person concerned must declare his intention to his clergyman, who must warn him of the seriousness of his proposed step. If, after four weeks, he still adheres to his resolve, he is furnished a certificate of dismissal, which is sent the clergymen of the confession to which he has become a convert, and without this he can not be received into any of the recognized churches. In case the conversion is to an unrecognized church, the name of the convert must be entered in the official register of dissenters. This latter provision, dating from 1870, renders the formation of new religious bodies possible. Advantage was taken of
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
it in 1871 by the " Separate Lutherans " (see LuTmsANs, II.), who charged the State Church with lapse from the Lutheran confession. They now have six congregations in Dresden, Planitz, Chemnitz, Crimmitzschau, Frankenberg, and Grim, with a membership of 1,500. (F. W. DIBEI.Ius.)
BIHLioanAP87: The best sources of information are the annuall"tatistisches Jahrbuch for das %8ni#reich Sachsen, published at Dresden, and %irchliches Jahrbuch, published at GOtersloh; and P. Drews. Daa kirchliche Leben der evangel.luther%schen Landeakirehe des R6nipreichs Sachsen, Leipsic, 1902.

SAYBROOK PLATFORM. See CoN(iazGATIONALISTS, III., § 1.

SAYCE, sk, ARCHIBALD HENRY: Church of England, archeological scholar; b. at Shirehampton (4 m. n.w. of Bristol), Gloucestershire, Sept. 25, 1845. He was educated at Queen's College (B.A., 1869), and was ordered deacon in 1870 and ordained priest in the following year. He was elected fellow of Queen's College in 1869, where he was also tutor in 1870‑79. He was deputy professor of comparative philology at Oxford (1876‑1889), and since 1891 has been professor of Assyriology in the same university. He was a member of the Old‑Testament Revision Company, and was Hibbert lecturer in 1887, Gifford lecturer in 1900‑02, and Rhind lecturer in 1906. He is a member of very many learned societies.
He has edited G. Smith's History of Babylonia (London, 1877) and Sennaehsrsv (1878); Records of the Pad, second series (5 vols., 1888‑92); the English translation of G. Maspero'e Histoire ancienne des peuples de 1' orient claaeique as The Dawn ql Civilisation (3 vols., 1894‑1900); Murray's Handbook to Upper Egypt (1896); The Aramaic Papyri Discovered at Assouan (1908); and The Tablet from Yusgat in the Liverpool Institute of ArcAmolopy (1907). Among his numerous independent writings, special mention may be made of his Assyrian Grammar for Comparative Purposes (London, 1872); Principles of Comparative Philology (1874); Astronomy and Astrology of the Babylonians (1874); Elementary Assyrian Grammar (1874); Babylonian Literature (1877); Lectures on the Assyrian Language and Syllabary (1877); Introduction to the Science of Language (2 vols., 1879); The Monuments of the Hittites (1881); The ancient Empires of the East: Herodotus i.‑iii (1883) ; Presh Light from the Monw menta: A Sketch of the most striking Confirmations of the Bible from recent Discoveries in Egypt, Assyria, Palestine, Babylonia, and Asia Minor (1883); Asayrsa, its Princes, Priests, and People (1885); An Introduction to the Books of Esra. Nehemiah, and Bather (1885; 5th ed., 1909); Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion as illustrated by the Religion of the ancient Babylonians (Hibbert lectures for 1887; 1887); The Hittites: or, The Story of a Pornotten People (1888); The Races of the Old Testament (1891); Social Life among the Assyrians and Babylonians (1893); The Higher Criticism" and as Verdict of the Monuments (1894); A Primer of Assyriolopy (1894); Patriarchal Palestine (1895); The Egypt of the Hebrews and Herodatus (1895); Early History of the Hebrews (1897); Israel and the Surrounding Nations (1898); Babylonians and Assyrians (New York, 1899); Genesis in The Temple Bible (London, 1901); The Religiona of Ancient Egypt and Babylonia (Gifford lectures; Edinburgh, 1902); Tobit and the Babylonian Apocryphal Writings in The Temple Bible (London, 1903); Monuments, Pads, and Higher Critical Pancies (1904); and Archowlogy of the Cuneiform Inscriptions (1907).

SCADDING, CHARLES: Protestant Episcopal bishop of Oregon; b. at Toronto, Canada, Nov. 25, 1861. He was graduated from Trinity College, Toronto (1885), and was ordered deacon in 1885 and priested in the following year. He was curate at St. George's, New York City (1886‑90); rector

$$1	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	9IS
		Scarborough
of Christ Church, Middletown, N. Y. (1890 91);
Trinity, Toledo, O. (1891‑96); and Emmanuel, La
Grange, Ill. (1896‑1906). He was Deputation lec.
turer on " the Church in the United States " for the
London Society for the Propagation of the Gospel,
and has lectured extensively in the United States on
similar topics. In 1906 he was consecrated third
bishop of the diocese of Oregon. He has written
Direct Answers to Plain Questions for American
Churchmen (New York, 1901).
	SCALIGER, scal'i‑ger (DE LA SCALA), JOSEPH
JUSTUS: Founder of scientific chronology and
philologist; b. at Agen (73 m. s.e. of Bordeaux) Aug.
4, 1540; d. at Leyden Jan. 21, 1609. Son of the
famous French scholar, Julius Cwaar Scaliger, he
devoted himself to the study of classical and orien
tal languages at Paris, after 1558. He entered the
Reformed church, 1562, and became one of its
leading representatives; traveled in Italy, Eng
land, and Scotland, 1565‑66; studied at Valence,
1570; fled from his native land after the massacre
of St. Bartholomew; was professor at Geneva, 1572
1574; spent his time in traveling throughout France
or residing at the castle of his friend, a French
nobleman, Louis Chastaigner de la Rochepozay,
1574‑93; and was professor and head of the Uni
versity of Leyden from 1593. Scaliger is the lead
Ing philologist of France, and secured the scientific
investigation of the classics and the adoption of the
principles for the correction of ancient teats by his
acute critical method. In the field of historical
chronology, his M. Manilii Astronomicon libri
quinque (1579) may be considered an introduction
to his famous work Opus novum de emendations
temporum (Paris, 1583; best enlarged ed., Cologne,
1629). In this he takes the Julian period as the
larger basis, upon which he calculates the time
periods of the history, of the peoples. This em
braces the periods of 7,980 Julian years, and is
therefore a union of the sun, moon, and indiction
cycles. Here is to be mentioned also Hippolyti
canon pawhalis (Leyden, 1595). He wrote his
Menchus trihmreaii Nicolai Serarii (Franeker, 1605),
against the attempted refutation by the Jesuits of
his denial of monasticism during the Apostolic
period; and in this he set forth on scientific grounds,
for the first time, that the representation of the
" contemplative life " by Eusebius (Hilt. eccl., ii.
17) was untenable. The capstone of his work was
the edition and restitution of the synchronistic
Eusebian chronieon, Thesaurus temporum Eusebii
(Leyden, 1606), which by its inestimable sources of
pre‑classic history, seemed to him best adapted as
a foundation upon which to erect the treasure‑house
of the times. The principal results of his investiga
tion appeared under the subtitle Synagoge historion,
better known under the separate title Olympiadon
anagraphe (Berlin, 1852), partly in the words of the
original authors, partly in a free rendering. To this
he appended Isagogici chronologim canones (" Main
Points to the Introduction of Chronology ") as his
own. His Epistolm appeared Leyden, 1627, while
Epistres frangoises to him was issued Harderwyck,
1624, and Lettres frangaism in6ditea, Paris, 1879.
		(G. LAUBMANNt.)
BIHnioa8APHT: Sources are: D. Baudius, Oratio funebrie honori . . . J. J. 3caliperi, Leyden, 1608; D. Heinsius, In obitum . . . J. 3oaliperi . . . orationea duos, Leyden, 1809; D. Gerdes, in Miecellanea Duiaburpenaia, Vol. iv., 8 vols., Amsterdam, 1732‑45. Consult further: C. Nisard, Le Triumvirat littbraire au 16. sickle, pp. 149‑308, Paris, 1852; J. Bernays, J. J. $ealiger, Berlin, 1855; E. and 15. Hang, La France proteetante, vii. 1‑26, Paris, 1857; C. 9eits, M6moire cur J. J. Bcaliper et Gendue, Geneva, 1895.
SCANNELL, THOMAS BARTHOLOMEW: English Roman Catholic; b. at London July 8, 1854. After completing his education at St. Edmund's College, Ware, and the English College, Rome, he was ordained to the priesthood in 1878, and from that year until 1885 was professor of philosophy in St. Edmund's College. He was for several years an administrator of the Southwark Fund for Infirm Priests, and has served as missioner in Brighton, Norwood, Sheerness, Folkstone, and Weybridge. In 1896 he was appointed as one of the papal commissioners on the question of the validity of Anglican orders, and since 1908 has been one of the canons of Southwark Cathedral. In collaboration with J. Wilhelm he prepared a Manual of Catholic Theology, based on Scheeben's e" Dogmatik," vol. i. (London, 1890), and besides editing the fourth and following editions of the Catholic Dictionary of W. E. Addis and T. Arnold (London, 1893 sqq.), has written The Priest's Studies (London, 1908).
SCAPEGOAT. See ATONEMENT, DAY op; AzAZEL.
SCAPULAR: A small badge or token consisting of two little pieces of cloth joined by cords, and worn over the shoulders, whence the name. Confraternities connected with various religious orders received the privilege of wearing this small representative of the habit, in token of participation in prayer, good works, and spiritual privileges with the order. These confraternities are now very widespread, and the wearing of the scapular is an approved act of devotion in the Roman Catholic Church. The most famous of the different scapulars is the brown or Carmelite scapular, the history of which goes back to a vision supposed to have been vouchsafed by the Virgin Mary to St. Simon Stock (1164‑1212) of the Carmelite order, in which she promised blessings to those who should devoutly wear this scapular. Others are the black scapular of the Servite order and the red of the Passionists.
SCAPULARY. See VESTMENTS AND INSIGNIA, ECCLESIASTICAL.
SCARBOROUGH, stdr'bvr‑8, JOHN: Protestant Episcopal bishop of New Jersey; b. at Castle wellan (25 m. s. of Belfast), County Down, Ireland, Apr. 25, 1831. He was educated at Trinity College Hartford (A.B., 1854), and at the General Theological Seminary, from which he was graduated in 1857. He was ordered deacon in the same year and was advanced to the priesthood in 1858. After being curate of St. Paul's, Troy, N. Y., from 1857 to 1860, he was rector of the Church of the Holy Comforter, Poughkeepsie, N. Y. (1860‑67), and of Trinity, Pittsburg, Pa. (1867‑75). In 1875 he was consecrated bishop of New Jersey.

8ohaeder
8obsff
BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. S. Perry, The Bpiscopate in America, p. 235, New York, 1895.
SCHAEDER, shb'der, ERICH: German Protestant; b. at Clausthal (25 m. n.e. of Gottingen), Hanover, Dec. 22, 1861. He studied at the universities of Berlin and Greifawald from 1881 to 1886 (lie. theol., Greifswald, 1891); was inspector of the Tholuck Seminary at Halle (1887‑89); privatdocent for New‑Testament exegesis at Greifswald (1891); associate professor of the same subject at Konigsberg (1894‑95) and at Gottingen (1895‑99). Since 1899 he has been professor of systematic theology at Kiel. In theology he is conservative, and has written Die Bedeutung des lebendigen Christus fur die Rechtfertigung nach Paulus (Giitersloh, 1893); Ueber das Wesen des Christentums and seinen modernen Darstellungen (1904) ; Die Christologie der Bekenntnisse and die moderne Theologie (1905); Christenstand and kirchliche Lehre (Berlin, 1906); Die Ofenbarung Gottes in der Geschichte der christlichen Kirche (Gross‑Liehterfelde, 1907); Der moderne Mensch and die Kirche (Giitersloh, 1908); Schriftglaube and Heilsgewissheit (1908); and Theozentrische Theologie, Eine Untersuchung zur dogmatischen Prinzipienlehre, vol. i. (Leipsie, 1909).
SCHAEFER, shb'fer, PHILIPP ALOYS: German Roman Catholic bishop of Saxony; b. at Dingelstadt (10 m. n.n.w. of Alfihlhausen), Saxony, May 2, 1853. He was educated at the universities of Prague (1873‑74) and Wiirzburg (1874‑78; D.D., 1878); was curate at Plauen and at the Hofkirche in Dresden (1879‑81); professor of Biblical science at the Lyceum of Dillingen (1881‑85); of New‑Testament exegesis at the universities of Miinater (1885‑95), Breslau (1895‑1903), and Strasburg (1903‑06), being also dean of Munster in 1887‑88 and 1892‑93, of Breslau in 1895‑96 and 1901‑02, and of Strasburg in 1903‑05, and rector of Munster in 1890‑91. In 1906 he was consecrated bishop of Saxony, and is also vicar apostolic in the kingdom of Saxony, apostolic prefect of Meissen‑Lausitz, and dean of the cathedral of Bautzen. He has written Biblisehe Chronologie vom Auszuge aus Aegypten bis zum Beginn des babylonisehen Exils mit Beracksichtigung der Resultate der Aegyptologie urtd Assyriologie (Munster, 1879); Die Gottesmutter in der heiligen Sehrift (1887); Das Neue Testament erkldrt (4 vols., comprising Thessalonians, Galatians, Corinthians, Romans, and Hebrews; 1890‑93); Einleitung in das Neue Testament (Paderborn, 1898); Die Aufgaben der Exegese nach ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung (Munster, 1900); Die Kaisererlasse vom 4. Feb., 1900, and die akademisch gebildeten Klassen (1901); and Klerus and soeiale Frage (1902).
SCHAEFER, PHILIPP HEINRICH WILHELM THEODOR: German Lutheran; b. at Friedberg (15 m. n. of Frankfort), Hesse, Feb. 17, 1846. He was educated at the universities of Giessen, Erlangen, and Leipsic, and at the seminary for preachers at Friedberg. He was pastor of the German Lutheran church in Paris in 1869‑70 and inspector of the Seegelmannsche Anstalt at Alsterdorf, near Hamburg, in 1871‑72. Since 1872 he has been pastor and director of the institute for deaconesses at Altona. In theology he is an orthodox member of his denomina‑
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
tion, and, in addition to editing Korresponclenzblatt der Diakonissen‑Anstalt in Alto" (Altona, 1873 sqq.); Monatsschrift fur innate Mission (Gutersloh,
1877 sqq.); Die innate Mission in Deutschland (1878 aqq.); Jahrbuch der Krx2ppelftirsorge (Hamburg, 1899 sqq.); Evangelisches Volkslexikon (Bielefeld, 1900), and Reden and Predigten vom Gebiet der Diakonie and inneren Mission (5 vols., Leipsie, 1890), has written Die Diakonissensache and die Diakonissenanstalt zu Altona (Bredstedt, 1875); Die weibliche Diakonie in ihrem ganzen Umfang dargestellt (3 vole., Hamburg, 1879‑83); Leidfaden der inneren Mission. (1888); Praktisches Christentum (4 vols., Gutersloh, 1888‑1901); DiakanissenKatechismus (1895); Die innate Mission in der
Schule (1895); Agenda fur die Feste and Feiern de; inneren Mission (3 parts, Berlin, 1896); Pariser Erinnerungen eines deutschen Pastors (Gutersloh, 1897); Kalender der inneren Mission (1897); Die innate Mission auf der Kanzel (Munich, 1897); Unsere Schwester, ein Wort fiber and fur die Diakonis‑
sensache (Potsdam, 1903); and Johann Heinrich Wichern (GUtersloh, 1908).

SCHAEFFER, CHARLES FREDERICK: Lutheran (General Council); b. at Germantown, Pa., Sept. 3, 1807; d, at Philadelphia Nov. 23, 1879. He was educated at the University of Pennsylvania and
studied theology under private direction; was ordained in 1829; pastor at Carlisle, Pa., 1829‑34; at Hagerstown, Md., 1834‑39; professor of theology
at Capitol University, Columbus, O., 1840‑13; pastor at Lancaster, O., 1843‑45; at Red Hook, N. Y., 1845‑51; at Easton, Pa., 1851‑55; professor of the
German language at Pennsylvania College, Gettysburg, Pa., 1855‑64; and professor of systematic theology and president at the new theological seminary at Mt. Airy, Philadelphia, 1864‑79. He was a representative of the strictly conservative and confessional party in the Lutheran Church, taking a leading part in the organization of the General Council in 1867. Among his works are English translations, of G. V. Lechler's commentary on Acts (1869) in J. P. Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (New York, 1865‑80); of Johann Arndt's Wahre Christenthum with title True Christianity (Philadelphia, 1869); and of J. H. Kurtz's Church History (1868).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Life by B. M. 3ehmucker and W. J.
	Mann, Philadelphia. 1830; and H. E. Jacobs, in American
Church History Series, passim, New York, 1903.
SCHAEFFER, CHARLES WILLIAM: Lutheran (General Council); b. at Hagerstown, Md., May 5, 1813; d. at Philadelphia Mar. 15, 1896. He graduated at the University of Pennsylvania, 1832, and at the Gettysburg Theological Seminary, 1835; was pastor in Montgomery County, Pa., 1835‑41; at Harrisburg, Pa., 1841‑49; Germantown, Pa., 1849‑75; professor of ecclesiastical history in the theological seminary at Mt. Airy, Philadelphia, 1864‑96; and a member of the board of trustees of the University of Pennsylvania from 1857. He was one of the leaders of the conservative conf essional petty in the Lutheran Church, in whose councils he stood high. He was an authority on the history of the development of the Lutheran

228	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	g
Church in America, and published Early History of the Lutheran Church in America (Philadelphia, 1857); C. H. Bogatzky's Golden Treasury, translated from the German (1858); Family Prayer, a Book of Devotions (1859); Halle Reports, translated from the German, with extensive historical, critical, and literary annotations (vol. i., 1.880); Wackernagel's Life of Luther, translated (1883); and Hans Sachs' Wittenberg Nightingale, translated (1883).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. E. Jambs, in American Church History Series, iv. 269 et passim, New York, 1893; and literature under LBTRERANa.

SCHAFF, achaf, DAVID SCHLEY: Presbyterian; b. at Merceraburg, Pa., Oct. 17, 1852. He was graduated from Yale (A.B., 1873), and Union Theological Seminary (1876). He was pastor of the Presbyterian church at Hastings, Neb. (18771881); associate editor of the Schaff‑Herzog Ertcydopadia (1881‑83); pastor of the First Presbyterian Church, Kansas City, Mo. (1883‑89); and professor of church history in Lane Theological Seminary, Cincinnati, O. (1897‑1903). Since 1903 he has held a similar professorship in Western Theological Seminary, Pittsburg, Pa. He contributed to the Bible Dictionary of his father, Philip Schaff (Philadelphia, 1880); has revised and abridged J. S. Howson and H. D. M. Spence's commentary on Acts for the International Revision Commentary (New York, 1892); has written The Life of Philip Schaff (1897); and has continued the History of the Christian Church by his father (vol. v. parts 1 and 2, 1907‑10).
SCHAFF, PHILIP.
I. Preparatory Period, 1819‑43. II. Mercersburg Period, 18433. Election; Literary Activity (§ 1). Relation to Use of German (¢ 2). III. New York Period, 1883‑93. Varied Activities (§ 1). Literary Work (§ 2).
Philip Schaff, Biblical scholar and church historian, organizer and editor of the first edition of this Encyclopedia, was born at Chur, Switzerland, Jan. 1, 1819; d. in New York City Oct. 20, 1893. There are three well‑defined periods in his life:
I. Preparatory Period, r8ig‑43: From the schools at Chur and Kornthal (Wiirttemberg) he passed to the gymnasium in Stuttgart, and the universities of Tubingen, Halle, and Berlin (1837‑f10). At Tubingen he heard Ferdinand Christian Baur (q.v.) but came especially under the influence of the Biblical theologian, Christian Friedrich Schmid (q.v.). At Halle he was on very intimate terms with Julius Miiller and Tholuck (qq.v.) living a part of the time under the letter's roof. There he made his first American acquaintance, George Lewis Prentiss (q.v.), afterward his lifelong friend and for many years his colleague in Union Theological Seminary. At Berlin he was especially attracted by Neander, whose amanuensis he was for a time. He then traveled through Italy and Sicily as tutor to Baron KriScher. In 1842 he received the venia legends at Berlin and began his career as privet‑docent at that university. It was at this period that he came to know Godet and Theodore Dionod (qq.v.) and
wrote his treatises, Die Sands under den heiligen Geist and die daraus gezogenen dogmatischen and ethischen Folgerungen. Eine exegetisch‑dogmalisehe Abhandlung, nebst einer historischen Anhange abet das Lebensende des Franceseo Spiera (Halle, 1841), and Des VerhtBltniss des Jakobus, Bruders des Hewn., zuJakobus Alphtii, aufs Neue ezegetisehund historisch untersucht (Berlin, 1842), the former being his licentiate of theology and the latter his habilitation theme.
	IL 1llercersburg Period, r843‑63: He emigrated
to the United States in 1843 at the invitation of the
German Reformed Church to occupy a chair in its
theological seminary in Mercersburg, Pa., and
showed himself eminently qualified for the position,
adding to scholarly attainments and religious fervor
wise theological judgment, a faculty of adapting
		himself to new conditions, and of enter
s. Election; ing heartily into the republican forms
Literary	of the West. On his way to America
	Activity.	he spent two months in England,
		studying the language and coming into
contact with some of the leaders of the Oxford
movement. Arriving in Mercersburg he found John
Williamson Nevin (q.v.) in charge of the seminary,
and as colleagues they brought out the so‑called
"Mercersburg Theology" (q.v.), known through
out the English‑speaking world and also in Germany,
and charged with a Rome‑ward tendency, but which
really signified, so far as there was anything pecu
liar in it, merely an application of the historical
spirit to all problems of theology and a churchly
regard for the ancient liturgical forms of the Church.
Suspicion soon fell upon Dr. Schaff as an alleged
advocate of a de‑Protestantizing tendency, and his
inaugural address on Das Princip des Protestantismus
(Chamberaburg, 1845, Eng. transl. with Introduc
tion by Dr. Nevin, The Principle of Protestantism,
as related to the Present State of the Church) called
forth the charge of heresy, which was argued before
the synod at York in 1845, but he was acquitted by
a practically unanimous vote. This address elabor
ated the two principles of Protestantism and the
two dangers to which Protestantism is exposed,
sectarianism and rationalism. Dr. Schaff in sub
sequent years said that he never dreamt of advoca
ting anything heretical when he prepared and
delivered his inaugural. His kindly references to
the Middle Ages and to the Oxford movement prob
ably suggested the charge. The great interest
which this address aroused was the beginning of
a new movement in the German Reformed Church.
In the seminary Dr. Schaff at one time or another
taught all the departments, having only a single col
league. He became identified with all the move
ments in the denomination, especially with the
liturgical movement, serving as chairman of the
committee to prepare a liturgy (1857). He brought
out a Gesangbuch (1859) which introduced a new era
in congregational song among the German‑speaking
churches of the United States by substituting a
book of merit for books in which rationalistic hymns
were freely used; and for the three‑hundredth an
niversary of the Heidelberg Catechism an elaborate
edition of that catechism (1863). He had already
written a simple catechism for children in German

Schaff	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG .	224
Schanz
and English (1861); while his preference for church
history was shown by his history of the Apostolic
Church, which appeared first in German at Mercers
burg (1851, 2d ed., Leipsic, 1854; English transl.
by E. D. Yeomans, New York, 1853; Dutch, Tiel,
1857). The work was favorably received on all
sides, both in Germany and the United States.
	The important problem was presented during this
period to the Reformed Church and other churches
of continental origin as to how far they should
yield in the matter of language and other customs
to the usages of the United States. The feeling
			was very strong among the emigrants
s. Relation of the first generation against any
		to Use	change as treason to their traditions.
of German. Dr. Schaff had been called to train
			ministers through the medium of the
German tongue, and this he conscientiously at
tempted to do in the class‑room until he was com
pelled by the demand of the majority of the students
to resort to English. He became aware that it was
unwise to attempt forcibly to perpetuate the use
of German in this land. In his address, Der Anglo
germanismus (English transl., Anglo‑Germanism,
or the Significance of the German Nationality in the
United States, Chambersburg, 1846) he recognized
the sure tendency of the second and third genera
tions to abandon those churches of German origin
which persisted in maintaining the German language
and other customs unmodified. His views met with
a storm of opposition and German papers denounced
him as a traitor to his German training. He took
the same attitude with reference to German the
ology and German books, and held that it was un
wise, as it was impracticable, to introduce them
unmodified into the United States, and that they
should be reproduced "and adapted to the prac
tical wants of the free church in a free state." But
these views did not interfere with the warmest love
for his native Switzerland or the continuance of the
warmest friendships in Germany and his unabated
esteem for the diligence, simplicity, and independ
ence of German professorial life. In 1854 he went
to Europe for a year to recuperate after his stren
uous labors. He delivered lectures on America and
its institutions (German original, Berlin, 1854; 3d
ed., 1865; English trans]. by E. D. Yeomans, New
York, 1855; Dutch trans]. by De Schryver, Rot
terdam, 1855) in different cities. One outcome of
the year was his Germany, its Universities, Theology
and Religion. (Philadelphia, 1857, the first book he
issued in English Limself), in which he gave infor
mation concerning German universities, their pro
fessors, and other leading German divines, from
personal acquaintance, which was very welcome to
the growing number of American and British students
interested in German theology.
	III. New York Period, x863‑g3: In consequence
of the ravages of the civil war the theological sem
inary at Mercersburg was closed for a while and so in
1863 Dr. Schaff became secretary of the Sabbath
Committee in New York City, and held the position
till 1870. He advocated the American view of Sun
day observance as opposed to the continental, and
gave himself up with characteristic energy and
practical foresight to the work of arousing public
opinion, enlisting the cooperation of the Germanspeaking clergy for the American Sunday and securing the enforcement of Sunday laws.
i. Varied In this interest he traveled east and
	Activities.	west, issued tracts, made addresses,
		called mass meetings, and in other ways
advanced the cause. Also in Germany he advocated
a better observance of the day before meetings of
Christian clergymen and laymen in different cities
held during visits in 1865 and 1869. On these
visits, as on others, he also advocated the idea of the
American Sunday‑school and organized the first
of such schools in Stuttgart (1865). In 1870 he was
made professor in Union Theological Seminary,
New York City, holding first the chair of theological
encyclopedia and Christian symbolism till 1873, of
Hebrew and the cognate languages till 1874, of
sacred literature till 1887, and finally of church
history, till his death.
But his labors in the class‑room represented only a part of his public services. Movements in which he became prominently identified were the Evangelical Alliance, the revision of the English Bible, and the Alliance of the Reformed Churches. In all of these he showed himself one of the most devoted as he certainly was one of the most distinguished advocates. As secretary of the American branch of the Evangelical Alliance he threw himself into the preparations for the great conference which met in New York in 1873, and by three visits to Europe succeeded in enlisting the cooperation of many prominent clergymen and scholars who probably but for him would not have come, and whose presence made the New York meeting so unique. He himself presented papers at all of the general conferences of the Evangelical Alliance down to 1891, although not able to attend the last, and in the same direction of unity strove for the closer union of the bodies representing the Reformed type of the Reformation, joining in the formation of the Alliance of the Reformed Churches in London in 1875 and delivering the opening address at the first council held in Edinburgh in 1877.
Dr. Schaff's connection with the revision of the English Bible began in 1870. By invitation of the British committee he selected a representative committee of American scholars. He
x. Literary was indefatigable in procuring a hearty Work. and sympathetic cooperation between the British and American committees. He saw the completion of the Revised New Testament in 1881 and of the Old Testament in 1885, and to the end of his life predicted that though the Revised Version was by no means perfect it would be ultimately accepted by the churches as an improvement upon the Authorized Version.
A work in which he was preeminent was as mediator between German theology and church life and the English‑speaking public. He represented the Evangelical type of German theology, and his thorough acquaintance with all types of German thought and his personal intimacy with many of the leading German scholars enabled him to interpret German theology with authority. His mastery of both German and English and his clear style furthered his influence. By his visits and ad‑

225	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Schaff
		Schanz
dresses in Germany and through publications he was
also the chief interpreter of American thought to
the German religious public. This intermediary
relationship was recognized on both sides of the
sea, and in the address presented to him by the the
ological faculty of Berlin in 1892, on the fiftieth
anniversary of his activity as a teacher, he was com
pared to Martin Butzer, who had carried the learn
ing of the continent to England in the time of the
Reformation, and also to Jerome, who translated
the Greek Scriptures into Latin, because of his
services in the cause of Biblical scholarship. As a
theological writer he was prolific. He wrote and
edited numerous works in the departments of exe
gesis, the chief of which was the American edition
of Lange's Bibelwerk (25 vols., New York); pro
paedeutic; hymnology (Christ in Song, 1868; en
larged by his son, 2 vols., 1897); symbolics (The
Creeds of Christendom, 3 vols., 1877); also Through
Bible Lands (1878); A Companion to the Greek
Testament crud the English Version (1883); The
Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (1885). Church
history was his most fruitful study, and he followed
his Apostolic Church with a history of the Church
down to 1073, and passing over the intervening
period brought out two rich volumes on the German
and Swiss Reformation respectively. He originated
the American Society of Church History (1888), and
arranged for the authorship and publication by it
of the American Church History Series (13 vols.,
1893 aqq.). He edited the series of Nicene and
Post‑Nicene Fathers (28 vols).	He edited the first
edition of this Encyclopedia (3 vols., 1884) and its
companion, afterward combined with it, The Ency
clopedia of Living Divines (1886).
	His last public appearance was in Chicago at the
Parliament of Religions, Sept. 22, 1893. He sat
upon the platform while his paper on Christian
Union was being read. The inscription on his tomb
stone presents the salient features of his career: "A
teacher of theology for fifty years. Historian of
the Church. President of the American Committee
of Bible Revision. He advocated the reunion of
Christendom." His great learning was held in the
service of piety. He regarded love as the central
principle of theology; and with a tolerant mind,
which sacrificed none of the fundamental tenets of
his own Reformed faith, he labored for fellowship
and cooperation among all classes of Christian be
lievers, among the Greek and Roman Catholics as
well as among the numerous communions of Prot
estants. His motto was Christianus sum. Chris
tiani nihil a me alienum puto; and his last confes
sion, "I am a sinner, and place my trust in my
Savior who died for me."	DAVID S. SCHAFF.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: D. S. Schaff, The Life of Phitig Scha$, New
	York, 1897.
	SCHAITBERGER, shait'bdrH‑er, JOSEPH: Lead
er of the Protestants driven from the valleys
about Salzburg in the persecution instituted in 1683
by Archbishop Maximilian Gandolf (see SALZBURG,
EVANGELICALS OF); b. at Diirnberg, near Hallein
(9 m. s.s.e. of Salzburg), Mar. 19, 1658; d. at Nurem
berg Oct. 2, 1733. Though a simple miner, he
studied deeply Luther's and Canisius's catechisms
		X.‑15
and attained a rich spiritual life. It was he who
drew up on the archbishop's requirement the con
fession of faith for his Protestant friends and
neighbors because of which they were driven from
their homes in the winter of 1685. With his wife
Schaitberger found refuge in Nuremberg and sup
ported himself there as wood‑worker and wire
drawer. During his last years he was a pensioner
of the Carthusian monastery. He made many
journeys through the valleys about Salzburg at no
small personal risk, exhorting and encouraging the
Protestants who had remained behind, and he wrote
for them a number of missives treating questions
of Christian faith and life which (twenty‑four in
number) were ultimately collected and printed as
Evangelischer Sendbrief (Nuremberg, 1702). The
book soon became known throughout all Germany
and is still read. A poem of his, written in his
native dialect on occasion of his exile and begin
ning "A poor exile am I," expresses the longing
for home with true pathos, yet breathes a joyous
trust in God. It has found place in many hymn
books. 	(HERTIANN BECK.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. G. Schellhom, De religionis eoangelicd in provincia Salzburgensi ortu et factis, Leipsic 1732• J. Moser, Salzburger Emigrationsakten, Frankfort, 1732; C. F. Arnold, Die Vertreibung der Salzburger Protestanten, Leipsie, 1900; idem, Die Ausrottung des Protestantismus in Salzburg, Halle, 1900‑01; C. Grosse, Die alten Trdster, Hermannsburg, 1900.
SCHALL, shill, JOHANN ADAM: German astronomer and Jesuit; b. at Cologne 1591; d. in China Aug. 15, 1666. He was educated in the Collegium Germanicum in Rome; entered the order of the Jesuits, and was in 1628 sent as a missionary to China, where he remained to his death. He reformed the Chinese calendar, acquired the confidence of the Chinese government, and translated into Chinese many mathematical treatises, interlarded with religious and Christian discussions. He also wrote Historica missionis soeietatis Jesu apud Chinenses (Vienna, 1665).
G. H. KLIPPELt.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. and A. de Backer, Bibliothkue de la compagnie de J€sus, ed. C. %mmervogel, vii. 705 sqq., Paris, 1896; A. Kircher, China monumentis . . . illuatrata, pp. 104 aqq., Amsterdam, 1667; KL, x. 1754‑56.
SCHANZ, ahfints, PAUL VON: German Roman Catholic; b. at Herb (20 m. s.w of Tiibingen), Wurttemberg, Mar. 4, 1841; d. at Tubingen June 1, 1905. He was educated at the universities of Berlin and Tiibingen (Ph.D., 1866) and at the theological seminary of Rottenburg (1865‑66); was lecturer at the Wilhelmstift, Tiibingen (1867‑70); acting professor of mathematics and science at the gymnasium of Rottweil (1870‑72); and full professor of the same subjects in that institution until 1876. After 1876 he was connected with‑the University of Tiibingen, first as professor of New‑Testament exegesis (1876‑83) and later as professor of dogmatics and apologetics (since 1883). In addition to being joint editor of the Theologische Quartalschrift and editing Al. von Aberle's Einleitung in dccs Neue Testament (Freiburg, 1877) and the fifth edition of J. A. M6hler's Neue Untersuchungen der Lehrgegensdtze zwischen den Katholiken and Prote‑

8chap eler	THE NEW SCHAFF ‑HERZOG	226
Schau~er
stanten (Regensburg, 1900), he wrote a commentary
on the Gospels (4 vols., Freiburg, 1879‑85) ; Nicola=
von Cusa als Mathematiker (Rottweil, 1872); Die
astronomischen Anschauungen des Nicolaus von
Cusa and seiner Zeit (1873); Galileo Galilei and
sein Prozess (Wiirzburg, 1878); Apologie des
Christentums (3 parts, Freiburg, 1887‑88); Die
Lehre von den heiligen Sacramenten der katholischen
Kirche (1893); Moderne Apologetik (Frankfort,
1903).
	SCHAPPELER, sha'pel‑er, CHRISTOPH: Re
former in South Germany; b. at St. Gall (19 m. s.e.
of Constance), Switzerland, in 1472; d. there Aug.
25, 1551. Nothing is known of his education, except
that it followed the scholastic vogue. He was en
gaged at the Latin school at St. Gall, 1493‑1513;
became preacher at the chief church at Memmingen,
Upper Swabia, 1513, where with rare eloquence
and upright life he fearlessly set himself against the
priesthood of the older faith, as well as against
private and public evils. At the approach of the
Reformation, he deliberately made his choice, and
cast his lot with Zwingli and his colleagues, intro
ducing the movement in his city. Laying stress
upon the Bible as the source of faith and ordinances,
he attacked the mass, the claims of the pope, and
the orders of the Roman Catholic Church. The
writings of the Reformers were spread abroad,
along with copies of the Scriptures, especially the
New Testament; but the council could not be pre
vailed upon to interfere, since the movement had
caught hold of the imagination of the people. On
Feb. 27, 1524, the bishop of Augsburg excommu
nicated Schappeler, with the result of the greatest
public excitement at Memmingen. On Dec. 7, 1524,
he administered holy communion in both species
and celebrated baptism in the German language.
Finally a public disputation was held, Jan. 2‑7,
1525, in which Schappeler presented his profession
in seven articles: he renounced (1) the oral confes
sional; (2) supplication to Mary and the saints;
(3) the practise of tithes; (4) the sacrificc of the
mass, which he regarded as a memorial; (5) pur
gatory; (6) he demanded the Eucharist in both
kinds; (7) he proclaimed the universal priesthood
of believers. He overwhelmed his adversaries with
Scripture. Practical results followed. The council,
after taking advice from other scholars in neighbor
ing towns, approved the marriage of the clergy,
permitted monks and nuns to abandon the cloisters,
subjected the priests to taxation and civil. jurisdic
tion, forbade the tithe of the laity, and abolished
the mass. Schappeler attracted not only an en
thusiastic following in the town but also among the
peasants of the surrounding country, who were op
pressed with economic and legal grievances. As
the author of the famous twelve articles, he had a
prominent part in the impending Peasants' war
(q‑v.).
	His Swiss nature had asserted itself in his attitude
on social and political affairs. From the beginning
he spore on behalf of the lower classes, and was wont
to appeal over the heads of the council to the whole
community of #tizens. The council's admonition
only made him more discreet. From the year 1523
he vigorously opposed the right of demanding tithes, but he warned the peasants repeatedly against resort to violence. He took no part, personally, in the peasant parliament of the delegates of the three groups of Algau, Lake Constance, and Baltringen in 1525 at Memmingen, but from Schappeler proceeded undoubtedly the demand that in the new order of things, both ecclesiastical and civil, a basis must be sought in divine law. He thoroughly approved of peasant organization in order to carry out this theoretical demand. The proposal for a Christian union of peasants that his friend and follower, Sebastian Lotzer, unsuccessfully tried to carry out, thwarted by the Swabian League, may be regarded as a scheme of Schappeler's. The authorship of the twelve articles has been variously attributed, partly because Schappeler subsequently did not acknowledge them and partly because of the failure to notice the inner resemblance to the ten articles submitted by the Memnungen peasants to the council, Feb. 23‑Mar. 3, 1525, of which the former seem an enlarged and more refined version. Nevertheless, the ten articles must be taken as a sublimation of the long‑continued public instruction of Schappeler. When the parliament met, Mar. 6‑30, the ten articles were taken as the basis for the Christian union, and they had to be revised and strengthened by the support of Scripture. Ili hether Schappeler performed this of his own accord or was prompted by Lotzer or other leaders remains uncertain. At any rate they appeared in print. Two elements were embodied; ecclesiastical freedom, and release from intolerable feudalistic burdens. Moreover, the Swabian League, under the implacable Leonhard von Ech, refused all discussion, and in the confusion it took advantage of a long‑cherished desire for an armed invasion of the imperial city, under pretense that Memmingen was the breeding‑place of disturbance and Schappeler the chief agitator, to be visited with a bloody penalty. The latter left the city secretly and took refuge at St. Gall. In 1532 the congregation sought his recall by the council in vain. After two years the council consented to the surrender of his library and to an indemnity of one hundred florins (about $45). Later he was preacher at Luisibfihl and at St. Mang in
j St. Gall.
(w. VOGT.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. Dobel, Memminpen in Rejormationsatter, 5 parts, Augsburg, 1877‑78 (part 1 deals with Schappeler); C. A. Cornelius, Studien zur Geachichte des Bauernkr%egea, Munich, 1881; E. Rohling, Die Reichatadt Memminpen %n der Zeit der evangeliaehen Volksbewegung, ib., 1884; A. Stem, Ueber die 18 Artikel der Bauern, Leipatc, 1868; F. L. Baumann, Die oberachwttbiachen Bauern . . . and d%e 1>S Arlikel. Kempten. 1871; w. Vogt, Die bayriache Po1%Eik %m Bauernkrdeg. NtSrdlingen. 1883; Cambridge Modern History, u. 180, 177, 179; and the literature under Pswewarre' WAR.

SCHARLIPG, shdr'ling, CARL HENRIK: Danish theologian; b. in Copenhagen May 3, 1836. He studied at the University of Copenhagen (candidate in theology, 1859); spent the years 1860‑63 in extensive travel, a result of which was the publication of Breve fra Holland (1864); Grtekertland (1866); and En Pilgrimsfterd i det hellige Land (1876); was editor of Ugeblad for den danske Folkekirke (18651868), and of Dansk Tsdsskrift for Kirke‑ og Folkeliv,

287	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	88I3o~DDee1er
chau~r
Literatur og Kunst (1869‑70); became docent in ethics in the university 1867, and professor 1870. In 1872‑74 he published his most important work, Menneskehed og Kristendom, in two volumes, a philosophy of history. Other theological publications are Jacob B6hmes Theosophie (1879); Den lutherske Dogmatik overfor Nutidens kirkelige og videnakabelige Krav (1883), the address at the university celebration of the fourth centenary of Luther's birth; Christelig Saxlelaere efter evangeliskluthersk Opfattelse (2 vols., 1884‑‑86), a systematic treatment of ethics; Religionens Stilling i det menr neskelige Aands‑ og Sjceleliv (1897) ; and Det svundne og det Vundne, Tanker og Overvejelser ved Aarhundredskiftet (1903). In theology Scharling is a confessional Lutheran, opposed to the Grundtvig school of theology, somewhat inclined to polemics, in the interest of which he has written several works, and is fearless in controversy. He has not confined his literary activities to theology. Thus he is the author (under the pseudonym of Nicolai) of Ved Nytaarstid i N6ddebo Pr&estegaard (1862; many Danish editions and translations into German, French, and English, Noddebo Parsonage, 2 vols., London, 1867), characteristic of Danish thought and personality; he wrote also the novel Uffe Hjelm og Palle Loves Bedrifter (1866); the biography of Christian IX. and Queen Louise (1895‑98). His The Rivals, or, Love and War (London, 1869), and Nieolai's Marriage (2 vols, London, 1876) are other works which have appeared in English. JOHN O. EVJEN.

	SCHARTAU, shar'tau,	HENRIK: Swedish
preacher; b. at Mahn6 (16 m. e.s.s. of Copenhagen)
Sept. 27, 1757; d. at Lund (24 m. e. of Copenhagen)
Feb. 2, 1825. He was of German descent; studied
theology at Lund, 1771‑78; was ordained in 1780;
was domestic preacher, and later assistant to a
rural pastor; but, 1786, became diakonus at the ca
thedral at Lund; archdeacon in 1793, and, besides,
district provost, 1800. In 1810 he was a repre
sentative of the clericals in the diet which chose
the king. He steered clear of the rationalistic moral
ism on the one hand and the pietism of the Unity of
the Brethren on the other, between representatives
of which the pulpit was divided at that time; and
while the former preached the abstract formulas of
God the Father, and the latter indulged in the mys
tical contemplation of the Savior's blood and
wounds, he chose and preached with earnestness and
power the third article, of the work of sanctification,
that is, the justification of the sinner before God.
At the same time he no less earnestly carried on his
catechetical work. 	(A. M1c11ELsENt.)
BIHLIoaRAPHY: Biographies are by A. Lindeblad, Lund, 1837, Germ. transl., Leipsic, 1842; and H. M. Melin, Stockholm, 1&38.

SCHAUFFLER, shbf'ler, ADOLF FREDERICK: Presbyterian; b. at Constantinople, Turkey, Mar. 7, 1845. He was educated at Williams College (A.B., 1867), Union Theological Seminary (18681869), and Andover Theological Seminary (18691871), and from 1872 to 1887 was pastor of Olivet Presbyterian Church, New York City. Since 1887 he has been superintendent, and since 1902 president, of the New York City Mission and Tract So‑
ciety, and has also been chairman of the New York State Sunday‑school Association since 1899 and secretary of the International Sunday‑school Lesson Commission since 1902. In theology he is a conservative. He has written Ways of Working (Boston, 1891); The Teacher, the Child, and the Book (1900); The Pastor as Leader of Sunday‑school Forces (Nashville, 1903); Sparks from a Superintendent's Anvil; practical Helper for every Sundayachool Worker (1909); and Knowing and Teaching the Scholar (1910).

SCHAUFFLER, ALBERT HENRY: Missionary, "Apostle to the Slavs of the United States, " brother of the preceding, and son of William Gottlieb Schauffler; b. at Constantinople, Turkey, Sept. 4, 1837; d. at Cleveland, Ohio, Feb. 15, 1905. He came to America, Apr., 1855, to enter Williams College, and graduated therefrom in 1859. After completing a course in Andover Seminary (1861) he studied a year (1862) at Harvard Law School in preparation for teaching at Robert College, Constantinople. On his return to Turkey, he became professor of law for two years in that institution; but a preference for missionary work led to his ordination, on June 3, 1865, at Pera, Constantinople, and his employment by the American Board in that city until 1870. While he was in America on furlough (1872), the American Board induced him to open the Austrian mission field. He located at Prague for two years (1872‑74) and then at Briinn, Moravia, for seven years (1874‑‑81). He was influential in obtaining from the Emperor Francis Joseph a decree which gave to Protestant churches and to the Young Men's Christian Association a fair amount of religious freedom in the Austrian Empire.
Obliged by affliction to return to America (1881) he was persuaded to undertake mission work among Bohemians settled in Cleveland, Ohio. He began work in Olivet Chapel in 1882, and in 1883 was appointed superintendent of Slavic missions in the United States under the Congregational Home Missionary Society. He organized Bethlehem (Bohemian) Congregational Church, Cleveland, Ohio (1888) ; opened Bohemian missions at St. Louis, Mo., Iowa City, Ia., Crete; Neb., Milwaukee, Wis., and Silver Lake, Minn.; Slovak missions in Pittsburg and its suburbs; Polish missions at Cleveland, O., Detroit, Mich., and Bay City, Mich., besides furnishing inspiration, counsel, and workers to other denominations which desired to enter where Congregationalists could not undertake such work. To carry forward this Slavic work he founded two new institutions for the training of Slavic workers, the Slavic department of Oberlin College for the training of ministers, and the Bethlehem Bible and Missionary Training School. for women, as Bible readers.
He consecrated to missionary service a rare ability. His vigorous constitution withstood peril, persecution, and incessant toil. His disciplined mind tolerated only methodic, exact work, which he performed with unusual despatch. He was resourceful and cautious, and where diplomacy of a high order was required, his honest, fearless, and

Bche~it	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	228
broad grasp of the situation secured for him success and the lasting respect of his opponents. He served the interest of foreign and home missionary work, especially as a linguist. His mastery of languages enabled him to begin work at once in the Austrian field and later to meet the incoming foreigner to America with a greeting in his mother tongue. H„ had a warm, sympathetic, and generous heart, and a moral earnestness which befitted his stability of character and conscientiousness.
FRANCIS METHERALL WHITLOCK.
SCHAUFFLER, shauf'ler, WILLIAM GOTTLIEB:
Missionary, father of the preceding; b. at Stuttgart, Wurttemberg, Aug. 22,1798; d. at New York Jan. 26, 1883. In 1804 his father removed to Odessa, South Russia. In 1820 he resolved to devote himself to missionary work and in 1826 emigrated to America and studied at Andover, 1826‑31. Under the care of the American Board, he went to Conatantinople, where he resided and labored, 1831‑74. He was particularly interested in the conversion of the Jews, and for their benefit revised and superintended the publication of the Old Testament in Hebrew‑Spanish (at Vienna, 1839‑42). But his great work was the translation of the whole Bible into Osmanli‑Turkish, the language of the educated Turks. This occupied him eighteen years. For his services to the German colony at Constantinople he was decorated by King William of Prussia. After 1877 he lived in New York. He was a remarkable linguist, being familiar with nineteen languages and able to preach extemporaneously in German, Italian, French, English, Spanish, and Turkish. He published Meditations on the Last Days of Christ (Boston, 1837).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: His Autobiography was edited by his sons, with introduction by E. A. Park, New York, 1888.
SCHAUMBURG‑LIPPE, shaum'burg‑lip'pe: A German principality bounded by the Prussian provinces of Hanover and Westphalia; capital Backeburg; area 131 square miles; population (1905) 45,000, most of whom are Lutherans. In its present extent the principality dates from 1640. Like Lippe (q.v.) the country was Christianized in the time of Charlemagne, and was under the influence of Rome during the Middle Ages. Owing to the fact that nearly all the counts of the house of Schaumburg held high positions in the Roman Church, the Reformation made its way into the country at a comparatively late date. However, in the decade following 1560 the country became Evangelical, and the Mecklenburg Church Order of 1552 was adopted. In 1614 Prince Ernest promulgated a new church order which was only mildly Lutheran. From 1636 the reigning family at Biickeburg has adhered to the Reformed faith, though the population as a whole has remained Lutheran. The Lutherans have eilghteen parishes, under a superintendent and two district superintendents, and recently their consistorial constitution has been supplemented after the modern synodal plan. The Retormed Church, on the other hand, with a parish at Bilckeburg and another at Stadthagen, has belonged to the federation of Reformed churches in Lower Saxony for two hun‑
dred years. The Roman Catholics likewise have two parishes with full parochial rights.
(F. H. BRANDES.)
SCHECHTER, sheH'ter, SOLOMON: AngloAmerican Hebrew scholar; b. at Fokshani (100 m. n.e. of Bucharest), Rumania, Dec. 7, 1847. He was educated in the Talmudical school of Vienna and at the universities of the same city and Berlin. In 1882 he went to England as tutor in rabbinics to Claude G. Montefiore and eight years later was appointed lecturer on the Talmud at the University of Cambridge, where he became reader in rabbinics in the following year. In 1893 he visited Italy and five years later went to Egypt and Palestine, discovering in Cairo the valuable Genizah collection of Hebrew manuscripts, including the Hebrew original of parts of Ecclesiasticus. In 1898 he was appointed external examiner in Victoria University, Manchester, and in 1899 became professor of Hebrew at University College, London. Since 1902 he has been president of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York City. He has edited Abot de Rabbi Natan (Vienna, 1887); The Wisdom of Ben Sira: Portions of the Book of Ecclesiasticus from Hebrew Manuscripts in the Cairo Genizah Collection (in collaboration with C. Taylor (Cambridge, 1899); Midrash hag‑Gadol (1902); and Documents of Jewish Sectaries (2 vols., Cambridge, 1910). He has written Studies in Judaism (two series, 1896‑1908) ; and Some Aspects of Rabbinic Theology (1909). For a time he was Talmudical editor of The Jewish Encyclopedia.

SCHEEL, sh6l, JUERGEN OTTO EINAR IMMANUEL: German Protestant; b. at Tondern (25 m. n.w. of Flensburg), Sleswick‑Holstein, Mar. 7, 1876. He was educated at the universities of Halle (1895‑97) and Kiel (1897‑99; lie. theol., 1900), and was privat‑docent for systematic theology at the latter institution from 1900 to 1905, when he was made titular professor. Since 1906 he has been associate professor of church history at the University of Tabingen. In theology he belongs to the modern historical and critical school, and has written: Die Anschauung Augustin's von Christi Person and Werke (Tubingen, 1901); Luthers Stellung zltr heiligen Sehrift (1902); Wie erhalten wir das Erbe der Reformation in den geistigen Kdmpfen der GegenwartP (Leipsie, 1904); Die dogmatische Behandlung der Tauftehre in der modernen positiven Theologie (Tabingen, 1906); Individualismus and Gemeinschaftsleben in der Auseinandersetzung Luthers mit Karlstadt, 15.2‑25 (1907); and Die moderne Religionspsychologie (1908); besides editing the Enchiridion of St. Augustine (Tdbingen, 1903), and the first two supplementary volumes to the Berlin edition of the works of Luther (Berlin, 1905).
SCHEELE, sh61'e, gNUT HENNING GEZELIUS VON: Swedish Lutheran; b. at Stockholm, Sweden, May 31, 1838; graduated at Upsala; became privat‑docent, 1865; provost, 1877; ordinary member of consistory, 1878; professor, 1879; inspector of the teachers' seminary, 1880; censor of the demission examinations in the Swedish upper

229	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8chaumer
		Boheffier
schools, 1884; and in 1885 was appointed bishop
of Wisby. He was member of the house of nobility
in the Swedish parliament, 1865‑66; and in 1901
represented his university and country at the Yale
bicentennial. He is the author in Swedish of "The
Ontological Evidence of the Existence of God"
(Upsala, 1863) ; "The Preparations of the Theo
logical Rationalism" (1868); "Church Catechising"
(1869); "Theological Symbolics " (1877‑79); "From
the Court into the Sanctuary" (Stockholm, 1879),
and "The Fight for the Peace" (1881).
	SCHEFFER, shef'fer, JACOB GYSBERT DE
HOOP: Dutch ecclesiastical historian and leader
of the Mennonites in Holland; b. at The Hague
Sept. 28, 1819; d. at Amsterdam Dec. 31, 1893. He
studied theology at Amsterdam and Utrecht, in
tending to become a Mennonite preacher, but took
a lively interest in literary questions, and was one
of the founders in 1844 of the Vereeniging voor oude
Nederlandsche letterkunde. His interest in art and
letters was evident throughout his life, as when he
edited Navorscher (the Dutch "Notes and Queries").
From 1848 to 1859 he was a Mennonite preacher at
Hoorn, Groningen, and Amsterdam. Then he be
came professor in the seminary of the Algemeene
Doopsgezinde Soci6teit. With the elevation in
1877 of the Amsterdam AthencTum to the rank of a
university, he was appointed to the chair of Old
Testament exegesis and early Christian literature,
while he continued to lecture on the history of the
sect and practical theology in the Mennonite semi
nary. His most important work was done in the field
of church history, in the interest of which he edited
(1870‑80) with Willem Moll the periodical Studien
en Bijdragen. In this first appeared his principal
production, the Geschiedenis der Kerkhervorming in
Nederland van haar ontstaan lot 1631 (2 vols., Am
sterdam, 1873), a definitive treatment of the begin
nings of Dutch Protestantism. A number of
studies in the history of the Mennonites, many of
them appearing in the Doopsgezinde Bijdragen,
which he edited from 1870 to 1893, showed re
markable industry and acuteness. A third depart
ment of his studies dealt with the Brownists, or
English Independents settled in Holland, from
whom came the "Pilgrim Fathers" (see CONGREGA
TIONALISTS), and Scheffer made important contribu
tions to the history of these people (in the Ver
slagen der Koninklijlce Akademie). Scheffer was next
led to take up the history of baptism by immersion,
which he treated in the Verslagen of 1882. His
researches led to the abandonment of the old
Baptist theory of an uninterrupted succession of the
doctrine of immersion from the apostles, and their
importance has been recognized by the best modern
Baptist authors, such as Newman and Lehman.
No one among the Mennonites was better known
abroad than Scheffer, whose work brought him into
correspondence with many foreign scholars. At
home he occupied for thirty years a position of great
influence among the members of his communion,
whose activity he promoted in manifold ways.
Throughout his life he was an adherent of the liberal
theology of what was formerly known as the "Gro
ningen School." Though devoted to his own re‑
ligious body, he never assumed that this alone pos
sessed the truth or forgot proper consideration and
charity toward other churches. He was an admi
rable type of the liberal, highly educated, thought
ful Dutch Mennonite. 	S. CRAMER.
BmLjoQRAPHY: Sketches of his life are by Rogge, in the " Yearbook " of the Dutch Royal Academy of Sciences for 1894; and by A. Winkler Prins, Leyden, 1894; cf. Doopagezinde Bijdragen, 1895, pp. 1 aqq.
SCHEFFLER, shef'ler, JOHANN (ANGELUS SILESIUS) : German mystic and poet; b. at Breslau 1624; d. there July 9, 1677. He studied medicine at Strasburg (1643‑44), in Holland (1644‑17), and Padua (1647‑48). In Holland he became acquainted with Jacob Boehme's theosophical and mystical writings, brought from Silesia by Abraham von Franckenberg. On his return (1649) he became physician to the aealous Lutheran count, Sylvius Nimrod von Wdrttemberg‑Oels, at Oels in Silesia. He was intimate with Franckenberg, which probably led to his dismissal. Upon the death of Franekenberg (1652), he wrote an elegy, Ehrengeddchtnis, which contained, in the style of Boehme, the main ideas of all his later writings. In 1652 he went to Breslau, and became a member of the Roman Catholic Church, at the same time assuming the name Angelus, from a Spanish mystic of the sixteenth century. He gave the reasons for his conversion in his Grundliche Ursachen (Olmiitz, 1653). In his desire for mystical union with God he was repelled by the Lutheran religion as represented in the court.preacher at Oels, through its objection to the contemplative life and asceticism; and he thought to obtain freedom in the Roman Catholic Church, which stood for the communion of the saints and seemed to be the embodiment of the Holy Spirit. In Mar., 1654, he became court physician to Emperor Ferdinand III., an honorary office without duties or emoluments, but exempting him from difficulties in consequence of his change of confession. He lived quietly at Breslau, engaged in a comparative study of doctrines and the preparation of his literary publications. The only incident reported of this period was that he led a pilgrimage (1656) to the convent of Trebnitz, three miles distant.
In 1661 the brooding mystic suddenly issued forth as a fanatical controversialist against Protestantism. He entered the order of the Minorites and received ordination as a priest. He received strong support from Sebastian von Rostock, the vicargeneral of the archdukes of Austria, who were successively bishops of Breslau. At the vicar's instigation, an imperial edict was issued for the restoration of the Corpus Christi procession, at the first occurrence of which Scheffier carried the monstrance. The impending peril from the Turks brought forth a tract, Von den Ursachen der turkischen Ueberziehung and Zertretung des Volkes Gottes (Neisse, 1664), in which he ascribed the danger to the divine judgment upon the apostasy of the Protestants. After the conclusion of peace he wrote Christschrift von den herrlichen Kennzeichen des Volkes Gottes, in which he claimed the defeat of the Turks as proof that only a Roman theocracy could help Christendom. Counterblasts came from Chris‑

deh Mine	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	230
tian Chemnitz (q.v.) and Adam Schemer, and a long and bitter polemical feud ensued. Schefller was appointed court‑marshal and councilor to Sebastian von Rostock, now bishop‑prince and imperial supreme commander in Silesia. The consequence was that Schefiier's polemics of impassioned enmity acquired peculiar significance and were read all over Germany. Of these he issued fifty‑five in twelve years; thirty‑nine were selected by himself and published posthumously under the title Eccleaiologia (Neisse, 1677).
Scheffier attained more permanent fame as a poet. One of his two principal works was Johannis Angeli Silesii Geistreiche Sinn‑ and Sehl=sreime (Vienna, 1657). It contained in five books 1,410 epigrams with superscriptions, consisting of two, four, and rarely more Alexandrine verses. An appendix contained ten sonnets. These, with two poems of considerable length, five epigrams in quatrain, and 246 in couplets, form the sixth book of the second edition known as Cherubinische Wandersmann (Glatz, 1674). In this work Scheffier's theosophical and mystical wisdom of life is expressed in brief, terse sentences. Man's goal should be unity with God obtained by absorption in him; and God is love. Man experiences God not by thought but by becoming what God is, by renunciation, patience, humility, and love. The work is more metaphysical in character than ethical or dogmatic. Though it is obscure and not without self‑contradiction in form, exposing the author to the charge of pantheism, yet much is contained that is truly profound. For many thoughts he makes acknowledgment to predecessors; namely, Augustine Bonaventura, Jan van Ruysbroeck (qq.v.), Heinrich Harpius, and especially Johann Tauler (q.v.), but he leaves out Valentine Weigel and Jakob Boehme, evidently because the book was issued under Roman Catholic censorship. His book of spiritual hymns is still more famous, Heilige Seelenl=t oder geistliche Hirtenlieder der in ihrem Jesum verliebten Psyche gesungen von Johann Angelo Silesio and von Herrn Georgio Josepho mit ausbundig seh6nen Melodien geziert (Breslau, no date). It consisted of three books containing 143 hymns, each with a melody. It appeared in 1657, and the same year a fourth book with thirty‑two hymns and melodies was added. A second edition (Breslau, 1668) appeared with 205 hymns. The subject matter of these hymns consists of love and yearning of the soul for Jesus and the worshipful wonder at his glory; and they are of the pietistic, personal kind, characteristic of the subjective dotage of the mystics. The various hymnals of the later seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, especially that of the Unity of the Brethren, contained many selections, which disappeared during the period of rationalism. In the recent Evangelical hymn‑book the best ones reappear; such as "Ich will dich lieben meine Stdreke" (1657), " Liebe die du mich zum Bilde" (1657), "Mfr nach spricht Christ= unser Held" (1668), "Ach 8agt mfr nicht von Gold and Schdtzen" (1$57), and 'Jesus ist der sehonste Nam" (1657). Another book of poems is the Sinnliche Beschreibung der vier letzten Dinge (Sehweidnitz, 1675). His poetical works were collected in two vols. by D. A.
Rosenthal (Regensburg, 1862.) ; and Selections from his Rhymes was published in English by P. Carus (Chicago, 1909).
From his hymns and poems many translations into English have been made, though rarely do these embrace more than parts of the originals. Noted among these are "Earth has nothing sweet or fair," by Miss Cox; "Make my heart a garden fair"; "Jesus is the highest name," by A. T. Russell; "Morning Star in darksome night," by Miss Winkworth; and "Where wilt thou go? since night draws near," by A. Crull. (CARL, BERTHEAU.)
BiBwoaBAPBY. A. Kahlert, Angelus Silesius, line litterarhistorische Untersuchunp, Breslau, 1853 (best); J. J. Rambaeh, Antholoyie christlicher Gesdnge, iii. 90 sqq., Altona, 1819; W. Schrader, Angelus Silesius and seine Mystik, Halle, 1853; G. Schuster, in ZHT, 1857, pp. 427 eqq., F. Kem, J. Schefers Churubinischer Wanderenuann, Leipsic, 1888; E. E. Koch, Gexhichte des Kirchendiedee, iv. 3 sqq., Stuttgart, 1868; W. Lindemann, Angelus Silesius, Bild tines Konvertiten, Dichters and Streidtheolopen, Freiburg, 1878; A. Seltmann, Angelus Silesius and seine Mystik, Breslau, 1898; R. von Kralik von Meyerawalden, Anpqlus Silesius and die christliche Mystik, Frankfort, 1902; W. Nelle, Geschichte des deutachen evanyelischen Kirchenliedes, pp. 141 sqq., Hamburg, 1904; ‑ idem, Johann Schefer, ib. 1904; ADB, i. 453‑458; Julian, Hymnolopy, pp. 1004‑07; KL, x. 1785‑87.
SCHEIBEL, shai'bel, JOHANN GOTTFRIED: German Lutheran; b. at Breslau Sept. 16, 1783; d. at Nuremberg Mar. 21, 1843. He was educated at the University of Halle (1801‑04); became minister at Breslau 1804‑18; and theological professor in the University of Breslau after 1818. Scheibel's open profession of the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures and of the doctrines of the Lutheran Church on justification, original sin, and the real presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper was quite unusual and occasioned no little antagonism; but though his mode of expression was involved and not popular, he gradually gathered a following of believing, positive Christians from all classes about himself. Religion seemed to him something readymade, and not only what was revealed, but what was evident to him, seemed to him important and necessary. His faith was the certainty that the matter in question was contained in Scripture. His first publication, Einige Worte fiber die Wahrheit der ehristlichen Religion (1815), was an attack upon the rationalistic criticisms of the Bible and of the doctrines of creation and atonement. In his Untersuehungen fiber Bibel and Kirchengeschichte (1816) he pleaded especially for the authenticity of the OldTestament books. He became a sturdy opponent, after 1814, of the movement for the union of the Lutheran and Reformed Churches in Prussia, mainly in his anxiety for the Lutheran view of the Eucharist. When the synod at Breslau began the consideration of a new church order, he felt constrained to make a closer study, the result of which was Allgemeine Untersuchung der christlichen Verfatsungs‑ arid Dogmengeschichte (Breslau, 1819). The pastoral epistles of Paul, he claimed, revealed a government of elders from the instructing and lay classes, which also, he thought, Luther contemplated. His severe strictures on the agenda of union of King Frederick Wilhelm III. led to his suspension in 1830. Forbidden to take any official position as

231	RELIGIONS ENCYCLOPEDIA	9ehefer
8chelling
well as to engage in. any literary activity for the
Lutheran Church, he removed to Dresden, 1832,
from where, as headquarters, he continued the fight
by means of numerous polemical tracts. In conse
quence of a polemical sermon, the same year, he was
ordered to leave Dresden, and went to Hermsdorf,
near by. Compelled to leave this place in 1836, he
found asylum at Glauchau where he engaged again
in public preaching. Driven thence he spent the rest
of his life at Nuremberg in literary work. Just as
the efforts for restoration to his professorship and
pulpit at Breslau were being successfully completed,
after the death of King Friedrich Wilhelm, he
passed away.	(G. Faostiss.)
BIBLIOORAPRY: M. Vorbrugg, Reds am Grabs Scheibels, Nuremberg, 1843; Lebenslauf Scheibela vom oberkirchenkollegium vero$entlicht, Breslau, 1843; H. Steffens, Was ich erleble, vol. ix., Breslau, 1844; T. Wangemann, Sieben Bvcher pr.sussischer Kirehenpeschichte, Berlin, 1859; J. Nagel, Die Kampfe der evanpelisch‑lutherischen Kirche in Preussen, Giitersloh, 1869; R. Roeboll, Die Geschichte der evangelischen Kirche in Deutschland, Leipsic, 1897; E. Ziemer, Die Missionathatipkeit der evanpeliach‑lutheriwhen Kirche in Preussen, Elberfeld, 1904; G. Froboas, Kurze Abwehr, ib. 1905; ADB, xxx. 693‑899.
SCHELHORN, shel'hsrn, JOHANN GEORG: Name of two Lutheran theologians.
1. Johann Georg the Elder: was born at Memmingen Dec. 8, 1694, and died there Mar. 31, 1773. He studied philosophy and philology at the University of Jena 1712‑14 and after 1717; was librarian in his native town and co‑rector at the school, 1725‑32; pastor at Buxach and Hardt, near Memmingen, 1732‑34, and in Memmingen after 1734; and also superintendent after 1753. His importance is that of a collector of valuable material and correspondence, first in Ammnitates literarice (14 vols., Leipsic, 1721‑31). For the celebration of the Augsburg Confession in 1730 he wrote Kurzgefasste Reformationsgeschichte der Stadt Memmingen, and the fate of the Salzburg Protestants occasioned the De religionis evangelicce in provincia Salisburgensi ortu (Leipsic, 1732). A new collection appeared, Amlenitates historic, ecclesiasticte et literarice (2 vols., 1737‑10), after he came into possession of the literary remains and correspondence of his deceased friend, Zacharias Konrad of Uffenbach. Among his valuable works were, De vita, fatis ac meritis Philippi Camerarii (Nuremberg, 1740); Commercii epistolaris U,f'enbachii (Memmingen, 1753‑58); and Erg6tzlichkeiten aus der Kirehenhistorie and Literatur (3 vols., Leipsic, 1761‑64).
	2. The Younger, son of the above; b. at Mem
mingen Dec. 4, 1733; d. there Nov. 22, 1802. He
studied philology, history, and theology at Gotting
en and Tfibingen after 1750; was pastor at Buxach
and Hardt after 1756; and became associate of
his father in the pastorate at Memmingen, 1762,
also city librarian there; and in 1793, superintendent
of Memmingen. Among his works were: Beitrage
zur Erlauterung der Geschichte, besonders der Schwab
ischen Kirchen‑ and Gelehrten‑Geschichte (Mem
mingen, 1772‑75) ; and Kleinere historische Schriften
(2 vols., 1789‑90).	(T. KOLDE.)
BIBxdOGRAPRY: F. Braun, J. G. Schelhorn, in Beitrdpe zur bayerischen Kirchenyeschichte, vol. iv., Erlangen, 1898 (supersedes all earlier discussions); ‑4DB, xxx. 756‑759.
SCHELL, HERMAN: German Roman Catholic; b. at Freiburg Feb. 28, 1850; d. at W drzburg May 31, 1906. He was educated at the universities of Freiburg (1868‑70) and Wilrzburg (1870‑73), and at the College of the Anima, Rome (1879‑81); and after 1885 was professor of apologetics, comparative religion, and the history of Christian art in the University of Wurzburg, of which he was rector in 1896‑97. He wrote Die Einheit des Seelenlebens aus den Prineipien der aristotelischen Philosophie entwickelt (Freiburg, 1873); Das Wirken des dreieinigen Gottes (2 vols., Mainz, 1885); Katholische Dogmatik (4 vols., Paderborn, 1889‑93); Gott and Geist (2 vols., 1895‑96); Katholizismus als Prinxip des Fortsehrittes (Wfirzburg, 1897); DasProblem des Geistes (1897); Neue Zeit and alter Glaube (1898); Apologie des Christentums (2 vols., Paderborn, 1901‑05; 3d ed., 1907); Christus: das Evangelium and seine weltgeschichtliche Bedeutung (Mainz, 1903); Gottesglaube and naturwissenschaftliche Welterkenntnis (Bamberg, 1904); and Kleinere Schriften (Paderborn, 1908).

SCHELLING, shel'ling, FRIEDRICH WILHELM JOSEPH VON: German philosopher; b. at Leonberg (8 m. w.n.w. of Stuttgart) Jan. 27, 1775; d. at Rogatz (30 m. s.e. of St. Gall), Switzerland, Aug. 20, 1854. He studied theology and philosophy at Tubingen from 1790, and science and mathematics at Leipsic, 1796‑97. With the assistance of Fichte and Goethe, he became professor at Jena, 1798‑1803, where a brilliant literary and academic career opened for him. Impelled by an ardent philosophic interest, during a creative period, he made it his work to incorporate with his own the elemental principles of others as he met them successively in his career, and the result was more a stimulating influence of his vast prospective views than the establishment of enduring fundamentals. Starting out originally with the absolute idealism of Fichte, his reading of Spinoza led him to supplement this by the philosophy of nature. This was also an unfolding, as unconscious intelligence, from the absolute. He conceived this to proceed by a synthetic process from the lower inorganic to the higher organic forms, issuing into conscious intelligence in man, and he based it on the assumption of a soul of the world as the organizing principle. Works of this period were, Ideen zur Philosophie der Natur (Leipsie, 1797); Von der Weltseele (Hamburg, 1798); and Erster Entwurf eines Systems der Philosophie (Jena, 1799). The contradiction between intellectual and natural philosophy is resolved by the System des transzendentaler Idealismus (Tabingen, 1800), in dependence upon the esthetic philosophy of Kant and in connection with the romanticism of Schiller and the two Schlegels, which aimed to reconcile philosophy and poesy. As unconscious intelligence has been shown to give rise in nature to the inorganic and to a series of organisms, at the apex of which is man, the organism of conscious intelligence, so transcendental idealism reverses the point of view and submits the objective as ideal representation, or conscious production. Its highest form is art, in which the harmony of subject and object is realized. The study of Spinoza and Gior‑

schenknef	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	232
dano Bruno (qq.v.) prepared him to work this out into the philosophy of identity, which first emerged in Zeitschrift fur speculative Physik in 1801 (a journal which he issued jointly with Hegel), but appears fused with Platonic idealism in Bruno, oder caber das gottliehe and naturliche Prineip der Dinge (Berlin, 1802), and expanded in popular form in Vorlesungen caber die Methode des akademisehen Studiums (Tiibingen, 1803), which has been pronounced a model of literary form. The absolute is defined as absolute reason or the total indifference of subject and object. The highest law of its existence is absolute identity, or undifferentiated unity. Everything that exists is this absolute itself. It is the universe itself, not the cause of it. It is present in everything as both subject and object, ideal and real, with a preponderance of either one over the other. Theology, as the science of the absolute and divine essence, is the highest synthesis of philosophical and historical knowledge. The antithesis of the real and ideal occurs in the contrast of Hellenism and Christianity. The former illustrates the unconscious identity of nature; the ideal lay concealed in visible gods and polytheism. This was followed by separation or fate at the close of the ancient world. Christianity, as the inception of the period of providence, follows with the reconciled unity, and with God revealed. The incarnation of God is from eternity. The ideas of Christianity symbolized in its dogmas have a speculative significance. The fundamental dogma of the Trinity means that the eternal Son of God, born of the essence of the Father of all things, is the finite itself as it exists in the eternal intuition of God, who at the culmination of his phenomenal manifestation in Christ as suffering God terminates the world of finiteness and opens that of the supremacy of the Spirit. The consummation of the process is the regeneration of esoteric Christianity and the proclamation of the absolute gospel, or the self‑consciousness of the absolute in which subject and object disappear, or the becoming of God.
In consequence of his polemics Schelling left Jena, and was professor at Wiirzburg, 1803‑16. Under leave of absence he lectured at Stuttgart in 1810. In the mean time he was given more and more to syncretism and mysticism. In his Philosophic and Religion (Tiibingen, 1804), he betrays a neoplatonic influence in affirming that finiteness and corporeality are the products of a falling away from the absolute as the means of the perfect revelation of God. Theosophical are the views in Untersuchungen caber das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit (Landshut, 1809), under the influence of Jakob Boehme (q.v.). He distinguishes in God, according to the mystics, three degrees: indifference, the primordial basis or "abyss " of divine nature; differentiation of this into ground and existence; and the identity or reconciliation of the two. By this he explains the origin of evil. The first, which is only the beginning of the divine nature, without form or personality, is a dark, negative ground, the basis of reality; it is that which is in God, yet not God himself. This, which is described as a certain yearning for selfassertion, is the basis of the bare existence of all things. Man, who is immanent in God, is capable
of freedom; i. e., of enlightenment. By virtue of the dark ground, he has a particular will; as gifted by understanding he is the organ of the universal will. The separation of the two is the occasion of evil or imperfection.
The feud with F. H. Jacobi (q.v.), president of the academy, who severely assailed these views, led to Schelling's departure from Munich in 1820. He lectured several semesters at Erlangen, and was ordinary professor of the new university at Munich, 1827‑10. During this period, restive criticisms of the system of Hegel, who, though his senior yet his follower, had resolved his principle of absolute identity into a system of synthetic logic, began to appear. Lecturing at Berlin, 1840‑116, he further develops the departure made in his treatise on freedom. God, he now acclaims, may indeed be conceived as the culmination of a process in thought, but not of an objective process. Therefore, he partly reverses his position and declares the philosophy of Hegel as well as his own pantheistic system to be merely negative, which he supplements with a positive philosophy. Falling back on Kant's criticism of the ontological argument, he finds God not immanent in thought, but transcendent; not at the end of the process, but absolute first. God creates by a free act of will; and in positive philosophy, the real universe thus created, as well as the real God viewed as an objective principle, are not subjects of the speculative reason, but of experience, guided by the documents of revelation. The products of the theoretical are merely preparatory, affording ideals as means to the positive. Schelling distinguishes in absolute Spirit possibility of being, pure being, and absolute free being, which in creation reveal themselves as the three potenciesunconscious will, or causa materialis; conscious will, or causa efciens; and their union, causa finalis. They furnish the basis of the Trinity. In nature potencies, at the end of revelation, or creation, they are three perfect personalities in one God. The potencies which exist in man as God's image suffered separation by the fall. In consequence, the second was deprived of its divine reality and was degraded to a potency operating only in purely natural ways. It regains its total freedom in the consciousness of man, through the theogonic process; first in mythology and then in revelation. This was the subject of his philosophy of mythology and revelation, respectively, in his "Philosophy of Religion" (in Sdmtlichen Werke, 14 vols., Stuttgart, 1856‑61). Following the suggestion of Fichte, Schelling divides the Christian era into Petrine Christianity, or Catholicism; Pau'ine, or Protestantism; and the Johannean with its idea of the Logos, the Church of the Future. See IDEALISM, II., §§ 6, 8; PANTHEISM, §7.
BIBLIOGRAPHY. Besides the works on the history of philosophy (e.g., by J. E. Erdmsnn, 3 vols., London, 1892‑98; W. Windelbond, New York, 1893; F. Ueberweg, ed. Heinze. 9th ed., Berlin, 1901‑05) consult. F. K&ppen, Schellinj s behre, oder das Ganze der Ph.ilosophie des absoluten Nichds, Hamburg, 1803; F. Berg, Sextus, oder user the absolute Erkenneniss von Schelling WOrzburg, 1804; J. C. G&tz, Anti‑Sestus, oder fiber die absolute Erkenntniss von Schellin4, Heidelberg, 1807; S. T. Coleridge, Biographia literaria, London, 1817; J. Fries, Reinhold, Fichte and Schelling, in Polemische Schriften, vol. i., Halle, 1824;

233	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8che1Hng
		3chenkel
	J. T. Schwarz, Schelling's alte and new Philosophic, Ber
	lin, 1844; A. J. Matter, Sohelling, ou la philosophic de la
	nature, Paris, 1845; A. Engels, Schelling and die Of'en
	tarung, Leipsic, '1842; C. Kapp, F. W. J. Schelling: ein
	Beitrag zur Geschichte des Tages, Leip3ic, 1843; P. Mar
	heineke, Zur Kritik der sehellingschen Ofenbarungsphi
	losophie, Berlin, 1843• C. L. Michelet, Patwickelungsge
	schichte der neuesten deutschen Philosophic, Berlin, 1843;
	C. Rosenkranz, Schelling, Danzig, 1843; C. A. Brandis,
	Gedddchtnissrede auJ F. W. J. von Schelling, Berlin, 1856;
	Fichte's and Schelling's philosophischer Briefwechsel, Stutt
	gart, 1856; J. E. Erdmann, Ueber Schelling, namentlich
	seine negative Philosophic, Halle, 1857; R. Haym, Hegel
	and seine Zeit, Berlin, 1857; A. Planck, Schelling's nach
	gelassene Werke and ihre Bedeutung fur Philosophic and
	Theologie, Erlangen, 1858; H. Beckers, Schelling's Geistes
	entwickelung in ihrem inneren Zusammenhang, Munich,
	1875; T. Hoppe, Die Philosophic Schellings and ihr Ver
	hdltniss cum Christenthum, Rostock, 1875; 0. Pfleiderer,
	F. W. J. Schdling: Gedhchtnissrede, Stuttgart, 1875;
	C. Frantz, Schelling's positive Philosophic, 3 parts, CSthen,
	1879‑80; J. Watson, Schelling's Transcendental Idealism,
	Chicago, 1882; R. Gebel, Schelling's Theorie vom Ich des
	All‑Einen and deren Widerlegung, Berlin, 1885; K. Groos,
	Die reine Vernunftwissenschaft, Heidelberg, 1889; E. 0.
	Burman, Die Transcendentalphilosophie Fichtes and
	Schellings, Upsala, 1891; F. Schaper, Schelling's Philo8o
	phie der Mythologic, Nauen, 1893; ,idem, Schelling's Phi
	losophic der O$enbarung, Nauen, 1894; E. von Hart
	mann, Schelling s ph4losophisches System, Leipsie, 1897;
	L. Roth, Schellang and Spencer, Bern, 1901; K. Fischer,
	Geschichte der neueren Philosophic, vol. vi., Heidelberg,
	1894; idem, Schellings Leben, Werke and Lehre, 3d ed.,
	ib. 1902; M. Adam, Schellings Kunstphilosophie, Leipsie
	1907; G. Niehlis, Schelling's Geschichtsphilosophie in . . .
1799‑1804, Heidelberg, 1907.
	SCHELWIG, s)Iel'vig, SAMUEL: Lutheran theo
	logian and opponent of the Pietists; b. at Lissa
	(54 m. n.n.w. of Breslau) Mar. 8, 1643; d. at Danzig
	Jan. 18, 1715. He was the son of a Silesian preacher,
	and studied at Breslau and at Wittenberg, where he
	became an adjunct in the philosophical faculty in
	1667; he went to Thorn as associate rector of the
	gymnasium in 1668; to Danzig in 1673, where he was
	subsequently appointed pastor of Dreifaltigkeits
	kirche, and rector of the academical gymnasium
in 1685.	Rigorously orthodox, ambitious, and
	quarrelsome, he soon became involved in a variety
	of conflicts. In Danzig he fell into strife with one of
	his colleagues, Constantine SchiAze, the contest
	taking literary form in tracts and being continued
	until the city magistracy stopped the dispute (1693).
	The conflict between Schelwig and Spener then
	began. What particularly increased and embittered
	the strife was a journey undertaken by Schelwig
	through Northern Germany, the purpose of which
	his opponents asserted to be the forming of a con
federation against Pietism.	His most comprehen
	sive anti‑Pietistic work bears the title Die sektierer
	ische Pietisterei (Danzig, 1696‑97), which called
forth a number of replies.	In Schelwig's Sympsas
	eontroversariarum sub pietatis prcetextu motarum
	(1701, 1703, 1720) he sought to demonstrate 264
	Pietistic errors, which evoked replies from J. W.
	Zierold, pastor at Stargard, and J. Lange. Among
	the many orthodox opposers of Pietism, Schelwig
	was one of the readiest in equipment, but his
methods were bitter and unclerical.	C. MIRBT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY	J. G. Waleh, Religionssereitipkeiten der
	evangelisch‑lutherischen Kirche, i. 602‑603, 739‑746, v.
	749‑750, 849 et passim, Jena, 1733; E. Schnaase, Ge
	schichte der evangelischen Kirche Danzios, pp. 332‑353.
	Danzig, 186.'3; S. Schmid, Die Geschichte des Pietismus,
pp. 228‑236. NSrdlingen, 1863; E. Sachsse, Ursprung
and Wesen des Pietismus, pp. 321‑332 W iesbaden, 1884;
j	A. Ritsehl, Geschichle des Pietismw, vol. Ii. Bonn, 1884;
P. Griinberg, Philipp Jakob Spener, 1. 297‑302, Gdttina‑
en, 1893; ADB, xxxi. 30‑36.
SCHENCK, FERDINAND SCHUREMAN: Reformed (Dutch); b. in Ulster County, N. Y., Aug. 6, 1845. He was graduated from Princeton University (B.A., 1865; M.A., 1868), Albany Law School (LL.B., 1867), and New Brunswick Theological Seminary (1872); engaged in the practise of law, 1867‑69; was licensed by the classis of Ulster, 1872; served as pastor at Clarkstown, N. Y., 1872‑77, at Montgomery, 1877‑90, at Hudson, 1890‑97, and at University Heights, New York City, 1897‑99; became professor of practical theology in the New Brunswick Theological Seminary, 1899, where he has since remained, serving also as acting professor of philosophy in Rutgers College, 1904‑05, and acting professor of ethics and evidences of Christianity there, 1906‑07, also as acting professor of homiletics in Princeton Theological Seminary since 1909. 'He is the author of The Ten, Commandments in the Nineteenth Century (New York, 1889); Bible Reader's Guide (1896); The TenCommandments and the Lord's Prayer (1902); Modern Practical Theology (1903); Sociology of the Bible (1909); and Christian Evidences and Ethics (1910).
SCHENK, JAKOB. See ANTrnioanaNmM AND ANTINOMIAN CONTROVERSIES.
SCHENKEL, shenk'el, DANIEL:. Evangelical theologian; b. at Dagerlen, near Winterthur (12 m. n.e. of Zurich), Dec. 21, 1813; d. at Heidelberg May 18, 1885. He bore arms for three years in the Basel war of 1831. In the study of theology he was greatly influenced by W. M. L. de Wette (q.v.), by whom he was convinced of the necessity of critical investigation. After a period of study of primitive Christianity and church history at G6ttingen, he returned to Basel, where, in 1838, he habilitated with the thesis, Dissertatio critica et historica de ecclesia Corinthia prima;va factionibus turbata (Basel, 1838). in the mean time he edited the Baseler Zeitung which opposed the ecclesiastical and political radicalism of the time. In 1841 he was called as head preacher to Schaffhausen. He made important changes in the church organization, and his sermons attracted wide attention, even in the univerr sity circle. Schenkel first obtained scientific recognition by the publication of his Wesen des Protestan.tismus arcs den Quellen des Reformationazeitalters dargestellt (3 vols., Schaffhausen, 1846‑51), which was supplemented with Des Prinzip des Protestantismu.s (1852). In 1850, he returned to Basel as professor, his inaugural address being on Die Idee der Personlichkeit (1850). The following year he was called to Heidelberg where he remained until his death.
As university preacher and head of the theological seminary, Schenkel had noteworthy success. A series of events‑open opposition to the Jesuit mission at Heidelberg, 1851, protest against the new liturgy of the former Durlach Conference adopted by the synod in 1855, the strife over the agenda in 1858, the transactions concerning the Concordat, 1859, which threatened a combination of the ministry of Stengel and the church r6gime of Baden these

Schenkel
Scherer	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	234
resulted in open conflict, the consequence of which was the end of the old church r6gime, the failure of the Concordat, the fall of the Stengel ministry, and the construction and approval by the general synod, 1861, of a new church constitution. In the mean time Schenkel, who was a rapid and voluminous writer, published Gesetzeskirche and Glaubenskirche (Heidelberg, 1852); Schutzpficht des Staats gegen die Evangelische Kirche (1852); and Evangelische Zeugnisse von Christo (1853‑59). In these writings Schenkel's ecclesiastical liberalism and Protestant tendency come to the front. Speculative 'acuteness he did not brook; and his controversy with Kuno Fischer ended in the latter's dismissal. The theological antagonism was becoming more pronounced and Schenkel felt constrained to oppose the orthodox reaction. His Fur Bunsen, wider Stahl, die neuesten Bewegungen and Streitigkeiten auf dem kirchlichen Gebiet (Darmstadt, 1856) has been said to mark the turning point in his theological development. His next work and the second in importance, Die christliche Dogmatik vom Standpankte des Gewissens (2 vols., Wiesbaden, 1858‑59) is more in accord with his earlier position. It challenged attention by its vindication of the conscience as arbiter in intellectual religious questions. There followed, Die Reformatoren and die Reformation (1856); Union, Konfession, and evangelisches Christenthum (Darmstadt, 1859); and Erneuerung der deutschen evangelischen Kirche (Heidelberg, 1861).
The publication of the much‑discussed Characterbild Jesu (Wiesbaden, 1864; 4th. ed. 1873; Eng. trand., The Character of Jesus Portrayed, Boston, 1866) alienated many who had remained loyal to Schenkel and subjected him to open attack. The basis adopted is the Gospel of Mark as furnishing the safest historical confines. The final conclusions of the book are by no means radical, but a storm of protest was aroused by certain passages, especially by the assumption that there was a change during Jesus' public career in his self‑determination and self‑consciousness. A demand was made by a part of the clergy of Baden for the author's dismissal, but schism was averted by the conciliatory tact of the superior church council. He became head of the Protestant Union organized in 1863. Two more important works were Die Grundlehren des Chrastentums aus dem Bewusstsein des Glaubens dargestellt (Leipsie, 1877), and Das Christusbild der Apostel and der nachapostolischen Zeit (1879). In the former of these the privilege and service of critical scientific rationalism is conceded, but it is also pointed out that as a self‑originated philosophy, it has not produced a dogmatic on the basis of revelation in history. Christianity he represents as the absolute religion, both because it presupposes the unity of God and man intrinsic in personal life, and because it regards as its religious ethical object the actualization of this unity in humanity through the absolutely divine imbued man Jesus Christ. He edited and published Allgemeine kirchliche Zeitschrift (1860‑72); and Bibellexicon, Realworterbuch zum Handgebrauch fur Geistliche and Gemeindeglieder (5 vols., Leipsie, 1869‑75).
(«'. Gesst.)
SCHENZ, shents, WILHELM: German Roman Catholic; b. at Niederrieden (a village near Memmingen, 43 m. s.w. of Augsburg), Bavaria, Mar. 7, 1845. He was educated at the University of Munich (D.D.,1869), and, after being incumbent of a benefice in the same city (1869‑72), was called to his present position of professor of Old‑Testament exegesis in the Lyceum of Regensburg, of which since 1895 he has also been rector. During his administration he has reorganized the lyceum and erected a new observatory for it. Besides translating Anselm's Cur Deus Homo (Regensburg, 1880), he has written Historiseh‑kritische Abhandlung fiber das er8te allgemeine Concil in Jerusalem (1869) ; Das Laien‑ and das himmlische Priestertum nach dem eraten Briefe des Apostela Petrus (Freiburg, 1873); Einleitung in die kanonischen Bxdcher des Alten Testaments (Regensburg, 1887); Priesterliche Ttitigkeit des Messias nach Isaias (1892); Lebende Bilder zum Bischofsiubil4um Leos XIII. (1893) ; Leo XIII. als Bischof von Perugia and von Rom (1893); St. Wolfgang in der Poesie (1894); and Erklarung der Altarbidder in der Albertu8kapelle zu Regensburg (1900).

SCHERER, she"‑rW, EDMOND HENRI ADOLPHE: French Protestant critic and theologian; b. at Paris Apr. 8, 1815; d. at Versailles Mar. 16, 1889. Scherer's paternal ancestors were Swiss from the canton of St. Gall, who emigrated to Paris in the first part of the eighteenth century; his mother was an Englishwoman. After a preliminary education at the Lyc6e Louis le Grand, he was sent to England, where he came under the influence of Thomas Loader, a clergyman in Monmouth. Up to that time he had shown no religious tendencies; he dated the epoch of his conversion from Christmas, 1832, during a revival movement characterized by a personal religion of pietistic emulation and devotion to prayer, combined with strict orthodoxy, and belief in literal inspiration, original sin, and the "foolishness" of Christianity in contrast with the rationalism of such as Victor Cousin, with little concern for the state church and liturgy and theological science. Returning to France, he studied law (1833‑35) without, however, giving up his interest in theological and philosophical questions; and proceeding to Strasburg, he studied theology (18361839); and was ordained, 1840. His ordination sermon betrays a depreciation of human speculation, science, and wisdom, in contrast with the authority of the Bible and the efficacy of prayer. For five years he refused to accept any official position, living at Strasburg and Truttenhausen and devoting himself to literary and theological studies. He published two long essays, De l'etat actuel de l'6glise reform6e en France (Paris, 1844), and Esquisse d'une tUorie de l'Fglise ehr6tienne (1845), written in a Calvinistic spirit, in which he outlined a Church independent of the State with a Presbyterian constitution. Led by a strictly Scriptural and practical theology resting upon earnest investigation, the Church would soon be freed from indifference, unbelief, and schism. In consequence, Scherer was in 1846 called to the chair of church history in the free theological school founded at Geneva by Merle d'Aubign6, and a year later ex‑

23$	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Schenkel
Scherer
changed this for the professorship of Biblical exegesis. Then as now, this institution received older students from the practical vocations who had not matured at the university, and counted among its students many coming evangelists in Europe and Canada. Soon after occupying this position, Scherer seemed to become aware of a conflict between the emotional needs of the religious consciousness and the theoretical convictions of the reason, but he still believed in the possibility of a union between sound theology and sound piety. The natural man, he thought, can not conceive religious things; only the experience of the Christian, by faith in Christ and love to him, unlocks the mystery. Accounts of "visitations of Christ," arranged somewhat in the form of a diary, from the year 1848, show Scherer in the heights of religious moments and from the personal mystical side. His transition from history to exegesis became fatal to his belief; he had always fully accepted the theory of verbal inspiration, and had subscribed without reserve the Consensus Helvetieus of 1655 on vowel points and punctuation, but with the insight that this position was untenable his faith and theology also were shaken. In June, 1849, Scherer's friends became acquainted with his dissatisfaction with his position, and before the end of the year he had resigned and taken farewell of his students. But he continued with a series of free lectures on matters of faith which were a great attraction, June, 1849, to Feb., 1850, and were summed up in a pamphlet, La Critique et la foi (1850). The repetitions, contradictions, inaccuracies, and the temporal contingency of Biblical writers were pointed out and the fact that they did not claim to be inspired. The personal authority of Christ and his Spirit in the disciples, the facts in the religious consciousness of sin and redemption remained for him the pillars of revelation and faith. At this time Scherer regarded himself as still a believing Christian, logically carrying on the thought of the Reformation, but did not linger long in this position. His Melanges de critique religieuse (1860) show a progress in negation. He examined the problem of sin and freedom which led him on the causal side to the question of miracles. A proposition is not true because it comes from Christ; but because its truth is affirmed in ethical consciousness, it comes from Christ. So far he could justify himself by reference to Alexandre Vinet (q.v.), but his interest in seeking individual freedom according to his subjective perception of truth led him farther. Original sin is a limitation of freedom; not that God was the author of sin, but rather Scherer came to deny original sin and to declare the freedom of man to achieve victory by struggle over a sinful world. Evil was a lesser good, the shadow needful for the completion of the optimistic world harmony. In order to conserve the humility under the sense of sin and the consequent desire of salvation, the necessity of sin to human development was to be held theoretically from the view‑point of the theodicy; but practically sin was to be regarded as something that should not be. A dualism resulted from this position of heart and head. From the maze of the problem of freedom he could not extricate himself. From the relativity
of freedom he proceeded to the invariability of law in nature until even the supernatural could no longer be maintained. Finally, Scherer attached himself to the Hegelian philosophy with enthusiasm. With the last step, that there is no final truth but that there are only truths which prepare themselves by self‑destruction, he had to break with even the prominent and advanced theologians. Scherer confined himself to mere textual explanation in his lectures on the Epistles, 1856‑60, and moved to Versailles in 1860. A call to the newly established chair of religious science at the lcole des Hautes nudes he declined; the columns of the Revue des deux Mondes were open to him, and his course was marked out. The fruit of his literary labors, remarkable for originality, psychological acuteness, and ethical earnestness, was collected in .9tudes critiques sur la litWature contemporaine (10 vols., Paris, 1863‑95; Eng. transl. of one volume, Essays on English Literature, and History of German Literature, 5 vols., London, 1891). He was also coeditor of the Temps since it was founded in 1860. He performed eminent political service as mediator between the provisional governments of the German occupation and the population and was made sena;;or for life in 1872. Scherer was never a polemical opponent of Christianity. Faith he likened to poesy, striking root everywhere, rising ever anew from the dust, to survive as long as humanity shall draw breath. The crisis of his faith brought him great suffering which left him a sad heart. The flood of theological and ecclesiastical malediction and ridicule he met either with total silence or answered with calm composure and noble patience, knowing that his course was the only one left to an upright man. (E. PLATZHOFF‑LEJEUNE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: O. G€rard, E. Scherer, 2d ed., Paris, 1891; J. F. Asti€, E. Scherer, ses disciples et ses advensairm Lausanne, 1854; idem, Les Deux Thiologies nouvelles, ib. 1882; idem, E. Scherer et la Wologie ind~pendante, ib. 1892; G. Frommel, Esquisses coneemporcinea, pp. 199288, ib. 1891; E. Logoz, Essai sur E. Scherer th6olopien ib. 1891; E. Dowden, New Studies‑ in Literature, Boston, 1895; Mary Fisher, in McClurg's Magazine, 1897.

SCHERER, shi'rer, JAMES AUGUSTIN BROWN:
Lutheran; b. at Salisbury, N. C., May 22, 1870. He was educated at Roanoke College, Va. (A.B., 1890), and Pennsylvania College (Ph.D., 1897). After being pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran church at Pulaski, Va., in 1890‑91, he founded a mission of his denomination at Saga, Japan, where he remained until 1897, being also a teacher in a Japanese government school in 1892‑96. He returned to the United States in 1897 for reasons of health, and held pastorates at Cameron, S. C., in 1897‑98, and at Charlestown, S. C., in 1898‑1904, being at the same time a professor in the Lutheran theological seminary in that city. Since 1904 he has been president of Newberry College, Newberry, S. C. In theology he holds that the Book of Concord is the "true and logical development of Christian faith in Reformation times" and that "the principle of historic continuity should determine any subsequent statement." He has written Pour Princes: or, The Growth of a Kingdom: The Story of the Christian Church centred around four Types (Philadelphia, 1903); Japan. To‑day

Seheneachewsky
Schinner	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	238
(1904); Young Japan: Story of the Japanese People, . especially . . their Educational Development (1905); The Holy Grail: Six Kindred Addresses and Essays (1906); and What is Japanese Morality? (1906).

SCHERESCHEWSKY, she"re‑shev'skf, SAMUEL ISAAC JOSEPH: Protestant Episcopal missionary bishop of Shanghai, China; b., of Jewish parentage, at Tanroggen, Russian Lithuania, May 6, 1831; d. at Tokyo, Japan, Sept. 15, 1906. He was educated at the Talmud Torah of Zhitomir, Russia, and the University of Breslau, where he spent two years. In 1854 he went to the United States, where he accepted Christianity. He studied theology at the Western Theological Seminary (Presbyterian), Alloghany, Pa., in 1855‑58, but in 1858 entered the Protestant Episcopal Church and studied for another year at the General Theological Seminary. He was ordered deacon in 1859 and priested in 1860. He then went to China as a missionary, and was stationed successively at Shanghai (1860‑63) and Peking (1863‑75). .From 1875 to 1877 he was in the United States, and in 1877 was consecrated missionary bishop of Shanghai. In 1883 he retired on account of paralysis, with which he had been stricken in 1881. He continued his work, nevertheless, with marvellous perseverance despite his infirmities. From 1886 to 1895 he resided in the United States, preparing a revision of the Mandarin Bible which he had translated unaided many years before. He then went again to Shanghai, where for two years he devoted himself to transferring the Romanized text of this version into Chinese characters. From 1897 until his death he resided in Japan, preparing a reference Mandarin Bible and a translation of the Apocrypha, the latter left unfinished.
BIBLIoaBAPHY: W. $. Perry, Episcopate in America, p. 251, New York, 1895.
SCHERMANN, sh6r'man, THEODOR FRANZ JOSEF: German Roman Catholic; b. at Ellwangen (45 m. e.n.e. of Stuttgart), W urttemberg, Jan. 19, 1878. He was educated at the University of Munich (D.D., 1901), and, after being catechist and curate at Munich in 1901‑02, studied in Paris and Italy for two years (1902‑04). Since 1904 he has been privat‑docent for church history, patristics, and Christian archeology at the University of Munich. He has written Die Gottheit des heiligen Geistes nach den griechischen Vatern des vierten Jahrhunderts (Freiburg, 1901); Die griechischen Quellen des heiligen Ambrosius in seinen drei Ruchern vom h‑digen Geiste (Munich, 1902); Eine Elfapostelmoral oder die X‑Rezension der beiden Wege (1903); Geschichte der dogmatischen Florilegien vom v.‑viii. Jahrhundert (Leipsic, 1904); and has edited Prophetenr and Apostellegenden nebst Jungerkatalogen des Dorotheus and Verwandter Texte (in TU, 1907); Prophetarum vita? fabulosm indices apostolorum discipulonemque (Leipsie, 1907); and Griechische Zauberpapyri and das Gemeinde‑ and Dankgebet im 1 Klemensbriefe, in TU, xxxiv. 2b (1909).
SCHEURL, sheirl, CHRISTOPH GOTTLIEB ADOLF, FREIHERR VON: German Lutheran, authority on canon law; b. at Nuremberg Jan. 7,
1811; d. there Jan. 23, 1893. He came of an ancient family which had immigrated from Breslau in the fifteenth century; studied at Nuremberg, completing the local gymnasium course in 1827, at Erlangen 1827‑28, and at Munich, where his object was jurisprudence, 1828‑31; he qualified as lecturer at the University of Erlangen in 1836; became extraordinary professor in 1840; and, in 1845, professor of Roman and canon law, and retired to his ancestral home in 1881.
Scheurl's importance inheres both in his productive authorship and in his official service in behalf of the Church, alike in the legislative chamber and in the general synod. His studies began with the Roman law, themes from which were treated in his dissertation (1835), his academic induction thesis (1836), his essay on Nexum (1839); his Dissertatio de usus et fructus discrimine (1846), in a guide to the study of the Roman jurisprudence (1855), and especially in his text‑book of the Institutiones, which appeared in eight editions. The course of his own development, however, drew him more and more into the sphere of canon law; and to this he subsequently devoted his main powers, though he won distinction in both civil and canon law. During the years 1845‑19 he was a member of the chamber of delegates, where he found rich opportunity of turning to account his comprehensive lore and his judicial opinions. In the national diet of 1849 he was active in the direction which was to determine the proper focus of his later life in questions affecting the constitution of the Evangelical state church. Possibly in those years Scheurl discerned his peculiar vocation, and thenceforward his professional activity applied itself predominantly to canon law. It was but a step in this direction that in 1865 he was elected to the general synod, to which he belonged until 1884.
His official activity was closely conjoined with productive authorship. Herein he gave predominant attention to questions of church constitution. So early as 1853 and 1854 he published two treatises on the constitutional relation of the Lutheran Church in Bavaria. In an independent investigation, 1872, he enlarged upon the status of the Church to the civil power in Bavaria. The decree of the general synod of 1873 evoked a further publication. The Bavarian situation naturally prompted investigations of a general and fundamental cast. Hence he treated (1862) the doctrine of church government, the problem of freedom of conscience, concepts of confessional church and state church (1867, 1868), and the tasks of the Christian State (1885). In the year 1857 he answered a number of general questions in pamphlets which he styled Fliegende Bldtter fur die kirchliehen Fragen der Gegenwart. Numerous articles in ZPK, whose associate editor he was from 1858, and in ZKR, dealt with questions of the Evangelical constitution, while on all sides he so advocated the rights of the Evangelical church that one may justly accord him the honorable title of "syndic of the Lutheran Church." He also specialized in the modern development of the marriage law, and this led to his Entwickelung des kirchlichen Ehes; hliessungerecht (Erlangen, 1877), interesting because it is Scheurl's one considerable effort in the

237	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8chereechewsky
Sohinner
domain of canon law at large. Even prior to that publication he had given his attention to Luther's marriage law, and he incorporated his Luthers Eherechtsweisheit, which first appeared in ZPK, in his Sammlung kirchenrechtlieher Abhandlungen (1873). An exhaustive summary is contributed by his very excellent Das gemeine deutsche Eherecht and seine Umbildung durch das R.‑G. vom 6. Februar, 1876 (1882). With Roman Catholic canon law he occupied himself but little, publishing in 1847 a survey of the Concordat and constitutional oath, and later a number of briefer studies in periodicals. His last work in canon law, Staatsgesetzgebung and religi6se Kindererziehung, was published in Deutsche Zeitschrift fur Kirchenrecht (1891). E. SEHLIN(1.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. von StIhiln, Zur Brinnerung an Christoph Gottlieb Adolf Freiherr von Scheurl, Leipsic, 1893; Das Glau5ensbekenntnis tines Rechtlehrers Gus unserer Zeit, Carlsnlhe, 1899.
	SCHIAN, shf'dn, MARTIN: German Lutheran;
b. at Liegnitz (40 m. w.n.w. of Breslau), Silesia,
Aug. 10, 1869. He was educated at the universities
of Greifswald, Breslau (lie. theoL, 1896), Halle,
and Leipsic (Ph.D., 1895), and at the preachers'
seminary at Wittenberg. After being curate (1895
1896) and pastor (1896‑1901) at Dalkau, Silesia, he
was pastor in Gorlitz until 1906; privat‑docent for
practical theology at the University of Breslau and
pastor of the Bernhardingemeinde in the same city
1906‑‑08; and since 1908 professor of the same sub
ject at Giessen. In theology he adheres to the older
Ritschlian school. Besides work as editor on the
Preussische Kirchenzeitung since 1905 and on Studien
zur praktischen Theologie since 1907, he has written
Die Scholastik im Zeitalter der Aufkldrung (Breslau,
1900) ; Unser Christenglaube (Freiburg, 1902, 2d ed.,
1910); Das kirchliche Leben der evangelischen Kirche
der Provinz Schlesien (Tiibingen, 1903); Der
deutsche Roman seit Goethe (Gbrlitz, 1904); Die
Predigt (Gottingen, 1906) 1906); Die evangelische Kirchen
gemeinde (Giessen, 1907); Zur Beurteilung der
modernen positiven Theologie (1907); and Die
modeme Gemeinschaftsbewegung (Stuttgart, 1909).

SCHICRLER, FERNAND DE, BARON: French Protestant layman; b. at Paris Aug. 24, 1835; d. there Oct. 18, 1909. He early distinguished himself by his devotion to the cause of Protestantism in France, which his wealth enabled him materially to aid. He became president of the Societk de 1'histoire du protestantisme frangais,1865; president of the Societk biblique protestante de Paris, 1878; member of the Central Council of the Reformed Churches, 1879; and was president of the liberal delegation of the reformed churches of France, 1877. He contributed to the history of the Bible Society of Paris, Notices biographiques (1868); to the Histoire de France dans les archives privies de la Grande Bretagne (1879); and published En Orient (Paris, 1862); Notice cur la Societe de l'histoire du Protestantisme franfais 1862‑7.2 (1874); and the very elaborate Les 4glises frangaises du refuge en Angleterre (3 vols., 1892).
SCHIELE, shMe, FRIEDRICH MICHAEL: Lutheran; b. at Zeitz (23 m. s.w. of Leipsic) Nov. 11, 1867. He received his education at the gymnasium
at Naumburg and at the universities of Tiibingen and Halle; taught in the gymnasium of Schliichtern and Ottweiler, 1894‑1900; on account of ill‑health he then laid aside professional employment to devote himself to literary work in the departments of theology, philosophy, and pedagogics; in 1907 he again took up teaching, becoming privat‑docent for church history in the University of Tiibingen. He has had editorial relations with the Philosophische Bibliothek, Die christliche Welt, Chronik der christlichen Welt, Religionsgeschichtliches Volksblatt, and Die Religion in Geschichte and Gegenwart; and has issued Kants Beweisgrund zu einer Demonstration des Dasein Gottes (Leipsic, 1902); an edition of Schleiermacher's blonologen (1902); Minnesang and Volkslied (1904); Sang and Spruch der Deutschen im 19. Jahrhundert (1904); Deutscher Glaube (1904); Religion. and Schule (1906); and Reformation des Klosters Schlfcchtern (1907).
	SCHIJN, chain, HERMANNUS:	Dutch Men
nonite; b. at Amsterdam in 1622; d. there 1727.
He studied medicine at Leyden and Utrecht, prac
tised his profession at Rotterdam and then at
Amsterdam, serving at the same time as minister of
the conservative Mennonite church, upholding its
faith both in his sermons and in his writings, and
issuing a catechism, Kort Onderwijs des christelijken
Geloofs (1697, and often). In opposition to the
"Lamistic" (i.e., subjective‑pietistic Socinian)
party of his church, he maintained the traditional
Biblical orthodox theology, rejecting with all Men
nonites predestination and satisfaction for sin by
Christ, and opposed union with the Socinian Collegi
ants, though in his Pleniar deductio (see below)
he spoke with respect of the leaders of the opposite
party. He united with all schools of his church in
the charities instituted for the oppressed Mennonites
in other countries. But his significance lies in his at
tempt to win respect for the Dutch Mennonites
through his writings, showing that only in the mat
ters of baptism, non‑resistance, and the refusal of
oaths did they differ from other Protestant bodies,
that they had no connection or affiliation of feeling
with such Anabaptists as John of Leyden (see
MUENZER, ANABAPTISTS oF), but were descended
from the Waldenses and thence from the apostolic
church itself. His first apologetic work was
Korte Historie der protestante Christenen die men
Mennoniten of Doopsgezinden noemt (Amsterdam,
1711), which elicited from the Acta eruditorum
(v., supplement pp. 85 sqq., Leipsic,1713) praise of .
a high degree. It was extended in Historia Chris
tianorum qui . . . Menntnito; appellantur (1723);
Dutch transl., 1723, 1727). His Historice Jlennoni
torum plenior deductio (1729) discusses the Men
nonite background, confessions, and notable repre
sentatives; there is a revised edition of this and his
Uitvoeriger Verhandeling (2 vols., 1744), completed
by Gerardus Maatachoen of Amsterdam, together
with a third volume extending the biographies.
		S. CRAMER.
SCHINNER, shin'ner, MATTHIAS: Cardinal; b. at Muhlebach in upper Valais, Switzerland, in 1456; d. at Rome Sept. 30, 1522. He was educated at Zurich and Como, and became bishop of Sitten

schinner
Schlatter	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	$•g8
in 1500. Appointed by Pope Julius II., in 1509, as legate in Switzerland, he was successful in bringing about an alliance between the pope and the Union against France; but losing the favor of the Swiss and not being allowed to return to his bishopric, he was compelled to resort to Rome, and was made a cardinal in 1511. In 1514 he went as a legate to England to enlist Henry VIII. to join in the league against Francis I. At the battle of Marignano (1515), in which the French disastrously defeated the allies, Schirmer led the Swiss in person. Francis I. recognized in him one of his strongest enemies in diplomacy and battle. Again, driven out upon attempting to return to his country and bishopric in 1518, he led a force of allies against the French in 1521, and drove them out of Milan. Zwingli in his account of the campaign of 1512 makes mention of the great impression the cardinal made on the soldiers (Werke, ed. Egli and Finsler i. 23‑37). When the Reformation broke out in Switzerland, he seemed to be in perfect harmony with the movement. He offered Luther a place of refuge and support in 1519, and continued for a long time to befriend Zwingli; but later he turned against the Reformation. When Johannes Faber (q.v.) met him in Rome in 1521, he agreed with him that the Reformation should be suppressed by force.
131BLIOGRAPHY: P. S. Furrer, Geachiehte des Wallis Ill., pp. 242 sqq., Sitten, 1850; W. Gisi, Der Antheal der Eidpe‑
noasen an der europdiwhen Politik . . 1618‑161 B, Sehaff‑
hausen, 1868; Pastor, Popes, vols. vi.‑vii.; KL, x., 1790‑
1792.
	SCHISM:	A term generally applied to the divi
sion that, either wholly or partly, suspends the out
ward unity of the Church; also, in Roman Catholic
canon law, the offense of producing or attempting
to produce such a division, and further, the deliber
ate withdrawal from the bond of the Church by a
		refusal of obedience to its authorities
Mature on the ground that their powers are and not legitimate. But mere insubordina‑
Classifica‑ tion to particular rulings or commands tion. of the authorities and simple resistance do not constitute schism. Where secession ensues from denying individual confessional doctrines of the Church, that is, where the offense of schism is concurrent with heresy, it is termed "heretical schism." On the other hand, in the case of separation, when, for instance, the papacy is acknowledged per se but the actual pope is declared not legally elected, the schism is named "pure schism." A further distinction is drawn between "particular" and "universal" schism, according as unity with the whole Church is ruptured directly, as by secession from the pope; or only indirectly, by separation from another ecclesiastical superior, particularly from the bishop. According to Roman Catholic canon law, schism constitutes an ecclesiastical offense chargeable before the spiritual tribunal, and is threatened with summary excommunication, forfeiture of office, suspension from holy orders, disqualification for church positions, infamy, and confiscation of property.
The most serious divisions in the Christian, as later in the Roman Church, were caused by differ‑
ences in the apprehension of Christian doctrine. To this category belong those divisions which arose in the fourth century and after, coincidently with the closer definition and elaboration of Christian dogmas;
further and preeminently, the final Earlier separation between the Western and
	Examples.	Eastern Churches in 1054; the rup
		ture of the Protestants with the Roman
Church in the sixteenth century; and the with
drawal of the so‑called Old Catholics from the Church
of Rome, in consequence of the Vatican Council.
Another class of church divisions was provoked
through a double occupancy of the Roman episco
pal see. During the period of the Roman Empire,
when the emperors possessed the right of confirma
tion at the elections of the pope, a discordant elec
tion had no decisive influence over the Church at
large, and was without essential significance to its
unity. Likewise in the tenth century, and in the first
half of the eleventh, such was the determining in
fluence that the German emperors exercised on the
papal election, and such the position which they
generally occupied toward the Church, that par
ticular attempts of the Roman factions to elevate
their creatures as popes, or to maintain them in the
papacy, were ineffectual, and could lead to no note
worthy divisions. But a change set in from the
middle of the eleventh century, when the reform
party which began to rule the policy of the Curia
sought to wrest this influence from the imperial
power and to subject that power to the sovereign
dispensation of the papacy. The central status in
the Church which the papacy had acquired through
the patronage of the emperors moved the latter,
in order to possess the advantage of papal prestige
in the battle now in progress, repeatedly to set up
anti‑popes. Thus in opposition to Alexander II.,
in 1061, Henry IV. put forward Cadalus (Honorius
II.); in 1080, Wibert (Clement III.), against Greg
ory VIL; and Henry V. opposed Gelasius II.,'in
1118, with Mauritius Burdinus (Gregory VIII.).
The division of the Church necessarily consequent
upon the strife between the two supreme heads of
Western Christendom became embodied in the high
est instance of the ecclesiastical organism. Again,
the discordant elections in 1130 (Innocent II. and
Anacletus II.), and in 1159 (Alexander III. and
Victor IV.), were occasioned, notwithstanding the
Concordat of Worms (1122), by the persistent
breach between the papacy and the empire, with
its concomitant division of the cardinals and the
Curia into an imperial and a papal faction, and
disrupted the unity of the Western Church for a
considerable time; especially the latter election,
forasmuch as the partizans of Frederick I., after
the death of Victor IV., opposed Alexander III.,
with Paschal III., 1164, and Calixtus III., 1168‑78.
From the time of the papacy's positive victory over
the empire such divisions no longer occurred; for
the attempt of Louis the Bavarian to offset John
XXII. with an anti‑pope in the person of the
Minorite Pietro Rainulducci, as Nicholas V., 1328
1330, miscarried.
Only once after this period did a papal schism occur in the Roman Church, and it agitated and shattered the Church as no other. Because of its

239	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Schinner
		Schlatter
long duration (1378‑1429), it was styled the "great
papal schism." After the death of Gregory XI.,
			1378, who had restored the papal
	The Great residence to Rome, the sixteen car
		Schism.	dinals then present in Rome elected,
			Apr. 8, Archbishop Bartholomew of
Bari as Pope Urban VI. However, he had embit
tered some of the cardinals through gross harshness
and indiscriminate censure of prevalent abuses in
the college of cardinals and in the Curia. Therefore
a quota of cardinals, thirteen in number, who had
betaken themselves to Avignon, elected, Sept. 20,
Cardinal Robert of Geneva as Pope Clement VIL,
affirming that the election of Urban VI. was in
valid on account of the coercion brought to bear
against them by the population of Rome. In Italy,
nevertheless, public sentiment continued over
whelmingly in favor of Urban VI., while Germany,
England, Denmark, and Sweden also sided with
him. On the other hand, Clement VII. soon
became acknowledged by France; and after he had
transferred his residence to Avignon, French in
fluence also contrived to draw Scotland, Savoy, and
later, Castile, Aragon, and Navarre to his cause.
Thus two popes were arrayed one against the other.
Each had his own college of cardinals, thus affording
a protraction of the schism by means of new papal
elections. Urban VI. was followed by Boniface IX.
	(1389‑1404); Innocent VIII. (1404‑06); and
	Gregory XII. (1406‑15). After Clement VII., in
1394, came Benedict XIII. The papacy having
shown itself incapable of abating the schism, the
only expedient was the convening of a general coun
cil. This assembled at Pisa, in 1408, and the dele
gates sat from the start in common accord. Though
the council deposed both Gregory XII. and Benedict
	XIII., and elected in their place Alexander V.,
who was succeeded in 1410 by John XXIII.,
this procedure failed to stop the schism. The two
former popes asserted themselves so that the Church
now had three popes. The futility of the Council of
Pisa led to the convocation of the Council of Con
stance (1414‑18). In 1415 this declared that, as
	representative organ of the ecumenical Church, it
	possessed the supreme ecclesiastical authority, and
every one, even the pope, must yield obedience.
In the same year, accordingly, it deposed John
XXIII., and again declared Benedict XIII. as a
schismatic to have forfeited his right to the papal
see. With the election of Martin V., which took
	place Nov. 11, 1417, by action of the duly appointed
conciliar deputation, the schism was practically
terminated, though not absolutely ended until
	1429; for Benedict XIII., though almost wholly for
saken, defied the sentence of deposition as long as
he lived (d. 1424); and Canon Egidius Munoz of
Barcelona, whom the few cardinals that lingered
with Benedict elected as Clement VIII., did not
	relinquish his dignity until five years after.
		The last schism in the Roman Church was pro
	voked by the conflict of the Council of Basel with
	Pope Eugenius IV.; whom the council, after his de
	position, opposed with an anti‑pope in the person
of Duke Amadeus of Savoy, Felix V. (1439‑1444).
This schism, however, was insignificant, because
Felix V. was unable to win any appreciable follow‑
ing outside the council. The Vatican Council declared the pope to be absolute monarch in the Church, and the episcopate now conLast stitutes only his advisory adjunct at
Schism. the general council. But if such is the case, then the episcopate is no longer competent, apart from the pope, where his right is in question, to exercise its earlier judicial prerogatives; and he alone, as the supreme organ, is authorized to decide on the matter of his legitimacy. Hence the means appointed by the Council of Constance for abolishing a papal schism can be no longer applied in the present status of the papacy. E. SEHLING.
BImioaRAPHY: T. Le Mesurier, The Nature and Guilt of Schism . . . with Particular Reference to the Principles of the Reformation, London, 1808; 1. H. von Wessenberg, Die grossen Kirehenversammlungen des 16. and 16. Jahrhunderten, ii. 353 sqq., Constance, 1840; T. Lindner, Geschichte des deutschen Reichs . . . unter Konig Wenzel, 4 vols., Brunswick, 1875‑80; L. Gayet, Le Grand Schisme d'occident, Florence, 1889; F. J. Scheuffyen, Beitr44ge zu der Geschichte des grossen Schismas, Freiburg, 1889; G. B. Howard, The Schism between the Oriental and Western Churches, New York, 1892; N. Valois, La France et Is schisme doccident, 2 vols., Paris, 1896; C. Locke, Ape of the Greal Western Schism, New York, 1897; M. Souchon. Die Papstwahlen in der Zest des grossen Schismas, 13781l,17, Brunswick, 1898; L. Salembier, Le Grand Schisms d'occident 1378‑1.¢17, Paris, 1902; F. P. Bliemetzrieder, Das Generalkonzil im prossen abendlbndischen Schisma, Paderborn, 1904; Pastor, Popes, vol. i.; KL, x. 17921805.
SCHLATTER, ahld'ter, ADOLF: German Protestant; b. at St. Gall (19 m. a.e. of Constance), Switzerland, Aug. 16, 1852. He was educated at the universities of Basel and Tubingen (1872‑75), and in 1888 became privat‑docent at Bern, where he was appointed associate professor in the same year. Within a few months he was called to Greifswald as full professor of New‑Testament exegesis, where he remained until 1893, when he went to Berlin as professor of systematic theology. Since 1898 he has been professor of New‑Testament exegesis in the University of Tiibingen. He has been associate editor since 1897 of the Beitrdge zur Forderung der ehristlichen Theologie, and has written: Der Glaube im Neuen Testament (Leyden, 1885); Einleitung in. die Bibel (Calve, 1889) ; Erlauterungen zum Neuen Testament (11 vols., 1890‑1910); Jason von Cyrene (Munich, 1891); Zur Topographie and Geschichte Paldstinas (Calve, 1893); Der Chronograph aus dem zehnten Jahre Antonius (Leipsie, 1894) ; Geschichte Israels von Alexander den Grossen bis Hadrian (Calve, 1901); Predigten in der Stiftskirche zu Tiibingen gehalten (8 vols., TGbingen, 1902‑10); Die Theologie des Neuen Testaments (parts i.‑ii., Calw and Stuttgart, 1909); Die Theologie des Neuen Testaments and die Dogmatik (Giitersloh, 1909); and Die philosophische Arbait seit Cartesius nach ihrem ethischen and religiosen Ertrag (1910).

SCHLATTER, MICHAEL: Reformed (German) Church in the United States; b. at St. Gall (19 m. s.e. of Constance), Switzerland, July 14, 1716; d. at Chestnut Hill, near Philadelphia, Oct. 31, 1790. He studied in the gymnasium of his native town, and probably also at Helmstadt; was for some time a teacher in Holland, where he was ordained to the

Schlatter	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	240
Schleiermacher
ministry; and in 1745 was vicar at Wigoldingen,
Switzerland. In 1746 he was commissioned by the
synods of Holland a missionary to the destitute Ger
man churches of Pennsylvania, with special direc
tions to visit. the scattered settlements, to organize
pastoral charges, and, if possible, to form a coetus,
or synod. Schlatter arrived in Philadelphia Sept.
6, 1746, and Was installed pastor of the united Re
formed churches at Philadelphia and Germantown,
Jan. 1, 1747, and proceeded to prosecute his special
mission with great vigor. He traveled (1747‑51)
a distance of not less than 8,000 miles, throughout
parts of Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, and
New York, and preached 635 times. He estimated
that there were at this time 30,000 German Re
formed people in Pennsylvania, with fifty‑three
small churches, and four settled pastors. Schlatter
formed the congregations into pastoral charges;
and Sept. 29, 1747, the pastors and delegated elders
met, at his instance, at Philadelphia, and organized
the German Reformed coetus, or synod (see RE
FORMED [GERMAN] CHURCH). In the mean time
trouble arose in the church at Philadelphia; a fac
tion opposed the discipline and close alliance with
Holland and chose as pastor, in Schlatter's place,
J. C. Steiner, a recent arrival from Switzerland. In
1751 Schlatter went to Europe at the instance of
the synod, where he succeeded in reassuring the
synods of Holland discouraged by reports of the
strife, and in raising a fund of £12,000 for the des
titute churches in America on the condition, how
ever, that the coetus in America must be entirely
subject to the Church in Holland. In 1752 he re
turned to America, accompanied by six young min
isters, and bringing 700 large Bibles for distribution
to churches and families. While in Europe, he pub
lished, in Dutch, a " Journal " (Amsterdam, 1751;
Germ. transl., Frankfort, 1752) of his missionary
labors, containing an earnest appeal in behalf of
the Germans in America. A large sum of money,
said to have been £20,000, was collected and placed
in the hands of a Society for the Promotion of the
Knowledge of God among the Germans. In 1755
Sehlatter was induced to resign his church in Phila
delphia, and to become superintendent of the pro
posed charity schools. The establishment of these
English schools aroused strong opposition among
the Germans, and his position became unpopular.
Accordingly he resigned in 1757 and accepted a
chaplaincy in the Royal American regiment. He
accompanied the expedition to Louisburg and re
mained with the army till 1759. He subsequently
lived in retirement at Chestnut Hill, near Philadel
phia. During the American Revolution he was an
earnest patriot, and was for some time imprisoned
for refusing to continue his position as chaplain in
the British army.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. Harbaugh, The Life of Rev. Michael
	Schlatter, Philadelphia, 1857; H. W. Smith, Life and Cor
	respondence of Rev. William Smith, D.D., vol. i., ib. 1879;
	J. H. Dubbs, Founding of the German Churches of Penn
	sylvania, ib. 1893; idem, in American Church History
	Series, viii. 278‑289, New York, 1895; H. E. Jacobs, in
	the same, iv. 288‑289, ib. 1893.
SCHLECHT, shIgHt, JOSEF: German Roman
Catholic; b. at Wending (37 m. n. of Augsburg),
Bavaria, Jan. 20, 1857. He was educated at the gymnasium of Eichstutt and the University of Munich; was curate at Eichstatt (1885‑89); a member of the clerical staff of the Campo Santo, Rome, and director of the historical institute of the Gorresgesellschaft in the same city (1890‑91); instructor in the Lyceum of Eichstatt (1892‑93); associate professor at the Lyceum of Dillingen (1893‑97); and since 1897 has been connected with the Lyceum of Freising, where he has been successively associate professor (1897‑1902) and full professor (since 1902). Besides being associate editor of the second volume of Die katholische Kirche unserer Zeit and ihre Diener in Wort and Bild (Munich, 1900); Eichstdtts Kunst (1901); Kirclliches Handlexikon (1904 sqq.); and Kalender bayrischer and schwdbischer Kunst (Munich, 1906); he has written Poesie des Sozialismus (Wdrzburg, 1883); Zur Kunstgeschichte der Stadt Eichstatt (Eiehstatt, 1888); Eiehstatt im Schwedenkriege (1889); Die Pfalzgrafen Philipp and Heinrich als Bisch6fe von Freising (Freising, 1898); Doctrina duodecam Apostolorum (Freiburg, 1900); Die Apostellehre in der Liturgic der katholischen Kirche (1901); Bayerns Kirchenprovinzen (Munich, 1902); Das Leben Jesu (in collaboration with P. Schumacher; 1902); Andrea ZamometQ, i (Paderbom, 1903); and edited Kilian Leib's Briefwechsel and Diarien (Munster, 1909).

SCHLEIERMACHER, shlai'er‑meH"er, FRIEDRICH DANIEL ERNST.
Life to 1796 (§ 1). First Berlin Period (§ 2). The Roden Q 3). The " :Monologues "; Stolpe Period (§ 4). At Halle; Call to Berlin (§ 5). Incidental Activities, 1811‑32 (§ 6). Introduction to the Glaubensiehre (§ 7). Doctrine of God, the World, Sin, and Grace (§ 8). Christology (§ 9). Election, Pneumatology, Inspiration (§ 10). Schleiermacher's Philosophy and Psychology (§ 11). His Science of Ethics (§ 12). Criticism of the Ethics (§ 13). Schleiermacher's Last Years (§ 14). Character and Influence (§ 15).

	Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher, whose
name marks an epoch not only in Protestant theol
ogy, but also in the sciences of religion and ethics,
was born at Breslau Nov. 21, 1768, and died at
		Berlin Feb. 12, 1834. His father was
	1. Life to a Reformed army chaplain who had
	1796. settled in Breslau, where his son was
		educated until he was ten years old.
A fresh outbreak of hostilities then recalled his
father to the field, and the boy and his family re
moved to Pleas, where he studied, partly in school
and partly under his parents' direction; when his
father and mother came under strong Moravian in
fluence, young Friedrich was placed in a school at
Niesky. Here he found congeniality of piety, cul
ture, and friendship, and in his enthusiasm entered
the Moravian seminary at Barby in 1785 to prepare
for the ministry. But his rising spirit of criti
cism and independence received scant satisfaction,
and by Jan., 1787, he found himself unable to re
main longer in Barby. He accordingly withdrew

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8chlatter
Schleiermacher
from the Moravians, and entered the University of Halle, where he plunged into Kantian and Greek philosophy, though even at this time his lack of agreement with Kant's system was clear. In 1789 he was compelled, by lack of funds, to withdraw from Halle, and after a year of private study at Drossen, near Frankfort‑on‑the‑Oder, he passed his first theological examination. He became a private tutor in the family of Count Dohna at Schlobitten in West Prussia, where he learned the ways of polite society. Here, too, in his fragment on the freedom of the will he argued skilfully on the deterministic side, while the sermons of this period stress Christianity as the source of lofty ethical life. After two and a half years, however, a dispute connected with his tutorial duties led to a friendly severance of his relations with Dohna. After another sojourn at Drossen, Schleiermacher, in the autumn of 1793, became a member of the Gedike seminary at Berlin, and also taught at the Kornmesser orphan asylum; but in the following year he accepted the post of assistant pastor at Landsberg‑on‑the‑Warthe, where he was ordained. Here, while diligently discharging his pastoral duties, he translated the sermons of Hugh Blair of Edinburgh and of the English preacher John Fawcett (qq.v.). In June, 1795, the senior pastor died, and Schleiermacher was appointed Reformed preacher at the Charitk in Berlin.
Schleiermacher's six years (1796‑1802) as preacher at the Charit6 were rich alike in inspiration and in struggle. Here in Berlin the Enlightenment (q.v.) was still in full tide, but with its increasing shallowness enthusiasm for Romanti‑
c. First cism (q.v.) steadily gained. When, in Berlin 1797, Friedrich Schlegel visited Berlin,
	Period.	Schleiermacher made his acquaintance,
		and under his inspiration wrote his
Red‑ fiber die Religion (anonymous, Berlin, 1799)
and Monolog‑ (1800). In Feb., 1799, his literary
relations were interrupted by his sojourn at Pots
dam as court chaplain, but on his return to Berlin
in May he resumed his pen. The work which fol
lowed the Monolog‑‑the Verlraute Brieje fiber
Schlegels Lucinde (also anonymous; Ldbeck, 1800)
‑was less happy than his former work, and even this
plea in behalf of the much‑blamed romanticist could
not prevent the breach that was already threaten
ing his friendship with Schlegel. At this juncture
Schleiermacher's old patron, the court preacher
Friedrich Samuel Gottfried Sack (q.v.), who had
long been sorely troubled by the young preacher's
eloquent defense of Spinozism, offered him a new
position, and in 1802 he went into his " exile " as
court preacher at Stolpe.
In estimating the literary results of Schleierma,cher's first years in Berlin, it is to be noted primarily that his Reden fiber die Religion shows the close relation of its author to the ro‑
3. The mantic movement. In opposition to
Reden. the pedantic Enlightenment he pleaded for a freer and more comprehensive culture based on fantasy and feeling, although his philosophical studies are still in control. In the background stands Kant's definition of the scientific theory of the universe as the impulse to seek elsewhere the unity of the world and the harmony X.‑16
of man's spiritual life; and to this is added Spinoza's tenet that the finite is comprised in and sustained by the infinite. The influence of Leibnitz is visible in the declaration that the life of the universe is mirrored in each individual, and there is recognized Schelling's poetic and philosophic interpretation of nature. The first discourse treats of the necessity of a defense of religion and of the reasons why religion is despised, and the second develops the basal definitions of the essence of religion. This is neither metaphysical interpretation of the world, nor moralistic legislation, nor a union of the two, but " taste and feeling for the infinite," based on apperception and feeling. Apperception presents the universe as a sum of free objects, unfettered by any system, among which each religious person may choose what is best adapted to him; and feeling is religion as the consciousness of the inward change of the individual through such apperception. Only in religion are apperception and feeling united, and their separation shows that the climax of religious experience, the union of the soul with the universe, has been missed, although action does not immediately proceed from them, even while they serve as the permanent basal determination of all action. In the third discourse the author prophesies the speedy passing of the supremacy of the arid rationalism which impeded the development of religious feeling. In the fourth he set forth his theories of the Church. True religious fellowship knew no distinction between clergy and laity; and religion as a whole was realized only in all religions together. The great churches, with their rigid organization and their connection with the State, had fallen far short of this ideal, and were rather training‑schools for those who truly sought religion than real associations of pious souls; and the invisible communions severed from the great Church stood nearest to the realization of the ideal. The fifth discourse considered the theory of religion in general. The multiplicity of religions is due to the infinite essence of religion and the finite nature of man, and true religion exists only in the form of a specific type of belief in which the religious life is individualized. So‑called natural religion is a mere abstraction, and the differences between positive religions is qualitative, not based on the different quantities of their underlying conceptions. In each of these religions there is a definite theory of the universe which in each case alters the complexion of the whole. In Christianity the cardinal ideas are the corruption and the redemption of man, with history as the stage of action. At the same time, Christianity does not claim to be the final form of all religion, and could a better be found, Christianity would not oppose it.
The Red‑ exercised an influence more lasting than immediate, but ultimately modified nineteenthcentury theology more profoundly than any other book. It sharply stressed the concept of autonomy in religion, and thus gave a certain steadiness of development amid the swiftly changing and mutually destructive tendencies of theology; but, on the other hand, the author failed entirely to vindicate the practical character of Christianity, and sadly underestimated its historic aspects.

Schleiermacher	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	242
	The Monologen reveal the development of Schlei
ormacher's distinctive ethical theories. Kantian
		influence is much diminished here,
4. The and the " Monologues " form a hymn
"Mono‑	to higher humanity, whose elements
logues "; are set forth as purity of will, superi‑
Stolpe	ority over fate, individual training,
	Period.	and devotion to mankind. During his
		two years' residence in Stolpe Schleier
macher had ample opportunity to practise the su
periority over fate which he preached, and this
period of relative isolation and deprivation of books
was not lost in his development, especially as it
was favorable to the translation of Plato which
he had begun in Berlin; the first volume ap
peared in 1804, a year later than his Grund
linien einer Kritik der bisherigen Sittenlehre. This
latter work supplements the ethical theory of the
" Monologues " by establishing for the first time
the triple division of ethics into the theories of
duty, virtue, and good by the coordination of
these classes, thus affording a glimpse of the dis
tinctive foundation of Schleiermacher's ethics. At
this period in his Zwei unvorgreiflichen Gutachten in
Sachen des protestantischen Kirchenwesens zunachst
in Beziehung auf den preussischen Staat, he advo
cated a closer union between Lutherans and Re
formed, a freer form of worship, and an educational
and social improvement of the clergy.
In 1804 the government refused to sanction his call to the projected Protestant theological faculty of W iirzburg, and appointed him instead to Halle as extraordinary professor, where he lec5. At Halle; tured on New‑Testament exegesis,
Call to philosophical and theological ethics,
	Berlin.	introduction to theology, introduction
		to church history, and dogmatics. In
1806 he became full professor and university preach
er. During this Halle period Schleiermacher pub
lished, besides two more volumes of his translation
of Plato, his Weihnachtsfeier (1805) and his treatise
on I Tim. in the form of a letter to Joachim Chris
tian Gass (q.v.). The former treatise is a dialogue
on the signification of Christ and his work of re
demption. In the treatise on I Tim. Schleiermacher
seeks to prove that the epistle is a compilation from
the other two pastoral epistles, and the discussion
opened the way to a strict study of the pastoral
epistles. Meanwhile the fall of JOna and Napoleon's
hatred of the German spirit of Halle had caused the
suspension of lectures there. Schleiermacher seized
the opportunity by his sermons to link the spirit of
patriotism and the life of the Church. In the win
ter of 1807, however, he went to Berlin, where he
had already lectured on Greek philosophy. Here,
at the newly founded university, Schleiermacher
lectured after Jan., 1808, on ethics and theological
encyclopedia, and in the winter of 1808‑09 on dog
matics and politics. His Gelegendiche Gedanken
caber Universitdten im deutschen Sinn (1808) gives
his views on the functions of the university. In the
spring of 1809 he became preacher at the Dreifai
tigkeitskirche in Berlin, and in 1809‑10 also lec
tured on Christian ethics and hermeneutics. When,
in the autumn of 1810, the University of Berlin was
formally opened, Schleiermacher became the first
dean of the theological faculty. From 1810 to 1814 he was also a member of the department of public instruction in the ministry of the interior.
To the period here under consideration belongs what may be termed Schleiermacher's theological program‑the Kurze DarsteUung des theologischen Studiums (1811). According to this
6. Inci‑ theology is a positive science, being dental directed to the solution of a practical
	Activities,	problem. The real soul of theology is
	:8a‑3Z.	its interest in Christianity as it lives
		in the Church, and the theologian's
ideal is the union of this living interest with the
widest scientific spirit. Schleiermacher divides the
domain of theological knowledge into philosophical,
historical, and practical. The first, as apologetics,
gives the basis of piety and Christianity, and the
special characteristics of Protestantism; while as
polemics it is directed against such internal evils as
indifferentism and separatism. Historical theology
he divides into exegesis, church history, dogmatics,
and statistics. The new element in this system is
the incorporation of dogmatics and ethics in the
historical department, a result of Schleiermacher's
view that dogma in itself is not knowledge. His
new science of statistics seems only now to be re
ceiving the Attention which it deserves. This
troubled period was a time of stress for Schleier
macher. In the matter of union of the Lutheran
and Reformed churches he, not without good rea
son, mistrusted the practicability of the govern
ment's scheme of organization. Although the union
of 1817 was forced on the churches instead of being
an expression of their spontaneous religious con
victions, he supported such union, and maintained
this position through the period of controversy that
ensued. One of these disputes evoked his Ueber den
eigentiemlichen Wert and das bindende Aufsehen
symbolischer Biicher, in which he limited the author
ity of the creeds to those expressions of the Protes
tant spirit which set forth the religious experience
of the period of the Reformation and separated
Protestantism from other systems of belief. The
controversies of these years, combined with his
teaching, left him scant leisure for writing. Never
theless, he published a third volume of sermons in
1814, and in 1817 his Kritischer Versuch iiber die
Schriften des Lukas, in which he traced the tradi
tion of the Gospels to the primitive Christian com
munity and maintained that it developed through
oral transmission and fragmentary notes to the form
of definite compilation. In ! 832 he returned to the
problem, and in his Ueber die Zeugnisse des Papias
von unsern beiden ersten Evangelien was the first to
suggest that the Gospel of Matthew is a collection
of apothegms.
Since 1819 Schleiermacher's energy had been devoted to the preparation of his Christlicher Glaube nach dcn Grundsatzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhang dargestellt (1821‑22). The introduction to this work seeks to determine the place occupied by Christian piety in the spiritual life of society and to fix the scientific formulation appropriate to its articles of belief. Ethics must determine the concept of the Church, the philosophy of religion the grades and varieties of religion, and

243	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	schieiermacher
apologetics the essence of Christianity, while, the Church is defined as a community azth respect to
piety. Interpretation of the Christian q. Intro‑ faith is, therefore, dependent on the def‑
duction inition of piety, which is the feeling of
to the general dependence, since man becomes Glaubens‑ aware that the whole world and his
	lehre.	own freedom depend on God. Having
		this definition of the Church, Schleier
macher proceeds to determine what is peculiar to
the Christian Church. In the lower grades of re
ligion, such as Fetishism and Polytheism (qq.v.),
there is but an approximation to the feeling of de
pendence, this being realized only at the mono
theistic stage. Even here there are two tendencies:
the esthetic, in which piety is predominantly emo
tional; and the teleological, in which it is primarily
active. The purest realization of teleological mono
theism is Christianity, which is the highest religion,
though not the only true one. Revelation can not
be claimed exclusively for Christianity, for revela
tion is only the sum total of the individual concept
of God. Essential to the essence of Christianity is
the fact that redemption has the central place, and
that its realization is dependent on Jesus, who was
specifically different from his followers in that he
needed no redemption. The coming of the Redeemer
is the eternal act of God, and his actual appearance
was neither a new revelation nor the development
of a factor originally given; the supernatural and
the natural interpretations are two equally justi
fied and equally necessary sides of the same fact.
Union with Christ is possible only through religious
faith, in other words, by trusting him with the sat
isfying of the need of redemption; and proofs based
on miracles, prophecy, and inspired writings are un
necessary and devoid of cogency. The articles of
Christian belief serve not as proofs, but as expres
sions furthering piety; they describe the functions
of personal faith, not the objects of belief. The dif
ference between Roman Catholicism and Protestant
ism is that the former makes the relation of the in
dividual to Christ depend on his relation to the
Church, while the latter makes the individual's re
lation to the Church depend on his relation to Christ.
The differences between Lutheran and Reformed
Protestantism are merely technical. In his division
of dogmatic Schleiermacher discusses first religious
consciousness without regard to sin and redemption,
and then this consciousness as modified by these
two factors. He distinguished three types of dog
matic affirmations: descriptions of human condi
tions of life, concepts of divine qualities, and state
ments regarding the world. Each of these expresses
the whole content of Christian consciousness, but
the first is basal, since it represents most immedi
ately the life of the religious man, and by it must be
measured whatever is purely religious in the other
two types.
In the Glavbenslehre itself, it is maintained that there is no need of a formal proof of the existence of the deity; and since the universal consciousness of God is connected with a perception of the general coherence of nature, the concepts of the divine creation and preservation of the world are gained. Of these the latter is by far the most important, since
it alone corresponds to experience; but preservation must be so construed as to cover both dependence on God and the coherence of nature.
& Doctrine Since the latter must not be excluded of God, the in favor of the former, the idea of mirWorld, Sin, acles is ignored. The doctrine of and Grace. angels and the devil forms an appendix to the theory of creation, and they are abandoned to poetic and liturgical language. By reference of the absolute feeling of dependence to‑God are derived the divine attributes of omnipotence, eternity, omnipresence, and omniscience, the fundamental attribute being that first named. Schleiermacher taught that both the world and man were originally perfect; the organization of the world is adapted to awaken and sustain piety, while human nature permits a constant development of this feeling, especially by evolution of consciousness of self into consciousness of race. The second part of the Glaubenslehre is devoted to the relations between the antitheses of sin and grace. Sin is set forth as the struggle of the flesh against the spirit, and as a defect of human nature incapable of good except through redemption, and all evil is the punishment of sin; nevertheless Schleiermacher regarded sin as an unavoidable inequality of development and transformed it, as presupposing the need of redemption, into a stage of evolution toward goodness. Yet Schleiermacher gave the doctrine of original sin a better Biblical basis, and postulated the common deeds and guilt of the whole human race. The divine qualities which bear relation to human sin are holiness, which causes conscience to arise in man, and justice, which causes him to recognize the counterpart of his own imperfection in the world as evil.
The central position in the Glaubenslehre is formed by the development of the consciousness of grace. To Schleiermacher redemption was the transit from restricted to unrestricted conscious‑
g. Christol‑ ness of God, this being realized in a ogy. new social life considered by the community to be divinely founded and based on the deeds of Christ. But in view of the eternity of God, this redemption is the realization of the creation, and the Redeemer is, therefore, the primal pattern of man as revealed in history. In Christ mankind became religiously perfect, and as the pattern he was perfect historically, though subject to the influences of time and nationality. Only in his inmost nature was he free from limitations of time, and for this reason Christ is the organ for the indwelling of God in all humanity, since he possesses the power of reproducing, in those like to himself, his own life filled with God in the same way as man influences man. The sole factor in the redemptive work of Christ, in the opinion of Schleiermacher, was his person; his supernatural birth, resurrection, ascension, and second advent were regarded as of little moment. The office of Christ was, accordingly, the extension of the being of God in him to its being in all mankind, so that his passion and death serve but to keep his mind and spirit in remembrance. There can be no idea of the effect of Christ on God, but in the working of Christ on man there are two sides: redemption, or the com‑

6chleiermacher	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	244
munication of the power of his consciousness of God; and atonement, or the communication of the blessedness of such consciousness. The result of the work of Christ in the faithful is regeneration. The new life becomes permanent and indestructible through Sanctification, and when regeneration is declared by Schleiermacher to be indelible, he is influenced in his view by psychological and metaphysical presuppositions.
In the forefront of Schleiermacher's theory stands his interpretation of election, the object of which is the new creature as a whole, its end ro. Election, salvation exclusively, while in choice Pneumatol‑ or rejection of individuals and peoples
ogy, In‑ by the divine governance of the world
	spiration.	he sees no final judgment. The doc
		trine of the communication of the spirit
is also closely connected with the theory of the
Church, since Schleiermacher regarded the Holy
Spirit as the spirit pervading the whole community
founded by Christ. In the Church he distinguished
between essential and immutable elements arising
from its relation to Christ and the Holy Spirit, and
transitory components based on its contact with the
world. The former included, besides preaching and
the sacraments, the power of the keys (i.e., of legis
lation and discipline) and prayer in the name of
Jesus. His concept of preaching was modified by
his rejection of the Old Testament and his tenet of
the inspiration of persons rather than of writings.
Schleiermacher denies that infant baptism has any
certain connection with regeneration, and rejects
both the sacramentarian and the rationalistic in
terpretations of the Lord's Supper. The union of
the Church with the world gives rise to the distinc
tion between the visible and invisible Church, the
former being in error and division through the in
fluence of the world, while the latter is one and in
fallible. Eschatology is discussed from the point
of view of the perfection of the Church. The work
of redemption reveals two other qualities of God:
love, the principle of God's communication of him
self; and wisdom, which regulates its activity.
The work concludes with an attempt to define the
Trinity, and lands the author in something closely
akin to Sabellianism.
It is generally thought that Schleiermacher's theological attitude must be interpreted with the help of his philosophical views, but his own statements show that while he felt that his philoso‑
: r. Schlei‑ phy and his theology to some degree in‑
ermacher's fluenced and even approximated each
Philosophy other, he held that neither was dependand ent on the other, and he expressly de‑
Psychology. nied that both could be reduced to the same formula, while with equal explicitness he disavowed the intention of creating a philosophical dogmatics. In harmony with this the Glaubenslehre shows only the formal influence of philosophy. The philosophical writings of Schleiermacher are all fragmentary sketches of drafts of lectures, and they show that their author's dogmatic system was already essentially formed when he sought to formulate his philosophy. To Schleiermacher philosophy was not a closed science, but a never‑ending problem, so that one can not
speak of philosophical results, but only of philosophical presuppositions and the determination of rules for dialectics, or the art of thought. The object of thought is knowledge, but this implies correspondence not only of thought with being but also equal conformity to law in the case of the connection of ideas. The harmony of all human thought with being implies a higher presupposition, for if thought is to become conviction, there must be a supreme unity which subsumes the antithetical terms of ideal and real. But since this unity can not itself be known, its recognition is simply faith, a basal conviction incapable of further demonstration; and the connotation of this supreme unity is the correlated ideas of God and the world. After 1818 Schleiermacher supplemented this train of thought by another, which paved the way for the Gldubenslehre. Unity of will is as necessary as unity of knowledge; knowledge is thought preceded by being, will is thought followed by being. Unless will is to be resultless, there must be a conviction that being is accessible, and since all can not speculate, this second way of gaining conviction concerning God is the more usual. Since, however, the concept of God is demanded both by knowledge and will, the home of this idea must be in that element of human consciousness which underlies both knowledge and will, or, in other words, in the feelings, which constitute the transition from thought to will and form the common basis of both. Accordingly, the consciousness of God is originally given in the feelings. God and the world are indissolubly connected. To imagine the world without God is to miss the bond of union; to imagine God without the world is to form an empty concept. Yet God and the world are not identical, for the world is the supreme unity inclusive of all antitheses, while God is the supreme unity exclusive of all antitheses. Both ideas, therefore, sustain a distinct relation to knowledge, God being the terminus a quo and the world the terminus ad quem. In his lectures on psychology Schleiermacher declined to proceed from such metaphysical concepts as spirit and matter, or soul and body, affirming that only the ego, as the nexus of body and soul, was immediately given. In psychical life there are, therefore, only relative antitheses, which imply the original unity and exclude all dualistic theories. But these functions appear only in various degrees of interaction, and the relative antitheses fall into the three categories of affective and effective activities, objective and subjective consciousness, and consciousness of the ego and of others. The three categories proceed from each other in the order named, and the supreme unity of all is reached in religious feeling, in which even the antithesis of nature and the ego disappears.
Side by side with his works on dogmatics and the psychology of religion, independent value attaches to Schleiermacher's system of ethics. He had early
become dissatisfied with the theories
12. His of Kant, and in his Monologen had
Science of sought to set forth positive ethical Ethics. ideals. At Stolpe he abandoned
Schlegel's idea of an ethical revolution in favor of a critical reform of ethical theories, and he pursued this purpose in his lectures on ethics at

245
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Halle as well in as a series of monographs presented before the Prussian Academy of Sciences. He collected sufficient material for his philosophical ethics to be edited by A. Schweizer (Entwurf eines Systems der Sittenlehre, Berlin, 1835) and in briefer and more scientific form by A. Twesten (Grundriss der philosophischen Ethik, 1841). Schleiermacher regarded ethics as the speculative science of reason, and as including the conceptual presentation of all influence of reason on nature so far as it falls within the sphere of human experience. In the widest sense it is the philosophy of history or of civilization, and is not imperative but descriptive. It is not limited to the practical, but finds activity of reason also in the acquisition of knowledge and the enrichment of the inner life. Ethics must, accordingly, describe the union of reason and nature through the agency of the former, its end being the realization of the union of reason and nature. The power through which reason works in nature is ethically termed virtue, and the mode in which virtue tends to produce ethical good is termed duty. Ethics can be adequately presented only by the combination of these three elements, but the most important is the doctrine of the good, which is summed up by the concept of the supreme good that includes all the products of the rational activity of man. The subject of the ethical process is man as a species; although a distinction may be drawn between individual and class morality, this difference is relative, since each person is at once both an individual and a member of the race. Again, the influence of reason on nature may be twofold: organizing, as making nature the tool, or symbolizing, as reproducing nature. The combination of the individual and class activity of reason with the organizing and symbolizing tendencies results in a fourfold form of moral activity, which is represented respectively by nation and State, family and society, school and Church. The theory of virtue and duty is discussed but briefly by Schleiermacher. While virtue, as the individualized power of reason, is a unity, it may be divided into four categories: wisdom, or inclination to knowledge; love, or inclination to manifestation; discretion, or readiness in knowledge; and steadfastness, or readiness in manifestation. The theory of duty is summarized by Schleiermacher as constant conduct so that all virtues act with reference to all good, though in concrete cases the claims of the various spheres must be duly weighed. Here the relative antitheses of appropriation and association on the one hand and of the universal and individual type on the other give rise to A fourfold classification: the duty of right, corresponding to the universal association; the duty of vocation, corresponding to the universal appropriation; the duty of love, corresponding to the individual association; and the duty of conscience, corresponding to the individual appropriation.
Both its terminology and its omission of the entire concept of obligation deprived this ethical theory of the power which otherwise it might have possessed. In avoiding the errors of Kant and Fichte, Schleiermacher went to the opposite extreme of regarding morality as originally present and as the inevitably developing content of life. In this way he
Schleiermacher
created something midway between ethics and the philosophy of history, but without the loftiness and
strength required by ethics, and withr3. Criti‑ out the observation of actual factors cism of the demanded by the philosophy of history.
Ethics. The only new element is that the Chris‑
tian, in virtue of the special definiteness of his consciousness of self, does in a special way the same thing that general reason constrains others to do. While the theory that Christianity is a new development and a higher point of view is merely touched on, in reality the Christian determination of ethical conduct prevails and conditions both the direction of interest and the choice of material. The two forms of Christian activity are purification and extension. Purificatory activity is manifested in the Church either as the influence of the community on individual members (church discipline) or as the influence of individuals on the community (church reform), and from the Church this purificatory influence extends to the home, the State, and international relations. Extensive activity, proceeding from the union of the divine spirit with the nature of man, is manifested either as a state of mind or as talent, the former being characteristic of the Church and the latter of the State, while the Christian spirit works even beyond the bounds of the Church in education and missions. Manifestative activity is developed in the service of God. In the narrower sense of the term this service is public worship, and in its wider sense the free expression of Christian morality;, and at the same time this manifestative activity contains an element of public morality and of social and intellectual life, to all of which it gives the stamp of purity, freedom, and perfect humanity.
The last fifteen years of Schleiermacher's life show him at the height of his activity. He exercised a profound influence both through his sermons and through his lectures, which covered the greater part
of philosophy and the most of theology 14. Schlei‑ excepting the Old Testament. He be‑
ermacher's gan to be considered the head of a dis‑
	Last	tinct school, but, on the other hand, he
Years. was involved in many of the controver‑
sies of the period and was the object of constant suspicion. In Jan., 1823, a formal charge was actually brought against him on the basis of certain expressions used by him in private correspondence, and he lived in continual uncertainty whether he would be permitted longer to reside in Prussia. To all this was added his participation in the agenda controversy; and it was only after the modified royal agenda had been adopted (see AGENDA, § 5) that Schleiermacher again enjoyed the favor of the king. In the third decade of the century Schleiermacher was busy editing the Berlin hymnal and opposing the proposed creed for the united Lutherans and Reformed. He contributed a number of articles to the newly founded Theologa'sche Studien ‑und Kritiken, in one of which he vigorously opposed rationalistic depreciation of the creeds, at the same time advocating all the principles of theological progress. He visited England in 1828 and Sweden in 1833 but his health was failing, and in Feb., 1834, he died.

6chmiermscher
Sohmalkald	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	248
What is especially striking in Schleiermacher is his versatility. He was a preacher of rare effectiveness; he lectured well on a large number of philosophical subjects; and by his trans:5. Charac‑ lation of Plato and such treatises as
ter and that on the art of translation he conInfluence. tributed not a little to classical learning. In addition to all this he was a sturdy patriot and preeminently a social being. His versatility is mirrored in his theological writings, in which he sought to prepare a way in which Christianity and the highest culture might walk together in harmony. In this he did not desire forcibly to unite elements essentially heterogeneous, but he was himself both Christian and humanist. His " Discourses " affirm that religion is the central point of spiritual life, and the fundamental basis of his Glaubenslehre is that the human is perfected in the Christian. Whatever may be lacking from his theology, it is at least self‑evident that this theology was Schleiermacher's own life; and his piety was pure, honorable, and earnest. With breadth of view Schleiermacher combined an unusual degree of resolution. The deficiencies of his ethical theories find their explanation in his personal conditions. Yet his energy overcame these hindrances, among which ill‑health was not the least, and for years, besides his preaching and his writing, he lectured three hours daily. He demanded of no one what he himself would not do, and he invariably remained true to himself. Nothing could induce him to surrender a conviction which he had once formed, and he clung to his position even against the well‑meant plans of his king for the reform of his church simply because he firmly believed that these proposed changes were perilous. The influence of Schleiermacher still persists, though by no means restricted to the school of mediating theologians commonly traced back to him. The modern historical school, rejecting Kant and Ritschl, turns more and more to Schleiermacher, drawn especially by his philosophical theories, his stress on the individualistic character of the positive religions, and his assumption of the principle of the development of religion. The agencies of this influence have been primarily the Roden, the Kurze Damteldung des theologischen Stadiums, the Glavbenslehre, and the Ethik. Of his posthumously published lectures only the Erziehungslehre (Berlin, 1849) and the Praktische Theologie attracted wide attention; the Leben Jesu (1864) was a failure. Among his posthumous sermons his homilies on the Gospel of John are of value for a knowledge of Schleiermacher's school, which so pronouncedly follows the Johannine type of thought; and a valuable supplement to the whole problem is promised by C. Clemen's proposed edition of Schleiermacher's lecture on theological encyclopedia.
(O. Knex.)
BIBwooHAPHY: The one practically complete collection of the Werke is in three divisions‑theology, sermons, and philosophy, by various editors, 32 vols., Berlin, 1835‑82, many individual volumes of which passed through many editions. The jubilee edition of the Roden. 1899, and a critical edition of the Monolopen, 1902, are noteworthy; also: Philosophische Sittenlehre, ad. J. H. von Kirehmamz, Berlin, 1870. In addition are to be noted Schleiermachers Briefwechsel mil J. C. Gass, ad. W. Gass, Berlin, 1852; his Brqefe an die Grafen zu Dohna, ad. J. Jacobi, Halle, 1887;
his correspondence with Twesten in Heinrici, A Twesten, Berlin, 1889; Schleiermachera Sendachreiben fiber seine Glaubenalehre, ed. H. Mulert, Giessen, 1908; and J. Baur, Ungedruckte Prediaten Schleiermachera aua den Jahren 1$8018,88, Leipsic,1". In English there have appeared: Critical Essay on the Gospel of St. Luke, London, 1825; Schleiermacher's Introductions to the Dialogues of Plato, trawl. by W. Dobson, Cambridge, 1838; Selected Sermons of Schleiermacher, trawl. by Mary F. Wilson, London, 1890; Christmas Eve; a Dialogue on the Celebration of Christmas, trawl. by W. Hastie, Edinburgh, 1890; Religion: Speeches to its cultured Despiaers, (trawl. of the Reden), London, 1893.
A very full list of works is given in Baldwin, Dictionary, iii. 1, pp. 459‑482. As sources for a life, there are the correspondence (Briefwechsel) as noted above, and Aus Schleiermachers Leben. In Briefen, ed. L. Jonas and W. Dilthey, 4 vols., Berlin, 1858‑63, Eng. trawl. by F. Rowan, 2 vols., London, 1880. Consult further: L. F. O. Baumgarten‑Crusius, Ueber Dr. F. Schleiermacher, seine Denkart and sein Verdienst, Jena, 1834; C. A. Auberlen, Schleiermacher: ein Charakterbild, Basel, 1859; R. Baxmann, Schleiermacher: aein Leben and aein Wirken, Elberfeld, 1883; M. Baumgarten, Schleiermacher, Berlin, 1888• D. Schenkel, Frdr. Schleiermacher: einLebens‑and Charakterbild, Elberfeld,1888; T. Hossbach, Schleiermacher: aein Leben and Wirken, Berlin, 1889; F. Zachler, Fr. Schleiermacher: kurzer Abriss seines Lebena and Wirkens, Breslau, 1889; W. Dilthey, Leben Schleiermachers, Berlin, 1870; E. Maier, Friedrich Schleiermacher. Lichtstrohlen aus semen Briefen and aammtlichen Werken, Leipsic, 1875; S. Brunner, Die vier Grossmeister der Aufklcrunps Theolopie (Herder, Paulus, Schleiermacher, Strauss), Paderborn, 1888; C. P. Fischer, Schleiermacher, Berlin, 1899; R. Munro, Schleiernaacher, London, 1903; O. Gramzow, Schleiermacher, Charlottenburg, 1904.
On his theology consult: F. W. Gass, Uebersicht ilber das eheolopiache System Schleiermachera, Reutlingen, 1837; G. Weisaenborn, Vorlesungen fiber Schleiermacher's Dialektik and Dopmatik, Leipsic, 1847; C. Schwarz, Schleier macher: seine Persbnlichkeit and seine Theologie, Gotha, 1881; S. Lommatzseh, Schleiermachera Lehre room Wander and room Uebernatarlichen, Ber:in, 1872; A. Ritsehl, Schleiermachers Roden caber die Religion and ihre Nachwirkunyen auf die eoanpelische Kirche Deutachlands, Bonn, 1874; O. Ritsehl, Sch1eiermachers Stellung zum Christensum in seinen Roden fiber die Religion, Gotha, 1888; E. Schreeker, Der Relipionabepri$ bei Schleiermacher and aeinen namhaftesten Nachfolyern, Jena. 1890; O. Pfieiderer, Die protestantisehe Theolopie seit Kant, Berlin, 1891; idem, Geschichte der Relipionsphilosophie . . . bit auf die Gegenwart, ib. 1893; H. Black, Die Grundlagen der Christolopie Schleiermachers, Freiburg, 1898; E. Fuchs, Schleiermachers Relipionabegri$, Giessen, 1900; K. Thiele, Schleier• machera Theolopie and ihre Bedeutunp far die Gepenwart, Tfibingen, 1903; L. G56e1, Herder and Schleiermachera Roden fiber die Religion, Gotha, 1904; C. Clemen, Schleiermachers Glaubenalehre in ihrer Bedeutunp far Verpangenheit and Zukunft, Giessen, 1905; W. J. Aalders, Schleiermachera Roden fiber die Religion ala Proeve van Apologia, Leyden, 1910.
On his philosophy and ethics consult: J. Gottachick, Ueber Schleiermachers Verh&ltnia zu Kant, Tfibingen, 1875; K. Beth, Die Grundanschauunpen Schleiermachers in seinem eraten Entwurf der philosophischen Sittenlehre, Berlin, 1898; G. Thimme, Die reliflioonaphilosophischen Prdmissen der Schleiermacher'achen Glaubenalehre. Hanover, 1901; T. Camerer, Spinoza and Schleiermacher, Stuttgart, 1903; H. Mulert, Schleiermachera peschicht8philosophiache Anaichten in ihrer Bedeutunp ffir seine Theolopie, Giessen, 1907; G. Wehrung, Der peschichtsphilosophiseke Standpunkt Schleiermachera zur Zeit seiner Freundschaft mit den Romantikern, Stuttgart, 1907; E. Cramanosel, La Philoaophie religieuse de F. Schleiermacher, Geneva, 1909; H. Scholz, Christentum and Wissenachaft in Schleier machers Glaubenalehre, Berlin, 1909; H. SOskind, Der Einffus Schellinps auf die Bntwicklunp von Schldermachers System, TVbingen, 1909; Entwurf eines Systems der Sittenlehre, ad. A. Schweizer, Gotha, 1835; Grundriss der philosophischen Ethik mit einleitender Vorrede, ad. D. A. Twesten, Berlin, 1841; F. VorlAnder, Schleiermachen Sittenlehre, Marburg, 1851; L. Jonas, Christliche Sittenlehre aus Nachschrirten. Gotha, 1891; F. Bachmann, Die Entwickluna der Ethik Sehlaermachers naeh den Grundlinien, Leipsic, 1892.

247
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
8chleiermacher Schmalkald
For his relation to education and the pulpit consult:
A. Petersen, Schleiermacher als Reformator der deutachen Bildunp, Gotha, 1869; P. Diebow, Die Padagogik Schleier• machers, Halle, 1894; O. Kim, Schdeiermacher and die RomanM, Basel, 1895; H. Kefexatein, Schleiermacher als Padagoge, Jena, 1899; R. Wickert, Die PBdagogik Schleiermachera in ihrem VerhdUnia zu seiner . . Ethik, Leipsic, 1907; A. Schweizer, Schleiermachers Wirkaamkeit a1a Prediger dargesteilt, Halle, 1834; J. Bauer, Schleiermacher als Prediger, Giessen, 1908.
SCHLEUSNER, shleis'ner, JOHANN FRIEDRICH: Lutheran theologian; b. at Leipsio Jan. 16, 1759; d. at Wittenberg, Feb. 21, 1831. He received his education in his native city, at the St. Thomas school, and at the university, 1775‑$0, where he devoted himself to Biblical philology. He became preacher at the University Church, 1780; instructor, 1781; associate professor of theology at G6ttingen, 1784‑90; and full professor, 1790‑95; professor at the University and provost at the central church at Wittenberg from 1795; and with the abolition of the university, first director of the Homiletic Institute and second director of the Seminary at Wittenberg. His lectures were mainly in NewTestament exegesis, but treated also somewhat of Old‑Testament exegesis, dogmatics, and homiletics. His two main works were, Lexicon grwco‑latinum in Novum Testamentum (Leipsic, 1792; 4th ed., 1819); and Thesaurus seu lexicon in, LXX (1820‑21). The latter contains all the vocabulary of the Greek Old Testament with the Hebrew equivalents.
(E. REusst.)
SCHLICHTING, JONAS. See SOCINUs, FAusTus, SOCINIANs, I., § 2.

SCHLOEGL, shlD'gl, NIVARD JOHANN BAPTIST: Austrian Cistercian; b. at Gaaden (a village near Mddling, 8 m. s.s.w. of Vienna), June 4, 1864. He was educated at the Cistercian abbey at Heiligenkreuz, near Vienna (1876‑80), the Obergymnasium at Wiener Neustadt (1880‑84), and again at the abbey and the University of Vienna (18851889; D.D., 1894). He was consecrated to the priesthood in 1889, when he became connected with the abbey of Heiligenkreuz, where he was professor of Greek in 1889‑91, 1892‑93, 1894, and 1902‑03, and professor of Old‑Testament and Semitics, 18961908; and since 1908 professor of oriental languages and Old‑Testament exegesis at Vienna. He was master of the novices at Heiligenkreuz, 1890‑1908, and festival‑preacher in the abbey‑church in 18931894, and 1895‑96. In 1906 he succeeded B. Schider as editor of the Leo‑Gesellschaft's Kurzgefasster toissenschaftlicher Comm‑tar zu den heitigen Schriften, to which he has contributed Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles (Vienna, 1904, 1907). He has also edited the Hebraw text of Ecclesiasticus xxxix, 12‑xlix. 16 (Vienna, 1901), of Canticles (1902), and Samuel (1905), and Kings and Chronicles (1909), and has written Geist des heiligen Bernhard (4 vols., Paderborn, 1898‑99), and De re metrics veterum Hebreeorum (Vienna, 1899).
SCHLOTTMANN, shlot'man, CONSTANTIN: German theologian; b. at Minden (60 m. e.n.e. of Munster) Mar. 7 1819; d. at Halle Nov. 8, 1887. He studied at the University of Berlin, devoting himself especially to philology and philosophy, and
then turned to theology, where he came under the lasting influence of A. Neander. He then studied the practical side of the work of the ministry at the Wittenberg Seminary, but returning to Berlin, 1842, was induced to enter the academic career. Supporting himself awhile by private teaching he ha, bilitated in the Old Testament in 1847. His commentary on the Book of Job (Berlin, 1851) was his first important work. For a time he served in Constantinople as chaplain of the embassy; there he became acquainted with modern Greek and Turkish, and traveled in the East adding to the range of his oriental scholarship. In 1855, he was called to Zurich, where he lectured not only on the Old but also on the New Testament, and on systematic theology. He was ordinary professor at Bonn, 1859‑66, and at Halle, 1866,87. He was able to point out at all points the relations of Hebrew and Indo‑Germanic culture as well as the connections of Hebrew writings and the monuments of classic antiquity, and brought to good service his firsthand knowledge of oriental life. For criticism he was disinclined, especially the newer criticism of the Old Testament, as he showed in his Kompenr drum der Biblischen Theologw des alter and Neuen Testaments (Leipsic, 1889‑95). Besides numerous contributions On various Old‑Testament antiquities, he published, Die Inschrift Eschmunazars, KBnig der Sidonier (Halle, 1868), and Die Siegessdule Mesa's, K6nig der Moabiter (1870). He lectured also on apologetics, from which grew his writings David Strauss als Romantiker des Heidenthums (1878), and Die Osterbotschaft and Visionshypothem (1886). He was a member and president of the commission for the revision of Luther's translation of the Bible after 1871, and appeared as an anxious antagonist of the rising ultramontanism, which gave rise to his Erasmus redivivus (1889).
(ERNST Kt1HN.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: ADB, axxi. 561 sqq.; Brandt, in Deutwlr
emngelisches Bfatt, 1889, pp. 187 sqq.
	SCHMALKALD, shm61'kold, ARTICLES: A
written instrument of Luther received into the sym
bolic books of the Lutheran Church and so named
after 1553. After the insistent demands of the
German estates during several decades and the re
		newed urging of the emperor, Paul III.
	Origin. issued a call for a council to meet at
		Mantua May 8, 1537. The question
arose as to the attitude of the Evangelicals. Elec
tor Johann Friedrich of Saxony, who took the most
active interest, appeared at Wittenberg June 24,
1536, and through his chancellor submitted four
articles for an opinion from the theologians and
jurists, in order to forearm himself and confederates
for the coming council. Two days later the elector
submitted that the council be wholly declined inas
much as a reception of the summons would imply
the recognition of the pope as the head of the
Church. After a session that closed Aug. 6, the
opinion prepared by Melanchthon was returned that
if the pope would summon the Protestant estates
like the rest he did not yet regard their princes as
heretics, and that by giving audience to the papal
nuncio no acknowledgment of papal power was im
plied, and so far the invitation was not to be de.

8chmidlkald	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	248
clined. The elector, taking it that the theologians had been prevailed upon by the jurists, had Melanchthon translate a protest into Latin to the effect that in case of taking the invitation under advice, the council should be understood to be free and open and not bound by papal prejudices; and he again called for a meeting of the scholars for the submission of certain questions. At the same time Luther received a specially assigned task, and it seems that he was already employed upon articles of belief. The absence of Melanchthon retarded the reply of the scholars; and Dec. 1, the elector took occasion to renew his appeal, to emphasize the necessity of declining a papal council, to sound the sense at Wittenberg on the question of holding an opposing Evangelical council; and he reverted to the task requested of Luther, deeming it necessary that the latter should, at least by Jan. 25, 1537, prepare a document, the summary of all that he had taught, preached, and written, as a final testament. Luther was to indicate also on what articles, not essential, any compromise could be made; and the Wittenberg theologians were called upon to make sure in advance of their agreement or disagreement with the proposed articles, independent of Luther's authority, so that there might be no subsequent dissent. On Dec. 11, the Wittenberg scholars tendered their second and satisfactory opinion; but as Luther's articles had not yet appeared, the elector reminded him by writing and named particularly Nikolaus von Amsdorf and Johann Agricola (qq.v.) among those theologians who were to be brought secretly to Wittenberg from the territories of the elector and his brother, Johann Ernst, at the elector's expense, to give their approval to the articles or to hand in their objections in writing. Luther set to work to prepare his articles, which were submitted to his colleagues and adopted before the end of the year, Melanchthon attaching with his signature the statement that the papal supremacy be acknowledged for the freedom of the Gospel. The official copy was forwarded to the elector Jan. 3, 1537, who expressed great satisfaction at the agreement of the articles with the Augsburg Confession (q.v.) and the unanimity of his theologians; and he set his chancellor to secure the signatures of the leading pastors so that in the case of Luther's sudden death his views should stand without admixtures from them.
The articles were arranged in three divisions. The first discusses briefly the undisputed majesty of God. In the second, on the office and work of Christ, or human redemption, the first
	Content.	and principal article represents that
		man, without any merit of his own,
but by the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, is jus
tified by faith alone. In the second article, the mass
is condemned as contrary to Scripture, and, like its
alleged progeny, or as varieties of idolatry, purga
tory, offices of saints, pilgrimages, monastic brother
hoods, relics, and indulgences are denounced. The
third article demands the devotion of monastic
properties to the education of youth and the use of
the churches, and the fourth attacks the pope as
Antichrist. The best government for the Church
is for all to live under one head, Christ; and for the
bishops to cooperate earnestly in a common doctrine, faith, prayer, sacrament, and work of love. In the third division are included articles on which Luther may have hoped for some degree of conciliation at least on the part of the more enlightened Roman Catholics; such as doctrines of redemption, sin, law, and repentance, in strong contrast with the penance of the papal Church. In contrast with the law and its significance for the way of salvation, there rises in due prominence the counsel and help of God offered against sin in the Gospel in various ways: of oral preaching, principally; of baptism, the sacrament, power of the keys, and confession; to which are correlated the articles on the ban, consecration and vocation, on the Church, and on how to become just before God, as well as on monastic vows and human ordinances.
The elector's intention was to lay the articles of Luther before a convention " for unanimous agreement," to be held at Schmalkald on Candlemas,
Feb. 2, 1537; and all the Evangelical History. estates were summoned to send one or
two theologians. In the first session, the Chancellor Briick proposed the discussion of the articles in preparation of the approaching council. But Melanchthon, who had not been in entire agreement with Luther's articles on the attack on the papacy, now obstructed this by informing Philip of Hesse on the same day that Luther had altered, under the influence of J. P. Bugenhagen (q.v.), the original cast of the article on the Lord's Supper, so that it was now in conflict with the Concord of Wittenberg (q.v.). In consequence and in order to avert a division, it was decided by the cities (Feb. 11) to decline the Saxon proposition and abide by the confessions now in the hands of the emperor upon which unanimity had been reached. To this the princes agreed in general, with the provision that the scholars review again the Augsburg Confession and Apology and fortify them with new arguments from the Scriptures and the Fathers, but make no internal changes in them or the Concord except to denounce more positively the papacy. While, for want of books, approval was suspended for further proof, Melanchthon, during the severe illness of Luther, wrote his Tractatus de potestate et primate papa, which was finished Feb. 17, in which, under the influence of the ever‑increasing anti‑papal feeling, he wrote in more drastic terms than was his custom. He antagonized emphatically the assumption of divine right by the pope, who, as the protector of false doctrines and godless worship, was much rather to be resisted as Antichrist. In the second part he set forth the true view of the episcopacy and of Evangelical ordination; and the obligation of allegiance to the bishops subject to the pope, who enforce godless doctrine and false worship, was repudiated. This tract, after being considered and approved by the estates, was subscribed, in common with the Augsburg Confession and the Apology, by the attendant theologians.
Luther's articles were to be read before the convention Feb. 18; but, owing to his illness, this did not take place. Finally, when all the business had been transacted, Bugenhagen issued the invitation to sign Luther's articles; but as Martin Butzer (q.v.)

249	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	schmalkald
8chmid
declined, not because he found anything objectionable but on the ground that he was not authorized,
		and others followed his example, the
	In the	matter was dropped in the interest of
	Book of peace. The theologians in attendance
	Concord. and later others affixed their signa
		tures simply to give in writing their
expression of individual concord, without thought,
as the council was declined, of issuing a confes
sional document of the Schmalkaldic league. A
year later Luther issued his document with longer
preface and various amplifications of the articles
and more acute deductions. Apparently not well
informed of what transpired at Schmalkald during
his sickness, Luther regarded his articles as an
official instrument. In the preface he represented
them as adopted, known, and resolved by his party
for a basis of defense in the council. This notice
may have contributed to the result that, while Me
lanchthon's tract retreated more and more into the
background, Luther's articles gained in estimation.
First, they were placed on the same plane with the
Augsburg Confession by the Hessian theologians,
1544. When the elector returned from captivity
he remarked that all the dogmatic confusion could
have been averted, if the agreement proposed at
Schmalkald in 1537 had been adhered to. In the
controversies of the fifth decade, it became more
and more expedient to class them with the formal
confessions, whereby, as the expression of the most
genuine Lutheranism, to combat the real or supposed
Philippist opinions (see PmmPPIsTS). Adopted in
nearly all " bodies of doctrine" begining with Bruns
wick, 1563, it was understood that they received
acknowledgment by the authors of the Formula of
Concord (q.v.), while Melanchthon's tract, whose
authorship seems to have been forgotten, was
placed in the appendix of the Schmalkald articles
in the Book of Concord. Luther's articles written
in German were translated by the Danish Petrus
Generanus into Latin, Articuli a Reverendo D. Doc
tore Martino Luthero seripto, Anno 1638 (Wittenberg,
1541; improved ed., 1542). For Schmalkald League
see PHILIP OF HESSE. 	(T. KOLDE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. L. Plitt, De audoritate articulorum
Smalcaldicorum symbolica, Erlangen 1862; F. Sander,
Geechichtliehe EinWtung zu den echmalkaldischen Artikeln,
in Jahrbiicher Par deutsche Theologie, xx (1875), 475 sqq.;
H. Birek, Zu den Beratunpen der Protestanten fiber die
Konzilsbulle vom l,. Juni 1636, in ZKG, xiii (1892), 487
sqq.; H. E. Jacobs, Book of Concord passim, 2 vols., Phila
delphia, 1893; J. F. Burst, Hist. of the Christian Church,
ii. 509 and passim, New York, 1900; Ii;. Thieme, Luther.
Testament under Rom, Leipsic, 1900; W. Rosenberg, Der
Kaiser and die Protestanten in den Jahren 1637‑39, Halle,
1903• Cambridge Modern History, ii. 26, 215 sqq., 232
243, 252‑258, New York, 1904; Moeller, Christian Church,
iii. 132; Schaff, Creeds, iii. 253‑257; idem, Christian
Church, vi. 706. Consult also the biographies of Luther.
SCHMAL$ALD LEAGUE. See PHILIP OF HESSE. § 4.
SCHMALZ, VALENTIN. See SOCINUS, FAUSTUS, SOCINIANs, I., § 2.

SCHMID, ‑limit, ALOYS VON: German Roman Catholic, b. at Zaumberg (a village near Immenstadt, 13 m. s.w. of Kempten), Bavaria, Dec. 22,
1825; d. at Munich May 16,1910. He was educated
at the University of Munich (1844‑50); was professor in the gymnasium of Zweibrucken (1850‑52); professor of philosophy in the Lyceum of Dillingen (1852‑66); and after 1866 was professor of apologetics and dogmatics in the University of Munich. He wrote Die Bisturnssynode (2 vols., Regensburg, 1850‑51); Entwicklungsgeschichte der Hegel'schen Logik (1858); Thomistische and seotistische Getvissheitslehre (Dillingen, 1859); Wissenachaftliche Riehtungen auf dem Gebiet des Katholizismus (Munich, 1862); Wissenschaft and Autorildt (1868); Untersuchungen fiber den letzten Grund des 0, fenbarunysglaubens (1879); Erkenntnislehre (2 vols., Freiburg, 1890); and Apologetik als spekulative Grundlage der Theologie (1900).
SCHMID, ANDREAS: German Roman Catholic; b. at Zaumberg (a village near Immenstadt, 13 m. s.w. of Kempten), Bavaria, Jan. 9, 1840. He was educated at the University of Munich (D.D., 1866), became subdirector and director of the Georgianum, a seminary for priests at Munich (1865), professor of pastoral theology, homiletics, liturgics, and catechetics in the University of Munich since 1877, though he no longer lectures. He has written Der christliche Altar and sein Schmuck (Regensburg, 1871); Dr. Valentin Thalhofer, Domprobst in Eiehstint, eine Lebenskizze (Kempten, 1892); Gesehichte des Georgiauums (Regensburg, 1894); Caerimoniale Air Priester, Leviten and Ministranten zu den gewohnlichen liturgischen Diensten (Kempten, 1895; 3d ed., 1905); Religi6se Sinnspriiche zu Inschriften auf Kirchengebdude and kirchliche Gegenstdnde in lateinischer and deutscher Sprache (1899); Der Kirchengesang nach den Liturgikern des Mittelalters (1900); and Christliche Symbole aus alter and neuer Zeit (Freiburg, 1909).
SCHMID, CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH: German Lutheran; b. at Bickelsberg, in Wurttemberg, in 1794; d. at Tiibingen Mar. 28, 1852. Educated at Maulbronn and Tabingen, he became lecturer in practical theology at the latter university in 1819, associate professor in 1821, and full professor in 1826, holding this Position until his death. Though a member of the committee for the Wurttemberg liturgy of 1840 and of the council for church organization in 1848, he took little part in administrative affairs, nor was he conspicuous as an author, his importance being due rather to his influence as a teacher and a man. Proceeding from the Tiibingen supranaturalism of his time, he later labored successfully for the positive foundations of Lutheranism, maintaining the tendency which had been traditional since the time of Bengel. He lectured on practical, moral, and exegetical theology. He was the author of the posthumous Vorlesungen caber biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments (Goths, 1853, new ed., 1888; Eng. trans]., Biblical Theology of the New Testament, Edinburgh, 1871), and
Vorlesungen 'ber christliche Sittenlehre (1861).

(C. WEIZSXCKERt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY. C. Weissheker, in Schwobischen Merkur,
June 6, 1852• Blatter der Erinnerung an C. F. Schmid,
Tiibingen, 1852.
SCHMID, HEINRICH FRIEDRICH FERDINAND:
German Lutheran; b. at Harburg (30 m. n.n.w. of

Schmid
Schmidt	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	250
Augsburg) July 31, 1811; d. at Erlangen Nov. 17,
1885. He was educated at the universities of Tu
bingen, Halle, Berlin, and Erlangen, and in 1833
was called to the newly founded seminary for preach
ers at Munich. Four years later he became a lec
turer in the theological faculty at Erlangen, and
during this period published his Dogmatik der evan
geliscl‑lutherischen Kirche (Erlangen, 1843; Eng.
transl., Doctrinal Theology of the Lutheran Church,
Philadelphia, 1876). In 1846, when he became
privat‑docent at Erlangen, Schmid published his
Geschichte der synkretistischen Streitigkeiten in der
Zeit des Georg Calixt (1846). Two years later he
was appointed associate professor, and in 1852 full
professor, first of church history and systematic
theology, and later of historical theology. For his
lectures on church history he wrote his Lehrbuch
der Kirchengeschichte (Nbrdlingen, 1851), later ex
panded into the Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (2
vols., Erlangen, 1880‑81). A similar purpose was
served by his Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte (Nord
lingen, 1860), after he had already published his
Theologie Semlers (1858). From 1855 to 1876
Schmid was editor of the Zeitschrift fur Protestantis
mus and Kirche, to which he contributed much. His
attitude toward Lutheranism was shown by his
Kampf der lutherischen Kirche um Luthers Lehre vom
Abendmahl in Reformationszeitalter (Leipsic, 1868),
and Geschichte der katholischen Kirehe Deutschlands
von Mitte des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts bis in die
Gegenwart (Munich, 1874). In 1881 he retired from
active life. 	(F. FRANgt.)

SCHMID, KONRAD: 1. Leader of the Magellants of the fourteenth century. See FLAGELLATION, FLAGELLANTS, II., § 4.
2. Swiss Reformer; b. at Kussnacht (15 m. n.e. of Lucerne) 1476 or early in 1477; d. in the battle of Kappel Oct. 11, 1531. He was educated at Tubingen, and entered the Johannite monastery of his native town. In 1515‑16 he resumed his theological studies at Basel, and was.inducted to the parish of Seengen in Aargau on Apr. 21, 1517. On Mar. 10,1519, he was chosen commander, and in this capacity exercised much influence on the development of the Reformation in Zurich. He soon came under the influence of Zwingli and devoted himself to the Bible, patristics, and Greek. Schmid was regarded as a learned man, and a powerful preacher. As early as the spring of 1522 he delivered a sermon at Lucerne in which he assailed Roman Catholic doctrines. In the first Kappel war he served as chaplain. Schmid was less inclined to violent action than was Zwingli, with whom he toured the country in harmony as official itinerant preacher to strengthen the cause of the Reformation. More important was Schmid's influence as the supporter of the authorities in momentous disputations. He took part in the disputation with the monks of the city in the summer of 1522, in the conferences concerning images and the mass in the spring of 1524, and in a number of controversies with Anabaptists, including Hubmaier himself. These Anabaptist controversies gave rise to Schmid's two pamphlets Ein christliche Ermanung zur waren Hofnung in Gott and Warnung (1527) and Verwerfen der Ar‑
tickeln and Stucken. Though not always unop
posed, Schmid admirably administered the par
ishes, charitable institutions, and other institutions
under his control. In 1525 he married. His entire
harmony with Zwingli in his latter years was shown
by his taking the place of his greater colleague while
Zwingli was on his way to Marburg, and also by the
tenor of his last pamphlet, Ein christlicher Bericht
des Herren Nachtmahls, with its Zwinglian views of
the Lord's Supper. Besides the three pamphlets
already mentioned Schmid published his Lucerne
sermon in 1522. 	(EMIL EGLit.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are the " Works " and " Letters "
of Zwingli; the early lives of that Reformer; and the " History of the Reformation " by H. Bullinger, ed. J. J. Hottinger and H. H. VSgeli, 6 vols., Frauenfeld, 1838‑40. Consult further: H. Hess, in Zarcher Chorherren for New
li	Year, 1825; S. VSgelin, Sr., in Zurcher Taschenbuch, 1862;
C. Dandliker, in the same, 1897; and the literature under
REFORMATION which deals with Switzerland.
SCHMIDT, alunit, CARL: German Protestant; b. at Hagenow (17 m. s.w. of Schwerin),.Mecklenburg‑Schwerin, Aug. 26, 1868. He was educated at the universities of Leipsic and Berlin (1887‑94; Ph .D., 1892); in 1899 he became privat‑docent for church history and titular professor at Berlin, and in 1910 assistant professor in church history. He is also an attach6 of the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences, engaged in the investigation of early Christian literature, particularly Coptic. He has been associate editor of Texte and Untersuchungen with A. Harnack since 1906, and has written De Bodice Bruciano seu de libris gnostieis qui in lingua coptica extant eommentatio (Leipsie, 1892); Gnostic sche Schriften in koptischer Sprache aus dem Codex Brucianus (1892); Plotins Stellung zum Gnostizismua and kirchlichen Christentum (1901); Fragmente einer Schrift des Martyrerbischofs Petrus von Alexandrien (1901); Die alten Petrusakten (1903); Acta Pauli aus der Heidelberger Papyrushandschrift (1904); Koptiselhgnostische Schriften (1905); Der erste Clemensbrief in altkoptischer Uebersetzung (1908); and Altehristliche Texte (1910; in collaboration with Schubert).

SCHMIDT, CHARLES GUILLAUME ADOLPHE:
Evangelical church historian; b. at Strasburg June 20, 1812; d. there Mar. 11, 1895. Even in his earlier period of instruction, which was passed in the Protestant gymnasium of his native city, he manifested an unusual interest in national and local history, and also in botany and mineralogy. In 1828 he entered the Protestant Seminary, and his tendency grew into marked preference for church history. In 1833 on his travels he went to Geneva, where the sight of the manuscripts of the time of the Reformation, particularly of letters, directed his special attention to that period. After further travels in France, Switzerland, and Germany, he returned and took his examinations, receiving his doctorate after presenting as his thesis Essai our les mystiques du XIV. si&le (Strasburg, 1836), a work which introduced him to a department which he later enriched. Within a few months he began to lecture in the Protestant Seminary of Strasburg; in 1839 he became professor of practical theology, although this department was not one in which his

251	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Schmid
		Schmidt
interest was supreme; in this capacity he served in
	the university 1848‑64, when he received the chair
	of church history which was his first choice. He had,
	besides, the principal authority in the Protestant
	Gymnasium, 1849‑59 and 1865‑69. His strength
was also drawn upon for numerous services in other
	directions to the advantage of the city.
		Schmidt's literary works appeared now in the
	German and now in the French language. They fall
	into four groups, which represent four departments
	of church history. The first is that which deals with
	church history at large, in which may be placed
	Essai historique sur la sociUtk eivile dans le monde
	romain et sur sa transformation par le ehristianisme
	(Strasburg, 1853; Eng. transl., The Social Results of
	Early Christianity, London, 1885), which was
	crowned by the French Academy; thirty years later
	he finished his literary labors with a work in this
	department, his Pr6cis de l'histoire de l'eglise d'occi
	dent pendant le moyen‑dge (1888). The second group
	is that which has to do with the Church of the Mid
	dle Ages, and contains a series of monographs de
	voted to the various sects and to the mystics of the
	period. Here belong his thesis for the doctorate
	already mentioned: Meister Eckart (1839); Essai
	sur J. Gerson (1839); Johannes Tauler von Strass
	burg (Hamburg, 1841); Der Mystiker Heinrich Suso
	(1843); Essai sur le mystieisme allemand au XIV.
	side (Strasburg, 1847); Die Gottesfreunde im 14.
	Jahrhundert (Jena, 1854); RulmanMerswin, le Jon
	dateur de la maison de Saint‑Jean de Strasbourg
	(Strasburg, 1856) ; Nicolaus von Basel and die Gottes
	freunde (1856); Nieolaus von Basel, Leben and aus
	gewahlte Schriften (1866); and Nicolaus von Basel,
	Bericht von der Bekehrung Taulers (1875); in these
	there was steady progress and change in opinion, as
	the author was not averse to learning from his con
	temporaries. His chief work in this department was
	Histoire et doctrine de la secte des Cathares ou Al
	bigeois (2 vols., Paris, 1849), in which he laid the
	basis for future expositions. A third group is re
	lated to the Reformation in Germany and France.
	Here are to be noted G&ard Roussel, prodicateur de
	la reine Marguerite de Navarre (Strasburg, 1845);
	La Vie et les travaux de Jean Sturm (1855) ; and three
	volumes contributed to the series on the founders
	and fathers of the Lutheran and Reformed churches
	‑Peter Martyr Vermigli (Elberfeld, 1858); Philipp
	Mdanchthon (1861); and Wilhelm Farel and Peter
	Viret (1861). Besides these and other writings, a
	noteworthy series of articles was contributed to the
	Theologische Studien and Kritiken. The fourth group
	dealt with local history, to which the last twenty
	five years of his life were given. Here may be named
	Histoire du chapitre de Saint‑Thomas de Strasbourg
	pendant le moyen‑dge (Strasburg, 1860); Histoire
	litMraire de l'Alsace d la fin du XV. et au commence
	ment du XVl. sikde (2 vols., Paris, 1879; crowned
	by the French Academy); Michael Schatz genannt
	Toxites (1888); and Livres et bibliothkques d Stras
	bourg au moyen dge (1893). Schmidt was engaged
	all his life, more or less, upon the gathering of other
	materials which he playfully designated as " hours
	with the muse," and these in the course of time grew
	into greater or lesser wholes. Such were his Strass
	burger Gassen‑ and Htuser‑Namen im Mittelalter
(2d eel., 1888) ; W orterbueh der Strassburger Mundart (1896); and Les Seigneurs, les paysans et la propriN rurale en Alsace au moyen dge (1897), the last two posthumous.
The foregoing by no means exhausts Schmidt's literary productivity, not to mention his numerous reviews and other more or less ephemeral writings. Enough has been said to exhibit his exceedingly great diligence. Commensurate with this was his fulness of knowledge, the thoroughness which he displayed in research, and the reliability which was the result. There was also a strong personal reserve or modesty, and a dislike for the rhetorical. He also exhibited pronounced personal piety, a mild and tolerant personality, and a manly earnestness. His later years found him growing, as he more and more appreciated Lutheranism, in opposition to Rome and in antipathy to Zwinglian spiritism. He outgrew also his early partiality for Romanticism. With him departed the last representative of the early generation of Strasburg theologians who, before the Franco‑Prussian War, acted as mediators between German and French theology, whose influence extended beyond the scene of their labors.
(P. LOBSTEIN.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A sketch of Schmidt's life was furnished by R. Reuss to the Journal d'Alsace, Mar., 1895, and reprinted separately, Strasburg, the same year. The same writer provided a preface drawn from Schmidts remains to the 1Vorterbuch, ut sup., and further material was provided by Pfister prefatorially in Les Sedgneurs, pp. v.‑xxxv.

SCHMIDT, FREDERICK AUGUSTUS: Lutheran; b. at Leutenberg (68 m. s.w. of Leipsic), Germany, Jan. 3, 1837. He was brought as a child to the United States, and received his education at Concordia College, St. Louis (B.A., 1857); entered the Lutheran ministry as pastor of the German Congregation, Eden, N. Y., where he served, 18571859; was pastor of St. Peter's Lutheran Church, Baltimore, 1859‑61; professor in the Luther College, Decoran, Ia., 1861‑72; professor of theology at Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, 1872‑76; at Madison, Wis., 1876‑86, at Northfield, Minn., 18861890, and since 1890 at the Seminary of the United Norwegian Lutheran Church, Minneapolis; he also edited The Lutheran Watchman, 1865‑66, Altes and News, 1880‑85, and Lutherske Vidnesbyrd, 1882‑88.

SCHMIDT, HERMANN CHRISTOPH: German Lutheran; b. at Frickenhofen (a village near Gaildorf, 31 m. n.e. of Stuttgart) Feb. 23, 1832; d. at Breslau Nov. 19, 1893. He was educated at Tubingen (1850‑54), where, after having been vicar at Korb and private tutor at Berlin and Danzig, he was lecturer in 1858‑61. He was then city vicar of Stuttgart until 1863, acting as general supply to the clergy, and in the latter year was called in a similar capacity to Calw, where he remained until 1869, sturdily opposing the local Pietism with the supranaturalism which characterized his theological position throughout his life, but unable to influence the people generally. From 1869 to 1881 he was attached to the Leonhardskirche at Breslau. Here he also took an active part in practical religious life, especially in the Innere Mission (q.v.), being president of the South German conference after 1869 and publishing at Hamburg in 1879 his In‑

Schmidt
$chmuoker
nere Mission, in Wurttemberg. In 1881 Schmidt was called to Breslau as professor of systematic and practical theology and New‑Testament exegesis, a position which he held until his death. After 1886 he was also a member of the Posen examining committee, and until his death he served as university preacher. His program was outlined in his Die Kirche, ihre biblisehe Idee and die Formen ihrer geschichtlichen Erscheinung in. ihrem Unterschiede vom Sekte and Hdresie (Leipsic, 1884), in which he held that the Church is a constant magnitude, while heresy destroys the fundamental distinction between the kingdom of God (or the Church) and the world, a gap which is bridged by sectarianism. All heresy is prefigured in Gnosticism, and all sectarianism in Ebionism and Montanism, while the phenomena of modern theology are closely akin to this prototype of heresy, which, like modern rationalism, has always rejected the concept of supranaturalistic revelation. He became, therefore, more and more an opponent of Ritschl and his school, but he was unable to carry out his intention of presenting his own doctrinal system in detail, although his contributions to theological periodicals and to the earlier editions of the original of this work make his position plain.
In addition to the works already noted, Schmidt was the author of a Handbuch der Symbolik (Berlin, 1890) and of a series of essays collected under the title Zur Christologie (1892). In 1891, after having repeatedly been the delegate of the faculty to the provincial synod of Posen, he was elected to the general synod. Constantly defending the independence of his communion, even to the last year of his life, he was rector of the university in 1891‑92, but his struggle with the school‑laws and the opposition of the majority of the faculty to his attitude impaired his health, which had already suffered from the death of his eldest son. (E. SCHMIDT.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. Weitbrecht, in NKZ, 1894, pp. 510‑534.
SCHMIDT, NATHANIEL: Ethical culturist; b. at Hudiksvall (170 m. n.n.e. of Stockholm), Sweden, May 22, 1862. He was educated at the gymnasium of his native town, Colgate University (A.B., 1882; A.M., 1887), and the universities of Stockholm (1882‑84) and Berlin (1890). From 1888 to 1896 he was connected with Colgate University, where he was successively associate professor of Semitic languages and Hellenistic Greek (1888‑90) and professor of Semitic languages and literatures (18901896), and since 1896 has been professor of Semitic languages and literatures in Cornell University. He was director of the American School for Oriental Study and Research in Palestine (1904‑05) and of the expedition for the exploration of the Dead Sea and Arabia Petra in 1905. In theology he belongs to the radical school, and has written The Prophet of Nazareth (New York, 1905) ; and The Message of the Poets; the Book of Job and Canticles, and some minor Poems in the Old Testament (1911) ; besides editing Ecclesiasticus for The Temple Bible (London, 1903).
SCHMIDT, PAUL WILHELM: Swiss Protestant; b. at Berlin Dec. 25, 1845. He was educated at the university of his native city, where he was privat‑
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
252
docent (1869=76); editor of the Proteatantische Kirchenxeitung (1870‑76); and general secretary of the Deutscher Protestantenverein (1874‑76). Since 1876 he has been professor of New‑Testament exegesis and dogmatics in the University of Basel. In addition to his activity as one of the collaborators on the New‑Testament section of the Protestanten‑Bibel (Leipsie, 1$73; Eng. tranal. by F. H. Jones, A Short Protestant Commentary on the Books of the New Testament, 3 vols., London, 1882,84), he has written Spinoza and Schleiermacher (Berlin, 1868); Neutestamentliche Hyperkritik, an dem jiingsten Angrif gegen die Aechtheit des Philipperbriefes auf ihre Methods hin untersucht, nebat einer Erkldrung des Briefes (1880); Der crate Thessalonicherbrief neu erkldrt, nebst einem Excurs fiber den zweiten gleichnamigen Brief (1885); Christentum and Weltverneinung (Basel, 1888); Anmerkungen caber die Komposition der Ofenbarung Johannes (Freiburg, 1891); and Geschichte Jesu (vol. i., Tiibingen, 1900; 4th ed., 1904; vol. ii., 1904; popular ed., 1 vol., 1906).
SCHMIDT, WILHELM: German Protestant; b. at Erfurt June 6, 1839. He was educated at the universities of Marburg and Halle (Ph.D., Jena, 1863) ; was pastor at Sch6nstadt (1866), Henschleben (1866‑74), and Curtow (1874‑94); being also chaplain in the army and in the hospital at Creuznach in 1870‑71. Since 1894 he has been professor of systematic theology in the University of Breslau. His works include Zur Inspiratiomfrage (Goths, 1869); Die g6ttliche Vorsehung and das Selbstleben der Welt (Berlin, 1887); Das Gewissen (Leipsie, 1889); Der alts Glaube and die Wahrheit des Christentums (Berlin, 1891); Christliche Dogmatik (2 parts, Bonn, 1895‑98); Die Lehre des Apostels Paulus (Giiteraloh, 1898); Der Kampf der Weltanachauungen (Berlin, 1904); Der Kampf um die sittliche Welt (Giltersloh, 1906); Die Forderung einer modernen positiven Theologie in kritischer Beleuchtung (1906); Moderns T,heologie des alten Glaubens in kritischer Beleuchtung (1906); Der Kampf um den Sinn des Lebens von Dante bis Ibsen (2 parts, Berlin, 1907); Die verschiedenen Typen der religidsen Erfahrung and der Psychologie (1908); and Der Kampf um die Seele (1909).
SCHMIDT, WOLDEMAR GOTTLOB: German Protestant theologian; b. at St. Afra in Meissen (14 m. n.w. of Dresden) June 2, 1836; d. at Leipsic Jan. 31, 1888. He studied at Leipsic and Gottingen, 1854‑57; taught at the Gymnasia of Plauen, Zwickau, and St. Afra, 1858‑66, when he became extraordinary professor in the University of Leipsic, full professor in 1876. His subjects covered mainly the New Testament, but he lectured also on theological encyclopedia and catechetics, also directing two catechetical societies. Owing to his multiplied academic activity, Schmidt found but little time for authorship. His most extensive work in this field is his Lehrgehalt des JacobusBriefes (Leipsic, 1869); he also edited Ephesians in the 5th edition of Meyer's Commentary. His lesser publications include a printed address on the dogma of the Incarnation (1865), and a Reformation anniversary program of 1882, on the narrative

253	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Schmidt
		$chmuoker
concerning Stephen in the Book of Acts. In these
writings he evinced the thorough, incisive, and yet
contained style of treatment that he showed in the
professor's chair.	C. T. FICBE$.
	SCHMIEDEL, shmi'del, PAUL WILHELM: Ger
man Protestant; b. at Zaukeroda (401 m. s.w. of
Dresden), Germany, Dec. 22, 1851. He was edu
cated at the universities of Leipsic (1871‑74) and
Jena (1874‑75; lic. theol., 1878), and in 1878 became
privat‑docent for theology at Jena, where he was
appointed associate professor in 1890. Since 1893
he has been professor of New‑Testament exegesis at
the University of Zurich. In theology he is a mod
erate liberal, and has written Qute intercedat ratio
inter doctrinam epistolee ad Hebrteos missce et Pauli.
apostoli doctrinam (Jena, 1878); Briefe an die
Thessalonier and Corinther (Freiburg, 1891); Jo
hannesachriften des Neuen Testaments (2 parts,
Halle, 1906; Eng. transl., The Johannine Writings,
London, 1908); and Die Person Jesu inn Streite der
Meinungen der Gegenwart (Berlin, 1906; Eng. tranal.,
Jesus in Modern Criticism, London, 1907); has
edited R. Seydel's Religionsphilosophie (1893); and
has prepared a new edition of G. B. Winer's Gram
matik des neulmtamentlichen Sprachidioms (2 parts,
Gottingen, 1894‑98).
	SCHMOLCg, shmolk (SCHMOLKE), BEfi
JAMIft: German hymliist; b. at Brauchitschdorf,
Liegnitz (38 m. w. of Breslau), Dec. 21, 1672; d. at
Schweidnitz (32 m. s.w. of Breslau) Feb. 12, 1737.
He studied at Leipsic, 1693‑97; and, after acting
as his father's assistant till 1702, spent the rest of
his life in ministerial work at Schweibnitz, though
suffering from paralysis after 1735. As a hymn
writer he was influenced by the Silesian school of
poetry. He was fond of plays on words, and treated
the Old Testament from the point of view of al
legory. In meter and in rime he showed freedom
and a light hand, but deep poetical feeling and
thought were often lacking, and subjectivity char
acterizes his work. His literary production was
large, his hymns alone number nearly 900. His
compositions show the character of occasional
versification, but some of the best of his hymns are
still in use. Several of his hymns have been ren
dered into English; so his " Mein Jesu, wie du
willst," Eng. trand. by Miss Borthwick, " My
Jesus, as thou wilt "; " Was Gott thut das ist
wohlgethan," Eng. trand. by J. Kelly, " Whatever
God doth is well done."
(HERMANN BECK.)
BaLJoaaerar: A 2d ed. of his Lieder and Gebete, ed. L.
	Grote, with a valuable biography, appeared Leipeic.18(10.
	Consult further: E. E. Koch, Geachichte des Kirchenlieda,
	v. 483 sqq., 3d ed., 6 vols., Stuttgart, 1888‑80; s. w.
	DufBetd. English Hymns, pp. 371‑372 et passim, New
	York, 1888; H. Beck, Die retipibae Volkslitleratur der
	tuanpelischen Rirche Deutechlanda, Goths, 1891; C. Grosse,
	Die alien Trijater, Hermaunsburg, 1900; W. Nelle, Ge
	achichte des deutxhen Kirchenliedea. pp. 533 BQQ., Ham
	burg, 1904; Julian, Hymnology. pp. 1011‑1014.
	SCHMUCBER, ahmuk'er, BEAL MELANCH
THON:Lutheran, son of Samuel Simon Schmucker
(q.v.); b. at Gettysburg, Pa., Aug. 26, .1827; d.
in Pottstown, Pa., Oct. 18, 1888. He was graduated
from Pennsylvania College (I844),and the Theo‑
logical Seminary of his native town (1847); and served the Lutheran congregations at Martinsburg and Shepherdstown, Va. (1848‑51), Allentown, Pa., (1852‑$2), Easton (18627), Reading (1867‑81), and Pottstown, Pa. (1881‑88). It was particularly through his intimate friendship with Charles Porterfield Krauth (q.v.) that his theological convictions developed into the very opposite of those of his father. He became a strong defender of historic Lutheranism and was one of the pillars of the General Council. His attitude in the doctrinal controversies of the American Lutheran Church of his time is clearly set forth in the charge which he delivered to the professors at the installation of the first faculty of the Theological Seminary in Philadelphia Oct. 4, 1864: " The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church stand out prominently in the inner history of the Christian Church as the most full, clear, precisely defined, and harmoniously developed system of doctrine which, by the help of the Holy Ghost, men have yet builded upon the only foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the Chief Cornerstone." His strength lay in the carefulness and thoroughness with which he labored in the various important interests committed to him, and the fine tact and parliamentary adroitness with which he represented them in ecclesiastical conventions. To the end of his life he served as secretary of the board of directors of the theological seminary, and as secretary of the board of foreign missions of the General Council. But he was moat prominent in the field of liturgics. His knowledge of details in matters pertaining to the order of service, especially of the Lutheran Church of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, was unusually extensive and accurate, and the excellent Church Book of the General Council (1868) is greatly indebted to him. As secretary of the Church Book Committee he gradually collected for their work a liturgical library of inestimable value, which is now preserved in the Krauth Memorial Library of the Lutheran Seminary at Philadelphia. To him, more than to any other man, is due the success which has crowned the efforts to secure the common service for English Lutherans in America. He proposed the adoption of the principle that all important questions were to be decided according to the consensus of the Lutheran liturgies of the sixteenth century. Schmucker was also an indefatigable, painstaking, and thorough investigator in the field of local history of Lutheran Churches in America. For years he gathered much and valuable material in this line, and became assistant editor in the new edition of the Halle'sehe NachricTtten by W. J. Mann and W. German. He made contributions to the theological magazines which are of permanent value to the historian and appeared also as separate pamphlets. The following deserve to be noted particularly: The First Pennyslvania Liturgy, Adopted in 17.48 (1882); The Early History of the Tulpehocken Churches (1882); The Lutheran Church in Pottslown (1882); The Lutheran Church in Frederick, Maryland (in Quarterly Review, 1883); The Lutheran Church in the City of New York during the First Century of its History (in Church Review, 1884‑85);

8ohmuaker aahrlepff
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
The Lutheran Catechism. Its Translation into Eng
lish (1886); English Translations of the Augsburg
Confession (1887) ; The Organization of the Lutheran
Congregation in the Early Lutheran Church in Amer
ica (1887); The Lutheran Church in York, Pa.
(1888). 	ADOLPH SPAETH.
BIBIdanHAPBY: A memorial by A. Spaeth appeared in the Lutheran Church Review for 1889. Consult further: H. E.
Jacobs, American Church History Series, vol. iv. passim,
New York, 1893; A. Spaeth, Charles Porterfield Krauth,
vo:. i., ib. 1898.
SCHMUCKER, SAMUEL SIMON: Lutheran theologian; b. at Hagerstown, Md., Feb. 28, 1799; d. at Gettysburg, Pa., July 26, 1873. He studied at the academy at York, Pa., the University of Pennsylvania (B.A., 1817), and Princeton Theological Seminary. He was ordained by the synod of Maryland and Virginia in 1821, and served a parish in New Market, Va., and vicinity, up to the year 1826. When the General Synod, founded in 1821, established its theological seminary at Gettysburg, Pa., in 1825, he was called to the head of the institution and for four years was the only theological instructor. Subsequently Charles Philip Krauth and Charles Frederick Schaeffer (qq.v.) were associated with him. After nearly forty years of service he resigned in 1864. About 400 students received their training chiefly under his influence.
He was one of the most prolific writers of the American Lutheran Church, setting forth the standpoint which he represented as a teacher in the seminary, and endeavoring to disseminate its principles by a series of more or less popular writings, such as his Elements of Popular Theology (Andover, 1834, 9th ed., Philadelphia, 1860) ; Psychology, or Elements of a New System of Mental Philosophy (New York, 1842); The Lutheran Manual on Scriptural Principles (Philadelphia, 1855); The Lutheran Symbols, or Vindication of American Lutheranism. (Baltimore, 1856), and dissertations, sermons, and articles in The Lutheran Observer and The Evangelical Review. He was particularly interested in the problem of a union of all Protestant denominations. As early as 1838 he issued an appeal to the American churches, with a plan for a general union. Later he took a prominent part in the organization of the Evangelical Alliance and was present at the first meeting in London, 1846. His last production, The Unity of Christ's Church (New York, 1870) was devoted to its interests, written in view of its approaching convention in New York, 1873.
Dr. Schmucker, on the one side, exerted a decided and positive influence toward holding together and organizing the Lutheran Church in this country. At the same time, he occupied a position foreign to and actually destructive of the true spirit of Lutheranism, if the fundamental question of the confession and its historical continuity be considered. At the time when he began his active labors the Lutheran Church in this country was threatened with disintegration. German rationalism and English deism had affected the Lutherans, though not to the same extent as other Protestant denominations. In New York the Lutherans fraternized with Episcopalians, in Pennsylvania with the Reformed. The critical period of transition into the English
language had arrived. But there was no English
Lutheran literature, and no seminary where pastors
could be educated to preach the Lutheran faith in
the English tongue. At this point young Schmuck
er, with his unquestionable talent for organization
and administration, put forth his most energetic
efforts to secure for the Lutheran Church in America
a continued existence and a respected place among
the Protestant denominations of the country. The
preservation of the General Synod, the founding of
its educational institutions, the Theological Semi
nary and Pennsylvania College at Gettysburg, are
owing chiefly to his self‑sacrificing labors. And
these institutions were meant to be of a conserva
tive character, to construct and preserve Lutheran
ism in America. But, on the other hand, his influ
ence as professor of theology tended to unsettle and
invalidate the historic confessional basis of the Lu
theran Church. According to his conviction it was
the vocation of the American Lutheran Church to
free herself from all respect " for the authority of
the fathers, whether they be Nicene or Ante‑Nicene,
Roman or Protestant." He strove to eliminate
everything distinctively Lutheran and to substitute
the basis of the Evangelical Alliance for the Augs
burg Confession and Luther's Catechism. These
tendencies culminated in the Definite Platform which
he published anonymously in 1855. It claimed to
be an " American Recension of the Augsburg Con
fession," representing the standpoint of the General
Synod. In this document twelve of the original
twenty‑one doctrinal articles of the Augsburg Con
fession were changed, mutilated, or entirely omitted.
The seven articles on abuses (XXII. to XXVIII.)
were all omitted. Dr. Schmucker's theological
standpoint may be characterized as a peculiar
mixture of Puritanism, Pietism, and shallow ration
alism. His Definite Platform was never formally
adopted by the General Synod, though many prom
inent men in it sympathized with its spirit. It
rather paved the way to a reaction in favor of the
Lutheran Confession. 	ADOLPH SPAETH.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pennsylvania. College Book, ed. E. S. Brei
	denbach, Philadelphia, 1882; H. E. Jacobs, American
	Church History Series, vol. iv. passim, New York, 1893;
A. Spaeth, Charles Porterheld Krauth, vol. i., ib. 1898.
SCHNECKENBURGER, ahnek'en‑burg"er, MATTHIAS: German Swiss Protestant; b. at Thalheim, near Tuttlingen (55 m. s.s.w. of Stuttgart), Jan. 17, 1804; d. at Bern June 13, 1848. He was educated at the universities of Tfibingen and Berlin, returning to the former university as theological lecturer in 1827. He became assistant pastor at Herrenberg, 1821, and professor of theology at the newly founded university of Bern in 1834, lecturing primarily on church history and systematic theology, and also on New‑Testament exegesis. He also shared the chair in dogmatics with Gelpke and Lutz, his province being ecclesiastical dogmatics. Here he, essentially a Lutheran, had the delicate task of arranging his courses to meet the needs of Reformed students. He accordingly took as the basis of his lectures on dogmatics the second Helvetic Confession, comparing it with Lutheran the. ology and with modern dogmatic systems. At the same time, the Reformed atmosphere of Bern eXer‑

255	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	t08ahmQPok‑pifohne
cised a constantly increasing effect on Schneckenburger himself, especially as neither the political conditions nor the religious thought of the period at Bern were conducive to the one‑sided intellectualism of German universities. Broadening the scope of his lectures, Schneckenburger dealt with apologetics, the philosophy of religion, the influence of philosophy on theology since the time of Descartes, and the conflict of modern thought with Christianity. In the latter subject Schneckenburger assumed a strongly theistic position and opposed Hegelianism. He likewise investigated with ever‑increasing interest the divergencies between Lutheran and Reformed doctrine, as set forth in his lectures on symbolics. For the six last years of his life, inspired both by the rise of the Old Lutheran movement and by his position as a Lutheran teaching Reformed dogmatics, he devoted himself especially to a study of early Reformed theology and its various schools, developing his views in courses of lectures on comparative dogmatics. With all this activity Schneckenburger never lost interest in the practical work of the Church, and was for many years a director of the missionary society founded under his inspiration. Among his writings were: Ueber Glauben, Tradition and Kirche (Stuttgart, 1827); Ueber das Alter der judischen Proselytentaufe and deren Zu8ammenhang mit dem johanneischen and christlichen Ritus (Berlin, 1828) ; Beitrage zur Einleitung ins Neue Testament (1832); Ueber das Evangelium der Aegypter (Bern, 1834); Ueber den Zweck der Apostelgeschiehte (1841); and Die orthodoxe Lehre vom doppelten Stande Christi nash lutheriseher and reformierter Fassung (Pforzheim, 1848).
	(C. B. HUNDESHAQENt.)
BIBLIOGBAPHY: E. F. Gelpke, Gedachenieerede auf . .
Match. Schnwkenburger, gehaUen . . . 1E. Juni, 18/,8. Nebat der Grabrede von E. Wyas, Bern, 184!3.
SCHNEDERMANN, ahn6'der‑mdn" GEORG HERMANN: German Lutheran; b. at Chemnitz (43 m. s.e. of Leipsic), Saxony, July 3, 1862. He was educated at the universities of Leipsic and Erlangen (1872‑75; Ph.D., Leipsic, 1878), and after being a private tutor (1875‑77), was attached to the theological seminary at Leipsic until 1879. In 1880 he became privat‑docent for New‑Testament exegesis at the University of Leipsic, and three years later (1883) went to Basel under the auspices of the Verein ftir christliche Wissenschaft as instructor in systematic theology. Returning to Leipsic in 1889 as instructor in New‑Testament exegesis and systematic theology, he was appointed, in the following year, to his present position of associate professor of dogmatics and catechetics, being also director of the catechetical seminary and second university preacher. Besides editing F. Weber's System der altsynagogalen paldatinischen Theologie (in collaboration with F. Delitzsch; Leipsie, 1880); and Beitrdge zur Vertiefung der kirchlichen Untertveisung (in collaboration with M. Pache; 1903), he has written Die Controverse des Ludovicus Capellus mit den Buxtorfen aber das Alter der hebrdi8chen Punclation (1879); De fidei notions ethica Paulina (1880); Das Judentum and die ehristliche
Verkiindigung in den Evangelien (1884); Die Briefs Pauli an die Thessalonicher, Gatater, Korinther,
R6mer (in O. ZOckler and H. Strack's Kurzgefasster Kommentar; NOrdlingen, 1887); Die Gefangenschaftsbriefe des Apostds Paulus (in the sama series, 1888); Von dem Bestande unserer Gemeinschaft mit Gott durch Jesum Christum (1888); Ringet darnach, doss ihr stills seid (3 sermons; 1889); Das moderns Christentum, rein Redd and sein Unrecht (Leipsic, 1889); Der jiidisehe Hdntergrund im Neuen Testament (1890); Frank and Ritschl (1891); Vorstellung vom Reiche Gottes (2 parts, 1893); Von rechter Verdeutsehung der Evangelien (1896); Unzuldnglichr keit der gegenw4rtigen kirchlichen Unterweisung (1897); Der ehristliche Glaube im Sinne der gegerowdrtigen evangelischen lutherischen Kirche (1902); Das Wart vom Kreuze, religionsgeschiehtlich und dogmati8ch beleuchtet (GUtersloh, 1906); Ohne des Gesetzes Werk. Eine Anleitung zu selbststdadigen gesohichtlichem Verstkndniss des Neuen Testaments (1907); and Die heilige Schrift im Religionsunterricht (1909).

SCHNEPFF, ahnepf, ERHARD: German Reformer; b. at Heilbronn (26 m. n. of Stuttgart) Nov. 1, 1495; d. in Jena Nov. 1, 1558. He studied at Erfurt and Heidelberg; taught in the latter city and possibly heard Luther's disputation there Apr. 26, 1518. When O;colampadius resigned as preacher at Weinsberg in 1520, Schnepff accepted the post, but was expelled by the Austrian government because of his Evangelical preaching in 1522; under the protection of Dieterich von Gemmingen he preached at Guttenberg and Neckarmiihlbach, and in 1523 in the little imperial town of Wimpfen. He avoided a call to act as field preacher for the peasants in 1525 by his hasty marriage with Margaretha Wurzelmann, daughter of the mayor of Wimpfen; the same year he signed the Syngramma Suevicum (of Brenz) directed against the (Ecolampadian doctrine of the sacrament, and before the year ended he was summoned by Count Philip of Nassau to introduce the Reformation in Weilburg. In 1527 Landgrave Philip of Hesse called him to Marburg University, of which he was rector in 1532 and 1534, and took him to the diet at Speyer in 1529, and in 1530 to Augsburg, where he preached frequently till forbidden by the emperor, also taking part in the discussions. His course here was praised for its consistency by Baumggrtner, ambassador of Nuremberg, also for its courage. After Duke Ulrich of W iirttemberg won back his country in 1534, he called Schnepff together with Ambrosius Blaurer (q.v.) to lead the Reformation. Schnepff was appointed to the Hospital Church in Stuttgart, and successfully accomplished his work in the northern half of the country. While Schnepff and Blaurer agreed regarding the sacrament on the basis of the formula of Mar., 1529, there was no lack of friction and misunderstanding, which brought admonitions to be peaceful from the landgrave, Strasburg, and Melanchthon. On the Urach " idol day," Sept. 16, 1537, with Brenz Schnepff argued against Blaurer for the retention of such church pictures as gave no offense. He accompanied the duke to Vienna, where the latter took the oath to King Ferdinand, and on his return was charged with preparation of forms for church government, revised by Brenz and printed

9chnepff
Schoenherr
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
in 1536. In Sept., 1536, he was in Tubingen with Melanchthon, and in Schmalkalden in Feb., 1537, where he signed Luther's articles. In July, 1540, he was sent to a discussion at Hagenau, whence he went to Strasburg and on July 18 preached there in the cathedral. Later he visited Worms, and, in 1541, Regensburg. He joined several of the Wiirttemberg theologians in pronouncing against the landgrave's bigamous marriage; meanwhile his position at court and with the government became insecure, so that in 1539 he was already thinking of going to Saxony. In 1544 he went to Tiibingen and was honored with the doctorate, and in February began to act as superintendent of the theological seminary, where he lectured on the Old Testament and on Melanchthon's Loci, also preaching with acceptability. In 1546 he carried on a discussion with the Augustinian Johann Hofmeister at Regensburg. On the approach of the Spaniards in the Schmalkald War, Schnepff fled on Jan. 7, 1547, to Blaurer at Constance, but was soon able to return. He did not accept the Interim (q.v.), and said farewell to his flock in a sermon on Nov. 11, 1548, lamented by his people, who formed a procession on his departure, while the duke sent a present. Melanchthon invited him to Wittenberg, but a professorship was offered in the University of Jena, just then being founded, where he soon had a class of sixty students. He undertook the office of superintendent, and became one of the most influential theologians and churchmen in ducal Saxony. Under political pressure he joined in opposition to Melanchthon and broke with his former friends in Wurttemberg; in the colloquy at Worms the Ernestine theologians delighted the Roman Catholics by their enmity to Brenz and Melanchthon, which caused the breaking off of the colloquy. He avoided intercourse with Brenz, who was his son Dietrich's father‑in‑law, and with Jakob AndreA, who was formerly his favorite scholar; against Brenz he became violent. Although he took part with Strigel and Hiigel (reluctantly) in the Konfutalionsbuch, he endeavored to make peace between Strigel and Flacius.
	A sermon on the wedding feast of the king was
printed (Tiibingen, 1578) ; also his Gutachten fur den
schmalkaldischen Konvent (1540); Konfession etlicher
Artikel des Glaubens (1545); and Refutatio Majo
rismi (Jena, 1555). 	G. BOSSERT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Rosa, Gratio de vita E. Schnepfii, Lelpslo,
	1562; M. Adam, Vitto Germanorum theologorum, pp. 320,
	578, Heidelberg, 1620; L. M. Fischlin, Memoria the.
	logorum Wirtembergensium, i. 9, supplement 8, Ulm, 1709
	1710; N. G. Eickhoff, Die Kirchen‑Reformation in Nassau
	Weilburg, Weilbulg, 1832; T. Presael, Ambrosius Blowers
	Leben, Stuttgart, 1861; J. Hartmann, Erhard SchnepJ,
	der Reforraator, Tubingen, 1870; J. Ficker, Thesaurus
	Baumianus, Strasburg, 19o5; BrieJmechset der Brttder . .
Blaurer, 1609‑l,8, ed. T. Schiess, 2 vols., Freiburg, 19081910; ADB, xxxii. 168 sqq.
SCHNITZER, shnit'zer, JOSEF: German Roman Catholic; b. at Lauingen (24 m. n.e. of Ulm), Bavaria, June 15, 1359. He studied at the universities of Munich and Vienna (1889‑91); was associate professor of church history and canon law at the Lyceum of Dillingen (1893‑1902); accepted, in 1902, the position of ,professor of the history of dogma, symbolics, and pedagogics at the Univer‑
sity of Munich. In 1908, in .consequence of his Modernism, he was suspended from exercising all ecclesiastical functions and was given leave of absence as professor. The intention was to transfer him to the philosophical faculty, but this has not yet been done. In addition to preparing the second edition of I. Silbernagl's Verfassltng and gegertwartiger Bestand sBmtlicher Kirchen. des Orients (Regensburg, 1904), he has written Btrengar von Tours, sein Leben and seine Lehre (Munich, 1890); Die Gesta Romance Ecclesice des Kardinals Beno and andere Streitachriften der schismatischen Kardinale under Gregor VII. (Bamberg, 1892); Katholisches Eherecht (Freiburg, 1898); Quellen and Forschuugen zur Geachichte Savonarolas (3 parts, Munich, 19021904); and Hat Jesus das Papstthum gestiftell (1910).
SCHNUETGEN, shniit'gen, ALE%: German Roman Catholic; b. at Steele (3 m. e. of Essen) Feb. 22, 1843. He studied at Munster, Tiibingen, Louvain, and Mainz (1860‑66), and since 1866'has been a member of the clergy staff of Cologne Cathedral, where he has been successively vicar (1866‑87) and a member of the chapter (since 1887). He has likewise been honorary professor of Christian archeology at the University of Bonn. Besides editing the Zeitschrift fur christliche Kunst since 1888, he has collaborated in preparing Katalog seiner Sammlung von Geweben and Stickereien des Mittelalters and der Renaissance (Cologne, 1876), and in editing the Ada manuscript of Treves (Leipsic, 1889).

SCHODDE, shod'de, GEORG HENRY: Lutheran; b. at Alleghany City, Pa., Apr. 15, 1854. He was graduated from Capital University, Columbus, 0. (A.B., 1872), the theological seminary of the same institution (1874), and studied at the universities of Tiibingen (1874‑75) and Leipsic (Ph.D., 1876). After holding a pastorate in his denomination at Wheeling, W. Va. (1877‑82), he was appointed to his present position of professor of Greek at Capital University, and has also been professor of New‑Testament exegesis in the theological seminary attached to the same university since 1894. In theology he is a positive conservative Lutheran, and has written The Protestant Church in Germany (Philadelphia, 1903). He is editor of the Theological Magazine (Columbus, O.) and has translated from the Ethiopic the Book of Enoch (Andover, 1882) and the Book of Jubilees (Oberlin, '1888), and from the German Franz Delitzsch's Day in CaPerreaum (New York, 1887) and B. Weiss's Religion of the New Testament (1905) and Commentary on the New Testament (2 vols., 1906).
SCHOEBERLEIN, sh8'ber‑lain, L U D W I G FRIEDRICH: German Lutheran; b. at Kolmberg (28 m. w.s.w. of Nuremberg) Sept. 6, 1813; d. at Gottingen July 8, 1881. After studying at Munich and Erlangen, he was a private tutor at Bonn and city vicar at Munich: In 1841 he became theological lecturer and privat‑docent at Erlangen, and in 1850 went to Heidelberg as associate professor of theology. From 1855 until his death he was full professor of the same subject at GSttingen, being also consistorial councilor after 1862 and ab‑

257
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
SchneB
Schoenherr
Dot of Bursfelde after 1878. He also served as curator of the Gottingen orphan asylum and member of a liturgical committee and of a hymnal committee for Hanover. His chief writings, which mostly relate to liturgies, were as follows: Die Grundlehren des Heils, entwickelt aus dem Prinzip der Liebe (Stuttgart, 1848); Der evangelische Gottesdieast (Heidelberg, 1854); Der evangelische Hauptgottesdienst in Formularen fiir das ganze Kirchenjahr (1855); Ueber den liturgischen Ausbau des Gemeindegottesdienstes in der deutschen evangelischen Kirche (1859); Schatz des liturgischen Chor‑ and Gemeindegesangs nebst den Altarweisen in der deutschen evangelischen Kirche (3 vols., Gdttingen, 1863‑72); Geheimnisse des Glaubens (Heidelberg, 1872); and Prinzip and System der Dogmatik (1881). In 1876 he founded, together with M. Herold and E. Krfger, the periodical Siona for the advancement of liturgics and church music. (J. A. WAGENMANNf
BmLIooRAPHY: Attgemeine eeangeliach‑tuthertxhe Kirchenzeitung, 1881, no. 29, pp. 688 sqq.; Siona, 1881, no. 8, pp. 101 sqq.

SCHOELL, sh61, CARL WILHELM: Lutheran; b. at Guglingen (23 m. n.n.w. of Stuttgart), W iirttemberg, Aug. 4, 1820; d. in London, May 13, 1899. He was educated at Tabingen; became, in 1846, assistant minister, and in 1859 pastor of the German Lutheran Church in the Savoy, now Cleveland Street, London. He was examiner in the German language and literature to the Military Education Division, War Office, London, from 1858; to the Civil Service Commission, London, from 1864; and in the University of London, 1872‑75, and 1882‑87. He was the author of De ecdesiasticce Britonum Scatorumque historite fontibus (Berlin, 1851).

SCHOENFELDER, shfn'fel‑der, JOSEF MARIA:
German Roman Catholic; b. at Forchheim (9 m. n. of Erlangen), Bavaria, June 8, 1838. He was educated at Bamberg, Erlangen, and Munich, and after being sacellanus at Bamberg (1861‑65) and professor of theology at Hildesheim (1866‑67), was vicar of St. Cajetan's, Munich (1867‑71) and courtpreacher at St. Michael's in the same city (18711874). Since 1869 he has also been connected with the University of Munich, where he has been successively privat‑docent (1869‑73), associate professor of theology (1873‑74), and professor of Biblical oriental languages, Old‑Testament introduction, and exegesis (since 1874; emeritus since 1903). He has likewise been canon of St. Cajetan's since 1886. He has written Die Kirchengeschichte des Johannes von Ephesus (Munich, 1863); Salomonis Episeopi Bassorensis LLber Apis (Bamberg, 1866); Onkelos and Peschitto (Munich, 1869); and Die Klagelieder des Jeremias nach rabbinischer Auslegung (1887).
SCHOENHERR, schfrn'her, JOHANN HEINRICH:
Theosophist; b. at Memel (74 m. n.e. of Kbnigsberg) Nov. 30, 1770; d. at Konigsberg Oct. 15, 1826. After preliminary training at the city school of Angerburg, whither his parents had removed, he was sent to KSnigsberg for commercial training; but he was averse to this pursuit, and studied in the gymnasium of Konigsberg and then entered the university, where he nominally studied law, though X.‑17
his strong liking was for philosophy with a theosophical trend. With but little money, in 1792 he traveled in Germany, visiting Rinteln and Leipsic to study philosophy. On his return he had reached such a degree of self‑sufficiency that he felt able, without further study at the university, to expound his views in private. His extreme earnestness gained him friends and the means to propagate his system, and he became marked as a man apart from his contemporaries even in his appearance, for he allowed his beard and hair to grow in literal agreement with Lev. xix. 27. Konigsberg was at that time in the throes of a decided rationalism, although nominally devoted to orthodox Lutheran doctrine, and the student body especially was devoted to rationalistic views. So the young theosophist, with a supreme confidence in his mission, expounded what he believed would inaugurate a new era in human knowledge. He conceived himself to be an inspired prophet, and his fundamental principles a new revelation; only the application of these principles to nature, history, QDd human life would he admit as subjects of discussion, together with the proof of them from the Bible. He gathered about him a circle of scholars, who were to be the seed from which should grow a society renewing humanity. Meetings were held twice a week, on Wednesday and Sunday evenings, for discussion and instruction, to which women were admitted, and a simple meal usually closed the session. In all this there was no thought of personal domination by Schonherr; his only object was the diffusion of his system of knowledge. Nor was there intention to form a sect, and he was himself a regular attendant upon divine service. Once he was threatened with prosecution, but influential interests prevented persecution.
Besides this circle gathered about Sch6nherr, there was a second which had as its center a gifted disciple named Johann Wilhelm Ebel (q.v.), who had adopted without reserve the teachings of his master. Ebel had become through this system a positive Biblical theologian, and after 1810 preached in KBnigsberg earnestly on the subjects of sin, grace, and redemption. Possessing a fine presence, great pulpit ability, and an unassuming address, he became the leader in the pulpit of the city. His following was from various circles, but principally from the higher and official classes‑a contrast with the immediate following of Schonherr which included students and the humbler classes. The latter was in this environment also the supreme spiritual authority. The separation of the two circles came through the teacher's introduction of Cie principle of flagellation, based on Gal. v. 24; I's. lxxxiv. 2; I Cor. xiii. 3; and Heb. xii. 4, which was the " pleasing sacrifice " of Rom. xii. 1. Were not this self‑sacrifice offered, a martyr death or bloody sufferings would be required. Ebel opposed this extreme, and the personal friendship of the two came to an end, though Ebel still held to the teaching of his master. After a journey to St. Petersburg in 1823‑24, Schonherr grew feeble; this feebleness was increased through self‑inflicted oastigations and his death soon followed.
His system united profound religious sensibility

6ohoeaherr
6oholastioism
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
philosophic earnestness; yet in itself it was but confused dualistic philosophy of nature which would have no enduring interest but for the judicial processes carried through 1835‑41 (see EBEL, JoHANN WILHELM) at Konigsberg, interest in which is by no means dead, especially in view of the secrecy which still covers the actual proceedings. Schdnherr's thinking began with sheer dualism, as he posited two primitive potencies, one active and male, the other passive and female, both personal and possessing intellect, will, form, and color; these were named fire and water, or light and darkness. From the union of these originated the universe, including God‑for the system is not merely a cosmogony, it is also a theogony. By an adaptive exegesis of the doctrine of the Trinity and of the Biblical account of creation he sought to justify his system as being in accord with revelation. The account of creation was followed by a most interesting chapter on the fall. Evil arose through the fall of Lucifer (Satan), a being of light created by God, who through envy led the first pair to disobey God; through eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge there was introduced into the hitherto sinless nature of man the power of darkness; death and misery became man's lot, and as original sin was transmitted to his descendants. Sin made redemption necessary, and through this the harmony of the primitive potencies and of their methods of working is restored. This process was introduced by Jesus Christ, in whom the law of righteousness is embodied and the inworking of Lucifer is abolished, and so the world is released from evil. For the law of righteousness grounded in Christ proceeds from him and passes over into the " primal natures " (Hauptnaturen), who are made complete through the Holy Spirit, in whom also Christ is present; by their mediation this law passes over into the " secondary natures "; in the former light is dominant, in the latter, darkness, and this darkness must be striven against by means of fighting, fasting, watching, prayer, and wrestling, and in this way room is made for light. By this course of reasoning Sch6nherr fell upon a new righteousness of the law. Just as he partly included and partly ignored the simple facts of the life of Christ, so to the teaching of Paul concerning the righteousness which springs from faith he gave no place, reproducing redemption by way of knowledge in the fashion‑of the early Gnostics (Bee GNOSTICISM).
Eschatology had an important place in the system. The second coming of Christ was regarded as imminent, since the present is the seventh (and last) period of the development of the kingdom of God. To this theosophist the dreadful events following the outbreak of the French Revolution portended the end; Napoleon was Antichrist, the millennial kingdom was near, and KSnigaberg with its seven hills was the city of Rev. xvii. 9. With the parousia would come the fulfilling of the kingdom.
In the case of Ebel, in the pulpit the fundamentals of Evangelical Christianity were proclaimed; but in the narrower circle of his immediate disciples the cure of souls was based upon the anthropology of Schonherr. While this circle was small, it was influential. The doctrine of primal and secondary
natures was especially stressed, together with emphasis upon knowledge. The secondary natures were to be led to self‑consciousness; this was to be accomplished by the open expression of their most secret thoughts, especially of their sine, and this in turn enabled the foreordained ministers of souls to give the advice by which the process of redemption was to be furthered. Thus Ebel gained an unwonted power over souls. But this caused repulsion among certain of those who had at first listened, among whom wee Hermann Olshausen (q.v.), opposition sprang up, and the judicial decision anon followed which is summed up in the article on Ebel (q.v.). (PAUL TBCHACBERT.)
BIHLIOaBAPHY: The writings of $chbnherr are the follow‑
ing: Der Sicp der pottlichen 08enbarunp, roorbereitd sum
eraten Mal, Kbnigeberg, 1803; Vom Siege der pLtttiehen
O$enbarung. Der Erate Siep (1804): cf. (irundzilpe der
Erkenntnias der Wahrheit aua Heinrich Schiinhena nach
pelasaenen philoaophiachen Btuttern mit esnspen Erpgnzurr
pen aua SchriJten Anderer, Le,psie, 1852. On the life and
system consult: J. I. Mombert, Faith Victorious. Being
an Account of the Life and Times of the Venerable Dr. Jo‑
hann Ebel, pp. 258 aqq., New York, 1882 (contains a very
full and useful bibliography of the subject); H. Olshausen,
Lehre and Leben lea R&nipeberper Theoaophen Johann
Heinrich Schbnherr, KSnigaberg. 1834 (adverse); Von
Wegnern, in ZHT, viii (1838), 108‑233; E. von Hannen‑
feld, Die retipibae Bewepunp zu Rbnigaberg, Braunsberg,
1858; Ernst Graf von Kanitz, AuJkiUrung reach Akten
quelten fiber den 1836‑.,.5 zu Kiinspsberp . . peJiihrten
Itetigionsprozeea, Basel, 1882; F. Zimmer, in ZIVT, zliv (1901), 253‑312; ADB, v. 519 sqq.
SCHOETTGEN, BhOt'gen, JOHANN CHRISTIAN: German New‑Testament scholar and philologist; b. at Wurzen (15 m. e. of Leipsic) Mar. 14, 1687; d. at Dresden Dec. 15, 1751. He studied at the Saxon state school at Pforta and at the University of Leipsic, where he also lectured. In 1716 he assumed the
i	rectorahip of the Latin school at Frankfort‑on‑the
	Oder; in 1719 went to Stargard in Pomerania as
	rector professor of humane letters at the GrSnin
	gischea Kollegium and also as rector of another
	school there; and in 1728 to Dresden, as rector of
	the Kreuzschule. He was an exceedingly fruitful
	author, especially in New‑Testament exegesis, in
	which he sought to utilize his rabbinic knowledge.
	He was a well‑grounded philologist, and an authority
	on the local history of Upper Saxony. His chief
	work, displaying his abilities as an exegete and his
	profound rabbinic information, is Horse Hebraicte
	et talmudieol in universum N. T., quibus horse 1.
	Lightfooti in libris historices supplentur, epistolte et
	apocolypais eotlem modo illustrantur (Dresden, 1733).
	In 1742 there appeared: Home hebraicce et tal
	mttdiece in theologiam Judeeorum dogmaticam an
	tiquam et orthodoxam de Messia impensce. Of leas im
	portance was his N, ovum lexicon Grceco‑Latinum in
	N. T. (Leipsic, 1746; new ed. by J. F. Krebs, 1765;
	another by G. L. Spohr, 1790). His edition of the
	Greek New Testament (1744) is a recasting of the
	text of Gleditsch (1735) with peculiar text divisions
	and tabulated contents. The Opuscula issued by
	Grundig (1766) contain his outlines for local, school,
	and Reformation history. Schoettgen was a typical
	exponent of an age which has been designated as the
	cradle of the entire body of Old‑Testament science
	along modern lines. 	GEORG MUELLER.
$rHIdOalt•PHT. K. Gaataeoh, in Arehiro Jnr auchaiaehe Ge.
achiehte, new series, iv. 338‑3b1; ADB, iii. 412117.

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
I. Introduction. II. Preparation.
Orthodoxy	and 	Philosophy
(§ i).
Anselm and Abelard (¢ 2).
1n9uence of Ansehn and Abelard ($ 3)•
Awakening of the Twelfth Century (¢ 4).
Revival of Aristotle (§ 5).
III. The Scholastic Period of the Thirteenth Century.
1. The Franciscan Advance.
Alexander of Hales (§ 1).
The Oxford School (§ 2).
SCHOLASTICISM.

t. The Dominican Advance.
Albert the Great; Thomas Aquinas

Reaction	against 	Thomas

3. Various Trends.
Bonaventura (¢ 1).
Henry of Ghent (¢ 2).
Biblical Conservatism; Roger Bacon (¢ 3).
4. Duns Scotus.
Critical work (§ i).
Theological Views; Regressive Results ($ 2).
IV. Decline of Scholasticism
I. Introduction: The term scholasticism is commonly used to designate the scientific theology of the Middle Ages, from the eleventh to the sixteenth century. As an index of the scope of this theology may be mentioned the notice by Johannes Pitseus in De illustribus Anglia, scraptoribus (Paris, 1619), who counts 160 English commentators upon the "Sentences" of Peter Lombard (q.v.); 152 commentaries were produced by the Dominicans, almost as many by the Minorites, not to speak of other works. Distinguished from exegetical, homiletical, and practical works, and heretical literature, the term scholasticism applies to what is now known as systematic theology, or dogmatics; and all the schoolmen of the varying tendencies represented orthodox church doctrine. By the reform theologians at the conclusion of the Middle Ages, the Humanists, and the Reformers, the prevalent dogmatics and its method was stigmatized as " school theology," and characterized as empty formalism, and untheological speculation, subtle and pedantic, in contrast with vital considerations held to be practical and religious, or a theology based on the Bible. From this point of view resulted its unjustified depreciation as well as the incorrect adverse parallelism of scholastic and mystical theology. Scholasticism and mysticism, however, represent a relation similar to that of dogmatics and religious contemplation. The latter also gives rise to theoretical explanations, as a rule referred to as " mystical "; yet, in the nature of the case, they qualify themselves as the descriptions of soul states, the antecedents of Christian ethics. Although they are in contrast with scholastic methods, they are not incompatible with them and their object was, with the aid of speculative inquiry, the analysis of church doctrine. The adverse judgment is also incompetent, because, instead of applying pure historical standards, it is pronounced from the point of view of present‑day philosophy and the religious antithesis of the time of the Reformation. A correct judgment can arise only from a due historical appreciation of the religious, ecclesiastical, and scientific conditions from which scholasticism proceeded. Such a review will lead to the verdict that scholasticism fixed its vision firmly upon the loftiest goals of human knowledge, and that it strove for their attainment with a marvelous and untiring acumen, faithfully availing itself of all means at its command. That the religious and
Bohoenherr
Scholasticism
i. Divergent Schools of the Four• teenth Century.
Craps Nominalism (¢ i).
The Averrhoiatic (¢ 2).
The Egidian (§ 3).
2. Culmination.
Disintegration and the Reformation ($ 1).
Restoration; Finality of Thomas Q 2).
V. Characterisation in Summary.
Method (§ i).
Problem (§ 2).
Three Types (¢ 3).
Surviving Influences (§ 4).
secular knowledge of the times imposed limitations is self‑evident. And that in this work, many of its virtues cast their shadows, and that the spontaneous activity of its spirit gradually crystallized in forms and stagnated into fruitless exercises of a purely formal mental acuteness is not characteristic of scholasticism alone. Nay, rather at the climax of its movement was there such an abundance of strenuous earnest thinking and a measure of enthusiastic devotion as has not elsewhere appeared in all the ages of the history of theology, sad its original thinkers in number and eminence have in all probability not since then been surpassed.
II. Preparation: The history antecedent to scholasticism is the whole theology of the earlier Middle Ages. This period took over Christianity in the shape of fixed formulated doctrines,
:. Ortho‑ and the representatives of these doc‑
doay and trines were at the same time the ex‑
Philosophy. portents of education and higher culture. The Church clothed its doctrines with divine authority. In accordance therewith the great theological teachers of the early Middle Ages would submit in their manuals only summaries of patristic theology and citations from the Fathers. Augustine and Gregory the Great (qq.v.) were the masters whose thoughts or even words were adopted bodily. Controversies were waged over the understanding of the authorities, not over the matter in question. Theology in the early Middle Ages may be described on the whole as traditionalism. But the vital development of church life demanded of theology new practical and ceremonial forma, and the interest to understand the traditional stuff made itself felt from an inner necessity. If the delivered doctrines were sacred and inviolable, only one form of their appropriation was possible; namely, the proof of their rationality and the recognition of their unity. Orthodox positiveness assumed a rationalistic character; the more so inasmuch as ancient philosophy and the doctrines of the Church had been handed down most closely combined. The proof of the rationality or tenability of church doctrine consistent with a systematic philosophy‑this formed the program of an enormous intellectual task; it was the labor of scholasticism. Confined to a fixed group of "given " subjects, hemmed in by sacred tradition, and not without stumbling, with ever so many modifications, fresh departures,

8oholastiai8m
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
and concessions to the old, slowly and surely reason
gained its position alongside of authority. Then, of
a sudden, the silent development was preciPitated
by the wide‑spread sensation caused by Berengar
of Tours' (q.v.) impassioned criticism of the doc
trine of the Eucharist, in which reason and dialectic
alone were to be the arbiters of truth. The defense
of authority itself employed such dialectic subtle
ties as the distinction between the permanent acci
dents of the bread and its temporary substance.
The more and more flourishing school system of
cathedral and cloister, the itinerant restlessness of
scholars, the attraction of brilliant teachers‑all
combined speedily to disseminate scientific theology.
	At this point two mighty spirits entered the cur
rent, creating two methods that governed scientific
		work for a long time to come. These
	x. Anselm were Anselm of Canterbury and Abe
	and lard (qq.v.). Anselm's method is
	Abelard. marked by the following points: (1) he
		was a realist, i.e., the champion of the
reality of the universal; of species and genus, of
concept and idea. These universals are objective
realities, not merely a flatus vocis, " blast of sound,"
or pure subjective images. Upon this hinged the
battle throughout the Middle Ages. Upon its vin
dication depended the right and merit of specula
tion in theology; to inquire into the realities at the
basis of church doctrine, and to create if necessary
new formulas. Anselm's problems (2) arose from
the consideration of the thing itself. They are of a
practical, religious importance, and their solution
aims at clear expression and forms intelligible to
the times. Witness in Cur dens homot the practical
idea of God as the sovereign Lord and the work of
Christ in forms derived from the sacrament of pen
ance. The pious daring and religious tendency of
Anselm's intellectual work betray the spirit of
Augustine. From him also (3) descended Anselm's
voluntarism. God's sovereign will rules the world
and the nature of will is freedom. Anselm, with his
maxim Credo ut intelligam, also (4) starts out from
belief in the traditional doctrines. But this is only
in order to gain experientia of the matter described
by the formulas. The existence of God, the Trinity,
and the incarnation can be proved by " reason
alone." Anselm means that the positive faith of
the Church is for him who obtains inner experience
of its content the rational truth. The significance
of Anselm is that he regenerated the formulas of
Augustine in the spirit and mode of thought of the
latter. In sharp contrast is the thought of Abelard.
Starting with the contradictions in tradition, he
held (1) that the task of science is to reconcile them
by dialectic (in his work, Sic et non). He does not
contemplate experience by himself of the truths of
religion, but a rational formulation of the articles
of belief. Thereby (2) he by no means aimed to
shake the faith as handed down in the Athanasian
formulas. He would only set limits to the belief
in authority. That which was believed must be
inwardly understood, and the truths of religion
must be made probable and clear to reason. (3)
The writings of the Fathers were to be read not
" with the necessity of believing," but with " the
liberty of judgment," or reason. (4) The canonical
authority of the Old and New Testament Scriptures consists in their inherent superiority: Abelard, believing that the substance of church doctrine was in harmony with the Bible, did not mean to attack it. (5) On the question of the reality of the universal, he combated the realism of his teacher William of Champeaux (q.v.), yet seemed to have represented a moderate realistic position himself. His interest was preoccupied by the dialectical treatment of theologyy and therefore abstracted from an intimate interest in realism. Pure nominalism, on the other hand, would have reduced his dialectic to a mere word‑battle, and, being already disreputable,
it was little adapted to his mediating tendency, which sought the harmony of " authority and reason." (6) Abelard proved his constructive talent by reforming the Augustinian division of theology
from faith, love, and hope, to faith, sacrament, and love, in correspondence with the historical situation
•r the Church of his time.
The method of Anselm was the more tedious; no one without speculative endowments could employ it. Abelard's method seemed made to order
for scholastic practise. It afforded the 3. Influence use of the reason when the time was
of Anselm eager and ripe. It drove through the and Abelard land like a storm‑burst. It introduced
to the scholars a mass of information and a formal discipline of thought, but in the final result it was fruitless. In the preparation of his Sentences (c. 1150), Peter Lombard (q.v.), prudent
in judgment, moderate in the application of reason, fortunate in the classification of his materials, at
once orthodox and scientific, followed the method of Abelard. The foundation for dogmatics which he laid and Abelard's method became through this text‑book the standard for all the Middle Ages, just
as his commentary on the Pauline Epistles made its way as a standard " glossary." Strict traditionalism still prevailed and impassioned attacks were made on the new theology by Bernard of Clairvaux, William of St. Thierry, John of Salisbury, Walter of St. Victor, and the brothers Gerhoh and Arno of Reichersberg (qq.v.); yet men like Gerhoh, from a genuine religious interest, began to deal with the substance of doctrine itself. The spiritual independence at the root of the dialectic of Abelard stirred also in the older orthodoxy. Rupert of Deutz (q.v.) worked out his themes in dependence upon Scripture. Honorius of Autun (q.v.) followed the footsteps of Anselm, his master in thought and method, in Octo qua'stiones and in Elucidanum, in which he treated Christian theology entire. More important are the two works of Hugo of St. Victor (q.v.), De sacramentis and Summa sententiarum, in which he partly depended on Anselm, and made the sacraments his main topic. Although dis‑
avowing " reason " and " experience," yet professing to depend on Scripture, he betrays evidence of some thinking for himself. On the whole and indi‑
vidually, although strict orthodox development continued, the leaven of Anselm's spirit and Abelard's method worked into the orthodox continuity; thought was promulgated; and the Fathers, particularly Augustine, were read in a new light.
The spiritual upheaval of which the liberation

281	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Scholasticism
of theology from the close of the eleventh century was the forerunner arrived with the middle of the twelfth. Intellectual activity, hitherto only ecclesiastical, now turns also to the nat¢. Awaken‑ ural life and benefits. Laymen enter
ing of the upon literature. The world picture
	Twelfth	becomes richer and broader, and in
	Century.	sight into human life deeper. History
		supplants chronicle. Understanding
makes place for the unity of development and for
human individuality. Poets present real human
characters; interest in nature awakens. The thirst
for reality craves first‑hand inquiry and knowledge.
Free spirits with a daring criticism and independent
judgment, even toward ecclesiastical offices and
institutions, are to be found now in the Church. In
the wider movement the question of the time was
whether the former unity of the ecclesiastical and
the secular philosophy could be longer maintained.
To do this theology laid an extensive lien upon
philosophy (Aristotle) in order to satisfy the new
interests and perchance to win them to the confines
of the ecclesiastical point of view. As of old, so
now, with the rise of the universities, theology was
to be the queen of the sciences. Monasticism under
took preaching and the advancement of science.
A wealth of new material and a power of method
were afforded by the study of Aristotle and his Ara
bian commentators. Then there was Augustine,
rich in metaphysics and psychology, and versatile
in his fine observations of life. His smoothly chiseled
and opulent formulas, the spiritual vigor of which
now first attained to appreciation, lured to imita
tion. A host of well‑disciplined churchmen, of in
defatigable industry and brilliant endowment,
sprang up to make the Church supreme in every de
partment as in no other era.
At first only Aristotle's writings used from antiquity were in evidence, as that on the categories and De interpretatione (dialectica vetus).
	S. Revival	Then, in the twelfth century the whole
of Aristotle. organon (dialectica nova) came into
		use, introduced by the translation of
Bollthius (q.v.) and later by John of Venice (c.1128).
But it was through the Arabian philosophers that
the rest became known, from the beginning of the
thirteenth century. The Arabian commentaries and
amplifications brought with them a plethora of prob
lems, but many also in the pantheistic form of the
Neoplatonists (see NEOPLATOmsM) of the unity of
the active intellect in humanity, the eternity of mat
ter, and the denial of individual immortality, ren
dering the reconcilement of positive religion with
secular philosophy ever more difficult and ultimate
ly impossible. Although Avicenna and Averrhoes
(qq.v.) had asserted that science did not abolish
but rather sustained practical views of religion, yet
orthodox theology had condemned it. In this occa
sion the tide of Eastern philosophy again set in, in
the West. This had to coordinate itself on Western
ground with church dogma and the Augustinian
spirit, finding in these, on the one hand, more flesh
of its own flesh than in the doctrines of the Koran;
and, on the other, the narrower limitations of ex
actly formulated dogma. Besides, the new influ
ences were afforded many starting‑points in the
dialectic spirit for the particular and the newly awakened interest in elementary problems, in the construction of cosmic views, and in the knowledge of nature. The consequence as a whole was the eager resort to the dialectic art of Aristotle, and gradually his methodical physics, psychology, metaphysics, and theory of knowledge adapted themselves. Of importance to this influx of Greek philosophy was the De divisione philosophice (c. 1150) of Dominicus Gundissalinus, including all those Aristotelian branches in the circle of necessary school studies. Wide theological circles, however, held themselves aloof from many articles of the new system. This is not surprising in view of the recurrence of the entire movement hostile to Abelard. A provincial synod at Paris (1210) condemned the writings of Amalric of Bena (q.v.), consigned those of David of Dinant (q.v.) to the flames, and prohibited the private or public reading of Aristotle's natural philosophy and the comments of Averrhoes thereon under threat of excommunication. The legate Robert forbade the reading of the metaphysics and natural philosophy and the comments on the same at the University of Paris in 1215; but as early as 1231, Pope Gregory IX. recommended expurgated copies, and twenty‑four years later they were adopted by resolution of the faculty of arts, .so rapidly did Aristotelian study snake headway in science and purely formal interests. Theology, also, gradually followed. Indeed, the great theologians before Alexander and Albert regarded the intellectualism and the logical analysis of the concepts of Aristotle as profane. They held to the older theology of a realistic world of divine ideas, according to the Augustinian formulas, which would become manifest to spirit living in fellowship with God, which were illumined from above. The spirit of Anselm and Hugo rather than the method of Abelard guided ‑theology till the middle of the thirteenth century. But its scientific character was to be maintained. The entering wedge was the admission of the method of Abelard, and led to farther advance in the direction of the particular. A negative result was frequently the wrangling over words and the art of confusing the subject by hair‑splitting distinctions. Yet it served as a tutelage for method of thought and the minor work for the approach of the most complex problems with Aristotelianism and its new questions and tools. The signal of wavering is already apparent in the writings of the stanch orthodox William of Auvergne (bishop of Paris, after 1228); but pronounced is the dialectic practise and interest to solve everything in the Summa aurea of William of Auxerre (d. 1231 or 1237).
III. The Scholastic Period of the Thirteenth Century: 1. The Franciscan Advance: The originator of scholastic theology in the narrower sense of the term was the Franciscan, Alexander of Hales (q.v.), author of the Summa universce theologise. This is neither a commentary nor a citation of Lombard, but a broadly outlined systematic work. A mass of material is collected which is arranged, criticized, and logically elaborated with untiring industry. The questions and problems raised by him and also many of his solutions became the proto‑

Aoholastioism
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
types for the dogmatics of the Middle Ages. Such or, the juagtia onginalis and donum superadd'itum
(original righteousness and superadded i. Ales‑ grace); snderesis (rudiment of eOn‑
ander of science); the sharp distinction of gratis
Hales. gratis data (preparatory grace freely given in particular effects) and gratia gratum facie" (grace as an abiding principle of character); of meritum de congruo (merit from the proper use of nature), and meritum de condigno (merit on the basis of supernatural grace); of carentia justitiig originalis as culpa (guilt) and concupiscentia as Pcena (punishment), in the doctrine of original sin. Also, the distinction of attritio and contritio; as repentance from servile fear and moral penitence. Alexander knew how to seize upon the inmost springs of the religious life of his day, to set them forth in clear apt statement, and with a sure skill to make the new philosophical knowledge and dialectic method subservient to dogma. Although much indebted to Aristotle and citing him continuously, he did not belong to the Aristotelians, but remained an Augustinian Platonist. He held fast to the realism of ideas and for him knowing maintained the religious character of illumination by means of " eternal ideas." Combination with the forms of Aristotelian metaphysics and psychology did not always redound to clearness and consistency. The work received highest recognition when Pope Alexander IV., in 1256, ordered it to be completed (the conclusion consisting of the last three sacraments and eschatology, and, in the third part, the doctrine on ethics were wanting). According to Roger Bacon (q.v.), as a result of Alexander's influence, academic study was reversed in placing the sentences first and Biblical interpretation second. Alexander gave the Church a thorough orthodox system with which to meet the intellectual movement of the time; in it Christianity was digested in thought and presented by means of all the newly acquired philosophical materials and motives.
In the Oxford school of theology, Robert Grosseteste (q.v.) gave impulses to theology decisive for
2. The the English Franciscans. He was a
Oxford thoroughgoing realist; but, as in the School. view of Anselm, the knowledge of the
universal realities must be appropriated in experience, which accounts also for his stress otherwise on scientific empiricism. Knowledge of nature he promoted together with mathematics, grammar, and practical philology. At one with this may have been his emphasis on the authority of the Bible for theology. Faith is essentially the " faith of those things which are believed by the authority of sacred Scripture." Faith in the truths of the Bible is redemptive. God is the will that works salvation, but good is realized only as it is done by human free will. The historical significance of this remarkable personage is in the noteworthy combination of empiricism with speculation‑of interest in connection with the traditional authoritative conception and the religious consciousness. The influence of this combination which he inspired was the main reason for the tenacity with which the Franciscans held to the
thought and method of tthhee Old Augustinian An‑
h h a d method of thought 0 t n
selmic theology.
y
m i.Adv,_
oug t 017 T
12. i The Dominican AdvsnOO*‑ The theological m
2 he D t	thirteenth movement of the	century, however, was
movemen	he b ~roug t of t	I	0 	y
	rought to its eminence by a deeper conception
a "'A 	tj
nd a stronger infusion of the system of Aristotle into theological discussion. This took place, in the first instance, through the Dominicans, Albert the Great (see ALBERTUS MearrQS) and Thomas Aquinas
(q.v.), his foremost pupil. Albert, in‑
1• Albert , spiced with a consummate passion for the Great; knowledge, collected all that was poa‑
Thomas able to human understanding, but did
Aquinas.
not advance beyond reproduction. Aristotle formed his framework, and the packing in of much Augustinian‑Platoniatic material naturally resulted in serious contradictions. To his world‑philosophy were added the church dogmas which remained essentially unchanged, no matter how much Aristotelian material was introduced. Thomas, on the contrary, penetrating and clear in conception, equipped with a fresh insight into fundamentals, a great systematic talent, and a remarkable gift of presentation, was uniquely qualified to take in the Aristotelian philosophy as a whole, and, with a sure and skilful art, of incorporating all except the absolutely contradictory. Without relinquishing dogma at any point, he reestablished the same on the new philosophy like superstructure on foundation. The entire Greek position with regard to the soul is accepted. The supreme object of man is to know. Theology is a speculative science that leads to human blessedness, which is the perfect knowledge of God. Accordingly, the nature of man does not center in will but in cognition. The intellect impresses upon volition its spiritual character. In reason as the spiritual power of choice is the seat of " free will.
Here the Augustinian point of view gives way to the Greek. Human reason, or philosophy, may of itself conceive only a few religious truths and these only imperfectly and slowly; revealed knowledge moat amplify, confirm, and complete. Revelation is at hand in the inspired scriptures. By them man becomes absolutely certain of the truth because God is their author. Therefore, the Bible is the only certain and absolutely binding authority. But revelation is doctrine, preeminently the doctrine of the " first truth," God. Doctrine is summed up in the Apostle's Creed, and guarded against heretical misinterpretation by the Nicene Creed, the conciliar decisions, and the Fathers. A nova editio symboli is in the power of the pope, who calls the council and confirms its sentence. Faith takes hold of the revealed truth. As the " reward of life eternal " is promised to faith, the will finds that which is believed agreeable. The effect of faith upon intellect for the acceptance of what is presented for belief can take place only by the infusion of a " divinely inspired disposition," inasmuch as the truths involved are supernatural. Through this "divinely inspired disposition " the intellect is adapted to believe; " an act of faith consists principally in cognition and therein is its perfection." The fides inJormis becomes fides formats by the addition of love. This is self‑evident; faith in itself remains

988	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	scholasticism
what it is but the will invests it with a personal and meritorious character. What man first would and could not, he now can and will. The knowledge by faith is supernatural and can not be demonstrated by " human reason "; yet theology is to refute the opponents of faith and elucidate and make probable the articles of belief by the aid of philosophical thought. This affords " reasons," which are not really "demonstrable," but "certain arguments, showing that what is set forth in faith is not impossible." On the question of universals, Thomas represents generally the moderate realistic point of view prevailing also elsewhere in the thirteenth century. The universal, in the first place, appears as an image of the human mind, which conceives and abstracts the common elements within changing phenomena. Things exist only as particulars; the conception of universality exists only in the intellect. But nominalist he is not; the universal, manifest in particulars, may be taken as the form of the particulars. These forms exist as realities in God, in whom they may be said, with Plato, to be preexistent ideas or universals. Their existence is not therefore merely subjective (post rem), but objective (ante rem or in re). Thomas became the philosophical and theological authority, henceforth,, of the Dominican order.
However, a vague restlessness as the sense of an innovation that was to be resisted made itself widely felt. The ideas of Averrhoes presuming to be Aris8. Reaction totehan were awakening suspicion.
Against	That Thomas sharply rebuked the
	Thomas.	doctrines of Averrhoes, particularly
		that of the unity of the inteUectus agena
in all men, availed nothing. The Minorite John
Peckham (q.v.), archbishop of Canterbury, opposed
the advancement of the Thomistio doctrines over
the order, taking exception specially to the view
that the intellective soul was the only human form.
A pro‑Augustinian reaction set in. The Franciscan
William of Mara published his Summa contra
Thomam (1284), assisted probably by his friend
Roger Bacon. As the consistency with dogma was
irreproachable, objection was raised against the
overreaching of the purely philosophical judgments
in theology and the destruction of the older meta
physics with its purely religious knowledge.
8. Various Trends: The breach was not radical; the new philosophy and Aristotle were universally
	1. Bona‑	recognized; the representatives of the
		older schools studied Aristotle; and a
		mystic like Bonaventura (q.v.) cites
him continually as authority. Plato, however, is
not to be abandoned, for he accords with Augustine.
But the authority of Scripture as the authority of
the Holy Spirit exceeds that of Augustine. Theol
ogy is the " knowledge of things eternal," or " a
wisdom and knowledge of God according to piety."
" Theology is an affective science and its knowl
edge is the grace of speculation, but principally that
men may become good thereby." The natural
" speculative intellect " is complemented by a habi
tus (" disposition ") which is the " grace of con
templation." Granted that Aristotle is right with
respect to natural cognition; theology, however,
pertains to the knowledge of practical experience.
Here Augustine is authoritative; and in God is conceived all knowledge of eternal ideas. In connection, the aim is the volitional activity of love, which is the supreme act of the soul; and by it blessedness is attained. This voluntarism is also from Augustine. In detail Bonaventura keeps close to Alexander; hence, his teaching is frequently more liberal or approximates Pelagianism more than that of Thomas, as is manifest in his meritum de congruo, attritio, and " to do that which is in himself." To Augustine is to be referred his symbolic explanation of the sacraments. . The combination of universals, contemplation, and voluntarism is peculiar in itself; and Bonaventura's significance is that by him, in adherence to Augustine, the greatest authority of the West, is expressed the instinctive effort of the peculiar character of Christianity to maintain itself against the Hellenism of the Aristotelians.
The same contrast may be recalled also in the Sentence commentary and Quodlibita of Richard of Middleton (at Paris, 1228). This sober .and clear mind affords an excellent glimpse into the Franciscan theology of the period, although not repre‑
senting the Franciscan realism. The
of Ghent. zealous antagonist of the mendicants,
Henry of Ghent (q.v.), opposed the older theology and applied the dialectic of Aristotle. On the question of universals, the essences of things are the " eternal ideas " in the divine intellect, which by a creative act of God are transposed into actual existence, and this is then conceived by the understanding as particular and universal. The things in a person's environment first produce imaginationm or phasmata, from which the intellectu8 agena, which is the " created light," abstracts the universal, or the concept, which is again reflexively referred to the cause which produced the " images." In this process Henry has in mind in addition to intellectus agena, a certain illumination by the uncreated light, which, given by the grace of God to whom he will, makes immediately evident from above the reality of things to the spirit. In dependence on Augustine and Anselm, he teaches the primacy of the will, lays stress on complete freedom, and disavows all dependence of will upon thought. In spite of this voluntarism he qualified theology as a speculative science. Like him, the theologians before Duns Scotus represented Augustine in general, laying main stress on the mystical speculation and relegating the voluntarism to second or third rank of importance. Bible and Church are to him the authorities of faith, which is the acceptance as true of the articles of belief. These can not possibly be proved; hence faith must be the gift of grace. Sin has weakened the energy of will and darkened the intellect. Grace as yratia gratis data, that is, vocatio, by the Word without or within enables man to meritum congrui and this leads to sacramental gratin gratum faciens; man is now " justified " and can deserve meritum de condigno. This in dogmatics is following the footsteps of Alexander and Bonaventura in outline, though deviating in some details. .
These two tendencies, the old Augustinian theology and the modern Aristotelianizing, had in com‑

Scholasticism
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
mon the basic authority of Scripture and the dogma arising therefrom, which were to be expounded by means of the philosophy of Aristotle. The swing of the pendulum in the direction of philosophy bore results. Here and there dogmatic speculation rooted itself in strange soil; dialectic arts were called in to reconcile contradictory
3. Biblical philosophic views. The Biblical studies
Conserva‑ of the past centuries retreat to the tism; Roger
	Bacon	background; the interest in patris
		tic literature is waning. Sentences
in process of collection from the time of Abelard
are deemed sufficient. Nowhere was the older the
ology so powerfully and peculiarly represented as
at Oxford, in the tradition of Grosseteste (q.v.) and
Adam Marsh. Roger Bacon's supreme valuation of
empiricism and experimental science led him to de
mand a limitation and division of the sciences.
Theology was to cease to amalgamate itself with
philosophy; because, dominated thereby, it en
gages itself with a number of purely cosmological
problems which do not concern it; purely theolog
ical questions resort to philosophical methods; and
real Biblical study is relinquished amid foreign in
terests, such as " analysis employed by, logicians,
forced agreements such as the legalists use and the
rhythmical harmonies of the rhetoricians." So it
has become customary from the time of Albertus
Magnus and Alexander of Hales (qq.v.), and
even at Oxford from 1250, to read the Sentences
solemniter. And all this notwithstanding the
fact that all these men understood almost nothing
of real philosophy, according to Roger Bacon, since
they did not grasp Aristotle, and could not on ac
count of the wretched translations. The peculiar
task of theology should be " about the sacred text."
Better than the collections would be to read the
Historica scholastics (Peter Comester, q.v.), as was
done before Alexander. Biblical interpretations
interspersed with dogmatic expositions is the ideal
before Bacon. Protests now arise from the spiritual
minded against the " curious and sterile science " or
" questions " which have banished Biblical study.
Perhaps the revival of Biblical study from the
closing decades of the thirteenth century may be
attributed to this attitude of the older theology.
The order, which is to prevail for the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries, has now formed itself ac
cording to which theological study falls into three
stages: cursory reading of the Scriptures, the ex
planation of the Sentences, and the lectio ordinaria,
or master's minute Scripture interpretation. The
first two are conducted by two baccalaurei; the third
by the magister regens. Though always marking
the high point in theology, yet Biblical study could
be pursued only according to the dogmatic schema
tism, the Bible being used as a source‑fund of specu
lative doctrines.
4. Duns Scotus (q.v.): An Oxford Franciscan, this greatest of the scholastics, enters the movement at the turning of the thirteenth to the fourteenth
1. Critical century. Versed in mathematics and
Work.	physics, he also possessed a fine per
	ception for the observation of the
tual in psychology and religious life. He stood wi his Franciscan colleagues for the older theology
284
realism and voluntarism, sin and redemption, and on the symbolic explanation of the sacraments; but differed by abandoning the faltering attitude toward Aristotle. A close student and commentator of Aristotle, unequaled in his mastery of the dialectic method, with consummate energy he criticized the doctrines of the Platonic Augustinian system and their proofs, and created new formulas and new proofs. He exerted himself to give statement to the fact of the matter and not merely to well‑modulated formulas. As a mere summary in passing he (1) sought to reestablish and advance the old realism with the new scientific means. (2) He carried through logically the primacy of the will with reference to God as well as to creature. (3) He grounded anew, and for the future, the particular doctrines of the Franciscans, overthrowing critically those to the contrary. After this follows (4) his ecclesiastical positivism. Theology is a positive science. The free will of God has revealed itself in free contingent acts and orders. This revelation is at hand in Scripture. Religious knowledge is not universal philosophical knowledge, but a practical understanding; it has to do with the " final end revealed by God and the attitude of human will which it conditions." In consequence the positive doctrines and ordinances of the Church are a priori the absolutely necessary means for the attainment of the ultimate end. Thereby, it is presupposed that church doctrine is Scripture doctrine; but the prescriptive authority is that of the Church. But this formula placed the dogma in the same relation as the positive statutes warranted by the right of the State. Both may be systematized, interpreted, and criticized, without being abolished in either case. An immediate consequence is (5) the disintegration of the unified world‑philosophy of Thomas. On the one hand is the view of the natural in conformity with laws; on the other is the contingent activity of God presenting itself casually in acts, doctrines, orders, and institutions. The methods of knowledge are different in kind: there, are necessary truths of reason; here, contingent truths of history.
Duns is significant not only in criticism or the judgment of the particular; he represents (6) also
a general religious theory that adheres 2. Theolog‑ to Augustine and conforms with the 'cal Views; basic tendencies of medieval piety. Regressive
Results. God is Will; man is will: the former
" dominant," the latter " subject." The absolute free‑will of God appoints, works, and organizes the whole; and all things are means for the attainment of the final end, the blessedness of the predestinated. From this point of view are to be understood the predestination of Christ to become man, the nature of man and sin, the validity of the work of Christ, the persuasive power of the Word which this conditions, the renewing divine efficacy in the sacraments, as well as merit and blessedness. On the other hand, man is represented to be absolutely free. Here are rooted all the Pelagianizing elements in the thought world of Duns. But the freedom of the creature obtains only for the immediate connection, of which man is in the act of be, coming conscious; absolutely, man is wholly sub‑

266	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	eoholastioirm
ject to the unity of the great objective plan. Though criticizing particular formulas and proofs, in substance and tendency Duns is at one with the old theology of the thirteenth century. His significance is therefore that alongside of the intellectualism of Thomas, the Augustinian voluntarism remained; that dialectic did not sweep out of existence the old problems of religious metaphysics; and that theology employed itself with realities and not merely formulas. Pelagian and disorganizing elements are not wanting, and continued powerfully in development. Although he strove for real things in theology, yet no one was as much responsible for the gradual deterioration of scholasticism into dialectic virtuosity, subtleties, and logomachy on the one hand, and a rigid positivism on the other. More remarkable is it that the last great protagonist of realism was the teacher of the man who disseminated nominalism in wide circles, William of Occam (q.v.). The increasing secularizing of the Church, the medieval traditionalism that became entangled in the chains of proof and forgot the substance, the rivalry of schools and orders anxious to uphold complete the doctrines of their masters, the critical tendency of Duns, using positivism as counterbalance and seal of certainty‑all these contributed to reduce spirit to dulness and more and more to substitute the pursuit of formulas for that of knowledge.
IV. Decline of Scholasticism. 1. Divergent Schools of the Fourteenth Century: Two systems now prevailed in the pursuit of theology; the Thomistic and the Scotist. The scientific development proceeded along two lines: First, the Scotist emphasis upon the active principle in knowing as well as the direction of the knowing faculty upon
the particular, together with the in1. Crass creasing complication, of the realities
	Nominal‑	immanent in the thin to be realized
		led to a break with realism and the
revival of nominalism through Occam. The inor
dinate criticism of dogma secured the widest op
portunity in the petentia absoluta of God, but was
made harmless by positivism. In particular church
doctrines the criticism and formulas of Duns were
followed. Nothing hastened the downfall of scho
lasticism more rapidly than the trifling with pos
sibilities, to set oneself at rest finally with the
authoritative. Among nominalists were Adam God
dam, Robert Holcot, Jean Buridan (q.v.), Marsilius
of Inghen, and later Pierre d'Ailly (q.v.), as also the
last representative, Gabriel Biel (q.v.). Also the
Dominican Durand of St. Pourgain (q.v.) departed
from the doctrine of his order. Theological knowl
edge, according to him, is concerned only with su
pernatural redemptive truths of revelation as they
occur in the Bible. Knowledge is possible only on
the basis of empirical realization, and speculation
and illumination of reason are to be rejected. As
frequently among the nominalists, the authority of
Aristotle is declined where he differs from the
" truth of things." In like manner the authority
of all human teachers including those of the order
is not binding.
The second line of development was that represented by the two schools, in contrast with the rationalism and positivism of the nominalists, which
in their way sought to connect with the mystical and Augustinian tendencies of the older theology. 2. The Aver‑The first of these, first represented by
rhoistio. Petrus Aureolus (d. about 1345), John
of Baconthorp (d. 1346), and Joannes de Jauduno (master at Paris after 1316), repudiated the Thomistic understanding of Aristotle and adhered to Averrhoes. Just as the things in the world known in themselves become fully realized by the light of the inteldectus agens, so the objects of faith presented in the Bible may be conceived by means of a " disposition " of faith whose character consists in taking the Scripture as divine truth. This is the light of faith that operates to make thought cleave to the objects of faith so firmly as to possess a real knowledge of them (Baconthorp). Joannes de Jauduno declared all the Averrhoistic doctrines, such as the eternity of the world and the unity of the intellect, as rationally necessary, and preserved the idea of revelation as a means to salvation just as his master had in a practical religious interest with the Koran. In like manner the Paduan school of the fifteenth century assigned to the Averrhoistic ideas a similar position to that which they occupied in the peripatetic philosophy from the thirteenth.
More important was the Schola Aegydiana or theology of the Augustinian hermits. Xgidius de Columna (q.v.) wrote a commentary to the first
3. The three books of the Sentences. Jacob Mgidian. Capocci (d. 1308) followed him, then
Augustinus Triumphus (q.v.), Gerhard of Siena, Prosper of Reggio, Simon Baringundus, and the German Heinrich von Freimar and Thomas of Strasburg (d. 1357). Xgidius considered in theology an affective " disposition " of knowledge which is akin to the speculative. God is not conceived " according to the mode of reason," but " according to the form of revelation." All sciences shall be subservient to theology, which, however, is not under the necessity of explaining its principles. Salvation is to be realized in life by " act of the will." The universal is in ipsa re as the natura rei, which is something different from the particular thing of sense; and as ante rem it subsists in God as eternal idea. Stress is laid upon the fact that God moves all creatures " to their activities " and that they are his " instruments and less than instruments." This natural operation of God is preliminary to the operation of grace. Preparation for the gratis gratum faciens is possible only as a divine calling and an inspiration of good reflections precedes. The sacraments, according to Thomas of Strasburg, are only means for the grace immediately wrought of God in the soul. Scotist and Thomistic elements mingle; on the whole the basis of the older theology is conserved without a thoroughgoing advance. An interesting and important advance was made by Gregory of Rimini (d. 1358), who regarded theology as an essentially practical science so far as it guides to eternal life, but containing also speculative principles, which it proves from Scripture. The principal authority for Gregory was Augustine; but it is remarkable that he professed nominalism and attempted to derive it from Augustine. Not " the lack of original right eousness " constitutes the nature of original sin, but

Soholsstioism
" concupiscence itself is original sin." " Act of lust " is not here thought of, but the " carnality " arising from the generative desire of parents, which is a " real quality " in the human soul. "The works of unbelievers which seem virtuous and commendable are truly sinful and punishable, vicious, and morally evil." Children dying unbaptized shall be subject not only to the " punishment of the damned " [i.e., judgment of original sin], but also " to the punishment of pain." Turning sharply against the idea of a "general influence of God " by which sinners de congruo are capable of earning " first grace," he held that to be capable of good requires a " special aid of God' ; of himself man may earn neither the gratis gratum faciens nor the dispersive gratis. gratis data. The good in man is a direct act of God. The only cause of salvation is the divine predestination embracing in itself, as in Augustine, " calling " and " justification " and not being dependent on foreknowledge. Gregory was a genuine scholastic with a lively interest in philosophical problems and a delight in proofs, and also a man of not inconsiderable independence, shown by his going over to nominalism and by the energy with which he was able to think himself to an independent position amid the views of Augustine. Pelagianism is again reduced to a fundamental heresy, and contemporaneously Bradwardine (q.v.) completed his great anti‑Pelagian work.
8. Culmination: The scientific activity of the thirteenth century had therefore been directed to satisfy the intellectual necessities raised by the
	twelfth, by means of unified philosoph
4‑ Disin‑ ical theory in which was merged the
twat" dogma of the Church with the philoso
and the phy of Aristotle. The boldest and
Reforma‑
	tion.	clearest attempt of Thomas Aquinas
	tion.	obtained only qualified approval.
Duns Scotus split apart the two elements; with
William of Occam (see OCCAM, WILLIAM OF), the
unity became illusory. Nothing illustrates the situa
tion better than the recall in the fourteenth century
of the sentence of Averrhoes: a principle may be
correct in philosophy but false in theology. Where
there was a readiness to follow Thomas, it stopped
short with the practical deductions; faith and in
centive to his daring idealism failed. The increasing
intellectual self‑dependence afforded theology an un
capricious character, and criticism did not univer
sally blunt itself as the nominalistic positivism.
Again theologians arose, like Anselm of old, who
approached theological problems with a striving for
the truth of experience, and these cared more for
the faith and a reformation of life than for
" system." Such movements were not interrupted
in the Franciscan order, and that Duns and Occam
were members was not accidental. Characteristic
of the time is it that, impelled by inmost experi
ence, Thomas Bradwardine (q.v.) of Oxford ral
lied his age from Pelagianism to the Augustinian
determinism of grace, and a man like Gregory of
Rimini so earnestly reverted to Augustine. Then
came Wyclif (q.v.), anti‑scholastic schoolman and
realistic critic, without, however, the critical pre
cautions of the nominalistic positivists or the
THE NEW SCIiAFF‑HERZOG
ass
naive credulity of Ansehn. He was induced by practical motives and theology was the means to his ideas of reform. As realist he saw in it no mere contrivance of words but realities, which led to real consequences. His thought was controlled by two main principles: the Augustinian predestination and the Biblical discipleship of Jesus.
But to the cry for reform in the fifteenth century was opposed, as usual, the counter‑effort at rectoration. In such cases, restoration allies itself with retrenchment, insisting only upon the
8. Resto‑ main things. Yet such reduction is ration; in danger of stagnation, unless new
Finality spiritual tendencies from fresh points of Thomas. f mew set in. Thus the battle between the " old " and the " modern," realism and nominalism, continued, but the charge against and ridicule of scholastic practise in theology emanated not only from Humanists but from theologians as well. Slowly scholasticism turned into new channels. For example, the nominalist Pierre d'Ailly (see AILLY, PIERRE D') limited his Sentence commentary to what appeared to him practical, seemingly important problems. Likewise for Thomas Netter (q.v.) in his Doctrinale antiquitatem against Wyclif; the problem pertains to Church and institutions; the Bible and earlier Fathers furnish the proofs. Above all new problems are disavowed, and the older ones are to be reduced to main points and simplified, but the native power of the authors is dead. The recourse is to seek a via media among the opinions of the past, or at moat adherence to a great master. By clearness, simplicity, thoughtfulness, and the elimination of paradoxes and extremes, no system of the past was so well adapted to this process as that of Thomas Aquinas. Besides, the practical theologians, the German mystics, followed him as their teacher and pure nominalism with its criticism and fruitless dialectic was more and more doubted, while realism rose again to power through Platonism in Niholas of Cuss, (q.v.) and Averrhoism (the Paduan School). Johannes Capreolus (q.v.), the chief of Thomists, in his four books, Defensiones theologise divi. doctoris Thomce (5 vols., Turin, 1901‑04) criticizes the other scholastic theories and recommends in all points a return to Thomas, thus introducing the Thomist reaction of the fifteenth century. Gradually, here and there, the theological Summa of Thomas became the basis of lectures instead of the Sentences of Lombard. Dionysius Rickel (see DIONYBIUa THE CARTHUaIAN) presented the scholastic theories clearly in his Sentence commentary, generally in adherence to Thomas. A comprehensive presentation by Gabriel Biel followed in most questions the views of Scotus and Occam. Soon after, Francis Lycketus prepared his commentary on the Opus Oxoniense of Duns, and Thomas del Vio wrote his commentary on the Summa theologica, and Franciscus de Silvestria Ferrariensis, on Summa contra gentiles, both by Thomas. More and more distinct became the return to the thirteenth century and the recognition of Thomas as the surviving fruit of scholasticism. He formed also the basis for the great restoration of scholasticism which, starting at Salamanca, took place in

287	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Scholasticism
Spain in the sixteenth century. Thomists were also the intellectual antagonists of Luther. Recently Pope Leo XIII. pronounced this the normal theology.
	V. Characterization in Summary: As a rule the
schoolmen present their teaching in the form of com
mentaries on the Sentences of Peter Lombard.
The problems raised by him are resolved into an
increasing multiplicity of questions, often so re
mote from the text that this is soon forgotten
		by the reader. The series of distinc‑
r. Method. tions by Lombard remain as an outline for the accumulating material. To extract the basic ideas of the theologians is one of the gravest impediments to the modem understanding of the peculiarity of the scholastic systems. Another is the repeated differentiation of the material into new questions the basis for the opposite views of which are thoroughly established and thoroughly refuted. For instance, a distinction of Lombard is resolved into a number of qumstiones and each of these into a number of articles. Other subdivisions may follow: such as, membra, principalaa, panes, tractatus, dubia, ad fcnitum. In detail each article is so treated as to raise a question; then citations for and against are quoted from the Church Fathers down to the scholastic masters. After the quod non or quod sic is concluded, follows the responsio of the author or the corpus of the article. Then follows the discussion in much detail of the views produced first for, then against, the question, not infrequently including the characteristic opinions of the author. Into this endlessly irksome mold, the explanation of every problem is dragged. But its great service was its vitalization of dialectic art and of logical categories for scholars and for the development of education to the present day. Easier and simpler was the presentation of Thomas, who parted from the scheme of Lombard and built his own system on the grand and simple outlines of (1) of God, (2) to God, (3) through Christ. He also possessed the art of setting forth perspicuously the essential and of expressing it in a form easily understood. Yet even here the endless analysis and monotonous dialectic are wearisome.
From the time of the famous introduction of V. Cousin to the works of Abelard (1839) it has become customary to trace the history of scholasticism by the thread of the conflict of rationalism and nominalism. But this division will not
z. Problem. classify in theology and must be complemented by the further view‑points of Augustinianism and Aristotelianism, voluntarism and intellectualism, positivism and rationalism, practical and theoretical knowledge, as has been done in the preceding sketch. The traditional and inviolable Biblical material authorized by the Church is to be interpreted and systematized. In addition it must be brought into harmonious relation with secular knowledge. In the example of Thomas, the philosophy of Aristotle takes its place beside church doctrine. Reason is not only the logical faculty, but also the organ of philosophic intuition. Hand in hand with revelation, it erects a grand system of religious philosophy. Revealed thoughts are not to be rationalized or proved in the strict sense but merely shown as probable and con‑
formable to reason. As a result orthodoxy and rationalism are commuted, giving rise to a speculative theoretical knowledge as subject of theology. Exactly this entrance of the rational element called forth the protest of the older theology and the movement introduced by Duns Scotus. The older theology, though acceding to the entrance of the science of Aristotle, and adopting the dialectic, desired to see the religious character of theology preserved, partly by adherence to the religious speculation of Augustine and his doctrine of will, and partly by the retention of realism. This latter seems contrary to the purpose; yet realism derived its ideas as inherent in things from heaven; it touched the divine in everything that transpired; everything earthly was a medium revealing the heavenly, and knowledge assumed an immediate mystical character. To Duns philosophy and theology were distinct in object and kind. The latter was concerned with a purely practical knowledge. The will of God revealed itself to human will as its end and provided the means and ways for attainment. The Church with its dogmas and institutions is that way. Though dealing with subjects common to both, metaphysics deals with the truths necessary to the thought of being; theology with positive revelation. Theology and philosophy must part. This practical knowledge of theology, however, becomes scientific by the dialectical proof of the inner unity of revelation and its ecclesiastical institution. But instead of doing this Duns simply makes revelation equivalent to church doctrine and order, and instead of producing a new conception of faith correlative to a practical revelation he rests correspondingly with the intellectual assent of tradition. And instead of wholly severing the bond to Aristotle he weaves him entirely into theology from new points of view. The result is shown in the endless unrest suspended over his system of thought. With a sure eye for system he takes in hand the exposition of the particular doctrines; with a keen criticism of tradition he has paved the way, but he is impeded from attaining his aim of practical knowledge by the ready‑made church doctrines, and, in part, by the Aristotelian dogma. Hence, the brilliant criticism of Duns proves to be in vain, and his characteristic tendency is ever deterred by the ecclesiastical positivism. So much more divergent is the inconsistency between aim and result as Duns, unlike Thomas, who follows a certain tendency of rationalizing faith, would conceive it only in its practical nature. But the undertaking of Thomas was also untenable because of the disparity of the religious faith and philosophic knowledge which he vainly aimed to unify. Faith as theoretical assent is the rock on which Duns splits and the fortress of Thomas; the relation of philosophy and theology is the stronghold of Duns, the weakness of Thomas. The latter founders on a false deduction; the former on the incapability of prosecuting a true one. The one was impeded by philosophy; the other by church doctrine.
Hereby are distinguished the two methods of scholasticism. The one is the union of dogmatics with Aristotelian philosophy, as the ultimate conclusion of natural metaphysics; the other repre‑

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Scholasticism
Scholia
sents separation and theology as the purely practical religious knowledge of the way to God. Having the inviolable formulas of the Church and
3. Three the Aristotelian logic in common, the
	Types.	two methods frequently coincide, in
		part or whole, in presenting the same
doctrine. Doctrinal reconstruction is precluded
for both by their presuppositions. Thus adher
ence to the foundations and problems of Lom
bard for centuries is self‑evident. Original obser
vations and judgments occur but do not dare to
brave the ban of church doctrine and practise.
More radical in antagonism to the system of Thomas
was the work of Occam. The aim of this was to ex
pose the irrationality of dogma and with an un
sparing criticism to show on every hand the an
titheses to the church tenets as thinkable. It was
customary to make excursions in the light of the
Potentia absoluta, how things might have been in
the absence of reality; but in the sterile atmosphere
of the day those possibilities soon dispersed and
the church positivism remained. But historically
considered this aspect of the matter was of the ut
most significance. When confidence in single church
doctrines was once attacked, the criticism of single
dogma and doctrines became customary, and
finally theology led quite barrenly to the consid
eration of the ecclesiastical doctrines and ordinances
as mere empirical realities. Not without enhan
cing the natural element in church ordinances, this
theology undertook the support of Pelagianism and
the externalizing of grace in the institution of pen
ance from an inner relationship of choice. The
negative criticism of the materials of tradition and
a rationalizing and naturalizing positivism within
the limits of its power‑these are the principles of
nominalism. They are the distinguishing marks of
the third type of scholastic theology. Following
mainly the outline of Duns Scotus, it is distinguished
from his system by the qualities characteristic of
the mode of thought of the nominalistic theologians,
namely, crassness of criticism, inner contempt of
dogma, and the lack of a unified Christian philos
ophy.
The supreme tendency of the theology of the
thirteenth century‑to provide the new world in the
act of self‑realization with a self‑consistent philoso‑
phy, which should render the kingdoms of the world
subject to the pope and all secular
4. Surviving knowledge a pillar to the arch of church
Influences. doctrine‑was reversed by nominal‑
ism. The older theology of the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries which was instinctively
disinclined to Aristotle prevailed. This right was
justified by Duns and Occam, though otherwise than
as those old theologians had anticipated. The practical situation which had occasioned the enormou
labor of the thirteenth century continued. It i
self‑evident, then, that in the fourteenth cent
Thomism on the one hand and Augustinianism o
the other took their places beside nominalism. The
Thomists desired to enforce the primacy of the
Church in learning and life, and became the bitter‑
est foes of the Reformation; the Augustinians, no
without being affected by nominalistic criticism,
endeavored to rescue the primacy of religion '
criticism,
288
life, and became the forerunners of the Reformation. A historical magnitude like scholasticism, lasting four centuries, was not without its permanent influence in philosophy and theology. Not only is this found in Roman Catholicism as already pointed out, but also in the influence of Duns upon Luther in favor of a practical religious doctrinal system setting forth the way of redemption as manifest in revelation. So also the influence of Thomas upon Melanchthon, who allowed philosophy as ancilla theologise to contribute the materials of natural knowledge to dogmatics. In principle, the older Protestant theology adhered to the rejection of scholasticism by the Reformation, and the Enlightenment (q.v.) was incapable of receiving a profound historical appreciation of scholasticism. This change did not occur until the revival of the historical sense by Romanticism (q.v.). From the time of F. C. Baur's great work on the Trinity, Protestant history of dogma has given more unbiased attention to scholasticism, especially after interest was stimulated by Albrecht Ritschl's inquiry into the persistence of scholastic thought within Protestantism. Yet no field presents so many unclaimed problems as the history of scholasticism. (R. SEEBER(3.)

B($LrodnAPAY: W. L. G. von Eberstein, Die naEUrliche
	Theolop6e der Scholast%ker, rtebat Zuantzen fiber die Freiheita‑
lehre and den Begri$' der Wahrheit 6ei denaelben. Leipsie.
1803; R. D. Hampden, The Scholastic Philosophy Con
sidered in its Relation to Christian Theology. 2d ed., Lon
don, 1837; G. O. Marbaah, Lehr6uch der Geschichte der
Philosophic, Part 2. 1.eiPSic. 18381: 7C. Rousselot,
etudes our la philosophic done le molten dge. Paris. 1840
1842; R. Hasse, Anselm von Canterbury, 2 parts. Leipsic,
1843, Eng. transl., London, 1850; A. Jourdain, Recherchea
critiques our Cfige d i orip%ne des traductiona Wines
d' Ariatote, 2d ed.. Paris. 1843; B. Haur6au. De la philo
sophic acolaatique. 2 vols., ib. 1850; idem, Hiato%re de la
philosophic acoiastique, ib. 1872‑80; idem. Grigoire IX.
et la philosophic d Atistote, ib. 1872; F. Morin, Dictaon
naire de philosophic el de thiolop%e acolastiquea, 2 vole.,
ib. 1858; E. Plasemann, Die Sehule des heilipen Thomas
van Aquino, 5 vole., Munster. 18572; H. D. KShler,
Realasmua and Nom%naliamus in %hrem E%nJlusae auJ
die dogmatiachen Syateme des Mittelalters. Goths. 1858;
W. Kaulieh, Geachichte der acholestiachen Philosophic,
part 1, Von Joh. Scotus Eripena his Abalard, Prague, 1883;
A. Stoeekl, Geachichte der . Philosophic des Mittela2tera,
3 vo1s., Mains. 18648; idem, Doctrine philosophique
e	de S. Thomas d'Aquin, Paris, 1893; C. S. Bsrach, Zur
Geachiehte des Nom%naliamus vor Roacell%n, Vienna, 1888;
L. Figuier, Vies des savants illuatrea du moyen dge, sues
d	l'apprEciation eommaire de leura travnux, Paris, 1887; F.
r	D. Maurice, Mediceual Philosophy of the First Six Cen‑
h	furies. new ed., London, 1870; 3i. Schneid, Die acholasti‑
ache L ehre von Materie and Form, Eichst>itt. 1873; J.
Sehwertsehlllger, Die erate Entstehung der Organisrnen nach
h	der Philosophic des Alterthums and des Mittelaltera, ib.
y	1873; J. Bach, Die Dopmenpeschichte des MittelalEera vom
christologiachen Standpunkte, 2 parts, Vienna, 1873‑75;
A. Ebert, Allpemeine Geachichte der Literatur des Mittel‑
au	alters %m Abendlande, 3 vole., Leipsie. 1874; M. Sehneid,
Ariatotelea %n der Scholastik. Ein Beitrap zur Ceschichte
der Philosophic %m Mitte7alter. Halle, 1875; J. H. Loewe,
Der KampJ zurischen dem Tlealiamus and Nom%naliamua im
8	M%ttelaltcr. Prague, 1876; C. Werner, Der Entwicklunga‑
~r	pang der mittelalterlichen Psycholopie van Alcuin b%s A1‑
n	6ertus Magnus, Vienna, 1878; idem, Die Scholastik des
aptiteren Mittelaltera, 4 vole.. ib. 1381‑87; idem, Die
e	nominalisirende Psgcholopie der Scholastik des aptlteren
C	Mittelaltera, ib. 1832; N. Valois, Guillaume dAuverpne,
sa vie M sea ouvrapea. Pares, 1&S0; F. X. Pfeifer, Harmoni‑
c	ache Beziehungen zrcischen Scholastik and moderner Natur
	wrissenachaJt. Augsburg, 1881; W. J. Townsend, The Great
Schoolmen of the Middle Ages London, 1881: J. Bering‑
ln	ton, Literary History of the Middle Ages, ed. W. Hazlitt,

269	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Scholasticism
8cholis,
London, 1882; J. Schwane, Dogm eschichte der midtleren
Zeit (787‑1617), Freiburg, 1882; P. Guess, Vrais prin
eip" de philosophic scolastique, Paris, 1883; G. Runze, Der
ordolopiache Gottesbeweia. %ritisehe Dareteldung seiner
Geschidte seit Anselm bis auf die Geyenwart, Halls. 1883;
J. Astromhoff. Introductio ad intelligendam doctrinam
Anpelici Doctoria, home, 1884; R. L. Poole, Illustrations
of the History of Medieval Thought, London, 1884; C. M.
Schneider, Das Wissen Gotles each der Lehre T. von Aquin,
4 parts, Regensburg, 1884; F. Ehrle, Bsbliotheea theo
logid scholastics, Paris, 1885; P. Nova, Dictionnaire de
terminologie scolastique, Avignon, 1885; K. Prand, Gs
schichte der Logik im Abendlande, 4 vols., 2d. ed„ Leipsie,
1885; H. T. Simar, Die Lehre vom Wesen des Gewissens in
der Scholaatik des 13. Jahrhunderts, Freiburg, 1886; J. von
der As, Cursus compendiarius philowphim scolastxo, Lou
vain, 1887; A. Adeodatus, Die Philosophic der Newest and
die Philosophic des heiligen Thomas von Aquino, Bonn,
1887; H. von Eicken, Geschichts and System der mitt"
terd"en Weltanschauung, Stuttgart, 1887; P. de Mar
t9M. La Scholastique et lea traditions franciscaines, Paris,
1888; )J. Blame, Traitk de philosophic scalaatique, 2 vols.,
Lyon, 1889; V. Lipperheide, Thomas von Aquino and die
platonische Ideenlehre, Munich, 1890; H. Appel, Die Lehre
der Scholastiker von der Syntereais, Rostock, 1891; C.
Baeumker, Beitrdge zur Geschichte der Philosophic des
Mittelalters, 3 vols., Miinater, 1891 eqq.; J. von Falke,
Geachichte des Geachmaeks im Mittdalter, Berlin, 1892;
J. Gardair, Corps d doe. Easais cur la philosophic de S.
Thomas, Paris, 1892; D. Nesmith, Makers of Modern
Thought, I‑t0‑1899, 2 vols., London, 1892; J. J. Berthier,
Tabula, systematicr totiua summa theologicce, Freiburg,
1893; E. Gebhardt, L'Italie mystique; histoire de la renais
sance religieuae au moyen dge, 2d ed., Paris, 1893; A. Port
mami, Das System der theologischen Summe des hefen
Thomas van Aquin, Lucerne, 1894; 0. Willmann, Ge
schichte des Idealismus, vol. ii., 3 vols., Brunswick, 1894
1897; A. Mignon, Les Origines de is acolastique d Huguea
de Saint Victor, 2 vols., Paris, 1895; M. C. J. W ulf, Hist.
de la philosophic seholastique clans lea pays‑bas, Brussels,
1895, new ed., Louvain, 1900; idem, introduction d la
philosophic Wo‑scolastique, ib. 1904; idem, Hid. de la
philosophic mMi€vale, ib. 1905, Eng. tranal., Scholasticism
Old and New; an Introduction to scholastic Philosophy. me
dieval and modern, New York, 1908; J. M. Littlejohn, Po
litical Theory of the Schoolmen, New York, 1896; F.
Pieavet, Roscelin philosophe d th&logien, Paris, 1896;
idem, Abilard et Alexandre de Hales criateura de la me
ehodescolastique,ib.1896; idem, Esquisse dune histoire des
philosophies mkdi6vales, ib. 1905; G. Leavre, Lea Varia
tions de Guillaume de Champeaux et la question des univer
aaus, Lille, 1898; T. F. Mandonnet, Siger de Brabant et
1'Averoiame latin au aiii. sihcle, Freiburg, 1899; C. Frae
sen. Scotus Academicus seu universa dodoria subtilia theo
logica dogmata, Rome, 1900; A. Gardner, Studies in John
the Scot, London, 1900; Jerome of Montefortino, Duns
Scoti Summa eheologica, Rome, 1900; R. Seeberg, Die
Theologie des Duns Scotus, Leipsic, 1900; J. Draeseke,
Johannes Scotus Erigena, ib. 1902; J. Guttmann, Die
Scholadik des 13. Jahrhunderta in ihren Beziehungen zum
Judentum and zur judishen Litleratur, Breslau, 1902; C.
Alibert, La Paychologie thomiate et lea obories modern",
Paris, 1903; H. Felder, Geschiehte der wissenachafaichen
Studien in Franziskanerorden big Mitte d" 13. Jahrhund
erts, Freiburg, 1904; K. Krogh‑Tanning, Der letzte Scho
lastiker, Dionysiua de Leuuris de Rickel, ib. 1904; P. Mirages,
Duns Scotus Indeterministt Munster, 1905; J. Rickaby,
Scholasticism (in Philosophies, Ancient and Modern), Lon
don, 1908; M. Grabmann, Die Ceschichte der acholasti
when Methode, vol. i. Die scholadische Mdhode van ihren
erden Anfdngen in der Vdterliteratur bis zum Beginn des
1,8. Johrhunderts, Freiburg, 1909; J. L. Perrier, The Re
vival of Scholastic Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century,
New York, IWO; H. O. Taylor, The Medieval Mind, 2 vola.,
New York, 1911; Schaff, Christian Church, V., 1, chaps.
xii.‑xui.; the works on the history of philosophy by H.
Ritter, Hamburg, 1844‑45; E. Erdmann, 3 vols., Lon
don, 1893; W. Windelband, ib. 1893; and F. Ueberweg,
ed. M. Heinze, 8th ed., vol. ii., Berlin, 1905; the litera
ture under UmvsasrrrEs; and that under individual
schoohnen treated in this work, e.g., Abelatt(; Albertus
Magnus; Duns Scotus; Lally, Raymond; Peter Lombard;
Thomas Aquinas; and others.
SCHOLIA.
Character of Scholia (§ 1). Biblical and Patristic Scholia (§ 2). Early Biblical Scholia (§ 3). Byzantine and Other Works ($ 4). Editions (§ 5). Editions of N. T. Scholia (§ 6).
The patristic acholia on the Bible are distinguished from Biblical commentaries in that, instead of following the text continuously, they explain only such individual points as seem to require elucidation. The wholion thus resembles the gloss (see GLOSSES, BIBLICAL AND ECCLESIASr. Character'rICAL), though in the medieval period of Scholia. " gloss " denotes a scholion which can not be ascribed to a definite author. In Greek philology, on the other hand, a gloss originally meant an obscure phrase or word, later being applied metaphorically to the interpretation of such a phrase or word. In such glosses the obscure words were replaced by intelligible ones, either on the margin of the text or above the words in question. Later still, the gloss comprised not only the interpretation of obscure words and phrases, but etymologies and elucidations of subject‑matter in the text under consideration. Both the state of patristic exegesis and linguistic usage render it impossible to distinguish sharply between scholia and commentaries, especially as the individual notes of the commentaries possess a certain degree of independence and are thus akin to the scholion. Moreover the scholion is defined by Suidas and the Etymologicum magnum as a note placed beside the text during school instruction. It thus bore a distinctly informal character, was essentially characterized by the individuality and ability of the teacher, and was not necessarily intended for publication. The linguistic usage of patristic exegesis furnishes many examples of these meanings of the term scholion. Arethas (q.v.) terms his commentary on Revelation a " Scholiastic synopsis," and the commentaries on Matthew and Mark in Cod. Laur. VI., 18 and Codex Vaticanus 1,445 are likewise designated as scholiaThe‑author of the catena Laur. VI., 33, on the other hand, distinguishes sharply between scholion and commentary, and this distinctioa is still more marked in the catena on Paul in Vindobonensis 166. The catenas are the principal sources for excerpt scholia, these being notes drawn from commentaries or other writings and appended to the words of the text they elucidate. Besides these sources, the independent labor of scholiasts must be considered, in which the individuality of the author appears more prominently than in the notes proceeding from studies in schools. Such scholia are the notes and comments of a reader less intent on explaining his text than on marking and elucidating passages which especially attract his attention. The scholiast's freedom is restricted in texts regarded as sacred, of which an authoritative interpretation had early been given. In itself it is immaterial whether the scholiast made his annotations for purposes of instruction, or for himself. In Biblical scholia the latter was rarely the case.
One of the most interesting Biblical scholia is the Codex Marchallianus on the prophets, which was re‑

THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG
vised according to the Tetrapla of Origen. On its margins scholia record the critical labors of Origen,
and also contain other pertinent matter s. Biblical of various periods. Especially instrucand Patristic tive for scholia literature is the Athos
Scholia. manuscript Laura 184 B. 64 con‑
taining Acts and the Catholic and Pauline epistles. The scholia contain valuable critical notes, mostly with the citation of the authorities and works from which they are drawn. The principal sources are the Stromata and the commentaries of Origen, though Ireneeus, Clement, and Basil are also used. The scholia are not invariably named, however, the anonymous ones apparently belonging to the original owner of the manuscript, which has been plausibly supposed to have come from the school of Arethas of Caesarea. The character of the echolia of this manuscript clearly show that the interest of the writer was concentrated on the subject‑matter and its problems, thus leading to a scientific revision of the entire manuscript. The Biblical acholia afford no certain data concerning the problem of their origin, since they for the most part presuppose the exegetical tradition of the commentary. The analogy of the scholia on the Church Fathers must accordingly be employed. Here the most important scholia are those on Clement of Alexandria, written by Baanes and Arethas, and the scholia on Gregory Nazianzen. The scholia of Baanes are primarily linguistic, though they also give notes on mythology and history. The interest of Arethas was primarily theological, though he cites the classics as well as the Bible or such Church Fathers as Athanasius, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory Nazianzen (qq.v.). He pays especial attention to allegorical exegesis, etymologies, definitions, figures, and similes, Short rules of life, paronomasias, antitheses, and anecdotes from history and natural science. The objects of Elias of Crete, one of the scholiasts on Gregory Nazianzen, were to interpret theological, ethical, and scientific material, as well as the mythological and linguistic problems of his text.
It may be assumed that similar interests and intentions led to the writing of scholia on the Bible; but if this be true, these scholia can rightly be judged only in connection with classical philology, the
methods being identical, despite the 3. Early divergence of matter and of aim. In
Biblical the Hellenistic period criticism became
Scholia. An indispensable element of education
to protect the sources of classical training and to guard their exegesis. Thus arose the classical commentaries, collections of acholia, florilegia, and lexicons. Even more attention, however, was directed to interpretation of the language and the matter than to criticism, and allegorical exegesis was carried far (See EXEGESIS OR HERMENEUTlcs). This tendency to interpret and deepen authoritative tradition led, in ancient philology, to a special class of Bcholiastic literature, designed to reconcile the discrepant statements of an author. This latter type to harmonize difficulties forms an important class of Christian scholia, exemplified not only by frequent passages in the commentaries of Origen, but also by marginal notes on manu‑
avo
scripts of the Bible, as is Laur~ VI., 33 and Cod. COW. 206. The earliest patristic collection of echolia is doubtless the Hypotyposeis of Clement, its sources being the original elders and Pantaenus, the founder of the catechetical school at Alexandria, whose object was to deepen knowledge, investigation, and interpretation of the Bible. The work, as described by Photius (Bibliotheca, cix.), was a condensation and a summary, incomplete, allegorizing, and full of repetitions. Despite the unfavorable attitude of Photius, who was theologically opposed to Clement, it is clear that the latter 's book was acholiastic in character. Origen is expressly said to have written acholia, besides his homilies and com‑
mentaries. Many of these scholia are preserved in the catenas, and Jerome mentions such comments on Leviticus, Isaiah, Psalms i.‑xv., Ecclesiastes, and John. The Athos manuscript likewise cites
Origen's scholia on Genesis, and mentions his Stromata as a source for its own scholia. The scholia of Origen are characterized by brevity and cogency. They contain notes on the text, pertinent interpre‑
tations, and information on the subject‑matter, with relatively little allegorizing. The catenas contain numerous scholia of Theodore of Mopsuestia
and other Antiochian theologians, while Theodoret is also occasionally mentioned as a scholiast.
The majority of the anonymous scholia are characterized by Byzantine orthodoxy, as is shown by the scholia of Hesychius on the Psalms. Whether
the scholia of Johannes Hamartolus on
4. Byzan‑ the same book is of a like anti‑Origen‑
	tine and istic spirit is problematical, but at all
		Other events he furnished the sole source for
		Works. the catena of Nicetaa. Byzantine scho
		lia are essentially of one type; dog
matic, ascetic, and allegorical interpretations pre
vail, rather than notes on geography, history, or
subject‑matter. Numerous examples of these
acholia may be drawn from J. C. G. Ernesti's edi
tions of the Glosso; sacrie of Hesychius (Leipsic,
1785) and Phavorinua (1786), as well as from C. F.
de Matthaei's Glossaria. (irceca minors (2 vols., Riga,
1774‑75) and J. Alberti's Glossarium Crrcecum in
sucros Novi Teatamenti libros (Leyden, 1735). The
oldest treatise on Biblical difficulties is Philo's
Qucestiones et soluliones quae aunt in Genesi et in
Exodo, translated from Armenian into Latin by
J. B. Aucher (Venice, 1828), and from the Latin
into English in Bohn's Theological Library, Works
of Philo, iv. 284 sqq., London, 1855. Of the Church
Fathers Eusebius wrote on the solution of discrepan
cies in the Gospels, those preserved (ed. A. Mai, Nova
collectio, i.1‑60, 61‑189, Rome, 1825) treating respec
tively of the genealogy and infancy of Christ, and
of his passion. A comprehensive work of similar
character was written by Theodoret (MPG, Ixxx.
77‑856), discussing the Oetateuch, Kings, and
Chronicles. In like manner, the " Collection of
Problems and Solutions " ascribed to the presbyter
Hesychiua (MPG, xciii. 1391‑1448), the 446 " Ques
tions and Answers " of Anaatasius of Sinai (MPG,
lxxxix. 311‑824), and the Qucestiones ad Amphiloch,
ium of Photiua (Mai, Nova colLectio, i.) contain chiefly
exegetical difficulties side by aide with dogmatic
and ascetic problems. To the Western Church be‑

271	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	eoholis
Soholtea
long the Quostiones ex Vetere et Novo Testamento, probably composed by Hilary. The manuscripts contain numerous collections on "difficulties," mostly anonymous. In Codex Vindobonensis XXIX. are the " Answers " of Severus of Antioch to Eupraxius, while in the Moscow manuscript of Arethas is a related work of similar form.
Comparatively few scholia have as yet been printed, though those of Clement, Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, Cyril, and others have been excerpted
from the catenas, and individual anong. Editions. ymous compositions have been edited.
The tasks preliminary to a corpus of Biblical scholia are many and difficult, involving the determination of which scholia are excerpts, what is their relation to their sources, the deviations of their transmission, the problem as to which scholia are original and hence independent sources, the interests and tendencies revealed in the scholia, and the relation of the scholia to the text as either corrupting it or preserving it. The first attempt to make a comprehensive collection of patristic scholia was by J. Gregorius, in his posthumous Scholia Gregoriana (ed. J. E. Grabe, Oxford, 1703), the chief sources being Origen, Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, (Ecumenius, Theophylact, and Nicetas. A similar attempt was made by E. W. Grinfield's Novum Testamentum Grwcu»t (4 vols., London, 1843‑48), the first two volumes paralleling each verse with the Septuagint, and the latter two containing parallels from Philo, Josephus, the Apostolic Fathers, the New Testament Apocrypha, etc. The parallels in Wetstein's edition of the New Testament (2 vols., Amsterdam, 1752) also have the value of a collection of scholia. The patristic scholia, so far as they can be referred to specific authors, are contained in the great editions of the Church Fathers, and in the collections of Montfaucon (Collectio nova patrum, 2 vols., Paris, 1706), A. Mai (Patrum nova bibliotheca, 8 vols., Rome, 18441871), and J. B. Pitra (Spieilegium Sdesmense, 4 vols., Paris, 1852‑58, and Analecta sacra, Paris, 1876 sqq.). These are mostly fragments derived from catenas, and the same scholia are sometimes represented by different recensions, as the scholia of Eusebius on Luke, of which Mai gives three texts. The fragments of Hippolytus on the Pentateuch, the historical books, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, and Ezekiel are edited by H. Achelis in his edition of Hippolytus (I., ii. 1‑194, Leipsic, 1897). The fragments of Origen on the Octateuch, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel are given by Pitra in his Analecta sacra (ii. 349‑350, iii. 1‑364, 523‑527, 538‑551), and scholia of Origen and Eusebius on Psalms i.‑cxviii (ib., 369‑520) ; E. Klostermann has edited the scholia of Origen on Jeremiah, Lamentations, and Samuel in the third volume of his edition of Origen (Leipsic, 1901). Scholia of Eusebius on the Psalms are given by Montfaucon (ut sup., i. 1‑2) and Mai (ut sup., IV., i. 65‑66), scholia of Athanasius on Job and the Psalms by Pitra (Analecta, v. 3‑27), scholia of Basil and Hilary on the Psalms by the same scholar (op. cit., 76‑104, 141‑144), end anonymous scholia on Psalms i.‑xiii. by C. F. de Mattha!i (Leo‑
tibnes Mosquenses, ii. 41‑52, Leipsie, 1779. Victor
of Capua's collection of Scholia veterum patrum is edited by Pitra (Spicilegium, i. 265‑276; the same volume [pp. 18‑20] also containing anonymous scholia on Proverbs). Mai (ut sup., vii. 2) has given scholia from Origen, Didymus, Hippolytus, Apollinarius, and Polychronius on Proverbs, Isaiah, and Ezekiel, as well as the fragments of Cyril of Alexandria on Proverbs, the Song of Solomon, and Daniel (ii. 468‑469, iii. 137‑138). The scholia of Chrysostom on Kings, Job, Proverbs, Jeremiah, and Daniel are contained in MPG, Ixiv. 193‑194, 501502. A special type of scholion is presented in the Ezpositio interlinearis in Job ascribed to Jerome (MPL, xxiv. 1475‑76), in the Qucestiones Hebraic in Genesin (ib. 983‑984), and In libros Regum et Paralipomendn (ib. 1391‑92).
Among New Testament scholia mention should be made of the fragments of Clement's Hypotyposeis (ed. T. Zahn, Supplementum Clementinum, pp. 6465, Erlangen, 1884), of Origen and Apollinarius on Luke (Mai, Auctores dassici, x. 474‑
6. Editions 482, 495‑499), of Hippolytus on Mat‑
	of N. T.	thew (ib.197‑208), of Theodore of Mop
	Scholia.	suestia on the Gospels and the Pauline
		epistles (ed. 0. F. Fritzsche, Zurich,
1847), of Chrysostom on Romans and the Catholic
epistles (MPG, lxiv. 1039‑40), of the Athanasian
homilies on Matthew and Luke (Montfaucon, ut
sup., ii. 24‑48; MPG, xxvii. 1391‑1404), of Cyril
of Alexandria on Matthew (Mai, Nova collectio, VIL,
ii. 142‑148), Luke (Mai, Auctores classici, x. 1‑407,
501‑546, 605‑613), and Hebrews (Mai, Nova col
lectio, VIII., ii. 142‑148), and of Severus on Luke
and Acts (idem, X., i. 408‑457, 470‑473, X., ii.
457‑470).	Of the anonymous scholia the Scholia
in quatuor evangelic, first edited by Mai (Auctores
classici, vi. 379‑500, ix. 431‑512; reprinted in
MPG, cvi. 1077‑1290), are especially important.
These seem to be in the main excerpts. Those on
Matthew and John correspond in content to Chrys
ostom, while the scholia on Mark and Luke are
most nearly akin to the anonymous portions of
Cramer's catena. The most extensive collection
of anonymous acholia, however, is in C. F. Mat
thaei's major edition of the New Testament (Riga,
1782‑88). Matthmi likewise published anonymous
scholia on Revelation in his edition of Victor's oom
mentary on Mark (pp. 210‑224, Riga, 1775). In
his edition of the catenas J. A. Cramer has made
many addenda from manuscripts containing scholia,
especially on Mark, Luke, Acts, and certain Pauline
epistles (Oxford, 1838‑44); and fragments of chilias
tic scholia on Matthew have been edited by G.
Mercati (Studi a testi, xi. 1‑2). See CATENAS and
GLOSSES. 		(G. HEINRICI.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. F. von Soden, Die Schriften des N. T.a in ihrer 81teaten erreichbaren Textgestalt, i. 293‑294, Berlin, 1902; G. Karo and J. Lietzmann, in the Nachrichten of the Gbttingen Royal Society of Sciences, philosophicalhistorical class, 1902, parts 1‑3; J. E. Sandys, Hist. of Classical Scholarship, Cambridge, 1903.

SCHOLTEN, JAN HENDRIg: Dutch Protestant theologian; b. at Vleuten, near Utrecht, Aug. 17, 1811; d. at Leyden Apr. 10, 1885. He was educated at the University of Utrecht (1828‑35), interrupting his studies in 1830 to Serve in the cam‑

8oholtsn
schoruashuis
paign against Belgium. He was pastor at Meerkker for two years (1838‑40), and professor at Fraaeker (1840‑43). A few months later Bcholten became associate professor of theology at Leyden, and full professor in 1845, retaining the latter position until his death, though after 1881 he was professor emeritus. Lecturing at first on natural theology and introduction, he began in 1845 to treat the Dutch creeds and the principles of the Reformed Church. Beginning with 1852 he added to his work an alternating course on Christian dogmatics and NewTestament theology, while with the change of the system of instruction in 1877 he took charge of the lectures on the philosophy of religion and the history of the concept of God. The writings of Scholten mark a steady evolution in his theological attitude, changing from conservatism to a full acceptance of the results of the critical school. This is exemplified by the difference between his HiSt0risch^kritische inteiding tot de schriften den Nieuwen Testaments (Leyden, 1856) and his Het evangelic naar Johannes (1864). His dogmatic writings were Dogmatices Christians; initia (1853‑54), Geschiedenia der chriatelijke godgdeerdheid gedurende het tijdperk den Nieuwen Testaments (1856), and especially his De leer der Henormde Kerk in hare grorufbeginaden (1848‑50). This latter work marked an epoch in the history of Dutch Protestantism, which had for several years approximated the Bible rather than Reformed standards. Scholten now became the leader of opposition to the Groningen school, which sought to return to the Gospel and the Arminian concept of the person of Christ, and in his work on the doctrines of his church he stoutly defended Calvinistic determinism. The position here held by Scholten was further developed is his Gesehiedenia van godsdienst en wnjabegeerte (1853) and was still more elaborated in his De vriie aril (1859). The question of the day became the relation of man to Calvinistic predestination, and the relation of that doctrine to Christianity; go that Scholten saw himself compelled to become the protagonist of the determinists, and thus to be the leader of the " modernists." Some idea of his position may be gained from his rectoral address De godgeleerdheid aan de Neederlandsche hoogescholen (1876) and his monograph Supranaturaliame in verband met Bijbel, Christendom en Protestantisme (1867), and from other contributions.
As a delegate of the theological faculty of Leyden, Scholten was repeatedly a member of the synod and of the synodal committee of his church. In 1854 he was commissioned by the synod to prepare the translation of the Gospel and Epistles of John which appeared in 1868. (A. KUENENt.)
BIHLIOGRAPBT: Proteatantiaclw Kirchenteitunp, 18&1, PP. 789‑794, 1885, pp. 380‑385; A. Kuenen,in Jaarboek der
kon. Acid. van WdvuhaPY‑, 1885 (s memorial ad‑
drem).

SCHOLZ, acholts, ANTON: German Roman Catholic; b. at Schmachtenberg, Bavaria, Feb. 25, 1829; d. at Wiirzburg Sept. 30, 1908. He was educated at the Lyceum of Aschaffenburg (18491850) and at the universities of Munich and Wiirzburg (1850‑53; D.D., Wilrzburg, 1856); was curate of Zell (1853‑55); secretary of Bishop
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Anton von Stahl (1855‑81); parish priest at Eiaingen, near WVrzburg (1861‑72), being also district inspector of schools from 1863 to 1872. In 1872 he was appointed professor of Old‑Testament exegesis and Biblical oriental languages in the University of W iirzburg, of which he was rector in 1879‑80 and 1892‑93. In 1903 he retired from active life. After 1885 he defended the thesis that certain books of the Bible, such as Esther, Jonah, Judith, Tobit, Bel and the Dragon, and Susanna, are not historical, but are midrashic apooalypaea. He was also a protagonist of Biblical criticism after 1895, and after long discussion, his views were recognized as justifiable by a papal decision in 1905. He wrote De inhabitatione Spiritus Sandi (W Urzburg, 1872) ; Der masaorethiache Tent and die Septuaginta‑Ueberaetzung des Bathes Jeremiaa (Regensburg, 1875); Kommenlar zum Buche des Propheten Jeremias (1880); Die atexandrinische Ueberaetzung den Bathes Jesaiaa (1880); Kommentar sum Buehe den Propheten Hoseas (1882); Kommentar rum Buche Joel (1883); Judith, sire Prophetic (1885); Kommentar zum Buehe Judith (1887); Kommentar zum Buche Tobias (1889); Kommentar abet das Buch Esther mit seineyt Zusatzen and abet Susanna (1892); Zeit and Ort der Entatehung der Bother des Alters. Testaments (1893); Kommentar caber daa Bueh Judith and fiber Bel and Drache (1896); Kommentar fiber den Pratiger (Leipsie, 1901); and Kommentar fiber daa Hohelded (1904).
SCHOOLMEP. See SCHOLABTICIBM.
SCHOPEIYHAUER, shtS'pen‑hau"er, ARTHUR: German philosopher; b. in Danzig Feb. 22, 1788; d. in Frankfort=on‑the‑Main Sept. 21, 1860. He was son of a prosperous merchant who destined him to follow his own calling. After his father's death, his mother became a well‑known novelist, member of the literary group at Weimar, drawn there by the fame of Goethe. His early life was one of vicissitude; he lived successively at Danzig and Hamburg, and in France, England, Italy. He tried his hand at commercial life, science and philosophy, studied at Gottingen, Berlin, and finally at Jena, where, in 1813, he received his degree with a dissertation Ueber die vierJache Wurzel den Satzes vom zureichenden (kunde (Rudolfatadt, 1813, 5th ed., 1891; Eng. tranal., The Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason, New York, 1889). This contained the germ of his later. thought. His chief works ass, Die Welt ala Wills and Voratellurcg (Leipsie, 1819; Eng. transl., The World as Will and Idea, London, 1883); Ueber den Willen in der Natur (Frankfort, 1836, 5th ed., Leipaic, 1891; Eng. transl., Will in Nature, 1889, and in Bohn's Philosophical Library); Die beiden Grundprobleme der Ethik (Frankfort, 1841) Parerga and Paralipomena (Berlin, 1851). His SBmmtliche Werke were issued in 6 vole. (Leipsic, 1873‑74; 3d ed., 2 vole., 1891). As a philosophical writer Schopenhauer is unexcelled unless by Plato, in penetrating analysis, logical acumen, boldness of conception, subtlety of reasoning, picturesqueness of presentation, brilliancy and fascination of liter ary style.
According to 3chopenhauer reality is character‑

278
RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
Scholt~a
8obortinghuio
ized by a blind impulse which actualizes itself in
the infinite variety of living forms in the world.
The " will to live" describes this all‑impelling
force. Hence arises the fierce instinct of self‑pres
ervation by which every individual is ruled, and
also the relentless warfare in which every individual
both seeks to defend himself and to devour others.
If in man the intelligence is more fully developed
and the sensibilities more refined, this only deepens
his consciousness not alone of actual but also of
imagined and therefore of possible misery. The
more complex the life, the more aggravated the
wretchedness. Not joy, but unhappiness is life's
positive content. Even freedom from pain results
in ennui. Morality is impossible. The instinct of
self‑preservation becomes self‑seeking, vanity, hy
pocrisy; and however the will may seem to be re
fined by culture, this is only apparent; it is hope
lessly fettered and can not be changed by training.
History but confirms the impression made by an
analysis of man's nature. A hope of redemption
appears to be offered by science, and especially by
art, which opens the door to contemplation in which
the intense struggle for existence is momentarily
stilled. But even this promise is illusory; for the
initiated it simply puts off the evil day, for all others
it is wholly unavailing. The only sure path to
emancipation lies in renouncing the will to live. He
who beholds all others in this vast vortex and knows
that for them as well as for himself deliverance can
come only through supreme and final renuncia
tion of the principium individuationis, will dedicate
himself to asceticism, to disillusionment as to pleas
ure, to total abstention from sexual intercourse and
ultimately from food. 	C. A. Bzecswrra.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: English transls. other than those noted in the text are: Select Essays, Milwaukee, 1881; Religion: a Dialogue, and other Essays, London, 1889 (from Parerpa). The Wisdom of Life, being the First Part of . . . Aphorismen zur Lebenaweisheit, ib. 1890; Counsels and Maxima: Being the second Part of . . . Aphoriamen sur Lebenaweisheit, ib. 1890; The Art of Controversy, New York, 1890; Selected Essays, London, 1891 (in Bohn's Philosophical Library); The Art of Literature, London, 1891; Studies in Pessimism, ib. 1891, 7th ed., 1908; On Human Nature, London and New York, 1897, 3d ed., 1908; and The Basis of Morality, London, 1903.
As sources for a life use: Briefweched swischen Arthur Schopenhauer and Johann Aug. Becker, ad. J. K. Becker, Leipeie, 1881; Schopenhauer‑Briefs, ad. L. Sehnm.„o, ib. 1893; Briefe an Becker, Frauenatadt, Van Does, Lindner and Asher, ed. Grisebach, Leipsic, 1895. On his life consult: J. Frauenat‑sdt and E. O. Lindner, Arthur Schopenhausr: van ihm, fiber ihn, Berlin, 1883; W. Gwinner, Schopenhauer and seine Preunds, Leipsie, 1883; D. Asher, Arthur Schopenhauer: Nauss von i4m und fiber ihn, Berlin, 1871; H. Frommann, Arthur Schopenhauer, Jena, 1872; W. Gwinner, Arthur Schopenhauer Gus pera6nlichem Umgange dargeatellt, Leipsie. 1878; K. Bgh1, Geaprdche and Briefwmhael mit A. Schopenhauer, Leipaie, 1894; ADS, aaxii.333‑348.
On his philosophy consult: F. Dorguth, Schopenhauer in seiner Wahrheit, Magdeburg, 1845; C. Bartholmees, Histoire critique des doctrines religieuses do la philoaophie moderns, vol. ii., Strasburg, 1855; A. Cornill, Arthur Schopenhauer ale sine Ueberganpaformotion von einer idealiatischen in eine rmliatische Weltanschauung. Heidelberg, 1858; C. G. Bahr, Die whopenhauer'sche Philo8ophie in ihren Grundzitgen, Dresden, 1857; R. Seydel, Schopenhauers philosophiaches System, Leipsic, 1857; G. de Spiegel, L'Esprit de to philosophic de Schopenhauer, Darmstadt, 1863; R. Haym, Arthur Schopenhauer, Berlin, 1884; C. A. Thilo. 8ehopenhausrs athischer Atheiamus,
X.‑18
Leipaio, 1888; W. Seheffer, Arthur Schopenhauer: die Philasophie van hd Pessimism, Leyden, 1870; A. von Wurzbaoh, Artur Schopsnhauer. Vienna, 1871; A. Taubert, Der Pesaimiamus and wine Gagner, Berlin, 1873; M. venetianer, Schopa4auer ale Scholastiker. ib. 1873; J. Huber, Der Pesvimismua, Munich, 1878; T. Trouts, Der Pesaimismua: seine Bepranduny in der neueren Phaosophie, Csrleruhe,1878; Helen Zimmern.ArthurSdopenhauer: his Life and his Philosophy, London, 1876; F. Bowen, Modern Philosophy. From Descartes to Schopenhauer and Hartmann, New York, 1877; E. Ddhring, Der Werth den Lebena, 2d ed., Breslau, 1877; idem, Rritische Geachichte der Philoaoghie, Berlin, 3d ad., Leipsic, 1878; E. von Hartaann, Neukantianismue. Schopenhauerianismua and Hegelianiamue in ihrer Stellung su den philoaophiachen Aufgaben der Gegenwart, Berlin, 1877; E. Herrmann, Woher and wohin f Sehapenhauee a A ntwort auf die letzten Lebenafrapen, Bonn, 1877; J. Sully, Pessimism: a History and a Criticism, London, 1877; L. von Golther, Der moderns Peaaimismus, Leipsie, 1878; E. Caro, Le Peasimiame au sir. eiade: Leopardi, Schopenhauer, Hartmann, Paris, 1879; P. Mainlrinder, Die Philosophic der Erl6sung, Berlin, 1879; L. Ducros, Schopenhauer: lea oripinaa de so mfphysique, ou lea traneformationa de la .. chose en aoi" do Rant d Schopenhauer, Paris, 1883; R. Koeber, Die Phi7oaophia Arthur Schopenhauera, Heidelberg, 1888; O. Cramer, A. Schopenhauera Lehre von der Schuld in ethiechen Besiehunpen, ib. 1895; W . Caldwell, Schopenhauer'a System in its Philosophical Significance, Edinburgh and New York, 1898; S. S. Colvin, Schopenhauer'e Doctrine of as Thing in Itself, Strasburg, 1897; R. Bbttger, Dos Grundproblem der sehopenhauer'achen Philosophic, Gre;fewald. 1898; O. Damm, Schopenhauers Bthik, Annaberg, 1898; M. Joseph, Die payeholopische Grundanschauunp Schopenhauera, ib. 1898; W. Deutsehthamler, Ueber Schopenhauer su Kant, Vienna, 1899; P. J. Mbbius, Ueber Schopenhauer. Leipsie, 1899; S. Rappaport, Spirwza and Sehopenhauer. Berlin. 1899; E. Clemens, Schopenhauer and Spinoza, Leipsic, 1900; R. Saitachick, Genie and Charaktar, Shakespeare, Leasing, Schopenhauer, Berlin, 1900; J. Volkelt, Arthur Schopenhauer, Stuttgart, 1900; O. Damm, Schopanhauer'a Rechts‑ and Staataphiloaophie, Halle, 1901; T. B. Saunders, Schopenbauer, London and New York, 1901; R. Schluter, Schopenhauera Philoaophie in seiner Briefen, Leipsie, 1901; E. Hubbard, Schopenhauer, London, 1905; D. Irvine, Defence of Pessimism, ib. 1905; A. Kowalen.ki, Arthur Schopenhauer and seine Weltanschauung, Halle, 1908; T. Whittaker, Schopenhauer, ib. 1909; R. Basaxdiian, Schopenhauer der Philosoph des Optimismua. Leipeic, 1909; G. F. Wagner. Encyklopddiwhea Register su Schopenhauera Werken, Carleruhe, 1909; J. MOhiethaler, Die Mystik bei Schopenhauer, Berlin, 1910; G. Wang, Schopenhauer. Darwin. Pessimismua Oder optimismus, ib. 1910; the works on the history of philosophy by E. Zeller, Munich. 1873; J. E. Erdmann, London, 1898; W. Windelband, New York, 1893; and Ueberweg‑Heinze, Berlin, 1905.

SCHORTINGGHUIB, shor"ting'hwls, WILLEM: Dutch Reformed poet and theologian; b. at Winechoten (21 m. e.s.e. of Groningen) Feb. 23, 1700; d. at Midwolda (18 m. e. of Groningen) Nov. 20, 1750. He was educated at the University of Groningen (1719‑22), and early in 1723 became second preacher at Weener in East Frisia, where his antipathy to Pietism was changed to admiration by his senior, Henricus Klugkist. Through the exertions of the two, the pietistic movement spread widely in the province among Lutherans and Reformed alike, promoting both the inward and the outward prosperity of the church. In 1734 Schortinghuis was called to the pastorate of Midwolda, where he passed the remainder of his life, successfully promoting the cause of true piety. Though far from being a poet, Schortinghuis began his literary career by his GewWike gesangen (1733), which was soon followed by his Betwnddike ge8angen, hymns of edifying and didactic purport which long

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
remained popular in conventicles. His Nodige vxiarheden in 't herte van een Christen (Groningen, 1738) was designed primarily for those who were about to make profession of their faith. His chief work was the Het innige Christendom . . . rooorgeatelt in E'‑ aamempraken tusel, een geoefende, begenadigde, kleingeloovnge en onbegenadigde (1740). In this work the author became the representative of Pietism in the Dutch Reformed Church of the eighteenth century, and gave a description of, and counsel for, a life of practical holiness. It caused a lively controversy because of its mystical trend, and its author secured the requisite approbation of the theological faculty of Groningen only with difficulty. Within the year a second edition appeared with the approbation of the classis to which Schortinghuisbelonged, but his opponents secured from the Synod of Groningen the prohibition of a third edition until the doubts of the faculty should be satisfied. The strife was even carried outside his own synod. Despite all this, the Het innige Christendom exercised a wide influence.
(S. D. vex VEEN.)
BrHLioa8APirY: H. van Berlcum, Schortsmhuis en de oiiJ nietm Utrecht, 1859: J. C. Kromsigt, Withedmue Schortinghuie. Groningen, 1904.

SCHOTT, shat, HEINRICH AUGUST: German Lutheran; b. at Leipsic Dec. 5, 1780; d. at Jena Dec. 29, 1835. He was educated at the university of his native city (Ph.D., 1799); lectured there on theology and philology (1801‑05), being morning university preacher after 1803; was associate professor in the philological faculty (1805‑08); and in the theological faculty (1808‑09); full professor and preacher at the castle church at Wittenberg (18091812); and at Jena from 1812. While at Leipsic Schott edited the Ars rhetorica of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Leipsic, 1804), and the Greek text of the New Testament with a Latin translation (1805), and wrote his Entwurf einer Thearie der Beredsamkeit mit besonderer Anwendung auf Kanzelleredsamkeit (1807). At Wittenberg he composed his Epitome theologise Chriatiance (1810). His chief work was Theorie der Beredsamkeit, mit besonderer Anwendung auf die christliche Beredsamkeit (3 parts, Leipsie, 1815‑28). Special mention should be made of his Isagoge historico‑crittica in libros Nom Poderis sacros (Jena, 1830) and his Latin commentary on Thessalonians and Galatians (Leipsic, 1834). His apologetic contributions, such as his Briefs fiber Religion (Jena, 1826), are of minor value. A number of briefer contributions from his pen were collected in his Opuscula (2 vols., 1817‑18). (L. PELTt.)
BIr1LIOaSAPHY: J. T. 1.. Dana, Heimich August Schou, Leipsic, 1836.

SCHOTT, THEODOR FRIEDRICH: German Lutheran and historian; b. at Esslingen (17 m. e.s.e. of Stuttgart) Dec. 16, 1835; d. at Stuttgart Mar. 18, 1899. He was educated at the seminary of Blaubeuren and Tubingen (1853‑57), and after being vicar for two years at Bopfingen and Kbngen, was a teacher at Hofwyl near Bern from 1859 to 1861; then he studied the history of the French and Italian Reformation at Paris for three months, and, after a short term as vicar, he. became teacher
274
of religion at the Stuttgart gymnasium. He was next pastor at Berg, a suburb of Stuttgart, for six years (1867‑73), and from 1873 until his death was librarian of the public library in Stuttgart. He was likewise a director of the W urttemberg branch of the Gustav‑Adolph‑Verein and helped found the Verein fur Reformationsgeschichte, and was also active in philanthropic work. After 1876 he was editor of the Allgemeines Kirchenblatt fur das evangelische Deutschland, and, besides many briefer contributions, wrote Hugenottengeschichten (Stuttgart,
lggg); Die Aufhebung des Ediktes von Nantes (Halls, 1886); and Die Rirehe der Waste 1757‑89' (1893).
(H. HERMELINS.)
Brsraoassrar: Biogrophischaa Jahrbuch, ed. A. Bettelheim. iv (1899), 75‑77.

	SCHRADER, shrti'der, EBERHARD: German
Protestant Orientalist; b. at Brunswick Jan. 5,
1836; d. at Berlin July 4, 1908. He was educated
at the University of GBttingen (Ph.D., 1860), and
1862 became privat‑docent at the University of
Zurich, where he was appointed full professor of
theology in 1863. In 1870 he was called to Giessen
in a similar capacity, and thence to Jena in 1873.
From 1875 until his final retirement, brought about
by impaired health in 1899, he was professor of
Semitic languages in the philosophical faculty of the
University of Berlin. He was the pioneer of Assyri
ology in Germany‑ Besides editing the eighth edition
of W. M. L. de Wette's Lehrbuch der historischr
kritiachen Einleitung in die kanonischen and apokry
Phischen Bxlcher des Alten Testaments (Berlin, 1869)
and the Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek (6 vola., 1889
1901), he wrote De linguce Xthiopicce cum. cognotts
linguis eomparata: indole (Gbttingen, 1860) ; Studien
zur Kritik and ErkkYrung der biblischen Urgeschichte
(Stuttgart, 1863) ; Die assyrisch‑babylonischen Keil
inschriften, kritische Untersuchung der Grundlagen
ihrer Ent2i,$'erung (Leipsic, 1872) ; Die Keilinschrif
ten and das Alte Testament (Giessen, 1872; 3rd ed.,
entirely revised, by H. Zilnmern and H. Winekler,
Berlin, 1902; Eng. trans. of the second edition, The
Cuneiform Inscriptions and the Old Testament, by O.
C. Whitehouse, 2 vols., London, 1885‑88) ; Die Hot
lenfahrt der Istar (Giessen, 1874) ; Keilinschrif ten and
Geschichtsforschung, sin Beitrag zur monumentalen
Geographie, Geschichte and Chronologie der Assyrer
(1878); Zur Kritik der Inschriften Tiglath‑Pileser's
11, des Asarhaddon and des Asurbanipal (Berlin,
1880) ; Zur Frage reach dam Ursprunge der altbabylon
ischen Cultur (1884) ; and Die Keilinschriften am
Eingange der Quellgrotte des Sebeneh.Su (1885).
Brsrroaawrav: C. Bezold, Eberhard Schrader. Eine Lebeneakiue. Strasburg, 1909: E. Meyer, Godachtniarede auJ Eberhard Schrader, Berlin. 1909: O. C. Whitehouse, in Expository Times, Dec., 1910, pp. 104‑108.

SCHROECgH, shruk, JOHANN MATTHIAS: German Lutheran; b. at Vienna July 26, 1733; d. at Wittenberg Aug. 1, 1808. After completing his education at GSttingen, he spent a year at Leipsic in further study and assisting his uncle, Karl Andrews Bell, to edit the Acts eruditorum and Leipziger Gelehrten Zeitungen. Still continuing his editorial labors, he lectured at the university on parts of the New Testament, as well as on literary history and

',875	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Schott
		Schubert
church history, and in 1761 was made associate
professor. In 1767 he accepted a call to Wittenberg
as professor of poetry, exchanging this chair in
1775 for that of history. Besides his Lebensbeschrei
bungen beriihmter Gelehrter (Leipsic 1764‑69), All
gemeine Biographien (Berlin, 1767‑91), and Christ
liche Kirchengeschichte (see below), Schroekh revised
four parts (on Italy, France, Holland, and Eng
land) of a German tranal. of W. Guthrie and J.
Gray's General History of the World (1770‑76) and
the fourth edition of L. Offerhaus's Compendium
histories universalis (1778), and wrote his Lehrbuch
der allgemeinen Weltgeschichte (1774), the fourth
part (from 1750 to 1760) of the Unparteiische
Kirchengeschichte Allen and Neuen Testaments (Jena,
1766), Historia religionis . et ecdesite Christiante
adumbrata in usum lectionum (Berlin, 1777), and
Allgemeine Weltgeschichte fur Kinder (4 vols.,
Leipsic, 1779‑$4). By far his most important work,
however, was his great Christliche Kirchengeschichte
(45 vols., Leipsic, 1768‑1812), the first thirty‑five
volumes extending to the Reformation, and the
rest (of which the two final volumes were edited by
H. G. Tzschimer after Schr6ckh's death) bearing
the special title of Kirchengeschichte seit der Refor
mation. The work is still of distinct value.
	The theological position of Schrbckh was one of
modified supranaturalism, and his method, with its
excellences and its defects, was essentially that of
the period in which he lived, the period of the
"Enlightenment" (q.v.). (J. A. WAGENMANNt.)
BIBLjoattAPHY: An autobiographic sketch is in J. R. Cl.
	Beier's Allgemeine Mapazin fur Prediger, v. 2, pp 209
	222, 12 vols., Leipsic, 1789‑96. Consult further: K. H.
	Polite, Leben J. M. Schrackhs, Wittenberg, 1808; K. L.
	Nitzeoh, Ueber J. M. Sehr6ickha Studienweise and Maxi
	men, Weimar, 1809; H. G. Tzschimer, Ueber J. M.
	Schr6rkkhs Leben, Charakter, and Schriften, Laipsie, 1812.
	SCHROERS, shrArs, JOHANN HEINRICH: Ger
man Roman Catholic; b. at Krefeld (20 m. s.w. of
Essen) Nov. 26, 1852. He was educated at the
universities of Bonn, WiArzburg, Innsbruck, and
Munich (Ph.D., Wiirzburg, 1880); was engaged in
parochial work in Munich (1880‑55); became privat
docent for canon law at the University of Freiburg
(1886), whence he was called in 1886 to his present
position of professor of church history in Bonn. He
has written Der Streit uber die Prddestination im
neunten Jahrhundert (Freiburg, 1880); Hinkmar,
Embischof von Reims, aein Leben and seine Schriften
(1884); and Kirche and Wissensehaft (Bonn, 1907).
	SCHUBERT, shu'bert, GOTTHILF HEINRICH
VON: German Lutheran and naturalist; b. at
Hohenstein (40 m. s.s.e. of Leipsic), Saxony, Apr.
26, 1780; d. at Munich June 30, 1860. Though in
tended by his father for the ministry, the rational
ism at Leipsic, where he began his theological
studies, was so uncongenial to him that he devoted
himself to medicine at Jena. For a time he was a
physician at Altenburg, but feeling impelled to
deeper study of the natural sciences, he went in
1805 to Freiburg, where he wrote the first part of
his Ahnungen einer allgemeinen Geschichte des
Lebens (Leipsic, 1806). In 1806 he removed to
Dresden, and there completed the Ahnungen (1821),
which was followed, a few years later, by the Sym‑
bolik des Traumes (Bamberg, 1814), and the An^ sichten von der Nachtseite der Natur (Dresden, 1808). In 1809 he was made rector of the newly founded Realschule at Nuremberg. Here, too, through the influence of a master baker named Burger, Schubert again turned his thoughts to religion. For a time he was tutor to the children of the grand duke of Mecklenburg, Frederick Louis, and was also invited to become the director of a proposed normal school. The latter project fell through, however, because of the avowed intention of Schubert to give all his teaching a religious trend. He was, accordingly, glad to accept a call to Erlangen as professor of natural history, where he lectured not only on mineralogy, botany, and zoology, but also on forestry and mining. In 1820 he made a tour of Switzerland, and shortly after his return wrote the popular Lehrbuch der Naturgeschirhte fur Schulen (Erlangen, 1822), followed by the Physiognomik der Natur (1826). He then visited southern France and Italy, the results being embodied in a work of two volumes, and on his return accepted a call to the University of Munich. Here, despite some opposition, his lectures became immensely popular, and here he wrote his most important book, Geschichte der Seele (2 vols., Stuttgart, 1830). In 1836 he made a visit to Palestine, describing his experiences in a work of three volumes. Retiring from active life in 1853, Schubert devoted himself entirely to writing, the result being his Die Krankheiten der menschlichen Seele (Stuttgart, 1845); his autobiographical Der Erwerb am einem vergangenen and die Erwartungen von einem zukiinfgen Leben (3 vole., Erlangen, 1854‑56); his Erinnerungen aus dem Leben . . . Herzogin von Orleans (Munich, 1860; Eng. transl., Reminiscences of the Life of . . . the Late Duchess of Orleans, Bath, 1862); and his Gesehiehte von Bayern far Schulen (1864). Among his very numerous other books, mention may be made of the Altes and Neues aus dem Gebiete der inneren Seelenkunde (Leipsie, 1817‑44) ; Geschichte der Natur (Erlangen, 1830) ; Zuge aus Oberlins Leben (4th ed., Nuremberg, 1832); and Vermischte Schriften (2 vols., Erlangen, 1857‑60.)
(JULIUS HAMBERGERt.)
Btsnloonsett:: Consult, besides the autobiographic Der Erwerb, ut sup.: M. Zeller, Dr. Gotthilf Heinrich von Schubert's Jugendgeschichte, Stuttgart, 1880; idem, (phi(/ Heinrich von Schubert's Tapewerk and Feierabend, ib. 1882. SCHUBERT, HANS GEORG WILHELM VON: German Protestant; b. at Dresden Dec. 12, 1859. He was educated at the universities of Leipsic, Bonn, Strasburg, and Zurich (1878‑‑83; Ph.D., Strasburg, 1884); was private tutor in Elberfeld (1883‑84); studied theology at Tabingen and Halle (1884‑86); was a teacher in the Rauhes Haus, Hamburg (1887‑91); associate professor of church history at Strasburg (1891‑92); professor of the same subject at the University of Kiel (1892‑1906), and since 1906 at the University of Heidelberg, of which he was rector in 1910. Besides revising the second edition of the first volume of W. M611er's Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte (3 parts, Tobingen, 1897‑1902), he has written Die Unterwerfung der Alamannen unter die Franken (Strasburg, 1884); Roma Kampf um die Weltherrschaft (Halls, 1888);

ar=ms
Die evangd%sche Trauung, ihre geschicW"e Bnt
wicklung and gegenwdrtsge Bedeutung (Berlin, 1890);
Die Komposition des pseudopetrinischen Evangelien=
Fragments (1893); Daa Petruaevangetium, ayrwp
fische Tabelle, nebst Uebersetzung and kritiwhem
Apparat (1893; Eng. tranal., "The Gospel of St.
Peter," Edinburgh, 1893); Die Entstehung der
schleswig‑holstein'schen Landeskirche (Kiel, 1895)Siebenbiirgen (Tabingen,1900); Anagar and die Ar
;
fringe der schlesurig‑holstein'achen Kirchengeschiclde (Kiel, 1901); Die heutige Aufassung and Behandlung der Kirchengeachichte (Tilbingen, 1902); Der sogenanate Prcodestinatus (Leipsie,1903); Grundzrlge der Kirchengeschichte (Tobingen, 1904, 3d ed., 1906; Eng. transl., Outlines of Church History, London, 1907); Hamburg, die Missionsmefropole des Nordens im Mittelalter (1904); Kurze Geschichte der chridlichen Liebed&igkeit (1905); Kirchengeschichte Sehleswig‑Holsteins, part 1 (1907); B‑andnias and Bekenntniss 1629‑1530 (1908); Beitrdge cur Gesehichte der evangelischen Bekenntnia‑ and Bandnissbildung (1909); Calvin. Rode (1909); and Bekenntnisbildung and Religionspolitik (1910).
SCHURRER, ahil'rer, EMIL: German Protestant; b. at Augsburg May 2, 1844; d. at‑ Gbttingen Apr. 30, 1910. He studied at the universities of Erlangen, Berlin, and Heidelberg (1862‑86); Ph.D., Leipsic, 1868). He was privat‑docent for theology at the University of Leipsic (1869‑73); and associate professor of the same subject (1873‑78); accepted a call to Giessen as full professor (1878); and at Kiel (1890); and professor of New‑Testament exegesis at G6ttingen after 1895. In theology he was an adherent of the moderate historical and critical school. He wrote: Schleiermachers Religionsbegrifund die philosophischen Ausseuungen desselben (Leipsic, 1868); De controvwsiis paschalibus secundo post Christum natum saeculo ezortis (1869); Lehrbuch der neutestamentlichen zeitgeschichte (1874), which in the later editions, entitled Geschichte des judischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi (3 vols., 1886‑90; 4th ed., 1909; Eng. transl. by J. Macpherson, g. Taylor, and P. Christie, A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Je
Christ, 5 vols., Edinburgh, 1890‑91), has become on of the leading authorities on its subject;
Gemeindeverfassung der Juden in Rom in der Raiserzeit nach den Inschriften dargestellt (Leipsie, 1879)
Die Predigt Jesu Christi in ihre?n VerhdUnis zu Alton Testament and zum Judentum (Darmstadt,
1882); Die dltesten Christengemeinden im r6mischen Reiche (Kiel, 1894); and Das messianische Sdbstbewusstsein Jesu (GHttingen, 1904).
SCHUERMANN, ahur'mdn, ANNA MARIA VON: Patroness of Jean de Labadie (q.v.); b. at Cologne Nov. 5, 1607; d. at Wienwert (37 m. w.s.w. of Groningen) May 4, 1678. She early showed extraordinary mental capacity, especially for linguistics, and was celebrated for skill in music, drawing, painting, carving, wax‑modeling, and etching. Her brother, Jan Gottschalk, who had become acquainted with Labadie is Geneva, and believed he was called to reform the Church, inspired her with the same conviction. She joined Labadie when he visited the Netherlands and became a
THE NEW sCHAFF‑HEifZOG
e
_
m
member of his household in Amsterdam, a step that
cost her all her old friends. She revoked all her
former writings, wrote defenses of Labadie and
his congregation, and supported him with her
wealth. The relations between her and Labadie
were of a mystical character; no word of accusation
was ever made against her. Her Eukleria (part 1,
Alton&, 1673, part 2, Amsterdam, 1685) gives an
account of her life and ideals. Her Opuscula ap
peared Leyden, 1648. 	(P. Tse>iscsmmRT.)
Hxstsoassrsz: A report which will serve ae a source for the life, probably based upon autobiographic conunumoatiom, is found in G. Arnold, Rsrchsn‑ and RdzsrAia‑
torie, vol. iv.. addition. pp. 1339‑b0. Frankfort. 1729.
Consult: P. Techsckert, Anna Maria von Schiirn<ann.
Goths, 1878; M. Gabel, Geeehiehts rise eAridlichen L°66^°
in der rfiainixA‑uedPWowivRucks. ii.
180‑299, Coblens, 18b2; and the literature under Irasnu, Jisx nx, Lsssniexa.

3CHiTLTERS, saul'tens, ALBERT: Celebrated Arabist and Hebrew scholar; b. at Groningen Aug. 22, 1686; d. at Leyden Jan. 28, 1750. In his fourteenth year he matriculated in theology at the University of Groningen, where he studied Aramaic, Syriac, sad finally Arabic as necessary to sn understanding of the other Semitic languages. Ia 1708 came his disputation De utilitate linguce Arsbicre in interpretanda Sacra Scriptura (printed in his Opera minors). He then went to complete his studies at Leyden under Hadrian Reland, taking his doctorate in theology in 1709, continuing for two years the study of oriental manuscripts; [in 1711 he became pastor at Waseenser;] became professor of Hebrew at Franeker, 1713, serving also as university preacher in 1717; he went to Leyden as rector of the Collegium theologicum, became ordinary professor of oriental languages is the university there in 1732, and in 1740 professor of Hebrew antiquities. His reputation is due to the fact that he was the first to apply in comprehensive style Arabic to the elucidation of Hebrew; that he made mistakes is true, but this was to be expected of a pathfinder. His most renowned pupil was Nikolaus Wilhelm Schroder, author of the frequently reprinted Inatitutionea ad fundaments lingua Hebraica; (Groningen, 1788). The principles advocated
Dye	by 8ehultens have been newly applied and advanced by Justus Olehausea (q.v.) sad Heinrich
Leberecht Fleischer, while the grammars of Bern‑
hard gtade, Wilhelm Gesenius, Eduard KSnig, and
, Hermann Lebrecht gtrack (qq. v.) are not unin‑
fluenced by the work of $chultens.
	His chief work was Origines Hebroxe give Heb
rtew lingua antiquisaima natura et indoles ex
Arabia; penetralibua reuocata (2 vole., Franeker,
1724‑38; 2d ed., Leyden, 1761). Other works are
Inatitutiones ad fundaments lingoes Hebroo: (Ley
den, 1737); Libor Jobi cum nova versions ad Heb
rceum fontem et commentarlo perpetuo (2 vole.,
1737); Proverbia Sslomonis (1748); Opera minors
(1769). He also edited the Rudiments lingoes Ara
bicce of Thomas Erpeniua and added to it a Clavis
(1733). 	(H. L. BTRACS.)
Biauoaseret: W. Gamine, lisschichta de, lubraiechen
	Bpraehs and SeArsft. pp. 128‑129• Leipel°• 1815; F. MOh‑
lsu, in ZsitschriJ! for iuthsrischs Thsotopie and Rixhs, 1870, pp. 1‑21; Lichtenberger, E3R, si. b29‑530.

277	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
		Schultm
SCHULTHESS, shul'thess, JOHANNES: Swiss Protestant theologian; b. at Zurich Sept. 28, 1763; d. there Nov. 10, 1836. He studied theology at the Carolinum in Zurich. His main interest in early life was the development of the public school system. His Kinderbibel des Alien Testaments (Zurich, 1813) and Schweizerischer Kinderfreund (1812‑13) were long valued text‑books. In 1796 he became professor of Greek and Latin, in 1816 of theology, with the title and position of canon of the cathedral. He worked with great industry at the exegesis of the New Testament and wrote Exegetiach‑theologische Forschungen (3 vols.,1818‑24), and a commentary on James (1824). In collaboration with J. K. von Orelli he published Rationalismua and Supranaturalismue, Kanon, Tradition raid Skription (1822); and Revision des kirchlichen Lehrbegrifs (1826). For a time he edited the periodical Anttalen founded by Wachler. His critical historical views appear most clearly in his last work, Vorlesungen t?ber daa historische Christentum roach der arissenaehaftlicAen Ansicht des 19. Jahrhunderts (1837).
Schulthess took part in the controversy that broke out in the second decade of the nineteenth century concerning the Lord's Supper, and wrote Evangelische Lehre von dem freien Gnadenmahl, ein Beitrag zur Vereinigung der evangelischen Kircher; (1818), and Die evangelische Lehre room heiligen Abendmahl (1824). He regarded himself as the representative of the genuine Zwinglian doctrine and as such he opposed ultramontanism and "all mysticism and pietism." He wrote in 1815 Das Unchriatliche and Vernunftwidrige, geistig and sittlieh Ungesunde mehrerer Buchlein, die sea einiger Zeit von der Traktatgesellachaft in Basel and thren Preunden heimlich ausgestrent werden. He was preeminently of a polemical nature, although in private intercourse a genial companion and tolerant of the opinions of others. In contrast with his theological liberalism and progressiveness was his political conservatism. After the establishment of the Zurich university in 1833, he was appointed extraordinary professor of New‑Testament exegesis and catechetics. Among his great services to science and the Church was his editing and publishing, together with his friend Schuler, the works of Zwingli (11 parts with supplement, Zurich, 1828‑61).
(P. CHRIert.)
BIHLioaxAPH7: J. Sehultheee (his eon), Denkschrift sur hundartjahripen Jubdfeier der Stiftunp dot aehulthtawher Familienfonds, Zurich, 1859; A. Schweizer, Biopraphiwhe Aufseichnunpen, ed. P. Schweizer, ib. 1889.

SCHULTZ, shiilts, FRIEDRICH WILHELM: Protestant theologian; b. at Friesack (33 m. n.w. of Potsdam), Mark Brandenburg, Sept. 24, 1828; d. at Breslau, 1888. He studied at Berlin, 1847‑51; became privat‑docent there, 1853; professor extraordinary, 1856; and ordinary professor, 1864, at Breslau. He wrote Das Deuteronomium erkldrt (Berlin, 1859); Die Sch6pfungsgeschichte mach Naturwissen8chaft and Bibel (Goths, 1865) ; the comments on Ezra. Nehemiah, and Esther, in J. P. Lange's Commentary (Bielefeld, 1876); and with W. Straek prepared the commentary on Psalms and Proverbs (Munich, 1888) in Kurzgefawtes Kommentar.
SCHULTZ, HERMANN: German Lutheran; b. at Lachow (37 m. s.e. of Liineburg) Dec. 30, 1836; d. at Gottingen May 15, 1903. He was educated at the universities of Gottingen and Erlangen (18531856), and, after being a private tutor at Hamburg for two years, returned to Gottingen as a lecturer in theology, becoming privat‑docent in 1861. In 1864 he was called to Basel as full professor, and in 1872 accepted a similar position at the reorganised University of Strasburg. In 1874‑76 he was professor of theology at Heidelberg, but in the latter year was recalled to Gottingen, where he passed the remainder of his life. He was created a consistorial counselor in 1881 and abbot of Bursfelde in 1890, and was also first university preacher and director of the seminary for practical theology, although his lectures were on the Old Testament and all departments of systematic theology.
	In 1863 Schultz published at Frankfort the sec
ond edition of H. A. C. HIZVernick's Vorlesungen fiber
die Theologie des Alien Testaments, but his most im
portant contribution to this theme was his Alttes
tamentliche Theologie (2 vols., Frankfort, 1869;
5th ed., 1896; Eng. trans]. from the 4th ed. by J. A.
Paterson, Edinburgh, 1892), in the succewivk edi
tions of which he passed from the position of Ewald
to that of Graf. Problems of Biblical theology
often led him to discuss questions in systematic
theology, as is shown by his Vorauasetzungen der
christlichen Lehre von der Unaterblichkeit (Gt)ttin
gen, 1861). The majority of the dogmatic studies
of Schultz were connected with Christology and the
cognate theme of the theory of the atonement,
these investigations reaching their culmination in
the Lehre von der Gottheit Christi (Goths, 1881), the
conclusions of which were in substantial accord with
the Communicatio idiomotum (q.v.), while the whole
work, though independent of Ritschl, was distinctly
Ritachlian in spirit. Of the other dogmatic con
tributions of Schultz the most important was his
Studien and Kritiken zur Lehre room heiligen Abend
mahl (Goths, 1886), which was practically a defense
of the old Lutheran position. The versatility and
receptivity of his theology find an admirable ex
emplification in his Grundriss der christlichen
Apologetik (Gottingen, 1894; Eng. transl., London,
1905), which followed his Grundriss der evangelischen
Dogmatik (Gottingen, 1890) and Grundrisa der
evangelischen Ethik (1891). In these three works he
sought to reach others than those who attended his
lectures, and the same spirit of practical Christianity
was manifested in his Zu den kirchlichen Frngen der
Gegenwart (Frankfort, 1869), as well as in his
volumes of sermons, Predigten, gehalten in der Uni.
versitdttskirche zu Gdttingen (Goths, 1882) and Aus
derv Universitdtagottesdienst (2 vols., Gottingen,
1902‑03). He did not, however, establish a distinct
school, although he never lacked pupils who
gratefully acknowledged the debt which they owed
him. 	(EBERHARD VISCHER.)
BIB‑n7: The Expository Tim". July. 1903; Bemis
des Glaubens, Sept.‑Oct., 1904.
SCHULTZE, shillt'se, AUGUSTUS: Moravian; b. at Nowawes (a suburb of Potedam), Prussia, Feb. 3, 1840. He was graduated from the Moravian

Sohnltze
Sohwaba,eh
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
college at Niesky (1858), and at the theological seminary at Gnadenfeld, Silesia (1861). He wan then a teacher in the French Academy at Lausanne, Switzerland (1861‑62), and classical instructor in the college at Niesky (1862‑70). In 1870 he left Germany for the United States, and has since been connected with the Moravian College and Theological Seminary at Bethlehem, Pa., first as professor of exegesis and dogmatics until 1885, and then as president. From 1881 to 1893 he was one of the three members of the governing board of his denomination in America. Besides editing Der Bruder Botschafter for several years, he has written History of the Widow's Society of Bethlehem (Bethlehem, Pa., 1880) ; Aarlig Dagbog (1888) ; Die Missionsfelder der erneuerten Bruderkirche (1890); Grammar and Vocabulary of the Eskimo Language of Northwestern Alaska (1894); The Theology of Peter and Paul (1896); Guide to the Old Moravian Cemetery at Bethlehem (1898); The Books of the Bible Analyzed (1902); and Christian Doctrine and Systematic Theology (1909).

SCHULTZE, BENJAMIN: Missionary to India and Translator of the Bible. See INDIA, II., § 2.

SCHULTZ, MAXIMILIAN VIKTOR: German Lutheran; b. at Fiirstenberg (a village near Corbach, 28 m. s.w. of Cassel), Waldeck, Dec. 13, 1851. He was educated at the universities of Basel, Jena, Strasburg, and Gottingen, and, after several years of study in Italy, became privat‑docent at the University of Leipsic in 1879. In 1884 he was called to Greifswald as associate professor of church history and church archeology, where he has been professor of the same subject since 1888. He has written or edited Die Katakomben von San Gennaro lei Poveri in Neapel (Jena, 1877); Arehdologische Studien vber altchristliche Monuments (Vienna, 1880) ; Die Katakomben, ihre Geschichte and ihre Monumente (Leipsie, 1882); Das evangelische Kirchengebdude, sin Ratgeber fur Geistliche and Freunde kirehlieher Kunst (1886); Gesehichte des Untergangs des griechisch‑romisehen Heidentums (2 vols., Jena, 1887‑92); Das Kloster San Marco in Florenz (Leipsie, 1888) ; Die allchristlichen Bildwerke and die wissenschaftliche Forschung (1889); Archdologie der altchristlichen Kunst (Munich, 1895); Waldeckische Reformationsgeschichte (Leipsie, 1903); Codex Waldeccensis, unbekannte Fragmente einer griechisch‑lateinischen Bibelhandschrift (Munich, 1904); Geschichts‑ and Kunstdenkmdler der k6nigliehen Universitdt Greifswald (1906); Die altchristlichen Grabstdtten Siciliens (1907); Philipp Nicolai (1908); and Waldeckisehe Landeskunde (1909).

SCHULZ, shults, ALPHONSS: German Roman Catholic; b. at Karchau (a village near Nimptsch, 29 m. s.w. of Breslau) Apr. 27, 1871. He studied at the lyceum of Braunsberg and the University of Munster (1891‑97; D.D., Munster, 1897), and in Jerusalem (1897‑98). He was privat‑docent for Old‑Testament exegesis at the Lyceum of Braunsberg (1900‑04); professor in the gymnasium of the same city (1901‑04) ; and since 1904 has been associate professor of Old‑Testament exegesis in the Lyceum. He has written De Psalmis gradualibus
27e
(Munster, i8s37); Quern zur Geachiehte lea ELiaa ($raunsberg, 1906); GGttiichee and Menschliches im ALten Testament (1906); and Doppe" im Pentateuch (Freiburg, 1908).
SCHULZ, DAVID: German Lutheran; b. at Purben, near Freystadt (75 m, n.w. of Breslau), Nov. 29, 1779; d. at Breslau Feb. 17, 1854. He was educated at the University of Halls (Ph.D., 1806), where he became privat‑docent in 1806. On the closing of the university, he took a like position at Leipsic, but when Halle was reopened in 1808, Schulz returned to his alma mater. In 1809 he was appointed associate professor of theology and philosophy, but in the same year accepted a call to Frankfort as full professor of theology. With the incorporation of the University of Frankfort with that of Breslau in 1811, Schulz went to Breslau, retaining his professorship until blindness forced him to retire from active life. Theologically he was a rationalist. His exegetical erred critical writings are antiquated, though his polemic works still possess a certain historical interest. His principal works, which are prolix and repetitive, are: Der Brief an die Hebrder (Breslau, 1818) ; Die christliche Lehre vom heiligen Abendmahl (Leipsie, 1824); Was heisat Glauben and wer sired die Ungldubigen2 (1830); and Die Geistesgeben der ersten Christen (Breslau, 1836). He edited the third edition of the first volume (containing the Gospels) of J. J. Griesbach's Novum Testamentum Greece (Berlin,
1827).
(J. J. HERZOGt.)
SCHULZE, shul'tse, LUDWIG THEODOR:
German Lutheran; b. at Berlin Feb. 27, 1833. He was educated at the university of his native city (lic. theol., 1856; Ph.D., 1858), where he became privat‑docent for New‑Testament exegesis and Biblical theology in 1859. Four years later he was called to Konigaberg as associate professor of theology, and was also chaplain of the house for deaconesses and a member of the committee on theological examinations. From 1866 to 1874 he was inspector of the Kloster unserer lichen Frauen at Magdeburg and head of the seminary for the training of teachers of religion at the gymnasium. Since 1874 he has been professor of dogmatic theology and ethics at Rostock; he was rector magaificus of the University of Rostock in 1894 and has repeatedly been dean of the theological faculty. In theology his position is essentially conservative. He has written De fontibus ex quibus historic Hyc sorum haurienda sit (Berlin, 1858); Ueber die blunder Jesu Christi, mit besonderem Bezug auf Reran (KSnigsberg, 1864); Martha and Maria, zwei Lebensbilder :.ach der heiligen Schrift (Goths, 1865); Passions‑ and Osterfeier (sermons; 1866); Vom Menschensohn and vom Logos (1867); Friede im Hewn (sermons; 1871); Philipp Waekernagel, sin Lebensbild (Leipsie, 1879) ; Friedrich Adolf Philippi, sin Lebensbild (Gutersloh, 1883); Luther and die evangelische Kirche (Rostock, 1883); August Neander, sin Lebensbild (Leipsie, 1890); Die Theologie der Off'enbarung, ihr Wesen and ihre Aufgabe in der Gegenwart (Rostock, 1894); Die IrrtumsLoaigkeit Jesu (Gutersloh, 1908); and Unsere Quellen fiir das Leben Jesu Christi (1909). He prepared the

279	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Schultze
third edition of K. F. A. Wuttke's Handbuch der christlichen Sittenlehre (2 vols., Leipaie, 1874‑75) and contributed the sections on the introduction to the New Testament, the New‑Teataaaent revelation of salvation, the history of the New‑Testament period, and the life of Jesus and the apostolic Church to 0. Z6ckler's Handbuch der theologischen Wissenschaften (3 vols., Nordlingen, 1883‑84).
SCHULZE, MARTIN: German Protestant; b. at See, Upper Lausanne, Switzerland, Jan. 26, 1866. )3e studied at the University of Halle (1889‑93) and after being director of the Tholuck hall for theological students in the same city for a few months, became privat‑docent for New‑Testament exegesis and dogmatics at Breslau within the year, and was appointed associate professor in the same institution (1899), but since 1904 has been professor of systematic theology at the University of Konigsberg. He has written Zur Frogs nach der Bedeutung der heiligen Schrift (Halle, 1894); Die Religion Jesu and der Glaube an Christus (1897); Das Wesen des Christentums (1897); Calving Jenseits‑Christentum in seinem Verhdltnis xu den religiosen Schriften des Erasmus (G6rlitz, 1902); Wert ttnd Unwert der Beweise fur das Dasein Gottes (1905); and Der personliche Character des protestantischen Christentums (Halle, 1909).
SCHUPP, ship (SCHUPPIUS), JOHANN BALTHASAR: German preacher and satirist; b. at Giessen Mar., 1610; d. at Hamburg Oct. 26, 1661. He studied philosophy at Marburg, but becoming convinced of the uselessness of the current metaphysical subtleties, he turned to theology. After completing his triennium he undertook a pedestrian tour in accordance with the custom of the times, and finally stopped at Rostock where he took his master's degree in 1631, and began to give lectures. In 1634 he accompanied a young nobleman, Rudolf Rauw of Holtzhausen, on a journey to Holland, and on his return was made professor of history and oratory at Marburg. His vivacious manner and geniality made him extremely popular with the students. Meanwhile he devoted a great part of his time to the study of theology. In 1643 he was chosen preacher at the Elizabethkirche, a position he filled while performing the duties of his professorship, and in 1646 became court preacher and counselor of the consistory for Landgrave Johannes von Hesse‑Braubach. The prince was so well pleased with Schupp that he sent him in 1647 as his ambassador to the peace convention at Munster and Osnabrack. He was about this time elected pastor of the Jacobikirche, at Hamburg, where he was extraordinarily successful, though his popularity aroused the jealousy of his brother clergymen.
Before this time Schupp had written only in Latin, excepting some small volumes of hymns. He now began to write in German, issuing in 1656 the famous sermon Gedenk daran, Hamburg‑the only one of his sermons he published entire. He published a number of pieces in 1657 under assumed names (Antenor, Mellilambius). To one of his Latin writings, published at Copenhagen, he appended the so‑called Psalm cli., and the supposed letter of Paul
to the Laodiceans. At this, the wrath of his colleagues broke out. His offense consisted in lashing the sins of the time with wit and satire, but the special charge against him was that he published apocryphal writings. He was summoned before a commission appointed by the ministry and requested not to issue theological writings under assumed names, not to publish apocrypha, to submit to a censorship, and not to introduce fables, jokes, and humorous anecdotes, alongside the sayings and accounts of the Bible. He is said to have agreed to the first two conditions, and promised to keep within bounds on the other matters. But Salomo oder Regenteuspiegel and Freund in der Noth were already in press, and their appearance caused another commotion with an appeal to the theological faculties of Wittenberg and Strasburg for advice on two hypothetical questions that described Schupp's offense. The clergy were advised to appeal to the state authorities, and the latter enjoined quiet upon both parties to the controversy (March, 1658). Schupp was now plunged in a complicated literary feud which continued until his early death at the age of fifty‑two.
	Schupp was an honest, pious man and a faithful
Christian. His writings, especially the little Ger
man tracts, went through many editions, had a
decided influence upon the people, and present an
interesting picture of the manners of his time.
His sermons were criticized for lack of dignity, but
they were earnest, attractive, and wholesome in
their influence. 	(CARL BERTHEAU.)
BmLIOGBAFHr: P. Lambecius. Programma in Schuppii
	obitum, Hamburg, 1661; J. Moller, Cimbria literata, ii.
	790‑804, Copenhagen, 1744; C. Ziegra, Sammlung von
	Urkunden . . . zur hamburgischen Kirchengeschichte, ii.
	249‑338. Hamburg, 1764; A. Vial. Johann Balthaaar
	Schup'pius, ein Vorldufer Speners, Mainz, 1857; K. E.
Bloch, in the Jahreabericht :,ber die ktinigliche Realachule . zu Berlin, Berlin, 1863; E. Oelze, BaUhasar Sehuppe,
Hamburg, 1863; G. Baur, Johann Balthasar Schupp ale
Prediger, Leipsic, 1888; T. Bischoff, Johann Balthasar
Schupp, Nuremberg, 1890; Paul Stotzner, Beitrbge zur
Wiardigung von Johann Balthasar Schupps lehrreichen
Schriften, Leipsic, 1891; J. Luhmann, Johann Balthasar Schupp, Marburg, 1907; ADB, xxxiii. 67‑77.
SCHWABACH, shvil'bBH, ARTICLES: A Protestant confession drawn up in 1528. They derive their name from being brought into connection with a meeting in that year in Schwabach regarding the Brandenburg visitation. They go back to the attempts at alliance resumed by the Evangelical Estates immediately after the protest at the Diet of Speyer (see SPEYER, DIET OF) in the spring of 1529. The preliminary agreement on Apr. 22, 1528, was between Saxony, Hesse, Nuremberg, Strasburg, and Ulm, and looked to the consideration of the Eucharistic problem in a meeting to take place at Rotach, in the Franconian mountains. The meeting was postponed till Aug. 24 and again till Oct. 16 as a result of a conference of the elector, Margrave George of Brandenburg, and Philip of Hesse at Saalfeld. The margrave desired a uniform creed, liturgy, and regulation of ecclesiastical affairs in the territories of the allies, and in this Elector John was in accord with him. Accordingly Luther, while at Marburg (apparently on Oct. 4), received a letter from the elector, dated Sept. 28, asking him, Me‑

8ahwally
8ohwebtil
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
lanchthon, and Jones to confer with the elector, but on Oct. 7 Luther was directed to prepare the articles at once, and by Oct. 10 they were in the elector's hands.
	The Articles are seventeen in number and, while
closely following the Marburg Articles, lay special
stress on the points wherein uniformity was neces
sary in order to secure political union. They like
wise lay sharp stress on Luther's distinctive Eucha
risticdoctrines, and expressly assail the teachings of
Zwingli. On Oct. 16, 1529, at the concluding of the
alliance, they were laid before the conference held
at Schwabach, and there rejected by the Upper
Germans. Besides being employed in drawing up
the Augsburg Confession, the SchwabachArticles
were used by the elector in May, 1530, to prove his
orthodoxy to the emperor, a wretched Latin trans
lation being sent to Innsbruck. The original draft
of the articles is lost, and they first appeared in
print at Coburg about 1530 under the misleading
title of Die bekenntnus Martini Luthera auff dart
jtzigen angestelten Reichstag 2u Augspurk evnzulegen,
In siebentzehen Artikel verfasaet. Shortly afterward
Luther himself published the Articles with a preface
of his own. 	(T. KOLDE.)
Brsiroatxsra:: H. E. Jacobs, The Book of Concord, 1. 303354. ii. 27‑28. Philadelphia, 1893; J. J. Mtllter. Hiatorie Von der aoanpelischan Stands, Jana, 1705; T. Bolds, Dar Tap Von 3chleia, in Beitrepe our ReJormationepexhiehte J. R6ai1in pcwidmet. pp. 84 sq4•. Go. 1 . creeds, i. 229‑229.
SCHWALLY, ahvdl'lf, FRIEDRICH: Orientalist; b. at Butabach (11 m. s. of Giessen) Aug. 10, 1883. He received his education at the gymnasium at Darmstadt and at the universities of Giessen and Strasburg; he was called as privet‑docent to Strasburg to teach Semitic languages, becoming extraordinary professor there in 1898, and going to Giesaen in the same capacity in 1901, being promoted to ordinary professor in 1908. He has issued Des Leben nach dam Tode. Nach den Vorstellungender adten Israel and des Jttdentuma einachliesslich des Volksglaubena im Zeilalter Christi (Giessen, 1892); Idioticon der christlich‑paldatinisehen Aramdiseh (1893); Kultur den alter Orients (1896); Ibraham ibn Mohammed el‑Baihaql. Kitdb et MahBsin vat MasBwi (3 parts, Leipsic, 1899‑1902); assisted in putting forth a critical edition of the Hebrew teat of the Book of Kings (1904) ; and edited the second edition of T. Noldeke's Geschiehte des Qorana (1909).

SCHWAftE, shvd'ne, JOSEPH: German Roman Catholic; b. at Dorsten (35 m. s.w. of Munster), Westphalia, Apr. 2, 1824; d. at Monster June 6, 1892. He studied at Monster, 1843‑48; at Bonn and Tilbingen, 1848‑50; became privatdocent in the theological faculty at Miinater, 1853; professor extraordinary there, 1859; and ordinary professor, 1867. He was author of Des g8ttliche Vorherurissen (MGnster, 1855); De controversia inter Sanctum Stephannm et Sanctum CyptKanum (1859); Dogmengeachichte (1862‑90); De operibua attpereTtlgCEtai'lia (1868); S7oeeielle Mot•altheotogie (18711878); Atlgemeitxe Moraltheotogie (1885).

SCHWARTZ, ahvarts, CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH: German Protestant missionary; b. at Sonnenburg
(19 m. n.e. of Frankfort‑on‑the‑Oder), Prussia, Oct. 28, 1728; d. at Tanjore (170 m. SAM. Of Mal* dras), India, Feb. 13, 1798. He studied theology at Halls; and having made himself master of the Tamil language, was sent se missionary to Tranquebar in 1750 by the Danish Missionary Society in Copel>hegen. Having entered the service of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge in London, in 1787, his station was in 1779 removed to Tanjore, where he remained to his death. He founded many congregations among the natives, exercised a moat beneficial influence during the war of Hydor Ali, and contributed much to make the name and character of Europe respected and trusted in India.
Brattoassrtlt: Remains of . . . C. F. Schwartz, Mission‑
ary in India, consisting of his Letters and Journals: with
a Sketch of his Life, 2d ed., London, 1828: H. M. Pearson,
Memoirs of . . . C. F. Schwartz, new ed., 2 vole., 1855;
J. D. Jaeniake. Mcnoira of . . . Jaenicka . . . with . . .
Letters and Notices of Schwartz, ib. 1833; W. Germann,
Miaaiondr C. F. 3chwaric,aein Leben undWsrken, Erleag
en, 1870; W. P. Walsh, Heroes of the Mission Field.
London. 1879; A. C. Thompson, Protestant Missions,
their Rise and Early Progress, New York, 1894: Helen H.
Holcomb. Men of Might in Indian Missions, ib. 1901:
C. C. Creegan. Per missionaries of the Church, ib. 1903;
H. C. Vedder, Christian Epoch Makers, Philadelphia, 1908.

SCHWARZ, shvttrta, FRIEDRICH HEINRICH CHRISTIAN: German Lutheran; b. at Giessen May 30, 1768; d. at Heidelberg Apr. 3, 1837. After completing his education at the university of his native city, he assisted his father se pastor at Alsfeld, and was then pastor of Dexbaoh (17901798), Echaell (1798‑98) and Monster, near But,ebach (1798‑1804), where he developed conspicuous ability as a teacher, in addition to his clerical duties. From 1804 until his death he was professor of theology at Heidelberg, his special fields being pedagogics and systematic theology. His theological point of view was one of Biblical and practical supernaturalism, combined with a unionistic tendency. Besides issuing works on pedagogy, in which field be is perhaps better known than as a theologian, he edited for several years the Theologiache Annalen (1824 eqq.), Die Kirche (1818‑17), and also the pedagogical Frei.• mtZtige Jahrbucher. His independent theological writings were Sciagraphia dogmaticea Christiana in usum Prtelectiortum (Heidelberg, 1808; revised under the title of Grettwlrias der kirchlichen groteatantischen Dogmatik, 1816); Daa Chtistentum in seiner Wahrheit and GBttdichkeit bettYtchtet, otter die Lehre den Evangeliums ava Urkunden dargestellt (1808); and Xandbuch der evangeliach‑christdichen Ethik fur Theologen and gebildete Christen (1821; revised in 1830 as Die Sittettlehre den eroangelisehen Christentums ale Wiasenschaft).
Schwarz was s zealous advocate of the union of the Lutheran and Reformed Churches in Baden, and after the union toiled with his colleague Daub to this end, also in preventing loose latitudinarianism and in giving proper validity to the creeds of both denominations. (C. B. HvxDEasso>CNt•)
SCHWARZ, JOHANN KARL EDUARD: German Lutheran; b. at Halls June 20, 1802; d. at Jena May 18, 1870. He was educated at the university of his native city (1822‑24), and after being

281	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
a teacher at Magdeburg for a year, was appointed,
in 1826, pastor in the neighboring town of Altenwed
dingen. In 1829 he was called to Jena as chief pastor
and superintendent, being at the same time honor
ary professor at the university. In 1844 he was
appointed full professor, lecturing on homiletics, cat
echetics, and ethics, besides directing the homiletic
and catechetic seminars, but in 1865 was compelled
by illness to retire from active life. He was for many
years theological editor of the Jenaer allgemeine
Lltteratwzeitung, was one of the founders of the
Proteatantische Kirchenzeitung, and in 1859 edited
the Weimamches Kirchenblatt. Besides writing a
volume of sermons (Jena, 1837) and an unfinished
biography of Nikolaus Amsdorf, he had charge of an
Evangelisches Kirehenbuch (2 vols., Jena, 1880‑63),
of which he wrote vol. ii. 	(C. Past.)

SCHWARZ, KARL HEINRICH WILHELM:
German theologian and historian; b. at Wick (21 m. n. of Stralsund), on the island of Ragen, Nov. 19, 1812; d. at Gotha Mar. 25, 1885. He attended the gymnasium at Greifswald, 1826‑30; studied theology and philology under Gesenius and Tholuck at Halls; in 1831 went to Bonn; studied in Berlin, 1832‑34; whence he returned to Greifawald. While under sentence of imprisonment at Wittenberg in 1837 for breach of academical regulations, he was allowed to attend the preachers' seminary conducted by Heubner and Rothe. In 1841 at Greifawald he became licentiate in theology and in 1842 licentiate at Halle, where he collaborated on the Hallische Jahrbacher. At Leipsic and CSthen he attended the meetings of the "Protestant Friends" but their rationalism repelled him. The minister of public worship decreed his suspension and he was rehabilitated at Halle only in 1848. In his Wesen der Religion (Halls, 1847) he deals in the first part with the conception of religion as the realization of God and in the second part with the history of religion and the philosophic systems of Kant, Jacobi, Schleiermacher, Hegel, and Feuerbach. In 1849 he became extraordinary professor and in 1854 published Lessing als Thedog. His most important work is Zur Geschichte der neueaten Theologie (Leipsie, 1856), wherein he treats of the antithesis between rationalism and supernaturalism, which was overcome by Schleiermacher and Hegel. In contrast with them stands modern orthodoxy, typified by Hengstenberg, while Strauss's Leben Jesu characterizes the historical critical process. The third part describes the philosophic‑dogmatic process, first the redemption theology of Strauss and Feuerbach, then the reaction against it and Schleiermacher's school, finally the transition to the free theology of the future for which he stood. In 1856 Duke Ernst II. of Coburg. Gotha called him to Gotha as court preacher. In 1858 he became head court preacher and member of the ministerial department for public instruction and worship, and in 1877 general superintendent of the state church of Gotha. In 1866 he published for the public schools of the duchy of Gotha a very popular Leitfaden fiir den Religaonavnlerricht. He was also active in matters affecting the organization of the church and in those which concerned Church
sad State.
(G. RUDLOFF.)
SCHWEBEL, shv6'bel, JOHANN, AND THE REFORMATION IN PFALZ‑ZWEIBRUECKEN: Johann Schwebel, or, as he styled himself, $chweblin, was born at Pforzheim (50 m. w.n.w. of Carlsruhe) in 1490; d. at Zweibriicken May 19, 1540. Thoroughly prepared in the excellent Latin school of his native town, he entered the University of Tiibingen in 1508, that of LeipEducation sic in 1509, and that of Heidelberg in sad Early 1511, taking his degree in canon law
	Labors.	in 1513. Still earlier he had entered the
		Hoapitallers' order of the Holy Ghost.
Consecrated as priest at Strasburg on Apr. 15, 1514,
he lived in his cloister at Pforzheim, where he con
tracted intimate relations with Melanchthon. From
1519 Schwebel preached in the hospital of his order
in Evangelical fashion, and although he observed
moderation, he roused the hostility of the "old
believers" to such a degree that he deemed it advi
sable, in 1521, to leave the order and seek protection
in $ickingea's castles, where, i n communion with
$ickingen, Hutten, Butzer, and others, he grew still
more decided. Like d;colampadius, Schwebel now
read the mass is German, though he held no official
post with Sickingen. He married in 1521, and in
the autumn of 1522 returned to Pforzheim, where
he again occupied his position in the hospital, at
first unmolested. In a tract that appeared at
Pforzheim Dec. 1, 1522, Ermahnung zu den Quea
tionieren, abzustellen uberjlilssige Kosten, Schwebel
opposed the "farming" of the credulous common
people in connection with collecting donations for
hospitals and the poor. He is also perhaps the
author of another work that soon appeared at the
same place, Liber vagatorum, describing the artifices
employed by the vagabonds of that age for swindling
the people.
In the spring of 1523, Schwebel had to leave Pforzheim again. An invitation from Duke Ludwig II. of Pfalz‑Zweibrucken then led him to Zweibriicken; where no later than April of Beginning 1523 he appears as preacher and forthof Work in with developed a fruitful activity, to Zwei‑ which Ludwig interposed no obstacle.
	briicken.	In a series of sermons, Schwebel ex
		pounded Matthew, Romans, Galatians,
and Corinthians. When in 1527 he preached on the
Old Testament, he studied Hebrew so eagerly that
his adversaries in ridicule styled him Judaicus.
When Duke Ludwig published the Nuremberg edict
of Mar. 6, 1523, and in 1526 put a new edge on the
same, prohibiting preaching of the Gospel except
as approved by the Church, Schwebel did not change
his manner of preaching, and before long his in
fluence began to spread over neighboring places.
Early in 1524 Schwebel victoriously defended his
doctrine against the arch‑priest Nicholas Kalten
heuser of Bitsch, who denied his authorization to
preach. Schwebel'a first wife having died early, be
married again, and justified the step in a special
tract. In a sermon on I Cor. iii., delivered at the
beginning of 1525, he expressed himself openly
against purgatory. About this time Schwebel sent
g brief presentation of his doctrine to a citizen of
Metz, which was translated into French and printed
at Strasburg. Another small tract of his, Hauptattick

Schwebel
Schweiser
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
and Summa den gctnxen Eroangeliuma, dates from 1525. In 1528, when, previously to the Diet of Speyer, the bishops took measures against the Evangelical preachers, the bishop of Metz desired to call Schwebel to account. And although Jacob Schorr, an influential counselor of Duke Ludwig's, in a repeatedly printed Radschlag fiber den Lutherischeu hdndel auf Speyerischen Reychstng, had as early as 1524 made spirited defense of the "invincibly authenticated" doctrine of Luther, Ludwig still entertained serious scruples, and Schwebel, for a time, discontinued the communion under both species. Through Ludwig's marriage with the Evangelical Elizabeth of Hesse (Sept., 1528), the friends of reform obtained powerful support, yet Ludwig did not aide openly with the Evangelical cause. He did not refuse his protection to Evangelical preachers who were assailed by their bishop, and he also drew men of Evangelical sentiments into his circle; but, on the other hand, he left priests undisturbed who discharged their office in the traditional manner. When Ludwig died on Dec. 3, 1532, aged only thirty years, Ludwig's brother, Palsgrave Ruprecht,together with the widowed mother, assumed the regency in the name of his only son, Wolfgang, six years of age.
Ruprecht was originally destined to the spiritual career, and had early become a canon in Mainz and Strasburg. He was a zealous friend of the Reformation, and evinced full confidence in
Palagrave Schwebel. Immediately after esau‑
Ruprecht's ming the regency, he summoned SchweRegency. bel to prepare a liturgy, which as early as Jan., 1533 (not 1529), obtained the regent's approbation, and was printed at Strasburg under the title: Form and Mass, uric es von den Predigern des Furstenthums Zweibruck in nachfolgenden MBngeln soil gehalten werden.. This liturgy treats in twelve articles of the life and official conduct of the clergy, the solemn observance of Sundays and festivals, week‑day sermons, baptisms, communion and confession, visitation of the sick, burial, catechetical sermons, and prayer. The volume was sent to the clergy with the remark that whoever could not adhere to the same in good conscience should communicate his opinion to the ducal chancery. On May 5, 1533, when Pastor Meissen_ heimer of Zweibr(icken resigned his office, Schwebel became his successor, and soon gained controlling influence upon the church administration. The liturgy was now gradually introduced throughout the principality. Ruprecht paid no heed to protests lodged against the same, on July 23, 1533, by Vicargeneral Tettenleben of Mainz, by Archbishop Albrecht of Mainz, in Nov., 1533, and again early in 1534, and by the bishop of Speyer. Schwebel, in a statement rendered by Ruprecht's direction, declared it a duty of the civil authority to proceed against the scandalous living of the Roman Catholic clergy, concerning which everybody made complaint. The bishops tolerated that scandal, yet sought to punish something instituted by Christ himself. Though even Schorr counseled prudence, Schwebel influenced Ruprecht,early in 1535, to command all priests and monks who lived in concubinage to marry before Easter under penalty of ea‑
ulaion. And though the bishop of Metz, Apr. 9, 535, lodged complaint, and urgently entreated to "leave the priests in their ancient and customary manner of life according to the precepts of the Church," only reporting those who lived unseemly for chastisement, Ruprecht consistently enforced his mandate. With the reforms that Ruprecht devised, the great majority of the population stood thoroughly in harmony. The assertion of N. Paulus (Historisch‑politische Blither, cuff. 805), to the intent that their introduction was coercive and had been wrought contrary to the will of the people, has no support in the records. In 1533 $chwebel gained a like‑minded fellow‑laborer in his friend Kaepar Glaser, who was adopted as such by reason of his mediating position as the young Palagrave Wolfgang's teacher. A second very able compatriot, Michael Zimmermann (Hilsbach), assisted him from the close of 1532 at first as schoolmaster and later as pastoral colleague.
Schwebel's theological position was of a moderate tone: With Ruprecht's consent, he subscribed the
Augsburg Confession and Apology. Completion Of the Lord's Supper it is stated in of Reform the liturgy prepared by Schwebel, Measures that, waiving subtle questions, one
should net faithfully before Christians what the Evangelists write of the Lord's Supper, to the end that they may in faith receive what Christ offers them when he says, "Take, eat; this is my body"; and "Drink ye all of it. This cup is the new testament in my blood." Schwebel followed with interest the proceedings that led to the W ittenberg Concord, subscribed the same himself, and invited the remaining preachers of the duchy to subscribe. On occasion of a church visitation undertaken in the Lichtenberg jurisdiction, in 1538, a great diversity manifested itself both in doctrine and in practises. One priest continued to administer his office, quite to the displeasure of his congregation, in Roman Catholic fashion. Doubtless this helped to induce the most eminent of the duchy's clergy to convene in a kind of synod. The resolutions which, on May 21, 1539, this body submitted for approval aimed at a greater unity in doctrine, proposed the appointment of churchwardens to administer the church properties and Christian discipline. In the town of Zweibrucken, at the beginning of 1540, this "Church Discipline" was adopted. On occasion of a church visitation not long afterward in the jurisdiction of Yeldenz this "Iliacipline" was introduced there as well. For sixteen years Schwebel labored in Zweibr(lcken. His death was probably caused by the pestilence. By that time the Reformation was diffused throughout the duchy. Glaser, his successor, continued the work in like spirit. Under the rule of Palsgrave Wolfgang, the process was completed through the introduction of the excellent liturgy of 1557.
JULIUa NEy.
Bisi,coaasr8:: The " Works " of 8chwebel were collected and issued by his eon in three parts. 4 vole., Zweibrtlcken, 1597‑98. though the work was badly done, but the charge
is not proved that they were distorted in the Reformed interest. To the second part (the letters) a biography was prefixed which has been the one source of all later sketches. Additional letters were published by J. Schneider in Zcit‑

283	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Schwebel
		Schweizer
	echrift far Geschichte des Oberrheina, xxxiv (1882), 223
	eqq. Later and more accessible sketches are in M. Adam,
	Vita Germanorum theologorum, pp. 82 eqq., Heidelberg,
	1620; J. G. F. PflOger, Geschichts der Stadt Pforzheim, pp.
	805, 338 sqq., Pforzheim, 1881‑82; F. Junk Johannes
	"webel, der Reformator von Zwetbraeken, Kaiserslautern,
	1910; J. Ney, in Zeiiachrift fiar bayerischs Kirchopeschichts,
	1910, pp. 174 eqq.
	SCHWEGLER, shveg'ler, FRIEDRICH CARL
ALBERT: Distinguished representative of the
Tiibingen School; b. at Michelbach, near Halle
(35 m. n.e. of Stuttgart), Wurttemberg, Feb. 10,
1819; d. at Tiibingen Jan. 5, 1857. He studied
at the seminaries of Schonthal and Tubingen;
devoted himself especially to the study of church
history; was for nearly a year pastor at Beben
hausen; became docent in philosophy at Tiibing
en, 1843; professor of Roman literature and an
tiquities in 1848; and, shortly before his death,
professor of ancient history. He distinguished him
self greatly at the university, and studied with zeal
the Hegelian philosophy. In 1841 appeared Der
Montanismus and die christliche Kirche des zweiten
Jahrhunderts (Tiibingen, 1841). Through Strauss's
Leben Jesu and other studies he found himself at
variance with the teachings of the Church, and
published Das nachapostolische Zeitalter (1846). It
exaggerates the Baur hypothesis of the early Church,
and dislocates the origin of the writings of the New
Testament. The work asserts that early Christian
ity was pure Ebionism (see EBIONITEs) and builds
up the history of the early Church on this founda
tion. He edited the Clementinischen Homilien
(Stuttgart, 1847); and published Die Metaphysik
des Aristoteles, text, translation, commentary, and
exposition (4 vols., Tiibingen, 1847‑48); Geschichte
der Phdosophie im Umriss (Stuttgart, 1848; 16th ed.,
1905; Eng. transl., New York, 1881); the Historia
ecclesix of Eusebius (2 vols., Stuttgart, 1852);
Romische Geschichte (3 vols., Ttibingen, 1853‑58);
and Geschichte der griechischen Philosophie (1859).
	SCHWEINFURTH, GEORGE JACOB. See
CHURCH TRIUMPHANT, I.
	SCHWEINITZ, shvai'nits, EDMUND ALEXAN
DER DE: Bishop of the Unity of the Brethren; b.
at Bethlehem, Pa., Mar. 20, 1825; d. at South
Bethlehem, Pa., Dec. 18, 1887. He was grad
uated from the theological seminary of his denom
ination at Bethlehem in 1844; studied at Berlin,
1845; was pastor at Canal Dover, O., 1850; Leb
anon, Pa., 1851‑53; Philadelphia, 1853‑60; Lititz,
Pa., 1860‑64; and Bethlehem, Pa., 1864‑80; and
was consecrated bishop in 1870. He was president
of the provincial board‑Le., the governing board
‑of the American province of the Unity of the
Brethren, and of the theological seminary, 1867‑84.
He was of 'a family that for more than a hundred
years has furnished ministers in an unbroken line
to the American branch of the Moravian Church,
and was a great‑great‑grandson of Count Zinzendorf
(q v.). He was the author of The Moravian Manual
(Philadelphia, 1859), The Moravian Episcopate
(Bethlehem, 1865) ; The Life and Times of David
Zeisberger (Philadelphia, 1870); Some of the Fathers
of the Moravian Church (Bethlehem, 1881); and
The History of the Unitas Fratrum (1885).
	SCHWEITZER, shvoit'ser, ALBERT: German
Protestant; b. at Kaysersberg (39 m. s.w. of Strae
burg) Jan. 14, 1875. He was educated at the uni
versities of Straaburg, Paris, and Berlin (Ph.D.,
Strasburg, 1899), and since 1902 has been privat
docent for New Testament exegesis at Strasburg.
He has written Die Religionsphilosophie Kants von
der Kritik zur reinen Vernunft bis zur Religion
innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft (Freiburg,
1899); Das Abendmahl im Zusammenhang mit dem
Leben Jesu and der Geschichte des Urchristentums
(2 parts, T(ibingen, 1901); Von Reimarus zu Wrede,
eine Geschichte der Leben‑Jesu_Forschung (1906;
Eng. transl., The Quest for the Historical Jesus; a
critical Study of its Progress from Reimarus to Wrede,
New York, 1910); and Deutsche and franzosiache
Orgelbaukunat and Orgelkunst (Leipsie, 1906).

	SCHWEIZER, shvait'ser, ALEXANDER: Swiss
Protestant theologian, follower of Schleiermacher;
b. at Murtsn (15 m. w. of Bern) Mar. 14, 1808; d.
at Zurich July 3, 1888. He studied at Zurich, Ber
lin, and Jena, and was ordained in 1831. While yet
a student he wrote Kritik des Gegensatzes zuriachen
Rationalismus and Supranaturalismus, and Dar
stellung der V ersuchungsgeschichte (published to
gether, Zurich, 1833), in both of which his depend
ence on Schleiermacher is evinced. In 1833, while
a student at Jena, he received a call as assistant
preacher to the Reformed congregation at Leipsic.
In 1834, he visited Berlin and saw Schleiermacher
for the last time a few weeks before the latter's
death, after which he wrote Schkiermacher's Wirk
samkeit als Prediger (Halls, 1834). In 1834 he
received a call from Zurich as instructor at the
newly founded university, where he taught New
Testament exegesis and practical theology and acted
as vicar at the cathedral. He became full professor
in 1840. In the excitement attending the candidacy
of Strauss for a position on the faculty at Zurich
Schweizer condemned an unfair criticism of the
former's Leben Jesu, but, while he recognized the
greatness of that work, himself disputed some of the
author's main positions, and attempted to prevent
his call to Zurich, and, after this call had been
given, protested against the action. In his Bvan
gelium Johannes fur das Leben Jesu kritisch unr
tersucht (Leipsic, 1841) he attempted to show that
the Fourth Gospel is composed of two parts, one
Galilean, the other Judean, a hypothesis which he
later gave up. Meanwhile he had issued Leitfaden
zum Unterricht in der chrisdichen Glaubenslehre
(Zurich, 1840), which was followed by Die Glaubens
lehre der evangelisch‑reformierten Kirche (1844‑47),
an apology for the Reformed doctrine, and supple
mented by Die protestantischen Centraldogmen in
ihrer Entwicklung innerhalb der reformierten Kirehe
(1854‑56). In Die christliche Glaubenslehre nach
protestantischen Grundsdtzen (Leipsie, 1863‑69) he
betrays an eminently speculative spirit and a philo
sophically monistic point of view, and shows that
modern dogmatics must go to the living Christian
consciousness for its material. Schweizer paid
much attention to ethics (although he issued no
formal treatise upon it), especially as connected
with threatening social problems. He is also recog‑

8ohwenoldeld
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
nixed as a scientific organizer of the study of practical theology, in this interest writing Ueber Begri$ and Einteitung der praktischen Theologie (Leipsie, 1838); Homiletik der evangelisch‑protestantischen Kirche (1848); and Pastorattheorie; oiler die Lehre von der Seelsorge ilea evangelisehen Pjarrers (1875). His own homiletic activity during thirty years of preaching in the cathedral illustrated the worth of his conceptions, and five volumes of his sermons were published between 1834 and 1882.
(P. Cxiusxt.)
Bauoansra:: Professor A. 8chweixer. Biopraphsx Au1‑
seichnunpen. won Am selbst antworJen, ed. P. Schweizer,
Zurich. 1889.

SCHWENCgFELD, ahvenk'felt, VON OSSIG,
CASPAR, SCHWERCSFELDIAIIS.
I. Biography.	Word and Spirit (4 1).
	Early Life (4 1).	Creed and Sacrament
		Reformer: Works (4 2).			(4 2).
	II. Characterization.		Chrietology (4 3).
III. Theology.	IV. The Schwenckfeldisaa.
L Biography: Caspar Schwenckfeld was born in Nov. or Des;., 1490, on the Ossig estate near Lichen (41 m. n.w. of Breslau), duchy of Liegnitz; d. at Ulm Dec. 10, 1581. Descended from an ancient aristocratic family, in consideration of an annuity, he later surrendered the an‑
x. Early cestral estate to his younger brother.
	Life.	After visiting the school at Liegnitz,
		he went to Cologne, in 1505, to pursue
general study, though probably without matricu
lating; proceeded to Frankfort‑on‑the‑Oiler, 1507;
and later, perhaps, to Erfurt. His university
studies embraced the liberal arts, scholastic the
ology, and canon law. It does not appear that he
came into close touch with Humanism (q.v.); nor did
he acquire an acquaintance, during his period of
study, with Hebrew and Greek. At the close of
1510, or beginning of 1511, he entered the court serv
ice, from which he withdrew in 1522 or 1523. Re
ligiously his attitude, in the mean time, was one of
indifference; and he first came under the influence
of religion in the Evangelical sense when, after the
protest of Luther against the traffic of indulgences,
the letter's writings were circulated and reprinted
in Silesia, which also suffered grievously from the
practise. Notwithstanding his later antagonism
to Luther, Schwenckfeld always acknowledged that
he owed to him his conversion to the Gospel, and
his adherence to the Reformation probably dates
from the winter of 1517‑18. He now committed
himself to the study of Luther's writings and of the
Holy Scriptures, of which, during 1519, he read
four chapters daily, so as to complete their perusal
within a year. When his sovereign decided in favor
of the Reformation, he publicly espoused the
transformation of ecclesiastical conditions in Lieg
nitz,and in Silesia at large, by allying himself with
clericals and laymen of like views, foremost of
whom was V. Crautwatd, by means of letters and
personal preaching, and by direct influence upon
his sovereign prince and the church rulers.
Meanwhile, Schwenekfeldhad formed personal connections with Wittenberg, where he had visited, Dec., 1521, or Feb., 1522. He became acquainted with Philipp Melanchthon, J. P. Bugenhagen,
Justus Jonas, the Zwickau Prophets (qq.v.), and Carlstadt (see Dxecoxrrxa, JOHANNES). He did not meet Luther while at Wittenberg, although he shortly afterward entered into
x. Reform‑ correspondence with him. Though er: Works. Schwenekfeld continued to be especially associated with Carlstadt, yet, he by no means followed in all the letter's methods and those of the Zwickau enthusiasts. On the contrary, his course as a Reformer, despite his zeal, was, in that first period, conservative. Soon began a certain estrangement from Luther. The collapse of the former ecclesiastical relations with the concomitant decline of both morals and religion, the dearth of fruits from Luther's preaching, and the carnal conduct of many who loudly professed their adherence to the Reformation with their lips, only disquieted and saddened 3chwenckfeld. As early as 1524, he wrote Ermanung dens missbraucha etlicher filrnemPster Artikei ilea Evangelic, aua tatdcher unveratandt der gemayn man in flayschliche Freyhayt and ymmg gefuret urirt. Antagonism to Luther first set in when Schwenekfeld put forward his peculiar doctrine of the Lord's Supper in 1525. Schwenckfeld had studied the writings of both Zwingli and Luther, had taken a keen interest in the dispute on the communion, and now affirmed that he had received through special revelation a new understanding of the Lord's Supper and of the words of institution. These he submitted to Crautwald, who at first stood aloof, but then went over to Schwenckfeld's opinion, which he aided in establishing upon thoroughgoing premises. Schwenckfeld next referred his views, together with the deliverances of Crautwald, to the Wittenberg theologians, on the occasion, at the close of 1525, of a visit to Wittenberg. In successive interviews with Jonas, Bugenhagen, and Luther, both aides stood firm on this and other questions; and henceforth Luther and the Wittenberg theologians regarded Schwenckfeld as a dangerous heretic. The first consequence of this separation was an overture to Schwenekfeld from the Reformed theologians. (Ecolampadius (q.v.) issued, with a friendly preface, Schwenckfeld's tract, De curauverbi Dei (Basel, 1527); and in 1528 Zwingli fostered the printing (without Schwenekfeld's knowledge) of one of the circular letters of Schwenckfeld regarding the communion (Zwingli's Opera, iii. 563‑588, Zurich, 1832). Losing the favor of King Ferdinand of Bohemia because of befriending the Anabaptists, Schwenckfeld left Silesia in 1529, never to return. He also departed from Strasburg, where he had taken refuge, in 1533 and 1534. During this period he repeatedly asserted himself in positive terms on the subject of the communion, collecting his utterances in the tract Bekanntnus vom heiligen Sacrament ilea Leibs and Blula Christi (Strasburg, 1530). During the ensuing years, Schwenckfeld sojourned in various towns of Swabia. From 1538 new controversies arose, involving, beside his previous divergencies, now also his Christotogy. His treatment of this theme in a series of essays was followed in 1538‑39 by the tracts Von der gDttlichen Kindacha,$'t and Herrlichkeit ilea gantzen Sores Gotten, and Ermanunge zum warm wrtd seelig machende ErkBnntnis Christi (Der erete Theil
Sic'.:'. .

985	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8ohwenokield
der Chrisdichen orthodoxiachen Basher and ScWften, pp. 486 sqq. and pp. 77 eqq., 1564‑70). His chief opponent was Martin Frecht (q.v.) at Ulm, who brought about his departure ~n 1539, and his formal condemnation at the convention of Evangelical theologians at Schmalkald in 1540 led by Melanchthon. No less hostile were the Swiss theologians, mainly to his Christology; foremost of these was Vadianus at St. Gall (see WATT, JOACHIM VON). Schwenckfeld defended his view in numerous missives and tracts; among which the most comprehensive in substance was Konfession and Erkldrung vow Erkdntnus Christi and seiner GMwAen Herrlichkeit (1540; ut sup., pp. 91 sqq.). During the succeeding years he frequently changed his abode, though not without a successful propaganda of his doctrines among both theologians and laymen, the latter including various princes. His death was followed by a more favorable judgment of his life and greater esteem for his personality.
II. Characterization: Schwenekfeld's character was marked by a genuine piety and religious feeling, attested beyond question by a transformation from a state of religious and moral indifference‑though, at its worst, not of a perverted type‑to that of a man for whom religion came to be his one and all. Many passages in his writings bear witness of pure devoutness and profound Christian mysticism, which, however, did not render him guilty of indifference to morality or wholesome activity. In his personal life he laid stress on holiness; and those persons who without prejudice expressed judgment had a favorable, even a hallowed, impression of him. Even his worst enemies scarcely attribute any evil to him. His industry in matters of religion was enormous, and, as far as possible, in a personal way. He preferred to treat all subjects either by letter or oral discussion. The picture of a practical Pietist which he presents was not without its shady side. Devout and humble, he yet became quite often conscious of a feeling that he was not " as other men are." His polemics, compared with that of most of his antagonists, was more mild, leaving here and there, however, the impression of artificiality. He was inflexible in opinion; for, self‑taught, he was so thoroughly imbued with self‑discovered truths that no authority could make him waver. An aristocrat he continued to be all his life, refusing either to bow to another or to the multitude, but desiring to find a resonant echo in a small circle of like‑minded associates. He had no appreciation of the necessity of larger associations, external or dinances, or anything statutory; and in this he was by nature a pure enthusiast. His intellectual powers, both of constructive thought and expression, were affluent; nor was he wanting in originality, though of restricted compass. In the course of years, he acquired a respectable knowledge of patristic and medieval theology, particularly on the mystical side, as well as an acquaintance with the current output. His own theology was not a finished system, but certain dominant and fundamental ideas repeatedly recur. Pertinent for review are those points which bear a historical significance; namely on the Word and the Spirit, the Lord's Supper, and Christology.
	III. Theology: Central in Schwenckfeld's theol
ogy was his relative definition of the Word and the
Spirit; or of historical revelation and present re
		generation. In the development of
	r. Word his thought, he shows contact with
and Spirit. Augustine, German mysticism, espe
		cially with John Tauler (q.v.), and
perhaps with the Bohemian, or Moravian, Brethren
(see BOHEMIAN BRETHREN; UNITY OF THE BRETH
REN). In addition he makes a series of independ
ent deductions, and rounds off this aggregate com
plex, bide making skilful correlations with the
teaching of Holy Scripture, on the one hand, and,
on the other, with the doctrines of faith, regenera
tion, and justification. Taking issue vigorously
with'the Lutheran theology, he distinguishes himself
from men like S. Franck (q.v.), in so far as he does
not represent the innate theory of the inner Word,
but is a strict supernaturalist; and has, besides, a
far deeper apprehension of the corruption of hu
man nature through sin, and places a higher val
uation upon the importance of historical redemp
tion through Jesus Christ. To this theme, indeed,
Schwenckfeld more or less explicitly recurs in al
most all his writings. His first connective presen
tation of the relation of the Word and the Spirit,
though unfinished in outline and less sharply de
fined against the Lutheran view, was in the tract
issued by (Ecolampadius (ut sup.), a document of
no great length, but rich in matter. What in
duced definiteness in both respects was the publica
tion of a great number of tracts against Flacius.
The principal of these, constituting also the chief
sources for Schwenekfeld's doctrine of the Word
and the Spirit, were the following: (1) Yom unter
eehaide des worts Gottes and der Heyligen Schrift;
(2) Voii der hailigen Schrft irem Innhalt / Ampt /
rechtem Nutt / Brauch and Missbrauch (Strasburg,
1594); (3) Yom leerampt des newen Testaments.
Das khein predicant der nicht from ist and Gottsdig
lebt / do$ Eroangelium . . . khan seliglich wit frueht
predigen (1555); (4) Confutatio and Ablainung des
dritten Schmachbuchlins F. Illyrici; (5) Besehluss
unnds Valets Auff Fluciy Illyrici letste zwai 8ehmaeh
b4ehlin . . . (1555); and (6) Vom worte Gottes das
khein wader wort Gottes sei / aigentlieh xu reden, denn
der Sun Gottes. Schwenckfeld correlates the doc
trine of the Word as a means of grace with that of
the Scripture as revelation, and conditions one upon
the other. He shares the ancient orthodox con
ception of inspiration, save that he contests the
point that its direct product appears in the Bible;
which, for him, has rather merely the value of a
human, imperfect image and similitude of that
which inspiration wrought in the hearts of the
prophets and apostles. Accordingly, Scripture has
no manner of significance as regards the inception
of the religious life in man, but simply adverts to
the same, and bears witness thereof. It is not the
Scripture which brings the Spirit, but man filled
with the Spirit brings this to the Scripture (Vow
Worte Gottes, xxii.e). Without arriving at perma
nent and very closely defined ideas on this point,
he valued the Scripture mainly as a trustworthy
historical documentary source of Christian revels.
Lion (lxxi., xvi.); and, like Zwingli, as a normative

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
l5ohweackfeld
guide for all inward revelations (ii.r aqq.). As not every one possesses, by nature, " his immanent living Word " (Christlichen orthodoxischen Buchern, p. 887) the renewing of man depends upon the immediate efficacy of Christ in the Holy Ghost; who, however, is intrinsically identical with the historic incarnated Christ (ut sup., pp. 566 sqq., p. 324; Vom Worte Gottes, li.r; Von der heitigen Schraft, cviii.). The main ground for separating the operations of Word and Spirit, and thereby ascribing regenerative grace exclusively to the immediate activity of the Spirit, lies for Schwenckfeld, as for the Reformed, in his distinctly expressed predestinarianism: God wills that all his gifts flow from the same celestial fountain into the hearts of the elect, through Jesus Christ, the head of the Church in the Holy Ghost; and that no external medium can be set up between them, not even as between the head and the body (De cursu verbi Dei, xiii.). Beyond these deductions, in the main, on the relation of the Word and the Spirit, no closer construction is warranted. Schwenckfeld may be said to have been the author of that mediating spiritualistic trend of thought after the Reformation (" middle way "), which, holding fast to the doctrine of grace and redemption, historically obtained by Christ, yet attributes the operation of that grace upon the predestinated to the immediate activity of the Spirit alone, allowing, however, a certain importance to Scripture and preaching.
If Schwenckfeld did not concede religious significance, in the strict sense, to Holy Scripture, his valuation of the confessions must needs be yet slighter. When the matter came to a thorough test,
he stood in accord with not a single i. Creed doctrine of the Augsburg Confession.
and The whole Confession, and more so the Sacrament. obligatory subscription to the same, had its place, in his view, among the statutory measures for the founding of a Church; which measures he disputed as conflicting with the Spirit and freedom. His ideal of church organization was of separate congregations, which were to be brought together, at most, into a moral and holy fellowship by the creation of a proper jurisdiction. Not improbable is it that he inspired certain merely sporadic tendencies of Luther. On such grounds Schwenckfeld could not ascribe to the sacraments a real character as vehicles of grace. In the doctrine of baptism, he has been classed with the Anabaptists, but incorrectly: for, though he was atone with them in rejecting the baptism of infants (according to some of his utterances, he was willing to retain that practise as an outward ceremony), he nevertheless regarded the baptism of adults as equally unavailing. Schwenckfeld's doctrine of the Lord's Supper is rooted, first, in his general theory of the essence of the means of grace; then, in his construction of the meaning of the words of institution; and, finally, in his peculiar Christology. In his exposition of the words of institution, Schwenekfeld, resting upon a " visitation from on high," advanced the view that the words " This cup is the new testament " (cf. Luke xxii. 20) are not according to the original rendering by the Holy Spirit. The demonstrative touto is not an adjunct of the
word for " cup "; but, being separated by the article, to, it is absolute, " This." Afterward Luke and Paul, by way of emendation, added the word " cup
or " drink." Accordingly, the Lord speaks of the character of his blood, saying: " This (drink) is the new covenant in my blood " (Epistolar, ii. 16). Complemented with John vi., the proper sense of the eucharistic words proved to be: " My body is this; namely, bread, in the signification of spiritual food. My blood is this; namely, drink in the signification of spiritual drink for the soul.
If Schwenckfeld not only dismisses from the very words of institution all manner of reference to any intimate, real connection of the elements with Christ's body and blood in the Roman Catholic or Lutheran sense, his Christology, or still more strictly, his theory of the relation between the divine and the earthly, debarred him from such an assumption. He combined, even more closely than the Lutherans, the humanity of Christ with his divinity; so that a conclusion for the physical ubiquity of Christ would not have been illogical, and so far the Philippists (q.v.) were correct in regarding him as the author of that doctrine; but, on ‑the whole, he was unwilling to bring deity, including the deity enveloping the humanity of Christ, into closer relation with anytaing created. Forasmuch, then, as the divine never mediates itself through the created, the presence of Christ is certainly not mediated by the eucharistic elements; and their apprehension spiritually by faith is no longer impeded. Accordingly, Schwenckfeld's doctrine of the Lord's Supper is to be classified with the apiritualisticdynamic; and, among the Reformation theories, is in closest affinity with Calvin's.
Schwenckfeld's Christology grew out of his conception of the relation between the divine and the human in general. Everything human, whatever comes into being by creative process,
3. Chris‑ stands in strong contrast with God:
	tology.	" All creatures are external to God, and
		God is external to all creatures ' (Epis
tolar, ii. 105). Wherefore, if the relation of Christ
to God is to be unique, that of perfect oneness with
God, then a unique condition must underlie the
origin of his human nature. Such is the fact; since
his nature was not " created," but " begotten."
God is the Father of Christ's humanity also (Epis
tolar, i. 612; Christlichen orthodoxischen Buchern,
p. 521). Schwenckfeld is particularly intent upon
the designation of Christ as the second Adam,
through whom the creation of man first attained its
consummation. This flesh of Christ, standing from
the very beginning in a peculiar relation to God,
came into the world, like his divinity, by the Virgin
Mary. For the entire life of Christ, no less than for
his birth, Schwenckfeld aims, so far as possible, at
a mutual absorption of the human and the divine.
The Lutheran formulas seemed to him insufficient;
they still persistently savored of Neatorianism; on
the other hand, he would fain retain the constant
integrity of the two natures, and rejects all manner
of reciprocal transformation (Christlichen orthodoxi
schen Biicher; pp. 218, 230). Schwenckfeld shared
with the Lutherans the interest in the close union
of Christ's humanity with his divinity and its en‑

267	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	sohwenotield
durance even after his exaltation. In his formal expression of this, he more nearly approximated Eutychianism (q.v.) and brought to view a number of paradoxical phrases rather than a clear representation of a state of reality. The work of Christ is considered as the winning of salvation through the historic Christ, and the dispensation of salvation through the glorified Christ. According to G. L. Hahn both propositions comprise: (1) redemption from the power of the devil; (2) purification of human nature from sin, or justification; and (3) emancipation from the state of the creature and adoption into the state of sonship, or regeneration; the entire emphasis falling upon the distributive activity of the exalted Christ, and the acceptance of the same by faith. And here, again, Schwenckfeld lays greater stress on moral and religious transformation, than on justification; though the latter is not altogether eliminated. This appears most evidently in the sentence: " God regards no one righteous in whom there is none of his essential righteousness " (Epistolar, i. 812). These conceptions, however, are not original with Schwenckfeld. Likewise in his mystical conception of faith and resignation, he no more than reflects medieval heritage.
IV. The Schwenckfeldians: Personally Schwenekfeld occupied a neutral posi'don (" the middle way ") between the great ecclesiastical and religious parties of his time; and he was desirous of gaining this neutral status for his adherents as well. These, therefore, withdrew quietly from the organized Church; adopting, at first, the designation " Confessors of the Glory of Christ," and after 1539 that of " Schwenckfeldians." They grouped themselves in individual congregations, and soon acquired the more or less distinct character of a sect. Congregations grew up most numerously in the two regions where Schwenckfeld had carried on his personal propaganda, Silesia and Swabia, and in the towns where he had sojourned. Beside these, G&rlitz, Glatz, Goldberg, Lowenberg, Jauer, and Wohlau became permanent sites of considerable congregations. At a comparatively early date, the movement also took root in Prussia. Schwenckfeld had become personally acquainted with Duke Albrecht (see ALBRECHT of PRUSSIA), and sought to win both him and the foremost theologians in Prussia; Paul Speratus (q.v.), for instance. Especially in Southern Prussia, there was a strong favorable movement between 1530 and 1535; but it declined after a colloquy at Rastenburg in 1531, and after the leading theologians and the duke declared themselves more and more adversely. At the present stage of research, a prolonged, in main outline intelligible history of the Schwenekfeldians appears only, beside at Landau in the Rhenish Palatinate, in WVrttemberg and specially in Silesia. Duke Christopher of Wilrttemberg issued a stern restriction against them in 1554, though some traces of them were still evident in the seventeenth century. In Silesia the congregations increased, toward the close of the sixteenth century, by receiving Anabaptists, and in the seventeenth century, through the accession of the adherents of Jakob Boehine (q.v.). But they retained the Schwenckfeldian type, as shown by
confessions published at the beginning of the eight
eenth century. During the entire seventeenth cen
tury, they flourished principally in the vicinity of
Goldberg; but at the beginning of the eighteenth
attention was drawn to them by means of an ad
verse tract. As a result a confession of faith was
demanded of them, and in 1720 the Emperor Charles
VI. despatched a Jesuit coercive mission against
them, which, however, did not effect their exter
mination. A part of them emigrating into Saxony
were denied tolerance and proceeded successively
to Holland, England, and to eastern Pennsylvania
in the United States. When Frederick the Great
had taken possession of Silesia, he not only granted
them tolerance, by an edict of 1742, but also res
toration of their confiscated properties. Their con
gregations are famed for their earnest piety and
sound morality. 	R. H. GRtITTZMACHER.
	The Schwenckfeldians, or Schwenckfelders, are
found in this country only in Pennsylvania. In
1734 some 200 of Schwenckfeld's followers emigrated
to America and settled in Bucks, Berko, and con
tiguous counties in Pennsylvania. They have al
ways been opposed to war, secret societies, and the
judicial oath. Their doctrines are drawn from the
Bible in the light of the indwelling Word. They
hold that the higher nature of Christ was progress
ive, rising steadily from the human into the divine,
and that faith, justification, and regeneration mean
a	positive change and that the constant aim in
Christian life should be Christ‑likeness. Discipline
is strictly maintained. There are district confer
ences and a .general conference in which all members
without distinction of sex are entitled to sit. The
Schwenckfeldians support missions at home and also,
through other societies, in China, India, and Japan.
There are 8 ministers, 8 churches, and 827 commu
nicants. The number of churches has doubled, and
the number of communicants more than doubled,
since 1800. 	H. K. CARROLL.

BIHLIOa8AY8r: The full edition of the Works of Schwenckfeld his never been published, but one is projected under the editorship of C. D. Hartranft and others, see below, Corpus Sckwenekfeldianorum. The Schri$ten as published, to which reference is made in the text, is the 4 folio‑volumes edition, i. Der crate Theil der christlichen orthodoxischen Bacher, 1564; ii. Epistolar, 1st part, 1588; iii. Epiatolar, 2d part, vol. i., 1570; iv. Epistolar, 2d part, vol. ii., 1520. Consult: J. Wigand, De Schwenckfeldiamo, Leipsie, 1587; G. Arnold, Ksreken‑ and Ketzerhistoris, H. 241 sqq 4 vols., Frankfort, 1700‑15; C. A. Salig, Vollatandipe Historic der augspurpischen Konfesaion, book Xl., Halls, 1730; G. L. Hahn, Schwenckfeldii sententia de Christi persona et opere, Wmtislaw, 1847; H. W. Erbkam, Geschichte der proteatantischen Sekten im Zeitalter der Reformation, Gotha, 1848; O. Kadelbaeh, AuafiArliche Geschichte Sch•ienkfeldta and der Schwenkfeldtianer, Lauban, 1881; Hampe, Zur Biwraphie Kaspar von Schwenckfeld, Jauer, 1882; F: Hoffmann, Kaspar Schwenekfelds Lebea and Lehren, Berlin, 1897; R. H. GrUtzmacher, Wort and Geist, J 18, Leipsic, 1902; H. W. Kriebel, The Schwenkfelders in Pennsylvania, Lancaster, 1904; Corpus Schwenckfeldianorum. Published under the Auspices of the Sehwenekfetder Church, and the Hartford Theological Seminary, vol. I., A Study of the earliest Letters of Caspar Schwenckfeld v. Oasig, ed. C. D. Hartranft, O. B. Schlutter, and E. E. Schultz Johnson, Leipsic, 1907; F. W. Loetecher, Schwenckfeld'a Participation in the Eucharistic Controversy of the 16th Century, Philadelphia, 1907; A. A. Seipt, Schwenekfelder Hymnology and ‑the Sources of as First Schwenckfelder Hymn‑book Printed in America. Philadelphia, 1909; ADB, ‑xiii. 403‑412,

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
adhWerlU
Science
SCHWERIN, shv6‑rW: A former German diocese, established in the second half of the twelfth century, and secularized about the middle of the seventeenth. It replaced the short‑lived diocese of Mecklenburg, which had come to an abrupt end on the martyrdom of its bishop, Johannes Scotus, by the Wends in 1066. On Sept. 25, 1149, Archbishop Hartwich consecrated Emmehard bishop of Mecklenburg, but the opposition of Henry the Lion seems to have prevented him from ever entering his nee, and in 1160 Henry conferred the bishopric on a Cistercian named Berno, then resident at Schwerin. Meanwhile this city had become the seat of a German count and the principal town of the Abodritians, and the new prelate accordingly made Schwerin his see city. The boundaries of the diocese were henceforth formed by a flat curve from the Bay of Wismar to the Elde on the west, the coast from the Bay of Wismar to the Greifawalder Bodden on the north, and by the diocese of Havelberg (q.v.) on the south. On the east the boundary was long uncertain, but in 1260 it was finally decided that the strip of territory between the Recknitz and the Trebel should belong to the diocese of
Ksmmin (q.v.).	(A. HAucs.)
I. The Official Statement. 1. The Founder.
Early Preparation (§ 1).
The Discovery of Christian Science
Organisation of the Church of Christ, Scientist ($ 3).
Mrs. Eddy's Work as s Teacher
Mrs. Eddy as s Leader (¢ b).
288
Until the end of the episcopate of Brunward (1192‑1238) the diocese of Schwerin suffered much from the hostility of the pagan Wends, but despite all obstacles the cause of Christianity triumphed. The bishops came to rank as princes of the empire, although subject to the archbishop of Bremen. In the administration of Magnus (1516‑50), who was also duke of Mecklenburg, the Reformation practically put an end to the diocese, the bishop himself openly declaring for Lutheranism in 1553. His cousin and successor, Ulrich I. (1550‑1603), whose election was never confirmed by the pope, was most contemptuous in his treatment of the ancient faith. The succeeding " administrators " of the diocese were insignificant, and in 1648, at the Peace of Westphalia, Duke Adolph Frederick of MecklenburgSchwerin received the bishopric as a hereditary principality in lieu of Wismar and other districts which Mecklenburg was obliged to cede to Sweden.
BIBLIOVBAPHT: MeckTznbur0ischea Urkuttdenbuch. 12 vole., Schwerin, 1883 sqq.; A. Rudloff, Geschichte Mecktenburpa, pp. 54 eqq.. Berlin. 1901; Hauck, RD, vole. iii.‑iv.; Game, Series spiawporura, P• 310.
SCIENCE, CHRISTIAN.

The Teaching of Christian Science (§ 8).
II. Judicial Estimate of the System. The Theological Situation (¢ 1). Mrs. Eddy's Idealism (¢ 2)• Her Teaching (¢ 3). Suggestion m a Basis (¢ 4). Prospects ($ b).
III. Critical View of the Doctrines. Doctrine of God (§ 1).
[NOTE: "I have examined this article, edited it, and now approve it. "‑MARY BASER G. EDDY *]
I. The Official Statement: Christian Science, discovered and founded by the Rev. Mary Baker G. Eddy, is defined in the Standard Dictionary as "a system of moral end religious instruction, founded upon principles formulated by Rev. Mary Baker G. Eddy and combined with a method of treating diseases mentally. `Christian Science is based on teachings of Scripture which it interprets, giving the Christ principle and rule in divine metaphysics, which heals the sick and sinner. It explains all cause and effect as mental, and shows the scientific relation of man to God."'The full exposition of this Science is given in Mrs. Eddy's book, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, which was first published in 1875.
I. The Founder: The consideration of Mrs. Eddy's unique and extraordinary achievements as a religious reformer and as the founder and leader of a religious denomination, which in a comparatively short time has gained world‑wide recognition and now commands the allegiance of a multitude of

t This approval extends, of course, only to the first part of this article, which is printed as submitted, except for changes in matters of typography and paragraphing, and in the corporation by the author of later figures and restatements made necessary by revised bases.
Doctrine of the Trinity (¢ 2). Chrietology ($ 3). Doctrine of Christ's Presence (¢ 4). Doctrine of the Holy Spirit (§ b). Anthropology ($ 8). Doctrine of Sin (§ 7). The Atonement ($ 8). Doctrine of Prayer ($ 9). The Scriptures ($ 10). Service ($ 11).
thinking people, naturally divides itself into four chronological periods: her early preparation for
what was to be her lifework; her discovery of Christian Science in 1866 and her pioneer work in es‑
tablishing it; her career as a teacher, and her crowning success as a leader.
	Mrs. Eddy was born in Bow, near Concord, N. H.,
July 16, 1821, and died at Chestnut Hill, Mass., Dec.
3, 1910. She came of Scotch‑English stock and
numbered among her ancestors Capt. John Love
	1. Early well of Dunstable, N. H., a famous
	Prepare‑ Indian fighter and Gen. ,Henry
		tfon. Knox of Revolutionary fame. Her
		parents, Mark and Abigail Ambrose
Baker, were earnest Christians. Her mother's father, Deacon Nathaniel Ambrose, founded the
North Congregational Church of Concord, N. H., which was known as "Deacon Ambrose's church."
The Baker family was also largely interested in the establishing of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the same city. Mrs. Eddy's great‑grandfather,
Captain Joseph Baker, was a member of the provincial congress and actively assisted the province to take its stand for the new republic. His sons, one of
whom was Mrs. Eddy's grandfather, were all soldiers of the American Revolution. The early trend of Mrs. Eddy's thought was markedly spiritual and philosophical, as was shown by her girlhood choice

289	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Schwerin
		Science
of such studies as natural science, logic, and moral
philosophy.	At an early age she wfote verses,
which express thoughts akin to the teaching of Chris
tian Science. Her inherent breadth of view was
evidenced by the fact that when in her girlhood
she joined the Congregational Church, she refused
to subscribe to the doctrine of unconditional elec
tion or predestination. In addition to her academic
education, Mrs. Eddy had the advantage of instruc
tion from a number of private teachers, among
whom was her brother Albert Baker, a graduate of
Dartmouth College and a distinguished lawyer,
Mr. Corser of Sanbornton Bridge Academy, and
Professor Dyer H. Sanborn. Her careful training,
supplemented by years of research and study, bore
fruitage in her writings, which were voluminous
before she began her labors as a Christian Scientist.
During her residence in the South as the wife of
Major George W. Glover of Charleston, S. C., she
wrote much for southern magazines. No one can
study her writings without being impressed by the
thorough familiarity with the best in literature
therein displayed. An important forerunner of her
discovery of Christian Science was Mrs. Eddy's
study of homeopathy, which she entered upon in
her early womanhood mainly for the purpose of im
proving her health. Her aversion to the dissecting
room prevented her from obtaining an expert
knowledge of surgery and from completing her
course, but her experiments in homeopathy were
valuable in directing her attention to the proposi
tion that all causation is mental.
	Regarding her discovery of Christian Science,
Mrs. Eddy says in her book, Retrospection and In
trospection: "It was in Massachusetts in February,
1866, that I discovered the Science of divine meta
physical healing, which I afterwards named Chris
			tian Science. The discovery came to
2. The Dis‑ pass in this way. During twenty
	covery of years prior to my discovery, I had
	Christian
	Science. been trying to trace all physical effects
			to a mental cause; and in the latter
part of 1866 I gained the scientific certainty that
all causation was mind and every effect a mental
phenomenon. My immediate recovery from the
effects of an injury caused by an accident, an injury
that neither medicine nor surgery could reach, was
the falling apple that led me to the discovery."
Mrs. Eddy spent the next three years in retirement,
studying the Bible and finding there the principle
and rule of her healing. She then tested her healing
system practically in every possible way, and finally
in 1875, after nine years of preliminary work, wrote
the Christian Science text‑book, Science and Health
with lien to the Scriptures. Her literary output after
that was tremendous, comprising books, sermons,
essays, polemics, poems, magazine articles, editorials.
Her chief books in addition to Science and Health
are: Miscellaneous Writings (1896); Retrospection
and Introspection (1892); Pulpit and Press (1898);
Unity of Good (1891); Rudimental Dii‑ine Science
(1891); No and Yes (1891); Christian Science, versus
Pantheism (1898); Christian Healing (1886); Peo
ple's Idea of God (1886); Christ and Christmas
(1897); Message to the Mother Church (1900); Our
Leader's and Communion Messages (1901).
		Y: ‑19
In 1879, Mrs. Eddy organized in Boston, Massachusetts, The First Church of Christ, Scientist, and was ordained as its pastor. This body was composed of twenty‑six members. In 1895, sixteen years later, the church, to accommodate its increased membership, erected a handsome edifice on the corner of Falmouth and Norway Streets,
Boston, at a cost of ;200,000. This
3. Organ‑ seats about 1,200 people. In June,
ization of 1906 a magnificent new structure, ad
of the Church .owng this and having a seating car
	Christ, 1
	scientist.	pacity of 5,000, was completed. It
		cost about $2,000,000. The First
Church of Christ, Scientist, in Boston is known as
the Mother Church of this denomination. The Chris
tian Science denomination had, in Jan., 1911, 1,244
branch churches and societies, holding Sunday
services. Chicago has nine large churches with five
handsome edifices. Greater New York has twelve
churches. In Greater New York there are eight
church buildings, First Church edifice having cost
over $1,150,000. Concord, N. H., has a strong or
ganization and a beautiful granite church, a gift
from Mrs. Eddy, which cost over $200,000. Mrs.
Eddy located this church, bought the land, started
the building, and paid for it, part of the money
having been contributed to her for this especial
purpose by Christian Scientists in all parts of the
world, who wished to have a share in the work.
There are influential Christian Science churches in
San Francisco, Los Angeles, Oakland, San Josh,
Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Brooklyn, Philadelphia,
Washington, Cleveland, St. Louis, Buffalo, Pitts
burg, Cincinnati, Atlanta, Providence, Toronto,
and, it may be said, in all the large cities of the
United States and Canada. There are firmly es
tablished churches in London, England, of which
First has recently completed a fine edifice at Sloane
Terrace, S. W. The organization in Manchester,
England, has its own church edifice, as has that in
Edinburgh, Scotland. There are organizations in
Australia, Germany, France, Scandinavia, Holland,
South Africa, South America, Mexico, Hawaii, The
Philippines, and in many of the English Colonies.
The following incident, which occurred in Chicago, June 13, 1888, at the meeting of the National Christian Science Association, illustrates Mrs.
Eddy's quality as a publicist and in‑
	4. Xrs. dicates the vital importance of the
	Eddy°s message entrusted to her. Mrs.
a TeacherWork as Eddy had been invited to this gather‑
.
ing as a guest, and one of her stipulations on accepting the invitation had been that she should not be called upon to speak. The meeting was held in Central Music Hall, then the largest and best in the city. When Mrs. Eddy arrived at the hall, she not only found a great assembly, which occupied every seat and every foot of standing‑room, extending out even into the corridors, but she was also astounded to learn that she was announced as the only speaker. Catching her theme as she walked from the entrance to the platform, she delivered extemporaneously the remarkable address, "Science and the Senses," which may be found in her Miscellaneous Writings. The effect of her words was so great that many authenticated cases of

Science
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
healing are recorded as having occurred m the audience. Modern thought, to which the term, "the effect of mind on the body," is a psychological and medical commonplace, finds it difficult to cOmPrehend the crassly materialistic conditions which confronted Mrs. Eddy when, in 1867, she taught her first student the elements of the theory and practise of Christian Science. As she claimed, and as her followers firmly believe, her new light on the Bible and on the sayings and teachings of Jesus Christ came as a divine revelation, as a result of which she was able to demonstrate through spiritual means only the truth of Jesus' statement, "These signs shall follow them that believe," by healing the sick, reforming the sinner, and even raising those pronounced dead by reputable mate medics practitioners. She had formulated a new system of religion, philosophy, and medicines system which annihilated the accepted belief in the reality and substantiality of matter; and she stood before the whole world its sole advocate. As soon as she found one individual willing to learn of her discovery, she began teaching, and from this humble beginning developed the educational system, which has made Christian Science an international propaganda. " The motive of my earliest labors has never changed," writes Mrs. Eddy in Retrospection. and Introspection. "It was to relieve the sufferings of humanity by a sanitary system that should include all moral and religious reform." In 1881, Mrs. Eddy obtained a charter from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts‑the only one of the sort ever granted‑and organized the Massachusetts Metaphysical College, in which during the eight succeeding years she taught over 4,000 persons. Many of these were indigent students, who received their tuition free. It was her custom to make it possible for all worthy applicants to avail themselves gratuitously of her personal instruction. In 1889, she closed the college, notwithstanding that hundreds of applicants were awaiting admission. Her purpose in doing this was to secure time to revise Science and Health and further to extend her field of labor. Later she established a board of education, based on the college, which board is now in active operation. Mrs. Eddy founded the Christian Science Journal in Apr‑, 1883, and was for many years its editor as well as its chief contributor. She founded the Christian Science Qtaarterly in 1890, the Christian Science Sentinel in 1898, Der Christian Science Herold (in German) in 1902, and The Christian Science Monitor, a daily newspaper, in 1908. She gave these periodicals to her church together with the plant of the Christian Science Publishing Society. For many years her only income was from the sale of her books and the interest on her investments. She healed the sick and the sinner with‑, out price. She contributed a large portion, of, her means to various charities and public, enterprises. She was also public‑spirited and took an interest in the affairs of her state and in matters pertaining to the betterment of her own city. She was simple in her tastes and habits, punctual and systematic in her work.
The organization, nature, constitution, and government of the Mother Church, its tenets, its church
290
manual, and its special form of public service are all of Mrs. Eddy's devising. They are in most respects unique, without precedent in church
~y &e s
5. Mrs. economy, proofs of her wisdom, and
Leader. evidence of her ability as a leader.
While the business of the Church of Christ, Scientist, is conducted by a board of directors, the inspiration and fountain head of the aeries of remarkable steps, which have brought Christian Science to the fore so unswervingly and so rapidly, can be traced to this modest and unassuming, but strong and resourceful woman. It is impossible to investigate the far‑reaching effects of the majority of her acts without coming to the inevitable conclusion that she was divinely directed. One can not study Mrs. Eddy's interpretation of the Lord's prayer as it is given in "Science and Health" without being strongly impressed by the
absolute absence of literalism m her exegesis of the Scripture, the spirituality, idealistic morality, and pure ethics of Christian Science. The First Church of Christ, Scientist, has no creed, but the funda‑
mentals of Christian Science are stated in the form of church tenets, written by Mrs. Eddy, which every
person joining the Mother Church >s required to sign. These tenets are copyrighted and published in
Science and Health, from which they are reprinted with Mrs. Eddy's permission:
1. As adherents of Truth, we take the inspired Word of the Bible as our sufficient grade to eternal Life.
2. We acknowledge and adore one supreme and infinite God. We acknowledge His son one Christ; the Holy Ghost
or ,aivine Comforter; and man as God's image and likeness. 3. We acknowledge God's forgiveness of sin in the destruction of sin and the spiritual understanding that casts out evil as unreal. But the belief in sin is punished, so long as the belief leafs.
4. We acknowledge Jesus' atonement as the evidence of divine, efficacious Love, unfolding man's unity with God through Christ Jesus the Wayshower; and we acknowledge
that man is saved through Christ, through Truth. Life, and Love as demonstrated by the Galilean Prophet in the healing of the sick and overcoming of sin and death.
5. We acknowledge that the crucifixion of Jesus and his
resurrection served to uplift faith and understanding to understand eternal life, even the apneas of Soul, Spirit, and the nothingness of matter.
8. And we solemnly promise to watch and pray for that Mind to be in us which was also in Jesus Christ; to do unto others as we would have them do unto us; and to be merciful, just, and pure.

Christian Science churches have no pastors in the ordinary sense of the term and no personal preaching. In 1895, in order to secure uniformity in the statement of Christian Science, Mrs. Eddy ordained the Bible and Science and Health as the impersonal pastor of the denomination. The Sunday services are presided over by readers, usually chosen from among the members of the church, who serve a term of three years. These readers present a lesson‑sermon, prepared by a committee appointed by the trustees of the Publishing Society, which consists of a compilation of Scriptural texts with correlative passages from the Christian Science text‑book. In correspondence with the order in other churches, the re‑
mainder of the service includes Scripture‑reading, hym~s, prayer, and benediction. The Wednesday evening meeting is devoted to individual testimonies and experiences. The branch churches con‑

291	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
form to requirements stated in the Manual of the Mother Church, but they have their separate congregational government. The readers, who conduct the services in branch churches, must be members in good standing of the Mother Church and are subject to its discipline. For the purpose of expounding Christian Science and bringing it to the attention of the public at large, Mrs. Eddy constituted through the Mother Church a body of qualified speakers called the Christian Science Board of Lectureship. The members are subject to the call of the various churches, which are required to give at least one lecture annually, to which the public is freely invited. The denomination also provides publication committees, the duty of which is to correct misstatements in the public press regarding Christian Science or Christian Scientists. It will be seen that although of comparatively recent development, the Christian Science denomination is completely organized down to details.
The Christian Science text‑book sets forth Christian Science as a religious system based upon Scriptural teachings. It elucidates faithfully the great fact that God is the only cause and creator; that God made man in his own image and
e‑ The likeness. that "all is infinite Mind and o~8 its infinite manifestation." Christian
tian Science affirms that God is person in Science. the infinite sense, but not in the humanly circumscribed sense; that the Holy Ghost, as taught in the Scriptures, is "the spirit of truth"; that Christ is the spiritual idea, the image of divine Mind which is one with the Father. By means of direct logical deduotions from these premises, the Christian Science text‑book teaches that sin, disease, and all the woes of mankind, though seemingly real to mortals, have no divine authority; that they are material, erring, mortal phenomena, must be so recognized and overcome by spiritual understanding of divine reality. This eternal verity gives hope and courage to those afflicted with disease by revealing to them the divine power, which heals and saves mankind. Christian Science has no kinship with pantheism, theosophy, spiritualism, Hinduism, or hypnotism. It holds that man is inseparable from Deity, being, as Scripture declares, the image, expression, or likeness of God, but denies that he is part of God as pantheism teaches. Christian Science recognizes no mind apart from God. Its practise is in harmony with Jesus's declaration, "Not as I will, but as thou wilt." It therefore repudiates the action or influence of the human mind or will as employed in hypnotism. In the practise of Christian Science, human will is stilled and the divine will governs.
Healing the sick is not the prime mission of Christian Science. Its higher mission is to effect the triumph over all evil. Bodily improvement follows as the natural sequence of spiritual regeneration. It holds that the evil‑doer is surely on the road to doom though he may not yet have realized this, while the well‑doer is in the right path though he may not yet understand it, for "whatsoever a ‑‑ soweth, that shall he also reap." Chris‑
tian Science teaches that true and effectual prayer is the spiritual realization of divine Truth and Love and of God's infinitude and omnipotence, which lifts mortals above the power of sin and disease.
LEwis C. STRANG.
II. Judicial Estimate of the System: The human soul was never so insistent as it is to‑day on something adequate to rest upon. It wants to know experimentally and immediately that God is all in all. Orthodoxy is to some no longer satisfying; historic forms to an increasing number seem hopelessly inflexible. Coin current ages
:. The long in the soul's vocabulary has lost Theological much of its luster and not a little of
	Situation.	its acceptability. Meanwhile, prophets
		true and false are crying everywhere:
"Repent ye: for the kingdom is at hand." One
prophetic voice was heard above all others, the
voice of Mrs. Eddy; and it gained a hearing
both unexpected and phenomenal. Though there
are at most not more perhaps than 70,000 actual
members in the Christian Science organization,
these are representative of a larger number of ad
herents. It is easy to account for the astound
ing growth of Christian Science. Materialism is a
spent force. The world has given it fair trial and
is turning definitely from it. Materialism has
neither satisfied the deeper yearnings of the soul
nor met the body's constant needs.
Mrs. Eddy was the first person in the modern world to proclaim the psychic kingdom so convincingly as '0 gain a respectable following and organize it into a compact cult not to be dismissed by Mrs. smart criticism or unintelligent abuse.
Eddy's She did not, to be sure, think the
	Idealism.	psychic problem through. She knew
		neither the evolution of philosophy
nor the content of psychology. She had reach but
not grasp. With no sense of humor she could bear
to quote in introduction to a book for which she
claimed a more than ',human origin" those well
known burlesque lines of Fichte's Idealism:
" I, I, I. I itself, I,
The inside and the outside, the what and the why,
The when and the where, the low and the high, All I, I, I, I itself, I: '
Mrs. Eddy was an idealist, but had no disposition to be one with other idealists. She would stand alone, associated not with man but God. Sometimes she so used language as to give the impression that her proper place was in the Trinity. These were her words in 1906: God is "divine Principle‑as Life, represented by the Father; as Truth, represented by the Son; as Love, represented by the Mother." Sometimes, as a few years earlier, she allowed the reader's mind to drift another way in verse like this:
" As in Blessed Palestine's hour, so in our age
'Tie	the same hand unfolds His power and writes the
	page."
And the leader of the cult in New York City once wrote Mrs. Eddy thus: "They who refuse to accept you as God's messenger, or ignore the message which you bring, will not get up by some other way, but will come short of salvation."
However Mrs. Eddy might describe herself, she

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
science
acted as one having unique authority. Being unable to see that spirit can be both original and ultimate
and yet for all practical purposes mat3. Her ter may have the character and comTeaching. position which it appears for this earth‑
ly while to have subject to laws which must be obeyed, she ventured to explain not how God actually works but how He ought in her judgment to work, and stilled in advance all criticism of what might appear to some as presumption with the announcement that she is not "apart from God," she moved on to the assertion that God does work as she described, that evolution both in matter and in spirit is but the explication of her theory of life. Historic Christianity she dismissed as summarily as science and philosophy. The Trinity was to Mrs. Eddy a variable and not a constant. Sometimes she assigned the third place in the Trinity to Christian Science; sometimes she kept it for herself. When she did not write that "the true Logos is demonstrably Christian Science" she was sure to say that "Jesus is the human man and Christ is the divine" and to allow one of her accredited teachers to teach that "Jesus of Nazareth is often mistaken for the real Christ." One of the Sacraments she abandoned altogether, putting in the place of the Lord's Supper a Galilean breakfast, and the other she evacuated of its historic meaning. Prayer she robbed of its petitional element and turned it into declaration of existing facts. To evil she denied all real existence and yet was obsessed habitually by what she called malicious animal magnetism which had all the attributes of the legendary devil except his horns and hoofs. In spite of these limitations and crudities, Mrs. Eddy won a following as obedient to her every wish as any modern army is to its commander. Convinced that Spirit is invincible and that "matter and mortal body are the illusions of human belief," she lived up to her convictions in the face of every jeer and joke. Insistent that "mind is all in all" and that "health is not a condition of matter but of mind," she would heal every ill that flesh is heir to by explaining to the seeming ill that things are not what they seem and‑to quote one authorized to speak for her‑"though the evidences of the senses may declare to the contrary we should still stick to the spiritual truth and should continue to denounce the false evidences." Broken bones and contagious diseases may appear a little stubborn because they have on their side a public opinion not yet permeated by the Christian Science spirit. Defer a while, said Mrs. Eddy, to public ill‑informedness. The time will come when the limb lost in a railway accident may be replaced "as readily as the lobster's claw," and boards of health, she evidently thought, understand with her that contagion is "engendered solely by mortal belief."
Exactly what the therapeutic value of Christian Science is no one knows. The cures so widely advertised have never been subjected to any searching test which satisfies the trained pathologist. Judge Clifford P. Smith solemnly affirms that Christian Science has cured every kind of illness known to medicine, and Mrs. Eddy claimed to have added to the list the raising of the dead and the
causing of an apple blossom to unfold in January. Although the full measure of the efficacy of Christian Science healing is not known
4. Sugges‑ it is known that the principle of sug‑
tion as a gestion underlies the cure in every
	Basis.	Christian Science case as in every other
		case of mental healing. The disavowal
of the principle is either ignorance or fatuous policy.
In no other cult has auto‑suggestion proved so
powerful. Through the complete isolation of the
patient from all alien influences the suggestion in
many instances amounts to hypnotism, which is
nothing but suggestion narrowed and in conse
quence profound. If Christian Science were to con
fine its therapeutic activity to diseases in which
‑as practically all psychologists and pathologists
agree to‑day‑there is proper place for it, much
criticism of its therapeutic methods would promptly
disappear. It is only the Christian Science dis
regard of the distinction, which if not always evi
dent yet is usually existent, between the organic
and the functional in disease that causes disquiet
and has led in some sections to active legislation
to protect children, small and great, from the dan
gers existing in a rapidly advancing civilization,
which often experiments first, sometimes with
disastrous consequences, and later formulates its
theories.
The life‑story of the founder of Christian Science has been told both by unfriendly and friendly hands, and the result has been to minimize her claims to sanctity. If the public is not inclined to‑day to take the attitude of those who love
g. Pros‑ her best and, because they read no
	pacts.	records save those she approves, know
		her least, it has no longer any disposi
tion to deny that from the standpoint of achieve
ment Mrs. Eddy stood alone among the women of
the world. The mystery surrounding both the
founder and the faith is gone. But the fact re
mains that Mrs. Eddy and her followers identi
fied themselves as have no other people in the
world with the religious and the philosophical re
volt against materialism, and if as years go by they
prove wise enough to eliminate the tress and the
crude, the foolish and the dangerous, and to
profit by the criticism, not all of which has been
ill‑natured or disrespectful, which they have of
late received, Christian Science may become a
blessing to the world. 	LYMAN P. POWELL.
III. Critical View of the Doctrines: Christian Science, as a distinct cult, dates back to 1866, when Mrs. Mary Baker Grover Eddy formulated its teachings or principles into a system. In 1875 her book, Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures, was published and since then has been the recognized text‑book of Christian Science, and is given a place side by side with the Bible. Mrs. Eddy claimed that forty‑odd years ago she discovered " the Christ Science," which she named " Christian Science," and also that her book came to her as a direct revelation from God. This latter claim is made in the book itself and in many utterances of Mrs. Eddy and her followers. How definite this claim is may be learned from the following quotation from The Boston Herald, of Dec. 2, 1900, which appeared in

293	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	science
that paper over the signature of Mrs. Eddy: " I should blush to write of `Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures,' as I have were it of human origin, and I, apart from God, its author. But as I was only a scribe, echoing the harmonies of Heaven in divine metaphysics, I can not be super‑modest in my estimate of the Christian Science text‑book."
The present has to do with Christian Science only as a religious system; and with an authorized copy of Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures in hand (74th ed., 1893, 103d ed., 1896), there can be no doubt as to the principles which constitute the system.
Any system of thought or philosophy, which claims to be a religious system, must be tested first by its idea of God. In this department
i. Doctrine Christian Science is a confused and con‑
	of God.	fusing system. It is a strange mixture
		of pantheism and platonism, borrow
ing from both and differing from each. The panthe
ism of the East admitted the reality of the universe
and taught that it is God. Christian Science denies
the reality of matter (Science and Health, 103d ed.,
p. 173), teaches that mind is all and identifies mind
with God (Science and Health, 103d ed., pp. 166,
171). This is the old monism, of which J. G. Fichte
was the foremost apostle. He declared that God
alone is and beside him is nothing. Christian Sci
ence says that " nothing possesses reality or exist
ence except Mind, God " (103d ed., p. 226). The
following sentences, found everywhere on the pages
of Science and Health, give the belief of this system.
" In Christian Science we learn that God is definite
ly individual, and not personal "; " An individual
God rather than a personal God." This individual
ity is defined as " the infinite and divine principle."
Again, " God is a spirit, and spirit is divine princi
ple." And definitely is it stated, " God is divine
principle." " God is Spirit, and Spirit is divine
Principle " (103d ed., pp. 225‑227). This is the
answer given to the question, " What is God? "
" God is divine Principle, supreme incorporeal being,
Mind, Spirit, Soul, Life, Truth, Love " (103d ed.,
p. 461). On the same page it is declared that these
terms are synonymous and that they are " intended
to express the nature, essence, and wholeness of
Deity." The system identifies the existence of God
with the existence of man as a spiritual being.
" God, without the image and likeness of himself,
would be a nonentity, or Mind unexpressed " (103d
ed., p. 199). " Man is coexistent with God " (103d
ed., p. 473). According to this system God is Prin
ciple, is love, is Life, is Truth: but principle without
personality, love without a lover, life without a liv
ing being, truth without any consciousness. Mrs.
Eddy's favorite word for God is Principle, an abso
lute depersonalized term, one which does not ad
mit of the ideas of consciousness, volition, or feel
ing. Mrs. Eddy says, " God is good, God is truth,
God is love." But she says more than that and it
is that addition which defines Christian Science;
for she declares: " Good is God, truth is God, love
is God." Thus Mrs. Eddy puts attributes of God
in the place of God, and deifies the attributes. All
admit that God is good, is truth, is love, but objec
tion arises when it is said that good is God, truth is
God, love is God. There are many detached sentences in Science and Health which any Bible student would accept as true expressions of the Biblical idea of God, but these sentences are offset by others which teach the very opposite ideas. Pres. William Herbert Perry Faunce, of Brown University, holds that " much of the success of Christian Science is due to the fact that its vague phraseology is equally acceptable to the evangelical Christian and to the atheist. ‑ The average Christian, approaching the Christian Science creed on one side, hears that God is `spirit, omnipresent and eternal'; and at once accepts the teaching. The atheist, coming up on the other side, hears that God is `principle, truth, harmony,' and he can accept it without the slightest change of position ." (Search‑Lights on Christian Science, New York, 1899).
A system is to be judged not by isolated sentences, but by its tone and tendency, its ultimate reach. The essential idea of God presented in Christian Science is that God is principle, not personality. As such the God of Christian Science has no existence apart from the mind or life that thinks God. President Faunce tells of a young man who had passed through Christian Science into atheism, who, when asked to describe the path he had traversed, answered: " The Christian Science teacher began by thoroughly persuading me that God is not personal, but is pure' Principle.' After some months I accepted that; and then I said to myself: `What is a principle? Does it have real existence? Is it an entity or reality? ' I soon saw that a ` principle ' is simply an idea of my own mind, and when the Scientist dissolved my God into ` principle ' I ceased to believe in any God whatever. I now believe simply in myself."
This is the ultimate of the Christian Science idea of God, it teaches one to find the spiritual reality, the "divine principle," within himself. But this does not accord with Biblical teaching, which is that God is Spirit, distinct from nature which he has created: that he is a being who wills and loves, who is to be obeyed and loved; a real, substantive existence, a self‑conscious, intelligent, voluntary agent; a being who can say " I am," and to whom we can say " Thou "; a being on whom men are dependent and to whom they are accountable. Christian Sciience denies all this in denying personality to God. Since the God of Christian Science is other and less than personal, he is other and less than the Christian's God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Father of our spirits.
After defining God as Principle, the question is asked, "Is there more than one Principle?" (Science and Health, 103d ed., p. 461). And the answer
is: " There is not. There is but one
2. Doctrine Life, one Truth, one Love; and this is of the God." On page 227 is this definite Trinity. statement concerning the Trinity:
" Life, Truth, and Love constitute the triune God, or triply divine Principle. They represent a trinity in unity, three in one‑the same in essence, though multiform in office: God the Father; Christ the type of Sonahip; Divine Science, or the Holy Comforter. These three express the threefold, essential nature of the Infinite." Such utter‑

science
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
ances as these are out of harmony with all that teaching of the Scriptures which represent the Eternal God as manifesting himself as Father, Son, and Spirit (Matt. xxviii. 19; I Cor. xii. 4‑8; II Cor. xiii. 14; I Pet. i. 2, etc.).
The position of Christina Science concerning the person and work of Jesus Christ radically differs from that generally accepted. To begin with, Christian Science teaches that " Mary's conception of him
(Jesus Christ) was spiritual " (Science 3. Chris‑ aced Health, 103d ed., p. 228). This is
tology. what Mrs. Eddy says of it: " The illu‑
mination of Mary's spiritual sense put to silence material law, and its order of generation, and brought forth her child by the revelation of Truth, demonstrating God (Principle) as the Father of men " (103d ed., p. 334). There is need to observe closely this claim of Christian Science. It claims to be the Holy Spirit, and as such to be the generating cause of Jesus. But if of Jesus, why not of other children? Mrs. Eddy meets the question by the statement: " The time cometh when the spiritual origin of man, the Science which ushered Jesus into human presence, will be understood and demonstrated "; but " until it is learned that generation rests on no sexual basis," Mrs. Eddy advises, " let marriage continue " (103d ed., p. 274). Of the existence of this tenet of Christian Science multitudes of the adherents of the system have no knowledge. But it is a fundamental element in the structure of the whole system and is essentially immoral. No accusation of immoral practise is brought against Christian Scientists, yet the accusation of immorality must be laid against this teaching of Christian Science. Though it is an absurd and preposterous teaching and might conceivably be laughed out of court, still it can not be merely laughed at as teaching what is subversive of the marriage relation. In her Miscellaneous Writings (p. 288) Mrs. Eddy asks the question, " Is marriage nearer right than celibacy? " and this is her answer: " Human knowledge indicates that it is, while science indicates that it is not."
In harmony with this notion concerning his conception Christian Science denies the actual incar nation of Christ, and so the reality of his person. Mary did not give birth to an actual body, but to a spiritual idea, an idea produced by her communion with the divine Principle. She gave birth to an ideal. But what Jesus said of himself is the opposite of this. He said: " A spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have " (Luke xxiv. 39). In explanation of this utterance Mrs. Eddy says: " To accommodate himself to immature ideas of spiritual power‑for spirituality was possessed only in a limited degree, even by his disciples‑Jesus called the body, which by this power he raised from the grave, `flesh and bones'" (103d ed., p. 209). In the theory of Christian Science flesh is an illusion, therefore Christ did not come in the flesh. There is a verse in St. John which may well be quoted in this connection: " Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God; and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God; and this is that spirit of anti‑Christ,
294
whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world " (I John iv. 2‑3).
Christian Science deals with Christ as a dual eaiateace, the seen and the unseen, the Jesus and the Christ. Jesus is a mortal belief which has disap‑
peared (Science and Health, 1034 ed., 4. Doctrine p. 229). Christ is a principle, a apiri‑
of Christ's tank idea, which continues " to exist in
Presence. the eternal order of Divine (Christian)
Science." According to this teaching the only Christ which humanity has to‑day is Christian Science (103d ed., p. 293). That this is a legitimate inference from the teaching of Christian Science is sustained by the teaching in Science and Health that Christ is " Divine Science." Here is a sentence from that volume: " There is but one way to Heaven and harmony, and Christ, Divine Science, shows us that way." Another thing that sustains the inference that Christian Science is humanity's Christ, is the teaching that identifies the second coming of Christ with Christian Science (1034 ed., pp. 43, 293). Mrs. Eddy says, " The second appearance of Jesus is unquestionably the spiritual advent of the advancing idea of God in Christian Science " (103d ed., p. 126). Adherents of Christian Science may not accept this teaching, but they readily fall into the habit of attributing to Christian Science the blessings which they receive and their praise is all of Christian Science. The leaders encourage this and they are consistent in doing so, for in their teaching, if not in their convictions, Christian Science is the Christ present and operative in human life. The acceptance of the Christology of Christian Science, as it is presented in Science and Health, may be considered the moat effective way of destroying the soul's consciousness of the Christ of Christian thought and belief.
Denying personality to God and to Christ, Christian Science likewise denies personality to the Holy
		Spirit. There is no Trinity, as it is
g.	Doctrine generally understood. Science and
	of the	Health affirms: " The theory of three
	Holy	persons in one God suggests heathen
	spirit.	gods, rather than one ever present I
Am " (103d ed., p. 152). Then, true to its idea of the impersonal deity, Christian Science teaches that " Life, Truth, and Love constitute the triune God, or triple divine principle. God the Father, Jesus the type of Sonship (not Sonship, only the type of sonship), and Divine Science, or the Holy Comforter " (103d ed., p. 227). It is here that Christian Science approaches the blasphemous by claiming to be the Holy Spirit. Mrs. Eddy very definitely says with reference to the Comforter whom Jesus promised, " This Comforter I understand to be Divine Science." The following quotations from Science and Health (1034 ed.) establish this fact of the identifying of Christian Science with the Holy Spirit. " It (Christian Science) is a divine utterance, the Comforter which leadeth into all Truth ' (p. 21). " John the Baptist prophesied the coming of the immaculate Jesus, and saw in those days the spiritual idea as the Messiah, who would baptize with the Holy Ghost‑Divine Science " (p. 553). In the Glossary (p. 579) is this definition: " Holy

295	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Balance
Ghost, Divine Science; the development of eternal Life, Truth, and Love."
	Christian	Science makes a distinction between
" mortals " and " immortals." " Mortals," who
are not created in God's image, are simply human
beings, " material falsities, errors which must dis
		appear to give place to the facts which
6. Anthro‑ belong to immortal man." The life of
	pology.	these mortals, or temporal life, is a
		false sense of existence. " To him
self, mortal and material man seems to be substan
tial; but this is mere belief, or a false view of sub
stance, and involves error." " Mortal man seems
to himself to be substance, but he is `image ' "
(Science and Health, 1034 ed., p. 197). " Mortal
body and material man are delusions which spiri
tual understanding and science destroy " (p. 198).
" Mortals are material falsities " (p. 472). The
" immortals " are the ideas or reflections of God,
they always have been, never shall cease to be, and
are absolutely perfect. According to this system
the " immortal," the essential or spiritual man,
" is coexistent and eternal with God" (pp. 231,
509), " has existed forever, and is always beyond
and above the mortal illusion of any life, substance,
and intelligence as existent in matter" (p. 198),
has no separate existence apart from God (p. 257),
" possesses no life, intelligence, or creative power
of his own " (p. 471), " is perfect even as the Fa
ther is perfect " (p. 191), " can do no harm, for his
thoughts are true thoughts, passing from God to
man " (p. 283). The doctrine of man is stated in
the paragraph on " Real Life " (p. 242) : " When
Being is understood, Life will be recognized as
neither material nor finite, but as infinite‑as God,
universal Good; and the belief that life, or mind,
was ever in a finite form, or good in evil, will be
destroyed. Then it will be understood that Spirit
never entered matter, and was therefore never
raised from it."
In its teaching on man Christian Science puts him on an equality with God in his origin, character, and eternity. It declares in unequivocal language that man never was formed from the dust of the earth, that God never breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, that in his case there is neither birth nor growth, maternity nor decay, that he is and always has been as perfect as the God whom he reveals and whose character he reflects. It is only necessary to compare this teaching with the Bible statements concerning man to see how widely Christian Science differs from the Bible on this subject. The Bible says: " God created man " (Gen. i. 27). That which is created can not be coexistent with its creator. The Bible represents man's life as a vapor appearing for a little time (James iv. 14), as a weaver's shuttle (Job vii. 6), as a hand‑breadth (Pa. xxxix. 5), as a tale that is told (Ps. xc. 9). These and similar utterances do not accord with the idea that man is coexistent with and eternal like God. The Bible says that " death has passed upon all men " (Rom. v. 12), that " it is appointed unto man once to die " (Heb. ix. 27), that his years are three score and ten or four score (Pa. xc. 10). Such utterances contradict the Christian Science teaching that " man
is incapable of death." The teaching of Christian Science that " man is perfect even as the Father is perfect," is denied in such passages as Job ix. 20; Ps. cxliii. 2; Isa. ixiv. 6; Ephes. ii. 1, and similar passages, all of which are in line with the general teaching of the Bible. It is impossible to accept the teaching of Christian Science on the creation and constitution of man and the teaching of the Bible on the same subject. If one is true the other is false. They are distinctly unlike and there is no possible compromise between the two.
Long ago it was said that the sign‑post at which true and false theology parts company is sin. Christian Science knows no such thing as sin. Dominated by the idea that man is coexistent with
God and has no actual entity apart 7. Doctrine from God (Science and Health, 103d
of Sin. ed., p. 471), Christian Science affirms
that sin is only a belief of mortal mind. Mrs. Eddy declares " man is incapable of sin, sickness, and death, inasmuch as he derives his essence from God, and does not possess a single original, or underived power. Hence the real man can not de. part from holiness " (p. 471). The dictum of Science and Health is that " evil should de denied iden. tity or power, because it has none of the divine hues " (p. 475), that " evil is but an illusion, and error has no real basis, it is a false belief " (p. 476), that " evil can only seem real, by giving reality to the unreal " (p. 466), that " evil is the awful deception and unreality of existence', (p. 103). All these utterances are condensed in this one: " Evil has no reality. It is neither person (hence there is no devil, the idea is ` pure delusion'; (p. 559), nor place (hence there is no hell), nor thing (hence there is no accountability), but is simply belief, an illusion of material self " (p. 237). Growing out of this doctrine of the unreality of evil, Christian Science teaches that sin has no existence, that it is not of the verity of being, and that it " exists only so long as the material illusion remains " (p. 207). The Christian Science principle of the " unreality of evil " plunges a dagger through the Bible lootrine of man's moral accountability and lets out the very heartblood of the distinctive teaching of the Scriptures. The Bible says: "The soul that simieth, it shall die " (Ezek. xxviii. 4, 20); Christian Science says: " The soul can not sin." The Bible doctrine is: " If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us" (I John i. 18) ; the doctrine of Christian Science is: " Man is incapable of sin." The Bible statement is: " He is just to forgive us our sins " (I John i. 9); Christian Science says: " To suppose that God forgives sin is to misunderstand Love." The Bible declares: " He that covereth his sins shall not prosper, but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them,.shall find mercy " (Prov. xxviii. 13); Christian Science exhorts: Deny the reality of sin.
Denying the reality of evil and the existence of
sin, Christian Science denies the fact 8. The of the atonement. According to its
Atonement. teaching Christ did not suffer or
die to deliver men from sin. In fact Christian Science denies altogether the reality of the suffering of Christ and calls his death 11 the great

Science	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	286
scilli
illusion." But Mrs. Eddy has difficulty in facing
its historic reality and even at the cost of sacrificing
consistency says: " Had wisdom characterized all
the sayings of Jesus, he would not have prophesied
his own death." In a paragraph on " Reconcilia
tion " we read that " Jesus aided in reconciling
man to God, only by giving man a truer sense of
Love, the divine Principle of his teaching, which
would redeem man from under the law of matter,
by this explanation of the law of Spirit " (Science
and Health, 103d ed., p. 324). Here we are taught
not that Jesus reconciled man to God, but " aided
in reconciling man to God," and that he did this
" only by giving man a true sense of love." This
certainly is not Pauline theology. " Reconciled to
God by the death of his Son " (Rom. v. 10) ; " Rec
onciled us to himself by Jesus Christ " (II Cor. v.
18); " Reconcile both unto God in one body by
the cross " (Eph. ii. 16) ; " Having made peace
through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile
all things unto himself; . . you that were some
times alienated and enemies in your mind by
wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled in the
body of his flesh through death " (Col. i. 20‑22).
It is impossible to reconcile Paul's doctrine of the
reconciliation with that of Christian Science. Paul
presents reconciliation as fact accomplished by
Christ through his death. Christian Science pre
sents reconciliation as a process, in which Jesus aids
by giving man a truer sense of Love. In a para
graph on " Substitution " we read: " One sacrifice,
however great, is insufficient to pay the debt of sin.
The atonement requires constant self‑immolation
on the sinner's part. That God's wrath should be
vented upon his beloved Son is divinely unnatural.
Such a theory is man‑made. The atonement is a
hard problem in theology; but its more reasonable
explanation is, that suffering is an error of sinful
sense, which Truth destroys, and that eventually
both sin and suffering will fall at the feet of ever
lasting love " (Science and Health, 103d ed., p. 328).
The statements of this paragraph are quite out of
harmony with statements in the Bible. " One sac
rifice, however great, is insufficient to pay the debt
of sin," but the Bible says: " By his own blood he
entered in once into the holy place, having obtained
eternal redemption " (Heb. ix. 12); " once in the
end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin
by the sacrifice of himself " (Heb. ix. 26); " by the
which we are sanctified through the offering of the
body of Jesus Christ once " (Heb. x. 10); " this
man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for
ever " (Heb. x. 12). " The atonement requires
constant self‑immolation on the sinner's part."
Then atonement is not made by Christ for the sin
ner, but by the sinner for himself. The Bible
teaches that we do not atone for ourselves; that
we " receive " the atonement, and that we receive
it through our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. v. 11).
" That God's wrath should be vented upon his well
beloved Son is divinely unnatural. Such a theory
is man‑made." Yet the Bible says that he was
"smitten of God," that "the Lord hath laid on
him the iniquity of us all," that " it pleased the
Lord to bruise him " (Isa. hii. 4, 6, 10); and " God
spared not his own son, but delivered him up for
us all " (Rom. viii. 32). In Christian Science there is no place for the atonement as generally understood by Christians. In this system salvation is not through a Savior sacrificing himself for man, but through an illumination of man's own mind. This is the way in which Christian Science defines salvation: " Explaining and demonstrating the way of Divine Science, he became the way of salvation to all who accepted his word, that mortals might learn of him and escape from evil. The true man being linked by Science to his Maker, mortals need only turn from sin, and lose sight of themselves, in order to find the real man and his relation to God, and recognize the divine sonahip " (Science and Health, 103d ed., p. 211). According to this the medium of salvation is not a Savior, but Christian Science. So it is definitely stated. " Christ is the idea of Truth, and this idea comes to heal sickness and sin, through Christian Science, which denies corporeal power " (p. 469). This denies in toto the idea of a personal Savior. Of course, in a system which denies the reality of sin, as moral evil, there can be no place for atonement. One asks, " What becomes of the atonement when suffering which was not suffering (only a `great illusion'), in a body which was not a body (only a `mortal belief '), was offered in expiation for sin which was not sin? "
As prayer is generally understood it has no place in Christian Science. Prayer implies that God is a personal conscious Being. Christian Science denies this, declares that God is princig. Doctrine pie and hence inhibits prayer. Mrs.
	of Prayer.	Eddy asks: " Who would stand before
		a blackboard and pray the principle of
mathematics to work out the problem? The rule is
already established, and it is our task to work out
the solution. Shall we ask the Divine Principle of
all goodness to do his own work? That work was
finished long ago; and we have only to avail our
selves of God's rule, in order to receive the bless
ing " (Science and Health, 103d ed., p. 308). She
also asserts that " Prayer to a personal God is a
hindrance, it is a misapprehension of the source and
manner of all good." The Christian Scientist may
declare that he believes in prayer, but if pressed
for his definition of prayer, provided he be well
versed in the doctrines of his system, he will state
that " prayer is the affirmation of principle." " A
request," writes Mrs. Eddy, " that another may
work for us never does our work. The habit of
pleading with the divine Mind, as one pleads with
a human being, perpetuates the belief in God as
humanly circumscribed " (p. 308). Prayer is de
fined as " the habitual struggle to be always good "
(p. 309). It is said that " the only beneficial effect
of prayer for the sick is on the human mind, ma
king it act more powerfully on the body, through
a blind faith in God," and that " it is not Truth
which does this " (p. 317), so Christian Science
would eliminate all prayer for the sick, because the
'` common custom of praying for the recovery of
the sick, finds help in blind belief; whereas help
should come from the enlightened understanding "
(p. 318). The idea of prayer, presented in Christian
Science, is quite opposite to the whole idea and

RELIGIOUS
297
economy of prayer as presented in the Bible, understood and practised by Christians in all ages.
Christian Science recognizes Mrs. Eddy's Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures as of equal authority with the Bible. Great attachment for the Bible is declared, but any passage which
contradicts any of the postulates of the Io. The system is rejected. Thus, Mrs. Eddy
Scriptures. gives no explanation of Gen. ii. 7,
" And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Commenting on this verse, Mrs. Eddy asks: " How can the material organization become the basis of man? How can the non‑intelligent become the medium of Mind, and error the enunciator of Truth? Is this truth? or is it a lie, concerning man and God?" And she answers: " It must be the latter, for God presently curses the ground " (Science and Health, 1034 ed., p. 517). Adam has made a good deal of trouble for theologians of all schools. Mrs. Eddy met the difficulties and in her own way solved them by a display of philological skill. She holds that Adam is merely a name for the " matter " which opposes " mind." In order to prove this she says: " Divide the name Adam into two syllables, and it reads, a dam, or obstruction. This suggests the thought of something fluid, of mortal mind in solution " (p. 233). These two instances of exegesis are samples of the way in which the Bible is treated by this system. Such treatment utterly destroys its majesty and meaning. A comparison of the estimate which Christian Science puts on the Bible and on the text‑book Science and Health shows the relative place of each in the system. The following parallel column exhibits these estimates. This column is made from sentences in Science and Health and the Miscellaneous Writings:
THE BIBLE.
(1) In parts composed of legends, meta, phors, fables, allegories, and myths. (2) Full of mistakes.
(3) Full of thousands of errors.
(4) A compilation of human documents. (5) Contains statements which are not true.
This comparison might be drawn out to great length, but these statements are sufficient to show the superior place which Christian Science assigns Mrs. Eddy's book.
Christian Science centers thought on self and self as free from all maladies, from sin, suffering, and sorrow. If the reality of sickness and suffering be denied, the channels of sympathy and phi‑
lanthropy dry up. If the reality of ::. Service. sin and death be denied, that act
quenches all missionary ardor. Christian Science builds splendid temples of stone and adorns them with all the genius of architect and
SCIENCE AND HEALTH.
(1) Revealed truth, the perfect word of God.
(2) Uncontaminated truth.
(3) Truth without mixture of human error.
(4) Divine teaching.
(5) Infallible teaching.
ENCYCLOPEDIA
Science Bcilli
artist. But Christian Science builds no hospitals or orphanages, or schools; for sickness, which needs a hospital; want, which needs an orphanage; and ignorance, which needs a school, have no actual existence. They are only illusions of mortal mind. Genuine Christianity builds churches, but does not lavish all its money on them, for there are hospitals and asylums and kindergartens and colleges to be built and to be built by the money of those who kneel at the cross of Christ and from him learn that the true economy of life is to minister even unto the least of the children of men.
J. F. CARBON.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. H. Holcombe, Letters on Spiritual Sub. jects %n Answer to Inquiring Souls, Philadelphia. 1885; H. M. Tenney, Christian Science: its Truths and Errors, Cleveland, Ohio, 1888; E. P. Terhune. Fallacy of Christian Science, New York, 1890; J. M. Buckley, Christian Science and Superstitions, ib. 1899; R. H. Newton, Christian Science: Truths of spiritual Healing and their Contribution to the Growth of Orthodoxy, ib. 1898; J. H. Bates. Christian Science and its Problems, ib. 1898; W. P. McCorkle, Christian Science, Philadelphia, 1900; C. F. Winbigler, Christian Science and Kindred Superstitions, New York, 1901; 111. W. Gifford, Christian Science against itself, Cincinnati, 1902; M. C. Sturge, Truth and Error of Christian Science. New York, 1903, new ed., 1908; C. G. Peace, EzposE of Christian Science Methods and Teachings, ib.1905; E. A. Kimball, C. P. Smith, S. J. Hanna, Christian Science and Legislation, Boston, 1906; R. D. Kathrena, Side i Lights on Mary Baker Eddy Glower‑Science Church Trustees Controversy, Kansas City, 1907• L. P. Powell, Christian Science, the Faith and its Founder, New York, 1907; F. T. Brown, The Truth and Error in so‑called " Christian Science;' New Haven, 1907; J. Dl. Gray, The Antidote for Christian Science, New York, 1907; R. C. Harker, Christian Science, Cincinnati, 1908; F. S. Hoffman, The Sphere of Religion, New York, .1908; L. A. Lambert, Christian Science before the Bar of Reason, ib. 1908; G. C. Mars, The Interpretation of Life, in which is Shown the Relation of Modern Culture to Christian Science, ib. 1908 (a defense of Christian Science); Sibyl Wilbur, Life of Mary Baker Eddy, Concord, 1908 (circulated by Christian Scientists); F. Ballard, Eddyism, "Christ%an Science" miscalled. A Delusion and a Snare, London, 1909; I. M. Haldeman, Christian Science in the Light of Holy Scripture, New York, 1909; S. J. Hanna, Christian Science: the Religion of the Bible, Boston, 1909; The Faith and Works of Christian Science, New York, 1909; F. E. Marston, The Mask of Christian Science, ib. 1909; G. Milmine, The Life of Mary Baker G. Eddy and the History of Christian Science, ib. 1909 (critical and adverse); S. Paget, Faith and Works of Christian Science, ib. 1909 (thorough medical criticism of the system); F. Podmore, Mesmerism and Christian Science. A Short History of Mental Healing, London, 1909; C. R. Brown, Faith and Health, New York, 1910 (adverse, by a former Christian Scientist); B. O. Flower, Christian Science as a Religious Belief and a Therapeutic Agent, Boston, 1910 (critical; rejects the philosophy of Christian Science but admits numerous cures); F. E. Maisten, The Mask of Christian Science: a History of the Rise and Growth of the System together with a Comparison of metaphysical Healing with Matters scientific, New York, 1910; W. W. Walter, Five Years %n Christian Science, Chicago, 1911; R. C. Armstrong, Christian Science Exposed, Fort Worth, Texas, 1911.

SCILLI, MARTYRS OF: Twelve Christians, seven men and five women, martyred on July 17, 180, either at Scilli, a city of the proconsular province of North Africa, or at Sila or Silli, two small cities of Numidia. The story goes that on July 17, 180, six Christians who were named Speratus (the spokesman), Nartzallus, Cittinus, Donata, Secunda, and Vestia, were brought before the proconsul Saturninus and repeatedly urged to swear by the genius of

Sailu	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Scotland		298
the emperor and thus to secure imperial clemency for their crime, which consisted in simple adherence to Christianity. This demand was steadfastly refused, and a respite of thirty days twice offered by the proconsul was as firmly declined. Saturninus thereupon condemned the six Christians and an equal number of absentees‑the four men, Veturius, Felix, Aquilinus and Ceelestinus, and the two women, Januaria and Generosa‑to be beheaded. Until 1881 the martyrdom was known only from the Latin Acts martorum Scillitauorum proamsularia (ed. C. Baronius, Annales eccleaiastici ad annum Christi 202, 12 vols., Mainz, 1609); Fragmentum de martyribua Seillitanis (ed. J. Mabillon, Vetera analeda, Vol. iv., part 3, Paris, 1723); a document edited by T. Ruinart (Acts martyrum, pp.131‑132, Regensburg, 1859); eight Latin manuscripts mentioned, though not published, by the Bollandist Cuperus (ASB, July, iv., 207‑208); and a text edited by Aubd (Les Chritiens tuna l'empire romain, pp. 503‑509, Paris, 1881). On the basis of these texts, the martyrdom was assigned to the year 200. In 1881, however, H. Usener edited in the list of lectures at Bonn a ninth‑century Greek text of the passion discovered by him in the Biblioth6que Nationale, Paris. This text is not only far more correct than the Latin Acts, but apparently comes from an eye‑witness or ear‑witness who drew up the record shortly after the execution of the martyrs. Since this discovery the Latin versions themselves have been reedited by the Bollandists in the Anar loch Bollandiana (viii. 5‑8, Paris, 1889), and by J. A. Robinson in Texts and Studies (I., ii. 106 sqq., Cambridge, 1893), both unduly exalting the Latin versions at the expense of the Greek. There is, however, no maxtyrology which gives so purely and unfeignedly a true picture of early Christian life and death as the text published by Usener.
It is clear from the Acta that considerable hatred of the Christians was still possible in the early years of the reign of the third Antonine emperor, although the rigor of Marcus Aurelius had been much mitigated, as shown by the fact that Saturninus did not resort to torture, but repeatedly offered the Christians time to reconsider. It is also noteworthy that it would appear that the martyr Speratus made a distinction between the Pauline writings and the other books of the New Testament.
(FRANZ GOnREB.)
BrswooH"Hx: Consult the following works cited under PElt
	96Cr7T70N of CsezIMANe: Heim, 1881, Neumann (i. 71
	78, 284‑288), and Allard (i. 438‑139); and also: B. AubS,
	Lea Chrhtiens done 1'empire romain 180‑049. Paris, 1881;
	idem, ‑Otude our un nouveau tests den Actes den martyrs
	acillitains, ib. 1881; F. GSrres, in ZWT, 1884, pp. 37‑84,
	1891, pp. 235‑243; idem, in Philolopus, 1884, pp. 134‑140,
	815‑624; idem, in JPT, x. 228‑288, 395‑434; R. Hilgen
	feld, in ZWT. xxiv. 3, pp. 291‑331; DCB, iv. 592‑593.
SCOT, MICHAEL: Scottish scholar; b. [in the county of Durham] England, c. 1190; [d. c. 1235, probably in Italy]. After studying natural science at Oxford, he went to Paris, the court of Emperor Frederick II. of Germany [in Sicily], Toledo, back to Frederick's court, and at a later period returned to England, where he is supposed to have held some office at the court of King Edward I. [He is said to have taken holy orders and to have enjoyed the
favor of Honorius III. and Gregory IX., but never
held an office in the Church, though once he was
nominated archbishop of Cashel.] Scot owed his
fame to his translations into Latin of Arabic works,
those of Averroas among others. By commission of
the emperor, he also translated Aristotle's"History
of Animals" and his books De ca'to et mundo. His
own writings did not attain to the merit of his
translations. [A number of them are still in manu
script. To later times he was a necromancer and not
a scientist, and as such Dante puts him in hell
(Inferno, cant. xx.).] 	CARL MIRBT.
BIHLJOGHAPHT: Earlier works are in large part superseded by J. Wood Brown, Life and Legend of Michael Scot (11761232), Edinburgh, 1897. Consult further: P. F. Tytler, Lives of Scottish Worthies, 3 vols., London, 1831‑33; Hietoire litthaire de la France, xx. 43 eqq.; A. Jourdain, Reeherches critiques our rdpe et roripine des tradudiona latinea d'Artatote, Paris, 1843; B. Haur€su, De la philosophic wolaatique, i. 487 sqq., ib. 1850; L. Leclere, Hid. de la m6dexine Arabs, 1451 sqq., Paris, 1878; DNB, li. 59‑62; Bayle, Dictionary, v. 100.

SCOTCH CONFESSION OF FAITH: A confession drawn up by John Knox and five associates appointed by the Scotch Parliament which assembled at Edinburgh in August, 1560, after the death of the queen‑regent, Mary of Guise, in June and at the close of the civil war. It consists of a preface and twenty‑five articles on the chief doctrines of religion which are briefly, tersely, and vigorously stated. It agrees with the other Reformed confessions of the sixteenth century, but in some articles is more pronounced in its opposition to the Roman Catholic Church than most of them. These parts Mitchell (ut inf., p. 123) called the "unrestrained" portions. It was composed in four days, twice read, article by article, in Parliament, and adopted by the same as being "based upon the infallible Word of God." Only three temporal lords voted against it, for the reason that they believed as their forefathers believed. The Roman Catholic bishops were called upon to object and refute, but kept silence. Seven years later (1568), after the abdication of Queen Mary, the confession was readopted, and the Reformed Kirk of Scotland was formally acknowledged and established. In 1580 the confession was signed by King James II., and a supplementary confession (sometimes called the Second Scotch Confession) added to it. It was practically superseded by the Westminster Confession, which was adopted by the Scotch Assembly in 1648. The confession is printed in the Acts of the Scotch Parliament for 1560; in John Knox, History of the Scotch Reformation (ed. D. Laing, vol. ii., Edinburgh, 1895); in D. Calderwood, History of the Kirk of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1842); in W. Dunlop, Collection of Scotch Confessions (vol. ii., London, 1857); in H. A. Niemeyer, Collectio confessianum Reformatarum (Leipsie, 1840; Latin only); and in Schaff, Creeds, iii. 437‑485 (English and Latin), cf. i. 680‑696.
(PHILIP ScHAFFt.) D. S. SCHAFF.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Knox, Hint. of the Reformation . . . in Scotland, ed. C. Lennox, pp. 213‑215, London, 1905 the literature under KNOX, JOHN, especially T. MoCrie, and H. Cowin (pp. 222‑234); W. M. Hetherington, Hint. of the Church of Scotland. pp. 50‑54, New York, 1881; P. H. Brown, John Knox, i. 88‑90, London, 1895; idem, Hint. of Scotland, ii. 70‑72. Cambridge, 1902: A. F. Mitchell.

299
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
The Scottish ReIomwtion, pp. 99, 123, Edinburgh, 1900; C. G. McCrie, The Confessions of the Church of Scotland, their Evolution in History, ib. 1907.
SCOTCH PARAPHRASES: A book of praise for church use made in Scotland in the eighteenth century. In May, 1742, the general assembly of the Church of Scotland appointed a committee to make or collect translations in verse of select passages of Scripture. Their work was sanctioned by the Assembly, 1751, and appeared as Scripture Songs, forty‑five in number, and now rare. In 1775 another committee undertook the revision of these, adding twenty‑two paraphrases and five hymns the precise authorship of which can not be determined in all cases. Some twenty were altered or rewritten from Watts, and three from Doddridge; one each
I. The Presbyterian Church. 1. As a Whole.
History (g 1).
Separation and Union (§ 2).
SCOTLAND.
Mode of Worship (§ 3). Constitution (§ 4).
2. Severally.
Scotland is the northern member of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland; area, nearly 30,000 square miles; population 4,579,223. In 1851 the population was eighty‑four per cent. Presbyterian. While this high percentage has not been maintained during the increase from 2,888,742 (in 1851) to the figures given above, the population is still predominatingly Presbyterian.
I. The Presbyterian Church.‑1. As & Whole: The struggle of the Reformation in Scotland was brief and decisive. It soon gave place to the contest for supremacy between Presbyterianism and Episco1. History. palianism, which lasted over a century; with the revolution of 1688, Scotland became as overwhelmingly Presbyterian. The first presentation of Scotch Presbyterian doctrine was the confession formulated by John Knox (q.v.) in 1560 (see SCOTCH CONFESSION OF FAITH). This was replaced in 1647 by the Westminster Standards (q.v.). This confession, together with the two catechisms of like name, has exercised a positive influence upon organization and worship, wherever Scottish Presbyterianism has spread.
The Church in Scotland did not share in the political and industrial prosperity that followed the union with England (1707). Religious indifference which found expression in Deism (q.v.) made itself felt in Scotland. The question of clerical patronage became a stumbling block to the peaceful growth of the Church. The claim of the landed aris8. Separd‑ tocracy and of the crown to the right of
	tUniong	appointing cIericalstoofficewasincom
		patible with the unity and independence
of the system of Scotch Presbyterian organization.
The claim had been at various times abolished; but
in 1712 the Tory majority in Parliament revived it,
causing a profound state of dissatisfaction among the
masses of the people bearing fruit in church divisions.
The first of these, called "The Secession," occurred in
1733 under Ebenezer Erskine (q.v.). While this
was the first formal and organized separation, the
Covenanters (q.v.) had already separated and in
1743 organized as Reformed Presbyterians (see
was contributed by Thomas Blacklock, John Ogilvie, and Thomas Randall; three are by William Robertson (1742‑51), and several by John Morrison (d. 1798). The name of William Cameron (d. 1811) appears chiefly as an improver of other men's verses. The most important share, both for quantity and quality, was taken from the manuscripts of Michael Bruce (1746‑87). The Paraphrases are marked by a dry neatness and precision of style, which excludes whatever could offend the most sober taste, and leaves little room for lyrical or devotional fire. Their eminent respectability and long service have made them household words in Scotland, and they have been constantly and largely drawn upon by English and American hymnals.
BIBLJ0aa11'HT: Julian, Hvmnolopy, pp. 1024‑25, 1033‑34.
n. The Scotch Episcopal Church. III. Congregationalists. IV. Other Protestant Bodies. V. The Roman Catholic Church.
PnEBBYTERIANs, I., 5). The opposition to the exercise of patronage grew to such an extent that ministers could be installed in office only with military aid. In 1752 arose a new separate body called the "Relief" (see PREsBYTERIANs, I., 2, § 3). In the course of a century the number of separatist organizations had grown to about 500 congregations and in 1847 they were combined as the United Presbyterian Church. With the beginning of the nineteenth century a reawakening took place in the Church of Scotland (see PRESBYTERIANS, I., 1) under the leadership of such men as Thomas Chalmers (q.v.), under which the church aligned itself more and more with the doctrinal viewpoint of the separatists. The patronage struggle, stimulated by the spiritual revival, was again resumed, with a view to restriction and correction of evils, and the general question of the spiritual independence of the Church came to the front. This led to the "Disruption" and the organization of the Free Church of Scotland (See PRES1jrrERIANS,1., 2). In the next sixty years the Free Church doubled in membership. In 1874 the right of patronage was removed by parliament, the election of the clergy was granted to communicants and adherents, and the Established Church has consequently gained in popularity.
At the close of the last century there were, accordingly, three great Presbyterian churches in Scotland: the Established Church consisting of 1,377 congregations; the Free Church with 1,068 congregations; and the United Presbyterian Church with 593 congregations. The difference between them was principally involved in the relation of Church and State. The Established Church was in accord with the existing state of things. The Free Church theoretically favored State recognition and endowment, but entered increasing protest against the prevailing arrangements, which, in spite of the abolition of patronage, were felt to be identical with the former state of things. The United Presbyterians repudiated all connection between Church and State. All adhered to the Westminster confession, but the United Church in 1879 and the Free Church

Scotland	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	800
in 1892 adopted a declaratory act, defining more
closely their attitude, to the effect mainly of moder
ating ultra‑Calvinistic points and not requiring total
subscription from candidates to clerical office. Ne
gotiations for union between the Free and United
Churches opened in 1863, broken off in 1873 and
resumed in 1896, resulted, Oct. 31, 1900, in the or
ganization of the United Free Church of Scotland
(see PRESBYTERIANS, I., 2). While this resolution
for union was carried in the general assembly of the
Free Church by a vote of 643 to 27, this small
minority now declared itself to be the only true and
legitimate Free Church and laid claim to all the prop
erty of the organization. For the resulting legal
complications and the settlement see PRESBYTE
RIANS, I., 2‑3. For a detailed history of the Pres
byterian Church in Scotland in its several branches
and for the present situation see PRESBYTERIANS, I.
	The time of worship is in the morning and evening
of the Sabbath. In the country, if the second serv
ice is held at all, it is usually in an adjoining chapel,
school, or hall. Prayer is voluntary and extempore,
8. Mode of no liturgy having been used from the
	Worship. time of Archbishop Laud (see LAUD,
		WILLIAM). Except in the Highlands
singing is usually accompanied by a musical in
strument, and the number of church organs is in
creasing rapidly in the cities. Some congregations
sing metrical versions of the Psalms of the seven
teenth century, but the great majority sing hymns
also. The Church Hymnary published (1898) by the
authority of the established church, the two parties
in the present United Free, and the Irish Presbyte
rian Churches, has been widely adopted. The
sermon, usually from twenty‑five to thirty‑five
minutes in length, is the chief part of the service.
Systematic exposition of the Scriptures, though still
prominent, especially in the morning service, is
on the wane. Baptism is performed in church as
part of the public service, or at home. Communion
is received by all at least twice a year; and by many,
four times. There is no confirmation in the proper
sense of the word, but the minister gives special
instruction to the young people before their first
communion. Weddings are usually at home, but
there is a tendency to transfer them to the church,
as in England. There is a service in the house of
mourning; and at the grave, including a short
prayer, but no address. The minister is expected
to visit not only the sick but all the members of his
congregation regularly. He is the superintendent of
the Sunday‑school and usually leads the highest or,,
so‑called, Bible class at a special hour. Of late
years there has been a very large growth of young
people's societies called "gilds," associated with
the church and especially of the Young People's
Society of Christian Endeavor. The organization of
Scotch Presbyterianism is essentially alike in all the
Churches. The church elders are chosen by all the
communicants and bound by the confession, and,
together with the minister, they constitute the
	4. Coned‑ church session and have authority
	tution. over matters of church discipline. A
		number of congregations, varying be
tween 10 and 200, each represented by an elder
elected by the church session (one elder for every
400 communicants in the United Free Church), and the minister, constitute a presbytery, which has general oversight over the congregations. A group of presbyteries forms a synod to which the acts of the presbyteries may be appealed. The members of the general assembly are chosen annually by the presbyteries from the ministers and elders, and it is the court of final appeal (see PoLrTY, ECCLESIASTICAL; PRESBYTERIANS, X.). In the Established Church some of the members are chosen by the towns and the universities. Candidates for the ministry must have attended lectures on the classics, mathematics, and philosophy, at a university, for at least three semesters. Each candidate is then examined as to his moral and religious fitness by a presbytery, and then again on his university studies by a committee of the general assembly. Four more years of theological study follow.
2. Severally: The Established Church‑officially, the Church of Scotland‑is ideally independent neither in legislative nor administrative powers, since it did not decline the dispositions of the civil courts with which the decisions of the general assembly were in conflict prior to 1843. In addition, when the right of patronage was abolished and the privilege of creedal modification was obtained, these changes were not valid for the church before the approval of the State was given. Notwithstanding this Church is freest among the State churches. The king is in no sense its head. His representative, the lord high commissioner, has no vote in the general assembly. He may summon and dismiss it, in the name of the king, as may the moderator in the name of Jesus Christ. For the statistics and work of this church see PRESBYTERIANS, I., 1. The decision of the house of lords against the union of the Free and United Presbyterian Churches, instead of crushing the United Free Church, awoke an enthusiasm for it that had not previously existed. Clergy, missionaries, and students, with scarcely an exception, stood by it, and by 1904 the organization showed an actual increase in membership. As a consequence of the decree of the house of lords which pronounced the constitution of the Free Church unalterable, the committee representing the assembly between sessions raised, within ten days, the claim for the privilege of heeding the commands of Christ without the fear of legal consequences. This was reiterated by the general assembly of 1905 more formally and explicitly. The ancient Scotch doctrine of spiritual independence was restated, emphasizing that the Church and it alone possessed the right to alter its creed, and asserting the rule of majority in all church affairs, governing also the matter of property. For the statistics of this body see PRESBYTERIANS, I., 2. The Free and the United Presbyterian Churches had different methods for raising contributions for clerical support. In the Free Church contributions were made to a central fund which was proportionately divided among the ministers, each congregation usually having a parsonage and being allowed to add a bonus to its minister's compensation, after satisfying the central fund. In the United Church the congregations paid the ministers di‑

301	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Scotland
rectly, but when the salaries did not come up to about $750 (generally with parsonage), the difference was made up from a reinforcement fund. The effort to coordinate these two methods met with difficulties.
The Free Church of Scotland is relatively strong only in the highland districts (see PREsBYTERIANB, I., 3), is rigidly conservative, especially insisting on the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures, and violently opposes the spirit of modern criticism. Its general assembly in 1905 rejected the declaratory act of 1892, and forbade the singing of "human songs" and the use of the organ in divine service. There are three other small Presbyterian churches in Scotland, remnants of minorities that refused to follow majorities in falling away from what they considered the truth. They are (1) the Free Presbyterian Church; (2) the Reformed Presbyterian; and (3) the Original Secession, properly called the "Old Light" (see for data and history of these churches PRESBYTERIANS, i., 4‑6).
II. The Scotch Episcopal Church: This church was in former times the great rival of the Presbyterian Church. After the downfall of the Stuarts its service was forbidden and subjected to other restrictive measures, while the church itself was almost expelled from the country. In 1792 full toleration was again granted. Owing to English influence most of the aristocracy and the landed nobility belong to this Church. Its cause has gained also by thorough organization. The country is divided into seven dioceses: Moray, Aberdeen, Brechin, St. Andrews, Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Argyle. From 1876 an excellent system of lay representation has been organized, whose aim is the support of the bishops in all financial affairs. The attractiveness of the church service and the earnest and self‑denying activity of the clergy have contributed to its rapid growth. In 1910 it reported 404 churches and mission stations, 335 clergymen, and 51,289 communicants, with contributions of about $100; 000 for main purposes. On account of its alleged High‑church proclivities, a small body forming nine parishes has separated, and claimed direct connection with the Church of England.
III. Congregationalists: There is no trace of a movement in Scotland simultaneous with that turbulent period in political life which gave rise to the Independents. However, in 1728 John Glas (q.v.), a minister of the Established Church, founded a body still represented by one or two small congregations. From the end of the eighteenth century an Independent movement has achieved notable results. It had its origin in the revival of the Christian ideal in which the brothers Robert and James Haldane (q.v.) took a part, which was no doubt reenforced, from England. The congregations formed joined the Congregational Union organized in 1863. A division in the Secession Church in 1841 resulted in the founding of the Evangelical Union. James Morison (q.v.) had been expelled from the old church for emphasizing the love of God without leaving room for election by grace. The denomination which he founded, often called the Morisonian church, preferred the Congregational to the Presbyterian government. In 1896 the Congregationalist
and Evangelical Unions were united to form the present Congregational Union of Scotland. This body has a theological faculty at Edinburgh with three professors. It is distinguished for its zeal in mission and temperance organization. A minority of eight congregations and five ministers refused to follow the Evangelical Union in joining with the Congregationalists in 1896. The total of Congregationalists reported for Scotland at the end of 1909 was 207 ministers, 4 evangelists or lay pastors, 70 lay preachers, 213 congregations, 35,845 members, with Sunday‑school teachers to the number of 2,744 and 26,194 scholars. The Baptist Union has existed in Scotland from 1750 (according to some only from 1765) when a renowned Baptist, Archibald Maclean, preached in Edinburgh. The movement doubtless received impetus with the acquisition of the Haldane brothers. The numbers of Baptists are comparatively small; their doctrine is Calvinistic; their worship simple; and their organization strictly congregational, although a Union and an interior mission have been provided for. Some of their preachers are laymen, and numerous congregations practise open communion. This church has a seminary with five instructors and fourteen students. It reports at the end of 1909 122 ministers, 156 local preachers, 155 congregations, 21,240 communicants, 2,127 Sunday‑school teachers, and 18,969 scholars.
IV. Other Protestant Bodies: The Methodists are weakly represented in Scotland. There are two branches, the Wesleyans and the Primitive Methodists, which form parts of the English organizations of the same name. Wesley first visited Scotland in 1751, and in 1767 there were 468 members of his church. There are now forty‑five circuits and missions with forty‑five ministers. A powerful mission established in recent years in Edinburgh bears the outline of an institutional church, and wields great influence. The Primitive Methodists have eighteen circuits and twenty ministers. There are small representations of the Quakers, the Catholic Apostolic Church (Irvingites), Unitarians, and the New Jerusalem Church or Swedenborgians. Probably none of these consists of more than twelve congregations.
V. The Roman Catholic Church: This numbers considerably more than half a million. Most of them are of Irish descent, but about 30,000 are Scotch. This element is found among the Highlanders of Gaelic tongue and has been steadfastly loyal from primitive times. The Roman Catholic hierarchy was reorganized in 1878 into six dioceses; St. Andrew's and Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, Dunkeld, Galloway, and Argyll, the first two of which are archbishoprics. At the close of 1909 there were about 250 parishes, 600 priests, 400 church buildings, 13 cloisters for men, and 51 for women. Week‑day schools attended by thousands of children are conducted, partly supervised and supported by the State.
A glance finally is to be given at those who have drifted away from all church connections. It is calculated that they amount to 1,600,000 or thirtyseven and one‑half per cent. of the total population. A number of institutions like the Bible and

6ootland
Scotus Erivens
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
tract societies, the city missions, the schools for morally neglected children, the temperance societies, and others have been created by the Church as a whole for the elevation of all classes.
(JOHN CAIRNS.)
BIBLIoa8Arf87: For the early period the most important literature will be found under Cxvric CBuRCH; for the Presbyterian churches under PHrw8ByTEnrAN6; other books of importance are under the articles on the worthies of Scotland, such as COLUMBA, JOHN KNox, and others named in the text. For sources use: Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, vol. ii.; Chronicon Anpio‑Scoticum (60 B.c.‑1189 A.D.), eel. C. W. Bouterwek, Elberfeld, 1863, Eng. transl. in J. 8tevenson's Church Historians of England, London, 1856; Thomas of Burton, Chrondca monaaterii de Melaa, eel. E. A. Bond in Rolls Series, no. 43, 3 vole., London, 18661868; Chronica de Maidros (731‑1275), eel. J. Stevenson, Edinburgh, 1835, Eng. trawl., Chronicle of Melrose, in J. Stevenson's Church Historians of England, London, 1856; A. Theiner. Vdera monuments Hrbernorum d Scotorum historiam illudranEia,1216‑16k7, Rome, 1804; Annales Anglia d Seotiee (189,2‑1900), eel. H. T. Riley in Rolls Series, No. 28, vol. ii., London, 1865; R. Hart, Ecclesiastical Records of England . . . and Scotland to the Reformation, 2d eel., Cambridge, 1846; J. F. 8. Gordon, Ecclesiastical ChronWe for Scotland, 4 vols., Glasgow, 1867; M. E. C. Waleott, Scoti‑Monadicon, the Ancient Church of Scotland. Hid. of the Cathedrals. Conventual Foundations, and Hospitals, London, 1874.
On the antiquities consult: T. :3. Muir, Eecleaiolooical Notes on the Islands of Scotland, Edinburgh, 1885; W. F. Bkene, Celtic Scotland, 3 vols., new eel., Edinburgh, 18861890; G. Chalmers, Caledonia, 8 vole., Paisley, 18871902; J. Robertson,.Scottiah Abbeys and Cathedrals, Aberdeen. 1891; H. C. Butler. Scotland's Ruined Abbeys. New York, 1899; M. E. L. Addis, The Cathedrals and Abbeys of Scotland, Philadelphia, 1901; D. Butler, Scottish Cathedrals and Abbeys, London, 1901; J. Anderson, Early Christian Monuments of Scotland, Edinburgh, 1903.
General works are: A. Stevenson, Hid. of the Church and State of Scotland from the Accession of Ring Charles I. to . . . 1686, 2d eel., Edinburgh, 1844; J. Lee, Lectures on as Hid. of the Church of Scotland from the Reformation to she Resolution Settlement, eel. W. Lee, 2 vole., Edinburgh, 1860; G. Grub, Ecclesiastical History of Scotland from the Introduction of Christianity to the Present Time, 4 vole., Edinburgh, 1861; W. Chambers and Others, The Scottish Church from the Earliest Times to 1881, Edinburgh and New York, 1881; J. Campbell. Mediaeval Scotland, 1093‑1613, Edinburgh, 1881; N. L. Walker, Scottish Church Mist., Edinburgh, 1882; J. Cunningham, The Church History of Scotland from the Commencement of the Christian Era, 2 vole., 2d eel., Edinburgh, 1883; J. M. Ross, Scottish Hid. to as Reformation, Glasgow, 1884; J. Anderson, Scotland in Early Christian Times, 2 parts, Edinburgh, 1886; D. Keith, A Hiat. of Scotland, Civil and Ecclesiastical, . . . to . . . 1163, 2 vole., Edinburgh, 1886; W. G. Blaikie, The Preachers of Scotland, Past and Present, 5 pole., Edinburgh, 1890‑91; A. T. Innes, Studies in Scottish History, Chiefly Ecclesiastical, London, 1892; D. C. Edmonds, The Early Scottish Church, its Doctrine and Discipline, London, 1906; J. H. Shepherd, Introduction to the Hid. of the Church of Scotland, ib. 1906; G. W. T. McGown, Scottish Heroes of the Paith, ib. 1907; J. Watson, The Scot of the 18th Century, his Religion and his Life, b. 1907; W. Beveridge, Makers of the Scottish Church, Edinburgh, 1908; R. C. Maclagan, Reliyio Scotica. Its Nature as traceable in Scottish saintly Traditions, ib. 1908; Cambridge Modern History, v. 279 eqq., New York, 1908; A. Macrae, Scotland from the Treaty of Union with England to the Present Time (1707‑1907), London, 1909; D. Macmillan, The Aberdeen Doctors. A notable Group of Scottish T4QOlopiane of the first episcopal Period, 1810‑88, ib. 1909; C. W. Thomson, Scotland's Work and Worth, 2 vole., ib. 1910; P. H. Brown, Hid. of Scotland, 3 vole., ib. 1910; W. L. Mathieaon, The Awakening in Scotland; a History, 1747‑.97, Glasgow, 1911.
	For the period prior to the Reformation consult: C.
In nee, Scotland in the Middle Apse, Edinburgh, 1860;
T. McLaughlan, The Early Scottish Church; Eccles. Hiet.
of Scotland from the first to the twelfth Century, Edinburgh,
1864; Miss M. G. G. Kinloeh, Hist. of Scotland, chiefly in
its ecclesiastical Aspect . . . to the Pall of the old Hierarchy, Edinburgh, 1873; W. Lookhart, The Church of Scotland in the Thirteenth Century: The Life and Times of David de Bernham of St. Andrew, 1289‑69, London, 1889; R. M. Stewart, The Church of Scotland from the Time of Queen Margaret to the Reformation, London, 1892; J. Dowden, The Celtic Church in Scotland, London, 1894; W. Cathcart, The Ancient British and Irish Churches, London, 1894; J. Paton, Scottish Hid. and Life, Glasgow, 1902; R. W. Billings, The Baronial and Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Scotland, London, 1909 eqq.
On the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland consult: J. Robertson, Concilia Scotia!, Edinburgh, 1864; W. M. Brady, Annals of the Catholic Hierarchy in England and Scotland, London, 1883; W. Forbes‑Leith, Narratives o' Scottish Catholics under Mary Stuart and James VI., Edinburgh, 1885; A. Bellesheim, History of the Catholic Church in Scotland, 4 vole., Edinburgh, 1887‑90; W. Paterson, Letters tom Countrymen, 6 parts, Edinburgh, 1900; J. Forbes, L'Iylise oatholique en 0cosse h la fin du xvi. sickle, Paris, 1901; W. F. Leith, Memoirs of Scottish Catholics during the 17th and 18th Centuries, 2 vols., London, 1909.
On episcopacy in Scotland read: J. P. Lawson, Hid. of the Episcopal Church of Scotland, 3 vole., Edinburgh, 1844; J. B. Craven, Hid. of the Episcopal Church in Orkney, Kirkwall, 1883; H. M. Luekoek, The Church in Scotland, London, 1893; H. D. Henderson, The Episcopal Church in Scotland. London, 1902; J. T. F. Farquhar, The Visible Church in the Light of Reason and Hid., Aberdeen. 1904.
SCOTLAND, FREE CHURCH OF, FREE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF, REFORMED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN, UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF, UNITED ORIGINAL SECESSION CHURCH OF. See PRESBYTERIANS.

SCOTT, CHARLES ANDERSON: Presbyterian; b. in London May 30, 1859. He received his education at Uppingham School, at St. John's College, Cambridge (B.A., 1882; M.A., 1896; Hulsean prize, 1884), New College, Edinburgh, and the universities of Leipsic and Jens; was assistant minister of Queen's Cross Church, Aberdeen, 1887‑89; minister at College Park, Willesden, 1892, and of St. John's, Kensington, 1898‑1907, being also examiner in historical theology for the University of London, 1902‑07; and Dunn professor of the New Testament in the Theological College of the Presbyterian Church of England at Cambridge since 1907. He has published: Ulfilas, Apostle of the Goth8 (London, 1885); Evangelical Doctrine Bible Truth (1901); Making of a Christian (1902); and contributed to the Detrotional and Practical Commentary the volume on Revelation (1905), as well as the same volume in the Century Bible (1902); also the essay on"Jesus and Paul" in Cambridge Biblical Essays (1909).

SCOTT, HUGH McDONAALD: Congregationalist; b. at Guysborough, Nova Scotia, Mar. 31, 1848; d. at Chicago Apr. 29, 1909. He was graduated from Dalhousie College,Halifax (A.B.,1870), and from the University of Edinburgh (1873). During the same year he studied at Berlin, and later (1878‑81) at Leiptuc. In 1874 he was ordained to the ministry, and for four years (1874‑77) was pastor of the Presbyterian church at Merigomish, Nova Scotia. After 1881 he was professor of church history at the Chicago Theological Seminary. He wrote The Nicene Theology (Stone lectures; Chicago, 1896), while from 1883 to 1890 he contributed the section on church history to Current Discussions in Theology, published by the faculty of the divinity school.

RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA'
8ootland
Sootue Brisens
SCOTT, ISAIAH BENJAMIP: Methodist Episcopal bishop; b. in Woodford County, Ky., Sept. 30, 1854. He received his education at Clark Seminary (now Clark College), Atlanta, Ga., and Central Tennessee College (now Walden University), Nashville (B.A., 1880; M.A., 1883); entered the Tennessee conference in 1881, and was transferred to the Texas conference, where he was professor in Prairie View State Normal and Industrial College, 1881, and served as pastor at Houston, Galveston, Austin, and Marshall, 1882,87; was presiding elder of the Marshall and Houston Districts, 1882‑93; president of Wiley University, Marshall, Tex., 1893‑96; editor of the Southwestern Christian Advocate, New Orleans, 1896‑1904; was elected bishop for Africa, 1904.

SCOTT, ROBERT: Church of England; b. at Bondleigh, Devonshire, Jan. 26, 1811; d. at Rochester Dec. 2, 1887. He was educated at Christ Church, Oxford (B.A., 1833); was fellow and tutor of Balliol College, 1835‑40 (M.A., 1836); rector of Duloe, Cornwall, 1840‑50; prebendary of Exeter Cathedral, 1845‑66; rector of South Luffenham, Rutland, 1850‑54; select preacher at Oxford, 1853‑54, 1874‑75; master of Balliol, 1854‑70; professor of Scripture exegesis, 1861‑70; and dean of Rochester, 1870‑87. He was a member of the New‑Testament revision committee; author of Twelve Sermons (London, 1851); University Sermons (1860) ; and of a commentary on the Epistle of James (1881) in the Bible Commentary (1872‑82). From I836 to 1843 he labored together with H. G. Liddell in the preparation of the great Greek‑English Lexicon (Oxford, 1843; 7th enlarged ed., 1883), upon which he was occupied all in all for fortyseven years.
BIBLAOGRAPBl: The Guardian, Dec. 14, 1887; E. Abbott and L. Campbell, Benjamin Jewett, 3 vols., London, 18971899; DNB, li. 85‑88.
SCOTT, THOMAS: Church of England; b. at Braytoft, Lincolnshire, Feb. 4, 1747; d. at Aston Sandford (near Thames, 11 m. e. of Oxford), Buckinghamshire, Apr. 16, 1821. He was ordained priest in 1773, and in 1781 succeeded John Newton, who had converted him to Calvinism, as curate of Olney. In 1785 he became chaplain of the Lock Hospital, London; and in 1801, vicar of Aston Sandford. His first publication was The Force of Truth (London, 1779, and numerous editions), narrating his change from rationalistic Unitarianism to the highest type of Calvinistic fervor, a work regarded as one of the most impressive spiritual autobiographies ever written. His most important work was The Holy Bible with Notes (5 vols., 17881792; very many reissues and reprints). This has long been considered a model family Bible, and has been read more widely, perhaps, than any other. It speaks volumes for Scott's industry and perseverance that without early educational advantages, oppressed by poverty, and compelled for years before his ordination to earn his living as a farm‑laborer, he yet was able to acquire considerable learning, and produce a work, published under the severest pecuniary straits, yet spoken of as the greatest theological performance of his age and country. J. H.
Newman wrote of him as a man to whom he almost owed his soul. Scott's Essays on the Most Important Subjects in Religion were published in 1793, 15th ed., 1844; and his Village Discourses in 1825. His Works in ten vols., edited by his son, appeared 1823‑25.
BiBLrooBAPHY: A. C. Downer, Thomas Scott the Commentator. A Memoir of his Life, London, 1909; The Life of
. T. Scott . . . Including a Narrative Drawn up by himself, ib. 1822; The Life of . . . Thomas Scott, in Christian Biography, ib. (183871; J. Stephen, Essays in Ecclesiastical Biography, pp. 413 sqq., 14th ed., ib. 1880; DNB, li. 73‑75.

SCOTUS ERIGENA, JOHANNES.
Early Life (§ 1). Participation in Controversy (§ 2). Reports of Later Life (¢ 3). His Learning (¢ 4). Views on Reason and Authority (1 ti). His System ($ 6). Doctrine of God (§ 7). The Ideal World ($ 8). The World of Sense ($ 9). Anthropology; Doctrine of Evil (¢ 10). Consummation of All Things ($ 11). His Position in General ($ 12).
Johannes Scotus Erigena stands out as one of the most distinguished figures not only of the ninth century but of the whole history of philosophy and theology. His early life, however, as well as his inner development, is hidden up to the time
z. Early to which his writings bring us. The Life. one fact which is clear is that his birthplace was Ireland; to this the name Scotus (or Scotigena) as well as Erigena testifies (both these titles in those times indicating Ireland), and there is the express statement of Prudentius, "Hibernia sent thee to Gaul" (De pradicatione, in MPL, cxv: 1194). It was. probably in Ireland that he received his education, though in the Frankish kingdom he first comes into historical light, but as already a man of mature powers. From this last fact it would follow that he was born in the early years of the century. That he won the distinguished favor of Charles the Bald is clear from the dedication to the latter of numerous writings and from many passages in his poems. He became celebrated and was the acquaintance of the distinguished men of the times‑Hincmar, Servatus Lupus, Usuardus, Ratramnus and others, not to omit Prudentius of Treves (qq.v.). As the last‑named left the court in 847, Scotus must have arrived there before that. Here probably Scotus did his literary work, though not as an ecclesiastic; there is no trace of his being a monk, and it is doubtful whether he was a priest. But he entered into the theological controversies of the time.
His first essay in this direction was in the matter of the eucharistic controversy begun by Ratramnus concerning the change of the elements, though the writing long ascribed to Scotus is now known to be the De Eucharistia of Ratramnus (Laufs, in TSK, 1828, pp. 755‑756). Yet Hincmar 2. Partici‑ charged him with regarding the pation in elements as symbols of the presence of Controversy. Christ, though whether this view was put forth in Scotus' own writing is doubtful, in spite of the fact that his position must have been well known. More important for Scotus

Scotus Erisena	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	804
was his entrance into the Gottschalk controversy concerning predestination (see GomCHALg, 1). He was urged by Hincmar and Pardulus of Laon to take part in this, and wrote between 849 and 853 the De diving prmdestinatione, in which he charged Gottschalk with heresy and ignorance, and expressed with great frankness his views on the being of God, the identity of foreknowledge and predestination, and good and evil. These views sounded so strange and blasphemous to his contemporaries that a very storm was aroused and synodical condemnation of some of his theses was evoked (Synod of Valence, 855). Hincmar pronounced against some of the positions of Scotus, though holding others. Pope Nicholas disapproved of Scotus in a letter to Charles (extant in C. Du Boulay, Hist. univemitatis Parisiensis, i.184, Paris, 1665), because the translation of the writings of Dionysius had not, as ecclesiastical custom demanded, been sent for approval, an offense aggravated by the fact that the translator was under suspicion in respect to matters of faith. He desired Charles to notify Scotus to appear before the pope or at least to remove him from his place at the head of the school in Paris.
The poems of Scotus permit the tracing of his life till the death of Charles in 877, and he seems to have lived even until 882, if an extant epigram may be attributed to Hincmar. But of the end of his life
French sources give no information. 3. Reports This last is not surprising considering
of Later the confusion of the times and the fact
	Life.	that Scotus held no ecclesiastical
		preferment. There are reports of
activity in England. Thus Asser, the biographer of
Alfred the Great, speaks of a certain Johannes "of
the race of old Saxons" called to England and made
abbot of Athelney where he was assassinated by
Gallic enemies (Monuments historica Britannica,
i. 493 sqq., ed. H. Petrie, J. Sharpe, and T. D.
Hardy, London, 1848); but this can not have been
John Scotus Erigena, who was not a Saxon. The
same author (p. 489) mentions a " Johannes, a priest
and monk, a man of acute intellect, skilled in letters
and other arts," who may be identical with the one
named above but is more likely another man, and he
can not be Scotus since he is designated a monk.
While there is no reason for holding, as has been
maintained, that Alfred would not have invited
Scotus to England because of the latter's unortho
doxy, the advanced age of Scotus at this time would
be a real obstacle. Later reports like that of William
of Mahnesbury (MPL, clxxix. 10, 1653) rest upon
inference from the statement of Asser and from a
tradition about the murder of an abbot of Mahnes
bury, over whose grave a light appeared to show that
he was a martyr and a saint. Tradition identified
this abbot with Scotus, and possibly upon the basis
of a combination of these different supposed data
arose the medieval tradition and the making of a
statue to " John Scotus who translated Dionysius
from Greek into Latin." Little dependence can be
placed upon this entire story. The most probable
conclusion is that Scotus died in the Frankish
kingdom.
Among his contemporaries he enjoyed a reputation for wonderful gifts and learning and great keen‑
ness and eloquence. Yet his writings do not show that he towered above the great men of his time.
What seems to have made his reputa4. His tion was his close knowledge of Greek, Learning. an acquirement rare and in that period
usually elementary when it was known. While the extent of his knowledge of Greek authors is uncertain, since he cited many of them from Latin translation, his translation of Dionysius and of the difficult Ambigud of Maximus speaks for a real scholarship. With his knowledge of Greek went a high valuation of Greek ideas, evinced in various ways‑in his manner of speaking of the Greeks, and in his regard for the formula regarding the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father through the Son, though he held also that the filioque was justified. The knowledge of Greek mediated for him a freer handling of theological and philosophical questions. But the entire disposition of Scotus differed from that of his contemporaries by virtue of his aptness in handling philosophical and philosophical‑theological questions, added to a certain ready facility. . From Dionysius and Maximus he learned how to treat speculatively the doctrine of God and the problems related to this in a way strange to the western theological discussions of the period. He thus had the key to an understanding of the speculative elements so rich in such older theologians as Basil, the two Gregorys, Origen, Ambrose, and Augustine,‑elements which went back to Neoplatonism or to Philo. It is suspected but not proved that Scotus knew and used the works of the Greek philosophers; he certainly had in hand Boethius, Macrobius, Marcianus Capella, and other mediators of ancient learning to the Middle Ages, and he gained from them a meaning different from the more literal and constrained results won by his contemporaries. He was the first Westerner of the Middle Ages to think comprehensively and philosophically and to attempt the construction of a system.
Scotus made no sharp distinction between philosophy and theology; rather they were both essential means by which to gain knowledge of truth. He never stopped to consider whether his system was more philosophy than theology. So, in the matter
of reason and authority he would not g. Views on have said that the first belonged to Reason and philosophy and the other to theology;
Authority. for him both had their right in both
regions and sprang from the same root ‑divine wisdom. Still, reason had the precedence, and authority had its origin from reason; reason, being in itself worthful and invariable, did not need the support of authority, while, on the other hand, authority appears feeble when not upheld by reason. Hence Scotus would employ authority for those who could not rightly use reason; yet he could advise: "Let ho authority drive thee in terror from the conclusions suggested by right contemplation" (De divisions naturce, i. 66). As contrasted with his times, he had a clear consciousness of what might be accomplished by means of human reasoning power. Yet he did not undervalue authority, though he emphasized reason where it led to clear results. The authority of Scripture he fully allowed. The

308	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Mootus Briaens
involved meaning of Scripture was infinite, so that the exegesis of different commentators might all contain truth (iii. 24). With respect to the Fathers, he claimed the right in cases where they differed to follow the one who to him seemed to be right, though he disclaimed the purpose of deciding between them.
	The philosophic‑theological system of Scotus is
set forth in his great work De divisione naturce [ed. T.
Gale, Oxford, 1681 (16857) and C. B. Schliiter, Miin
ater, 1838; Germ. transl., 2 vols., Berlin, 1870‑76],
which must be taken as the basis in an exposition
of his ideas, though other works furnish confirmation
		and illustration. It is in dialogue
	6. His	form, between a master and a pupil;
	System.	and it has been well said in praise of the
		composition that both contribute to the
development of the line of thought. By nature
Scotus means everything with which thought has
to do, existence and non‑existence‑the last, to
be sure, in the special sense in which the author
regards God as non‑existent. Nature includes God
and the world, even though neither has a predicate
in common with the other. The word "nature" is
not quite a fitting expression of what Scotus had in
mind; it might be rendered by "the All." This
he divided into four categories: that which creates
but is not created; that which creates and is created;
that which is created and does not create; and that
which is not created and does not create. Un
created creating nature is God, as is also uncreated
and non‑creating; the last is the world in its return
to God [i.e., God as the end of all things]. The
second and third categories are those of the ideal
and the real world; the system thus leads from
God through the ideal and the real back to God.
Book i. discusses the being of God in his selfexistence, book ii. the first revelation of God in the world of ideas or original causes, books iii. and iv. discuss the real world, and book, v. deals with the return of the world to God. Scotus'
7. Doctrine doctrine of God goes back to the kata‑
of God. phatic and apophatic ("affirming and denying") theology of Dionysius (i. 13). All positive predicates attributed to the mundane can be superlatively attributed to God as the transcendental or "super‑being," but these predicates are positive in form only, in fact negative (by virtue of the "super"; iii. 20). Hence positive leads to negative, and in this way all predicates may be denied to deity, since deity is incomprehensible. His being is a "super‑being," hence not in the category of being as applied to the mundane, and so can be called a "not‑being." But this "not‑being" is not to be understood as pure negation. Considering the self‑existence of God, Scotus affirms that God can not grasp the entire fulness of his being; God knows that he is nothing of all that is in the world, but does not know what he is (by which Scotus means that even God can not comprehend and define himself • as a certain definite something). The whole mundane existence is by God created and formed after his plan, and the realization of the world involves the self‑consciousness of God, but this self‑consciousness is not to be thought of as like that of man, since God is absolute and most comX. 20
plete unity (i. 12, 73). This conception of unity is for Scotus the highest, most comprehensive, and transcendental, its fulness unattainable by man; it means the absolute oneness of willing and knowing. It was Scotus' doctrine on this point which led him so bitterly to assail Gottschalk's doctrine of predestination. While on the one side Scotus regards God as altogether severed from the world, there is another side of the consideration according to which God and the world are identical (iii. 17) ; the reconciliation of these two sides is 'in the conception that the world is the revelation of God (i. 13). God creates himself in the world and is All in all; he is the substance of all things, the last unknowable basis of its existence as of its accidents hence God is all and all is God, yet meanwhile he remains over all within himself, does not go forth into what he creates. The analogy employed is the relationship between human thought and speech; thought clothes itself in speech but does not go forth in the speech. While God's inner being remains unknown, yet there is knowledge of him according to the measure by which he reveals himself. Scotus borrows from Dionysius and Maximus the expression "theophany," which he uses in various senses. It may mean special divine appearances or visions to a creature, or the virtues which God works in a creature which then become the basis of a knowledge of God; or, finally, each creature is itself a theophany in so far as God is revealed in it. Consequently the knowledge a creature has of its own being is a knowledge of God proportionally as God is revealed in the creature.
The next category, which leads from the absolutely unknowable divine unity to the manifoldneas of the world, is the creation of the ideal world or the totality, of potencies which in turn & The Ideal emits from itself the world of sense.
	World.	Scotus knows as ideas divine pre
		destinations, acts of will, original
causes (ii. 2), which are the names he gives to
goodness, essence, life, reason, intelligence, wisdom,
virtue, blessedness, truth, eternity, greatness, love,
peace, unity, perfection (ii. 36, iii. 1). But this is
not a complete enumeration or arrangement of these
ideas, which, in view of the divine unity in which
they issue, is impossible. They are the radii of which
the unity is the center, which can be indefinitely
multiplied without changing the being of the cir
cumference. The first step of the self‑revealing God
is taken in making himself accessible to the creature;
the means of doing this is unknown; but it is af
firmed that God is eternal, according to his eternal
(not temporal) being. The unlimited fulness of the
ideas is summed up in the divine Logos or Son of
God; in him in whom they are created do they exist
without change. To be known in a certain sense
coincides with being; so one may say that one is in
another when he is known by that other (ii. 8, iii.
4, iv. 9), and of God it is true that he becomes so far
as he becomes known (i. 12). Hence the"invariable
movement" taking place in the Trinity by which
God is made accessible to knowledge is a real crea
tion, and ideas become so far as they are made as
cessible to knowledge. Scotus conceived the primal
causes as wholly enclosed in the divine being, yet

Scotus Zrigena	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	Boo
Scribes
as also proceeding thence and as having in a certain
manner independent existence.
	The third category of Scotus is the world in the
usual sense of that term. The basis of this is the
primal causes; it is therefore eternal in the same
sense as those causes (v. 25). This eternity did not
come about through constant repetition of a world
		cycle, as with the Stoics and Origen.
	g. The	The apparent contradiction involved
	World of in the conception of the world's return
	Sense.	to God (the fourth category) is solved
		by the distinction of Scotus between
the material or sensible existence and the purely
spiritual existence of the world. At the head of the
created world stood the angels, with spiritual bodies
and free from all material qualities; at times these
really appeared to men (v. 38). They were produced
all at once from the primordial causes, were in nine
classes, of which only those in the highest class were
free from error. Their knowledge comes not from
experience but from view of God in theophany and
of their own being. The fallen angels, Satan at
the head, fell immediately after their creation, they
have material bodies which feel desire and will go out
of existence with the world (v. 13, iv. 24). Next
to the creation of these was that of the world of
space and time. In considering space (cf. i. 21 sqq.)
he regarded locality as limitation in space equivalent
to definition or circumscription in logic; apace is
that in which matter is extended. Space and time
are not prior to the world, but with it came into
existence from the eternal basis. Geometrical rela
tions Scotus distinguished from the figures which
represented them (iv. 8), and they are reducible to
absolute spacial unity. The monad is the principle
of number (iii. 1, 12). Matter is not eternal (iii. 14),
but came into existence in the course of creation by
the concourse of immaterial principles, quantity and
quality. Elsewhere (i. 56) it appears as the vari
ability of variable things, i.e., that which lies at
the basis of everything variable, the Aristotelian
Kyle. Distinction is to be made between matter
and the physical world; a body comes to exist when
the substantial form unites with matter, and these
two are to be distinguished apart. The "form" is
something constant, eternal, issues from the pri
mordial causes, and returns thither; but constant
change underlies matter. One can hardly explain
how Scotus derived matter from quantity and
quality, but his realism shows in his drawing the
particular from the general.
	Scotus' anthropology is difficult because it is
involved with his doctrine of evil and sin. He held
that by divine appointment man had preeminent
rank in the All. Man shares in the being of lower
		creatures that are without souls, in the
:o. Anthro‑ life force of plants, in the physical life
	pology;	of animals, and in the intellectual life
	Doctrine of angels (iv. 8, 14). He is the world's
	of Evil.	central point and the part which leads
		in the return to God. As to evil, the
monistic conceptions of Scotus compelled him to
think of evil as a necessary factor in evolution, which
was, however, to be overcome. But this involved
him in difficulties which he did not surmount. He
sought to exclude evil from divine appointment,
even from divine foreknowledge, since God knew only what he created; he did not create evil, therefore did not know it (ii. 28). Elsewhere Scotus was compelled to concede to God knowledge of evil, but he did not reconcile the disagreement. To do this he would have had to show a difference in the kind of divine knowledge, and that would have conflicted with his doctrine of unity. Even though God did not create evil, he included its existence or entrance in his world plan. If the basis of evil were sought, the answer was‑it had none (v. 35); yet the instability of the will was noted by Scotus and the pride which made man and not God the end. If there were in Scotus' system a ground for evil, it was in formal creative freedom. Paradise was for Scotus man's original complete condition, to which he will again attain in the future (iv. 17 sqq.). Exactly in view of the fall it is said that the origin of man was so ordered that not all individuals at one time proceeded from the background of existence as did the angels (iv. 12, ii. 6). Originally man was, like the angels, in spite of the mass of individuals, intended to be a unity; but in consequence of sin the female sex was derived from the male (iv. 23). This conception can be held only by means of a fully spiritual interpretation of the history of creation, for which Origen furnished the pattern. Original sin is not purely a matter of inheritance but is to be brought into relation with man's origin. But how sin comes as an actuality in the life and soul Scotus does not explain. Nevertheless, according to this author, the present material condition is determined by human sin, though a clear presentation of the fats is not given.
The last division in the system of Scotus is the termination of the entire course of the world and the return of all things to God. Central in this process is the person of Christ, in whom are embraced all mankind and the whole world, who
rz. Con‑ leads all back to God and frees man.
summation This comes about through his death of All and resurrection, which last abolishes
	Things.	distinction of sex, the risen being nei
		ther male nor female (ii. 13, v. 20, 25).
Following resurrection comes a double change; one
affects all men, and is attainment of all knowledge
suited for the creature; the other affects the most
exalted clarified spirits, and is induction into‑the
deepest secrets and into the transcendent absorption
into the godhead. A development of the lower
creature into the higher with continual progress to
the highest is affirmed‑after the elimination of
sex distinctions earth and paradise will become one
(v. 20), then paradise and heaven, the higher ab
sorbing the lower. All unnatural distinctions will
be abolished, all natures will return to their primor
dial causes and with these become one in God.
Evil is nothing substantial, it had no place in pri
mordial cause, it is only instability of will which is
an accident attendant upon God‑created natures.
Since the changes outlined above produce a will
fully sanctified and united with God, the will is in
full accord with the divine will; there is then no
cause of evil. The consequences of evil likewise
vanish, since that which is only an accident can not
assume the form of substance; at the end of world.

307	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	se bee Erigena
history evil in every form is to be annihilated. This is the necessary consequence of the system of Scotus, to which he gave extended discussion. According to his system, it was impossible that a nature, something created by God, could suffer eternally. And he attempted to show h9w a vice could attach to a pure nature without corrupting it, also how it might be punished, though in itself nothing, otherwise than in the nature possessed by it; his demonstration, however, is unsatisfactory. How the bad will can continue to exist while the nature is completely pure is not made clear, and this difficulty is the greater because Scotus regarded the will not as an accident but as an essential. Yet Scotus has (x. 38) a sentence which should be noticed. He says that practically all authors agree that as many men attain to the heavenly kingdom as there are angels who have fallen, and remarks that, if that is correct, then must the number of men who eventually are born equal that of angels or else not all men attain to the purpose of their creation, which last is contrary to the reasons already given for the salvation of all men in Christ. In that case only demons and the devil are doomed to eternal condemnation. The system of Scotus in its consequences favors throughout the doctrine of Apocatastasis (q.v.).
The foregoing points have been the more thoroughly considered because in his general thinking this scholar wag true to the teaching of the Church. Where he differed from it he seems to have concealed the fact even from himself. He used trini‑
tarian formulas frequently; he asr2. His sumed that the Father created in the Position in Son‑the Logos or intelligence‑the General. primordial causes, while in the Holy
	Spirit he saw the active principle
through which those causes issued in effects. The
teaching of the Church on Christology he assumed
in his system without regarding the deep‑lying dif
ficulties. Whether Scotus can be called "the father
of scholasticism" is the more doubtful inasmuch as
his interest was more philosophical than theological.
His personal position is freer and more independent
than that of later schoolmen. His relation to mys
ticism is peculiar; he can not be called a mystic, for
the personal experiences of mystics were never his
or at least never found expression; yet his system
is full of mystical thought dialectically justified.
Through this thought and by the translation of the
Dionysian writings he exercised an uncommon in
fluence upon mysticism. He also greatly affected
medieval speculation, especially in the twelfth cen
tury; in the first part of the thirteenth century he
had considerable vogue in Paris, ecclesiastical op
position to him found voice, and Honorius III.
ordered the destruction of his De divisions naturtE.
This worked forgetfulness of him so that he does not
appear on the Tridentine index. A requirement of
the present is a complete critical edition of his works,
with an adequate investigation of his relation to his
predecessors.	(S. M. DEUTSCHt.)
BIHLJOGRAPHY: For the life consult: G. B. Schuter, Scotua Eripena, Munster, 1838; F. Christlieb, Leben and Lehre des Johannes Scotus Brigena, Gotha, 1860; J. Huber, Johannes Scotus Eripena, Munich, 1861; O. Hermens, Das Leben des Scotus Bripena, Jena, 1868; L. Noaek, Ueber Leben and Schriften des Joh, Scotus Zripena: die Wiasen‑
achalt and Bildunp seiner Zeit, Leipeic, 1876; P. Hoffmann, De Johannis Scoti Brigena vita et dochina, Halle. 1877; K. Werner, Johannes Duns Scotus, Vienna, 1880.
For his philosophy consult: P. Hjort, Johann Scotus Eripena, oder von dem Ur.prung einer christlichen Philosophic and ihrem heiligen Beruf, Copenhagen, 1823; H. Schmidt, Der Mysticiemus des Mittelalters in seiner Entakhunpsperiode, Jena, 1824; F. C. Baur, Die christliche Lehre von der Dreieinigkeit and Menschwerdunp, ii. 263344, Tubingen, 1842; A. Helfferich, Die christliche My& tik, vol. ii., Gotha, 1842; St. Renb Taillandier, Scot. ‑tripdne et la philosophic scolastique. Strasburg, 1843; N. Moller, Joh. Scotus Erigena and seine Irrthiimer, Mainz, ‑1844; J. P. Haur6su, De la philosophic seolastique, Paris, 1850; idem, Histoire de la philosophic scolastique ib. 1872; W. Kaulieh, Geschichte der wholastiwhen Philosophic, Prague, 1863; A. Stoekl, Geschichte der Philosophic and Theologie im Mittelalter, i. 31‑128, Mainz, 1864; idem, De Joh. Scotus Bripena, Munster, 1867; J. G. Boivin, Philosophic quadripartiti Scoti, 4 vols., Paris, 1868; H. Riihse, Des Joh. Eripenas Stellung cur mittelalterliehen Scholastik and Mystik, Rostock, 1874; F. J. Hoffmann, Der Gottes‑ and Sch6pfunpsbepriff des Johannes Scotus Erigena, Jena, 1876; G. Anders, Darstellung and Kritik der AnsicU von Johannes Scotus Bripena, does die Kateporien nicht auf Gott anwendbar seien, Jena, 1877; G. Buchwald, Der Loposbepriff des Johannes Scotus Erigena, Leipsic, 1884; T. Wotschke, Fichte and Eripena, Halle, 1896; M. DeWulf, Histoire de la philosophic m€digvale, Louvain, 1900; A. Gardner, Studies in John the Scot (Erigena), London, 1900; J. Dreseke, Johannes Scotus Brigena and deasen Gewahrsmann, Leipsic, 1902 (on the sources used by Scotus); the works on the history of philosophy by H. Ritter, Hamburg, 1844 (vii. 206‑296); J. E. Erdmann, Eng. transl., 3 vols., London, 1892‑98; W. Windelband, Eng. transl., New York, 1893; and F. Ueberweg, ed. Heinze, 9th ed., Berlin, 1901‑05.
SCOTUS, JOHANNES DUNS. See DUNS SCOTUS.
SCOULLER, sku'ler, JAMES BROWN: United Presbyterian; b. near Newville, Cumberland County, Pa., July 12, 1820; d. at Newville, Pa., 1899. He graduated at Dickinson College, Carlisle, Pa., 1839, and at the Associate Reformed Theological Seminary, Allegheny, Pa., 1842; was pastor of United Presbyterian churches in Philadelphia, 1844‑46; Clylerville, N. Y., 1847‑52; Argyle, N. Y., 1852‑62; and editor of The Christian Instructor, Philadelphia, 1862‑63. He was the author of A Manual of the United Presbyterian Church (Pittsburg, 1881); and Calvinism: its History and Inr fueilces (1885).
SCOVEL, SYLVESTER FITHIAN: Presbyterian; b. at Harrison, O., Dec. 29, 1835; d. at Worcester, Ohio, Nov. 29, 1910. He was graduated from Hanover College, Hanover, O. (A.B., 1853), and New Albany Theological Seminary, New Albany, Ind. (1857). He then held pastorates at Jeffersonville, Ind. (1857‑60), and the First Presbyterian churches of Springfield, O. (1861‑66), and Pittsburg, Pa. (1866‑83); he was president of the University of Wooster, Wooster, O. (1883‑99); and after 1899 professor of morals and sociology in the same institution. In theology he was a conservative, and wrote Centennial History of the First Presbyterian Church of Pittsburg (Pittsburg, 1884).
SCRIBES: A term used, especially in the New Testament, to denote those skilled in the Mosaic law. The profession or calling came into being after the return from the exile (for mention of scribes in its more literal sense cf. Jer. viii. 8), when in place of the kingdom there was set up the dominion of the Mosaic statutes, which furnished the rule for

Scribes
Scrivener
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
the guidance of life in all its aspects among the Hebrews. The man who initiated this condition of things, Ezra, himself bore this designa‑
Meaning	tion (of. Ezra vii. 6, 11, 12, 21; Neh.
	of Term.	viii. 1, etc.), which was given to him
		probably on account of his [supposed]
care for the law in respect to the making and
distribution of its exemplars or manuscripts. The
New‑Testament word for "scribe" is often gram
matew (Matt. ii. 4, v. 20, etc.); but two other sides
of the activities of these men gave rise to the
designation nomikos, "lawyer" (Matt. xxii. 35,
etc.), and nonwdidaakolos, "doctor of the law"
(Luke v. 17; Acts v. 34; cf. the expression "in
terpreter of the Jewish laws," Josephus, Ant.,
XVIL, vi. 2).
	The first task of these men was to preserve the
text of the sacred books, particularly of the law of
Moses (the Pentateuch), in a form suited to the
maintenance of the Hebrew religion. This task they
sought to perform through copies which guarded on
		the one side the essential content and
Work on on the other had regard for scruples
Hebrew	which might be raised. Exact in‑
	Text.	formation of the means employed by
		the early scribes in carrying out these
purposes is unfortunately not obtainable because
of the sparseness and fragmentary character of the
material at hand. Yet careful and critical use of
this material as found in scattered notices leads to
results quite worth while. Over the reading in pub
lic worship much care was exercised. According
to the Mishna (Megilla, iv. 10) Gen. xxv. 32 and Ex.
xxxii. 21‑24 were read but not interpreted (see
SYNAGOGUE); and according to the old tradition in
Megilla 25b for expressions which might give offense
or which might raise scruples euphemisms or other
phrases were substituted. For the divine name
Yhwh was substituted "Adonai," except that in
the combination Adonai Yhwh, Elohim was sub
stituted for Yhwh (see JEHovAH; YAHWEH). There
were changes too in the written text. Such a change
is the one which results from the confusion which
might come from Baal, meaning "lord" or "mas
ter," and Baal as the name of a heathen deity (cf.
Hos. ii. 16‑17); thus with the Ish‑bosheth of II Sam.
ii.‑iv. cf. the Esh‑baal of I Chron. viii. 33, in ac
cordance with which the Chronicler replaces the
earlier name (Merribbaal) for Mephibosheth; the
other name of Gideon used in Judges vi.‑ix., Jerub
baal, is replaced in II Sam. xi. 21 by Jerubbesheth;
in II. Sam. v. 16 appears the form Eliada for which
the older form was Beeliada (I Chron. xiv. 7). A
testimony to this habit exists in the gloss found en
closed in Num. xxxii. 38, " (their names being
changed)," referring to the mountains Nebo and
Baal‑meon [one of which is the name of a heathen
deity Nebo, Bee BABYLONIA, VIL, 2, 1 11, and the
other contains the element Baal]. In II Sam. vii.
23 a plural verb accompanies the plural form Elo
him, but in the parallel I Chron. xvii. 21 a singular
verb is employed, by which the unity of God is
maintained. Especially important is the regarding
as holy of the names Yah and Yahweh (note Lev.
xxiv. 11: "And the Israelitish woman's son blas
phemed the name," where "Yahweh" is not writ‑
ten in the text). In effect this has been treated above, but the practise further involved the inclusion of Yah as one word in "Hallelujah" in the psalms, and also in other expressions. Similarly the Jews put such expressions as "heaven," "name," and the like in place of a name for God. Moreover, before the introduction of the` vowel sounds, the pronunciation of many words had been changed through the working of varied influences. The word Molek (Moloch, q.v.), formerly pronounced Melek (cf. Isa. xxx. 33) has received the vowels of bosheth, "shame," and the same is probably true of Ashtoreth and Tophet; in imitation of shikkuz, "monster," are vocalized Chiun and sikkuth, "tabernacle" (Amos v. 26). Milcom, the name of the god of the Ammonites, is to be restored in II Sam. xii. 30 in place of "their king's" (cf. Jer. xlix. 1‑3, margin). An artificial distinction is made for the sake of theology in the word 'abbir (the original pronunciation) as it applies to bulls as possessions of men and to the word in such passages as Isa. i. 24 and Isa. x. 13 (in the last passage a new reading is substituted in the keri; see KERI AND KETHIBH). Euphemistic expressions are substituted by a difference in the pointing of the original text in such passages as Deut. xxviii. 30; Gen. xxxiv. 2. In the Biblical Aramaic of the verb "to be" a lamedh is substituted for a yodh as preformative in the imperfect, probably in order to avoid producing a word which looks like the divine name Yhwh and so leading to accidental pronouncing of that name; in early Egyptian‑Aramaic papyri the forms with yodh appear. In the study of the text one has to guard against both undervaluation of the text by the scribes as well as against overvaluation. For further discussion of these topics see BIBLE TExT; and MAsoRAH.
The Mosaic law was not what would according to modern conceptions be considered a systematic body of ecclesiastical law, still less a complete legal code. Yet aftgr this law had gained its unique position, only those statutes and usages which had the sanction of long custom and had so Activities become sacred could attain to the as Inter‑ position of official law; a new code preters of could not be created. As a result it the Law. became necessary so to explore and explain the written law that it should be found sufficient to meet the exigencies of everyday life. Of Ezra (Ezra vii. 10) it is said that he "prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments." When one recalls the condition under which the law existed (as just noted), also its nature, and that since Malachi the prophetic spirit had died out, and that the impulse which had come with the return from exile and its experiences had died out with the generation which had known them and had taken with it the stimulus to independent religious life, explanation is easy of the tendency to slavish observance of the letter of the law, and the way was opened for that scribal exposition of the law which "strained at a gnat and swallowed a camel" (Matt. xxiii. 24). One may compare Christ's proof of the resurrection which rests upon Ex. iii. 6 (Matt. xxii. 32) with that adduced in the Babylonian Talmud

809	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Scrivener
on Deut. xxxi. 16, where Gamaliel cites "thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, and this people will rise up," and may note that in thus quoting Gamaliel was supported by other rabbis almost as noted as he. By a certain method of exegesis this was regarded as justified. The exigencies of civil, legal, and ritual life occasioned ever new questions, and these called for progress in the science of interpretation of the law, and these interpretations came to codification in the Mishnah (see TALMUD). A supplement directed toward the insuring of observance of the law resulted from this scribal activity in the matter of study of its provisions. In order to forestall transgression, additional regulations or commands were provided which were hardly within the range of possibility to observe. Thus in Pirke Aboth i. 1 it is said "make a bridle about the law." The scribes were not so much theologians as jurists; and so they were members of the Sanhedrin (q.v.) and are mentioned constantly in that relationship.
	If the Jews were to remain "the people of the
law," the science of law being once obtained, it must
be preserved for future generations. In carrying
out this purpose, especially before the essential
		matter was reduced to writing, there
	Work as was required of the scribes a teaching
	Teachers. activity. The instruction was oral;
		only manuscripts of the Bible were at
hand; the lectures and discussions were held gen
erally in special places designated for that purpose,
in Jerusalem halls and chambers in the forecourt of
the Temple. Teacher and pupils sat, the teacher
upon a platform somewhat elevated. The religious
discourses of the Sabbath and other occasions were
in no small part delivered by the scribes. Many of
them busied themselves with the Haggada, though
the Halaka was their especial province (for Haggada
and Halaka see MIDRASH).	Most of the scribes
naturally belonged to the party of the Pharisees
(see PHARISEES AND SADDUCEEB), and a8 a con
sequence were to be found mostly in Judea and
especially in Jerusalem. Yet, inasmuch as the high
priests were Sadducees, there must have been Sad
ducean scribes. For their judicial or professorial
activity the scribes received no compensation.
Many supported themselves by manual labor, and
not a few were so well‑to‑do as to be able to live upon
their income from property; but they might also
receive entertainment so long as they continued
their teaching activities. It was regarded as im
proper to make knowledge of the law a means of
gain (Pirke Aboth, i. 13; Baba bathra, 8a). But
there must have been many exceptions to this rule
(cf. Mark xii. 40; Luke xx. 47, xvi. 14); and the
circumstance that the scribes demanded an abnor
mally high degree of honor may be taken as proof
that disinterestedness was not so general as Jewish
sources seem to make it. 	(H. L. STRACK.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY. Discussions of the subject are to be found in the commentaries on the Gospels and on Acts, generally at the passages where mention of the scribes occurs, often in the works on the history of the Apostolic Age, in those on the life of Christ (e.g., Edersheim, i. 93 sqq.; Farrar, i. 255‑258), and in works on the history of Israel (such as those of Jost, GrItz, and Ewald). For the English reader there is nothing better than § 25 of the Eng. tranal. of Schffrer's Geachichte (same section in the Ger‑
man). Consult further: T. C. Lilienthal, De nomikoia juria utriusque apud Hebrows dodortibur priroatfa, Halle, 1740; A. T. Hartmann, Die enge Verbindunp des Aken Testaments mil den Neuen, pp. 384‑413, Hamburg, 1831; A. F. Gfrbrer, Doe Jahrhundert des Heila, f. 109‑214, Stuttgart, 1838; W. Baeher, Die ADada der babylon'iachen Amorder, . • . der Tannaiten, . . der palitatinensiachen Amorder, 8vols., Strasburg. 1878‑99; V. Ryssel, Die AnAnpe der j4dischen Schr%Jtpelehreamkeit, in TSK, 1887, pp. 149‑182; F. Weber, Jedische Theolopie, Leipsic, 1897: C. D. Ginsburg, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, pp. 241 sqq., London, 1897; L. Blau, Studien sum althebraischen Buchmeaen, vol. i., Strasburg, 1902; J. w. Lightley, Les Scribes . . . lour origine ches lea Iarahlitea, Cabors, 1905; DB, iv. 420‑423; EB, iv. 4321‑29; JE, m. 123‑128; DCG, ii. 582‑584; and the literature under PHARIsEEB AND SADDDCEEB.
SCRIPTORIS, scrip‑to'ris, PAUL: Scholastic theologian; b. at Weil (14 m. w. of Stuttgart) about 1450; d. at the monastery of Kaisersberg in Upper Alsace Oct. 21, 1505. At an early age he entered the order of the Minorites of the strict observance, and was educated at Paris, where he became a firm adherent of Scotistic realism. In this spirit he labored first, apparently, at Mainz and later at Tabingen, where he was guardian of the Franciscan monastery until 1501. Although not connected with the university, he lectured in his monastery on the " Sentences " of Duns Scotus, the throngs that came to hear him including Thomas Wyttenbach, Johann von Staupitz (qq.v.), and other leaders of nascent Protestantism. These lectures, entitled Lecbura fratris Pauli Scriptoria . . . quam edidit declarando subtiliasimas doctoris subtilis sententim et`rca Magistrum in primo liber, constituted the first book printed at Tabingen (1498), and amply prove that, while their author foresaw the coming of a new r6gime in which scholasticism should yield place to patristics, he was neither a humanist nor, as some have claimed, a "Reformer before the Reformation." Acquainted with Greek, although not employing his knowledge in Biblical studies, Scriptoris also lectured on the cosmography of Ptolemy and on Euclid. He was likewise active as a preacher in the vicinity of Reutlingen and Horb, but his merciless castigations exposed him to the censure of the Tabingen theologians, and complaints were lodged against him with his provincial, particularly as he was unpopular with his monks. In 1501 he was removed from office. Henceforth he was obliged to restrict himself to literary labors in the monastery at Basel, later being required to defend his views before his superiors at Zabern. He escaped, however, possible imprisonment and went to Rome to lay his cause before the Curia. Returning unmolested, he was directed by the Franciscan vicar general to teach theology in Toulouse, but died while on the way to take up his new office.
(H. HERMELIN%.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: N. Paulus, in TQS, 1893, pp. 289‑311; J. J. Moser, Vita; profeeaorum Tubingensium, pp. 80‑88, Tiibingen, 1718; ADB, =iii. 488 189.
SCRIPTURE, READING OF, IN WORSHIP. See PERICOPES.
SCRIVENER, scriv'ner, FREDERICK HENRY AMBROSE: Church of England, New‑Testament scholar; b. at Bermondsey, London, Sept. 29, 1813; d. at Hendon (8 m. n.w. of London), Middlesex, Oct.

Scrivener
Sculpture	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	810
30, 1891. He was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge (B.A., 1835; M.A., 1838); became assistant master of King's School, Sherborne, 1835; was curate of Sandford Orcas, Somerset, 1838‑1845; head master of Falmouth School, 1846‑56; perpetual curate of Penwerris, Cornwall, 1846‑61; became rector of St. Gerrans, Cornwall, 1861; prebendary of Exeter, 1874; and vicar of Hendon, 1876. He was a member of the New‑Testament revision committee, 1872‑80; received a pension of £100, in 1872, in recognition of his eminent Biblical services; and was the author of A Supplement to the Authorized English Version of the New Testament (London, 1845); Collation of Twenty Greek Manuscripts of the Holy Gospel (Cambridge, 1853); Codex Augiensis, . . . (and) Fifty other Manuscripts, Gk. and Lat. (1859); Novum Testamentum Textus Stephanici (1860; 7th ed., 1877); Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament (1861; 4th enlarged ed., 2 vols., 1894); Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus (1863; 2d rev. ed., 1867); Bezm Codex Cantar brigiensis, Gr. and Lat. (1864) ; Six Popular Lectures on the Text of the New Testament (1875); and edited The Cambridge Paragraph Bible (1870‑73), the introduction to which appeared in separate revised edition (1884); and The New Testament in the Original Greek, according to the Text Followed in the Authorized Version together with the Variations Adopted in the Revised Version (1881).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: P. Schaff, Companion to the Greek Testament and the Revised Version, New York, 1883; C. R. Gregory, Canon and Text of the N. T., pp. 480 182, New York, 1907; DNB, li. 126.

SCRIVER, acrf'ver, CHRISTIAN: German Lutheran devotional writer; b. at Rendaburg (18 m. w. of Kiel) Jan. 2, 1629; d. at Quedlinburg (31 m. s.w. of Magdeburg) Apr. 5, 1693. He entered the University of Rostock in 1647, and in 1653 was appointed archdeacon at Stendal, whence he was called in 1667 to Magdeburg as pastor of St. James's. Here he remained twenty‑three years, until in 1690 he was made chief court chaplain at Quedlinburg, a position which he held until his death. The friend of Spener, Scriver was one of those theologians of the latter part of the seventeenth century who opposed the formalism then besetting Lutheranism, and thus prepared the way for Pietism, even while himself maintaining strict orthodoxy. The writings of Scriver now most interesting were devotional, those including the Gottholds vierhundert zufallige Andaehten (1667; lasted., Basel, 1893; Eng. transl., Gotthold's Emblems: or, Invisible Things understood by Things that are made, by R. Menzies, Edinburgh, 1857), a collection of 400 parables; Gotthold's Siechund Siegesbette (1687; new ed., Stuttgart, 1870); and Chrysologia Catechetica, Goldpredigten tlber die Hauptstiicke des lutherischen Katechismus (1687; new ed., Stuttgart, 1861). His most important work, however, was his Seelenschatz (5 parts, 16751692; new ed., 3 vols., Berlin, 1852‑53), describing the progress of the soul from misery to eternal life and combining allegory, dogmatics, and ethics. Scriver was also a hymn‑writer, though here he was but second‑rate. Nevertheless, three of his compositions have been translated into English: "Auf, Seel, and danke deinem Herrn" as " To God, my
soul, thank‑offerings pay"; "Den lieben Sonne Licht
and Pracht" (his best hymn), found in a number of
renderings; and "Hier lieg ich nun, mein Gott, zu
deinen Filasen" as "Here, O my God, I cast me
at Thy feet." The collected works of Scriver have
been edited by J. H. Heinrich and R. Stier (6 vols.,
Barmen, 1847‑52). 	(HERMANN BEC%.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: To the funeral sermon by S. Calvisius, Helmstadt, 1684, there is added a sketch of Scriver's life. There are biographies by O. Weinechenk, Leipsic, 1729; and H. Krieg, Dresden, 1872. Consult further, H. Beck, Die religiose Volkslitteratur den foanpetiachen Kirche Deutachlanda, pp. 143 aqq., Goths, 1891; C. Grosse, Die alien Tr6ater, Herrmanasburg, 1900; Julian, Hymnology, pp.1034‑35.
SCUDAMORE, scvd'a‑mar, WILLIAM EDWARD:
Church of England; b. at Wye (24 m. s.e. of Rochester), Kent, July 24, 1813; d. at Ditchingham (12 m. s.e. of Norwich), Norfolk, Jan. 31, 1881. He was educated at St. John's College, Cambridge (B.A., 1835), of which he became a fellow in 1837. After teaching for a time, he was appointed, in 1839, rector of Ditchingham, a parish which he held until his death. Theologically he was distinctly a Highchurchman, though not of the most advanced type. An admirable patristic and liturgical scholar, he was the author of The Communion of the Laity (London, 1855); Litanies for Use at the various Seasons of the Christian Year, before and after the Holy Communion, and on other Occasions (1860); The North Side of the Table: An historical Enquiry (1870); and Notitia Eucharistia (1872; a masterpiece in its field). In the sphere of polemics and church history he wrote Letters to a Seceder from the Church of England (London, 1851); England and Rome: A Discussion of the Principal Points of Difference (1855); and The Diocesan Synods of the Earlier Church (1878). He also gained a lasting reputation as a devotional writer, his works here being Steps to the Altar: A Manual of Devotions for the Blessed Eucharist (London, 1846, and constantly reprinted); Words to Take with us: A Manual of Daily and Occasional Prayers (1859); The Hour of Prayer, being a Manual of Devotion for the Use of Families and Schools (1873); and Incense for the Altar: A Series of Devotions for . . . Communicants (1874).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Davenport, Scudamore and Bickeretdh;
or " Steps to the Altar " and " The Devotions of the Reformers" compared, Hobart Town, 1851; DNB, li. 157‑158.
SCUDDER, acud'er, HENRY MARTYN: Missionary to India and Japan;. b. at Panditeripo, Jaffna District, Ceylon, Feb. 5, 1822; d. at Winchester, Mass., June 4, 1895. He was the son of John Scudder (q.v.); was educated at New York University and Williams College, and graduated at the former, 1840; studied at Union Theological Seminary, New York, 1840‑43 ; was missionary under the American Board at Madras, India, 1844‑51; and, after exploring the Arcot district, was stationed there where he established a dispensary. Ills study of medicine gave him special facility for access to the people. In 1864, his health declined and he returned to America, becoming successively pastor of the Grand Street Reformed Church, Jersey City, N. J., 186"5; the Howard Presbyterian Church, San Francisco, Cal., 1865‑71; the Central Congregational Church, Brooklyn, N. Y., 1871‑82; and the

		crivener
811	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Sculpture
Plymouth Congregational Church, Chicago, 1882‑87. He joined his son and daughter in missionary service in Japan, 1887‑90. He published in Tamil, Liturgy of the Reformed Protestant Dutch Church (Madras, 1862); The Bazaar Book (1865); Sweet Savors of Divine Truth (1868); and Spiritual Teaching (1870; Eng. transl., 1870).

SCUDDER, JOHN: Missionary of the Reformed (Dutch) Church; b. at Freehold, N. J., Sept. 13, 1793; d. at Wynberg (7 m. s.e. of Capetown), Southern Africa, Jan. 13, 1855. He was graduated at the College of New Jersey, 1811; and at the College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, 1815; and practised medicine until 1819. While in professional attendance upon a lady, he took up a tract entitled The Conversion of the World and his religious sense of duty was so impressed that he gave his life to missionary labor. After being licensed by the New York classis, he proceeded, under the American Board, to Ceylon, where he arrived 1820; was ordained there, 1821; established a hospital at Jaffnapatam; was foremost in organizing a college there, 1822; had an extensive revival 1824; and in 1836 with Miron Winslow was transferred to Madras, in order that he might print Scriptures and tracts in Tamil. In the first year they printed six million pages. Scudder fixed his residence at Chintadrepettah, near Madras, and thus, under his attention, there grew up the Arcot mission, which was received under the care of the American Board in 1852, and of the Reformed (Dutch) Church the next year. He was in America, 1842‑16, in the interest of foreign missions. In 1849 he was in the Madura mission, and with this exception all his energies were given to the Arcot mission. His health gave way in 1854, and he went to the Cape of Good Hope, where, upon the point of returning to India, he was stricken by apoplexy. He was incessant in his heroic labors, given much to Evangelistic itinerancy. It is remarkable that his eight sons, two grandsons, and two granddaughters have been members of the Arcot Mission. He published Letters from the East (Boston, 1833); Letters to Pious Young Men (1846); and Provision for Passing over Jordan. (New York, 1852).
BuHLzooRAPHY: J. B. Waterbury, Memoir of Rev. John Scudder . . . Thirty‑six Years Missionary in India, New York, 1870; W. B. Sprague. Annals of the American Pulpit, vol. ix., ib. 1873; E. T. Corwin, Manual of the Reformed Church in America, pp. 716‑720, 4th ed., ib. 1902.

SCULLARD, scvl'ard, HERBERT HAYES: Congregationalist; b. at Belper (7 m. n. of Derby), England, July 4, 1862. He received his education at Pembroke House School, Lytham, Lancashire, Lancashire Independent and Owen's Colleges, Manchester, St. John's College, Cambridge (B.A., 1888; M.A., 1891); and London University (B.A., 1883; M.A., 1885; B.D., 1904; D.D., 1907); was minister of York St. Congregational Church, Dublin, 18901896; and of Howard Congregational Church, Bedford, 1897‑1907. Since 1907 he has been professor of church history, history of Christian ethics, and of religions in New and Hackney Colleges, London University. In theology he is an Evangelical. He has written: St. Martin of Tours (Manchester, 1891) ; John Howard (London, 1899); Early Christian
Ethics in the West (1908); and contributed an essay to Christ and Civilization, issued by the National Free Church Council (1910).
SCULPTURE, CHRISTIAN USE OF.
I. The Early Christian Period. II. The Middle Ages. Influence of Early Models (§ 1). Results of Gothic Development (1 2). III. The Modern Period. The Renaissance in Italy (§ 1). The New German Era (§ 2). Recent Art ($ 3).
In the artistic life of the Church and of Christianity Painting and Architecture (qq.v.) took precedence of sculpture.* In the Middle Ages the plastic arts were an adjunct of architecture; in the preceding epochs under the influence of the antique their position was freer but less independent. The Renaissance first set forth new views of art and gave to the other branches their equal rights. In the primitive Church and even in the Middle Ages the development of sculpture, especially in statuary, was hindered by its old association with idolatry. So in the early period, where the plastic art appears, it is limited to relief forms.
I. The Early Christian Period: Christian work of this sort in the early period worked most upon sarcophagus relief and ivory. The peculiar history of the sarcophagus began with the fourth century, when new forms of burial were sought. In the churches and the cemeteries above ground, then becoming more numerous, the stone coffin found its use, and numerous exemplars come from the central points of Rome, Ravenna, and Arles. On the front of the sarcophagus, seldom on the other sides, in high relief are portrayed Biblical events, generally in historical sequence, though sometimes freely arranged. Usually the series is arranged without pillars, trees, and the like separating the different scenes. Often, after the ancient fashion, the portrait of the deceased was worked into the fabric of the relief. Western art showed inclination for human figures, the Hellenist‑oriental preferred animal and plant forms. While there was a general uniformity, individual tendencies showed themselves locally. Recent discovery has made clear in Hellenistoriental work a commingling of Syrian and Egyptian elements in varying proportions; this field far surpasses in artistic worth the western‑Latin sculpture on the sarcophagi. The leading position of Byzantine art appears particularly in ivory carving, emanating from Byzantium, Antioch, and Alexandria as the principal centers; facility in execution best shows itself in copies of work from the fourth to the sixth centuries. There is an inner connection with the antique; in conception, execution, and content, the graceful naturalness of Hellenistic art lived on in ornament. The variety of objects is large, these being found as diptychs, chests for sacramental or secular use, medallions for the adornment of episcopal chairs, figurines, and the like. For work in wood the relief on the door of the St.
* .. Scare .. and " plastic art " as used in this article include carving as well as works which ordinarily go under those terms.

Sculpture	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	312
Sabina Church in Rome is a fine example, so far as archeological purpose goes. Terra‑cotta and the noble metals furnished material also, while the furni= ture of church and home provided other ground for work. Here the lamps were especially selected for ornamentation with cross, monogram, animals, plants, secular and sacred figures or scenes. A long list of clay and metal objects also offered a basis, while portals, pillars, railings, ambo, and other objects were enriched by ornaments of this kind. Of statuary proper, especially of a monumental character, little has come down, though there is literary testimony to a once abundant material. Among extant examples, the good shepherd takes the first place. While the brazen statue of St. Peter in the Vatican is of the thirteenth century, there is one of marble of early date, and the seated Hippolytus in the Lateran is of his own times, though modeled on antique lines.
II. The Middle Ages: As the spiritual life of the Carolingian period took its departure from classical tradition, so the plastic arts followed the same trend. While the Germanic tribes, as they came into the sphere and under the influence of the Roman culture, recognized and bowed to the imposing force of
these forms, they yet retained their i. Influence own genius which shone out with
of Early greater or less clearness. Sculpture
Models. was largely expressed in carving of
ivory, and the lineage of the work was Roman, with a relatively high facility in execution. But there is often to be discovered the naive freshness of German genius. In lands like Ireland and England, where Roman influence was leas direct, the native genius is still more in evidence. In France there were many centers for this class of productions, in Germany the Lower Rhine was the busiest workshop, though northern Germany had an artistic carver in TuotiIo of St. Gall. The eleventh‑century architecture, developing out of the old Carolingian style, gave opportunity for the development of sculpture. On the outside the space over the portal was employed; while on the inside capital, baptismal stone, ambo, and the cultic objects formed the ground for this sort of adornment. The plastic arts took their place alongside of painting and served on the great surfaces to set forth the symbolism of Christendom. This is especially true of Germany (Hildesheim, 1015; Augsburg, 1060; and the doors for Novgorod, Gnesen, and of St. Zeno in Verona, all from German hands). The conception follows the trend of the architecture and is decorative in purpose, the pattern is antique with little tendency to novelty; in the carving of ivory (book covers, diptychs, chests, croziers, and the like) Carolingian influence often remains unbroken, while at times independent observation and execution are apparent, especially in a Saxon environment. Monks and the clergy were the principal artists of the eleventh and the twelfth centuries.
After a slow development in the twelfth century, under the stimulus of Gothic architecture, German plastic art of the Middle Ages reached its culmination in classic completeness and monumental creations, the Saxon countries being in the lead. Wechselburg, Freiburg, and Naumburg furnish the
noblestand oldest expressions of the invention of this
period. While in South Germany masterpieces are
		found, French influences, naturally, are
	z. Results stronger‑indirect in Bamberg, direct
	of Gothic in Strasburg. The tendency was to
	Develop‑ give way to individualistic expression
	meat. in the concrete, though the means
		chosen were not always happy; there
was moreover the effort after a harmony between
the solemnity of place and of purpose and individual
life. The ideal was more subjective and artistic,
though the tradition of the twelfth century was not
abandoned. France also in the twelfth century ex
perienced a lively development in plastic art, in
which the schools of Provence, Toulouse, and Bur
gundy were prominent, and this development was
not uninfluential even in Spain. Roman traditions
are in evidence still, with a fondness for adornment
of entrances. The thirteenth century, that of the
Gothic style of architecture, brought about a dis
tinct revolution. The mighty structures which
arose, especially in the central provinces of northern
France, demanded, with their imposing doors and
lofty and richly membered architecture, a wealth
of statuary and relief work. With enthusiasm the
plastic art took up its task and achieved the clas
sical completeness of Christian imagery. Painting,
equally zealous, followed the lead and limited itself
no more to figures, scenes, and groups, but set forth
the whole drama of salvation from the creation to
the judgment. Fancy had full play, while the Bible,
legend, popular and learned conceptions, history,
and typology combined to furnish the subjects (cf.,
e.g., the cathedrals of Chartres and of Reims). Yet
the call of architecture imposed its limits upon
sculpture, within which there were a depth of sen
sibility and a fineness of observation which justifies
comparison with the antique. The general effect
was that of a more youthful and graceful style than
obtained in Germany. Especially in the portrayal
of the person of Christ this century surpassed all
previous ones, and long stood in the lead. In this
and in the figures of the apostles the Renaissance
was anticipated. Hence French influence flowed out
to the neighboring lands. So strong was this in Ger
many that connection with the past was practically
broken. With this development came also applica
tion of this art to the cultic objects, even the most
insignificant, and color was used to enhance the
effect; additional to stone as materials were used
wood, stucco, the precious metals, and enamel.
The Netherlands felt even more forcibly than Ger
many the influence of France. In England native
elements mingled with the French. In Italy during
the eleventh and twelfth centuries there were
mingled the various streams of Byzantine, Roman,
and Lombardic art. In the thirteenth century Pisa
led the way to a higher exposition through Niccolo
Pisano, a man thoroughly and intelligently ground
ed in appreciation of the classical ideals of beauty,
while his son Giovanni was even more influential.
In the East, Christian art employed itself with archi
tecture and painting, the early prejudice against the
plastic continuing. Carving in ivory is the one
branch of this art which reached eminence there.
	III. The Modern Period: In the fifteenth century

813	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Sculpture
in Italy art released itself from the traditions of the Middle Ages, and in the process individualism, for which Humanism (q.v.) had victoriously fought, led
the way back to nature as a source of
i. The inspiration and thence to an increasing Renaissance richness of creations, in which the
	in Italy.	deep content of life was exhibited. As
		compared with Greek art, which drew
from the same source, the Christian is distinguished
by an effort to portray the inner life and not mere
external beauty of form. Plastic art, recognizing
its task, released itself from the limits imposed by
architecture and then imparted some of the freedom
thus gained to painting. The artists were encour
aged, moreover, by native enthusiasm, the nobility,
both secular and ecclesiastical, serving as patrons.
Thus the Church offered no opposition, and plastic
art was allowed free scope in the churches. Even
mortuary monuments, which hitherto had followed
the old style, joined the new movement. Monastic
structures, in spite of conservative tendencies, fol
lowed on, and the workmen were now found among
the laity. A higher idealism guided the hand of the
artist, who conceived his work in the spirit of a
holy service. While the artists were many, they
were united in this conception of their province,
though individuality was not submerged. While
the most varied material was employed, marble
was most highly regarded; there was also much
use of many‑colored terracotta, rendered durable
by glazing or enameling. Florence was the leader,
where Lorenzo Ghiberti (d. 1455) and Donatello
worked, in whom the strength of invention and ex
ecution which characterized the new era unfolded
itself. In the latter full yielding to nature and
reality, elevation almost to harshness, grace even
to delicacy flow together in the harmony of art. Por
trayal of the human form was recognized as the
highest result here; while the influence of the clas
sical was felt, it was rather by assimilation of its
ideals than by imitation. As Florence was the cen
ter in the early Renaissance, so Rome became the
center in the "high Renaissance," containing, as it
did, not merely the remains of antiquity but also
the recollections of a great history. The incarna
tion of the ideals and powers of this later period
were concentrated in Michelangelo Buonarotti.
None had so great power in forcing the marble to
express his will; he created a new era in the exal
tation of the common forms into the gigantic, where
in nature was expressed but after the type of civi
lized man. Examples of his art are the Pieta, David,
Moses, and the dying slave, each exemplifying a
phase of his art which has its own excellencies and
greatnesses. It was inevitable that such a man
should influence not only his own time but also
dominate largely the future through his inspiration
of other artists.
In Germany not only the views but the social and especially the cultural organization of the Middle
Ages still obtained, and where new z. New Ger‑ motives and pictures came in, these
man Era. were of a religious character.	There
	were lacking the keen spirit, the gener
	ous patronage of the rich, and the immediately work
	ing influence of antiquity that were present in Italy.
There was no attempt at the great and monumental; but in place of this, there was an appreciation of reality and of the truth of the phenomenal, without earnest effort after or concern for an ideal of beauty. The nude was not employed, the draperies of figures being heavy and abundant and in the fashion of the period. Yet there was earnestly sought the combination of internal and external truth, the expression of the personal, perception of the spiritual. Art is here the expression of common life and speaks a popular language, dwelling upon sacred history and the history of the saints; Mary was not the queen of heaven but rather the lovely virgin or the agonized mother. But these aims were sometimes marred by a repellent materialism. The sculptor and the painter united forces and together produced such works as altar‑pieces and the like. The period between 1450 and 1530 is the second period of bloom in German plastic art. Everywhere were created great altar‑pieces, the joint production of painting and sculpture, while the registers of corporations exhibit numerous names of artists, though there were no such prominent centers of influence as were Florence and Rome in Italy. As the center of the Frankish school, however, Nuremberg must be named. The carvings which came out of the workshop of Michael Wohigemut show the first traces of the new movement, and in the work of his younger contemporary Veit Stoss this movement reached its culmination. The medium was wood, and the aim was sharp definition and a conception of reality. Examples of his work are the altar of Mary in Cracow, the greeting of the angels in the Church of St. Lorenz, and creations in the Jakobskirche in Nuremberg. With him should be mentioned as the master in stone work Adam Kraft (b. about 1450; d. 1509), who had an archaistic bent which he used in. pieces that exhibit a devotional restfulness, as shown in his Seven Stations and his group of the crucifixion, while in the celebrated chapel of the sacrament in the Lorenzkirche a feeling for the decorative and mastery of technique are combined. A third name is that of Peter Vischer (b. about 1455; d. 1529), the author of numerous works, with whom his sons collaborated. He excelled both his contemporaries in largeness of conception and feeling for beauty, though between him and Adam Kraft significant relations existed. Toward the latter part of his life he came under the influence of the Renaissance, but retained his Teutonic traits, as is shown by his chief work, the men~orial in the Sebalduskirche (completed 1519). A man held in highest honor was Tilmann Riemenachneider (d. 1531), artist in both stone and wood, and a great body of disciples attest his eminence. Swabia participated in this development of German art, although painting was there more favored. Ulm JSrg Syrlin, father and son, developed a significant activity; to the son was ascribed the high altar at Blaubeuren, one of the masterpieces in this line of Christian art, with which must be named the crucifix in the chief church at NSrdlingen. The Tyrol produced in this period Michael Pacher, a man of high artistic capacity. On the Lower Rhine home production was stifled by the importation of art work from the Netherlands, and what work was done there was patterned after the models thus ob‑

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
tained. In North Germany Hans Briiggemann, though incited by Netherlandic art, through his own genius gave his work distinction, producing the great altar in the cathedral at Sleswick.
During the sixteenth century the Italian Renaissance began to diffuse its results over Germany with the result that the classicism then fashionable came in. In Italy at the end of this century the baroque style entered and prevailed. The creator here was the papal architect Lorenzo Bemini (d. 1680). This style ran to the pathetic and affecting; and since it needed for effectiveness the aid of painting, plastic art surrendered its independence to its sister art. Thus there came into being the theatrically composed portrayals of history of saints and martyrs characterized by unbalanced piety, frivolous sensualiem, and repellent realism. While the Thirty Years' War shattered German art for the time, Prussia showed the first recovery, artists being imported. But the baroque stylist Andreas Schlijter (d. 1714) was of home growth, whose equestrian statue of the great elector is the most characteristic production, though his marble pulpit in the Marienkirche in Berlin is a graceful and decorative composition.
With the end of the eighteenth century the independence of art ceased. There began a rechaufg of all periods and styles which gave both to architecture and to sculpture a chaotic impress. Modern intercourse and expositions facilitated
3. Recent methods of reproduction, brought per‑
	Art.	sons and schools of all lands together,
		and produced the great mixture of
atyleR which is found in the present. At first, the
antique was in fashion, represented by the Italian
Antonio Canova (d. 1822) and the Dane Bertel
Thorwaldsen (d.1844). The latter lives through his
great creation, now in the Vor‑Frue‑Kirke in Copen
hagen, the Christ accompanied by his band of dis
ciples, a work which vividly brings to mind Matt. xi.
28. Exaltation and gentleness envelop this form,
fashioned in antique beauty. The most eminent
representative of classicism in Germany was Chris
tian Daniel Rauch (d. 1857), who, though his in
clination was toward the secular, yet left in his
praying Moses (in the Friedenskirche at Potsdam)
evidence of perception of the needs of religious sculp
ture. In Ernst Rietschel there was completed an
approach to realism. While his delicate Pieta in the
Friedenskirche at Potsdam is based on ideal classi
cism, the Luther memorial at Worms has received
the entire force of historical presentation. But in
Germany classicism is worthily represented only by
Adolf Hildebrand. For the rest, plastic art is show
ing all types from fantastic symbolism to the
sharpest realism and the most bizarre impression
ism. The same may be said of France, where August
Rodin, following his predecessors Frangois Rude and
David d'Angers, has made a break with the classi
cistic past and introduced a thoroughgoing sub
jectivism, his figures showing emotionalism and the
sensual. Yet the representative Frenchman of to
day is not Rodin but Albert Bartholome, whose
creations reveal lofty conception, harmony, and
proportion, especially as exhibited in his Monument
aux morts in the churchyard of Pore la Chaise in
814
Paris. In Belgium Konstantin Meunier (d. 1905) placed his great talents at the service of the social question, portraying the laboring classes with fidelity to life.
As a whole the art of the present is eclectic, though originality is not lacking, while strong individuality is also a marked characteristic. Hellenism is still distinguishable in plastic form, and romantic and ecclesiastical traditions remain in force, especially in Roman Catholic art. But the tendency of art as a whole is to walk in the free paths of subjectivism, and it reflects, equally with literature, the spiritual, ethical, and religious incoherence which marks the times. Moreover, the close bonds, so evident in the Middle Ages, between architecture and sculpture have been severed. On the other hand, in the works of memorial character religious art has produced some memorable results, though even in these great dangers. are manifest. In decorative work ecclesiastical art still leans upon the models presented by the Middle Ages. (VICTOR SCHULTZE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: In general, much of the literature under ART AND CHURCH; CEMETE$IE6; and PAINTING has bearing on the subject, some of it is immediately pertinent, especially the works of Auguste, Didron, Lenoir, Hemans, Otte, Jameson, Schlosser, Kraus, Lowrie, Schultze, Garrucci, Burckhardt, W51fflin, and Rosenberg. The reader is directed also to the series of monographs published as Zur Kunatpeschichte, Strasburg, 1900 sqq.; Kianaaer‑Monopraphien, Bielefeld, 1901 sqq., and Great Masters in Sculpture, published by Bell, London, 1903 sqq. Also to H. Stegman, Sculpture of the West, London, 1907; and A. Kuhn, Allgemeine Kund‑Geachichte, Einsiedeln, 1908.
For the ancient period consult: W. Labke, Geschichte der Plastik, Stuttgart, 1880; idem, Grundrias der Kunatpe8chichte, ed. M. Semrau, 5 vols., ib. 1903‑05; C. C. Perkins, Historical Handbook of Italian Sculpture, London. 1883; A. Bayersdorfer, Klassischer Skulpturenschatz, Munich, 1896; A. Springer, Handbuch der Kunstgeschichte, 2 vols., 4th ed., Leipsic,1895• J. Ficker, Die alechristlichea Bildwerke im chrisllichen Museum des Laterans, Leipsic, 1890; G. Stuhlfauth, Die altehristliche Elfenbeinplastik, Freiburg, 1896‑ J. Wiegand, Das allchristliche Hauptportal `n der Kirche der heilipen Sabina zu Rom, Treves, 1900; F. Freiherr Goeler von Ravensburg, Grundrisa der Kunstpeschichte, ed. M. Schmid, Berlin, 1901‑03; J. Strzygowski, Koptiache Kunst, Vienna, 1904; K. M. Kaufmann, Handbuch der chridlichen Arehdologie, Paderborn, 1905; E. Redelob, Das Kirchenportal, Jena, 1909. A rich source of knowledge is Cabral, Dictionnaire, e.g., the article .. Agneau, ' i. 878 eqq.
For the pre‑Reformation period consult: W. Bode, Goachichte der deutachen Plaetik, Berlin, 1885; A. Sehmarsow, Donateilo, Leipsic, 1886; P. Clemen, Merovinpiache and karolinpssche Plastik, Bonn, 1892; E. von Flottwell, Meisteruerk deutscher Bildnerei in Naumburg, Magdeburg, 1892; E. Meyer, Die Skulpturen des Strassburger Manatera, Strasburg, 1894; W. VSge, Die Anfdnge des monumentalen Stiles im Miuelalter, ib. 1894; L. Gonse, La Sculpture franpaiae depuis le xiv. sitcle, Paris, 1895; M. R. James, The Sculpturts in the Lady Chapel at Ely, London, 1895; E. Stueckelberg Longobardiwhe Plastik, Zurich, 1896; A. Weese, Die Bamberger Domakulpturen, Strasburg, 1897; M. G. Zimmermann, Oberitalienische Plastik im frithen and hohern Mittelalter, Leipsic, 1897; S. Lami, Dictionnaire des aculpteurs de l'€cole frawaise du moyen Qge, Paris, 1898• E. Mile, L'Art religieux du xiii. sQcle en France, ib. 1898; K. Moriz‑Eichhorn, Der Skulpturencyklu8 in der Vorhalle des Freiburyer Managers, Strasburg, 1899; J. Mantuani, Tuotilo, Strasburg, 1900; L. J. Free.:Italian Sculpture of the Renaissance, New York, 1901; A. Venturi, Storia dell' Arts ltaliana, Milan, 1901 aqq.; A. Goldsehmidt, Die Freiberyer Goldene PJorts, Berlin, 1902; A. Marignan, Hist. de la sculpture en Languedoc du xii‑xiii. sickle, Paris, 1902; K. Franck, Der Meister der Becleaia and Synapope am Straasburper Manager, Dassel‑

315	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	$2lptnre
8esbury
dorf, 1903; R. S. L. Gower, Michael Angelo Buonarotti, London, 1903; D. A. E. Lindsay, Donaddlo, ib. 1903; A. Brach, Nicola and Giovanni Pisano and die Plastik des siv. Jahrhunderts in Siena, Strasburg, 1904; M. Sauerland, Die Bildwerke des Giovanni Pisano, DOsseldorf, 1904; A. Alexander, Donatello, Paris, 1905; H. Bergner, Handbuch der kirchlichen Kunstaltertfimer in Deutschland, Leipsic, 1905.
	For the modern period consult: A. Woltmann, Die
deutsche Kunst and die Reformation, Berlin, 1867; A.
Oppermann, Ernst Rietschel, Leipsie, 1873; F. and K.
Eggers, C. D. Rauch, 5 vols., Berlin, 1873‑91; C. Gurlitt,
Gesehichte des Barock. Rokoko and Klassizismus, Stutt
gart, 1887‑89; L. and E. L. de Taeye, nudes our lea arts
Plastiques en Belgique, Brussels, 1891; A. Saeh, Hans
Braggemann, Sleswick, 1896; B. Daun, Adam Kraft,
Berlin, 1897; idem, Veit Stoss and seine Schule, Leipsic,
1903• A. R. Willard, Hist. of Modern Art, London, 1900;
M. H. Spielmann, British Sculpture and Sculptors of To
day, ib. 1901; W. C. Brownell, French Art, Westminster,
1902; D. Christison, The Carvings and Inscriptions on
the Kirkyard Monuments of the Scottish Lowlands, Edin
burgh, 1902; E. Claris, De l'impressionisme en sculpture,
Paris, 1902; H. Thode, Michelangelo and das Ends der
Renaissance, 2 vols., Berlin, 1902‑03; A. Heilmay er, Die
moderne Plastik in Deutschland, Leipsic, 1903; E. Hum
blot, Documents sur la sculpture religieuse, Saint‑Dicier,
1903; L. Taft, The Hist. of American Sculpture, New York,
1903; S. Trier, Thorvaldsen, Copenhagen, 1903; L. de
Fourcaud, Francois Rude. Paris, 1904; C. Mauelair, Au
guste Rodin, London, 1905; C. Meunier, Constantin Meunier
et son oeuvre, Paris, 1905; F. Bond, Wood Carvings in
English Churches, London, 1910.

SCULTETUS, scul‑ti'tus (SCHULTETUS), ABRAHAM: German Reformed; b. at Grilneberg (86 m. n.w. of Breslau) Aug. 24, 1566; d. at Emden (60 m. w.n.w. of Bremen) Oct. 24, 1624. Educated at the universities of Wittenberg (1588‑90) and Heidelberg (1590‑91), he was ordained in 1594 to the ministry of Schriesheim near Heidelberg, whence he was called, a few months later, to be court chaplain to the Elector Frederick IV. In 1598 he became pastor of the Franciscan church at Heidelberg, ecclesiastical councilor and inspector of pastors and schools in 1600, succeeded Pitiscus as court preacher on his death in 1614, and in 1618 was made professor of theology at the university. Meanwhile he had been employed in various missions of importance. He was called in 1614 to the court of Brandenburg to counsel the Reformed convert, Elector John Sigismund, in arranging the ecclesiastical affairs of the province; in 1618 was one of the Palatine delegates to the Synod of Dort; in 1619 he accompanied the electoral envoys to Frankfort to choose the new emperor, and in 1620 followed his elector, who had been offered the Bohemian crown, to Prague, where he was involved in the fatal events after the battle of Weissenberg (Nov. 8, 1620). Scultetus fled from Prague to Heidelberg, but further residence there was impossible, and he sought refuge with his adherents successively‑in Bretten and in Schorndorf in Wiirttemberg, and was called, in 1622, to be pastor at Emden, where he passed the remainder of his life.
One of the most distinguished Reformed theologians of his period, Scultetus was a prominent figure in the irenic proposals steadily refused by the Lutherans. His chief works were the Medullm theologice patrum syntagma (4 parts, Heidelberg, 15981613), and the Annalium evangelii passim per Europam quinto decimo salutis partce seculo renovati decas prima et secunda ab anno 16166 (Heidelberg,
1618‑20); to these may be added the posthumous Narratio apologetica (Emden, 1625).
(H. MALLETt.)
BIBL7oaHAPHY: The funeral sermon by F. Salmuth was published, Emden, 1625. Consult: E. Meiners, Oo8tvrieschlandts Kerkelijke Geschiedenisse, ii. 439 aqq., Groningen, 1739; P. Bayle, Dictionary, v. 100‑104; ADB, xxxiii. 492 sqq.
SCYTHIANS. See GGG AND MAGOG.

SDRALEg, shrd'lek, MAXIMILIAN LUKAS:
German Roman Catholic; b. at Woschezytz (a village near Sohraul, 57 m. s.e. of Oppeln), Upper Silesia, Oct. 11, 1855. He was educated at the universities of Breslau and Freiburg (D.D., 1880), and in 1882 became privat‑docent for church history and canon law at the former institution. In 1884 he was called to Munster as professor of church history, but in 1896 returned to Breslau to accept his present position of professor of the same subject. He has also been resident canon of the Breslau Cathedral since 1900, and was rector of the university 19061907. Besides editing the Kirchengeschichtliche Studien and the Kirchengeschichtliche Abhandlungen, he has written Hinkmars von Reims kanonistische Gutachten iiber die Ehescheidung des Konigs Lothar 11. (Freiburg, 1881); Die Streitschriften Altmanns von Passau and W ezilos von Mainz (Paderborn, 1891); Wolfenbiittler Fragmente, Analekten zur Kirchengeschichte (Munster, 1891); and Die Strassburger Diozesansynode (Freiburg, 1894).

SEABURY, SAMUEL: First bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church; b. at North Groton (now Ledyard), Conn., Nov. 30, 1729; d. at New London Feb. 25, 1796. He graduated at Yale College, 1748, and soon after began the study of medicine. In 1752, though he had already devoted himself to the clerical calling, he went to Edinburgh to complete his medical studies, and there became acquainted with a remnant of the ancient Church of Scotland. He was ordained deacon by the bishop of Lincoln, Dec. 21, 1753; and priest two days later at London; arrived at New Brunswick, N. J., as missionary, 1754; was rector at Jamaica, L. I., 17571767; and at Westchester, N. Y., from 1767. Deriving his support as missionary from the Church of England, and being under the oath of allegiance, he remained stanchly loyal, which brought him into disfavor with the patriots. He made himself particularly obnoxious by a series of pamphlets signed A. W. Farme and entitled, Free Thoughts on the Proceedings of the Continental Congress (Nov. 16, 1774); The Congress Canvassed (Nov. 26); and A View of the Controversy between, Great Britain and her Colonies (Dec. 24). He was seized by an armed band, removed to Connecticut, and held prisoner at New Haven, for six weeks. Upon being passed through the British lines he retired to New York, where he supported himself in part by the practise of medicine, served as chaplain of the king's American regiment, and maintained his loyalty till the end of the war. In 1783 he was elected bishop by the clergy of Connecticut, and proceeded to England for ordination. This was refused by the archbishop of Canterbury, because certain complications with the civil oath of allegiance had not yet

Sesbury	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	ale
been resolved, and Seabury turned to Scotland, where he was consecrated in 1784 by three nonjuring prelates. He returned to Connecticut, 1785, where, resident as rector at New London, his episcopal jurisdiction was recognized, and was extended, by invitation, over Rhode Island. He was the first presiding bishop of the churches in the several states united under the general convention in 1789. He united with the three bishops subsequently consecrated in England in the formation of the new constitution rendering the American church independent and autonomous, in the joint consecration of the first bishop of Maryland, Thomas J. Claggett. Consequently no bishop has ever been consecrated without deriving his prerogatives both through the Scottish and Anglican lines of descent.
Seabury was fitted by his ecclesiastical knowledge and persistent devotion to his church system, exercised with remarkable prudence and patience, to render services making him a pioneer and founder of American Episcopalianism, fortunately resulting in guiding a free, valid, and regular succession through the crisis of American independence, and demonstrating that the episcopacy was adaptable in a free state. His permanent services include the securing, by amendment, of coordinate legislative functions for the house of bishops, and the restoration of the oblation and invocation to the communion office, according to his pledge to the Scotch Church which ordained him. His Discourses on Several Subjects was published (New York, 1793; 2 vols., Hudson, 1815).
Btataoaawrar: E. E. Beardsley, Life and Correspondence
SEAMEN, MISSIONS T0.
I. In Great Britain.	II. Continental Missions.
	Work in the Navy (¢ 1).		Scandinavian (§ 1).
	Work in the Merchant Marine (§ 2).		German (¢ 2).
	Various Societies Operating (¢ 3).	III. American Missions.
I. In Great Britain: As early as the middle of the eighteenth century sermons were preached and printed on behalf of seamen by John Flavel (q.v., 1630‑91). An organization named The Bible Society (see BIBLE SOCIETIES, I., 1) was organized in London in 1780 to supply English soldiers with the Holy Scriptures. Very soon its efforts were ex‑
tended to embrace the seamen of the r. Work in royal navy. The ill‑fated "Royal
the Navy. George," sunk off Spithead, England,
Aug. 29, 1782, was the first ship supplied with Bibles. The society's name was changed to The Naval and Military Bible Society, and it still continues its beneficent work of supplying the Scriptures to the army and navy of Great Britain. Incidentally, it helped to form the British and Forsign Bible Society (see BIBLE SOCIETIES, I., 2), whi,,h society in turn helped to call into existence the American Bible Society (see BIBLE SOCIETIES, III., 2). Seamen as a class, in those days, were devoid of scriptural knowledge, neglected by the Church at large, without Gospel ministrations or privileges, sea missionaries, or any special humanitarian effort on their behalf. When attempts were made to furnish seamen with church services and the Holy Scriptures, unchristian officers in the royal
ofReo. S. SeaburH, Boston, 1881; W. B. Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit, v. 149‑153, New York, 1869; W. S. Perry, Hist. of the American Episcopal Church, passim, 2 vols., Boston, 1885; idem, The Episcopate in America, pp. 1‑3, New York, 1885; C. C. Tiffany, in American Church History Series, vol. vii. passim, ib. 1895; S. D. McConnell, Hilt. of the American Episcopal Church, passim, 7th ed., ib. 1897; W. J. Seabury, Memoirs of Bishop Seabury, ib. 1908; and in general the literature under PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH which deals with the early period.

SEABURY, WILLIAM JONES: Protestant Episcopalian; b. in New York City Jan. 25, 1837. He was educated at Columbia College, New York City (A.B., 1856), and, after practising law for a few years, entered the General Theological Seminary, from which he was graduated in 1866. He was ordered deacon and ordained to the priesthood in the same year. He was rector of the Church of the Annunciation, New York City (1868‑98), and since 1873 has also been professor of ecclesiastical polity and law in the General Theological Seminary. Besides editing S. Seabury's Memorial (New York, 1874) and the same theologian's Discourses on the Nature and Work of the Holy Spirit (1874), he has written Suggestions in Aid of Devotion and Holiness (New York, 1878); Manual for Choristers (1878); A Guide to the Observance of the Canons of the Church affecting those who are seeking Holy Orders (1888); Lectures on Aloostolical Succession (1893); An Introduction to the Study of Ecclesiastical Polity (1894); Notes on the Constitution of 1901 (1902); and Memoir of Rev. Samuel Seabury (1908).
SEALS. See DRE88 AND ORNAMENT, HEBREW, 16.
Beginnings; American Seamen's Friend Society (§ 1).
Stations and Operation.,; (¢ 2).
Auxiliary Movements (¢ 3).
navy opposed with considerable spirit the new movement, but in the year 1828 the king was petitioned to abrogate an admiralty order, then issued, prohibiting the free distribution of tracts in the navy.
Outside of the navy a Methodist clergyman, George Charles Smith, established prayer‑meetings for seamen on the Thames at London. The first recorded prayer‑meeting was held on the brig " Friendship" on June 22, 1814. These prayer‑meetings multiplied until on Mar. 23, 1817, the first
bethel flag‑indicating that divine s. Work in service would be held on board shipthe Mer‑ was unfurled by Captain Hindulph of
chant Ma‑ South Shields, England. The Port nine. of London Society, organized Mar. 18,
1818, was the first regular seamen's society in England formed for the specific purpose of preaching to seamen. Its first meeting‑place was on a ship of three hundred tons and Smith was the first chaplain. Nov. 12, 1819, The Bethel Union Society was formed to establish unity of purpose and action between various seamen's societies in Great Britain, formed by the exertions of chaplain Smith. An amalgamation of these two societies produced the British and Foreign Sailors' Society, international and interdenominational in its plan.

817	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
The object of the society is the religious, intellectual, and social elevation of British and foreign seamen. It is world‑Ride in its operations, having stations in the chief ports of the world, and is associated with 113 missions in 110 ports. In these ports there are 111 buildings, called palaces, bethels, institutes, homes, rests, reading‑rooms, or missionaries' quarters. For harbors, roadsteads, and rivers, there are forty‑three floating bethels, steam launches, mission cutters, sail and row boats; 1,191 Christian shipmasters, and 124 helpers, have joined, since 1866, its Bethel Union Association, an association of Christian shipmasters who have a flag which they hoist in port, indicating their connection with the union and their willingness to hold or attend religious worship. In the service of the society there are 167 chaplains and missionaries.
The Missions to Seamen, the official society of the Church of England (headquarters 11 Buckingham Street, London, England), is the largest seamen's
society in the world. It employs 3. Various sixty‑four chaplains and sixty‑eight
Societies lay assistants, with twenty‑six large
Operating. and small boats in various parts of the
world. The Royal National Mission to Deep Sea Fishermen, London, England, carries on a vigorous work on the North Sea (England), and in Labrador, Newfoundland, by means of its hospital work ashore and afloat. The society owns five large steam vessels, a number of luggers, and has been instrumental in destroying the iniquitous system whereby liquor and tobacco were sold to the fishermen at enormous profit, resulting in loss of life and character. Within the last five years its superintendent, Dr. Grenfell, has interested America in the work on the Labrador coast. Besides the larger national societies in England, there are a number of smaller missions to seamen independent in government and local in their operations, such as the Glasgow Seamen's Friend Society and the Liverpool Seamen's Friend Society. The Seamen's Mission, headquarters at the "The Queen Victoria's Sailors' Rest," Poplar, E., London, is associated with the Wesleyan Methodist Church of England and has for its primary object to minister to the spiritual wants of the thousands of seafaring men who frequent the port of London. The Liverpool Seamen's Friend Society, formerly known as the Liverpool Seamen and Emigrants' Friend Society and Bethel Union, having its headquarters at "Gordon Smith Institute for Seamen," Paradise Street, Liverpool, has for its object to promote the religious and social welfare of seamen, their families, and other persons connected with shipping, and of emigrants, by earnest endeavour to bring them under the power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and to encourage among them habits of temperance and frugality.
There are several other local societies of minor importance. The foregoing are singled out for notice because of their size and importance.
II. Continental Missions: Continental mission work for seamen is of a later date than that of Great Britain or America. The Scandinavian seamen's mission was begun by the Norwegian minister Storrjohann. In 1864 he founded the Society for
Promoting the Gospel Among Norwegian Seamen in Foreign Ports, popularly known as the "Norwe‑
gian Seamen's Mission" with its head‑
y. Scandi‑ quarters in Bergen, Norway, and
navian. having forty‑four stations abroad.
A similar organization was started in 1867 in Denmark, at Copenhagen, the Society for the Preaching of the Gospel for Scandinavian Seamen in Foreign Ports, with six stations in England and America. In 1869 the Svenska Afdelningen af‑ Fdreningen fdr uppsgttande of skandinaviska Sjifmanshem i utllladska Hamnar, a mission for the erection of Scandinavian sailors' homes, was established. These homes have nearly always a chaplain attached to them and an active missionary work is usually carried on, resulting in accessions to the regularly established Scandinavian churches in Sweden and abroad. The Scandinavian churches on the Pacific coast of the United States are largely the outgrowth of. this movement which has preserved the Scandinavian element and given it remarkable solidarity in a part of America settled by emigration of mixed character.
Germany's entry into missions for seamen is coincidental with her rise as a naval and maritime power in the decade from 1880 to 1890. Johann Heinrich Wichern (q.v.), the father of the Innere
Mission (q.v.), became interested in
a. German. the needs of seamen and made some
suggestions as early as the year 1849.
German Evangelical congregations in foreign countries, seeing the needs of their countrymen abroad, were the first to realize their obligations and to make efforts for the moral welfare of German seamen. The Rev. F. M. Harms, pastor of the German Evangelical congregation in Sunderland, organized the first congregation in Great Britain and in 1885 founded the General Committee for General Evangelical Seamen's Mission in Great Britain. The Central Board of the Innere Mission in Berlin awakened interest in the Fatherland which resulted in a quickened movement for seamen all over the world wherever Germans were located. The field of the General Committee is Great Britain, except the Bristol Channel, and it is active in forty‑two ports with twenty missionaries, six sailors' homes, thirteen reading‑rooms. The local committees are subsidized with 30,000 marks annually. The German Lutheran Association for the Care of Seamen began the work on the Bristol Channel in 1887 and sent the Rev. J. Fungclaussen as first German seamen's pastor to Cardiff, Wales. The association began work in 1891 at Hamburg, in 1896 on the lower Weser at Bremerhaven and Geestemande, in 1906 in New York. A third organization was founded in 1895 by members of the Evangelical High‑Consistory and the Central Board for Innere Mission in Berlin, to interest the old provinces of Prussia. This is the Committee for German Evangelical Seamen's Mission. The Baltic ports from Memel to Lilbeck are under supervision of a special seamen's pastor. The chief ports connected with the committee's work are Antwerp, Rotterdam, Marseilles, Genoa, Constantinople, St. Petersburg, Copenhagen, Shanghai, Buenos Aires, Valparaiso, and Baltimore, Md.

Seamen	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	818
Sears
	There are now 175 ports where the work of the
German Evangelical Seamen's Mission is carried on
in some way. There are twenty‑nine sailors' homes
(with lodgings) and forty‑four institutes (reading
rooms). For the welfare of sailors twenty seamen's
pastors and forty missionaries (house‑fathers,
deacons) are at work in the field, besides about
ninety who devote a part of their time to this serv
ice. The statistics for 1907 show that 13,800 men
took lodging in the homes; the reading‑rooms were
visited by 160,000; 29,400 attended the religious
services; more than 900,000 marks were deposited
by sailors for safekeeping or to be sent home.
	III. American Missions: The mission to seamen in
America began in 1812, and was initiated by The
Boston Society for the Religious and Moral Improve
ment of Seamen. As far as is known it had no
		direct visible relation to the move
	r. Begin‑ ment in Britain, for the operations of
nings; Amer‑ the war between Great Britain and
	ican Sea‑ the United States created such dif
men's Friend ficulties that the work was suspended.
	Society.	In 1816 prayer‑meetings were started
		in New York and in 1819 the first
mariners' church ever erected was opened in
Roosevelt Street, New York, by the New York
Port Society, now in its ninety‑second year. Bethel
Unions or Marine Societies, as they were called then,
were opened in Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Or
leans, Charleston, S. C., Portland, Me., and New
Bedford, Mass. In 1828, the year of the founding
of the National Society for Seamen, the American
Seamen's Friend Society, 76 Wall Street, New York
City, unquestionably the most widely operative
and efficient of existing missionary societies for
seamen, came into being. Its first president was
Hon. Smith Thompson, then secretary of the United
States Navy; Rev. C. P. McIlvaine, afterward
Protestant Episcopal bishop of Ohio, was its cor
responding secretary; and Rev. Joshua Leavitt its
general agent. Article II. of its constitution pro
vides:
	" The object of this society shall be to improve the so
cial and moral condition of seamen by uniting the efforts of
the wise and good in their behalf, by promoting in every
port boarding‑houses of good character, savings‑banks,
register offices, libraries, museums, reading‑rooms, and
schools, and also the ministration of the gospel, and other
religious blessings."
	Its first foreign chaplain was Rev. David Abeel
(q.v.), who reached his field of labor at Whampoa,
the anchorage for ships trading at Canton, China,
Feb. 16, 1830. In its fortieth year, (1867‑68)
its laborers (chaplains and sailor missionaries)
were stationed at twenty foreign and thirteen do
mestic seaports. The services rendered in the evan
gelization of the Hawaiian Islands by the American
Seamen's Friend Society's chaplains, 1840‑70, Rev.
Titus M. Coan and Rev. S. C. Damon, popularly
known as " Father Damon," are worthy of mention
because of their association with the American
Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, and
with an almost forgotten chapter in American
marine history, the whaling industry.
	At the eightieth anniversary held in 1908 the
society had seventeen foreign stations and sixteen
domestic stations. In the United States of America: Brooklyn Navy Yard; Gloucester, Mass.; Norfolk,
Newport News, Va.; Charleston, S.
s. Stations C.; Pensacola, Fla.; Savannah, Brunsand wick, Ga.; Mobile, Ala.; Galveston,
Operations. Tex.; New Orleans, La.; Portland,
Astoria, Oregon; Tacoma, Seattle, Wash.; San Francisco, Cal.
In South America: Buenos Aires, Rosario, Argentine Republic; Montevideo, Uruguay; Valparaiso, Chile; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
In Europe: Stockholm, Gothenburg, Sweden; Copenhagen, Denmark; Rotterdam, Holland; Hamburg, Germany; Antwerp, Belgium; Genoa, Naples, Italy; Funchal, Madeira.
In Asia: Bombay, India; and Yokohama, Japan. At that time the society had shown a steady advance and decided increase in efficiency. From its beginning the national society had cared for the physical and mental needs of seamen along with its spiritual ministrations, and in its eightieth year the society opened the new institute, 507 West Street, New York, costing $325,000, the largest institution in the world for merchant seamen. In brief terms, the institute aimed to reach the whole ship and the whole man. Around the Bethel was grouped a hotel, club, and social features adapted to the steamship sailor's needs. So successful was the effort that in one year three or four new places modeled after it had been initiated. The loan library work began in an organized way in 1859, and became and has remained an important and regular feature of the society's operations, circulating since 1859 a grand total of 25,708 libraries, an average of 521 per year for fifty years. In the fifty‑second year of the loan library work 3,000 libraries are in active use. These libraries contained 620,808 volumes of general matter, and 26,702 Bibles were sent in them, 12,000 manuals of worship for seamen, and 25,938 (estimated) hymn‑books. 445,044 seamen have had access to the books by actual record, although more than one million seamen must have been reached by them. The number of books sent to sea by this system since its start in 1859 would nearly equal the present combined libraries of Princeton and Columbia universities. Public recognition of this work has been generous and frequent. In 1900 the Paris Exposition medal was granted the society for its literary work, and at the Jamestown Exposition, 1907, a diploma and bronze medal was awarded for the society's exhibit. When the explorer Peary went to the North Pole he had two of the American Seamen's Friend Society's Loan Libraries with him on the "Roosevelt."
Chief among the local societies unattached to the American Seamen's Friend Society are the following: Seamen's Church Institute, New York (Protestant Episcopal), with a sailors' home, a boat
for work in the harbor of New York 3. Auxiliary and a branch at Houston and West Movements. Streets; the New York Port Society
with the Mariners' Church and readingroom, and a work among the Latin seamen; and the Boston Seamen's Friend Society (Congregational). Extra missionary effort on behalf of seamen which may legitimately be called "Missions to Seamen"

319	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	seamm
Bears
is carried on by establishments known as sailors' homes. London, Liverpool, Glasgow, Newcastleon‑Tyne, Cardiff, Leith, Antwerp, Buenos Aires, Rosario, Sydney, Bombay, Karachi, Calcutta, New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore have such places supported by (1) the income from lodgers; (2) general subscriptions; (3) state subsidy, tir city grant. Nearly all of them have resident chaplains, missionaries, or helpers who devote time to the spiritual and moral welfare of the seamen. Sailors' homes are no longer being built, the changed conditions of sea life rendering them obsolete, and seamen's institutes, adapted to modern conditions of sea life, are taking their place.
The papers published by the missionary societies laboring among seamen are an important factor in the work, helping to carry the Gospel afloat. The oldest paper in the world for seamen is the Sailors' Magazine and Seamen's Friend, in its eighty‑second year, published by the American Seamen's Friend Society, 76 Wall Street, New York, which society also publishes the Life Boat, devoted to creating marine interests in the Sunday‑schools of America. The Chart and Compass is published by the British and Foreign Sailors' Society, London England; The Word on the Waters is the organ of the English Church's society; Sea Breeze is issued in furthering the interests of the Boston Seamen's Friend Society, Boston, Mass.; Toilers of the Deep is sent out by Royal Missions to Deep Sea Fishermen, London, England; Ashore and Afoat, edited by Miss Weston of Portsmouth, England, is circulated in the British and American Navies. Bhdtter fur SeemamsMission is published at Berlin.
Since the Spanish‑American War the Young Men's Christian Association in America has devoted considerable energy and money to promoting the standards and principles of that organization among the men of the United States navy, thus leaving the societies engaged in welfare work for seamen to concentrate their energies on the merchant marine, a class of men numbering three millions and a half of all nationalities.
The Seamen's Christian Brotherhood, an organization for Christian seamen, was started at an international conference of seamen's chaplains, held under the auspices of the American Seamen's Friend Society in 1908. In two years it spread into the ports of twelve different countries and promises to be of significance and spiritual worth to seamen. Its flag is a star, cross, and crown on a blue ground. Wherever a chapter of the organization is formed, ashore or afloat, the flag is hoisted on Sunday. The missionary movement on behalf of seamen held aloof from work of a social nature until the last decade when a healthy and conservative movement set in, recognizing the physical and social needs of seamen, resulting in a changed method of work which attracts all classes of seamen, the irreligious as well as the religious.
GEORGE MCPHERSGN HUNTER.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: T. C. Garland, Leaves from my Lop of Chris‑
tian Work among Sailors, London, 1882; The Word on the
Waters. Quarterly Record of Mission Effort amongst
Sailors, London, 1889,sqq.; A. Gordon, What Cheer 01
The Mission to Deep Sea Fishermen, London, 1890; T. S.
Tremor, The Lop of a .Sky Pilot, London, 1893; 8. G.
Wints, Our Blue Jackets. Miss Weston's Life and Work, London, 1894; M. Mao Lean, Seafarers from the Land of the Rising Sun in London. London, 1896; J. Slater, The East in the West; or, Work among the Asiaties and Africans in London, ib., 1896; H. Dalton, Deutsche Seeinantmission, Berlin, 1897; O. Strecker, Die Geschichte der . . . verbundenen lutherischen Vereinen for inner@ Mission petriebenen kirchliehen Versorpunp deutscher Seeleute, Hanover, 1899; F. T. Bullen, With Christ in Sailor Town, London, 1901; idem, With Christ at Sea, New York, 1901; idem, A Sailor Apostle, ib. 1903; M. L. Walrond, Launching out into the Deep. The Missions to Seamen, London, 1904; N. Duncan, Dr. Grenjell's Parish. The Deep Sea Fishermen, London, 1905; R. M6aehmeyer, In d. Fremde. Einipe Zeupnisse aus der Auslandsarbeit, Marburg, 1905; and the Reports of the various societies named in the teat.
SEARLE, sfrl, JOHN PRESTON: Reformed; b. at Schuylerville, N. Y., Sept. 12, 1854. He was graduated from Rutgers College (A.B., 1875) and New Brunswick Theological Seminary (1878); was ordained (1878), and after holding pastorates at Griggstown, N. J. (1878‑81), and the First Reformed Church, Somerville, N. J. (1881‑93), he was appointed in 1893 to his present position of professor of systematic theology at the New Brunswick Theological Seminary. He has also been president of the faculty of the same institution since 1902. He is vice‑president of the Board of Foreign Missions of his denomination, and is the author of a number of sermons, addresses, and contributions to religious periodicals.

SEARS, afrz, BARNAS: Baptist educator; b. at Sandisfield, Mass., Nov. 19, 1802; d. at Saratoga Springs, N. Y., July 6, 1880. He was graduated from Brown University in 1825; and from Newton Theological Seminary in 1828; was pastor at Hartford, Conn., 1829‑31; professor of ancient languages in Hamilton (N. Y.) Literary and Theological Institution, now Madison University, 1831‑33; and pastor at the same time at Hamilton. He studied at Halle, Leipsic, and Berlin, 1833‑35, and in 1834 baptized J. G. Oncken and six others, forming the first German Baptist Church in communion with the Baptists of England and America. He returned to Hamilton in 1835; was professor of theology in Newton Theological Seminary, 183618; and president, 1837‑48. For several years he was the editor of the Christian Review. He was president of Brown University, 1855‑67; and general agent of the Pear body Educational Fund, with residence at Staunton, Va., 1867‑80. He published a Life of Luther (Philadelphia, 1850), and an edition of P. M. Roget's Thesaurus (Boston, 1854).

SEARS, EDMUND HAMILTON: B. at Sandisfield, Mass., Apr. 6, 1810; d. at Weston, Mass., Jan. 14, 1876; was graduated from Union College, 1834; and from Cambridge Divinity School, 1837; was pastor of Unitarian societies at Wayland, Mass., 1839‑10 and 1847‑65; at Lancaster, Mass., 1840‑47; and at Weston, 1865‑76. Though connected with the Unitarian body, he held Swedenborgian opinions, and often'professed his belief in the absolute divinity of Christ. He wrote largely for the Monthly Religious Magazine, of which he was joint‑editor, 1859‑71. He published Regeneration (Boston, 1853), Pictures of the Olden Time (1857), Athanaeia, or

Saba
Second Advent	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	320
Foregleams of Immortality (1858), The Fourth Gospel the Heart of Christ (1872), and Sermons and Songs (1875). His writings are noted for their great spiritual power and beauty; he wrote also two exquisite Christmas‑hymns, "Calm on the listening ear of night," and "It came upon the midnight clear" (1834 and 1849 or 1850).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: S. W. Duffield, English Hymns, pp. 264265, New York, 1886; Julian, Hymnology, p. 1036.

SEBA. See TABLE OF THE NATIONS, § 6.

SEBASTIAN, se‑bas'ti‑an or bast'yan: Saint and martyr; patron of archers, and formerly invoked to avert pestilence; martyred at Rome. Ambrose (MPL, xiv. 1497) states that Sebastian was born at Milan and suffered martyrdom at Rome; and it is also certain that he suffered martyrdom on Jan. 20 of an unknown year (3057). These few facts are all that are certainly known concerning him. The Acts of St. Sebastian (ASB, Jan., ii. 265‑278) contains, besides many miracles and conversions, such a mass of historical inconsistencies that, even though probably written in the early part of the fifth century, they can not be regarded as original documents. Three data in the life of the saint, however, were from an early period regarded as authentic. His martyrdom was fixed in the first reign of Diocletian; he was an officer of the imperial bodyguard; and he was shot with arrows in the Colosseum. These three statements are derived from the forged Acts. That he fell a victim to the great Diocletian persecution of 303 sqq., as the Acts state, is merely a conjecture not wholly devoid of plausibility; but the so‑called Depositio martyrum of the Chronicle of Liberius affirms that St. Sebastian was buried in the catacombs on Jan. 20, 354. Again, Roman criminal law did not prescribe execution by shooting with arrows as a death penalty for Christians, the punishments in question being decapitation, crucifixion, fighting with wild beasts, or death by burning or scourging. A mosaic picture of the saint, dating from about 682, is preserved in the church of San Pietro in Vincoli. It represents St. Sebastian, not, as in Renaissance art, as naked and young, but as a bearded man of adult age, with a long mantle, the fine raiment of a courtier, a nimbus, and a diadem in his right hand. No representation of the martyrdom is known from the first six centuries; nor does even this earliest portrait contain any trace of an arrow to symbolize the supposed manner of St. Sebastian's death. (FRANZ GORRES.)
BIRLIOGRAPHY: Documents other than the Acta are published in MGH, Script., xv. 1 (1887), 379‑391, 2 (1888), 771‑773; ASM, iv. 1, pp. 383‑410; and the fragment of the Sebastian saga by C. R. Unger in Heilagra Manna Siigur, ii. 228‑235, Christiania, 1877. Consult further: J. C. F. Biihr, Geschichte der ri)mischen Literatur im karolingischen Zeitalter, p. 259, Carlsruhe, 1840; P. J. Chapusot, Notice sur la vie de S. S€bastien et sur la reliquie . . . conserves dans 1'eglise de Chalons, Ch8lons‑sur‑llfarne,,1863; J. 111. Triehaud, La Legende de S. Sebastien, Afarseilles, 1872; F. X. Kraus, Roma Sotterranea, pp. 119, 133,181, 518, Freiburg, 1879; F. GSrres, in ZTT'T, xxiii (1880), 3164, 165‑197; idem, in JPT, Hiii. 511‑518; P. Allard, La Persecution de Diocletien, i. 131‑132, Paris, 1890; V. Cocchi, Memorie di S. Sebastiano, Frosinone, 1892; DCB, iv. 593.
SEBASTOS CYMINETES: Greek Orthodox theologian; b. at Cymina, near Trebizond, 1630; d. at
Trebizond Sept. 6, 1702. He was apparently educated in his native country, and in 1671 became the head of the Greek patriarchal school in Constantinople. Later he assumed a like position at Trebizond, where he spent the remainder of his life. He energetically opposed the entrance of Western theology into the Greek Orthodox Church. Only a few of his many works have appeared in print, among them being the Heortologion (Bucharest, 1701) and especially the posthumous Dogmatike didaskalia (1703). The latter consists of three parts: " When the elements are changed into the body and blood of Christ; that the Virgin was subject to original sin; that the `parts' are not changed into the body and blood of Christ." Some of the work was obviously not written by Sebastos, a portion being ascribed by Sathas to the patriarch Dositheos. In his work Sebastos maintains that the elements are transformed through the Epiklesis (q.v.), as the Orthodox liturgy teaches, but that the "parts" are not changed; he holds that the Virgin was born in sin, but was delivered from original sin through the annunciation, as Christians are freed through baptism.
	Sebastos again discussed the Eucharistic contro
versy in a long letter to Chrysanthos, later patriarch
of Jerusalem ("True Church," I., ii. 245 sqq., 253
sqq.; cf. viii. 92). His philosophical writings are
devoted to the dissemination of ecclesiastical Aris
totelianism. 	(PHILIPP MEYER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fabrieius‑Harles, Bibliotheca Greece, xi. 531, 634, Hamburg 1808; F. Kattenbuseh, Lehrbuch der vergleichenden Confessionskunde, ii. 413‑414, Freiburg, 1892; F. Legrand, Bibliographie hellUnique, iii. 47, 62, Paris, 1895.
SECESSION CHURCH. See PRESBYTERIANS, I., 2, 3, 6.

SECESSION CHURCH IN IRELAND. See PRESBYTERIANS, III., 3.

SECESSION CHURCH OF SCOTLAND, UNITED ORIGINAL. See PRESBYTERIANS I., § 6.

SECKENDORF, sek'en‑dtirf, VEIT LUDWIG VON: German Lutheran statesman and scholar; b. at Herzogenaurach (6 m. s.w. of Erlangen) Dec. 20, 1626; d. at Halle Dec. 18, 1692. He was educated at the University of Strasburg (1642‑15); after which he was appointed page to Duke Ernest the Pious, his duties being to supervise the library, to draw useful and interesting material from designated books, and to communicate the results to the duke, a task which laid the basis for his own writings. In 1648 Seckendorf was made gentleman of the bedchamber, and in 1652 court councilor and councilor of justice. Three years later as privy court councilor and councilor of the board of domains he rendered important service in regulating the finances of the country and in a number of diplomatic affairs. In 1664 Duke Ernest made him chancellor, but in the same year he entered the service of Maurice, duke of Saxony‑Zeitz, as chancellor and president of the consistory. These positions he held, in spite of many jealous attacks, until the death of Maurice in 1681. Still retaining his position as district director at Altenburg, Seckendorf now found time and leisure to indulge his literary

321
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
tastes. His interest became more and more concentrated on the problem of the value and essence of practical Christianity, and he thus became closely associated with such men as Philipp Jakob Spener, whom he had called to Dresden. Seckendorf could scarcely be called a Pietist, though he defended Spener in his Bericht and Erinnerungen auf eine neulieh im Druek lateinisch and deutsch augsgestreute Schrift Imago pietatis (Halle, 1692), after having translated into Latin Spener's Frankfort sermons of 1677 under the title Capita doctrines ct praxis Christianm insignia (1689). The qualities of Pietism which attracted Seckendorf were its moral earnestness and its emphasis upon practical Christianity, though his critical nature kept him from sympathy with Pietistic mysticism. But in the evening of his life he was again drawn into the movement when, on Sept. 9, 1692, Elector Frederick III. of Brandenburg appointed him chancellor of the newly founded University of Halle. On Oct. 31 Seckendorf entered upon his duties, where the difficult task awaited him of reconciling the controversy between Francke and the clergy of Halle. A few weeks later he died.
Despite his manifold official activity, Seckendorf found time at Gotha for a series of writings, such as the Justitid proteetionis in eivitate Erfurtensi (1663), Repetita et necessaries defensio justce protectionis Saxonicce in eivritate Erfurtensi (1664), and the Compendium historim ecclesiastic&, . . . in usum gymnasii Gothani (Leipsic, 1666). During this period he likewise wrote his Teutscher Fiirsten Stat (Hanau, 1656), followed by the Christen Stat (1685). The latter work, influenced largely, especially in the first part, by the Penseses of Pascal, was partly an apologetic directed against atheism, and partly reformatory in purpose.
The work on which Seckendorf's fame rests, however, is his Commentarius historicus et apologeticus de Lutheranismo seu de reformatione (Leipsie, 1688‑92). The work was essentially a refutation of the Histoire du Luth6ranisme of the Jesuit L. Maimbourg (Paris, 1680), of which Seckendorf made a partial Latin translation, with a Dissertatio historica et apologetica pro doctrines D. Lutheri de missa to serve as a sort of preliminary work (Jena, 1686). For his Commentarius Seckendorf, as the trusted friend of all the Saxon princes, had access to original documents to a degree enjoyed by no later scholar, and a mass of sources, both manuscript and printed, hitherto unutilized, were also sent him, thus enhancing his wealth of material. His method is to give, paragraph by paragraph, Maimbourg's presentation in Latin translation, with a refutation .from original sources, pertinent additiones, often of considerable length, being appended. The Commentarius is, therefore, not a uniform artistic presentation, but is still an indispensable source for every historian of the Reformation because of its wealth of material. (T. KOLDE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The funeral sermon by J. J. Breithaupt
	was published at Zeitz, 1693, and a memorial address by
	C. Thomasius in his Kleine Sehriften, no. XIII., p. 497
	ST", Halle, 1721. Consult further: R. Pahner, Veit Lud
	evig von Seckendorf and seine Cedanken vber Erxiehung
	and Unterricht, Leipsic. 1892; D. G. Schreher, Historia
	. . . Viti Ludovici a Seckendorf, ib. 1733; J. V. von Lude•
X.‑21
Seba
Second Advent
wig, Oekonomische Anmerkungen iiber Seckendorjs Fiirstenstaal, Frankfort, 1753; A. Beck, Ernst der Fromme, 2 vols., Weimar, 1865; W. Schrader, Geschichte der Friedrichs‑Universitat zn Halle, vol. i., Berlin, 1894.
SECKER, seck'er, THOMAS: Church of England; b. at Sibthorpe, Nottinghamshire, 1693; d. at London, Aug. 3, 1768. He was graduated at Leyden (M.D., 1721); then entered Exeter College, Oxford; was ordained priest, 1723; rector of Houghton‑leSpring, 1724; of St. James's, Westminster, 1733; appointed chaplain to the king, 1732; consecrated bishop of Bristol, 1735; was transferred to Oxford, 1737; and in addition was installed dean of St. Paul's, 1750; and was archbishop of Canterbury, 1758‑68. Seeker was a remarkable instance of the orthodox eighteenth‑century prelate, assumed a lively interest in the questions of his time, and possessed a fund of knowledge wide and deep. His Works were collected, twelve vols., London, 1770, with a Review of his Life and Character by B. Porteus.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Consult, besides the sketch by Porteus, ut sup.: J. H. Overton and F. Relton, The English Church (17'14‑1800), passim, London, 1906; DNB, li. 170‑173.
SECOND ADVENT.
Old Testament (§ 1). Jewish Apocrypha and Apocalypses (§ 2). New Testament (§ 3). The Twofold Conception (§ 4). Compounded in the New Testament (§ 5). The Parousia (§ 6). The Consciousness of Jesus (§ 7). Practical Estimation (§ 8).
	The belief in the second coming of Christ can be
understood only as presented in a coherent historical
outline. The eschatology of the Old Testament and,
in its main ideas, of the Jewish apocalyptical litera
		ture, is concerned with the confident
	r. The Old assurance that God's rule must finally
	Testament. prevail. The concrete forms of this
		hope vary with the conception of the
universe and the horizon of religious interests.
The prophetic hope, especially of the more remote
period, casts its pictures on the background of this
world, with the predominant interest in Jerusalem
and Israel. The Day of Yahweh (see DAY OF THE
LORD) must come, which will free God's people from
unjust oppression and bring judgment on the enemy
(Ob. 15; Isa. xiii. 6 sqq.). At first this was not con
ceived as a single decisive epoch, but as a day of
visitation upon a particular enemy, which might be
multiplied (cf. Jer. xlvi. 10). The view was gradu
ally extended so as to include not only the neigh
boring peoples but all nations. With this, real
eschatological elements are approximated, with at
least a suggestion of transcendental tendency. Only
the righteous nation shall be saved, from whom
sinners shall be separated, leaving only a "remnant"
(Isa. i. 27, iv. 3). Whoever will call upon Yahweh
shall be saved, and for this the grace of God pro
vides beforehand (Mal. iii. 1 sqq.), in which the
personal and eternal relation to God appears as the
essential, working itself out of the historical situa
tion. That the scene, however, is mundane shows
itself in the narrower idea of the Messianic hope.
The Messiah is never the judge of the world but the
king awakened and enthroned by God, and he shall

Second Advent	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	322
lead his people to victory and rule over them in justice and peace (Jer. xxx. 9; Isa. ix. 6‑7). God shall be present with his people and sin and evil shall vanish. This shows a tendency toward transcendence, although Zion is yet in this world (Isa. ii. 2, iv. 5). There is to be no world cataclysm and renewal, although there shall be signs and wonders. No universal resurrection is implied, the passages so taken merely representing additions (Isa. xxvi. 19; Dan. xii. 2), as well as that expressing a unique expectation of a new heaven and a new earth (Isa. Ixv. 17 sqq., lxvi. 22). The average consciousness in the Old Testament implies no dual theory, no dual world; hence no ground for a dual Messianic revelation.
A decided change first appeared in the century before the birth of Christ. More and more distinctly the apocryphal and apocalyptical literature created a transcendent picture of the end of the world, until the rabbinical writings after Christ produced a finished system of eschatology. As the
s. Jewish older earthly hopes for Israel and JeruApocrypha salem continue, an ellipse, so to speak, and Apoc‑ with two foci appears; one is the center alypses. of a group of Messianic expectations here, the other of more strictly deduced new transcendent and more individualistic ideas. This led ultimately to a double revelation, parallel to the Christian view. The judging of the nations appears according to the older prophetic style. The Messiah shall redeem Israel, and as judge shall punish, and be king after God's own heart. The New Jerusalem shall be created by God and transferred from preexistence into the world; yet it has a mundane character, and its inhabitants have not eternal but long and peaceful life. Above all this is erected a transcendent world, not only by the later apocalypses, which, surpassing the Book of Daniel, employed themselves with the background of an earthly history and the conflicts of a spirit world, not only at a later stage, by identifying the Messiah with the Son of Man of Daniel and regarding him as a preexistent Being; but ir_ early times, the claims of an individual personality appear alongside of the national Messianic hope. The hope of a common blessedness in this world is transferred to another, after death, involving the individual resurrection of the just for life eternal. Two eons are recognized, separated by the day of Yahweh, which after a universal resurrection shall determine the deserving fate of the blessed and the damned. Beyond is a new heaven and a new earth. The individual interest, not content with the transcendent blessedness of the single personality, regains coalescence with history and totality. Yet the picture is variously shortened by particularisms: redemption is not universal like that of Joel and the New Testament; the saved are to be at most the Jews only "in this country"; the Messiah gains no universal significance and has no place in the final judgment, except in the Book of Enoch, where the Son of Man ascends the throne in glory and chooses among men. This, however, was the result of Christian influence. According to IV Esdras vii. 28 sqq. the Messiah dies, after reigning 400 years, together with all men. Then the new eon opens with resurrection and judg‑
ment, paradise and gehenna. The tendency was generally to restrict the function of the Messiah in this world and dilate upon the eon of the next world at the termination of the Messianic period, in which eon the Messiah has no longer any part.
It was otherwise in Christianity. The dual conception of the universe was assumed; the division between the "the present eon" and the "eon to come" is the inseparable assumption of Christian thought (Matt. xii. 32; Luke xvi. 8).
3‑ flew But the Old Testament's Messianic
Testament. idea, which served to give value to the personality of Jesus, is employed in undiminished force with reference to the final goal beyond. The inheritance of the Old Testament is clothed in apocalyptic transcendental form. The Messiah does not perform an earthly work, which can not be transferred to the beyond, but reveals in his person the personality of the Father. The basis of salvation hence is not membership in the nation from which the Messiah is descended, but personal relationship to the Messiah, who gathers about him his nation of believers. The mother of the Christians is no longer an earthly Jerusalem, but that city above which is identical with the congregation of the perfect (Gal. iv. 26). The personality of Jesus acquires eternal significance; those who belong to him belong for time and eternity to God.
The central position of the personality of Christ leads to the conception of a double Messianic revelation, the end of which, however, is not, as in the Jewish apocalyptic system of thought, an exaltation of the kingdom of the Messiah, first
4. The Two‑ established upon earth, into the
fold Con‑ heavenly world, but a return of Christ
	ception.	from the kingdom beyond into the
		midst of conceivable reality. For no
earthly Messianic kingdom was established at the
first coming of Christ. On the contrary, he was
rejected by his people. If he is nevertheless to re
main the Messiah, the basis of his kingdom must
be a transcendent one, centering in himself as a
personality secured in God, and conserving other
personality with his own. Jesus himself certainly
lays claim to an actual reign. He will come as the
Son of Man in the clouds and will establish the king
dom which shall absolve all earthly kingdoms
(Mark xiii. 26, xiv. 62). But the same title is used
of him in expressions that declare that Jesus is
homeless upon the earth, that he sows only for the
future, that he suffers in order to rise hereafter,
that he serves in order to give his life as a sacrifice
for sin, that his authority upon the earth is to for
give sins, and that he has come to seek the lost
(Mark ii. 10, viii. 31, x. 45). Thus the purely per
sonal character of the Messiahship of Jesus is
harmonized with the apocalyptic transcendental
plan. Personalities constitute the materials of the
transcendent structure of which the personality of
Christ is the cornerstone (Mark xii. 10; Eph. ii. 20
sqq.). The resurrection of Jesus was not that
coming again; for he appeared personally only to the
disciples and later exists in spiritual continuity.
For Israel and the world, there began another period
of waiting, during which the words of his witnesses
are at work bringing about repentance and faith.

828	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Second Advent
Those that surrender themselves to him he includes in his unseen fellowship, so that, although they live in the flesh, they no longer essentially belong to the present world (Gal. i. 4). They are, by virtue of their membership in the body of the living Christ, though in the world not of the world, but translated into eternity (John xvii. 11, 14 sqq.; Eph. ii. 2, 5 sqq.). Such expressions as these are not meant figuratively in the New Testament, but serve to describe an unseen reality which is future in so far as it has not yet entered the domain of tangible appearance, but is present in so far as it exists behind the visible world and is accessible to faith. The only thing yet looked for is the episode transforming the mystical fellowship of the Head and members into the actual. This will result in Christ's return designated as parousia (Matt. xxiv. 3, 37, 39); or erchetai, "he cometh" (Mark xiii. 26; Rev. i. 7, xxii. 7, 20); but, from an earthly viewpoint better expressed as a "revelation," "coming," or "appearance" (Luke xvii. 30; I Cor. i. 7).
As evidence how inseparably associated with New‑Testament faith the expectation that Christ must, from his focus of the redemption of souls, carry it out to its utmost consequences, stands the fact that in all the varying doctrinal
5. Com‑ types of the New Testament, the
pounded in blessing of salvation is everywhere
the flew described as present and future. The
	Testament.	"salvation" of the primitive apostolic
		mode of expression is to be realized at
the return of Christ, but for the "saved" (Acts ii.
47) it is a reality dominating present life, since it is
guaranteed by the Spirit and by personal relation
to the exalted Christ (ii. 38; I Pet. iii. 21). The
Johannine "eternal life" is certainly a present
possession, but instead of being conceived as im
manent it is to await its perfection and reduction to
form in the future (John xvii. 3, vi. 40). As cer
tainly as Paul's experience of justification forms the
present and actual basis of the Christian life of faith
so certainly is it adapted to eschatological concep
tion. "Justification" is awaited as an acquittal in
the final judgment (Gal. v. 5; Rom. viii. 30). It is
a "giving of life" (Gal. iii. 21), the operative as
surance of the favorable outcome of the final judg
ment. Salvation is by hope (Rom. viii. 24); so also
adoption is partly a future reality (Gal. iv. 5; Rom.
viii. 15). The eschatological element comes for
ward no less in the thoughts of Jesus on the king
dom. However, he who accepts it in the present is
received within its secure protection (Mark x. 15).
The perfected kingdom is identical with the future
world; it is a "kingdom of heaven." As the future
world, according to the apocalyptic view, opens with
the appearance of the Messiah, so also the kingdom
of God on earth is at hand when the Messiah ap
pears; the King is the kingdom. The force of Luke
xvii. 20 is to rebuke the manner of judging by signs
and seasons, and does not negate the main point of
receiving the present revelation of the kingdom in
order to gain admission to its complete future devel
opment. Already evidences appear. The power
of Jesus over demons demonstrates that he has
wrested the dominion of the world absolutely from
Satan (Matt. xii. 28‑29). His own are now con‑
cealed in the community of the kingdom (Col. i. 13); its complete realization is only a matter of time. The reign of God which shall come with power, contrasted with its first weak appearing (Mark ix. 1), is only its unfolding, just as Christ who as the Son of God was established with power seems, but was not, a contradiction of the Christ crucified (Rom. i. 4).
	The significance of the parousia consists in finally
bringing about this transformation; the surviving
tension between center and circumference is re
moved. A complete termination of earthly history
is expected. The Son of Man unrecognized on earth
		shall appear again unmistakably in
6. The a glory that shall bring terror to his
	Parousia.	enemies and perfect redemption to his
		faithful (Matt. xxiv. 27, 30). The
offenses shall be removed from his kingdom, and
the chosen shall be gathered and reunited into
an eternal community of glory (Matt. xiii. 31,
40, 49 sqq.). History, however, must first be
fulfilled to the extent that the Gospel shall be
preached to all nations (Matt. xxiv. 14). The
preaching of the Gospel serves only as a testi
mony; the final deliverance will appear no more
as developing out of humanity than the first,
but as an act of God entering from without. The
coming of the Son of Man is cataclysmic. The
human race of all periods of history shall be sum
moned for judgment. The belief in a general
resurrection of the dead is implied with this expec
tation (John v. 29; Rev. xx. 11 sqq.). The ap
pearance of Christ as judge of the world is a step
beyond Jewish apocalyptic literature. In the New
Testament he has become the representative of God
on earth, not in an incidental matter but to actualize
in history and person God's revelation of grace.
Apart from all metaphysical statements, the
"power" of Jesus is adequate to forgive sins, to
establish the basis for the coming judgment (Mark
ii. 10). Standing at the center of humanity whence
access to God is only through him, the fate of every
individual rests on him. Its consummation is
postponed to the end of the world in agreement with
the history of Christian faith, inseparable as it is
from transcendence. If Jesus is the expression of
the purpose of God in the history of revelation,
then his personality as Savior and Judge must also
stand at the goal of this history (Matt. xi. 27, xxvi.
64). The day of Yahweh becomes the day of Jesus
Christ (I Cor. i. 8, v. 5), and Christ's seat of judg
ment is that of God (II Cor. v. 10; Rom. xiv. 10).
For believers the significance of the parousia lies in the consummation of that which they already possess within themselves; after the salvation of the soul comes the complete salvation of the body (I Cor. xv. 43 sqq.). Even impersonal creation, as the scene of redeemed humanity, shares in the transformation. A new heaven and a new earth in which all contradiction between inner and outer is overcome appears in place of the old (Rev. xxi. 1). Not a nebulous ideal world is pictured, but the new Jerusalem coming down from heaven has all the characteristics of reality, though without the elements of the earthy (xxi. 2).
Whether these thoughts on the second advent necessarily fit together harmoniously from the given

Second Advent	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	824
Secrecy
premises or are the result of wilful systematizing
must be determined by the answer given to two
		questions: Did Jesus himself actually
y. The Con‑ have in mind his coming again to
	sciousness judge the world? Is the hope for his
	of Jesus. return one of the inalienable elements
		of Christian faith? The literature
of the New Testament appears without ex
ception controlled by the apocalyptic eschatological
expectation that Jesus as the Christ will some time
terminate the history of the world, and open the new
world of God for the reception of his followers.
There appears, in place of the fantastic apocalyptic
" watching," just as clearly the idea of a present
fellowship with Christ which guarantees to faith
the attainment of its goal. Who is the author of
this grand conception? Jesus or Paul? Is this a
theological speculation, or rather a comprehensive
expression of the belief in the religiously understood
and yet in reality world‑ruling Messiahship of
Jesus? If the latter, then the outcome of the his
torical judgment will depend upon the justification
of this belief. Whoever does this will not assume
that Jesus used the name of Messiah uncertainly
and sustained himself inwardly in his sufferings
with a vague hope of returning; but the religious
Messianic faith of the New Testament, instead of
indulging a meaningless return, involves the claim
to the judgment of the world. W. Bousset's asser
tion, that the faith of the Church pushed the self
assumed position of Jesus as a witness in the divine
judgment gradually forward to a world‑judgment,
rests merely upon an unproved presupposition that
Jesus disavowed himself as the judge of the world.
The prevailing critical assertion that a finished little
apocalypse was inserted with the discourse of Jesus
in Mark xiii. would be valid proof against the origin
from Jesus of that apocalypse pertaining to the
parousia. If, in addition, the authentic literature
on the life of Jesus be restricted to the Gospel of
Mark, it would be easy to interpret from the few
remaining passages the consciousness of a mere
witness in the divine judgment and the triumph of
his person and kingdom in history (Mark viii. 38,
xiv. 62 sqq.). However, the theory of a little apoc
alypse would also be of historical value only if
Jewish origin could be assumed, but, in general, it
is of a specifically Christian character, placing the
figure of Jesus prominently at the center of the
transcendent expectations. The decision of the
matter lies deeper than with mere critical literary
research.	It appears that various critics would
assent to only one side of the twofold problem
they face, particularly those who would segregate,
in the consciousness of Jesus, the eschatological
elements from his person. Jesus would thereby be
isolated in a position inconceivable to human per
ception; the Jewish and Christian contemporaneous
literature would be filled with apocalyptic hopes,
while the faith of Jesus without discriminating
emphasis would have contented itself with the other
world, resurrection, judgment, and the kingdom of
God, in general. Similarly, but creating less dis
order in the historical situation, is the theory of the
" eschatological school " said to have been left be
hind by Jesus, which claims that every statement of
the Evangelists concerning the presence of the kingdom is an intrusion of rabbinical representation. As to the truth of the matter itself, this is supposed, on many sides, to be resolved by the ignorance of Jesus concerning the nearness of the time. As truly as a change occurs in Paul's idea of the nearness (II Thess. iv. 17; II Cor. v. 2 sqq.), a historical view may not assume that Jesus announced his return in the following generation. No words are so well authenticated as the statement that he knew neither the day nor the hour (Mark xiii. 32). Is this to refer to the particular moment, while as the general extension, the immediate future is self‑evidently fixed? But the events pronounced under the woes, particularly the appearing of many false messiahs, and the preaching of the Gospel to all the nations, necessarily imply a longer development and thoughts of a community of the kingdom on earth. This being so, then the words relating to a personal return of Jesus are to be taken as pointing to the destruction of Jerusalem (Matt. x. 23, xvi. 28). Even if the mistaken formulation of these words effected in the community a wide‑spread belief in the near approach of the end (John xxi. 23; II Thess. ii. 2) ; and this belief gave rise, in the account, to the close temporal approximation of the judgment of the people of God and the universal judgment of the human race, although only inwardly associated by Jesus, yet the distinction of the two acts is unmistakably present throughout.
For the positive estimation of the belief in the second coming no clear direction can be given. It all depends on the attitude taken with reference to the authority of Jesus and the personal needs seeking satisfaction in the truths of Christian faith. A mere regulative idea to act as an ethical incentive would be indifferent to eschatological hopes. This position, especially prominent from Kant to
8. Practi‑ Schleiermacher and Ritsehl, results cal Estima‑ more and more in the divergence of tion. individual immortality and the consummation of society. The chief interest, according to Ritschl, accrues to the kingdom of God, unfolding upon an earthly basis, as the end or ideal common to God and his chosen religious community, which, rising above the natural limitations of ethnic distinctions, advances to the ethical unity of all the peoples. Whether this involves merely a constant ideal hovering before, or a real historical goal, is nowhere made distinct; but if the latter, there is no light thrown upon the relation in which the individuals departing previously from history stand with reference to the common goal. These projects rule the newer theology so far as it, not without candor, applies itself to a philosophy of the world, as well as to the religion of Jestrs and the Apostles. For the modern attitude, resting on the basis of an empirical world, the acme of thought is a personal society, realized, with the conquest of purely natural motives, in ethical ends. Timidly and insecurely the consequence is scarcely ventured upon that this kingdom of God may be in full reality the goal of historical evolution subserved also by the natural world. The result is scarcely more than an idealistic self‑reflection. In fact all ideas are enlisted in the scheme of the immovable con‑

326	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Second Advent
		Secrecy
trast of nature and spirit. Personal spiritual exer
tions have the value of preserving from absorption
in mere nature, but not the promise of ever becom
	ing reality in the historical sense. Individual postu
lates reaching over into transcendent realization are
	possible, but not a consistent, sustaining certainty.
On the contrary the incomparable power of the un
constricted New‑Testament faith which unites the
apocalyptic assurance of actual consummation with
the interest in personalities is assured in God and in
their community. The combination of the cer
tainty of the beyond with the positive worth of
personality constitutes the sure ground of life for
believers. This certainty is guaranteed through the
purely personal activity and experience of Christ
who possessed in this world, which rejected him,
nothing but his personality assured in God, but de
parting with this possession inwardly triumphant
to open the outward victory by the resurrection,
to assemble his own to his exalted activity, and to
raise them in unity with himself as head to God in
the other world, and, finally, in his last revelation,
to extend the ultimate consequences of the reign of
God over the world and his society of the kingdom.
The certainty of redemption includes this hope as
an essential element, and the conviction that the
disappearance of one would mean the loss of entire
certainty of redemption engirdling real life, is proof
that this subsists not on illusions. Meantime, a self
reliant faith has no occasion to indulge the utiliza
tion of phenomenal expressions presuming to be
"realistic," the forms thence available for the de
scription of transcendent realities being obtained
from the hither world only. Most significant, how
ever, for the ethical judgment of the world by the
Christian and his attitude therein is an earnest be
lief in the return of Jesus and in the world‑compre
hending transcendent consummation of his kingdom.
From the point of view of the kingdom of God as the
"Father's house" for redeemed personalities assem
bled in eternity, the purely contingent state of life is
judged as mere scenery, "for the fashion of this
world passes away" (I Cor. vii. 31). Therefore
the Christian emulates not things in the course of
this life but persons, not culture but Evangelization.
He also does not look for an uninterrupted ethical
evolution; all attempts in this direction, which are
to be prosecuted because the kingdom of God aims
to comprehend all life as one, are ever doomed to
violent interruption, so long as the world of sin will
stand, in which a progressive revelation of light
calls forth a corresponding revelation of darkness.
No Church in its outward aspect and no Christian
state is therefore an immediate vestibule of the per
fect kingdom; on earth there can be only folds to
guard the members of Christ mingling with other
elements, until his appearing, and with him that
of the saints hitherto scattered throughout all his
tory, as the everlasting community. ~~,
		( E. F. KARL. MuLLER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY‑ For the doctrine as found in the Bible con
	sult the literature in and under BIBLICAL THEOLOGY (es
	pecially the works by Duhm, Smend, Dillmann, Bennett,
	Davidson, Toy, and Schultz for the O. T.; and by Bey
	schlgg, Adeney, Holtzmann, Stevens, and Gould for the
	N. T.); DAY OF THE LORD; and under ESCHATOLOGY.
	For the doctrine in the apocryphal and pseudepieraphi
literature consult the works under MEsaIAH, MESSIAMSM (especially those by Briggs, Orelli, Stanton, and Woods), and under PBEuD&PIGRAPHA (especially those by Charles, and Drummond). Consult further: W. Burgh, Lectures on the Second Advent of our Lord Jesus Christ, 4th ad., London, 1845; D. Brown, Christ's Second Coming; Will it be Premillennialf ib. 1846; S. Lee, Eschatology; or the Scripture Doctrine of the Coming of our Lord, Boston, 1858; D. N. Lord, The Coming and Reign of Christ, New York, 1858; J. Berg, The Second Advent of Jesus Christ not Premillennial, Philadelphia, 1859; E. Luthardt, Die Lehre von den letzten Dingen, Leipsie, 1861; J. F. Demarest and W. R. Gordon, Chrisloeracy; or, Essays on the Coming and Kingdom of Christ, New York, 1867; J. Grant, The End of All Things; or, the Coming and Kingdom of Christ, 3 series, London, 1866‑67; w. Weiffenbach, Der Wiederkunfispedanke Jesu, Leipsie, 1873; S. M. Merrill, The Second Coming of Christ Considered in its Relation to the Millennium, the Resurrection, and Judgment, Cincinnati, 1879; S. Davidson, Doctrine of the Last Things, London, 1882; G. N. H. Peters, The Theocratic Kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, as covenanted in the O. T. and presented in the N. T., New York, 1885; J. C. Rankin, The Coming of the Lord, ib. 1885; R. N. Burns, When will Christ Come? Toronto, 1886; W. Belly, Lectures on the Second Coming and Kingdom of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, London, 1886; T. Kliefoth, Christliche Eschatolopie, Leipsic, 1886; J. S. Russell, The Parousia: a critical Inquiry into the New Testament Doctrine of our Lord's Second Coming, London, 1887; N. West, Studies in Eschatology: or, thousand Years in both Testaments, New York, 1889; C. A. Briggs, The Messiah of the Gospels, New York, 1894; idem, The Messiah of the Apostles, ib. 1895; H. Dieckmann, Die Parusie Christi, Geestemunde, 1898; R. H. Charles, Doctrine of a Future Life in Israel, in Judaism, and in Christianity, London, 1899; J. Weiss, Die Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Gottes, Gottingen, 1900; E. Cremer, Die Wiederkunft Christi and die Aufpabe der Kirche, Giitersloh, 1902 P. Polz, Jiidische Eschatolopie, Leipsie, 1903; W. Rheinland (F. W. Stuckert), Das Kommen des Hewn, 8th ed., Neumanster, 1904; W. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums im neutestamenelichen Zeitalter, Berlin, 1906; S. Modalski, Jesu Wiederkunft, Breklum, 1907; M. Kahler, Angewandte Dogmen, pp. 487 sqq., Leipsie, 1908; F. Tillmann, Die Wiederkunft Christi nach den paulinisehen Briefen, Freiburg, 1909; A. D. Fairbanks, Christ's Second Coming, Boston, 1910; Sehilrer, Geschichte, ii. 496 sqq., Eng. trand., II., i. 126 sqq. (gives a good list of literature); DB, i. 741‑757. The subject is discussed also in the works on systematic theology (see DOGMA, DOOMATICB).
SECRECY OF THE CONFESSIONAL: When, in the early Middle Ages, the discipline of auricular confession prevailed in the Church, the obligation of absolute secrecy on the part of the confessor followed as a necessary consequence. The secret of the confessional partakes of the nature of the ordinary secret called professional, e.g., that of the lawyer with respect to his client, or of the physician toward his patient, and adds thereto a special religious obligation resulting from the sacramental character of the confession. This obligation, often referred to in the statutes of ecclesiastical law, and expressly formulated in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), chap. xxi., admits of no exception or attenuation even though the life of the confessor were at stake (cf. Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, v. 888). It extends to all matter strictly pertaining to sacramental confession independently of the circumstance whether absolution be granted or not. Though primarily binding the confessor, the same obligation rests also on other persons whether lay or cleric who by accident or otherwise may have obtained knowledge of the confession. To induce this obligation the confession should be sacramental in character, i.e., it should be made in good faith

Secret Discipline
Secularization	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	328
and with the intention of receiving absolution. Thus
if a penitent were to simulate confession by way of
a joke, the confessor would incur only the natural
obligation governing such matters, and likewise if
the narration of one's sins were made merely in
order to obtain counsel or consolation, the secret,
though still of the professional kind, would not,
however, entail the strict obligation of the sacra
mental seal. There are on record a few historic in
stances in which the secrecy of the confessional has
been heroically defended. The most notable per
haps is that of St. John of Nepomuk (q.v)., who is
honored as a martyr of the confessional. In 1377
he was chosen by the pious Johanna, wife of the
Emperor Wenceslaus, to be her spiritual guide. The
emperor, whose life was that of a dissolute tyrant,
being jealous of his consort, endeavored first by
cajolery and later by threats to obtain from the con
fessor a revelation of her confessions. John re
mained firm, and after much inhuman treatment he
was ordered by the enraged Wenceslaus to be cast
into the River Moldau. The order was carried out
after nightfall on the vigil of the Ascension, May
16, 1383. 	JAMES F. DRISCOLL.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. P. Gury, Compendium Theologice Horalis, Paris, 1881; and in general writers on moral theology; F. Mame, Vie de Saint Jean NEpoinucane, Paris, 1741; A. Butler, Lives of the Saints, iv. 332.
SECRET, DISCIPLINE OF THE. See ARCANI DISCIPmNA.

SECRETAft, sec"r6‑tdn', CHARLES: Swiss Protestant; b. at Lausanne Jan. 18, 1815; d. there Jan. 21, 1895. Educated at Lausanne and Munich, he became, in 1838, associate professor of philosophy at the Academy (after 1891 the University) of Lausanne, where he was promoted to a full professorship three years later. In 1845 he was one of the professors suspended by the radicals during the Vaud revolution, and accordingly delivered his lectures privately until, in 1850, he was called to the Academy of Neuchatel. In 1866, however, he was recalled to Lausanne, where he spent the remainder of his life. His view of the universe, as revealed in his writings, was threefold; philosophically he passed from the position of Schelling and Baader to that of Kant; theologically he abandoned all positive speculation for a dogmatic of ethical consciousness based on Kantian philosophy; sociologically his position was original, though destined to exercise little influence.
Seer6tan's Philosophic de la libert6 (2 vols., Paris, 1849) postulates the identity of the principle of being with the Deity, which is free in self‑limitation, and endowed with spirit and will. Man, free to make his own choice, preferred voluntary independence, which he used in favor of evil, this selection being explained by the theory of a preexistent fall. Instead of permitting evil to work itself out, however, the C‑eator planned a return to redemption; the primeval purpose of creation, by begetting a perfect type of humanity (the Son of God), whose sufferings, representing man's pain in consequence of sin, cause a reaction realized in Christian history, the end of which is the everlasting life of emancipated humanity. In the two subsequent editions of this work (1866, 1879) Secr4itan sought to adapt his old text
to his changing views, but the attempt was impossible and his ethical and religious concepts received their new form in his Recherches de la m4thode qui conduit d la v&W sur nos plus grands int6rft (NeuchAtel, 1857), La Raison et le christianisme (Paris, 1563), Diseours laiques (1877), Religion et th<sologie (1883), La Civilisation. et la croyance (Lausanne, 1887), and the posthumous Essais de philosophie et de litt6rature (1896). But despite all his shifting of position, he steadily maintained the two principles of freedom and duty, though he surrendered all derivation of the cosmos from a single principle. To him religion was neither the uncritical acceptance of a sum of data, nor the observance of certain rites, nor poetic feeling, but obedience to the moral law in man's own heart, conceived as the operation of a personal force outside him. His attitude toward dogma, therefore, may be described as increasingly indifferent, especially in relation to man's moral position; and he utterly rejected the doctrines of plenary inspiration, the equal importance of all the books of the Bible, and the vicarious sacrifice in the death of Christ, giving this, like the resurrection and the ascension, a distinctly symbolic meaning. He likewise rejected the tenets of eternal punishment and the moral requirement of belief in miracles, and, in his humility, sometimes doubted personal immortality. Personally he preferred the free churches to those supported by the State, though he held that the Church failed to meet the demands of modern times, and advocated greater familiarity with modern culture on the part of ministers, with an intensification of practical work and less stress on purely theological problems.
Shortly after the publication of his second great work, the Principe de la morale (Lausanne, 1883), Secr6tan turned his attention especially to sociology, his Civilisation et la croyance, already noted, treating its theme from the threefold point of view of philosophy, theology, and sociology, while the economic and political sides receive almost exclusive attention in his Le Droit de la femme (Paris, 1887), 9tudes sociales (1899), Les Droits de l'humaniM (1890), and Mon Utopie (1882). He sought, on the one hand, to secure for the masses that prosperity which the economic development of centuries had taken from them by unequal division of property and class favoritism; and on the other hand, here parting company with socialism, he emphasized the natural and inherent inequality of individuals, and their consequent rights to different degrees of wealth and wages. He strongly advocated cooperative labor, savings‑banks, insurance against old age, accident, and loss of employment, as well as the emancipation of woman, for all which he strove with the technical knowledge of a political economist and the motives of an ethicist and friend of the people. (E. C. PLATZHOFF‑LEJEUNE.)
BIHLIOGR.AFIrY: (3. Frommel, in Esquisses contemporaines, Lausanne, 1891; F. Pillon, La Philosophie de Charles Secriltan, Paris, 1897; J. Duproix, Ch. Secr&an et la philosophic kantienne, ib. 1900.
SECULARISM: An atheistic and materialistic movement established in England about the middle of the nineteenth century, at one time counting hundreds of thousands of adherents. The founder

$27	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Secret Discipline
Secularization
was George Jacob Holyoake [b. in Birmingham Apr. 13, 1817; d. at Brighton Jan. 22, 1906; received his education at the Mechanic's Institution in Birmingham, where he taught until he entered political and literary life; began lecturing in 1841 on Robert Owen's social philosophy, and directed his efforts to the uplift of the laboring classes; in 1842 he was imprisoned for blasphemy], who, in 1846, assisted in starting a periodical called The Reasoner, which soon became the chief organ of English freethought, a movement which was atheistic rather than theistic, but possessed of a marked tendency toward the formation of associations, and characterized by utilitarian aims in the sphere of morals. Although the followers of the school repudiated the designation " atheists " (see ATHEIsnf), and claimed to be simply " non‑theists," they were soon termed " secularists " because of their avowed purpose of working " for the welfare of men in this world," ignoring altogether any hypothesis of a future life. The sole ethical principle of the school was utilitarian, and its dogmatic position was entirely negative, denying the justifiability of assuming the existence of God, the divine governance of the world, the reasonableness of prayer, the possibility of a future life, and the like. At the same time this position was primarily not one of absolute denial, but rather of extreme agnosticism, with the assumption that what can not be positively and indubitably known should be ignored, both in theory and in practical life.
	Under the guidance of Holyoake secularism was
a relatively tame movement, but with the early
eighth decade of the nineteenth century its charac
ter changed under the leadership of the well‑known
Charles Bradlaugh (q.v.), and it became not only
radical in politics, but bitterly hostile to all forms of
religion, even while adopting a sort of religious cere
monial drawn up by Bradlaugh's friend, Austin
Holyoake, and entitled Rituale Hotyoakense, sive
hierurgia secularis. In all this the more vulgar
forms of secularism revealed a certain degree of
affinity with Positivism (q.v.), while the more cul
tured adherents of the movement came to prefer to
term themselves " agnostics " (see AONOsTICIsM).
Since the closing decades of the nineteenth century
secularism as a distinct sect seems more or less to
have disappeared or to have been merged in such
forms of modern anti‑Christian radicalism as so
cieties for ethical culture (see ETHICAL CULTURE,
SOCIETIES FOR). 	(O. ZOC$LER.t.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Buchanan, Faith in God and Modern Atheism, ii. 233‑291, London, 1857 (records the beginnings of the movement); M. Davies, Heterodox London, i. 364 aqq., ii. 116‑209, ib. 1874 (gives the later development); C. Bradlaugh, Autobiography, ib. 1873; J. MacCann, Secularism: unphilosophical, immoral, and antisocial, ib. 1881; Christianity and Secularism. A wri ten Debate between Rev. G. Sexton and C. Watts, ib. 1882; J. Foxley, Secularism, ib. 1882; R. G. Ingersoll, Secular Lectures, Manchester, 1882; W. G. Blaikie, Christianity and Secularism Compared, London, 1883; R. Potter, Examination of Secularism, Melbourne, 1883; S. H. Gem, Christianity and Secularism, London, 1890; W. H. Harris, The Secularist Programme, ib. 1891; M. Keibel, Die Religion and ihr Recht pegeniiber dem modernen Aforalismus, pp. 51 sqq., Halls, 1891; R. A. Armstrong, Agnosticism and Theism in the 19th Century, London, 1905; DNB, supplement, i. 248‑250 (life of Bradlaugh).
SECULARIZATION.
Carolingian and Merovingian Action (§ 1). Tendencies at End of Middle Ages (§ 2). Conditions under the Reformation (§ 3). Effects on the Princes of the Church (§ 4). Consequences of the French Revolution (§ 5). Effect on Papal Authority and Property (§ 6). Legal Aspects of the Process (§ 7). Legal Basis of Alienation of Property (§ 8). Modern Roman Catholic Theory Invalid (§ 9). The States of the Church (§ 10). Anomalous Position of the Papacy (§ 11).
By secularization is meant confiscation of church property by the State and the use of the revenues thus acquired for other than church purposes; or, in the narrower sense of the term, it denotes the transformation of spiritual domains into secular possessions, the first instance of this being the negotiations immediately preceding the Peace of Westphalia (q.v.), particularly in France.
At the very beginning of the Carolingian period there was a comparatively extended secularization in France, and medieval tradition is essentially correct in declaring that Charles Martel
I. Caro‑ deprived the Church of a great part of lingian and its estates for the benefit of his vassals. Merovingian The reason for this course was the finanAction. cial poverty of the State, especially in view of the exhaustion of the crown lands and the increasing danger of Saracen invasion, while Charles had in addition the personal motive of creating a vassal body rivaling that of his Merovingian predecessors. The estates thus confiscated were not restored under the sons of Charles Martel, but a legal form was devised which, while recognizing the spiritual quality of the confiscated estates and while laying a tax on the church institutions affected, protected the present incumbents, even while further use of church property by the State was rendered possible through new investiture in case of a change of incumbent. Under Henry II. the monasteries were the object of attack, while, following the traditions of his house, he regarded the episcopate as his surest defense against the secular‑lords. The emperor availed himself of the pretext of reforming the monasteries to appropriate a large portion of their property, with which he reimbursed both himself and his followers for his golitical generosity toward the episcopate. At the same time, whatever was necessary to the maintenance of the monastery itself was spared.
In the course of the Middle Ages half of the national estates of Germany had come under Mortmain (q.v.), and poverty‑stricken peasants, in their blind fury, longed for the secularizas. Tenden‑ tion of all church property‑a desire cies at End ominously echoed in the hearts of
of Middle many who elsewhere had no sympathy Ages. for the lower classes. Roman Catholic princes, the Archduke Ferdinand., among them, vied with Protestants here, and as early as 1525 a general secularization was proposed, which was to be carried out by the Empire, not by the common people. Spiritual princes and prelates were to have so much as was sufficient to proper dignity, and canons were to retain their canonries, but prelacies and canonries were gradually to die

Secularization	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	ggg
out. A few nunneries were to be retained; and the income of the confiscated estates was to be devoted especially to the salary of parish priests, the maintenance of a bishop (stripped of all temporal power), and the erection of a high school in each district. Though the power of the spiritual princes was too strong to permit such drastic measures, it was the Roman Catholics themselves, with Austria to set the example, who commenced the abolition of monasteries. All this was the tendency of the day, but Luther warned his adherents that the property of the Church must be administered in the interests of the Church, and that the conditions of country pastors must first of all be improved, after which the residue might be devoted to benevolent institutions and to general interests. It was in this spirit that the Saxon visitation was conducted and that Melanchthon advised the council of Strasburg in 1538. At the same time, many secular authorities grasped the opportunity to turn to private advantage the course advocated by Luther and Melanchthon, and failed to make proper provision for preachers and schools, the care of the poor, and the advancement of education, so that the Schmalkald Convention of 1540, at the instance of Melanchthon, formally demanded reformation of church property rather than secularization, even while advocating the secularization of spiritual domains. In many lands, as in Hesse, large institutions, such as the strongly Protestant University of Marburg, were endowed from suppressed monasteries, while in 1525 Prussia was changed from a spiritual state to a secular archduchy.
The estates of the Church in the various territories at the rise of Protestantism fell into three categories, each of which underwent a separate development: the property and income of individual
churches and benefices, the property 3. Condi‑ of religious corporations (property of tions under chapters, monasteries, etc.), and the
the Refor‑ property and income of ecclesiastical
mation. dignitaries (local bishops). The prop‑
erty and income of individual parishes remained practically unchanged, although there were minor losses, as in the case of Stole Fees (q.v.) and certain cases of enforced contribution, while instances of deliberate violation of the spirit of the new regulations were not unknown. In W iirttemberg Duke Christopher sought to offset the attempts of Ulrich to secure complete secularization by a specially administered " general church fund " which should permanently apply ecclesiastical property to the benefit of Protestantism. This fund was to provide for the endowment of new pastorates, the repair of pastors' residences, the support of aged pastors, and the like; but the destruction of the multifarious local legal persons which the ecclesiastical properties formed under Roman, canon, and common Protestant church law were a peril to Christopher's scheme, which finally suffered incameration in 1806. In many districts the estates of ecclesiastical corporations were undiminished, although their objects were changed, only hospitals, poorhouses, etc., retaining their original purposes. Much of the confiscated property was devoted to educational ends; in other cases the corporations
survived, though they became benevolent institutions; while yet others, when their incumbents died or resigned, were given back to their patrons or founders. In Wtirttemberg the monasteries were retained as schools; and this transformation of monasteries, rather than entire secularization, was the course pursued by Duke Ernest the Confessor of Liineburg and Duchess Elizabeth of CalenburgG6ttingen, as well as by Duke Julius of Brunswick. The University of Helmstadt was endowed from suppressed monasteries, and educational and eleemosynary institutions were founded in similar fashion in Hanover, Hesse, Mecklenburg, and elsewhere.
The property and income of ecclesiastical dignitaries underwent a profound change with the rise of the new doctrine. Protestantism left no room for the union of temporal and spiritual
4. Effects lordship in the bishops which had on the hitherto prevailed, and some bishops,
Princes of like those of Samland and Pomerania, the Church. voluntarily resigned their secular powers when they embraced the tenets of Luther. More than this, the entire episcopate vanished with the extension of the consistorial system, and as bishops died, they were not replaced. Members of the secular nobility were elected or appointed to administer the vacant sees, and the episcopal estates gradually became incorporated with the secular domains. In many religious foundations immediately dependent on the Empire the Reformation was similarly carried out, and in this way Protestantism gained control of the dioceses of Magdeburg, Bremen, Verden, Lubeck, Osnabriick, Ratzeburg, Halberstadt, and Minden, while for a time the Roman Catholics were threatened with the loss of Munster, Paderborn, Hildesheim, and Cologne, although the Counter‑Reformation ultimately enabled them to retain possession of these sees. The Protestantized dioceses, on the other hand, went their course to secularization, such being the fate of Bremen, Verden, and Magdeburg, which became secular duchies, of Halberstadt, Minden, Can‑tin, Schwerin, and Ratzeburg, which were changed into principalities, and of many lesser foundations. By the provisions of Jan. 1, 1624, the only unsecularized imperial diocese in Protestant hands was Labeck, and the sole unsecularized monasteries were those of Gandersheim, Hervorden, and Quedlinburg; while the Protestants were now declared entitled to peaceful possession of all sequestrated and transformed ecclesiastical estates and foundations.
The suppression of the Jesuits in the eighteenth century gave secular lords wide pretexts for confiscation of church property, such sequestration following the banishment of the order from Portugal (1759), France (1764), Spain (1767), Naples, Malta, and Parma (1768). On the suppression of the order by Clement XIV. on July 21, 1773, the pope appointed a special congregation to decide concerning their property, and this congregation accordingly addressed a circular letter to the episcopate directing the bishops to take possession of Jesuit property and apply it to the purposes designated by the pope. Since, however, German law refused to recognize the papal supremacy which was thus implied,

$29	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	BeoWarlmtion
volve the destruction of the organization of the Roman Catholic Church in Germany. The severest blows were struck at the authority of 6. Effect on the pope, who was not even consulted
Papal Au‑ in the matter, and with the suppresthority and sion of the monasteries he lost a host
	Property.	of devoted adherents. The mingling
		of Protestant and Roman Catholic
populations opened a way to Protestantization
which was checked only by the infiltration of ultra
montanism into the Roman Catholic laity and later
into the clergy, and by the weakening of the State
Church and the concessions of the government;
while the erection of a German primacy fostered the
schismatic tendency which characterized the Ger
man episcopate in the time of Joseph II. Against
all this the Curia could only protest, and with so
little effect at the time that the spiritual estates
hitherto spared were quickly secularized. Far more
perilous was the fact that the promised reorganiza
tion of the dioceses and chapters was not realized,
despite the exertions of the primate, Prince Dal
berg. Pending this delay vacant sees remained un
filled, and the old bishops died one by one, until in
1814 there were but five bishops in Germany. The
dioceses were administered by vicars general, and,
as the number of suffragans was likewise dimin
ished, the sacraments of confirmation and ordina
tion could no longer be performed. Cathedral chap
ters were also unfilled, and countless parishes were
empty or impoverished, while temporal dignitaries,
on the basis of the estates they had received through
sequestration, alleged the right of succession to the
prerogatives of presentation and collation which
had been granted to bishops and monasteries.
In this general trouble Protestantism also shared. In Wurttemberg the property of the Church was declared to belong to the State; and in Prussia war expenses led to the confiscation of the property of those monasteries and spiritual foundations which still survived, only the chapter of Brandenburg escaping suppression, while in Westphalia the secularization even of Protestant foundations was accomplished within a few years.
In considering the legal aspects of secularization in Germany a distinction must be drawn between the various reasons underlying it. The abolition of the temporal lordship of imperial dio7. Legal As‑ ceses and prelacies involved no inva‑
pects of the sion of church property, for this secular Process. power was due to purely political, not religious, causes, and originated under the conditions in which the Church, as the great civilizing factor of the West in the Middle Ages, had been forced to discharge many purely secular functions if all the higher culture of the Greco‑Roman world was not to disappear amid the wild struggles of the ruder northern nations. Thus the Church opposed to the factions of the secular State the marvelous ideal of the spiritual universal State. But the days had passed when kings must reign through their bishops because they could not reign through temporal princes, counts, and lords, and by the end of the thirteenth century the political states had passed their period of disability, having become able to dispense with ecclesiastical guard‑
and since the bishops could not, by the provisions of the papal brief, take any independent action, the secular authorities everywhere seized the Jesuit estates, even though the imperial councilor deemed this property to be essentially that of the Church.
The French Revolution was especially fateful for church property, for the financial needs of France were deemed too great to be satisfied by merely taxing such property. The excuse
5. Conse‑ alleged by the revolutionists formed
quences of but the counterpart to the theory
the French which gained supremacy in the Gal‑
Revolution. lican Church, as well as among seventeenth‑century Roman Catholic canonists in general, that the church property of the clergy consisted in their associations. This encountered Protestant opposition by its basal hierarchic identification of clergy and Church, and from the alleged usurpation of church property by the clergy the Encyclopedists (q.v.) argued that, since the clergy as a corporation was dependent on the State, the State could confiscate the estates of the clergy. The National Assembly declared, on Nov. 2, 1789, that all ecclesiastical property was at the disposal of the nation, at the same time guaranteeing the salaries of the clergy. The suppression of all monasteries soon followed, and in quick succession came the fall of the church organization and of the Church itself. Even on its restoration by the concordat of July 15, 1801, it was forced to submit to the sale of its property, although the government pledged itself to pay the clergy a suitable salary; and even when a portion of the Church's belongings were again returned to its own control, these were held to be not its property, but to appertain to the State and the communes. No less ominous for the possessions of the Roman Catholic Church were the consequences of the French Revolution in Germany. Here an important factor was the theory of " the law of nature," which had been evolved in the eighteenth century, largely on the basis of the legal tenet of eminent domain‑a theory which by some writers was carried so far as to make the Church a mere society subserving the interests of the .State. In the second half of the eighteenth century the idea of secularization was widespread, and was exemplified not only by Joseph II. of Austria and the elector of Mainz, but even by the course proposed by a Roman Catholic canon, Friedrich Karl von Moser, in 1787. By the secret provisions of the peace of Campo Formio (Oct. 17, 1797) the emperor agreed to cede to France the greater part of the region to the left of the Rhine, including Mainz. This implied not only the secu,larization of this region, but also, since Austria claimed compensation on the right bank of the Rhine, the devotion, and consequent secularization, of church estates in the empire. Only the quondam prince elector of Mainz (now electoral archchahcellor) and the heads of the Maltese and Teutonic Knights remained spiritual estates; all other imperial spiritual principalities and dignities were declared secularized and apportioned among secular estates, chiefly Protestant.
The effect of these secularizations and the regulations accompanying them was so great as to in‑

9eon)ariastion	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	380
ianship. As early as the fifteenth century the modern concept of the State had arisen, and with the abolition of the old confusion of public and private spheres of right the union of temporal sovereignty with spiritual dignity came to be regarded as anomalous, though for a considerable time it dragged out an ostensible existence in the constitution of Germany. The Curia demanded a restitution of the old status, including the restoration of the Holy Roman Empire, the reerection of the spiritual principalities, and the return of the property wrested from the Church, but all in vain. The sole consolation of the pope was his continued control of the States of the Church in Italy. Neither can the confiscation of royal fiefs and of Regalia (q.v.) be regarded as invasions of the rights of the Church, since they had been used distinctly for political ends. It is, however, a question what constituted a royal fief, some defining it as the temporal rights connected with an imperial bishopric or abbey, while others restrict it to specific estates and privileges. In the Frankish kingdom the royal monasteries were deemed the property of the king or of the treasury, while the king controlled, though in more restricted degree, the property of the dioceses. In Germany churches and their endowment were the possession of the laity who had established them, though after the twelfth century the Church succeeded in reducing this control to the mere right of Patronage (q.v.). From the end of the ninth century the great majority of German bishoprics, including all their estates and prerogatives, were the property of the Empire, so that the property belonging to a church really meant only the permanent usufruct of such estates and prerogatives. The object of Investiture (q.v.) was the bishopric and the episcopal office, or both temporal and spiritual functions, and it is clear that previous to the investiture controversy the king controlled the bishoprics, i.e., the temporal side. After 1111, however, the king not only restricted himself to the temporal aspect of the matter, but expressly granted that a part of the temporalaa, such as church edifices and oblations, belonged unconditionally to the Church.
The diversion of the property of the estates of the Roman Catholic Church to Protestant uses in territories where the new doctrines were introduced
was deduced from the reformatory 8. Legal rights of secular rulers as construed in
Basis of the form which it assumed in the six‑
Alienation teenth century as distinct from the of Property. extinct positive law of the Middle Ages.
Historic relations to the western Church and the necessity of control in the midst of confusion had placed the empire in jurisdiction, and this was transferred to the territorial rulers. Since Protestantism gained its legal basis through the help of temporal lords, its endowment was accomplished in legal form; and the church organizations arising from the Reformation were not due to the exit of Protestants from the Roman Catholic Church, but to the cleavage of the Western Church into Roman Catholic and Protestant. On the basis of their legal position as assured in the religious treaties of peace, the Protestants could claim that since their orran‑
ization was no less a legitimate continuation of the pre‑Reformation Church than Roman Catholicism, so the property which they received from this preReformation body had not been decatholicized by the Reformation, and had consequently not been alienated from the Church to which it had been dedicated. On the other hand there was at least a formal injustice in the diversion of true church property for secular uses. It is true that many of the older secularizations represent a reaction against the excessive accumulations of property under mortmain, which disturbed the economic balance of society. But this plea can not be alleged in extenuation of the confiscation of church property in the early nineteenth century, nor is the excuse valid that many of the richer ecclesiastical corporations and institutions of recent centuries served the interests of the privileged classes rather than the ends of the Church. It must further be recognized that the false theories of the " law of nature," alleged in extenuation of the illegal confiscation of a great part of Roman Catholic and of no small portion of Protestant church property at the commencement of the nineteenth century, can not validate injustice. This holds true both of the theory of eminent domain and of the doctrine that the property of the Church is really the property of the State, and may be devoted to religious ends only so long as the State pleases. The modern theory of the State rejects the tenet of eminent domain [not, however, in the United States], and while recognizing the supremacy of the State over private property, forbids such property to be devoted to mere political or economic needs of the State [in the United States the rights of eminent domain operate only upon just compensation to the owners of property]. Equally erroneous is any foundation of the State right of secularization on the alleged supremacy of society, for the right of the State to sequester the property of corporations is bound by precisely the same restrictions as its right to confiscate the property of individuals. False also is the theory that the power of the State absorbs all social and spiritual life, for religion, in particular, is no function of the State. The Church is a special organization for the promotion of the moral life and has its own justification; its property serves its special end, and is as exempt from the capricious control of the State as is any other private property. It is with justice, therefore, that modern legislation declares the property of the Church inviolable and expressly guarantees its security, although, as in the case of private property, it reserves the right of escheatage; nor does the mere fact that the property of a particular foundation is designed for spiritual ends of itself make the diocese, and eventually the Roman Catholic Church, the legal heir in case the foundation in question lapses. At the same time, a number of modern codes expressly enact that the property of individual foundations which can no longer be applied to their original ends may be used only for religious purposes.
The modern Roman Catholic theory that, although the religious corporations were suppressed, their property was reserved for religious and educational purposes, so that the Roman Catholic

831	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8eoularization
Church has a permanent claim on the property in question, is legally untenable, and has been granted
	'	only by the Austrian concordat. Secu
g. Modern larized property and the property of
Roman the Church are irreconcilable concepts,
Catholic and only through rededication could Theory property once sequestrated again come
Invalid. to belong to the Church. At the same
time, the State is ethically bound, since it holds so large a portion of the possessions of the Church through its secularizations, to provide adequately for the needs of the'two communions which all German states regard as corporations in public law. This has been carried out perhaps more favorably to the Roman Catholic than to the Protestant communion. And it should be noted that purchasers of secularized property, having a legal title from the State treasury, are the valid owners of such property, though Roman Catholic purchasers are in duty bound, according to canon law, to gain the approval of the pope to their purchase.
The secularization of the States of the Church deserves special consideration. This " patrimony of Peter " (see PAPAL STATES) was regarded as the property of the Church, and every pontiff was required to pledge himself that none of it should be
alienated‑a fact which did not preio. The vent Pius VI. from accepting the peace
States of of Tolentino (1797), by which Avignon
the Church. and Venaissin, together with Ancona
and the legations of Bologna, Ferrara, and Romagna, were lost to the Church. Between the States of the Church and the concept of the modern secular State there was the widest discrepancy. The modern State is construed as an independent organization resting on its own ethical foundation, as the legitimate organization for the complete life of its people, in whose behalf all its energies are devoted. That the State should be in control of a subject beyond its own borders, which was the relation of the Roman Catholic Church to the States of the Church, is irreconcilable with the modern theory of the State; and though the States of the Church were incapable of the profound transformations undergone by secular powers, this very fact would ultimately have proved fatal. The States of the Church lacked, moreover, an organic national basis, and the whole trend of modern history was opposed to them. In 1798 the boundaries of the States of the Church were abolished, though restored, essentially undiminished, at the Congress of Vienna; but the temporal power of the pope over his states was possible only through repeated, and finally permanent, armed intervention of foreign powers, until, amid profound changes in Europe, the Italian revolutions of 1859‑60 robbed the States of the Church of a great part of their possessions, while the overthrow of the French Empire in 1870 encouraged the Italians, after taking Rome on Sept. 20, 1870, to incorporate the remainder of the papal dominions in the kingdom of Italy. True to the principle that the continuance of the temporal power of the pope was essential, especially at that period, to the independence of the Roman Catholic Church and of her earthly head, Pius IX. placed all who had taken part in the act which he termed
" robbery of God " under major excommunication. Meanwhile the kingdom of Italy, on May 13, 1871, promulgated its law concerning the Curia and the Roman Catholic Church. By this the pope was guaranteed the personal prerogatives of a sovereign, the Holy See was endowed with a yearly pension of 3,225,000 francs (corresponding to the former papal budget for apostolic palaces, the holy college, the congregations, the secretaryship of state, and diplomatic representation abroad), freedom was granted the pope in the discharge of his office in the governance of the Church, while on Italian soil he was granted free communication with his bishops and foreign governments, and the full immunity of diplomats was accorded his nuncios and legates to foreign courts as well as to the diplomats accredited to the Holy See.
Despite the loss of his temporal sovereignty, the pope still possesses a quasi‑sovereignty in his relations, as a spiritual power, to sovereign states, as well as a still more real power which gives him, besides the honors rendered to his perii. Anomal‑ son, the right of embassy and of conous Position chiding quasi‑international treaties.
of the On the other hand, the essential differPapacy. ences of his quasi‑sovereignty from the full sovereignty of temporal powers forbids any actual equality between the two. He can not, for example, wage war, since he has no state to form the object of attack. All this involves difficult and thus far unsolved problems of international law, which are only complicated by the Italian law of guaranty. Not only would Italy have to answer, by the law of nations, for any armed attack upon the pope, but, again by the law of nar tions, the Italian government must be responsible for any misuse of its guaranty to the pope of the privilege of legal immunity, even in the case of breaches of the peace which otherwise violate international law. On the other hand, considerations of practical policy justify recognition of a privileged and immune legal position of the pope in the international fellowship of Christian nations so long as the Roman Catholic Church maintains its quasistate organization. This assures to the papacy the possibilities of such far‑reaching political development that, recognizing that a double sovereignty of spiritual and temporal power over the same peopies is irreconcilable, the pope, since his loss of temporal sovereignty, has renewed with increased energy those ancient claims to spiritual universal monarchy which represent him as the one true sovereign over the national states, these being regarded by curialists as mere provinces of his world dominion, over which he is to exercise rule. The Roman Church is, in a word, both an institution of political power and a Christian body for the worship of God, and for this reason the relation of temporal states toward it can be governed only by individual rules, not by any general theory of the relation of the State to the Christian Church as a whole.
On the secularization of churches, and especially of monasteries, in Italy see ITALY, I., § § 1‑2, and on the secularization in France, wrought by the law of separation of Dec. 9, 1905, see FRANCE, I.
(E. SEHLrNG.)

Sedarim	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	332
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Kleinaehmidt, Die Sdkularisation vom 1803, Berlin, 1878; F. A. Gasquet, Henry VIII. and the English Monasteries, rev. ed., London, 1899; M. Anglade, De la skularisation yes biers de clerya sur la revolution, Paris, 1901; M. Emberger, Die SBkularisation in iViirttembet'D, 1802‑10, Stuttgart, 1902; H. Reimers, Die Sakularisation der Kl6ster in Ostlriesland, Aurieh, 1908; K. Sehornbaum, Die Sakularisation yes Klosters Heidenheim, Neuendettelsau, 1906; F. Kdrholz, Die Sakularisation and Organisation in den preussischen EntschadipunpsZtindern . . . 180.9‑0t1, MGnster, 1907; M. Pfeiffer, Bettrage zur Geachichte der Secularisation in Bamberg, Bamberg, 1907; A. M. Seheglmann, Geschichte der Sakularisalion im rechtarheinischen Bayern, 3 vols., Regensburg, 1903‑08; KL, x. 1526‑34.

SEDARIM, SEDAROTH. See PARASHAH.

SEDES VACANS: The ecclesiastical term for a " vacant see." For the principles and practise governing in case of vacancy of the papal see, see POPE, PAPACY, PAPAL SYSTEM. The cases here considered are those of actual and constructive vacancy in ordinary bishoprics.
An episcopal vacancy occurs through death, abdication, translation, deposition, and the like; and lasts till the occupancy has been regularly renewed. In such a case, the episcopal jurisdiction devolves upon the Chapter (q.v.), which [in the Roman Catholic Church], within eight days as reckoned from the moment of certified knowledge that the vacancy has begun, must appoint one or more stewards, and a capitulary vicar (see VICAR); the latter may be the former episcopal vicar general. In case the chapter is dilatory, or if no chapter attaches to the vacant church, the right of nomination devolves, in connection with a suffragan church, on the metropolitan; in the case of a metropolitan church, on the eldest suffragan bishop; in the case of an exempt church, on the bishop nearest. Where the vacant church has no chapter, if at the time the metropolitan church itself is without an archbishop, the nomination devolves on the metropolitan chapter. According to the Council of Trent the capitulary vicar is expected to be at least a doctor or licentiate in canon law. Where a suitable person is present in the chapter, selection must be made accordingly. The capitulary vicar exercises his vested rights independently, like the bishop, until the renewed occupancy of the episcopal see and may not by the chapter be deprived of his administration. In general, pending the election, episcopal rights which emanate from the " episcopal standing " or from papal delegation continue dormant, except as the Curia makes provision to the contrary or as the situation demands the summoning of a bishop from ~,i without. The principle prevails that during the interim no alteration may be undertaken of a nature prejudicial to the future bishop. In particular, the episcopal revenues for the interim period are not to be employed, except that the capitulary vicar's salary may be defrayed therefrom. The vacancy ceases with the new bishop's official occupancy.
A distinction is drawn between actual and constructive episcopal vacancy, as when the bishop is hindered from undertaking his incumbent administration. In case this obstruction is only partial, a coadjutor acts; but if it be absolute, a procedure then ensues parallel to the case of actual episcopal
vacancy. But the situation is different where communication with the bishop is still possible; in that case his jurisdiction is not suspended so obviously, and his appointed vicar general may officiate. After the vicar general's death, the appointment of a new vicar general appertains to the pope, the chapter not being authorized to install a vicar.
E. SEHLING.
In the Anglican communion the arrangements for the administration of a vacant see and for filling the vacancy vary in different parts. In England the administration of the diocese falls during a vacancy largely to the Chapter (q.v.; which is supposed always to be the bishop's council), with certain prerogatives reserved to the metropolitan of the province. A bishop is of course called in to perform any distinctly episcopal function, but he has no jurisdiction or power beyond that which is distinctly committed to him for the occasion. The crown nominates a successor to the vacant see, but he must be elected by the chapter.
	Where, as outside of England, the Church is not
in any direct relations with the State, the successor
is elected by representatives of the diocese, both
clerical and lay, assembled in synod or council or
convention. Such election needs confirmation by
the bishops of the national church or of the prov
ince, and in America by representatives of other
dioceses. During a vacancy the administration of
the diocese in America belongs to the standing com
mittee of the diocese, which corresponds in its func
tions to the chapter as the bishop's council, and in
other national churches either to a similar repre
sentative body or to a vicar general as may be pre
scribed by local diocesan or provincial canons, sub
ject to limitations like to those mentioned in the
case of England. 	A. C. A. HALL.

SEDGWICg, sej'wic, DANIEL: English hymnologist; b. at London Nov. 26, 1815; d. there Mar. 10, 1879. He was originally a shoemaker, became a dealer in second‑hand books in 1837, and fell in with collectors, mainly of theological literature. In 1839 he united with the Baptists. Being fond of hymns, he bought the old books containing them, and about 1840 began the systematic collection and study of texts and editions, and, at the same time, taught himself writing. He gradually acquired a unique library, and a knowledge of the subject long unrivalled. The popularity of Roundell Palmer's Book of Praise (London, 186:3) and the care Sedgwick had bestowed in making it a model of accuracy in texts, dates, and ascriptions of authorship, established his reputation; and thenceforth the compilers of nearly every prominent English hymnal availed themselves of his help. He published Catalogue of Scarce Religious Poetry, containing a Choice Collection of Original Psalms, Hymns, and Poems (London, 1859) ; a series entitled English Hymn Writers; Reprinted Verbatim from the Originals, with Biographical Sketches, including such names in single volumes as John Ryland, William Williams, and A. Al. Toplady; and Comprehensive Index of Nantes of Original A nthors of Hymns (1860). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Julian, Hymnology, pp. 1036‑37; DNB, IL
182.

333	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	13edarim
6edulius
SEDLNITZKI, sell‑nit'ski, LEOPOLD GRAF VON: German prince bishop of Breslau and convert to Lutheranism; b. at the castle of Geppersdorf in Austrian Silesia, July 29, 1787; d. at Berlin Mar. 25, 1871. He was educated at the University of Breslau (1804‑09), and in 1810 was ordained to the priesthood. His intention to devote himself to theological teaching was frustrated by illness, and in 1811 he accepted from the prince bishop of Breslau the posts of assessor and secretary in the vicariate which administered the spiritual affairs of the diocese. Even at this time he was by no means in full accord with the course pursued by the Roman Catholic Church. At the same time, he firmly maintained the external unity and the apostolic character of that church, regarding the Reformation as a break in the unity of the Church and as a disturbing factor in its divinely appointed development. Before long Sedlnitzki accepted an appointment in the royal service at Breslau, where he plunged into a multitude of new tasks concerning the Church and higher education. Discovering that the Protestant gymnasia were superior to the Roman Catholic, he considered it his duty to raise the standard of the schools of his church. He thus found himself obliged to consider more closely the relation of the Roman Catholic and the Protestant churches, and accordingly began a thorough study of Protestant symbolics. Nevertheless he still remained true to his church, though disapproving indulgences, the growth of adoration of saints and of pilgrimages. The conclusions thus reached could not be concealed, but despite his views, which now involved doubts of the unity and catholicity of the Roman Catholic Church, Sedlnitzki was unanimously elected bishop in 1835. He accepted with reluctance, and soon had to encounter serious opposition. Matters reached a climax in his refusal to obey the papal brief of Mar. 25, 1830, to the effect that mixed marriages could be blessed by the church only after the contracting parties had promised to bring up their children in the Roman Catholic faith. Sedlnitzki, preferring to obey the laws of the State rather than those of his church, offered to resign his see on June 10, 1839. King Frederick William IV. vainly sought to restrain him from this extreme step, and, on the acceptance by Rome of Sedlnitzki's resignation, appointed him in 1840 privy councilor at Berlin. For a short time the ex‑bishop continued to celebrate mass on high festivals but soon became more and more imbued with Protestant ideas, and, on Apr. 12, 1868, he marked his complete break with his church by receiving Protestant communion.
Henceforth Sedlnitzki sought with all earnestness to advance the cause of Protestantism. As early as 1864 he had founded a Lutheran institution, the Paulinum, for the education of boys, especially of those intended for the Lutheran ministry and for higher education. He later founded at Berlin the Johanneum, where young Lutheran theological students might receive appropriate training. In his will he devoted a considerable portion for the foundation of a similar Johanneum at Breslau, and a like foundation was provided for Silesia in the Sedlnitzkische Vikariatsfond. In addition to all
this a fund was created by him to provide theolog‑
ical works for the education of needy clergy.
(DAVID ERDMANNt.)
BIBLioGRAPH7: Consult his Selbstbiographie. Nach seinem Leben and seine Papieren herausgegeben mit Aktenstiicken, Berlin, 1872.

SEDULIUS, se‑du'li‑us, COrLIUS: Christian poet of the early fifth century. Almost nothing is known of his life, even the name Coelius [or Circilius] is not assured, and it is only probable that he lived in Greece. His fame comes through his poems, especially his Carmen paschale, in 1,753 hexameters and five books, with a prologue of eight distichs, dedicated to a presbyter Macedonius. The poem deals with the miracles of Christ, the first book being an introduction discussing the miracles of the Old Testament, and the other four being based on the Gospels, particularly Matthew. The material is freely handled, and in form the poern belongs to the best of early Christian Latin literature. Sedulius later rendered his work into prose, to which he gave the title Opus paschale. In this the bombastic style contrasts strongly with the concise and compact diction of the poem. Sedulius left also two hymns. The first is an elegy in fifty‑five distichs, which connects the events of the Old Testament with those of the New in the form of antetype to type. The structure is artificial, a hexameter on the Old Testament being succeeded by a pentameter dealing with the New Testament. The second hymn, a call to praise of Christ, is alphabetical in twenty‑three strophes, the first lines of the strophes beginning with the letters of the alphabet in turn. Two parts of the composition have been used as church hymns, strophes A‑G (as a Christmas hymn), and H,. I, L, N (at the feast of Epiphany).
The cento De verbi incarnatione was formerly wrongly attributed to Sedulius. (G. KROGER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The poems were edited by F. Arevalo, Rome, 1794 (with preface of value) and reproduced in MPL, xix.; J. Looehorn, Munich, 1879; and J. Huemer, in CSEL, vol. x., 1885. Two brief Eng. transls. are in D. J. Donahoe, Early Christian Hymns, pp. 67‑68, New York, 1908. Consult: J. Huemer, De Sedulii . . vita et scriptis commentatio, Vienna, 1878; C. L. Leimbach, Ueber den christlichen Dichter Sedulius, Goslar, 1879; G. Boissier, in Journal des savants, Sept., 1881; J. Kayser, Beitrage zur Geschichte and Erklarung der 61teslen Kirchenhymnen, pp. 337‑385, 1351; S. W. Duffield, Latin Hymn Writers and their Hymns, pp. 83‑87, New York, 1889; A. Ebert, Geschichte der Litleratur des Millelalters im Abendlande, i. 373‑383, Leipsie, 1889; 111. Dlanitius, Geschichte der chrastlich‑lateinischen Poesie, pp. 303‑312, Stuttgart, 1891; A. Baumgartner, Die lateinische and griechische Litteratur der christlichen Valker, pp. 195‑196, Freiburg 1905; Bardeahewer, Patrologie, p. 395, Eng. transl., St. Louis, 1908; DCB, iv. 598‑$00 (noteworthy); Julian, Hymnology, p. 1037.

SEDULIUS SCOTUS (SEDULIUS JUNIOR)
Irish monk, probably to be identified with Siadhal Mac Feradach, who died abbot of Kildare 828. Of his life nothing is known, although some have identified him (probably incorrectly) with the " Sedulius, bishop of Britain of the race of the Scots," who was one of the signers of the decrees of a synod held at Rome in 721 (cf. Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, ii., part 1, p. 7). This prelate was almost certainly a Scotch diocesan, though his see (if he possessed one) is unknown. The writings of Sedu‑

8 e'ntrs	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	334
lius, which are little more than compilations from the Fathers, especially Origen, are as follows: Colleetanea in omnes beati Pauli epistolas; Explanatiuncula de breviariorum et capitulorum canonumque diferentia; Explanationes in prcefationea sancti Hieronymi ad‑ evangelic; and De rectoribus Christianis et conventientibus regulis quibus est respublica rite gubernanda (all ed., most conveniently, in MPL, ciii. 1‑351). Johannes Trithemius, who confuses Sedulius Scotus with his more distinguished namesake, as well as with Bishop Sedulius, ascribes to him (De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis, cap. exlii.), in addition to the works already mentioned, De miracelis Christi; Ad Theodosium imperatorem; In majus volumen Prisciani; In secundam editionem Donati; Exhortatorium ad ftdeles; and Epistolce ad diversos. BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Healy, Inaula sanctorum d dwtorum, pp. 30‑39, 574‑578, Dublin, 1890; Lanigan, Ecd. Hid., i. 17, iii. 255; DCB, iv. 600; DNB, li. 188‑189; Ceillier, Au• teurs saeris, xu. 357‑381.
SEEBERG, s6'berg, OSKAR THEODOR ALFRED: Russo‑German Protestant; b. at Pedua, Esthonia, Russia, Sept. 24, 1863. He was educated at the universities of Dorpat (1884‑89), Erlangen, and Leipsic (1891). In 1890 he was teacher of religion at the municipal school for girls in Dorpat, and in 1891, after his return from Germany, he resumed this position, being also chosen assistant pastor of St. Peter's, Dorpat. In the same year he became privat‑docent at the University of Dorpat, where he was promoted to the rank of docent within a few months; in 1895 he was appointed associate professor of New‑Testament exegesis, and 1897 full professor of the same subject; in 1908 he went to Rostock in the same capacity. In theology he belongs to the liberal school, and has written Die Anbetung des Herrn bei Paulus (Riga, 1891); Der Tod Christi in seiner Bedeutung fur die Erlosung (Leipsie, 1895); Der Katechismus der Urchristenheit (1903); Das Evangelium Christi (1905); Die Taufe im Neuen Testament (Gross‑Lichterfelde, 1905); Die beiden Wege and das Apostddekret (Leipsie, 1906); Die Leiden der Christen (Barmen, 1906); Die Didache des Judentums and der Urchristenheit (Leipsic, 1908); and Christi Person and Werk nach der Lehre seiner Junger (1910).
SEEBERG, REINHOLD: German Lutheran; b. at PSrrafer, Livonia, Apr. 5, 1859. He was educated at the universities of Dorpat (1878‑82) and Erlangen (1882‑84; mag. theol., Dorpat, 1884). In 1884 he became privat‑docent for systematic theology at the former university, where he was appointed associate professor and second university preacher in the following year. In 1889 he was called to Erlangen as professor of church history and New‑Testament exegesis, his chair being changed in 1894 to that of systematic theology. Since 1898 he has been professor of systematic theology at the University of Berlin. He has written Der Begrif der chrVtlichen Kirche, i (Erlangen, 1885); Der Apologet Aristides (1894); Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte (2 vols., Leipsic, 1895‑98, new ed., 1907‑08); Gewissen and Gewissensbildung (Erlangen, 1896) ; Die Kirche and die soziale Frage (Leipsie, 1897) ; Die Stellung Melanchthons in der Geschichte der Kirche and der Wissenschaft (Erlan‑
gen, 1897); Die Theologie des Duns Scotus (Leipsie, 1900); GrundrimderDogmengeschichte(1901; 3ded., 1910); An der Schwelle des zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts (1901) ; Luthers Stellung zu den sittlichen and sozialen N6ten seiner Zeit (1901); Die Grundwahrheiten der chrisllichzn Religion. (1902; Eng. transl., Fundamental Truths of the Christian Religion, New York, 1908); Luther and Luthertum in der neuesten katholischen Beleuchtung (1904); Das Abendmahl im Neuen Testament (Gross‑Lichterfelde, 1905); Aus Religion and Geschichte (2 vols., Leipsic, 1906‑08) ; Die kirchliche soeiale Idee (1907); Ofenbarung and Inspiration (1908; Eng. tranal., Revelation and Inspiration, New York, 1910); Von Christus and von dem Christentum (Berlin, 1908); Sinaliehkeit and Sittliehkeit (1909); Adolf Stoecker (1909); and Alto and Neue Moral (1910).
SEEBOHM, FREDERIC: Barrister and author; b. at Bradford, Yorkshire, 1833. He was called to the bar (Middle Temple) in 1856. His published works include: The Facts of the Four Gospels (London, 1861); The Crisis of Emancipation in America; being the Review of the History of Emancipation from the Beginning of the American War to the Assassination of President Lincoln (1865); The Oxford Reformers of 1/H98: being a History of the Fellow‑Work of John Colet, Erasmus and Thomas More (1867); The Era of the Protestant Revolution (1874); The English Village Community Examined in its Relations to the Manorial and Tribal Systems (1883); The Tribal System in Wales: being Part of an Inquiry into the Structure and Methods of tribal Society (1895); Travelling Impressions in, and Notes on, Peru (1901); and Tribal Custom in Anglo‑Saxon Law (1902).
SEEHOFER, sA'ho‑fer, ARSACIUS: Bavarian Reformer; b. at Munich early in the sixteenth century; d. at Winnenden (20 m. n.e. of Stuttgart) 1542. He was educated at the universities of Ingolstadt and Wittenberg, at the latter place coming under the influence of Melanchthon. In the summer of 1523 he was charged with delivering exegetical lectures of Melanchthonian content, and, compromising documents being found in his residence, he was formally tried for heresy, seventeen articles drawn from his manuscript being deemed unsound. After a period of imprisonment, Seehofer recanted on Sept. 7, 1523, and was directed to retire to the monastery of Ettal. The affair caused great excitement, especially through publications by Argula von Stauff (q.v.), Luther, and a South German author, Martinus Reckenhofer of Clausen; whereupon the university resolved to demonstrate in a public disputation the justice of its course. Since, however, safe conduct was not granted to the opponents of the university, the disputation, which began on Apr. 11, 1524, and lasted several days, was without result. In some unknown way Seehofer escaped from his confinement, but nothing is known of his movements until 1528, when he was in Wittenberg, where Melanchthon recommended him as a teacher at Eisfeld. In 1530 he was in Prussia, and in 1532 in Augsburg, where internal ecclesiastical strife prevented him from accepting the deaconate offered him. In 1535 he

886	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	gbm
again visited Augsburg, where he taught in a school. He was then reader at the monastery of St. George in W urttemberg, after which he was a pastor in various places, including Leonberg. From 1537 until his death he was pastor at Winnenden, where he wrote his only work, Enarrationes evangeliorum dominicalium (Augsburg, 1539). (T. KOLDE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: T. Kolde, Areacius SeehoJer and Arpula von Grumbach, in Beitrbge zur bayerisahen Kirchenpe•
echichte, vol. id., Erlangen, 1905; the literature under
MxLANCwmoN; and STABPP'.
SEEKERS: A name used in the English revolutionary period, probably not designating a distinct religious body, but applied as a nickname to the Independents, the two names appearing in the same period. Robert Baillie (q.v.), author of A Dissuasive from the Errours of the Time, . . . especially of the Independents (London, 1645), speaks of the Seekers as people that are represented in " all the sects." Reggius (i.e., G. Horn, in De statu ecclesim Britannicte, Danzig, 1647) heard that the Seekers believed the Apostle Paul still to be living and that he would in a short time appear. E. Pagit affirmed that " some of them " declared the Church to be " in the wilderness " and that they were " seeking " it. An Anonymi epistola (contained in the Whitsuntide program of the University of Gottingen, 1814) speaks of the " new sect of the Seekers or Inquirers, commonly called 'Seekers."' Whenever the " Seekers " are compared with the Church, the Presbyterians are referred to as representing the latter, which seems to show that Seekers and Independents were one.
The Epistola gives the following as characteristics of the Seekers: (1) They deny the absolute authority of the Scriptures, because the original manuscripts have been lost; 1noreover, the Bible is declared to be unsuitable as a foundation of faith, because few men can read it in the original languages; (2) the Church's doctrine concerning God as a " thing most easy to understand " is questioned; (3) the limitation of the sacraments to two is not founded on Scripture; (4) with regard to baptism, they doubted whether only ministers of the Church could perform it; whether it was right to perform it only in churches; whether the baptism of children should be encouraged; whether the customary formula was proper, preferring the form " in the name of Christ " or " of the Lord Jesus "; (5) they criticized the celebration of the Lord's Supper, discussing whether women should participate, whether ministers only should distribute the bread and wine, and whether it should be administered only in the church; (6) they attacked the church doctrine of the sufficiency of faith, (7) the Church's mode of investiture in office; and (8) proclaimed the absolute religious freedom of all men.
It is improbable that any sect advocated these heterogeneous views and only these, though in general they accord with the Independents' position. The view that the Independents and Seekers are one is supported by a sentence from a letter of Cromwell's, of Oct. 25, 1646 (Oliver Cromwell's Letters and Speeches, ed. T. Carlyle, 3 vols., London, 1866) : " to be a seeker is to be of the best sect next to a finder, and such an one shall every faith‑
ful humble seeker be at the end. Happy seeker,
happy finder I " 	(F. KATmNBUscm)
	The term is properly applicable not to a sect but
to individuals who failed to find satisfaction in the
doctrines and practises of any existing denomina
tion, though they hoped by further study of the
Scriptures or by special divine revelation to gain
new light adequate for their guidance. Roger Will
iams (q.v.), after he had founded a church of im
mersed believers, reached the conviction that the
ordinances had been lost in the great apostasy, and
that no one had a right to restore them without a
special revelation from God. 	A. H. N.
BIBLjOORAPHY: E. Pagitt, Heresiopraphy: or, a Description of the Heretickes and Sectaries of these latter Times, London, 1845; H. Reggius (i.e., Georg Horn), De etatu eecleeias Britannicas hodierno, Danzig, 1647; Reliquia Basteriana, ed. M. Sylvester, p. 76, London, 1697.
SEELEY, SIR JOHN ROBERT: Man of letters; b. at London Sept. 10, 1834; d. at Cambridge Jan. 13, 1895. He graduated at Cambridge (B.A., 1857); became fellow of Christ's College, 1858; a master in City of London School, 1861; professor of Latin, University College, London, 1863; professor of modern history at Cambridge, 1869. He was the author of the very celebrated Ecce Homo, a Survey of the Life and Work of Jesus Christ (London, 1865; latest ed., 1908), which evoked among many others the reply of Joseph Parker, Ecce Deus (1867). Other works of theological interest were Lectures and Essays (1870); Natural Religion (1882). He wrote also a number of works in political history and in literature, including The Growth of British Policy (1895; contains a memoir by G. W. Prothero).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Besides the memoir by Prothero, ut sup., consult: DNB, li. 190‑193; J. R. Tanner, in English Historical Review, a (1895), 507‑514; M. Todhunter, in Westminster Review, ezlv (1896), 503 eqq.; H. A. L. Fisher, in Fortnightly Review, lavi (1896), 183 eqq.
SEELYE, JULIUS HAWLEY: Congregationalist; b. at Bethel, Conn., Sept. 14, 1824; d. at Amherst, Mass., May 12, 1895. He was graduated from Amherst College, 1849; from Auburn Theological Seminary, 1852; and studied at Halle, Germany, 1852‑53; became professor of moral philosophy and metaphysics, Amherst College, 1858; member of Congress,' 1875; and was president of Amherst College, 1877‑90. He translated Albert Schwegler's History of Philosophy (New York, 1856); and wrote The Way, the Truth, and the Life, Lectures to Educated Hindus (Bombay and Boston, 1873); and Christian Missions (New York, 1875).
SEGARELLI, GHERARDO. See APOSTOLIC BRETHREN.
SEGNA, s6n'yd, FRANCESCO: Cardinal; b. at Poggio Ginolfo (diocese of Marsi), Italy, Aug. 31, 1836. He was educated at the Roman Seminary and the College of the Sapienza, after which he was professor of dogmatics in the College of St. Apollinaris, Rome, and divisional director of Oriental affairs in the Propaganda. In 1881 he was appointed canonist of the Holy Penitentiary, as well as canon of Santa Maria in Trastevere. He was assistant secretary for extraordinary ecclesiastical affairs until 1884, when he accompanied Rampolla to Madrid as councilor of the nuncio. After his

=138	886
rl	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
return to Italy, he became auditor of the Rota, director of the Penitentiary, secretary for extraordinary ecclesiastical affairs, and canon of St. Peter's. In 1894 he was created cardinal deacon of Santa Maria in Portico. He is also archivist of the Curia and prefect of the Index, and has taken a prominent part in the discussion concerning the validity of Anglican orders.
SEGNERI, sAn‑y6'A, PAOLO: Italian Jesuit; b. at Nettuno (31 m. s.s.e. of Rome) Mar. 21, 1624; d. at Rome Dec. 6,1694. He entered the Society of Jesus (1637); was ordained priest, 1652; and from then until 1665 he taught in a Jesuit school at Pestoia. From 1665 to 1692 he spent half of each year in retirement, and the rest in traveling as a missionary throughout northern Italy. He became the foremost preacher among the Jesuits in Italy, and has been styled the " restorer of Italian eloquence." His sermons were modeled upon Chrysostom's. When the Jesuits at Rome perceived that Quietism (see MOLINOs, MIGUEL DE) was slowly undermining Romanism, and particularly Jesuitism, they sent him " a bundle of Quietistic books with directions to prepare an antidote to them." So in 1680 he published at Florence a small volume with the title, Concordia tra la fatica a la Quiete (" harmony between effort and Quiet "), in which without naming Molinos, or disparaging the contemplative life, he endeavored to show that the successful prosecution of Quietism was possible only to a few. His book raised, however, a storm of opposition from the then powerful Quietists, and was put on the Index. He prudently remained away from Rome. In 1692 Pope Innocent XII. called him to Rome as his preacher‑in‑ordinary, and theologian of the penitentiary. His Opere appeared in Venice in 4 vols., 1712, and later; also Milan, 1845‑47 (best edition). His best‑known work is It Quaresimale (thirty‑four Lenten sermons, Florence, 1679; Eng. transl. by James Ford, Sermons from the Qvaresimale of . . . P. Segneri, 3 vols., London, 1857‑61, 4th ed., 1869, reprinted 2 vols., New York, 1872). Besides this, there have been translated: The Devout Client of Mary Instructed (London, 1724; 1857); The Knowledge of Ourselves (1848); Father. Segneri's Sentimenti; or, Lights in Prayer (1876); Panegyrics (1877); Manna of the Soul (2 vols., 1879); Practice of Interior Recollection with God (1881).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. Massei, Breoe Rapgua®lio della Vita del . P. Segneri, Venice, 1701; E. P. Hood, Lamps,
Pitchers, and Trumpets, vol. i., London, 1867; J. Bigelow, Molinos the Quietist, pp. 18‑24, New York, 1882; KL, xi. 70‑71.
SEGONDD, Wgen, JACQUES JEAN LOUIS: Swiss Protestant theologian; b. at Plainpalais, Geneva, Oct. 4, 1810; d. at Geneva June 18, 1885. He studied at the universities of Geneva, Strasburg, and Bonn; was pastor of the Geneva National Church at Chgnes‑Bourgeries, 1840‑41; founded a society at Geneva for the exegetical study of the New Testament which lasted 1836‑41, and gave free lectures in the university on Old‑Testament exegesis; lectured on Old‑Testament introduction, 1862‑64; and was professor of Old‑Testament exegesis, 1872‑85. His fame rests upon his translation, at the request of the Venerable Company of Pas‑
tore of Geneva, La Sainte Bible; Aneaen Testament (2 vols., Geneva, 1874), Le Nouveau Testament (1880); reprinted by the University Press (Oxford, 1880). His other works include Ruth (Geneva, 1834); L'Eccldsiaste (1835); De voce Scheol et notione Orci apud Hebrwos (1835); De la nature de l'inapiration chez les auteurs et dans les 6crits du Nouveau Testament (1836); TraW 416mentaire ‑des accents h6breux (1841); Soirges chr6tiennes (2 sir., 1850; new sir., 1871); G6ographie de la terre sainte (1851); Rkita bibliques d l'usage de la jeunesse (1862); Chrestomathie biblique (1864); and Le yrophRe Esaie (1866).
B:BtaoasAPH:: Lichtenberger, ERS, ad. 196‑197.
SEIDEMANft, adi'de‑man, JOHANN KARL: German Lutheran; b. at Dresden Apr. 10, 1807; d. there Aug. 5, 1879. He was educated at the University of Leipsic (1826‑28), and, after teaching in his native city in various institutions, was called in 1834 to the pastorate of Eschdorf, not far from Pillnita. Here he remained until his retirement from active life in 1871. The first noteworthy work of Seidemann was his Eschdarf and Dittersbach (Dresden, 1840), supplemented, twenty years later, by his Ueberlieferungen zur Geschichte von Eschdorf, Dittersbach and Umgegend (1860). His first book was quickly followed by a series of monographs on the history of the Reformation in Saxony: Thomas Mtanzer (Dresden, 1842); Die Leipziger Disputation im Jahr 1519 (1843); Karl von Miltiz (1844); Erlduterungen zur Reformationsgeschiehte durch bisher unbekannte Urkunden (1844); and Beitrdge zur Reformationsgeschichte (2 parts, 1846‑48).
After 1846 Seidemann became more and more interested in the writings of Luther. In 1856 he published at Berlin the completion of W. M. L. de Wette's edition of Luther~Eletters, and three years later he issued forty‑one additional letters of the Reformer in his Lutherbriefe (Dresden, 1859). In 1872 he edited the diary of Anton Lauterbach, which had recently been discovered by F. Schnorr von Carolsfeld (Dresden, 1872); and three years later published D. Jakob Schwenk, der vermeintliche Antinomer, Freibergs Reformator (Leipsic, 1875). In 1874 he discovered, in the Dresden library, Luther's earliest lectures on the Psalms‑an autograph‑which he edited under the title of Luthers erste and dlteste Vorlesungen uber die Psalmen dus den Jahren 1513‑16 (Dresden, 1876), of which only the first volume appeared. When he died, he had nearly completed the collection of material for a critical edition of Luther's " Table‑talk." He may be considered the founder of modern research concerning Luther, though he was a collector and investigator rather than a historian.
(T. KOLDE.)
BIBLIOaHAPHY: F. Sehnorr von Carolsfeld, in Neues Archiro
Ar seehaiache Geschichte, i (1880), 94 sqq.; C. Krafft, in Zeitachrift des bergischenGeschichtsvereins, xvi (1881), 257258; ADB, xxxiu. 62730.
SEIR. See EDOM.
SEIRIM. See DEMON, DEMONOLOGY.
SEISS, sais, JOSEPH AUGUSTUS: Lutheran (General Council); b. near Graceham, Md., Mar.
18, 1823; d. at Philadelphia June 21, 1904. His

parents were Moravian, but he became a student in Pennsylvania College, Gettysburg, 1839‑41, without graduating; and his theological study was mostly private. He became pastor at Martinsburg and Shepherdatown, Va., 1843; Cumberland, Md., 1847; Baltimore, Md., 1852; of St. John's, Philadelphia, 1858; and of Holy Communion, Philadelphia, 1874. He was one of the most eloquent preachers of the country, possessing a style that was clear, ornate, and forceful. He was one of the founders of the General Council, and one of the committee which made its Church Book. He edited Prophetic Times, a monthly, 1863‑75; was joint editor of The Lutheran, 1860‑61; of The Lutheran and Missionary, 1861‑73; editor of the latter, 1873‑79; and traveled in Europe and the East, 1864‑65. He was the author of Lectures on Epistles to the Hebrews (Baltimore, 1846) ; Baptist System Examined (Philadelphia, 1854); Digest of Christian Doctrine (1855); Last Times (1856); Holy Types (1860); Book of Forms (1860); Evangelical Psalmist (1860); Parable of the Ten Virgins (1862); Ecclesia Lutherana (1867); Plain Words, sermons (1869); Lectures on the Apocalypse (3 vole., 1870‑84; 6th ed., 1900); The Javelin, by a Lutheran (1871); Uriel, Occasional Discourses (1874); Church Song (1875‑81); Lectures on the Gospels (2 vole., 1876); A Miracle in Stone (1877); Recreation Songs (1878); Thirty‑three Practical Sermons (1879); Voices from Babylon (1879); Blossoms of Faith, sermons (1880); The Golden Altar, manual of private devotions (New York, 1882); Gospel in the Stars (Philadelphia, 1882); Luther and the Reformation (1883); Lectures on the Epistles (2 vols., 1885); Right Life (1886); Letters of Jesus (1889); Beacon Lights (1900); The Christ and his Church (1902); and Recent Sermons (1904).
SEITZ, snits, ANTON: German Roman Catholic; b. at Windsheim (30 m. s.e. of Wiirzburg), Bavaria, May 27, 1869. He was educated at the universities of Leipsic and Munich (1887‑88), and then studied theology at Wfirzburg from 1888 to 1892, after which he was curate at Hammelsburg. From 1895 to 1897 he studied philosophy at Munich (Ph.D., 1897), and in 1902 became privat‑docent at Wijrzburg. Since 1904 he has been professor of apologetics at the University of Munich. Among his works are: Die Apologie des Christentums bei den Griechen des vierten and fanften Jahrhunderts in historisch‑systematischer Daratellung (Wiirzburg, 1895); Die Willensfreiheit in der Philosophic des Christian August Crusius gegenuber dem Leibnitz‑Wolfachen Determinismus in historuch‑psychdogiwher Begriindung and systematischen Zusammenhang (1899); Willensfreiheit and moderner psychologischer Determinismus (Cologne, 1902); Die Heislsnotttrendigkeit der Kirche nach der altchristlichen Literatur bis zur Zeit des heiligen Augustinus (Freiburg, 1903); ChristuszeWnisse aus derv kla8sischen Altertum Von ungldubiger Seite (Cologne, 1906); and Das Evangelium vom Gottessohn. Eine Apologie der wesenhaften Gottessohnschaft gegenuber der Kritik der modern8ten deutschen Theologie (1908).
SELAH (SELA) : The former capital of Edom (q‑v.), mentioned II Kings xiv. 7 and Iea. xvi. 1. %.‑22
RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
The name means " rock " (of. Gk. Petra, and Judges i. 36; Isa. xlii. 11). It is situated sixty miles north of Elath and seventy miles south from the Dead Sea, in the Wadi Musa, a deep cleft of the MountSeir range, near the foot of Mount Hor. It is approached through a narrow defile on the east, a mile and a half long, called the Sik (" cleft ") of Wadi Musa. .The rock of red sandstone towers to a height of from 100 to 300 feet above the floor of the wadi, and in places the way is so narrow that the traveler can almost touch the sides on either hand. Once the way was paved, and bits of the pavement can be seen. Abruptly the traveler comes upon the so‑called Khaznet Fir'aun (" treasury of Pharaoh "), really a temple cut from the living rock, with a fagade eighty‑five feet high, beautifully sculptured, and in remarkable preservation. Two hundred yards farther along the valley, which widens considerably at this point, is the amphitheater, also entirely from the rock, thirty‑nine yards in diameter, and with thirty‑three tiers of seats, accommodating from 3,000 to 4,000 _ spectators. Farther on there are curious tombs, some very elaborate, other temples, chief of which is the Kasr Fir'aun ("palace of Pharaoh"), a ruined basilica, and a triumphal arch.
Besides the Biblical passages noted above, reference to this place may perhaps be seen in the work " rock " in II Chron. xxv. 11, 12; Jer. xha. 16‑18; Ob. 3. Nothing definite is known of the history of the place before its capture by Amaziah (II Kings xiv. 7), who renamed it Joktheel. The Nabatmana conquered the region c. 300 B.C., and made Selah, under its Greek form Petra, their capital. The city rose into prominence, being upon the high‑road between Arabia and Syria, and so important for the caravan trade. The Seleucidw made vain attempts to take it. Pompey captured the whole region called by Greek writers Arabia Petrwa, i.e., Arabia whose capital is Petra. In Petra, Hyrcanus II. and his son Herod, afterward Herod the Great, found a hiding‑place (Joseph, Ant., XIV., i. 4; War, I., vi., 2, xiii.8). In the first Christian centuries Petra was the capital of a Roman province, and it is from this period that the ruins most in evidence date. It became an episcopal see, and its bishops are mentioned as late as 536 A.D. It was destroyed by the Mohammedans probably between 629 and 632, was lost to knowledge till rediscovered by the Egyptian rulers in the thirteenth century, and then again sank completely out of notice until Seetzen, in 1807, visited it, and gave the world the wondrous tale. It is now quite often visited by tourists and other travelers.

BIt11dOGRAPHY: g. Baedeker, Palestine and Syria, pp. 176183, Leipsic, etc., 1906; J. L. Burekhardt, Travda in Syria and the Holy Land, London, 1822; L. de Leborde, Journey through Arabia Petrda, London, 1838; E. H. Palmer, Desert of the Exodus, pp 366 sqq., 440 sqq., Cambridge, 1871; E. Hull, Mount Seir, Sinai, and Western Palestine, London, 1885; J. Barth, in American Journal of Semitic Languages, xiii (1898‑97). 267‑268; J. Lagrange, in Revue biblique internationale, vi (1897), 208230, vii (1898), 165‑182; T. Noldeke, in ZA, xii (1897), 1‑7; M. de Vogu€, in Revue bsblique internationale, vi (1897), 231‑238; JBL (1899), 132 eqq.; DR, iv. 430‑431; EB, iv. 4344‑45; and the literature under Enou.

sele'h
Beleuddae	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
338
SELAH, silo: A musical or liturgical term which occura seventy‑four times in the Bible (seventy‑one times in the Psalms, and in Hab. iii. 3, 9, 13). Its meaning is not known, and modern scholars are much divided over its interpretation. It has been supposed (1) to represent the Greek psalle, " play on the harp," or " staccato "; (2) to be an abbreviation; (3) to mean °' pause "; (4) to mean " for ever " (so the Targum, Aquila, Theodotion); or (5) to be a direction to raise the voice, equivalent to the musical sign forte, or fortissimo.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. A. Brig, in JBL, xviii (1899), 132‑143, J. Parisot in Revue biblique internatianale, viii (1899), 573‑581; Emilie G. Brig, in American Journal of Semitic Languages, xvi (1899‑1900), 1‑29: DB, iv. 431 132; EB, iv. 4346‑47;. and the commentaries on the Psalms.

SELBIE, JOHN ALEXANDER: United Free Church of Scotland; b. at Maryculter (7 m. s.w. of Aberdeen), Kincardineshire, Feb. 4, 1856. He was educated at the University of Aberdeen (M.A., 1876), the University of Tubingen (1878), and Free Church College, Aberdeen (from which he was graduated in 1880). In 1882 he became minister of Birsay Free Church, Orkney, and in 1896 succeeded his father as minister at Maryculter. In 1905 he retired from the ministry to devote himself entirely to literary work. Since 1893 he has been the assistant of James Hastings in the preparation of the Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols., Edinburgh, 1898‑1904), Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels (2 vols., 1906‑07), the Dictionary of Religion and Ethics (1908 sqq.), and Smaller Dictionary of the Bible (1908). He is editor of the foreign department of The Expository Times, and has translated E. Kdnig's Exiles' Book of Consolation (Edinburgh, 1899). In theology he is an adherent of the school represented by Driver's Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, and is " generally in sympathy with all modern liberal currents of theological opinion."
BIBLIoaRAPRY: Expository Times, Feb.. 1907, contains sketch and portrait.
SELBIE, WILLIAM BOOTHBY: Congregationalist; b. at Chesterfield (22 m. n. of Derby) Dec. 24, 1862. He received his education at Manchester Grammar School and Brasenose and Mansfield colleges, Oxford (M.A., Trinity Hall, Cambridge, 1904); was lecturer in Hebrew and Old Testament, Mansfield College, Oxford, 1889‑90; minister of Highgate Congregational Church, London, 1890‑1902, and of Emmanuel Congregational Church, Cambridge, 1902‑09; became principal of Mansfield College, Oxford, 1909. He has written Life and Teachings of Jesus (London, 1908); and Aspects of Christ (New York, 1909).
SELBORNE, ROUNDELL PALMER, EARL OF: B. at Mixbury (55 m. n.w. of London), Oxfordshire, Nov. 27, 1812; d. at Blackmoor, Petersfield (50 m. s.w. of London), May 4, 1895. He was educated at Trinity College, Oxford (B.A., 1834; M.A., 1837); called to the bar, 1837; became a queen's counsel, 1849; member of parliament, 1847‑52, 1853‑57, 186182‑ solicitor‑general, 1861; attorney‑general, 1863‑86; and lord chancellor of England,
1872‑74, 1880‑85. He was elected lord rector of
the University of St. Andrew's, 1877; raised to the peerage, 1882; and was president of the first house of laymen of the Church of England, Westminster, Feb., 1886. His principal significance for theology lies in the fact that he edited Book of Praise, from the Best English Hymn‑Writers (London, 1863 and often), marking one of the great advances in English praise books (see SEDGwic$, DANIEL).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: R. T. Davidson and W. Benham, Life of Archibald Campbell Tait, 2 vols., London, 1891; W. Ward, William George Ward and the Oxford Movement, ib., 1889; idem, William George Ward and the Catholic Revival, ib. 1893; DNB, xliii. 150‑154; Julian, Hymnology, p. 1589. SELBY, THOMAS GUNN: English Wesleyan, b. at New Radford (2 m. n. of Nottingham) June 5, 1846; d. at Bromley (8 m. s.e. of London) Dec. 12, 1910. His father was a silk merchant, and educated him first in private schools at Nottingham and Derby, then in the Wesleyan College at Richmond, but he did not study for a degree. He was missionary at Fatshan and Shin Chau Foo in Canton Province, China, from 1868 till 1881, after which time he traveled extensively in other provinces. On his return to England in 1883 he served as Wesleyan minister at different places. In 1898 he retired for literary work to Bromley. He wrote several good books on China, The Chinaman in his own Stories (London, 1895); Chinamen at Home (1900); As the Chinese see us (1901); he also wrote a life of Christ in Chinese and was active on the executive board of the Anti‑Opium Society from 1883 to his death. But it is as a preacher that he will be longest remembered. He published many volumes of sermons, The Imperfect Angel, and other Sermons (1890, 4th ed., 1894); The Lesson of a Dilemma, and other Sermons (1893, 4th ed., 1899); The Holy Spirit and Christian Privilege (1894); The Unheeding God, and other Sermons (1st and 2d ed., 1899); The God of the Frail (1902); The Alienated Crown (1904); A Strenuous Gospel (1906); The Divine Craftsman, and other Sermons (1909). He delivered the Fernley lecture at Liverpool on The Theology of Modern Fiction (1896); contributed to the series of Books for Bible Students that on The Ministry of the Lord Jesus (1896); to Clerical Life, Letters to Ministers (1898); and to The Cross and the Dice‑box: Sermons and Addresses to Workingmen (Manchester, 1903); and published independently The God of the Patriarchs. Studies in the Early Scriptures of the Old Testament (1904).
SELDEN, JOHN: English jurist, statesman, and archeologist; b. at Salvington, West Tarring (11 m. w. of Brighton), Sussex, Dec. 16, 1584; d. in London Nov. 30, 1654. Selden received his education at Chichester free school, and Hart Hall, Oxford, but did not graduate, leaving college to take up the study of law at Clifford Inn. In 1604 he was admitted to the Inner Temple, and was called to the bar in 1612. Influenced by Ben Jonson Camden, and especially by Robert Bruce Cotton, he turned to theoretical and historical juridical investigations resulting in Analecton Anglo‑Britannieon (1607); Jani Anglorum fades altera (1610); England's epinomis (1610); and De laudibus legum Anglite (1616). He first won fame with his De die

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Syris (1617; Eng. transl., The Fabulous Gods Denounced in the Bible, Philadelphia, 1881), which attracted attention and was reprinted on the continent, and was long regarded as authoritative, though later oriental studies have shown that it relied too implicitly upon rabbinical sources, and was of course dependent upon the earlier philology and exegesis. This work was followed by a large number of oriental studies, made possible by his access to the rich collections of the Bodleian and of Lambeth palace. His most important investigations were: De succesaaonibus in bona defunctorum ad leges Ebrceorum (London, 1631, with a supplement, De successions in pontificatum Ebrworum, Leyden, 1638); De jure naturali et gentium juxta disciplinam Ebrceornm (London 1640); De anno civdi et calendario veteris eccdesite seu reipublicte Judaicte (1644); Uxor Ebraica, seu de nuptiis ed divortiis veterum Ebrceorum (1646); De synedriis et prcefecturis juridieis veterum Ebraorum (16501655). These publications were characterized by great learning, and in them Selden introduced to the western world many matters of oriental culture and history, such as the Coptic‑Arabic calendar notation.
His Historie of Tithes (1618), in which he sought to prove that tithes had been enjoined by " ecclesiastical and positive law," but not by the jus divinum, caused him to be brought before the court of high commission for trial. He was compelled to express regret for having published the book, which was suppressed and its author forbidden to answer his opponents.
Selden, in consequence of this act, entered politics and took a foremost part in the fight for individual liberty, being in parliament in 1623, 1626, and in 1628, and later, where he led the attack against the duke of Buckingham, Charles' minister, aided in the fight for the habeas‑corpus act, and was repeatedly imprisoned. He took a prominent part in the ensuing conflicts against the clerical party. As a member of the Long Parliament and the Westminister Assembly he used his influence against the catholicizing State Church. In his Table‑Talk (1689; reprint, Oxford, 1892) he took the position that the State was sovereign, but that Church and State should each manage its own affairs. Selden was accused of infidelity, a charge to which his friendship with Hobbes gave a pretext, but he opposed Hobbes' doctrines and believed to the end in the divine origin of the Christian religion.
In his later years he joined the Presbyterians but opposed the excesses that ended in the death of Charles. His name is honored for his integrity and versatile learning. His writings, which include many not mentioned above dealing with subjects in law and history, suffer from obscurity, prolixity, and an unsatisfactory method. They are distinguished by subtlety and fearless outspokenness. After the king's death he retired to scholarly private life. A large proportion of his books, manuscripts, and archeological treasures ultimately came into possession of the Bodleian library. His works were collected by Dr. Wilkins (3 vols., London, 1726, with Life prefixed).
8elah
8eleucida
BraLroa8Apny: J. Aikin, The Lives of J. Selden and Archbishop Usher, London, 1812; the Life by Wilkins in the Works, ut sup.; a biography by Singer appears in the editibns of the Table Talk after 1847; A. it Wood, Athens Oxonienaes, ed. P. Bliss. vol. iv., London, 1817; DNB, li. 212‑224.
SELEUCID.E, sel‑itYsi‑di or ci‑d5 ("descendants of Seleucus "): The name given to the dynasty founded in Syria by Seleucus, one of the generals of Alexander, which ruled Syria either in whole or in part and more or less continuously from about 321 to 65 D.C. The history of the dynasty necessarily involves also that of the usurpers or contestants who succeeded in establishing themselves for longer or shorter times, sometimes in only a part of the territory, during this stormy period. The history is of interest to the student of theolbgy for at least three reasons: (1) because of the nearly continuous contact with the Jews and the effects upon their fortunes, especially in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes (see below); (2) because of the Hellenization of the region, preparing for the culture which was to be in no small part Christian; and (3) because of the development of the city of Antioch, which was to become a great seat of Christian learning and activities (see ANTLOCH, SCHOOL. OF; ANTLOCH, SYNODS OF).
Seleucus I. fticator (306‑281), the founder, was a Macedonian, and one of the generals of Alexander in his Asiatic campaigns. On the death of Alexander, and at the first distribution of the provinces, Seleucus did not at once receive a separate assignment of territory, but was attached as chiliarch to Perdiccas, the " protector of the kingdom." But in 321 he obtained Babylonia, whence, however, he was expelled in 316 by Antigonus, but with the help of. Ptolemy regained it in 312, thus fixing the era of te Seleucids (Oct. 1). After the victory over Antigonus at Ipsus in 301, Syria also came to him as a part of his dominions and Antioch displaced Babylon as the capital. Meanwhile, between 311 and 302 he carried his arms victoriously as far as the Indus, and in 306 assumed the title of king. With this success, he was too good a strategist to attempt to hold territory so far away as the extreme east, and so for a valuable consideration (500 elephants) yielded to Chandragupta (Sandracotta) the northwestern provinces of India. In the allotment after the battle of Ipsus Ptolemy had received Coele‑Syria and Palestine, territory which Seleucus coveted, and in a momentary panic had withdrawn. Seleucus claimed this as forfeited, but Ptolemy again assumed control in spite of Seleucus' protests, and the regions became anew the source of strife for a century between Egypt and Syria (see PTOLEMY). In the contests which continued between those who were striving for Alexander's empire, Seleucus made constant gains, and at the end of his life all of Asia Minor except the extreme northeastern portion bordering on Armenia came into his possession; but this was really a source of weakness rather than of strength, as the history of the following reigns demonstrates. Meanwhile he was constantly engaged in the organization of his kingdom and in attempts at cementing the unrelated parts. He was assassinated by Ptolemy Ceraunos, son of Ptolemy I., in 281. He was a good administrator,

Beleuddee	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	840
an able statesman, generous and open as a man, withal a patron of art, trade, and agriculture.
Antiochus I. Soter (281‑261), son of Seleucus, found that instead of coming quietly into possession of his kingdom he would have to fight for it. One of the purposes of the assassination of Seleucus by the freebooting Ptolemy Ceraunos was the removal of the leading personage in the East and the affording thus of an opportunity for carving a kingdom for himself. The effect was to throw the entire Greek world into a turmoil, with the various Greek aspirants or monarchs attempting to make capital out of the situation. Antiochus I. had been trained both in war and in government. When his father was killed, he was at work in his province (Babylonia), and his hold upon the East was firm because of the loyalty of the inhabitants to one of their own race (his mother was an Iranian). Ptolemy was prevented from more than a half‑hearted bid for the kingdom by troubles at home. The real seat of war was Asia Minor, and the situation there was complicated by the irruption of the Gaulsthe ancestors of the Galatians to whom Paul carried the Gospel and wrote his epistle (cf. W. M. Ramsay, Church in the Roman, Empire, p. 105 et passim, New York, 1893). In spite of some victories (Antiochus is said to have won his title of Soter by a defeat of the Gauls), Asia Minor was in part lost to Syria, and the Seleucid possessions there constantly dwindled under the attacks of Macedonians and Egyptians, the whole north of that region was also lost to the Armenians. War with Ptolemy Philadelphus also intervened, the theater being the eastern coast of the Mediterranean and southeastern Asia Minor.
Antiochus II. Theos (261‑246) was the second son of Soter, the eldest son having been charged with conspiracy and executed. The war with Egypt continued with varying fortune until the marriage of Antiochus with Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus, when his former wife Laodice was formally divorced and banished. History does not give a very clear picture of this king. He is portrayed as sensuous and debauched, and was the object of the flattery which produced his name Theos (" God "). He seems to have practically deserted Berenice for Laodice, and died at Ephesus, possibly poisoned by Laodice, who feared for the succession of her son. His death brought new turmoil to the kingdom, the two queens striving for their offspring. Berenice proclaimed her infant son king in Antioch, and he was slain within a few days while she herself fell soon by an assassin. Laodice, in Ephesus, proclaimed her son.
Seleucus II. Callinicus (246‑226). The assassination of Berenice and her son brought her brother Ptolemy III. from Egypt to avenge her death, and there resulted his famous march through Asia (see PTOLEMY), as well as conquests in Asia Minor of Seleucid possessions there. The queen mother of Callinicus was holding portions of Asia Minor really for her younger. son Antiochus Hierax, who rebelled against Callinicus while the latter was recovering a part of his eastern kingdom. Eventually Mithridates of Pontus intervened in Asia Minor against Callinicus, who was
attempting to subdue his brother, and that region was virtually lost to the Seleucidee; in the East Callinicus had only partially recovered his possessions, the kingdom of Parthia being established there, when he was killed by a fall from his horse.
Seleucus III. (Ceraunus) Soter (226‑223), son of Callinicus, thus succeeded to a difficult position. He attempted to recover Asia Minor, and was warring there when he fell, probably a victim to conspirators in his own camp.
Antioch III. Magnus (223‑187), younger son of Callinicus, was in Babylon when his predecessor fell. He was called at once into action to repel assaults upon his realm from foes without and to put down rebels from within, assailing the eastern portion of his kingdom. After succeeding there, he took advantage of the opportunity to gain the longcontested CcBle‑Syria and Palestine offered by Theodotus, governor of Ccele‑Syria, when Ptolemy Philopator had disregarded his merits and permitted court jealousies to influence him. Antiochus at once recovered parts of the Phenician littoral, which was but the beginning of a series of operations which was to win Egyptian possessions in Asia for Syria. Continued success attended him till, at the battle of Raphia in 217, he suffered a disastrous defeat, which, however, Ptolemy did not follow up. Antiochus used the respite to regain his strength, this time employing his forces in the recovery of central Asia Minor, which he accomplished by 213. Before undertaking the more distant parts of the work in his plans of campaign, he associated his son Antiochus with him in the government, so as to leave a ruler in the capital in case of accident. In 212 he turned to the East‑to Armenia, eastern Iran, Parthia, and Bactria‑and penetrated to northern India, subduing states that had revolted, making tributary those which were on the fringes of his empire, and binding the petty kings, whom he left on their thrones, to his interest either by matrimonial alliances or by indebtedness to his magnanimity. By these exploits, in which he manifested a moderation equalled only by his statesmanship as exemplified by his treatment of the once hostile kings, he won the title of Magnus. In the East he had practically reconstituted the empire of Alexander. One blot stands to his discredit in that he set the example, to be followed by several of his successors, of pillage of temples in his seizing of the treasure of the temple of Anaitis (Aine) at Ecbatana. This act was impolitic, raising against him the hatred of the worshipers, and the practise was to cause infinite trouble to his descendants. In 204 he returned to Syria proper, but not to rest. With the death of Ptolemy IV. Philopator and the accession of the infant Ptolemy V. Epiphanes in Egypt, the time seemed. ripe to realize the longhalted ambitions of Syria for the possession of Palestine. This he achieved, making, however, a matrimonial alliance with Ptolemy by betrothing to the latter his daughter Cleopatra with the revenues of the conquered territory as dowry. He next attacked Asia Minor to enlarge his holdings there (199‑198); at this moment the Egyptian‑Greek general Scopas attempted to recover Palestine for the Ptolemies but was defeated in the decisive

341	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8eleuddn
battle at Pandas which terminated Egyptian rule in Asia (198). The next year Antiochus carried further his assault upon Asia Minor by sea and land, recovering Ptolemaic territory nearly all the way along the southern and eastern coasts. He then challenged Rome by passing into Europe, his successes seeming to him as a Greek to give him the right to intervene in the constant struggle of the Grecian states in behalf of a reunited Greek world. This brought a protesting Roman embassy, demanding his retirement and the restriction of his operations to Asia. But he assumed to be the liberator of Greece from the Romans, despised the Roman power, entered upon the struggle less fully prepared than was his wont, and suffered defeat‑at Thermopylae. The Romans carried the war into Asia, and Antiochus met a crushing defeat at Magnesia, after which he was compelled to give up all the territory north of the Taurus mountains, was fined 15,500 talents, and a large quantity of corn. In 188 Antiochus departed to the East, and the report was that he was killed while plundering or on his way to plunder the temple of Baal at Elymais (cf. Dan. xi. 19; I Mace. viii. 6).
Seleucus IV. Philopator (187‑176), son of Antiochus the Great, succeeded to a difficult task, that of recovering the prestige lost by his father in the contest with the Romans, while at the same time he had to pay the indemnity imposed by the latter. He found an empty treasury (which his comparatively peaceful reign succeeded in filling) and a consequent advisability for cessation from the ceaseless wars in which his predecessors had engaged (cf. Dan. xi. 20). It is possible, however, that he was prevented from intervening in the wars of the Greek world by an embassy from the Romans. He is the king mentioned in II Mace. iii. as sending, to confiscate the money in the treasury of the Temple at Jerusalem, his minister Heliodorus who is reported to have entered the sanctuary and to have been prevented by a terrible apparition there from accomplishing his purpose. On his return, Heliodorus formed a conspiracy and murdered Seleucus, putting on the throne the infant son.of Seleucus (intending thus to keep the power in his own hands), passing by the elder son Demetrius (a hostage at Rome), and disregarding Antiochus the brother of Philopator. But the Plans of Heliodorus came to nothing when Antiochus forced his way to the throne.
Antiochus IV. Epiphanes (175‑164), son of Antiochus III., grew up in Rome where he was a hostage; he accepted Greek citizenship at Athens and a magistracy. Interest in him for the student of Jewish and Christian history centers in his determined attack in behalf of Greek culture and religion upon Jewish nationality, religion, and Scriptures, provoking the uprising which resulted in the temporarily brilliant period of Maccabean rule (see HABMONEANB). That he is the focus of the Book of Daniel (q.v.) is now generally accepted, while his picture, also from a Jewish angle of vision, is in I and II Maccabees (for a brilliant analysis of his character from a more than usually sympathetic point of view consult E. R. Bevan, House of Selerh
cus, ii. 128 sqq., London, 1902). When the stroke
of Heliodorus became known, Epiphanes left for Syria, aided by Eumenes and Attalus of Pergamene, and soon succeeded in seating himself on the throne, overcoming opposition, getting rid in the usual way of rivals, and reducing to quiescence those opposed to him. In 173 he sent an embassy to Rome to seek assurance of friendship, which was granted with some reserve, though amity was assured. War with Egypt was begun by the latter, the object being the annexation of the Seleucid empire to Egypt. But Antiochus made adequate preparation not only for defense but for aggressive action, associated his infant son with him so as to leave a ruler in case of accident, defeated the Egyptians near Pelusium, pushed on and seized that frontier fortress, captured Ptolemy Philometor, established Seleucid government at Memphis with Philometor as viceroy, and withdrew after unsuccessfully assailing Alexandria. But Philometor came to an agreement with his brother to reign jointly, and Epiphanes returned to Egypt to subdue it once more only to receive the Romans' curt order to withdraw (168). Meanwhile his forces had been making a conquest of Cyprus, whence the Romans compelled their withdrawal.
The regions of expansion for Antiochus were thus circumscribed by the great western power. But the peculiar mission to which he deemed himself called was still possible of exercise, and that was the advancement of Hellenic religion and culture in the regions which were acknowledged as his own. He was especially a devotee of Zeus, of whom it is probable that he thought himself an incarnation (hence his own title for himself‑Theos Epiphanes, " God Manifest "). Among the Jews, through the favor of the Greek rulers of Egypt and Syria and under the constant pressure of contact and the pass to favor which a tendency to adopt Greek culture put in the hands of apostate Jews, the drift was almost away from their own national religion. Onias had been overthrown as high priest by Jesus (175), who changed his name to the Greek Jason, and was in turn outbid for the priesthood by another Jew with a Greek name, Menelaos. Greek sports and exercises had been introduced for Jewish youth, and some even were ashamed of Jewish parentage and sought to eliminate the marks of it. Of course the nation at large had not gone over to Hellenism, though there was a large drift and it might have come to that. But a report during the king's Egyptian campaign that Jerusalem had declared for Ptolemy led Antiochus to sate his vengeance for defeated plans upon the Jews. The fact that the Hellenism of Menelaos had led to this was probably fuel to the flame of his anger. He first punished Jerusalem as a rebellious city; later he determined upon making it a stronghold of his kingdom as an outpost against Egypt, and to make it safe it was to be Hellenized. The Jewish religion was to be blotted out, the Temple was plundered and converted into a sanctuary of Zeus Olympics, the worship of Dionysos was introduced, the Jews were to sacrifice to heathen deities and eat sacrificed swine, while their books were to be destroyed. These measures were enforced by frequent massa,cres. Such measures as these with a people like the

Seleueedse
Self‑Defense	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	342
Jews, always ready to be aroused into fanaticism, cemented the party opposed to Hellenism, caused revolt in those who were wavering in their adherence to the national faith, and led by degrees from passive to the active resistance which culminated in the Maccabean revolt and later in deliverance and autonomy for the nation (see ISRAEL, HISTORY OF, I., § 11; HASMONEANS, § 1). Antiochus left the carrying‑out of this policy to Lysias, one of his council and a general of his army, and in 166‑165 started on what proved to be his last expedition to the East. That he was impelled to this by an empty treasury is almost certain. He had posed as a patron of Hellenism not only by the attempt to convert the Jews, but by his large expenditures for temples to Greek deities, and not less by his extension of the city of Antioch, and by the rebuilding and readornment of cities in the East. Thus he began the erection of an incomparably splendid temple of Zeus at Athens, which was not finished till the reign of Hadrian (130 A.D.). Indeed, his central thought along these lines was evidently to unify his kingdom by means of Greek culture (I Mace. i. 41). Besides these expenditures, he had spent large sums on Greek celebrations, and thus left an empty treasury where he had found a full one. The report as to his death is to the effect that he barely escaped with his life from an attempt to loot a temple of Anaitis, and that soon after he was seized with some sudden malady‑epilepsy or apoplexy‑and died at the Persian town of Taba 165164 (II Mace. ix. 7).
Antioch V. Eupator (164‑162) had been associated with his father in the government, but during his term Lysias was the real ruler. The first result of the death of Epiphanes was that in Palestine the proscription of the Jewish religion as such ceased, probably because Lysias had seen that by such means the people would best be reduced to quietness. In Dec., 164, the worship of Yahweh was renewed in the Temple. But the contest had entered upon a new phase in which not merely religion but nationalism was the issue. The Syrians were practically forced, by the excesses of the Jews in punishing apostates, to carry on the war; the Maccabees sustained a severe reverse in 163 at Beth‑zur, and Jerusalem was besieged. An attempt by a certain Philip to seize the Syrian throne compelled Lysias to make terms with the Jews, leaving a Syrian guard in the citadel at Jerusalem. He hastened back to meet Philip, whom he defeated. Meanwhile Demetrius I. had escaped from Rome, seized the throne, and had both Eupator and Lysias beheaded.
Demetrius I. Soter (162‑150), son of Seleucus IV. Philopator, attempted while still at Rome to secure the consent of the senate to his return and assumption of the throne. But the Romans preferred the weakness of a court cabal in the East (which would give opportunity for intervention) to control by a single hand which gave promise of firmness. Procrastination resulted, and Demetrius took the veiled hint of Polybius that action was better than diplomacy. Accordingly he escaped from Rome, relied upon the inherent loyalty of the East to his house as against the palace camarilla headed by Lysias, and was not disappointed. The
army seized and at a hint slew Lysias and Eupator, and Syria proper acclaimed the new king. Rome was not pleased, however, and permitted a certain Timarchus to assume kingship over the Medes; but Demetrius soon disposed of Timarchus, and continued the process of making sure his control of those regions. In Judea strife was continuing between the Greek party and the nationalists, and the former appealed to Demetrius for support; the latter established Alcimus, the spokesman of the Greek party, as high priest, and sent Nicanor against the Maccabees. In the ensuing conflict Judas gained his last great victory over Nicanor, and followed this up by appealing to Rome. But while the embassy was on its way Demetrius sent Bacchides with a strong force, and he defeated and slew Judas, established a chain of forts to hold the Jews within bounds, including the Acra at Jerusalem, which long remained a menace to the city. Encouraged by his successes elsewhere, Demetrius intervened in Asia Minor, but at length was disastrously defeated. His opponents there retorted by putting forth Alexander Balas as a claimant to the throne (153), asserting that he was the second son of Antiochus. The new claimant won over the Roman senate, and during the subsequent conflict Demetrius fell and Alexander became king.
Alexander I. Balas (Theopator Euergetes; 150145) was assisted in overthrowing Demetrius by Ptolemy Philometor, whose daughter Cleopatra he married. Alexander's purpose in gaining the crown seemed from the issue merely the opportunity for indulgence in sensual pleasure. Government was turned over to his minister Ammonius, whose crimes were legion and inflamed the people. Meanwhile the Jews under Jonathan and Simon were making capital out of the conditions and the rivalry of kings in Syria. While Balas and Demetrius were striving for the throne, both were bidding for the support of the Jews, and the latter accepted each of the concessions made by either of the parties. So it came about that Jonathan became high priest, the Hellenistic party in Judea became practically extinct, the garrisons from the border fortresses were withdrawn, though that in the Acra at Jerusalem still remained; while the Jews were more closely bound together by the newly recognized high‑priestly status of the Hasmoneans. In 148147 Demetrius Il. Nicator, the son of Demetrius Soter, a boy of fourteen, was put forward as a claimant to the Syrian throne, and the Philistine cities declared for him. The Jews were, however, faithful to Alexander, defeated the army raised in the Philistine territory, and so protected Alexander's southern approaches. Ptolemy Philometor again intervened, this time in favor finally of Demetrius, occupied Antioch, and, himself rejecting the offer of the crown of Syria, conferred it upon Demetrius (145), Alexander and Philometor both losing their lives as a result of the later phases of the conflict.
From this time the story of Syria is that of a series of struggles for the throne on the part of those who had claims more or less direct, two and even three kinglets at a time exercising authority over parts of the realm or retiring to gather strength

848
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Seleucidee
Self‑Defense
for a new essay at power. Demetrius II. Nicator (145‑138, 128‑124) was practically maintained on the throne by the Cretan mercenaries, of evil fame, who had assisted to place him there, who, with Jewish contingents, rioted in Antioch and boasted of the slaughter of the gentiles wrought there. Tryphon, one of the generals of Balas, disputed the reign of Nicator, setting up Antiochus VI. Theos Epiphanes Dionysus (145‑?), son of Alexander Bales, in Antioch while Demetrius ruled in Seleucia. The gains of the Jews seemed dangerous to Tryphon, and he treacherously captured Jonathan the Maccabee and slew him, hoping thus to leave the Jews without a leader and at his mercy. This alienated the Jews under the unexpected leadership of Simon, who espoused the cause of Demetrius. About 143142 Tryphon had the young Antiochus assassinated and himself aspired to the throne, hoping to found a new dynasty. About 140 Demetrius determined upon a campaign in the East to recover that region from the Parthians; but he was captured by them (138) and held a close prisoner. This seemed to leave Tryphon a clear field. But Antiochus VII. Sidetes (138‑128), younger son of Demetrius I., had grown up in Side of Pamphylia. When his brother was captured in Parthia, he entered Seleucia as the rightful king, and in the presence of a Seleucid the backing of Tryphon fell away while he was himself captured and forced to commit suicide. During the reign of Sidetes the genius of the Seleucids shone out with a dying gleam. The gains of the Jews had been enormous through the bidding of rival claimants to the Syrian throne and their own seizure of opportunities. They had gained territory never before in possession of Hebrews. Sidetes demanded indemnity for their conquests, which Simon attempted to meet with commercial bargaining. In 134 Sidetes sent an army which besieged Jerusalem and Put the Jews in a humbler frame of mind, yet without raising fanatical opposition. He then set out for Parthia to recover the East and release his brother. Successful at first, in the end he was defeated and slain. Meanwhile, in the earlier stages of the conflict the Parthian king had released Demetrius, and later attempted to recapture him. The latter, having regained Syria, attempted the conquest of Egypt to restore his mother‑in‑law Cleopatra against Ptolemy Euergetes. But he was checked at Pelusium, while Syria revolted against him as soon as he left, Alexander Zabinas (129‑122) being put forth as a pretender by Euergetes; Demetrius was defeated, became a fugitive, and fell at Tyre. Under Cleopatra, daughter of Ptolemy Philopator, the struggle went on between the house of Seleucus and Alexander. Seleucus V. (12r124), son of Nicator, was assassinated, possibly by order of Cleopatra, while his brother, Antiochus VIII. Grypos (12r124‑113; 111‑96) defeated Zabinas and ended his reign. Cleopatra then attempted to poison him but was caught in her own device (121?). Grypos amused himself with feasts, until Antiochus I%. Cyzicenus (113‑95), his half‑brother, assailed him and compelled him temporarily to withdraw (113); but two years later he returned and recovered all but Coele‑Syria, which Cyzicenus held. The rival kings died within a year
of each other, both probably by violent deaths; then the sons of Grypos (Seleucus VL, Antiochus ZL, Philip, Demetrius III. Eucarus, and Antiochus %IL) fought with the son of Cyzicenus (Antiochus %. Eusebes). In the mfil6e Tigranes of Armenia captured the kingdom and held it (8369), but in 69 the Roman Lucullus permitted Antiochus RIH. Asiaticus to sit on the throne. In 65 Pompey made Syria a Roman province.
GEo. W. GILMORE.
BIBLIOGniPET: As sources recourse should be had to CIG and CIS, C. Michel, Recueil d'inscriptions precques, Paris, 1900; to the historical works of Polybius, Appian, Strabo, the younger Pliny (Hist. naturalis), Isidore (Stathmoi Par ehikoi), the Chronicorum libri duo of Eusebius (which contains some sources otherwise lost); and from the Jewish side the Antiquities and War of Josephus, and I and II Maccabees. For the English reader a splendid work is available in E. R. Bevan, House of Seleucus, 2 vols., London, 1902. Of singular value for completeness and exactness are: J. G. Droysen, Geschichte des Hellmismus, 2 vols., Hamburg, 1836‑43; B. Niese, Geschichte der priechischen and makedoniachen Staaten seit der Schlacht bei Chdronea, 3 parts, Gotha, 1893‑1903. Other literature bearing on the subject is: L. Flathe, Geschichte Macedoniens and der Reiche welche von makedonischen BBnipen beherracht wurden, vol. if., Leipaie, 1834; H. F. Clinton, Fasti Hellenici, pp. 310‑350, Oxford, 1851; A. P. Stanley, Hist. of the Jewish Church, pp. 285‑396, London, 1877; E. Babelon, Catalogue des monnaies precques. Les Rois de Syrie, d'Armlnie, et de Commagene, Paris, 1890; A. Kuhn, Beitrage zur Geschichte der Seleukiden . . . 1,29164, Altkireh, 1891; F. Susemihl, Geschichte der Oriechisehen Litteratur in der Atexandrinerzeit, 2 vols., Leipsie, 1891‑92 (gives excellent sidelights); A. Holm, Griechische Geschichte, vol. iv., Berlin, 1894, Eng. tranal., Hid. of Greece, vol. iv., London, 1898 (comprehensive); H. Willrieh, Juden and Griechen vor der makkabdischen Erhebunp, GSttingen, 1895; J. P. Mahaffy, Greek Life and Thought. London, 1896; S. Mathews, Hist. of New Testament Times in Palestine, chaps. i.‑vi., new ed., New York, 1910; G. Hoelscher, Paldstina in der persischen and hellenistischen Zeit, Berlin, 1903; P. Barry, in JBL, xxix (1910), 126‑138; SehOrer, Geschichte, i. 166 sqq., Eng. transl., I., i. 169 aqq. For the Jewish side use may be made of the literature on the period indicated under ABA.B, and ISRAEL, HISTORY or (some exact references will be found to this literature in C. F. Kent, Hist. ofJewiah People, p. 367, New York, 1899); and of the later commentaries on Daniel and on I and II Maccabees. The history of Egypt and Syria so interlaced during this period that the literature given under PToraas: will be found illuminative for the most part.

SELF‑DEFENSE: A term of jurisprudence, politics, and ethics, requiring a different treatment in each. In law it is an act which has the outward form of a penal offense, but instead of being penal it is permissible and justifiable‑a defense which is requisite in order to ward off an illegal attack of which there is immediate danger. The danger may be of loss of life, bodily injury, or injury to honor or property. The defense may go to the length of killing the aggressor, even without respect to the value of the good that is threatened; but excess beyond a reasonable measure of defense involves guilt, though not penal, in view of the alarm caused in the one threatened. In the political field the question of self‑defense assumes importance in deciding the justification of war or revolution. In a thoughtful discussion of the question (Ethik, II., ii. 265 sqq.) Hans Lassen Martensen is inclined to justify revolutions of a national character, such as the revolt of the Low Countries against Spanish domination, as cases in which a nation is defending its life.

Self‑Denial	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	g¢
e lli
	From the purely ethical standpoint, personal self
defense is not only a right but a duty, to be re
stricted to the defense of life or female honor (R.
Rothe, Ethik, ii. § 894). If life is attacked in such
a manner that it can not be defended by flight or
by recourse to the protection of the State, and if
no purpose is served by its sacrifice except the per
mission of a crime, then the one attacked has the
duty of opposing not violence to violence, but right
to violence. The individual is here fighting not for
himself alone, but for social rights, and for moral
principle. Martyrdom is a different case; here the
duty of bearing witness to divine truth rises above
the duty of self‑preservation in the same measure
as the value of the truth of God above the life of
sense. The defense of other goods than life and the
sexual honor is morally not so universal a duty, and
the measures of self‑defense should be proportion
ate to the value of the thing threatened. The Bible
contains no prohibition of self‑defense; Matt. v.
38‑39 can not be adduced under the conditions
here laid down, and Ex. xxii. 2, 3 is not a general
moral precept but a regulation of the Mosaic law.
The action of Peter in the garden of Gethsemane
was from his point of view justifiable self‑defense;
the special reason for Christ's rebuke of it is obvi
ous. Ethical and juridical constructions diverge
on this matter. In all instances the moral sense
must intensify the consciousness of duty. On the
other hand, the law makes concessions in self‑de
fense which are untenable in moral judgment.
		(KARL BURGERt.)
	SELF‑DENIAL: A term, the exact adversative
of Selfishness (q.v.), expressing the reference of
human will and desire not to self but to the altruistic
object (Matt. x. 38‑39, xvi. 24‑25; Mark viii. 34
35; Luke ix. 23‑24). It represents a New‑Testa
ment idea (arneisthai; aparneisthai). Of self‑denial
in the sense in which Jesus enjoined it upon his
followers the world before him was unconscious,
and outside of him has no knowledge of it. Self
denial demands nothing less than the renuncia
tion of the self and the deliverance of the will from
the false egoistic center, thereby virtually abolish
ing. or losing the natural life and gaining a new true
life‑center, by joining the will with the divine, or
having one's life hid with Christ in God (Col. iii. 3),
not living for self but Christ (II Cor. v. 15; cf.
Gal. ii. 20). It involves the exercise of a lifetime.
Its first appearance is in repentance. When the
divine Spirit takes hold of man, he is thrown into
self‑conflict. An inclination to truth and righteous
ness in him awakens the desire or will to escape
from the carnal self. This willing is as yet weak,
but God permits the upright to conquer. Regen
eration takes place, and self‑denial becomes a daily
exercise and enters into every contested act or step
that makes for righteousness and holiness. It is
thus the inner principle of Christian discipleship.
With a daily self‑abnegation and crucifying of the
flesh, the new life in Christ grows, increases in
strength, and reaches a more and more complete
character. Self‑denial becomes habitual. It is con
trary to the spirit of the Gospel to prescribe a law
to self‑denial and convert it into a work of merit.
As a product of the freedom of the regenerate,it possesses ethical value, and is an important means to the promotion of Christian unity, in the suppression of all the motives that violate brotherly love, and the alternative advancement of the gentleness that overcomes an erring one, the humility that serves, and the fidelity that yields in order to win. (KARL BURGERt.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. Martensen, Christian Ethics, ii. 411, Edinburgh, 1882; I. A. Dorner, System of Christian
Ethics, pp 378 sqq., New York, 1887; J. Kostlin, Chnatliche Ethik, pp. 74, 119, 123, 197‑198, Berlin, 1899; the literature under 8zLFIsaNBes; and the lexicons under apvcia4m, aaapvcio0m.
SELFISHNESS: A term of late origin for a conception of great antiquity, which means, more appropriately than " egoism," the exclusive reference of human will and desire to self in contrast with the love and obedience by which man is obligated to God by virtue of his created character (Cf. SELF‑DENIAL). This abnormal tendency may be regarded dogmatically as the fundamental sin; ethically, as the root of sinful development, and as the concomitant and undercurrent of all natural morality. Man as a dual being, in his personality akin with God, and identified on the one side with the world, had the duty and privilege of maintaining fellowship with God by free grateful love, and first of consecrating himself to God, and then by faithful service of sustaining the world in obedience toward God and likewise sanctifying it for him. In the faithful pursuit of this mission, the image of God was to be realized in him, as the end of his life and development. How he departed from this original career set before him is a matter that pertains to the problem of the origin of evil. Attention is called here only to the difference between the idea that selfishness is the root of sin (J. Miiller) and its alternative, that it originated from sense (R. Rothe). As by a false self‑assertion man sought his own life and, independently of God, yielded to the temptations to be like God, he released the impulses of sensuousness within (Gen. iii.). Spiritual apostasy from God resulted in sensual inclination toward the world. Man who, by self‑exaltation, seeks to force his own salvation instead of accepting it from above, brings upon himself the punishment of self‑humiliation. He becomes a slave to carnality and appetite. The development springing from this. perverse tendency of selfishness may assume either of two commutable and multitudinously intersecting directions‑the passion of sensual indulgence and spiritual pride. The sensualist pursues happiness by seeking to conquer the world and finding satisfaction in its goods and joys. From this arises the so‑called " battle for existence," offered as a hypothesis for the history of human development. The elements of truth in this are that selfishness recognizes no social obligation. Spiritual pride, on the other hand, feigns to despise selfishness, and aspires to satisfaction in an assumed spiritual perfection. Its motives are the conceit of knowledge and the passion to rule. The sensual man is not without pride, setting up his theory of self‑justification and spiritual pride frequently suffers most humiliating disasters when the

845	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	self‑Deaial
sepia
suppressed and despised sensuality reasserts itself.
	Tile coarse and common sins classify themselves
under sensuality, the more refined and spiritual
ones under pride. Self is in all instances central;
love of God is in all its forms negated and excluded,
while the morality based on egoism is atheistic.
The effort to oppose a coarse selfishness to a " ra
tional self‑love " which places the benefits and ad
vantages of self uppermost but concedes also some
thing similar to others, may be taken as a disguise
of its real nature and a dissembling of virtue. Its
egoism is chiefly commercial. Live and let live is
its maxim. In family‑life selfishness ascends even
as far as heroism or self‑sacrifice. Parents deny
themselves to accumulate for their offspring or
provide for their education. In the aristocracy all
is sacrificed to the maintenance of the name. Am
bition in knowledge, art, and statesmanship is vir
tually self‑seeking. Even piety is not inaccessible
to it. Here it appears in both forms; passion of
spiritual indulgence and self‑righteousness. Not
content with simple Biblical fare, it drags worldly
affectations and modes into the religious life. Self
righteousness is the root of Pharisaism; and how in
eradicably it is embedded in the human heart is
illustrated in Christian history and human experi
ence. In the last account, selfishness rewards its
votaries with death. Seeking to save their lives they
shall lose them. 	(KARL BuRGERt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: R. Rothe, Theolopische Ethik, vol. i., Wittenberg, 1867; A. Wuttke, Christian Ethics, i. 175, ii. 165, New York, 1876; J. Moller, Lehre van der Sfande, ii. 3‑4, Breslau, 1839‑44, Eng. transl., 2 vols., Edinburgh, 1877; 1. A. Dorner, Christliche Glaubenalehre, ii. § 177, 2 vols., Berlin, 1886, Eng. transl., Edinburgh, 1880‑‑82; idem, System of Christian Ethics, pp. 378 sqq., New York, 1887; A. H. Strong, Philosophy and Religion, pp. 450‑457, ib. 1888; H. L. Martensen, Ethik, i. 132 sqq., Berlin, 1894, Eng. transl., London, 1881‑82; J. 86stlia, Christliche Ethik, pp. 74, 93 sqq., 197 sqq., 393, 456 sqq., 532, 548 sqq., Berlin, 1899.

SELIGENSTADT, s6'lig‑en‑stilt": A small He&. sian town on the Rhine (15 m. e.s.e. of Frankfort), at which Archbishop Aribo (Arno) of Mainz convened, probably on Aug. 12, 1023, one of the most important of the comparatively few German medieval provincial synods. It was attended by Bishops Burchard of Worms, Werner of Strasburg, Brun of Augsburg, Eberhard of Bamberg, and Meginhard of Wiirzburg, and the abbots of Fulda, Hersfeld, Lorsch, St. Maximin, Toley, St. Burchard in Wiirzburg, Schldchtern, St. Alban, Klingenmiinster, and Bleidenstadt. The decisions of the synod concern, among other matters, the observance of fasts before high feasts, the ember‑day fasts, the prohibition of superstitious usages, synodal procedure in cases of adultery, the degrees of kinship, prohibition of a transfer of a church without the permission of the diocesan, and penance. There was also a prohibition against going to Rome without the consent of the bishop or his vicar; and it was likewise enacted that those charged with grave offenses should be obliged to perform the penanees enjoined by their parish clergy before being permitted to go to Rome to seek absolution from the pope, such a visit being itself contingent upon the consent of
their diocesans. The two latter requirements have
by some been construed as attempts to reduce papal
prerogatives to mere honorary privileges, but as a
matter of fact they simply reaffirm usages which
already existed. 	(A. HAucx.)
BIBLtoaaAPa:: R. Miller, Erzbiaohof Aribo von Mains,
Berlin, 1881; W. Derseh, Die Kirchenpolitik des Erzbischol Anbo von Mainz, Marburg, 1899; Hauck, KD, iii. 534 sqq.; Hefele, Concitienpeschichte, iv. 671.
SELL, EDWARD: Church of England, orientalist; b. at Wantage (14 m. s.w. of Oxford) Jan. 24, 1839. He finished his education at the Church Missionary College, London, 1862, and was fellow of Madras University, 1874; was made deacon in 1862, and priest, 1867; was principal of the Harris High School for Mohammedans, Madras, India, 1865‑81; became secretary of the Church Missionary Society for the dioceses of Madras and Travancore, 1881; examining chaplain to the bishop of Madras, 1899; and canon of St. George's Cathedral, Madras. He is one of the chief authorities on Mohammedanism, and in this interest has written The Faith of Islam (London, 1880, 3d ed., 1907); The Historical Development of the Qur'an (1897; 2d ed., 1909); Essays on Islam (1901); Islam: its Rise and Progress (1907); The Religious Orders of Islam (1908); The Khulafa'r‑Rashidun (1909); The Cult of Ali (1909); The Battles of Badr and Uhud (1909); Al‑Qur'an (1909); Sufiism (1910); The Druaes (1910); Ghazwas and Siriyaa (1911).
SELL, KARL: German Protestant; b. at Giessen Nov. 29, 1845. He studied at the universities of Halle, Gottingen, and Giessen (1863‑70; Ph.D., Giessen, 1869); was curate at Darmstadt (18691871); pastor there (1871‑82); supreme consistorial counselor and superintendent in the province of Starkenburg (1882‑91), and since 1891 has been professor of church history in the University of Bonn. He has written Das Christentum gegenuber den Angrifen von Strauss (Heilbronn, 1877); Aus Religions‑ and Kirchengeschiehte (Darmstadt, 1880); Alice, Grossherzogin von Hesse (1883); Die geschichtliche Enhoicklung der Kirche im neunzehnten Jahrhundert (Giessen, 1887); Aus der Gesehichte ties Christentums (Darmstadt, 1889); Philipp Me. lanehthon and die deutsche Reformation bis 1631 (Halle, 1897); Die Entwicklung der katholischen Kirche im neunzehnten Jahrhundert (Leipsie, 1898); Goethes Stellung zur Religion. and zum Christentum (Freiburg, 1899); Die Religion unaerer Klassiker, Lessing, Herder, Schiller, Goethe (Tiibingen, 1904, 2d ed., 1910); Katholizismus and Protestantismua in Geschichte, Religion, Politik, Kultur (Leipsie, 1908); Wilhelm von Humboldt in seinen Briefen (1909); and Christentum and Weltgeschichte bas zur Reformation and seit der Reformation. (2 parts, 1910).

SELLIIY, ERNST FRIEDRICH MAX: Austrian Protestant; b. at Altschwerin (80 m. n.w. of Berlin), Mecklenburg, May 26, 1867. He was educated at the universities of Rostock, Erlangen, and Leipsic; taught in a gymnasium at Parchim (1891‑94); was privat‑docent for Old‑Testament exegesis at Erlangen (1894‑97); professor of Old‑Testament exegesis and archeology in the Evangelical theological faculty of the University of Vienna (1897‑

8elnecker
Semfpelagianism
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
1908), during this period making important excavations in Palestine; and since 1908 professor at Rostock in Old‑Testament exegesis. He has written Beitrdge zur israelitisch‑judischen Religionsgeschichte (2 vols., Leipsic, 1896‑97); Serubbabel, ein Beitrag zvr Geschichte der messianischen Erwartung and der Entstehung des Judentums (1898); Studien zur Entstehungsgeschichte der judischen Gemeinde nach derv babylonischen Exil (2 vols., 1900); Tell‑Ta'dnek. Bericht fiber meine Ausgrabungen in Paldstina (1904); Die alttestamentliche Religion im Rahmen der anderen altorientalischen (1908); Das Rdtsel des deuterojesajanischen Buches (1908) ; Die israelitischjiidische Heilandserwartung (in Biblische Zeit‑ and Streitfragen; Gross‑Lichterfelde, 1909); and Altes Testament (Leipsic, 1909).

SELNECKER, NIKOLAUS: German Lutheran theologian, hymnist, and collaborator on the Formula of Concord; b. at Hersbruck (17 m. e.n.e. of Nuremberg) Dee 5. (or 6), 1530; d. at Leipsic May 24, 1592. He early manifested marked musical talent, but it was only after completing his course in law at the University of Wittenberg (1550‑54) that he turned to the study of theology, mainly under the influence of Melanchthon, whose distinctly irenic type of theology he adopted. After lecturing for a time on philology, philosophy, and theology, he was recommended by MeIanchthon, in 1557, as third court chaplain to Elector August of Saxony, and in Jan., 1558, he accordingly removed to Dresden. A year later he also took charge of the training of the choir in the court chapel, and for four years he was, in addition, tutor of the heirapparent, Alexander (d. 1565). During this Dresden period he published exegeses of the Psalms, Wisdom of Solomon, and I John, as well as Catalogus prcecipuorum conciliorum wcumenicorum et nationalium a tempore apostolorum usque ad nostram cstatem (2 parts, Frankfort, 1571) and such dogmatic and practical works as his Libellus brevis et utilis de cmw Domini (Leipsic, 1561) and Pwd4Wogia Christiana (Frankfort, 1565). Meanwhile Melanchthon had died, and Selnecker came under the far from irenic influence of his father‑in‑law, Daniel Greiser, thus being transformed into a bitter polemist. The opponents whom he now created seized as a pretext his severe criticism, in one of his sermons, of the elector's inordinate fondness for hunting, and in 1564 Selnecker left Dresden. In the following year he accepted a call to Jena, but two years later he and his Philippistic colleagues (see PmmrrisTs) were expelled from the country on the accession of Duke John William. He now turned to his former patron, Elector August, who appointed him, in 1568, professor in Leipsic, and also pastor of the Thomaskirche and superintendent. In 1570, securing from the elector leave of absence for two years, he accepted a call to Wolfenbattel as court chaplain, ecclesiastical councilor, and supreme superintendent‑general. Here, however, he became involved in most rancorous theological discord, accused by the Philippists of being an apostate to Flacianism, and by the Gnesio‑Lutherans of being a friend of the despised Wittenberg theologians. Escape seemed impossible, and his only solace was
in writing, this period, while he was residing at Ganderaheim, witnessing the composition of his Institutao religionis Christiance (Frankfort, 1572). In the summer of 1573 he worked for a few months at Oldenburg, where he sought to introduce a Lutheran church order, and was then recalled to his Leipsic professorship, resuming his superintendency and pastorate at the Thomaskirche in 1576.
This second Leipsic period was the most important, theologically, in the career of Selnecker, who found a task distinctly congenial to his irenic type of mind in the furtherance of the Formula of Concord (q.v.), even while becoming utterly estranged from his former friend Jakob Andrea (q.v.), who was bruskly dismissed from office by the elector. Selnecker's own time was, however, at hand. As long as August lived, his prot6g6 was busily engaged in writing, making visitations of churches and schools, and in pastoral work, but with the accession of Christian I. in 1586 Philippism revived, and the second Crypto‑Calvinistic controversy broke out. In 1589, unable conscientiously to refrain from criticizing Calvinism, Selnecker was suspended from office, although he still resided for a time at Leipsic. Within a few months, however, he fled, first to Halle and then to Magdeburg, and later secured the position of superintendent at Hildesheim. Late in 1591, on the sudden death of Christian, Selnecker was one of those invited to return to Leipsic and resume office. Despite serious illness, he accepted the call, but died almost immediately after his arrival.
The list of Selnecker's writings includes about 170 items, but of the collected edition which he planned, only four parts of his Latin works appeared (Leipsic, 1584‑93). His writings are, in content, dogmatic and polemic, exegetic, historical, and devotional. The chief of these, apart from those already noted, are Relationes aliquot: De consilio scripti Libri Concorditv; De persona Christi et cans Domini; De autoritate et sententia Confessionis Augustanw; De autoritate Lutheri et Philippi; De controversis nonnullis articulis (Leipsic, 1581) and Historic von der Augsburgischen Konfession (1584).
	A poet of some ability not only in Latin, but even
in Greek, Selnecker occupies a prominent place
among the hymnists of his period. He collected his
hymns, together with those of other writers, in his
Funfzig Psalmen des koniglichen Propheten David
ausgelegt (Nuremberg, 1563); Der ganze Psalter des
koniglichen Propheten David ausgelegt (1565‑66);
Trostliche Spriiche and Grabschriften aus heiliger
Schrift (1567); Psalter Davids mit kurzen Sumr
marien and Gebetlein (1572); and Christliche Psal
men, Lieder and Kirchengesdage (Leipsic, 1587).
Many of his hymns mirror forth his personal experi
ences and events in his career, but they have pre
served their popularity in Germany to the present
day, while seven of them have been translated into
English, the largest collection of the latter being in
the Ohio Evangelical Lutheran Hymnal (Columbus,
1880)• 	(F. W. DIBELIUS.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. Dibelius, in Beitrdge zur sdchaischen Kirchengeschichte, part 4, 1888; Buchwald, in Umere
Kirchenliederdichter, iv (1905); G. J. Planck, (3eschichte des protedantischen Lehrbepriffs, vol. v., 6 vols., Leipeie,

RELIGIOUS
347
1781‑1800; H. L. J. Heppe, Geschiehte des deutachen Prot‑
estantismus, vols. iii.‑iv., 4 vols., Marburg. 1853‑59; K. F. G6schel, Die Konkordienformet nach ihrer Geschichte, Leipsie, 1858; G. Frank, Geschichte der protestantischen Theologie, vol. i., ib. 1862; R. Calinieh, Kampf and Unterpang des Melanchthonismus in Kursachsen, ib.1866; Julian, Hymnology, pp. 1038‑41.
SELWYN, sel'win, GEORGE AUGUSTUS: Church of England; b. at Church Row, Hampstead, London, Apr. 5, 1809; d. at Lichfield (15 m. n.n.e. of Birmingham) Apr. 11, 1878. He was educated at Eton and Cambridge (B.A., 1831; M.A., 1834). While curate at Windsor in 1841, he was appointed first bishop of the Anglican Church in New Zealand. At his farewell sermon before leaving England there was present John Coleridge Patteson (q.v.), then a youth of fourteen, later bishop of Melanesia. Besides ministering to the spiritual wants of his colonial diocese, he extended his operations to the South Sea Islands, navigating his own vessel, the " Southern Cross," for this purpose. He brought youths from Melanesia to New Zealand, who, after receiving instruction, returned to enlighten their countrymen. In 1861 this branch of work was entrusted to Bishop Patteson, who had assisted him from 1855. In 1854, in England, he obtained permission to subdivide his diocese of New Zealand and establish a general synod of self‑government. Accordingly, upon his return four bishops were consecrated and a legal constitution went into effect. In 1868 he became bishop of Lichfield.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Mrs. E. A. Curteis, In Memoriam. A Sketch of the Life of . . . G. A. Selwyn, Newcastle, 1878; H. W. Tucker, Memoir of the Life and Episcopate of George Augustus Selwyn . . , 2 vols., London, 1879; G. H. Curteis, Bishop Selwyn of New Zealand, and of Lichfield, ib. 1889; E. A. Bulley, George Augustus Selwyn, First Bishop of New Zealand, ib. 1909.

SELWYN, WILLIAM: Church of England; b. in London in 1806; d. at Cambridge Apr. 24, 1875. He was educated at St. Johns College, Cambridge (fellow, 1829; M.A., 1831; B.D., 1850; D.D., 1864), became deacon, 1829, and priest, 1831; rector of Branstone, 1831; canon of Ely, 1833; vicar of Melbourne, 1846; and Lady Margaret profess.)r at Cambridge, 1855. Among his works are: Principles of Cathedral Reform (Cambridge, 1840) ; Horse Hebraicce (1848‑60); Testimonia patrum in veteres interpretes (1859); and he edited Origines contra Celsum, books i. iv (1877).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A sketch of the life by J. S. Wood is in Selwyn s Pastoral Colloquies on the South Downs, Cambridge, 1876, and another is in DNB, li. 233‑234.
SEMI‑ARIANS. See ARIANISM, I., 3, § 6.
	SEMIPELAGIANISM: A synergistic view raised
in opposition to Augustinian monergism. The
origin and scope of the term in the history of dogma
has not yet been clearly determined. From a pas
		sage in the Historia Pelagiana (Padua,
	Augustine 1673) of Enrico Noris it is regarded
not Wholly as being created by the medieval
	Authorita‑ scholastic theologians, but more
	tive. probably Noris there traces back its
		origin to the post‑Tridentine elabo
rators of the scholastic theology. Certainly it
is not found in current usage as late as the six
teenth century. It appears isolated in the Lu‑
ENCYCLOPEDIA
Selneoker
Semipelal;ianism
theran Formula of Concord (Epitome, 581, 10) and by the year 1601 it is found in‑ the records of the Congregatio de auxiliis in reference to an assailed thesis of Luis Molina (q.v.); and subsequently it became common. From this it appears probable that the term arose in the Molinist strife between the Dominican Thomists with the Jesuits. Its general acceptance may then have been occax sioned by the public notice of the Molinist strife produced by the Jansenist controversy (see JANsEN, CORNELIUs, JANSENISM). Evidently the term was to represent that doctrine of sin and grace in which Prosper of Aquitaine (q.v.) opposed the Massilians, and was later represented by Faustus of Riez (q.v.), and in some points declared heretical by the Synod of Orange, 529. The Synod of Carthage (418) had adopted among the eight canons against the Pelagians (see PELAGIUs, PELAGIAN CONTROvERsms) that (1) Adam became mortal only by the fall; (2) infants must be baptized on account of original sin; (3) divine grace involves, besides forgiveness, the power to avoid sin; (4) sinless perfection is impossible on earth. The entire Augustinian doctrine of grace was, however, not approved in this. Two years later Augustine, in formulating the Pelagian heresy, goes beyond the judgment of the council in stating that Pelagians assume that the grace by which men are justified was not given gratis but " upon merit." Not all who approved the condemnation of Pelagius were in accord throughout with Augustine. The question whether the " grace of creation, remission, and doctrine " were sufficient to attain salvation or whether a " grace of inspiration " was inwardly essential in addition and for every actthe real point at issue‑could be answered, as shown in Augustine's own thinking before 396, in the antiPelagian sense even where the Augustinian mode of thinking was not wholly followed. Once Augustine experienced this in the objection of a certain Carthaginian Vitalis, to whom he replied (c. 420), emphasizing grace " Prevenient to human will." Again, upon the agitation occasioned by his doctrine of grace before merit and of predestination, in apparent contradiction with the merit of good works, among the monks of Hadrumetum, he forwarded to them for further enlightenment the De gratis et libero arbitrio teaching that the work of grace does not make freedom and merit nugatory,
but is their only basis; he followed this with the De correptione et gratin, containing the doctrines of freedom by grace only, of perseverance, and the fixed number of the elect.
The last‑named work stirred lukewarm friends to hostility in the monastic circles about Marseilles
and Lerins, southern Gaul, including such men as
		Johannes Cassianus and Hilary) later
	Objections bishop of Arles (qq.v.). The former
	in Southern held (Collationes patrum, xi.‑xvii.)
	Gaul, that man possessed a rudiment of good
	will, which the grace of inspiration
even if Prevenient served to reenforce. Man must
be saved by grace but conditioned on his consent,
and " all who perish do so contrary to the will of

God." Reports of the disaffection reached Augus
tine in two letters from Prosper and another from

6emipelaeazaism	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	848
Hilary (428 or 429). With serious reverence for the piety of the Massilians, their objections are stated: (1) against the doctrine of predestination, involving human incapability of freely appropriating saving grace, on the ground that it is an innovation against the Fathers and subversive of the admonition and cure of souls of the Church. Moreover (2) the divine counsel of redemption contemplates all men; the choice of being saved or not is in the power of free will; and predestination (of which Rom. viii. 29‑30 necessarily forced recognition) was based on the foreknown " merit of faith and perseverance." Augustine answered with De prcedestinatione sanctorum on the " beginning of faith " and De dono perseueranti<e on persevering by grace alone. This was done in a fraternal spirit for the instruction of the Massilians, and Augustine therewith called attention to a similar former error on his part; but emphasizing, as these writings did, the most objectionable points, they naturally failed at conciliation. After Augustine's death (Aug. 28, 430), the polemics taken up by Prosper became more intense. The latter wrote responsiones to the Massilians (MPL, li. 155‑174), and (li.‑187‑202) against an attack of Vincent of Lerins (q.v.); and then with Hilary resorted to Rome (432) for aid; but Celestine I. (q.v.) declined to take an open attitude. His letter to the bishops of southern Gaul to restrain the " presbyters " from menacing the unity of the Church by raising improper questions was vaguely non‑committal. Prosper wrote his De gratia dei et libero arbatrio (Ii. 213‑276) against the Collationes of Cassianus and removed to Rome (434) from the scene of conflict. The Commonitorium pro catholica; fidei antiquitate (MPL, 1.), which treats Augustine with silence, may be taken to indicate that Prosper abandoned a hopeless cause. The Massilians remained in possession of the field in southern Gaul. There the doctrine of predestination was regarded as a heresy about 450; the presbyter Lucidus who taught it was recalled, 473; and two synods (Arles and Lyons) authorized Bishop Faustus of Riez (q.v.) to present it anew in comparison with the right synodal doctrine. The result was his Libri duo de gratis, in which Pelagius and the " error of predestination " are alike denounced, without the conscious advancement of a special doctrine. More in line with Augustinian tradition were two anonymous writings of the fifth century, possibly from Gaul. Libri duo de voeatione omnium gentium, sometimes ascribed to the later Leo I., attempts to disguise the severity of the Augustine position by the conception of a gratin or benignitas generalis beside the gratia specialis; but basing the attainment of the " special grace," not in the human employment of gratia generalis, but purely in the divine will, makes the latter irrelevant. The Hypomnestieon contra Pelagianos et C&elestianos, probably of the middle of the fifth century and apparently Gallic in origin, is remarkable for its reconstruction of the Augustinian doctrine of grace. It disavows the basing of predestination on " faith foreknown," but reckons also with a resistance to grace; the elect only are predestined, and " for those foreknown in evil works there may be said to be
a predestined punishment." Rome seems to have assumed a similar attitude, though less outspoken. This is shown by an ancient but ungenuine appendix to the letter of Celestine I. cited above, a catalogue of orthodox guide‑points on the doctrine of grace whose origin is unknown, although sometimes ascribed to the later Leo I. It is wholly Augustinian on total incapability, prevenient grace, and perseverance; but there is silence on irresistibility and predestination. That the writings of Faustus were included among the non‑approved works at the close of the fifth century is quite possible.
The conflict was renewed in the sixth century from another point of departure. When in the controversy between the Scetic monks and the papal legates at Constantinople, 519, over the formula " one of the Trinity suffered in the flesh," a certain
North African bishop, Possessor, tarryThe Contro‑ ing there, extended his support to the
versy over legates by citing for authority Faustus Faustus; of Riez. At this the monks declared
Synod of Possessor and all those in accord with
Orange. him to be Pelagians, and the contro‑
versy was opened concerning the orthodoxy of Faustus. The monks went to Rome (519) to secure the support of Pope Hormisdas and at the same time the disavowal of Faustus. The pope withheld decision at their departure after a stay of fourteen months, and, in reply to the motion of Possessor in 520, declared that Faustus, like all others not included among the Fathers, was incompetent to judge on dogmatic questions. The pope found error in the works of Faustus, but did not pronounce him heretical. Although Hormisdas appealed to the letters of Augustine (ut sup.) sent to Prosper and Hilary in behalf of the true doctrine on grace and free will, it does not follow that he recognized the ultra‑predestinarian view as that of the Church. From Rome the Scetic monks had issued a written appeal to the African bishops living in exile in Sardinia, to support their Christological and anti‑Pelagian views. One of them, Fulgentius of Ruspe (q.v.), responded in a thoroughgoing Augustinian manner in his Ad Petrum diaconum de incarnatione et gratis (MPL, lxv. 451‑493), the seven books of Contra PaustuM (now lost), De veritatione pradestinationis (603‑671); and, with other bishops, Epistula synodicd (435‑442). The importance of this incident consists only in the revival of interest at Rome for the heritage of Augustine. In southern Gaul, Caeesarius of Arles (q.v.), a pupil at L€rins, and in certain respects esteeming Faustus, was, however, a representative of genuine Augustinianism, although from his sermons apparently unconcerned about the irresistible effect of grace. At the Synod of Valence (528 or 529) his doctrine was assailed in his absence. His counterstroke was a series of eight negative and seventeen positive canons adopted by the " authority and admonition of the apostolic seat " by the Synod of Orange taken from Prosper's theses of the Sententim ex Avgustino. These not only negated all Pelagianism but partly the principles which had become dominant in southern Gaul a century before and were probably the opinion of a majority still. The resolutions affirmed the total

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
moral inability of the natural man to do good, the dependence of all moral human activity upon grace, or infusio et insgiratio Sancti Spiritus; and the prevenience of grace to all merit and human choice and volition. Irresistibility is nowhere affirmed; the disconnection of baptism and the impartation of grace, which may be shown repeatedly in Augustine, is discarded and baptism is pronounced a vehicle of grace; and an anathema. is declared upon those who maintain the predestination to evil, which is the only mention of that doctrine. Boniface II. approved these resolutions of Orange and they became the official disposition of the Semipelagian controversy for all time.
The Massilians held Pelagius to be a heretic and accepted the decision of the Synod of Carthage (418). They concurred in Augustine's doctrine of grace, including the thesis that man requires the inspiration of grace to do good. But
The View they declined the Augustinian mon‑
	Defined.	ergism; their synergistic view involved
		the decision on man's part, with refer
ence to eternal life, whether by virtue of his free
dom he assented, and therefore submitted to the
operation of divine grace, or was indifferent to
grace, therefore rejecting it. The Augustinian
theses, that faith is purely an effect of grace; that
grace is irresistible; that no human act (as meritum)
is ever to be considered as a cause of the divine
operation of grace; that salvation has its basis only
in the divine election‑these were unacceptable.
This view has been designated as Semipelagian on
the presupposition of the difference between Augus
tine referring the salvation of those who are saved
to the grace of God alone, and Pelagius referring the
same to the possible well‑doing of man without the
" grace of inspiration." Accordingly the synergism
of the Massilians is correctly presumed to be " half "
Pelagian, and the discovery by Augustine and
Prosper of reliquice of Pelagianism is from their point
of view well founded. But it is improper to make
the doctrine of grace of Augustine, as a whole never
recognized by the Church, the standard with which
to compare a heresy. Semipelagian it was, for, in
common with Pelagius, its thought was anti
Augustinian not only on points of Augustine never
approved by the Church, but also on theses whose
negation was later expressly condemned. But no
Pelagian thought condemned by the Church of that
time has ever been pointed out in it. Was Semi
pelagianism something other than the anti‑Pelagian
popular Catholicism of the time? The departures
from Augustinian doctrine not censured at Orange
should not be designated Semipelagian. From the
point of view of the Church the material concept
of Semipelagianism should be defined only by the
standard of the later official doctrine, not by Augus
tinianism as such. As a censured heresy its distinc
tive marks are: (1) denial of Prevenient grace; (2)
refusal to recognize that " faith " was a " gift of
God "; (3) refusal to regard the natural man as
totally incapable of doing good, making the spon
taneous cooperation of man a condition to the opera
tion of grace; (4) presuming grace to be imparted in
consequence of " some merit." A broader definition
of the content and scope of the concept of Semi.
6emipela8'ianiem
	Pelagianism devolves upon a critical consideration
of the development of the Roman Catholic Church.
	The attitude of the Roman Church to Augustine is
	untrue to fact. He is the doctor ecclesice, yet his
	doctrine of grace has never been officially sanc
	tioned. The later development, even that which has
	official sanction, has drifted away in the direction
	characterized by Semipelagian thought. This un
	true attitude arises from the obscure perplexities,
	which were to be left alone in the adjustment of
	the Semipelagian controversy. The decision of
	Orange is equivocal. Thorough Augustinianism
	may add to the sentence that " all the baptized
	should be able, if they will, to labor faithfully to
	become perfect," that of Augustine, " if God have
	compassion, we also exercise will." On the other
	hand, the idea of resistance to grace is not pro
	hibited. This position appears already in the Hy
	pomnesticon, antedating Semipelagianism. Here
	all the unbaptized, even the dying infants of Chris
	tians, remain subject to the uncertainty of predes
	tination; merely the fact of their being non‑elect
	is the reason why grace has never sought their
	rescue. But with reference to the baptized the anti
	Augustinian tendency was triumphant. For even
	if the non‑resistance of the elect was not taken as
	the ground of their election, yet the predestination
	to death of reprobates was grounded upon the fore
	seen demerit of their resistance, involving also the
	conditioning of election on the failure of the fore
	seen resistance. Augustine's doctrine was thus up
	rooted; for all the baptized the decision of eternal
	life rested upon free will. To such thought the re
	vival of the predestination doctrine by Gottschalk
	(q.v.) seemed to be heresy. Therefore this view of
	the Hypomnesticon may be termed crypto‑Semi
	pelagianism. The Franciscan theology of the thir
	teenth century passed beyond this. With the aid
	of the distinction, coming down even from the fifth
	century, of gratis generalis grata data and saving
	grace, and meritum de congruo, and meritum de con
	digno (see Scxol.AsTicisx, II., § 1), the Semipelagian
	representations appeared in new garbs. These views
	may be termed Neo‑Semipelagianism. The two
	latter may justly be charged against the Roman
	Church of the present. 	(F. LooFs.)
BIBLIOORAPRY: T. Eleutherius, Histories controversarium de divince gratin: auxiliis, Antwerp, 1705; C. W. F. Walch, Historic der Ketzereien, vol. v., Leipsic, 1770; J. Geffcken, Historia Semipelapianismi antiquimima GSttingen, 1826; G. F. Wiggers, Versuch titer pragrnatischen Daratellunp des Aupustinismus and Pelayianismus nach ihrer geschichtlichen Enturickeluna, Hamburg, 1833; idem, in ZHT, xxiv (1854), 3‑42, xxv (1855), 268‑324, xxvii (1857), 163263, xxix (1859), 471‑591; P. Sublet, Le Semipeagianisme des origines dans ses rapport: noec Augustin, le p6lapianisme et l'eglise, Namur, 1897; F. W6rter, Beitruge zur Dogmengeschichte des Semipelagianismus, Paderborn, 1898; idem, in Zur Dopmengeschichte des SemiPelagianismus, ed. Kn6pfier et al., v. 2, Munster, 1899; M. Tacquin, in Revue des sciences philosophiques et theolopiques, i (1907), 506‑508 (on the date when Semipelagianism" arose); Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, ii. 697 sqq., 724 sqq., Eng. transl., iv. 123 sqq., 152 sqq., Fr. transl., ii. 2, pp. 1053 sqq., 1085 sqq. (should be consulted for supplementary bibliography); Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 857‑885; KL, Xi. 121‑126; and the literature under A6cosTINE; CAMBARIUB; CASSIAN; FAUSTUS OF RIEz; FULGENI7US; HILARY OF ARLES; PELAGIUS, especially NPNP, I Ser., VOL v., the "Introductory Essay"; PREDESTINATION; and PROSPER; and especially the works under DoorRINE, HisTORY OF,

Semitic Languages	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 	860
SEMITIC LANGUAGES.

	I. Name.	Disappearance of Semitic	Grammar; Phonetics (§ 1)•
Il. Territory.		Languages (§ 4).	Morphology and Syntax (§2).
	In Historical Times (§ 1).	III. Divisions.		Vocabulary and Style (§ 3).
	The Original Home (§ 2).		Grouping (§ 1).	V. Literary Products.
	Foreign Influence (§ 3).		Use of Those Tongues (§ 2).	VI. Relation to other Families of
		IV. Characteristics.			Languages.
I. Name: Up to the latter part of the eighteenth century, before Sanskrit was known to Europe, or attention had been directed to the Central and Eastern Asiatic tongues, or those of Africa (except Coptic), " Oriental languages " signified only Hebrew and its sister dialects: these alone, with the exception of Coptic, had been the object of scientific study. Up to this time all study of nonclassical languages was connected with the Bible; Biblical students accomplished all that was done in Hebrew, Arabic, Ethiopic, and the related tongues, for the preceding 300 years. But when the linguistic circle began to widen, and attempts were made at classification, the need of special names for different linguistic groups was felt; and, for the more general divisions, recourse was naturally had to the genealogies in the table of nations in Gen. x. The credit, if such it be, of having originated the name " Semitic " (from Noah's son Sem, or Shem) for
the Hebrew group, is to be given either to Schldzer or to Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (q.v.)‑to which of the two is doubtful. The first known use of the term is in Schlozer's article on the Chaldeans, in Eichhorn's Repertorium (viii. 161, 1781), and he seems to claim the honor of its invention; but a similar claim is made by Eichhorn for himself, without mention of Schlozer, in his Allgemeine Bibliothek, vi. 772 (Leipsic, 1794), and Eichhom appears to have been accepted as the author of the name. In a short while, however, it was everywhere adopted, and is now the recognized name of this group of languages. In Germany and France, and to some extent at least in England (so Coleridge, Table‑Talk, 1827), the form " Semitic " was employed (after Septuagint and Latin Vulgate, and Luther's " Sem," instead of Hebrew " Shem "); while some English and American writers prefer the form " Shemitic," after the more accurate transliteration of the Hebrew. Between the two there is little to choose, but the shorter form, now the more common one, is preferable to the other, because it is shorter, and inasmuch as it is farther removed from genealogical misconception. The once popular but unscientific threefold division of all the languages of the world into Japhetic, Shemitic, and Hamitic, is now abandoned by scholars. " Shemitic " is misleading, in so far as it appears to restrict itself to the languages spoken by the peoples mentioned in the table of nations as descendants of Shem, while it in fact includes dialects, as the Phenician and the Philistine, which are assigned in the table to Ham. The form " Semitic " (in English, but not in German and French), as farther removed than " Shemitie " from " Shexn," may, perhaps, be more easily treated as in itself meaningless, and made to accept such meaning as science may give it. On the other hand, as meaningless, it is felt by some to be objectionable; and
other names, expressing a geographical, or ethnical, or linguistic differentia of the languages in question, have been sought, e.g., Western Asiatic, Arabian, Syro‑Arabian: but none proposed has been definite and euphonic enough to gain general approbation, and it is likely that " Semitic " will retain its place for the present. If a new name is to be adopted some such term as " Triliteral " would be the most appropriate, since triliterality of stems is the most striking characteristic of this family of languages, and is found in no other family.
II. Territory: In ancient times (1,000 B.C.) the Semites occupied as their proper territory the southwestern corner of Asia; their boundaries, generally stated, being‑on the east, the mountain
range running south from about forty
r. In His‑ miles east of the Tigris River, and the torical Persian Gulf; on the south, the Indian Times. Ocean; on the west, the Red Sea,
Egypt, the Mediterranean Sea, and GSlieia; and on the north the Taurus or the Masius Mountains. The north and east lines are uncertain, from the absence of full data in the early Assyrian records. At least 1,500 years before the beginning of the Christian era, Semitic emigrants from Southern Arabia crossed the Strait of Bab‑el‑Mandeb, and occupied the part of Africa lying just south of Egypt, their territory being about that of the modern Abyssinia: these were the Geez (" emigrants," or possibly " freemen "), or Semitic Ethiopians. The main Semitic region thus lay between the tenth and thirty‑eighth degrees of north latitude and the fortyfourth and sixtieth degrees of east longitude, with an area of over a million square miles. Semitic colonies established thereselves early in Egypt (Phenicians in the Delta, and perhaps the Hyksos), and on the north coast of Africa (Carthage and other cities) and the south coast of France (Marseilles) and Spain, possibly (though this is uncertain) in Asia Minor and in Greece. In modern times Syrian Semites are found in Kurdistan, as far east as the western shore of Lake Urumiah (lat. 37° 30' N.; long. 45° 30' E.); but it is doubtful whether this region was Semitic before the beginning of the Christian era. A large part of Semitic territory was steppe or desert. Only those portions which skirt the banks of rivers and the shores of seas (with the exception of the city of Mecca and possibly one or two other small cities) were occupied by settled populations the desert was traversed by tribes of nomads, whose life was largely predatory. Semitic speech is interesting, not from the size of the territory and population it represents, but from the controlling influence it has exerted on history through its religious ideas.
The original seat of the Semites is unknown. There must have been a primitive Semitic race (with a primitive Semitic language), which existed before the historical Semitic peoples and dialects had taken