TURLUPINS:

A medieval sect akin to the Beghards, like whom they called themselves "the fellowship of poverty." The origin and meaning of the derisive epithet "Turlupins" are obscure. They seem to have been especially numerous in Paris and the province of Isle-de-France during the reign of Charles V. (1364-80), while in 1460-65 they were in the vicinity of Lille. According to their tenets, which are known only from their opponents, "inward prayer" was the sole religious duty. They carried their endeavor to imitate apostolic poverty to such an extreme that they went almost naked. In their gatherings, which were secret, they are said to have laid aside all their garments to symbolize paradise, and it is also said that they held that those who had reached a certain stage of perfection could no longer sin, and might indulge sensual impulses without hesitation. The Inquisition proceded unsparingly against the Turlupins, and Gregory XI. praised the king for his zeal against them, but they did not entirely disappear from France until the second half of the fifteenth century.

(EUGEN LACHENMANN.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Gerson, Opera, ed. Du Pin, Antwerp, 1706; J. Hermant, Hist. des heresies, iv. 374, Rouen, 1726; P. Fredericq, Corpus documentorum inquisitionis . . . Neerlandicae, i. 409-412, The Hague, 1889; H. C. Lea, History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, ii. 126, 158, New York, 1906; KL, iii. 147-148.

Church of England bishop of Korea; b. at Farley (4 m. e. of Salisbury), Wiltshire, Aug. 24, 1862. He was educated at Keble College, Oxford (B.A., 1885), and was ordained to the priesthood in 1888. After being curate of Watlington, Oxfordshire (1887-89), Downton, Salisbury (1889-92), and St. Nicholas Cathedral, Newcastle-on-Tyne (1892-96), he was a missionary in Korea from 1896 till 1905, when he was consecrated bishop of that country.

TURNER, FRANCIS:

Church of England bishop; b. probably at Fecham, Surrey, c. 1638; d. in London Nov. 2, 1700. He was educated at Winchester and at New College, Oxford (B.A., 1&59; M.A.,1663; B.D. and D.D., 1689); became rector of Therfield, Hertfordshire, 1664; fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, 1668; prebend for Sneating at St. Paul's, London, 1669; master of St. John's Col lege, Cambridge, 1670, and vice-chancellor, 1678; rector of Great Hasely, Oxfordshire, 1683; dean of Windsor and bishop of Rochester, 1683; was trans lated to Ely, 1684; preached the sermon at the cor onation of James IL, Apr. 23, 1685; joined in the protest of the seven bishops against the lung's dec laration for liberty of conscience, 1688; refused the oath of allegiance to William and Mary and was sus pended, 1689, and deprived, 1690; was arrested but discharged, 1698. He was a controversialist, and evoked a sharp retort from Andrew Marvell. Besides letters and occasional sermons, he wrote Brief Memoirs of Nicholas Ferrar (2d ed., London, 1837).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. à Wood, Athenae Oxonienses, ed. P. Bliss, iv. 545, 619, and Fasti, vol. ii. passim, London, 1813-20; T. Lathbury, Hist. of the Nonjurors, ib. 1862; W. H. Hutton, The English Church (1625-1714), pp. 228, 240, ib. 1903; DNB, lvii. 336-0337.

TURNER, HENRY McNEAL:

African Methodist Episcopal bishop; b. at Newberry Court House, S. C., Feb. 1, 1834. In his boyhood he lived in the cotton fields of his native state and learned to read and write by his own exertions, while as a servant in the Abbeville Court House, and later in a medical college at Baltimore, he widened his knowledge. In 1858 he was licensed as a preacher in the Methodist Episcopal Church South and traveled extensively in the southern states. In 1858 he became a member of the African Methodist Episcopal Church and soon joined the Missouri conference, in which he became an itinerant minister. In the fall of the same year he was transferred to the Baltimore Conference, where he remained four years, during which he completed his education at Trinity College. In 1862-63 he was pastor of Israel Church, Washington, D. C., and during the Civil War was chaplain of the First Regiment of United States Colored Troops. At the close of the war, he was commissioned chaplain in the regular army and was detailed to the Freedmen's Bureau in Georgia. He returned to the ministry in 1866 and was active also in educational and political affairs. He was elected a member of the Georgia constitutional convention in 1867 and in the following year entered the legislature of the same state, where he remained two terms (1868-72). He was then appointed successively postmaster of Macon, Ga., in 1870, inspector of customs in 1874, and United States secret detective in 1875. In 1876 the general conference of his denomination elected him general manager of its publications, with his residence at Philadelphia, and in 1880 he was chosen bishop. He is an ardent advocate of the return of the negroes to Africa, where he holds that they should build up a nation of their own, and he has organized four annual conferences in Africa at Sierra Leone, Liberia, Transvaal, and South Africa. He bas written African Methodist Episcopal Hymnal (Philadelphia, 1876); African Methodist Episcopal Catechism (1877); and Methodist Polity (1889).

TURNER, SAMUEL HULBEART:

Protestant Episcopal; b. in Philadelphia Jan. 23, 1790; d. in New York Dec. 21, 1861. He was graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, 1807; settled as pastor at Chestertown, Md., 1812; became professor of historic theology in the General Theological Seminary, New York, 1818, and from 1821 till his death was professor of Biblical learning. He was a sound and able commentator. He translated, with Bishop Whittingham, Jahn's Introduction to the Old Testament (New York, 1827), and Planck's Introduction to Sacred Philology and Interpretation (1834); wrote commentaries upon the Greek test of Hebrews (1852), Romans (1853), Ephesians (1856), Galatians (1856); prepared Companion to the Book of Genesis (1841); Biographical Notices of some of the most Distinguished Jewish Rabbies, and Translations of Portions of their Commentaries and Other Works (1847); Thoughts on the Origin, Character, and Interpretation of Scripture Prophecy (1852); Teachings of the Master (1858); Spiritual Things compared with Spiritual, or Gospels and Acts illustrated by Parallel References (1859); The Gospels according to the Ammonian Sections and the Tables of Eusebius (1861).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Autobiography of Samuel H. Turner, New York, 1863.

TURNOW, tur'nev, PETER:

Waldensian with Taboritic tendencies; b. at Tolkemit (50 m. s.w. of Königsberg), probably about 1390; executed at Speyer probably in Apr., 1426. Of his early life nothing is known, but about 1415 he was in Prague. Henceforth his fortunes were closely connected with those of Johannes Drändorf, and somewhat later he apparently visited Greece. A few years before his death he was rector of a school in Speyer, where, together with Drändorf, he began a series of attacks on the clergy of the city. He sought in vain to keep his friend from his own negotiations with Weinsberg, Heilbronn, and Wimpfen, and the pair were involved in common ruin. Besides his attacks on the secular power of the clergy, Turnow is said to have held that general councils could err, that the Eucharist must be administered under both kinds, the priest teaching or acting to the contrary being doomed to eternal punishment at the last day.

(FERDINAND COHRS.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Flacius, Catalogus testium veritatis, Frankfort, 1666; C. D. d'Argentre, Collectio judiciorum de novis erroribus, vol. ii., Paris, 1728; J. E. Kapp, Nachlese Einiger . . . zur Erläuterung der Reformations-Geschichte nützlicher Urkunden, part iii., Leipsic, 1730; H. Haupt, Die religiösen Sekten in Franken vor der Reformation, Würzburg, 1882; idem, in Historisches Taschenbuch, VI., vii. 233 sqq.; idem, Waldensertum und Inquisition im südöstlichen Deutschland, Freiburg, 1890; L. Seller, Die Reformation und die älteren Reformparteien, Leipsic, 1885.

TURRECREMATA, JOHANNES DE.

See Torquemada, Juan de.

TURRETTINI, tur"rê-tî'nî (TURRETIN):

A family of Geneva theologians, whose founder, Francesco Turrettini, left his native Lucca in 1574 and settled in Geneva in 1592.

1. Benedict:

Son of Francesco; b. in Zurich 1588; d. at Geneva Mar. 4, 1631. He became pastor and professor of theology at Geneva in 1612. In 1620 he was a delegate to the national synod of Alais, which introduced the results of the Synod of Dort into France. In the following year he was [Page 43]

[Page 44]

[Page 45]

[Page 46]

(1846); Letters to Dr. Horace Bushnell (1847-48), and the posthumous Lectures on Theology, with Memoir by N. Gale (Boston, 1859). His style is forcible and clear, and his matter always manifests the old Puritan faith in a personal God of holiness.

M. B. RIDDLE.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: See NEW ENGLAND THEOLOGY, v., § 1, and consult: the Memoir by N. Gale, ut sup.; E. A. Lawrence, in New Englander, 1859; A. H. Quint, in Congregational Quarterly, 1860; A. E. Dunning, Congregationalists in America, pp. 312, 388, New York, 1894; W. Walker, in American Church History Series, iii. 358-381, 366, New York, 1894; idem, New England Leaders, pp. 400-436, New York, 1901; F. H. Foster, New England Theology, pp. 386-393, Chicago, 1907.

TYMMS, THOMAS VINCENT:

TYNDALE, tin'dal, WILLIAM:

Biblical translator and martyr; b. most probably at North Nibley (15 m. s.s.w. of Gloucester), England, in 1484; d. at Vilvoorden (6 m. n.e. of Brussels), Belgium, Oct. 6, 1536. He was descended from an ancient Northumbrian family, went to school at Oxford, and afterward to Magdalen Hall and Cambridge, and about 1520 became tutor in the family of Sir John Walsh, at Little Sodbury in Gloucestershire. He was in orders; but the record of his ordination has not yet been verified. Having become attached to the doctrines of the Reformation, and devoted himself to the study of the Scriptures, the open avowal of his sentiments in the house of Walsh, his disputes with Roman Catholic dignitaries there, and especially his preaching, excited much opposition, and led to his removal to London (about Oct., 1523), where he began to preach, and made many friends among the laity, but none among ecclesiastics. He was hospitably entertained at the house of Sir Humphrey Monmouth, and also pecuniarily aided by him and others in the accomplishment of his purpose to translate the Scriptures into the vernacular. Unable to do so in England, he set out for the continent (about May, 1524), and appears to have visited Hamburg and Wittenberg; but the place where he translated the New Testament, although conjectured to have been Wittenberg, can not be named with certainty. It is, however, certain that the printing of the New Testament in quarto was begun at Cologne in the summer of 1525, and completed at Worms, and that there was likewise printed an octavo edition, both before the end of that year. From an entry in Spalatin's Diary, Aug. 11, 1526, it seems that he remained at Worms about a year; but the notices of his connection with Hermann von dem Busche and the University of Marburg are utterly unwarranted conjectures; and, it being now an established fact that Hans Luft never had a printing-press at Marburg, the colophon to Tyndale's translation of Genesis, and the title pages of several pamphlets purporting to have been printed by Luft at Marburg, only deepen the seemingly impenetrable mystery which overhangs the life of Tyndale during the interval between his departure from Worms and his final settlement at Antwerp. His literary activity during that interval was extraordinary. When he left England, his knowledge of Hebrew, if he had any, was of the most rudimentary nature; and yet he mastered that difficult tongue so as to produce from the original an admirable translation of the entire Pentateuch,The only perfect copy is in the Grenville Library of the British Museum; one in the Public Library, New York, is defective, folios XLIV. and XLV., as well as two of the eleven woodcuts of the volume, are wanting; the missing woodcuts have been supplied in facsimile by H. Another copy there lacks Genesis. The copy in the Baptist College, Bristol, England, contains Genesis, edition of 1534, the other four books are of the edition of 1530. the Books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, First and Second Samuel, First and Second Kings, First Chronicles, contained in Matthew's Bible of 1537, and of the Book of Jonah, so excellent, indeed, that to this day his work is not only the basis of those portions of the Authorized Version, but constitutes nine-tenths of that translation, and very largely that of the Revised Version. His Biblical translations appeared in the following order: New Testament, 1525-26; Pentateuch, 1530; Jonah, 1531. There is no general title of the Pentateuch; each book has its own title.

In addition to these he produced the following works. His first original composition, A Pathway into the Holy Scripture, is really a reprint, slightly altered, of his Prologue to the quarto edition of his New Testament, and had appeared in separate form before 1532; The Parable of the Wicked Mammon (1527); and The Obedience of a Christian Man (1527-28). These several works drew out in 1529 Sir Thomas More's Dialogue, etc. In 1530 appeared Tyndale's Practyse of Prelates, and in 1531 his Answer, etc., to the Dialogue, his Exposition of the First Epistle of St. John, and the famous Prologue to Jonah; in 1532, An Exposition upon the V. VI. VII. Chapters of Matthew; and in 1536, A Brief Declaration of the Sacraments, etc., which seems to be a posthumous publication. Joshua-Second Chronicles also was published after his death. All these works were written during those mysterious years, in places of concealment so secure and well chosen, that neither the ecclesiastical nor diplomatic emissaries of Wolsey and Henry VIII., charged to track, hunt down, and seize the fugitive, were able to reach them, and they are even yet unknown. Impressed with the idea that the progress of the Reformation in England rendered it safe for him to leave his concealment, he settled at Antwerp in 1534, and combined the work of an evangelist with that of a translator of the Bible. Mainly through the instrumentality of one Philips, the agent either of Henry or of English ecclesiastics, or possibly of both, he was arrested, imprisoned in the castle of Vilvoorden, tried, either for heresy or treason, or both, and convicted; was first strangled,and then burnt in the prison yard, Oct. 6, 1536. His last words were, "Lord, open the king of England's eyes." Excepting the narrative of Foxe, which is very unsatisfactory, and the opportune discovery of a letter written by Tyndale in prison, showing that he was shamefully neglected, and that he continued his literary labors to the last, no official records of his betrayal, arrest, trial, and martyrdom, have as yet been discovered. Indeed, less is known of Tyndale than of almost any of his contemporaries, and his history remains to be written. If the unknown and the mysterious excite and sustain interest, no theme can excel that attached to Tyndale. His life must have abounded in incident, variety, and adventure; and it culminated in tragedy. That his precious life might have been saved can not be doubted; and, although neither Cromwell nor Henry has been convicted of planning and conniving at his death, it is impossible to exonerate them from criminal indifference and culpable neglect.

Tyndale's place in history has not yet been sufficiently recognized as a translator of the Scriptures, as an apostle of liberty, and as a chief promoter of the Reformation in England. In all these respects his influence has been singularly under-valued. The sweeping statement found in almost all histories, that Tyndale translated from the Vulgate and Luther, is most damaging to the reputation of the writers who make it; for, as a matter of fact, it is contrary to truth, since his translations are made directly from the originals.

Correspondence with Prof. Julius Caesar of Marburg (Hand-book, pp. 110 sqq.) proves that Hans Luft never had a printing-house in that town and that Tyndale had no connection with its university. The Prolegomena in Mombert's William Tyndale's Five Books of Moses show conclusively that Tyndale's Pentateuch is a translation of the Hebrew original. The full titles of these works are given in the footnote.J. I. Mombert, William Tyndale's Five Books of Moses called the Pentateuch, being a literal Reprint of the Edition of 1530, compared with Tyndale's Genesis of 1634, and the Pentateuch in the Vulgate, Luther, and Matthew's Bible with various Collations and Prolegomena (New York, 1884; this book is out of print); idem, English Versions of the Bible, a Hand-book with copious Examples illustrating the Ancestry and Relationship of the several Versions and Comparative Tables (London, 1907). As an apostle of liberty, he stands foremost among the writers of the period, whose heroic fortitude and invincible love of the truth were heard with a force superior to royal and ecclesiastical injunctions; and the very flames to which fanaticism and tyranny consigned his writings burnt them into the very hearts of the people, and made them powerful instruments in attaching and converting multitudes to the principles of the Reformation. It is not exaggeration to say that the noble sentiments of William Tyndale, uttered in pure, strong Saxon English, and steeped in the doctrines of the Gospel, gave shape to the views of the more conspicuous promoters of that grand movement, who, like himself, sealed their convictions with their blood.

A monument commemorating the life and work of Tyndale has been erected on the Thames Embankment, London.

J. I. MOMBERT.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Besides the treatises on the history of the English Bible given in ii. 141 of this work, consult: R. Demaus, William Tyndale, 2d ed., London, 1886; John Fox, Acts and Monuments, ed. G. Townsend, vols. i.-v. passim, London, 1843-49 (consult Index); C. Wordsworth, Ecclesiastical Biography, i. 187 sqq., London, 1810; J. Strype, Ecclesiastical Memorials, i. 2, pp. 363-367, London, 1822; J. Stoughton, The Pen, the Palm, and the Pulpit, London, 1855; H. Money, English Writers, pp. 228-229, London, 1884; W. H. D. Adams, Great English Churchmen, London, 1879; F. L. Clarke, The Life of W. Tyndale, London, 1883; C. E. Heisch, William Tyndale, London, 1884; G. B. Smith, W. Tyndale and his Translation of the English Bible, London, 1896; C. Tyler, The Story of William Tyndale, London, 1898; I. M. Price, The Ancestry of our English Bible, chap. xxi., Philadelphia, 1907; DNB, lvii. 424-430.

TYNG, STEPHEN HIGGINSON:

Protestant Episcopal; b. at Newburyport, Mass., Mar. 1, 1800; d. at Irvington on the Hudson Sept. 4, 1885. He graduated at Harvard College, Cambridge, Mass., 1817; was in business, 1817-19; studied theology, 1819-21; was rector at Georgetown, D. C., 1821-23; in Queen Anne Parish, Prince George's County, Md., 1823-29; of St. Paul's, Philadelphia, 1829-33; of the Church of the Epiphany, in the same city, 1833-45; of St. George's, New York City, 1845-78, when he retired as pastor emeritus. He was for years one of the leaders of the Low-church party in his denomination, and was famous for eloquence and Christian zeal. He was prominent in the organization of the American Church Missionary Society and the Evangelical Education Society, and was a ready and polished platform-speaker, much in demand. He edited for several years The Episcopal Recorder and The Protestant Churchman, and was the author of Lectures on the Law and the Gospel (Philadelphia, 1832); Memoir of Rev. G. T. Bedell (1835); Recollections of England (New York, 1847); A Lamb from the Flock (1852); Christian Titles, a Series of Practical Meditations (1853); Fellowship with Christ (1854); The Rich Kinsman, or the History of Ruth (1855); Memoir of Rev. E. P. J. Messenger (1857); The Captive Orphan, Esther, Queen of Persia (1859); Forty Years' Experience in Sunday Schools (1860); The Prayer-Book illustrated by Scripture (8 vols., 1865-67); The Child of Prayer: a Father's Memorial of D. A. Tyng (1866); The Reward of Meekness (1867); The Feast Enjoyed (1868); The Spencers (1870); The Office and Duty of a Christian Pastor (1874); and several volumes of sermons.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. R. Tyng, Record of the Life and Work of Stephen H. Tyng, and History of St. George's Church, N. Y., to the Close of his Rectorship, New York, 1890.

TYRE.

See PHENICIA, PHENICIANS, I., §§ 2-3.

TYRRELL, tir'el, GEORGE HENRY:

English Roman Catholic; b. at Dublin Feb. 6, 1861; d. in London July 15, 1909. He matriculated at Trinity College, Dublin, in 1878, but in the following year left the Anglican Church for the Roman Catholic, and in 1880 entered the Society of Jesus. He then studied philosophy at Stonyhurst (1882-85) and theology at St. Beuno's, Wales (1888-92), and speedily became known as one of the ablest Roman Catholic writers in England. From an ultramontane and scholastic position he gradually advanced to an attitude of distinct Modernism; but though admonished for his views on hell in 1900, he did notcome into serious conflict with his communion until 1906, when in his Much-Abused Letter (generally supposed to be to the late St. George Mivart) he denied that Roman Catholic theology is perfect and inerrant, and held that the visible Church is but a mutable organism subject to development and modification, he incurred the extreme displeasure of the ecclesiastical authorities. He had sought release from his obligations as a religious on the condemnation of the works of Loisy in 1904, and now, on his refusal to retract the above teachings, he was expelled from the Jesuit order in Feb., 1906. He was also forbidden to officiate in the archdiocese of Westminster, and declined the proffered right to exercise priestly functions in the archdiocese of Mecheln on condition that he submit any future writings to the censor. When, finally, he sharply criticized the encyclical Pascendi in 1907, he incurred the minor excommunication. Theologically he described himself as a "liberal Roman Catholic." His works, some of which have gone through repeated editions and been translated into German and French, are as follows: Nova et Vetera (London, 1897); Hard Sayings (1898); External Religion (1899); Faith of the Millions (2 vols., 1901); Lex Arandi (1903); Lex Credendi (1906); Oil and Wine (1907); Through Scylla and Charybdis (1907); A Much-Abused Letter (1907); Medievalism (1908); and Christianity at the Cross Roads (1909).

TZSCHIRNER, tshîr'ner, HEINRICH GOTTLIEB:

German Lutheran; b. at Mittweida (10 m. n.n.e. of Chemnitz), Saxony, Nov. 14, 1778; d. at Leipsic Feb. 17, 1828. He was educated at the University of Leipsic (1796-99), and in 1800 became privat-docent at Wittenberg, where he was soon appointed adjunct of the philosophical faculty. Before long, however, the death of his father led him to exchange his academic position for that of deacon of his native town, where he found leisure, despite his parochial duties, for writing, Leben and Ende merkwürdiger Selbstmörder (Weissenfels, 1805); Ueber den moralischen Indifferentismus (Leipsic, 1805), and began a Geschichte der Apologetik (1805). Largely because of the latter work, he was recalled to Wittenberg in 1805 as professor of theology, thus having occasion to prepare his De dignitate hominis per religionem Christianam adserta et declarata (Wittenberg, 1805) and De virtutum et vitiorum inter se cognatione (1805), the latter touching upon a theme more fully developed in his Ueber die Verwandtschaft der Tugenden und Laster (Leipsic, 1809). In his De sacris publicis ab ecclesia vetere studiose cultis (Wittenberg, 1808), moreover, he issued a prelude to his intended history of Christian worship, which his academic duties forced him to relinquish. He lectured on natural theology, dogmatics, and homiletics, as well as on church history after 1806.

In 1809 Tzschirner was called to Leipsic as fourth professor of theology. His ability as a church historian was evinced by his preparation of the ninth and tenth volumes of J. 117. Schröckh's great Christliche Kirchengeschichte seit der Reformation (Leipsic, 1810-12); while as a dogmatic and homiletic scholar he wrote Beurteilende Darstellung der dogmatischen Systeme, welche in der protestantischen Kirche gefunden werden (in Memorabilien, i., 1810-11), and Briefe veranlasst dureh Reinhards Geständnisse (1811), in which he sought to prove that the only middle way between rationalism and supernaturalism was an ethical and critical rationalism which held the rational concept of morality to be the supreme principle of Christianity, and criticized the Scriptures on the basis of this concept, retaining all connected with moral requirements, and rejecting all temporal elements derived from the later Jewish theology.

In 1813 Tzschirner was for a short time chaplain in the Saxon army, after which he wrote Ueber den Krieg, ein philosophischer Versuch (1815). In the autumn of 1814 he was appointed archdeacon of Thomaskirche, Leipsic, and shortly afterward was made pastor of the same church and superintendent of the diocese of Leipsic (1815). In 1818 he was promoted to be second professor and canon of Meissen. Meanwhile the conditions of his country and his church had changed, and he was now obliged to combat not only unbelief and indifference, but the recrudescence of Roman Catholicism and Roman Catholic tendencies arising within the Protestant Church, and especially Pietism. While he planned a work on Der Fall des Heidentums, his interest in contemporary history led him to write Die Sache der Griechen die Sache Europas (1821). But the aims of the Roman Catholic hierarchy engaged his special attention, and he defended the Protestant cause in Protestantismus and Katholicismus aus dem Standpunkte der Politik betrachlet (1822); Die Rückkehr katholischer Christen im Grossherzogtum Baden zum evangelischen Christentume (1823); Die Gefahr einer deutschen Revolution (1823); and Zwei Briefe durch die jüngst zu Dresden erschienene Schrift: Die reine katholische Lehre, veranlasst (1826). He also wrote four treatises on the relation of the Church to marriage, urging a revision of marriage law, but rejecting civil marriage; while in his Gutachten über die Annahme der Preussischen Agende (1824) he advised the rejection of this unsatisfactory liturgy, unless its adoption was expressly recommended, at the same time urging a thorough reform of public worship. Besides two collections of sermons (1812-16), Tzschirner wrote Graeci et Romani scriptores cur rerum Christianarum raro meminerint (1824-25); De perpetua inter Catholicam et Evangelicam Ecclesiam dissentione (1824); De causis impeditae in Francogallia sacrorum publicorum emendationis (1827); and De religionis Christianae per philosophiam Graecam propagatione (1827). After his death a number of his writings were edited by his friends: a selection of his sermons from 1817 to 1828 (3 vols., Leipsic, 1828); the first part of the uncompleted Fall des Heidentums (1829); the Vorlesungen über die christliche Glaubenslehre (1829); the academic programs under the title Tzschirneri opuscula academica (1829); and the unfinished Briefe eines Deutschen an die Herren Chateaubriand, de la Mennais und Montlosier über Gegenstände der Religion and Politik (1828).

(P. M. TZSCHIRNER+.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. G. Tzschirner, Skizze seines Lebens, Leipsic, 1828; J. D. Goldhorn, Mittheilungen aus . . . H. G. Tzschirners . . . Amts- und Lebensjahren, ib. 1828; K. H. L. Pölitz, H. G. Tzschirner. Abriss seines Lebens and Wirkens, ib. 1828; J. A. H. Tittmann, Memoria H. G. Tzschirner, ib. 1828; ADB, xxxix. 62 sqq.

UBBONITES, ub'-bo-naitz:

A term applied to a party of Anabaptists in a certain phase of their development. Ubbo Philipps (Ubbe or Obbe Philipzoon), b. at Leeuwarden (70 m. n.e. of Amsterdam) near the beginning of the sixteenth century, had become a Roman Catholic priest some time before Melchior Hoffmann began his propagandism in the Netherlands (1529). With multitudes of others he was persuaded that Hoffmann was a divinely inspired prophet (c. 1531), and was ready to follow him blindly in his exposition of the Old-Testament prophets and the Apocalypse and to expect speedy deliverance from the trials and persecutions that were being inflicted by Catholics and Protestants on true believers. His faith in Hoffmann was considerably shaken by his failure to go forth from his Strasburg prison in 1533, as he predicted he would, at the head of 144,000 enthusiastic believers who would set up Christ's kingdom on earth, and by his failure to keep his vow to live on bread and water until his liberation. When Jan Mathys, weary of waiting for the fulfilment of Hoffmann's promises, proclaimed himself the Elias that should usher in the messianic kingdom and ordered the resumption of baptism which Hoffmann had suspended for two years, Ubbo, who, with many others, had been awaiting Hoffmann's orders, received baptism. With his brother Dirk and Jan David Joris, he soon came to distrust Mathys with his sanguinary program and urged the infatuated people to desist from their plan of setting up the kingdom of Christ by violence in Munster. In this he had the cooperation of Menno Simons, who did not definitely become an Anabaptist until 1536. When Ubbo, Dirk, and others, after the fall of Munster (1535), saw multitudes that had been under the influence of Hoffmann and Mathys disillusioned and anxious to follow wise Evangelical counsel, they persuaded Menno to assume the leadership, and Ubbo ordained him, his brother Dirk, and David Joris, who had not yet manifested his pantheistic tendencies. During the short period from 1534 to 1536 the quiet, non-resisting Anabaptists that repudiated Mathys and the Munster kingdom might properly be called Ubbonites. After Menno's leadership became established, the name Mennonites is more applicable to the same people. Ubbo afterward deeply regretted the part he had taken in the organization of the Mennonite movement. When Menno came into recognized leadership, his intolerance of opposition in matters of doctrine and discipline, his violent denunciation of other Christian parties, and the strife that occurred among the churches of the connection proved distasteful to Ubbo, and he felt constrained to sever his relations with the Mennonites. Shortly before his death (1568) he wrote an interesting account of his life among the Anabaptists and of the circumstances that led him to break with the party. Whether he united with the Reformed when he left the Mennonites does not clearly appear from his narrative. His Bekentniss und Aussage is published in full in J. C. Jehring's Grundliche Historie von denen Begebenheiten, Streitigkeiten und Trennungen, so unter den Tauffgesinneten, oder Mennonisten von ihren Ursprung an bis aufs Jahr 1615 vorgegangen (Jena, 1720; contains lists of the writings of Dirk and Ubbo Philipps).

UBERTINO, u"bar-ti'no, OF CASALE: Italian Franciscan; b. at Casale-Monferrato (32 m. w. of Turin) 1259; d. about 1350. He entered the Franciscan order in 1273, and taught at various places in Italy, later in Paris (1289-98). After 1298 he devoted himself chiefly to propagating the views of Pierre Olivi, whose pupil he had been in the house of Santa Croce. After the death of Olivi Ubertino was recognized as the leader of the "spirituals," the strict party among the Franciscans which insisted upon the rigid rule of poverty (see OLIVI, PIERRE). On Oct. 1, 1317, he received permission from John XXII. to enter the Benedictine monastery of Gembloux, though it is doubtful whether he availed himself of this permission, as he was certainly living at Avignon during 1320-25. In 1325 he fled from Avignon to escape arrest in connection with the condemnation of the works of Olivi, and later he is said to have joined the Carthusians. Besides some minor works (in ALKG, iii.) and a defense of Olivi (ALKG, ii. 377 sqq.) he wrote Arbor vitae crucifixae (Venice, 1485), a defense of Olivi's doctrine in the style of the mysticism of Bonaventura and the apocalyptics of Joachim of More. See Francis, Saint, of Assisi, III., §§ 4-5.

UBIQUITY.

Preliminary History (§ 1).

Luther's Doctrine (§ 2).

The Reformed Doctrines; Brenz (§ 3).

Chemnitz (§ 4).

Formula of Concord (§ 5).

The Two Schools (§ 6).

1. Preliminary History.

Ubiquity is the term applied to the non-spatial ("repletive") omnipresence of the body of Christ set forth by Luther in the eucharistic controversy. All statements of the Eastern Church which apparently involve the question of ubiquity from Origen to John of Damascus affirm, on the unity of the natures, the logical, not the real, transfer of the qualities of one nature to the other, thus teaching an "exchange," or "community," of names, not an exchange of attributes. Augustine, with his local concept of the "right hand of God" as contrasted with the non-local view of John of Damascus, gained favor in the Middle Ages, and laterwith the Reformed and with Melanchthon. He nowhere clearly expresses the realistic concept of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but confines the omnipresence to the divine nature of Christ. Scholasticism gained increasing interest in the question of omnipresence in proportion as the doctrine of the real presence gained the recognition of the Church and obtained its theory in the dogma of Transubstantiation. Here Augustine remained the prime authority, and Hugo of St. Victor held that "Christ is humanly in heaven, divinely everywhere." Peter Lombard and Thomas Aquinas followed John of Damascus, in distinguishing between Christ as totus and totum, Christ being omnipresent in the former case in virtue of the unity of his person, but not in the latter as conception of both natures. Thus the omnipresence of the body was rejected. According to the anhypostasis of Leontius the Logos is essentially the person of Christ; deity follows humanity everywhere, but not vice versa. Radbertus taught that in each case the body was created anew from the bread by a special miracle. Arno of Reichersberg taught "a special power of Christ of being bodily present wherever he wished," not exercised until after death; and in like manner Peter Lombard taught the presence in one place of the exalted body of Christ, omnipresence of his divinity, and multipresence of his sacramental body. This remained, in all essentials, the teaching of scholasticism. The difficult problem now arose of explaining how the circumscribed celestial body of Christ, with its attributes of quantity and dimension, could replace the bread in the host. Albert the Great (see ALBERTUB MAGNUS), distinguishing between a natural and a spiritual body, held that "the glorious body" of Christ was present in the host "in the fashion of the spiritual body." This, however, combined with the subintration theory (see TRANSUBSTANTIATION, II., § 4), rendered uncertain not only the spatiality but also the actuality of the body of Christ in the host. Bonaventura and Thomas Aquinas accordingly sought to prove "the dimensive quantity of Christ's body" in the host, and to unite their teaching with the theory later taught by William of Occam as "definitive existence," namely, "whenever anything is in place so that the whole is in the whole and in any part whatsoever." The theory of Bonaventura and Thomas Aquinas, however, was self-contradictory in that the portion present in the host was conceived as at once quantitative and non-quantitative. Occam resolved this realistic doctrine of space and quantity critically. To him quantity was something substantial involving "circumscribed existence." "Definitive existence" (ut sup.) pertains only to non-quantitative things. The body of Christ in the host must, therefore, be conceived as non-quantitative, thus returning to the original position of scholasticism, except that the theory of subintration was replaced by a sort of condensation hypothesis, whereby, through divine omnipotence, a substance might be reduced to the mathematical non-extensibility of a point. But Occam proceeded still further, dialectically postulating, at least, the possibility of the "repletive existence" (and thus of the ubiquity) of the body of Christ. He accordingly taught, (1) the actual "repletive existence" of God; (2) the local presence of the body of Christ in heaven; (3) the non-quantitative, definitive presence in many places of the body of Christ in the host; and the possibility of the ubiquity of this body in the universe.

2. Luther's Doctrine.

On this dialectic straining of the doctrine of the ubiquity of the body of Christ Luther based his doctrine. Luther's original eucharistic theory was based entirely on opposition to the Roman Catholic opus operatum. The essential part of the Eucharist was held to be the word, faith being the right disposition. Luther affirmed his belief in the real presence and transubstantiation in 1519, but within a year he had replaced the latter by the teaching of the consubstantiation (of Occam), postulating, without any attempt at explanation, the substantial coexistence of the bread and the body of Christ in the Eucharist. When, however, Johann Carlstadt and Zwingli denied the real presence, Luther proceeded further than Occam; and in Wider die himmlischen Propheten von den Bildern und Sakramenten, in reply to Carlstadt, he set forth the initial statement of the synecdochical theory of the real presence, and the first intimations of the doctrine of ubiquity. Luther maintained that the "this" of the words of institution implied the presence of the body already in the unbroken bread. When Christ says, "This is my body," he takes the "whole" (bread and body) "for the part" (body); this is the synecdoche of Luther, later modified by Melanchthon. Luther introduced his teaching on ubiquity in his Sermon vom Sakrament des Leibes (Wittenberg, 1526), and developed it in his polemics against Zwingli and Oecolampadius. Dass diese Worte (das ist mein Leib) noch fesfstehen (1527), and Bekenntnis vom Abendmahl (1528). Maintaining the real presence as an immutable article of faith established by the Scriptures, Luther sought with equal zeal to defend the doctrine of the true reality of the body as well as to dispel all gross notions. He teaches that the body of Christ is exceptional and supernatural, different from ordinary human flesh and blood; that his flesh is born of the spirit, of a spiritual nature, and fit for spiritual food; and that the attributes of magnitude and extension do not apply to his body. Two deductions were then drawn: all things being present and permeable to Christ, he can enter and pass through them, being as energy without matter (as proved by the sealed tomb and the closed door), and the entire body of Christ may be in the smallest atom, though not circumscribed by it. This mode of "definitive existence" explains, however, only how it is possible for a corporeal being to be present in material substances without changing itself or them. For an answer to the further problem, how the body of Christ can be present simultaneously in heaven and in the host in countless celebrations of the Lord's Supper, recourse becomes necessary to the omnipotence of God, and Luther returns to the doctrine of the presence in an indefinite number of localities according to his will (Arno) taught by scholasticism. He continually emphasizes the necessityof the belief that with God all things are possible, and that, therefore, the heavenly body of Christ is miraculously present in the host. Such is wrought by the creative word and the command of God. Although satisfied that "definitive existence" and presence in as many places as Christ willed to be were sufficient to faith in view of the omnipotence of God, he brought still higher arguments to bear against his opponents, developing the one into "repletive existence," and the other into omnipresence. This was done by the symbolic interpretation of the "right hand of God" and by the logical consequences of the Communicatio idiomatum. Definitive existence and multipresence pertain, through divine omnipotence, also to angels and demons. The body of Christ, however, possesses a far higher supernatural character, especially as he was at once God and man. Luther then affirmed that "the right hand of God" everywhere followed the divine omnipotence, and he deduced that Christ's body was at the same time at the right hand of God, and in the Eucharist by his syllogism: The body of Christ is at the right hand of God; the right hand of God is everywhere; therefore the body of Christ is in the bread. The same conclusion he reaches also by his Christology, as is fully set forth in his larger Bekenntnis. Accordingly, the two natures of Christ in one person demand the participation of the exalted humanity of Christ in the omnipresence of God. Luther now sought to complete his demonstration of ubiquity by developing the communicatio idiomatum from the premise of personal union. That the real presence in the host naturally follows repletive existence is self-evident, but proved too much; for it imperiled the unique sacramental presence, making it superfluous. To avert this Luther asserted that the sacramental, distinct from the ubiquitous, presence was such only by the word of God, whereby he binds himself to the bread for the reception of the communicant. This was a recourse to a particular act of the divine will or a retreat to a multiple presence subject to Christ's will. Luther's doctrine of ubiquity remains important only for Christology. There are, then, according to Luther, three demonstrable ways in which the humanity of Christ may anywhere be present: "circumscriptive or local existence," as it was on earth; "definitive existence," as it was during the resurrection through the sealed tombstone, and afterward through the closed door, and as it is also in the host; and "repletive existence," as the humanity is, in virtue of its personal union with God and exaltation to his right hand, everywhere and nowhere, also in the communion substances, yet in itself inapprehensible and inactive (wirkungslos). Luther did not restrict the body of Christ or the omnipotence of God to these three modes of being, but merely emphasized the ways human thought can and must establish the doctrine in accordance with faith and the Bible. Though transcending reason, if not contrary to it, yet here is primarily a matter of faith in the miracles of God in nature and grace.

3. The Reformed Doctrines; Brenz.

Zwingli, on the grounds of humanistic and rationalistic criticism, denied ubiquity and the real presence, and opposed the communicatio idiomatum with the disparity of the mode of existence of the two natures, maintaining the presence of Christ to be circumscriptive and local in heaven. Calvin advanced to the doctrine that the predicates of redemptive activity apply also really to the human nature of Christ, but recoiled from the doctrine of ubiquity. He held that the redemptive powers of the passion and resurrection of Christ are really imparted through the symbols of bread and wine. The believer receives, not the substance, but "the communion of the body of Christ" (I Cor. x. 16), mediated by the Holy Ghost. Melanchthon at first adhered to Luther's concept of the real presence, but always remained skeptical regarding the doctrine of ubiquity. The real presence he desired to see established on mandatory, not magical, grounds. His loyalty to the doctrine is shown by his stanch defense at the Marburg Conference (1529), as well as in art. 10 of the Augsburg Confession (1530-31). But after his dialogue with Oecolampadius he inclined more and more to restrict this presence to Christ as God. As early as 1535, in a letter to Johann Brenz, he adopted the figurative exegesis of the "is" in the words of institution, and he finally came absolutely to deny the doctrine of ubiquity, coming to prefer the "communion of the body of Christ" as the membership of the faithful in the body of Christ, later emphasized by Calvin. His increasing hostility to ubiquity led to the local view of "the right hand of God"; and the eucharistic presence of Christ was to him his "power in the believing." Melanchthon thus stood much closer to Calvin than to Luther. However favorable the prospects for Protestantism, they were definitely destroyed by the Stuttgart Synod in 1559, when the confession drawn up by Brenz, and adopted, fastened the tenet of ubiquity as a symbol upon the church in Württemberg. The result was that in the bitter polemics with Heinrich Bullinger and Pietro Martire Vermigli, Brenz in a series of writings erected on the basis of Luther's arguments an imposing Cbristological system. In his De majestate Domini nostri (1562) he re-affirms the two natures in one person upon the broader basis of the incarnation of the Son of God, and consequently the deification of the Son of man. This afforded a double point of departure for the demonstration of ubiquity: "the personal union," and the "deification." The first, which is indissoluble and effected by divine omnipotence, does not involve a mutation of humanity into deity nor a duplication of persons; it is the immediate ground of the communicatio idiomatum, which is not an interchange of specific properties in name only but in fact. To save the human nature from total elimination Brenz drew a distinction between essential and separable, accidental qualities. Deity being without accidental properties, humanity is composite with a constant substance but with such accidents as suffering, mortality, and locality, which may be discarded and replaced by hyperphysical qualities, as accidental accessories, however. Brenz's weakness consisted in reducing local existence to an accident or negligible quantity, when it was the brunt of his contention. As to the second basis,the exaltation, Brenz argues the "assumption of humanity into deity," and the infinite domination of the latter. The incarnation is really deification, which transpired in utero; then was Christ raised to the right hand of God and to full divine majesty, as Lord of all creatures. The human nature is only passively endowed with this power through the grace of the hypostatic union. There is, therefore, a threefold ascension: at the instant of the incarnation, immediately after the resurrection, and, finally, a merely spectacular one. In the state of exinanition Christ lived, during his earthly period, a twofold existence; a divine-human in heaven dominated by his deity, and a human-divine on earth, dominated by his humanity. The "repletive existence," by virtue of the exaltation at the incarnation, is the real state also of his humanity, only temporarily interrupted or rather attended by the "circumscriptive existence." The "inanition," therefore, postulates only a figurative mode of existence of the man Christ; there was only a "concealment," not a real "kenosis of the function" of the divine properties. Nevertheless, deity was, in an indefinable manner, involved in the process by the communicatio idiomatum. God, although impassible, so appropriated the suffering and death of Christ, or was affected by the same, through the hypostatical union, as though he himself suffered and died. But to take part in suffering and mortality and be impassible at once is a contradiction; so is also an indissoluble union in one person of deity and humanity, both dwelling in bliss and reigning over all the world, and at the same time suffering, dying, and rising again on earth; or, that the man Christ was at once alive and dead. The communicatio proved incapable of logical conclusion. On the other hand, the humanity was imperiled, inasmuch as the man Jesus, invisible by his exaltation, i.e., incarnation, was only in loco subject to his condescension. With the proof of ubiquity, the real presence was also established for Brenz. The Maulbronn Conference of 1564 served to reveal the weakness of the Christology of Brenz, yet more enfeebled by Jakob Andreä;. The doctrine prevailed in Wurttemberg for the remainder of the century.

4. Chemnitz.

Martin Chemnitz sought vainly to mediate between the Swabian followers of Brenz and the Philippists of Wittenberg, who rejected ubiquity and the "scholastic disputations" over the real presence. His teachings, however, remained a mass of disparate elements of both factions (De duabus naturis in Christo, 1571). Like Melanchthon, following Aristotle's dictum, "properties do not pass out of their subjects," he held properties to be essential, not accidental; and locality was, therefore, an essential, not accidental, property of human nature. The genus majestaticum (see CHRISTOLOGY, VIII., 1) thus negated was by degrees regained. Although conceding that human nature can appropriate divine properties only according to the finite human capacity, in the manner of a reenforeement, yet he argued that in Christ this capacity was so augmented by the "personal union" that the humanity possessed the divine attributes not in substance but efficient power. The humanity was the automatic organ dynamically of the Logos; the humanity is permeated with deity, after the analogy of heat in the iron, by a process which he termed Perichöresis. In the humiliation, the Logos, though never wholly quiescent, retreated to a "concealment of function," and even to its "kenosis." Thus, at the same time, a compensation was rendered for the doctrine of inherent ubiquity, which as an intrinsic possession of the humanity was positively declined, and then regained as a sort of potential ubiquitous presence. This was in conflict with his other assertion of the hypostatic union according to which the humanity embracing all creatures is ever present in the Logos. Chemnitz loses himself, therefore, in distraction between an a priori ubiquity and an a posteriori potential multipresence, and in conflict with his Aristotelian dictum as premise. The logical result of his theories was that the humanity of Jesus was at once essentially circumscribed and potentially omnipresent.

5. Formula of Concord.

The Formula of Concord presented a loose and incongruous combination of the views of Luther and Brenz and those of Chemnitz. Directly, it may be said, the potential ubiquitous presence is taught by the admission of the views of Chemnitz just mentioned seriatim. While the full possession of the divine majesty is ascribed to the humanity, omnipresence is never mentioned as one of its attributes, being assumed as implied in omnipotence; and the "repletive existence" is never expressly asserted of the humanity. Indirectly is taught the essential ubiquity of the body of Christ, by the adoption of large citations from Luther's eucharistic writings, not excluding the statements on ubiquity and the "repletive existence," particularly by falling back on Luther's idea of the "right hand of God" for a figure of the divine majesty. Moreover, the realistic communicatio idiomatum, as the basis of all Christology, was so carried through with strong emphasis on the integrity of the natures and their properties, the non-receptivity of the divine nature for human properties, and the separation of the two states, that the moderated views of Brenz as promulgated by Andrea and the advanced Melanchthonism of Chemnitz could both accept it.

6. The Two Schools.

The inconclusiveness of the Formula proved itself in the reservation entered by Chemnitz with his signature, and the mutual efforts to advance the doctrine of ubiquity to the front on the part of the two Swabians, Leonhard Hutter, who essentially reproduced the views of Brenz; and Aegidius Hunnius, who, following Chemnitz (and perhaps even Luther), maintained an immanent universal presence of the humanity in the Logos, or a passive omnipresence. At the same time, he advanced be yond Chemnitz by raising the "internal presence," latent during Christ's humiliation, to an "external omnipresence" through his exaltation, alongside of which, however, was maintained the continuous spatial presence of the body of Christ in heaven, thus making permanent the dualism of the human existence of Christ which Luther and Brenz had restricted to his humiliation. Thus the doctrine of ubiquity had attained to recognition, and only its [Page 54]

[Page 55]

[Page 56]

[Page 57]

[Page 58]

[Page 59]

[Page 60]

[Page 61]

[Page 62]

[Page 63]

[Page 64]

[Page 65]

[Page 66]

[Page 67]

[Page 68]

[Page 69]

[Page 70]

[Page 71]

[Page 72]

[Page 73]

[Page 74]

[Page 75]

[Page 76]

[Page 77]

[Page 78]

[Page 79]

[Page 80]

[Page 81]

[Page 82]

[Page 83]

very conservative utterances respecting the office of Jesus and the significance of miracles, but it had broadened its basis, and in 1875 welcomed "all who desire to work with it in advancing the kingdom of God." These differences were harmonized by the action of the national conference at Saratoga in 1894, which made its preamble declare: "these churches accept the religion of Jesus, holding, in accordance with his teaching, that practical religion is summed up in love to God and love to man." In 1910 there were 504 societies in the United States and Canada, and the ministers enlisted in the fellowship were 538. There are theological schools at Meadville, Penn. (founded 1844) and Berkeley, Cal. (founded 1904). Students are also trained in the Harvard Divinity School, founded in 1817 and maintained as a Unitarian institution to 1878, when it became the undenominational theological school of Harvard University.

The latest phase of the Unitarian movement is the effort to increase cooperation among those in all lands "who are striving to unite pure religion and perfect liberty." The International Council organized for this purpose in Boston in 1900 has held congresses in London (1901), Amsterdam (1903), Geneva (1905), Boston (1907), and Berlin (1910).

6. Genius of Unitarianism.

Unitarian religious thought has had successive phases. It began as a method of inquiry, the method of Socinians and Arminians. No truth was allowed prior validity to the Bible, the Bible was interpreted by reason and conscience, and the results obtained from the Bible by this method were held as historic revelation. The pioneer in a movement beyond this position was Channing. Refusing to characterize man by the sin which deprived him of his true being as man, he found the essence of human nature in the moral principle of disinterested justice and benevolence, which is sovereign over the whole self. Religion and virtue are the mind itself, are human nature, and nothing else. Therefore, "we must start in religion from our own souls. In these is the fountain of all divine truth. An outward revelation is possible and intelligible only on the ground of conceptions and principles previously furnished by the soul." "We have faculties for the spiritual as truly as for the outward world." A further development of this view with a polemic against dependence on miracle and mere Biblicism enabled Theodore Parker to inaugurate the freer critical historical valuation of the Bible and to rescue the movement from the rationalism of Locke's school, while the more poetic and romantic transcendentalism of Emerson operated as a powerful stimulus to independent spiritual intuition and emancipation from convention and formula. All these leaders infused into the movement an ardor of mystical communion with God, without ecstasy or loss of self, and at the same time an active passion for all philanthropic reforms. Others, among whom James Freeman Clarke was of greatest eminence, united the insistence on inner personal grounds for faith with more historic feeling for the Christian past. The most eminent philosopher of the Unitarian school was James Martineau, who, with splendor of diction, speculative profundity, and intense ethical interest, elaborated a view of experience in which idealistic rationalism was blended with a refined spiritual mysticism. The most complete exposition of Unitarian theology in a form related to the traditional dogmatics is found in James Drummond's Studies in Christian Doctrine (London, 1908).

For the doctrines consult: The writings of Joseph Priestley, W. E. Channing, J. Martineau, and M. J. Savage and the literature under the articles on them; J. Wilson, Concessions of Trinitarians, Manchester, 1842; J. R. Beard, Unitarianism, Exhibited in its Actual Condition, London, 1846; J. F. Clarke, Orthodoxy, its Truths and Errors, Boston, 1870; R. B. Drummond, Free Thought and Christian Faith, Edinburgh, 1890; R. Bartram, Religion and Life, London, 1891; J. Wright, Denials and Beliefs of Unitarians, ib. 1901; T. R. Slicer, One World at a Time, New York, 1902; W. G. Tarrant, Unitarianism Restated, London, 1904; J. E. Manning, The Religion and Theology of Unitarians, ib. 1906; R. T. Herford, Unitarian Affirmations, 2d ed., ib. 1909; J. P. Hoff, The Unitarians' Justification, ib. 1910; E. Emerton, Unitarian Thought, New York, 1911.

UNITED AMERICAN FREEWILL BAPTISTS, COLORED.

See MISCELLANEOUS RELIGIOUS BODIES, 19.

UNITED BAPTISTS.

See BAPTISTS, II., 4 (g).

UNITED BRETHREN IN CHRIST.

I. United Brethren in Christ (New Constitution).

Origin (§ 1).

Organisation and Work (§ 2).

II. United Brethren in Christ, Old Constitution.

I. United Brethren in Christ (New Constitution):

A denomination of Evangelical Christians, Arminian in doctrine, founded by Philip William Otterbein in the latter part of the eighteenth century.

1. Origin.

Otterbein came to America in 1752 as a missionary of the German Reformed Church. His first charge was at Lancaster, Penn., where he experienced what he regarded as his first real change of heart, and hisministry thenceforward assumed a deeply spiritual character. He began to hold frequent evangelistic services and instituted special prayer and experience meetings. In pursuing his evangelistic labors, he made numerous visits to places near and remote, often conducted largely attended open-air meetings, and invited to a hearty cooperation all spiritually-minded persons of whatever name or church. His labors resulted in the organization of numerous societies of converts, who, because of their warmer and more earnest spiritual life, frequently found it difficult to remain in harmonious connection with their parent churches. To supply these people with the ministration of the word, Otterbein appointed or approved for them teachers, who visited them at irregular intervals, expounded to them the Gospel, and encouraged them to continue faithful in their religious life. As the work extended, it became necessary to devise a regular system of supply; and conferences of ministers, chiefly for this purpose, began to be held. Finally, in 1800, at one of these conferences, these scattered societies were organized into one body; and the name "United Brethren in Christ" was adopted as the official title of the denomination thus formed. Otterbein and Martin Boehm, a Mennonite, were chosen bishops. The people thus organized spoke at that time almost exclusively the German language; at the present time that language is used by less than four per cent. of the congregations.

2. Organization and Work.

The government of the church is vested primarily in a general conference, holding quadrennial sessions. The power of the church is in its laity. The delegates are ministers and laymen in equal proportions, women being eligible since 1893, all chosen by popular vote. There are also annual conferences, whose powers are chiefly executive, in which each pastoral charge is entitled to one lay representative. The bishops are elected by the general conference quadrennially, as are also the editors, publishing-house manager, and the several general boards with their executive officers. Ministers are appointed to their charges by a stationing committee for one year, appointments being renewable indefinitely. Presiding elders, elected by their respective conferences, have general supervision over districts or subdivisions of the annual conferences. A home, frontier, and foreign missionary society was organized in 1853; a woman's missionary board in 1875. The general conference of 1905 separated the home and foreign work, creating a board for each. The foreign missions of the church, begun in western Africa in 1855, have since extended to China, Japan, Porto Rico, and the Philippines. The number of missionaries in 1911 was 61, with 141 native preachers and teachers, with 55 in training for Christian work; communicants, 4,335; catechumens and adherents, 11,607. The aggregate funds contributed for the foreign work are something over $1,250,000; for the home work, $1,800,000. A general Sunday-school board was organized by the general conference in 1865, and a church-erection society and a general education board in 1869. On questions of reform, such as temperance and slavery, the historical attitude of the church has been that of strong radicalism, its position concerning slavery having prevented any considerable extension in the southern states before the war.

The denomination has ten colleges and one theological seminary (at Dayton, O.) with over 3,500 students, 65 of whom are in the theological seminary. The total membership in 1911 was 290,516; there were 2,030 itinerant ministers and 475 local ministers; the number enrolled in Sunday-schools was over 360,000. The denomination is found chiefly in Pennsylvania, Maryland, northern Virginia, western New York, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, and Kansas, but extends westward in nearly parallel lines to the Pacific coast and in recent years has entered a number of the southern states. The publishing-house at Dayton, O., issues twenty-six weekly, monthly, semimonthly, and quarterly periodicals, with an aggregate average circulation for the year ending Apr. 1, 1911, of 525,250 copies.

II. United Brethren in Christ, Old Constitution:

The general conference of the United Brethren in Christ in 1885 took measures for revising the confession of faith and amending the constitution of the church. A commission consisting of the six bishops and twenty-seven ministers and laymen was appointed to formulate the proposed changes and additions and submit them to popular vote. The result was overwhelmingly in favor of the several measures, and at the next general conference in 1889 this result was declared by the presiding bishops, with the announcement that thenceforth the conference would transact business under the amended constitution and the revised confession of faith. Fourteen delegates, with one bishop, then withdrew from the conference, and proceeded to hold the "General Conference of and for the United Brethren in Christ," elsewhere in the same city, electing general officers and boards, and transacting such other business as would pertain to a general conference. Under the claim that they with their followers were the true church of the United Brethren in Christ, they held that the rightful ownership of the property of the denomination belonged to them. Yearn of litigation followed, resulting finally in defeat in the courts. This organization had at its beginning a following of between 15,000 and 20,000. Its year-book shows a membership of 18,317, with 304 itinerant and 75 local ministers. The Sunday-school enrolment is 19,386 scholars. The church has three collegiate institutions, a home and foreign missionary society, and a woman's missionary board, with missions in West Africa. Its publishing-house is located at Huntington, Ind., and it issues a church weekly, a missionary monthly, Sunday-school literature, and other publications. The doctrinal standards and the general polity are essentially the same as those of the United Brethren in Christ.

D. BERGER.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A good list of literature is prefixed to D. Berger. Hist. of the United Brethren in Christ, in American Church History Series, xii. 310-314, New York, 1897, cf. Berger's work with same title, Dayton. Ohio, 1897. Consult besides the above: H. G. Spayth, Hist. of the Church of the United Brethren, Circleville, Ohio, 1881; J. Lawrence, [Page 86]

[Page 87]

[Page 88]

[Page 89]

[Page 90]

[Page 91]

[Page 92]

[Page 93]

[Page 94]

[Page 95]

[Page 96]

[Page 97]

UNIVERSITIES.

Basal Ideas (§ 1).
University of Paris, Organization (§ 2).
Bologna University (§ 3).
Early "General" Schools (§ 4).
Organization (§ 5).
Instruction and Degrees (§ 6).
Students (§ 7).
Post-Reformation Foundations (§ 8).
Changes Due to Humanism and the Reformation (§ 9).
The Eighteenth Century (§ 10).
Nineteenth Century; Germany (§ 11).
The Continent and England (§ 12).
Other Foundations (§ 13).
American Universities; Economic Foundations (§ 14).
Types of American Universities (§ 15).
Activities of American Universities (§ 16).

1. Basal Ideas.

Universities are a product of the spiritual life of the Middle Ages, when they were at once ecclesiastical and secular institutions. In origin they date from the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, when they were called "general schools," as at Paris and Bologna, in contradistinction from other institutions termed "special" or "particular" schools. Their characteristics were three: they were institutions for every one who wished to study; their teaching was designed to be for the advantage of all Christendom; and those who completed the course of study considered typical and necessary were declared worthy, on examination, to propagate and teach the learning they had acquired.

But the university was something more than the "general school"-- it was a juristic corporation. Such organizations of teachers and students arose toward the end of the twelfth century, remolding the schools and securing important privileges. Within these corporate bodies, or universitates magistrorum et scholarium, were "faculties" of teachers and "nations" of students. In the course of time the designation of the corporate body was transferred to the corps of teachers, and in Germany studium generale and universitas were synonyms from the first. The archetype of the university was found in Paris and Bologna in the early twelfth century, the former devoted to theology and the latter to law, but both employing the same new method. This was the dialectic consideration of theology and law respectively, the set task being the dialectic removal of discrepancies between Church Fathers or glossators, the weighing of the pros and cons, and the final conclusion, or sententia. In harmony with the medieval doctrine of the universal monarchy and the universal Church, theology and jurisprudence stood in the foreground of interest. The universities were favored with special privileges, the first being the Authentica habita of the Emperor Frederick I. (1158) giving imperial protection to those journeying to distant places for the sake of study, exempting them from local jurisdiction, and placing them under the control of teacher or bishop. A similar course was followed by Philip Augustus for the University of Paris in 1200, and the popes later bestowed the right of conferring degrees and the so-called right of residence.

2. University of Paris; Organization.

Toward the close of the twelfth century the University of Paris was formed by the union of the teachers of the four subjects of theology, law, medicine, and arts. By degrees the teachers of the same subjects formed still closer associations (caused primarily by the need of regulation of the conferring of degrees), which took place 1310-20. About this same time the term "faculty" was employed to denote first the subject and then the body of those teaching it. Among the faculties that of arts was the lowest, serving as introductory to the other three. It taught the traditional seven liberal arts and especially Aristotelian philosophy, while in its study of dialectics it prepared the way for theology. The faculty of law, in like manner, was devoted to canon law. In these same decades the scholars were divided, for administration and discipline, into four "nations," each headed by its chosen "procurator," and all four united under a "rector."

The students of the faculty of arts soon gained the ascendency in the university, especially as their masters were at the same time scholars in the higher faculties, and about 1274 the rector of the orations, which included the entire university except the teachers of the higher faculties, became the head of the faculty of arts. About the same time each of the other faculties seems to have given itself a "dean" as its chief officer, but by 1341 the rector had become supreme over the deans of medicine and law, and even of theology, so that he was now the ruler of the whole university, a development completed shortly before the foundation of the first German university (Prague, 1348).

3. Bologna University.

While in France education had been connected, since the time of Charlemagne, with monasteries and churches, so that both teachers and scholars were clergy; in Italy the laity had also taught from Roman days, and the development of the Bolognese type accordingly differed from the Parisian. The chief studies in Italy were grammar, rhetoric, and law, the latter taught at Rome, Pavia, Ravenna, and Bologna as a department of the arts. Early in the fourteenth century, however, law became a separate branch of study at Bologna, due to the abiding influence of the lawyer Irnerius and the canonist Gratian. Thus practical and legal Bologna became the type of lay and democratic student universities, while speculative and theological Paris and Oxford were models of clerical schools of masters.

At Bologna the foreign students formed themselves into nations on the pattern of the city gilds; but by the middle of the thirteenth century the corporations had become the two great juristic universities of Citramontani and Ultramontani, within which the nations continued to be independent. These two universities (Citramontani and Ultramontani), with their two rectors, existed until the sixteenth century, whereas in offshoots from Bologna reduction to a single university took place at an earlier date. The teachers of law were at first outside the university at Bologna, nor were they organized into a formal board until the second half [Page 99]

[Page 100]

[Page 101]

[Page 102]

[Page 103]

[Page 104]

[Page 105]

[Page 106]

[Page 107]

[Page 108]

[Page 109]

[Page 110]

[Page 111]

[Page 112]

[Page 113]

[Page 114]

[Page 115]

[Page 116]

[Page 117]

[Page 118]

[Page 119]

[Page 120]

[Page 121]

[Page 122]

[Page 123]

[Page 124]

V

VADIANUS. See WATT, JOACHIM VON.

VALDES, val-des', JUAN and ALFONSO DE.

Alfonso on the Sack of Rome (§ 1).
Juan's "Mercury and Sharon"; Alfonso (§ 2).
Juan's Relations with Rome, and with Giulia Gonsaga (§ 3).
Later Writings (§ 4).
Theological Views (§ 5).

1. Alfonso on the Sack of Rome.

The Hispano-Italian reformers, Juan and AIfonso de Valdes, were born as twins at Cuenca (84 m. s.e. of Madrid), Castile, about the end of the fifteenth century, Juan dying at Naples in the summer of 1541, and Alfonso at Vienna early in Oct., 1532. Alfonso, in 1520, accompanied the young King Charles to his coronation at Aachen, and then went to Worms, where he witnessed the burning of Luther's writings, which he, unlike the majority, considered but the beginning of the tragedy of the Reformation. A few years later he was imperial secretary to the high chancellor, Mercurino Arborio da Gattinara, and when the Spanish monks raged against Erasmus, Alfonso warmly defended the Basel scholar. In May, 1527, Rome was stormed and sacked by an imperial army, though without imperial sanction, and the pope himself was made prisoner. Alfonso voiced the sentiment of the court in a dialogue on the catastrophe between Lactantius, a cavalier of the emperor, and an archdeacon just come from Rome to Valladolid. Lactantius, through whom Alfonso expresses his own views, declares that the pope, as a disturber of the peace and as faithless to his word, brought the sack of Rome upon himself. He advocates the surrender of the papal temporal power and asserts that, since the exposure of ecclesiastical corruption by Erasmus and the sedition incited by Luther had alike failed to reform the papacy, God had turned to other means of conversion and had found them in the sack of Rome. The archdeacon himself concludes the dialogue with the hope that the emperor would now take the reformation of the Church in hand. The papal nuncio, Count Baldassare Castiglione, and Alfonso's fellow secretary, Juan Aleman, both sought to have this "ultra-Lutheran" document condemned to the flames, but the archiepiscopal grand inquisitor declared that the dialogue contained nothing heretical.

Meanwhile, probably in Dec., 1528, Juan had written his dialogue "Mercury and Sharon," a piece full of biting satire on false Christians. At the same time, Spain is declared more happy than Germany, where Lutheranism had given birth to many other sects. The justice of the punishment of Rome is maintained, and the absolute need of reform is stressed. Both the "Mercury" and the "Lactantius" were printed anonymously, probably in 1529, repeated editions following; modern editions are by Usoz i Rio in Reformistas antiguos espanoles, [Page 126]

[Page 127]

[Page 128]

[Page 129]

[Page 130]

[Page 131]

[Page 132]

[Page 133]

[Page 134]

[Page 135]

[Page 136]

[Page 137]

[Page 138]

[Page 139]

[Page 140]

[Page 141]

[Page 142]

[Page 143]

[Page 144]

[Page 145]

[Page 146]

VATICAN COUNCIL.

I. Antecedent History: The first adducible proof

that Picas IX. intended to call an ecumenical coun

cil appeared Dec. 6,1864, at a session of the cardinals

of the Congregation of Rites. He then

r. Prelimi- directed them, and soon extended this

nary Can- order to include all the cardinals resi

vass and dent in Rome, to present their views

Committees. on that project, in the form of written

opinions; and early in Mar., 1865, a

committee of cardinals was appointed to examine

these opinions. The majority of the cardinals agreed

that a council was necessary, though there was not

entire concord as to the matters to be treated. After

that, the convening of a council was no longer an

open question. So during April and May, and by

advice of the college of cardinals, the prefect of the

Propaganda, Cardinal Caterini, addressed to thirty

six bishops of various nations a formal request sub

arctissima secreti lege, to set forth in explicit terms

the matters which seemed to them most worthy of

consideration before the council, with regard to their

diocesan interests. Picas IX, had himself outlined

the list of these confidential advisers; he also made

the first public announcement of the prospective

council, on June 26, 1867, in his address to such

princes of the church as had assembled in Rome

for the jubilee festival. The preparation of the

council devolved upon an extraordinary congrega

tion of the college of cardinals, briefly known as the

" Central Committee." Its members included Car

dinals Patrizi, Reisach, Panebianco, Bizarro, Ca

terini, and, later, Barnabo, Bilio, Capalli, de Luca.

Their preliminary labors in 1865 were occupied with

enlisting distinguished theologians and canonists as

expert advisers of the council. These invitations

were guided by the propositions advanced by the

nuncios and by the various bishops. Only the

ultramontane trend received such marked prefer

ence herein, at the outset, that when the resultant

selections became known, they were sharply con

tested. Besides the central committee there were

accessory committees appointed: (1) on dogmatics,

(2) on church discipline, (3) on religious orders,

(4) on oriental churches and missions, (5) on eccle

siastical polity, and (6) on ceremonies. The labors

of these committees were subject to the central

committee's revision. There were ninety-six ad

visers actively engaged. The question as to who

should be invited to the council at large occasioned

prolonged inquiries and incidental scruples. Ob

jection was raised against inviting the Roman Cath

olic princes. The bull Aterni patris, subscribed by

Picas IX. and the cardinals present in Rome, was

published on June 29, 1868; and convened the council to meet at Rome on Dec. 8, 1869. As the council was to be ecumenical, the bishops of the churches of oriental rites were also invited; and in a subsequent bull, all Protestants and others outside the Roman Catholic pale were summoned, on occasion of the council, to rejoin the Roman Catholic Church. Howbeit, the Orientals declined the summons, without exception, and on the Protestant side the invitation was disregarded. The papal invitation found some accordant response. within the Anglican church; yet here, too, there was counterbalancing opposition. Thus the Curia's hope of inducing the schismatic orient and the world of Protestant heresy to some recognition of the Curia's contemplated measures came to naught..

The reception accorded to the impending council in Roman Catholic circles was not everywhere alike and underwent great fluctuations. Little could be deduced from the terms of convocation

WACKERNAGEL, vae'ker-nä''gel, KARL EDUARD PHILIPP: Hymnologist and educator; b. in Berlin June 28, 1800; d. at Dresden June 20, 1877. He studied at Berlin and Breslau, devoting himself especially to mineralogy and crystallography. He also entered upon his hymnological studies. He became involved in the political troubles of the time, and had to leave Breslau for Halle and Halle for Nuremberg (in 1823), where he taught in a private school until it was closed for lack of support. In 1829 he obtained his doctor's degree and was called to Berlin as teacher in the Technical School. In 1839 he went to Stetten in Württemberg as teacher, in 1845 to Wiesbaden as professor in the Realgymnasium, and in 1849 to Elberfeld as director of the Realschule. In 1861 he resigned and lived thenceforth in retirement in Dresden, occupied with literary work and hymnological studies, so far as his strength permitted. He was one of the prominent founders of the German Evangelical Church Diet (see CHURCH DIET). Wackernagel's work and achievements in the domain of pedagogy, as well as in mathematics and the natural sciences, especially crystallography, were important. As an advocate of a Christian national education he opposed the rationalistic pedagogy, and published a series of "German Reading Books," which were much used, and a significant treatise, Ueber den Unterricht in der deutschen Muttersprache (Stuttgart, 1843), in support of his views. In like manner he held that in the field of the sciences everything is "spiritually ordered," and he had no sympathy with the empirical point of view which notes only sensuous phenomena. From his youth a deep interest in the poetry and song of the people led him to comprehensive studies in German history and literature. His religious bent forbade his passing over the pearls of German folk-songs--the hymns. In this field no one before him had made so far-reaching, thorough, and methodic investigation, and no one had brought greater natural gifts to the undertaking. The first ripe fruit of his labors was Das deutsche Kirchenlied von Martin Luther bis auf Nicolaus Herman und Ambrosius Blaurer (Stuttgart, 1841), a collection of 850 hymns from the oldest and best texts, and a treatise on the sources whence they were derived. In the preface a history of hymnology is attempted on broad lines, and the principles on which it should be studied and written are discussed. Further study brought so much new material to light that Wackernagel determined on a complete recasting of his work. After thirteen years' preparation he published Bibliographie zur Geschichte des deutschen Kirchenliedes im 16. Jahrhundert (Frankfort, 1855), in which he described 1,148 song-books and sheets (against 187 in the first edition; the number was augmented by 620 more in a supplement in 1877). The second part, under the title Das Kirchenlied von der ältesten Zeit bis zu Anfang des 17. Jahrhunderts, mit Berücksichtigung der deutschen kirchlichen Liederdichtung im weiteren Sinne und der lateinischen von Hilarius bis Georg Fabricius und Wolfgang Ammonius, followed in five volumes (Leipsic,1864-77). It presents 6,783 hymns. Wackernagel also published Die Lieder Paul Gerhards (Stuttgart, 1843); a new edition of Luther's hymns (1848); Johann Hermanns geistliche Lieder (1856); Gesangbuch für Kirche, Schule, and Haus (1860); and Beiträge zur niederländischen Hymnologie (Frankfort, 1867).

(L. SCHULZE.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Schulze, Philipp Wackernagel nach seinem Leben und Wirken, Leipsic, 1819; R. Wackernagel, Wilhelm Wackernagel Jugendjahre 1806-33, Basel, 1885; ADB, vol. xl. [Page 232]

[Page 233]

[Page 234]

[Page 235]

[Page 236]

[Page 237]

[Page 238]

[Page 239]

[Page 240]

[Page 241]

[Page 242]

[Page 243]

[Page 244]

[Page 245]

[Page 246]

[Page 247]

[Page 248]

[Page 249]

[Page 250]

[Page 251]

[Page 252]

[Page 253]

[Page 254]

255 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Waldenses Waldenstroem to the Vaudois of Piedmont, London, 1855; P. Heber, Waldo, Kaiser Karla des Grrosaen yeiatlicher Rath, and die alteren Waldenser, Basel. 1858; D. Costello, Piedmont and Italy, 2 vole., London, 18591'; M. Young, The Life and Times of Aonio Paleario, 2 vols., London, 1880; P. Melia, The Origin, Persecutions, and Doctrines of the Wal denses, from Documents, many now the first time collected and edited, London, 1870; J. P. Maine, General Beckwith: his Life and Labours among the Waldenses of Piedmont, London, 1873; J. Goll, Quellen and Llnterauchungen zur Geschichte der bShmischen Briider, Prague, 1878-82; Jane L. Willyams, The Waldensian Church in the Valleys of Piedmont, from the Earliest Period to the Present Time, new ed., London, 1879; J. N. Worsfold, Peter Waldo, the Reformer of Lyons, London, 1880; J. A. Wylie, History of the Waldenses, London, 1880; W. Jones, Hist. of the Wal denaes, new ed., 2 vole., London, 1882; A. Deissmann, Wnldenaer in der GraJschaft Schaumburg, Wiesbaden, 1884; H. Meille, Recollections of Two Hundred Years ago in the Waldenaian Valleys, Edinburgh, 1888; E. Montet, Hial. Z%tteraire des Vaudois du Piemont, Geneva, 1886 (reprints early sources); K. Muller, Die Waldenser and ihre einzel nen Gruppe bis sum Anfang des 1.4. Jahrhunderts, Goths, 1888; L. Brunel, Les, Vaudois des Alps Jrangaises, Paris, 1888; D. K. Guthrie, Lecture on the Waldenses and their Glorious Return, Edinburgh, 1889; A. Thomson, Letters Written in Connection with the Bi-Centenary Commemora tion of the " Glorious Return " of the Waldenses to their Native Valleys. Edinburgh, 1889; J. W. Brown, Italian Campaign, London, 1890; J. Chevalier, Memoire his torique sur lee heresies du Dauphin, Valence, 1890; H. Haupt, Waldensertum and Inquisition, Freiburg, 1890 (re produces documents); A. Berard Les Vaudois . du l,. au 18. siecle, Paris, 1892; F. Rostan, The Waldensian Church and her Work of Evangelization in Italy, Torre Pel liee, 1894; T. Gay, The Waldenses, their Rise, Struggles, Persecutions, and Triumphs, London, 1895; Sofia V. Boni piani, A Short History of the Italian Waldenses who have inhabited the Valleys of the Cottdan Alps from Ancient Times to the Present, New York, 1897; C. Huck, Doymen historischer Beitray zur Geschichte der Waldenaer, Frei burg, 1897 W. B. Worsfold, The Valley of Light: Studies with Pen and Pencil in the Vaudois Valleys of Piedmont, London, 1899; G. Jalla, Compendia di storia valdese, Florence, 1902; J. Gibson, The Waldenses, their Home and History, Edinburgh (1903); H. C. Lea, Inquisition of the Middle Ages, 3 vole., New York, 1908, and in general works on the Inquisition; T. de Cauzons. Les Vaudois et l'inquisitian, 2 vole., Paris, 1907; Schaff, Christian Church, v. 1, pp. 493-507; KL, xii. 1185-95. On Waldensian literature: F. J. M. Itaynouard, Choix des poesies des troubadours, ii. 73-102, Paris, 1817; G. von Zezschwitz, Die Kateclaismen der Wa7denser and bBhmischen Bruder, Erlangen, 1863; H. Haupt, Die deutsche Bibel iibersetzung der mittelalterlichen Waldenser, W urzburg, 1885; F. Jostes, Die Waldenser and die vorlutheri3che deutsche Bibelubersetzunp,Munster, 1885; J. bliiller, in Monuments Germanize pa!dagogica, vol. iv., Berlin, 1887. W A L D E N S T R O E M, vdl'den-str8m, PAUL PETER: Swedish theologian and educator; b. at Lulea (106 m. n.e. of Stockholm), Sweden, July 20, 1838. He pursued post-graduate studies at the Uni versity of Upsala, 18572 (Candidate in Philos ophy, 1862; Ph.D., 1863); in 1864 he was ordained and was appointed lector in theology, Greek, and Hebrew at the gymnasium at Umea. Financially aided by the State, he traveled, in 1867, in Prussia and Wiirttemberg, Germany, for the purpose of studying the German school system. In 1873-74 he studied at the University of Upsala the symbolical books of the Lutheran Church, publishing the re sults in De justifeeatione quid statuant libri symbolici ecclesice lutherante (Upsala, 1874). In the spring of 1874 he was appointed lector in theology and He brew at the gymnasium in Gefle. He has contribu ted numerous articles on pedagogy to Pedagogisk Lidsskrift (1866-73); after the death of Rosenius (q.v.), in 1868, he became the editor of Pietisten, in

which most of his religious beliefs have found expression; in 1877-80 he was coeditor of Vittnet, a monthly periodical; and is the editor of the annual Calendar Ansgarius. He is prominent in politics, having been repeatedly elected a representative at the State diet, second chamber.

It is in the ecclesiastical field that he has exerted most of his influence. He is one of the foremost leaders of the Free Church movement in Sweden, and the father of a theological movement the supporters of which; found both in Sweden and in America, are called Waldenstromianere, though they prefer to be known as Missionsvanner. In a sermon, published in Pietisten, 1872, he gave impetus to the theological movement with which he is identified by proclaiming his novel idea of the atonement. He holds that the reconciliation through Christ is of us to God, not of God to us: not through grace on account of Christ, but on account of grace through Christ. The subject is God, the Father of Christ; the source is the love of God; the object is the whole world; the mediator is Christ, the only begotten God (Waldenstrom accepts and defends the reading d tCOVOyev~s 9a6g in John i. 18), the Son of God; the end is the restitution of men to God, not the reconciliation of God to men, which latter teaching, according to Waldenstrom, ,finds no support in Scripture.

This sermon called forth a storm of controversy. He then published (1873) Om forsoningens betydelse, which was combated by theologians but met with the favor of many lay people who were opposed to State religion, the nucleus of his subsequent constituency.

Within the ranks of Evangeliska Fosterlandsstiftelsen (a society for foreign and home missions, founded 1856 as the result of the evangelical work of Carl Olof Rosenius; q.v.), the adherents of Waldenstr8m soon brought matters to a schism. They submitted in 1875 a motion to annul the confessional basis of Fosterlandsstiftelsen by making adherence to the Augsburg Confession no longer obligatory for missionary workers. The motion failed to pass. The Waldenstromians consequently left the Fosterlandsstiftelsen and organized, Aug., 1878, Svenska Missionsforbundet, now consisting of 1,144 congregations with 91,000 members. In 1904, Waldenstrom became president of Missionsforbundet. Waldenstrom held his clerical position in the State church till 1882, when he resigned. His conflicts with the church authorities were caused by his manner of accommodating his idea of the Church to circumstances rather than by his doctrine of the atonement. When he once was called to serve a group of "believers " by administering the Lord's Supper, the authorities refused him the use of the church. This furnished him the opportunity of attacking the Church for refusing to believing ministers the opportunity to serve people who for the sake of their conscience could not partake of the Lord's Supper except with believers.

For almost a generation Waldenstrom has been a leader of the Free Church movement in Sweden. His influence has also been felt in America, where his adherents number about 33,000. He visited America in 1889 and several times subsequently, the last

WAYLAND, FRANCIS:

Baptist preacher and educator; b. in New York Mar. 11, 1796; d. at Providence, R. I., Sept. 30, 1865. He was graduated from Union College in 1813; studied medicine for three years; uniting with the Baptist church, he studied at Andover Theological Seminary, 1816-17; was tutor in Union College, 1817-21; pastor of the First Baptist Church in Boston, 1821-26; professor in Union College in 1826; president of Brown University, 1827-55; pastor of the First Baptist Church in Providence, 1855-57; and subsequently devoted himself to religious and humane work. He is widely remembered as a college officer. The text-books [Page 280]

[Page 281]

[Page 282]

[Page 283]

[Page 284]

[Page 285]

[Page 286]

[Page 287]

[Page 288]

[Page 289]

[Page 290]

[Page 291]

[Page 292]

[Page 293]

[Page 294]

[Page 295]

[Page 296]

[Page 297]

[Page 298]

[Page 299]

Wends Werenfels THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG 800

interpreter. One result of the uprising was that the peaceful conversion of the Wends ceased to be thought of; annihilation was now the word. The conditions were not bettered when, in 1067, Bishop Burchard of Halberstadt destroyed the chief senttuary of the Leutizi and rode the sacred steed of Radigast into Halberstadt. Missionary activity was resumed when Kruto, the successor of Gottschalk, was slain by Heinrich, son of Gottschalk, who with Saxon assistance seized the rule. Heinrich proceded more cautiously than his father, though he eves a Christian and had a church at Altliibeck, the only one in Mecklenburg. Constant wars with external foes prevented him from carrying out his plans. His assassination in 1127 caused missionary work again to cease. Under the powerful Niklot, the Mecklenburg country again relapsed into heathenism. The Wends found piracy, which they learned from the Danes, a more attractive occupation than agriculture or cattle-raising. This again showed that what was required for the safety of the kingdom was either thoroughgoing conversion of the Wends or their annihilation. This was the watchword in the Saxon crusade of 1147. Count Adolf of Holstein-Schauenburg and Heinrich of Badewide succeeded in tearing Wagrien and Pola,bien (East Holstein and Lauenburg) from the Wends, and the former was completely devastated and cleared of its Wendish population. German settlers took their place, to whose spiritual welfare the aged Vicelin devoted his last days.

When Bernard of Clairvaux was preaching a crusade to the Holy Land, the Saxons replied that they had heathens enough at home. Bernard thereupon began to preach with enthusiasm the crusade against the Wends. Niklot had been living in peace with the German princes. Adolf of Holstein being reminded of the alliance between him and Niklot, excused himself, whereupon Niklot attacked and captured Liibeck. The campaign thus inauspiciously begun by the crusaders ended in disaster. The German nobles were finally content to make a sorry peace with Niklot, upon his agreeing to let his people be baptized if they wished. .Henry the Lion saw more profit to himself in the Wends as heathens, for so he received the tribute that would have gone to the Church. Upon his receiving the right of investiture for Wendland, he changed his policy, and appointed the Provost Evermod to Ratzeburg, Gerold to Oldenburg, Berno to Mecklenburg (1155). Berno became the Boniface of the Mecklenburg Wend country. He had, indeed, little success before Niklot's heroic death in 1160. 2diklot's son Pribislaw was baptized and the Christianizing of the country proceeded rapidly. This was, however, due to the practical extinction of the original Wendish population. German colonists had taken their place. The Mecklenburgian Wends had defied conversion for four hundred years and had gone dawn without having as a people embraced Christianity.

The Sorbs on the southern borders of the German empire had quite a different history. As early as ?82 a war of the Sorbs is referred to as an " uprising," showing their prior subjection to the empire. They lived together with Germans in the valleys of

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are: Thietmar of Merseburg, Chronicon, ed. J. M. Lappenberg in MGH, Script., iii. (1839), 733-871, and in Script. rer. Germ., Hanover, 1889, also in MPL, exxxix. 1183-1422; Adam of Bremen, GeaEa Hammaburgensis ecclesix pontificum, ed. J. M. Lappenberg in MGH, Script., vii (1846), 267-389, and in Script. rer. Germ., 2d ed., Hanover, 1876; Helmold, Chronica Slavorum, in MGH, Script., xxi (1869), 11-99, in Germ. transl. by J. C. Laurent, 2d ed. by W. Wattenbach, Leipsic, 1888; Arnoldus Lubecensis, Chronica Slavorum, in MGH, Script., xxi (1869), 115-250, and ed. J. M. Lappenberg, in Script. rer. Germ., Hanover, 1868; F. Wigger, Mecklenburgische Areualeu bis . . 1066, Schwerin, 1860; Mecklenburgisches Urkundeubuch, vol. i., Schwerin, 1863. Consult: L. Giesebrecht, Wend, sche Geschichten, 3 vols., Berlin, 1843; Wendisches Volksthum in Sage, Brauch, and Sitte, Berlin, 1882; L. Nottrott, Aus der Wendenrnission, Halls, 1897-98; Hauck, KD, iii. 69-149, 623-658, iv. 554-625; E. Fireusch, Kircheugeschichte der YVendenlande, Paderborn, 1902; and the articles ArrscAH; GoTrBCHAL%, 2; OTTO OF BAMBERG; and VICELIN, with the literature under them.

WENDT, vent, HAMS HINRICH: German Protestant; b. at Hamburg June 18, 1853. He was

WESLEY, SAMUEL, SR.: Father of John and Charles Wesley; b. at Winterbourne-Whitchurch (28 m. w. of Southampton) Nov. (baptized Dec. 17), 1662; d. at Epworth (23 m. n.w. of Lincoln) Apr. 22, 1735. His early education was received among the dissenters; but in 1683 he renounced non-con formity, and entered Exeter College, Oxford (B.A., 1688). He was ordained deacon that year, and priest Feb. 24, 1689-90, and held various prefer ments, including a chaplaincy on a man-of-war, and the rectory of South Ormsby, Lincolnshire (1690), until Queen Mary gave him the living of Epworth in Lincolnshire (1695), in return for the compliment of his dedication to her of his Life of our Blessed Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, an Heroic Poem (1693; ed. T. Coke, 2 vols., 1809). He was a man of learning, benevolence, devotional habits, and liberal senti ments. He wrote largely, and by this means eked out his salary, which was insufficient to support his large family. He had nineteen children, of whom, however, nine died in infancy. Of, his poetical works mention may be made of: The History of the New Testament Attempted in Verse, 1701; The History of the Old Testament in Verse, 1704. His learned Latin Commentary on the Book of Job, Dissertationes in librum Jabi, in which he was, however, aided by others, appeared posthumously (1736). Other prose works are: The Pious Communicant rightly Prepared [Page 311]

[Page 312]

[Page 313]

[Page 314]

[Page 315]

[Page 316]

[Page 317]

[Page 318]

[Page 319]

[Page 320]

[Page 321]

[Page 322]

[Page 323]

[Page 324]

[Page 325]

[Page 326]

[Page 327]

[Page 328]

[Page 329]

[Page 330]

[Page 331]

[Page 332]

[Page 333]

[Page 334]

[Page 335]

[Page 336]

[Page 337]

[Page 338]

[Page 339]

[Page 340]

[Page 341]

[Page 342]

[Page 343]

[Page 344]

[Page 345]

[Page 346]

[Page 347]

[Page 348]

[Page 349]

[Page 350]

351 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Wilb81'Y0PC9 Wild. WILBUR, JOHN: A noted minister of the So ciety of Friends; b. at Hopkinton, R. I., July 17, 1774; d. there May 1, 1856. He came into prom inence in 1838, by opposing Joseph J. Gurney (q.v.), an English minister, who, he claimed, wax exalting the letter of the Bible as against the inward light. His own Meeting sustained him, but the New Eng land Yearly Meeting was opposed to him and, to depose him from the ministry, joined his Monthly Meeting to another which had a majority against him. In this manner he was disowned by Friends; but a considerable number of his sympathizers sep arated from the main body and formed a separate Yearly Meeting which still exists. A number of Meetings in different parts of the United States which held similar views became separated from the larger bodies of Friends about the same time, and have been designated by the name " Wilburite " (see FRIENDS, SOCIETY OF, I., § 7). John Wilbur published certain polemical pamphlets during his life, and his Journal and Correspondence appeared after his death (Providence, 1859). BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. S. Turner, The Quakers, pp. 247, 300, 302, London, 1889; American Church History Series, xii. 264-272, New York, 1894. WILDEBOER, vil'de-bor, GERRIT: Dutch Protestant, Old-Testament scholar; b. at Amster dam Sept. 9, 1855; d. at Leyden Sept. 4, 1911. He was educated at the University of Leyden (D. D., 1880); was pastor of the Dutch Reformed Church at Heiloo, near Alkmaar (1881-84); be came professor of Old-Testament exegesis, litera ture, and religion at the University of Groningen (1884), where he was rector (1897-98); went to Leyden in a similar capacity (1907). In theology he was " historico-critical, believing in God's par ticular revelation given to Israel." He wrote De waarde der syrische Evangelien vests- Cureton (Leyden, 1880); De profeet Micha en zijne beteekenis voor het verstand der profetie onder Israel (1884); De profetie onder Israel in hare grondbeteekenis voor ehristendom en theologie (1884); Het ontstaan van den kanon des Ouden Verbonds (Groningen, 1889; 4th ed., 1908; Eng. transl. by B. W. Bacon, The Origin of the Canon of the Old Testament, London, 1895); De letterkunde des Ouden Verbonds naar de tijdsorde van hair ontstaan (1893, 3d. ed., 1903); Karakter en beginselen van het historisch-kritisch onderzoek des Ouden Verbonds (Utrecht, 1897); the volumes on Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Esther in K. Marti's Kurzer Handkommentar zum Alien Testament (Frei burg, 1897-1908); and Jahvedienst en Volksreligie (Groningen, 1898). WILDENSPUCH, vil'den-spuH, CRUCIFIXION, THE: An event which took place in the hamlet of Wildenspuch (about 6 m. s. of Schaffhausen), canton of Zurich, Switzerland, Mar. 15, 1823. The deed is partially explicable from the religious fer ment caused quite widely in Europe by several series of events, such as the Napoleonic wars, the German wars for freedom, the lingering effects of the French Revolution, the famine years of 1816 1817, and the celebration of the Reformation, which in the region named took place in 1819. A sort of revival, attended by violent physical convulsions and other like phenomena, involved the district and

induced singular experiences and led to singular beliefs in numbers of cases.

In the hamlet of Wildenspuch, consisting of about twenty houses, lived a well-to-do family named Peter engaged in agriculture, in which there were one son and five daughters, one of the latter married to a shoemaker and farmer named Johannes Moser, of the neighboring village of Oerlingen. The youngest daughter was Maxgareta, born in 1794, unusually gifted mentally and spiritually, and from an early age very precocious. She became the favorite of the family and neighborhood, and was expected to develop into something extraordinary. She, however, developed chronic phthisis, and seemed destined to an early death. But one day at noon during her illness, while in her father's vineyard, she had a vision of an angel who showed her a herb in a place about an hour distant from her home which was to cure her. She found the herb, distilled from it a tea which she drank, and found herself restored. In thankfulness she dedicated herself to God, became associated with pious persons, attended with her brother-in-law Moser the assemblies of the Herrnhut Brethren, began to preach, and conceived that she had battles with the devil and evil spirits. She came into connection with Barbara Juliana von Kruedener (q.v.), being accompanied by her brotherin-law and her sisters Elizabeth and Susanna, and she came to have the opinion that the events of the period presaged the imminent end of the world.

A new influence upon her at this time was the personality and opinions of Jakob Ganz, a man of lowly birth and moderate equipment, vicar of Embrach in the canton of Zurich, and a preacher of revival type. He had developed the theory that in order to attain blessedness no real change was necessary in man's life, but that there was needed simply a development of the good in man which had been latent but not lost. His watchword was: Not Christ for us, but Christ in us. The Church was Antichrist since Christ had not arisen in it. In each Christian Christ must .fight Satan, suffer, die, and rise again. Under this influence Margareta deserted the association of the Brethren and preached at home. In a vision she found herself before the throne of God, saw there the Father and the Spirit surrounded by angels, patriarchs, Elijah, and the apostles; but the Son was not there, and God told her that the Son was to live, suffer, die, and abide in her; she also looked into hell, where she saw thousands of poor souls whom she was to save. Through Ganz a certain melancholic shoemaker named Morf, a married man and a father, was summoned to receive in his house Margareta and her sister Elizabeth, where they remained inactive for a year and a half, while to Morf was revealed that with Margareta he was to enjoy a spiritual love and was to be transported to heaven. The two sisters returned home Jan. 11, 1823, after Margareta had given birth the night before to a daughter by Morf -as Maxgareta stated, altogether unexpectedly to her, therefore by God's doing. She declared that she must prepare for the great event which was to happen, and therefore undertook no more visits and remained at home inactive. On Mar. 13, she assembled her relations to fight against the devil for

WILL, FREEDOM OF THE

   I Biblical: The Old Testament as a Biblical theological basis is favorable to the assumption of the freedom of the human will. The will of God always appeals to the autonomy of man. Nothing happens without the divine will (Job vii 17-21; Isa. xlv 17-21; Jer. x 23, xxxi 18); . on the other hand, the autonomous decision of the human will, whether in relation to enticing sin (Gen. iv 7) or to grace (Jer. xxix 13-14), is asserted more frequently and positively. The law makes its appeal to free choice (Deut. xxx 15 sqq.); the relation of man and God adapts itself to the free inclination of the human heart (Pa. xviii 26-29). In view of this parallelism striking antitheses and paradoxical symbolisms are inevitable (Ex. xxxiv 6-7; Hos. xiii; cf. Deut. xxx, xxxi; Jer. xviii). The tradition of the Mosaic idea of hereditary guilt gives way to that of personal accountability (Jer. xxxi; Ezek. xviii). A distinction between hereditary guilt and original sin would not resolve the contradiction: because (1) it would exceed the simple Old-Testament representation; (2) the same figures applied to ordinary human weaknesses are also referred to man's proneness to sin; (3) a development of the idea of freedom appears in prophecy (Isa. xxix, xlv; Jer. xviii). Western thought first laid open the logical alternative between these two trains of religious and ethical thought aeries, which lie in the Old Testament in embryo: Is the good such because God wills it or vice versa? (Plato.) Must man will the good because God works within him to do so? (Augustine.) Or, is the willing of man good because of voluntary adaptation to the divine will? (Duns Scotus.) This dilemma gave rise to a theological antinomy and became the principal point of controversy between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants; and the cleavage was present already between the free-will Sadducees, the deterministic Essenes, and the Pharisees holding to a general dependence upon divine omnipotence, with free choice to the individual. The synoptical discourses of Jesus emphasize sometimes the moral freedom of the individual (Matt. vii 24, xii 27, 37, xix 14, xxiii 37); at other times the causal connection of character with education, heredity, or divine descent (Matt. xii 34, xv 13, xviii 7, xxiii 32). Paul, too, emphasizes the idea of freedom. Although everything good, especially forgiveness, is a gift of God and sanctification the work of God, yet there is the direct appeal (Rom. vi 12); damnation is just (iii 7-8), and every one is accountable (II Cor. v 10). To the contrary is the fact of experience that conduct does not result from perception of the good and corresponding willing (Rom. vii 20; Gal. v 17) ; much less may the natural man sold under sin (Rom. vii 14) be called free (vii 23, viii 7). Grace has broken the bond of sin (vi 18), but the new state is another servitude (vi 19), and God performed the act of transformation (iii 21 sqq.; Eph. ii 8). The descent of sin according to the law may be traced back to the progenitor of the race (Rom. v 12 sqq.), and the growth of sin falls into unison with the purpose of grace (v 20-21). Formal freedom may seem implied at least for the reason (vii 16); but free deliberation is expressly denied the arbitrament (iii 19, ix 20; II Cor. x 5); and beside the duality of "mind" and "flesh", is pictured the monism of the absolute dependence on God (Rom. xi 32). The contrast is yet sharper in the Johannine writings. The knowledge of truth and the reception of eternal life depend on the will of the individual (John v 40, vii 17; cf. viii 45-46). I John betrays a strong undertone sounding an appeal to faithfulness and brotherly love, and casually calls for the duty of self-sacrifice (iii 16). On the other hand, the Christian state of grace appears so exclusively the work of divine omnipotence that the believer is designated as the offspring of God, as the product of a divine "seed," even incapable of sinning (iii 9, iv 4-5).. The Gospel, too, teaches this dualism (viii 34, 44, 47). God wills the salvation of all men (II Pet, iii 9), and voluntary surrender to corruption results in the inevitable doom (ii 9). On the other side, unbelievers are appointed to stumble (I Pet. ii 8). The New-Testament doctrine teaches freedom as well as constraint. There is no theoretical contradiction, since there is no thematic discussion, but a multiplicity of particular expressions bear upon the various sides of the problem in the vivid, Oriental symbolical fashion. The individual is now God's planting, offspring, elect, and now self-determining: partly fundamentally one with God, and partly distinct and different. Dualism applies now to the antithesis of God and man, now of God and Satan, and again of good and evil. The only difference between the Old and New Testaments is that in the latter the duty of moral volition and the sense of natural impotence have been intensified (Mark xiii 37; I Cor. xvi 13; Gal. v; Rom. vii).

   II. Historical: §1 The Old Hellenic theory of the will was predominantly deterministic, partly in the metaphysical, religious sense of fate (Heraclitus, the Pythagoreans, and the Eleatics), and partly in the psychological, ethical sense that the will is governed by the degree of understanding (the Socratic school).

WILLIAMS, ROWLAND: English Broad-church theologian; b. at Halkyn (12 m. e.s.e. of St. Asaph), Wales, Aug. 16, 1817; d. at Broad Chalke (7 m. w.s.w. of Salisbury), Wiltshire, Jan. 18, 1870. He studied at Eton and at King's College, Cambridge (B.A., 1841; M.A., 1844; B.D., 1851; D.D., 1857), where he was fellow 1839-59, and classical tutor 1842-50. During 1843-46 he was instrumental in averting the proposed amalgamation of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor, publishing in the press a number of remonstrances against the measure. In 1848 he won the Muir prize for a preliminary essay on the comparative merits of Christianity and Hinduism. From 1850 until 1862 he was vice-principal and professor of Hebrew at the theological college of St. David's, Lampeter, Wales. Despite the most uncompromising opposition on account of his liberal views regarding the interpretation of Scripture, his administration of the college was aggressive and successful. In Dec., 1854, he was appointed select preacher at Cambridge, though his sermons there were quickly interrupted by his father's death. In 1858 he accepted the living of Broad Chalke, whither he removed in 1862. In 1860 he contributed Bunsen's Biblical Researches to the famous Essays and Reviews, which resulted in his trial for heterodoxy before the Court of Arches (see ESSAYS AND REVIEWS). His principal works were, Rational Godliness (London, 1855), sermons preached at Cambridge and at St. David's College; Christianity and Hinduism Compared (1856), his greatest work; The Hebrew Prophets Translated . . . with Introduction and Notes (2 parts, 1866-71); Broad Chalke Sermon-Essays (1867); Owen Glendower: a Dramatic Biography . . . and Other Poems (1870); and Psalms and Litanies (1872).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: His Life and Letters was published by his widow, 2 vols., London, 1574. Consult: John Owen, in Contemporary Review, Apr., 1870; C. K. Paul, Biographical Sketches. London, 1883; DNB, lxi. 450-453; literature under ESSAYS AND REVIEWS. The Judgment of S. Lushington in the Court of Arches was published, London, 1882.

WILLIAMS, SAMUEL WELLS: Congregational layman and sinologue; b. at Utica, N. Y., Sept. 22, 1812; d. at New Haven, Conn., Feb. 16, 1884. In 1831 he entered Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute at Troy, N. Y.; went to Canton, China, in 1833 as a printer for the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions; there he was editor, contributor to, and printer of The Chinese Repository, 1838-51; removed to Macao, 1835, to complete the printing of Medhurst's Hokkeen Dictionary, 1835; visited Japan, 1837, and translated into Japanese Genesis and Matthew; began to print Bridgman's Chinese Christomathy, to which he contributed one-half, 1837-38; he was away from China, 1844-48, spending three years in America, where he was instrumental in raising funds for a full font of Chinese type; was interpreter to Commodore Perry's Japan expeditions, 1853-54; became secretary and interpreter of the U. S. Legation, Peking, 1855; assisted Minister Reed in negotiating the treaty with China, 1858. He made two more visits to America, and in 1877 he returned to become professor of the Chinese language and literature at Yale University. He had been charge d'affaires nine times during his term as secretary and interpreter in China. His great work [Page 372]

[Page 373]

[Page 374]

[Page 375]

[Page 376]

[Page 377]

[Page 378]

[Page 379]

[Page 380]

[Page 381]

[Page 382]

[Page 383]

[Page 384]

[Page 385]

[Page 386]

[Page 387]

[Page 388]

[Page 389]

[Page 390]

[Page 391]

[Page 392]

[Page 393]

[Page 394]

[Page 395]

[Page 396]

[Page 397]

[Page 398]

[Page 399]

ing. But hopes were disappointed. At a synod at Zurich (May 4, 1538), in which the note was loudly voiced that the agreement should only be assumed as valid after Luther had formally recalled his written attacks against Zwingli, a reply to Luther was resolved upon, in which the Swiss asserted the partaking of the body through a believing spirit; presumed that no difference longer existed; and begged the privilege, under present circumstances, of presenting such instruction to the people as would be most intelligible to them. But before its receipt, Luther, in an answer to Bullinger, assumed the harmony to be an assured thing, and the missive of the Swiss he acknowledged briefly by referring them, regarding his scruples, to Butzer as mediator. Thus, the movement resolved itself for years into polite correspondence; of an ultimate concord, by the action of a general convention, there was no more mention; and Butzer, who had made another attempt at Wittenberg (1538), seemed to have lost his former interest. The only fruit was a temporary truce of friendliness with the cities of upper Germany. Luther's comparison of Zwingli with Nestorius (Concilien and Kirchen, 1539) caused deep resentment in Switzerland. His restrictions upon the Swiss and their orthodoxy became ever severer until by a letter (Aug. 31, 1543) he broke off all relations with them, offering to pray and teach against them until his end. (T. KOLDE.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The sources are the official reports in Butzer's Scripta Anglicana, pp. 648 sqq., Basel, 1577, and in Walch's ed. of Luther's Werke, xvii. 2543; the matter in Tentzel, Supplementum hist. Gothanæ, pp. 114 sqq., Jena, 1716; Wolfgang Musculus' reports in his Itinerarium, given in T. Kolde, Analecta Lutherana, pp. 216 sqq., Gotha, 1883. Consult: J. C. G. Neudecker, Urkunden aus der Reformationszeit, Cassel, 1836; idem, Merkwürdige Aktenstücke aus der Zeit der Reformation, 2 parts, Nuremberg, 1838; idem, Neue Beiträge zur Geschichte der Reformation, Leipsic, 1841; T. Kelm, Die Reformation der Reichstadt Ulm, Stuttgart, 1851; idem, Schwäbische Reformationsgeschichte, Tübingen, 1855; C. Pestalozzi, Heinrich Bullinger, Elberfeld, 1858; J. W. Baum, Capito und Butzer, ib. 1860; G. Uhlhorn, Urbanus Rhegius, ib., 1861; F. W. Hassencamp, Hessische Reformationsgeschichte, vol. i., Frankfort, 1864; M. Lenz, Briefwechsel Landgraf Philipps mit Bucer, 3 vols., Leipsic, 1880-91; G. Kawerau, Der Briefwechsel des Justus Jonas, Halle, 1884 sqq.; H. E. Jacobs, The Book of Concord, ii. 253-259, Philadelphia, 1893; idem, Martin Luther, pp. 316 sqq., New York, 1898; W. Germann, Johann Forster, Meiningen, 1894; J. W. Richard, Philip Melanchthon, pp. 254-255, New York, 1898; E. Egli, Analecta reformatoria, Zurich, 1899 sqq.; K. Wolfart, Die Augsburger Reformation in . . . 1533-1534, Leipsic, 1901; F. Roth, Augsburgs Reformationsgeschichte, 3 vols., Munich, 1901-07; Cambridge Modern History, ii. 234, 339, New York, 1904; K. Schornbaum, Zur Politik des Markgrafen Georg von Brandenburg, Munich, 1906; T. Kolde, Die älteste Redaktion der Augsburger Konfession, Gütersloh, 1908; idem, Historische Einleitung in die symbolischen Bücher der evang.-lutherischen Kirche, ib. 1907; the letters and lives of Luther (see under article on him), and the literature on the later stages of the German Reformation.

WITZEL, vit'sel, GEORG: German Roman Catholic theologian; b. at Vacha-on-the-Werra (30 m. s.w. of Gotha) 1501; d. at Mainz Feb. 16, 1573. He studied at the University of Erfurt 1516-18, then interrupted his studies and became parish schoolmaster in Vacha; after that he continued work at the University of Wittenberg for twenty-eight weeks under Luther, Carlstadt, and Melanchthon. In the same year he was consecrated priest and served as vicar and also a part of the time as town-clerk in his native city until his twenty-fourth year. In 1523 he petitioned the abbot of Fulda for permission to marry, and in the silence of the abbot married without dispensation the daughter of a citizen in Eisenach. In 1524 he lost his clerical position. In Eisenach he became acquainted with Jakob Strauss (q.v.), in conjunction with whom he preached sermons against princes and bishops, against Roman abuses, picturing also the heavy burdens of the peasantry. Strauss made him preacher of Wenigen-Lupnitz, where he zealously began his work when the excitement among the peasants had already reached an alarming height. However much he may have been influenced by the social ideas of Strauss, his later assurance is to be received that he tried to subdue the rebellious spirit. In consequence of the Peasants' War he lost his position and was in great need until at the recommendation of Luther he became preacher at the small town of Niemegk. His leisure at that place he employed in comprehensive studies, especially of the Church Fathers, while the works of Erasmus influenced his views of the Church. What had led him to the Evangelical cause had not been assent to Luther's doctrine of justification or personal longing for certainty of faith, but a desire for the purification of the Church from abuses in worship and discipline, partly also in doctrine, but principally in life. Seeing in Lutheranism disagreement between doctrine and life, he at a later time returned to the Roman Catholic Church. Lutherans mistakenly accused Witzel of the Antitrinitarianism of Campanus, so that in Mar., 1530, he was arrested and imprisoned in the castle of Belzig. His innocence was soon proved and he returned, sick, to Niemegk, greatly disappointed and dissatisfied with Luther and his associates. In 1531 he left Niemegk, and began his open contest with the "Lutheran sect." Two years he spent in Vacha, trying in vain to find a new position, his mariage naturally proving an obstacle. But he was at this time diligently engaged in literary work. In 1533 Count Hoyer of Mansfeld called him as minister to St. Andrew's in Eisleben, where he as preacher and pastor of a small number of Roman Catholics experienced five years of bitter struggle with Johann Agricola, Güttel, Cordatus, Coelius, Kymaeus, Balthasar Raidt, and especially with Jonas. He also tried to put into practise his program of a renewal of the Roman Catholic Church in accordance with the principles of the primitive Church. On Aug. 30,1538, he was still in Eisleben, when he accepted a call from Duke George to Dresden or Leipsic, where he attempted to reconcile the two religious parties by leading them back to the doctrine and custom of the apostolic and early Church. Duke George laid no obstacles in his way, but under Duke Henry, his successor, Witzel was compelled to flee into the mountains of Bohemia. Thence he went to Berlin to Joachim II., who at first seemed to be inclined to adopt the Catholicism of Witzel, whom soon the sentiment of the country compelled to introduce the Reformation. Berlin was therefore no longer open to Witzel, who began to lead a migratory life, trying to find a receptive soil for his ideas in Lusatia, Silesia, Bamberg, and in 1540 in Würzburg. In 1541 he found [Page 401]

[Page 402]

403 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA W V~.m 1gner

were issued after his death (4th ed., 1835), and parts not issued by him appeared 1787. The authorship did not remain hidden, though Lessing tried to lay a false scent by suggesting the name of Johann Lorenz Schmidt, the editor of the Wertheim Bible (see BIBLES, ANNOTATED, I., § 4). The author was Herrmann Samuel Reimarus, as is confirmed by his own son, Johann Albert Heinrich Reimarus, who gave to the Hamburg city library the complete work from which the fragments were taken (a letter from the younger Reimarus is published in the Leipziger Litteraturzeitung, 1827, no. 55, in which the authorship is asserted).

Hermann Samuel Reimarus was born at Hamburg Dec. 22, 1694, and died there Mar. 1, 1768. He came of a family of ministers, though his father was a teacher, but one of rare talents, and was himself the oldest son. In his preparatory course he was under such instructors as Johann Christian Wolff; he studied at the universities of Jena and Wittenberg, at the latter of which he taught in the philosophical faculty. In 1723 he became rector of the city school at Wismar, and in 1717 professor of oriental languages in the gymnasium of Hamburg, where he remained in spite of a call to Göttingen to succeed Gesner. Reimarus was held in high honor in his native city, and his house was the gatheringplace of choice spirits. He employed the leisure which his duties left him in the study of one branch of learning after another. His official position entailed upon him the duty of preparing memorials of deceased persons. Outside of these he left but three larger works, which appeared in the earlier portion of his life. These were: Die vornehmsten Wahrheiten der naturlichen Religion (Hamburg, 1754); Die Vernunftlehre, als eine Anweisung zum richtigen Gebrauch der Vernunft in der Erkenntnis der Wahrheit (1756); and Allgemeine Betrachtungen über die Triebe der Tiere (1760). These appeared in several editions after the death of Reimarus and were translated into Dutch. The philosophical standpoint of Reimarus was essentially that of Wolff, though more radical; the being of God, the divine plan in the world, the annihilation of doubt of the divine providence, the immortality of the soul, the advantages of religion were proved by reason, and so far his attitude was apologetic. He was awake to the fact that in his time many little works had appeared which assailed not only Christianity but all religion and ethics, and his aim was to oppose these and to set forth by the claims of reason the truths of natural religion as well as of Christianity. Hence he named the great work which he left behind "Apology or Defense for the Rational Worshiper of God." In this he subjected the entire Biblical history to the tests of analytical criticism; according to the deistic standpoint of Reimarus, miracle is impossible, so that if the prophets and Jesus and the apostles pretended to work miracles, they were impostors. Such "impurities" he found to be conceivable in the Bible, since it contained much that was at variance with virtue as tested by the laws of nature and of peoples. A psychological explanation of this attitude of Reimarus appears when it is recalled that he was a man highly honored by his contemporaries, and that he held fast to the observances of the

Church, even though he regarded both Judaism and Christianity to have been founded by processes which involved imposture. He recognized that his book would cause unrest, and so did not print it, preferring that it remain concealed, being available for the use of such friends of his as were possessed of discretion. Some parts he had frequently worked over, and had revised the whole shortly before his death; this revised autograph is still extant.

While Lessing went to Hamburg in Apr., 1767, and Reimarus did not die until March of the next year, there is no evidence that the two met; but soon after the death of Reimarus, Lessing became acquainted with the son and daughter of Reimarus. According to a letter of Lessing to the son (in Lessing's Briefe, Nachträge and Berichtigungen, p. 17, no. 183a, Berlin, 1886), the latter was aware of Lessing's possession of parts of the elder Reimarus' work. These parts were in the author's handwriting, but not in their final shape, though the main thought was in no way different. Permission to publish excerpts was obtained by Lessing only on condition that the name of the author be not divulged. The complete work was carefully guarded by the family and shown to but few-"the community" of friends of Reimarus. In 1779 Lessing was allowed to copy from the final draft the chapters which related to the passage of the Red Sea, in which the results with reference to the numbers differed from what had been published. In 1779 the publisher Ettinger of Gotha was ready to publish the whole work, but the family decisively negatived the proposition, fearing a loss of the good reputation which it enjoyed and the effect upon the health of the mother of the family. The intention to republish portions (Zeitschrift für historische Theologie, 1850-52) failed through lack of interest in the work on the part of the public. (CARL BERTHEAUt.)

Bibliography: An ed. of the " Fragments " as issued by Lessing appeared Berlin, 1895. There is an Eng. transl. of part, Fragments from Reimarus, ed. C. Voysey, London, 1879 (cf. J. Sawyer, A Criticism of . . . C. Voysey's " Fragments from Reimarus," ib. 1880). Consult: the literature under GOBZE, JOHAN MELCHIOR; and LESSING, GOTTHOLD EPHRAIM; D. F. Strauss, Hermann Samuel ReimaruS and seine Schutzschrift für die vernünftigen Verehrer Gottes, Leipsic, 1862; J. A. H. Reimari . . . de vita sua commentarius. Additae sunt de vita H. S. Reimari narrationes J. G. Büschii et C. A. Klotzii, Hamburg, 1815; C. Mönckeberg, Hermann Samuel' Reimarus und Johann Christian Edelmann, ib. 1867; K. Fischer, Geschichte der neueren Philosophie, ii. 759-772, Heidelberg, 1867; K. C. Scherer, Das Tier in die Philosophie des H. S. Reimarus, Würzburg, 1898; B. Brandl, Die Ueberlieferung der " Schutzschrift " des H. S. Reimarus, Pilsen, 1907.

WOLFF, volf, CHRISTIAN, AND THE WOLFFIAN SCHOOL: German philosopher; b. at

Breslau Jan. 24, 1679; d. at Halle May 9, 1754.

He was educated at the gymnasium in Breslau

and the University of Jena, where he was greatly

attracted to the study of mathematics

Life. by the certainty of its method, which

seemed to him typical for science.

Without entirely giving up the thought of a theo

logical career, he took his master's degree in Leipsic,

then studied philosophy at Jena, and in 1703 estab

lished himself as privat-docent of philosophy at

Leipsic. In 1707 he accepted a call to Halle where

he lectured on mathematics, after 1709 also on

WORSHIP.

Definition (§ 1).

Necessity of Study of Primitive. Religions (§ 2).

Widely Divergent Theories of Comparative Religion (§ 3).

The Theory of Fear (§ 4).

The Theory of Love (§ 5).

Rival Theories of Order of Development (§ 6).

Caution Requisite in Constructing Theories (§ 7).

Probable Origin of Worship (§8 ).

The Earliest Forms of Worship (§ 9).

Worship and the Kingship (§ 10).

Relation of Fetishism to Worship (§ 11).

Ancestor Worship (§ 12).

Worship of Trees and Plants (§ 13).

Worship of Life-Giving Forces (§ 14).

Communal Worship (§ 15).

Associational Cults (§ 16).

Joyous Character of Primitive Worship (§ 17).

Propitiatory and Apotropaic Worship (§ 18).

The Greek Mysteries (§ 19).

Influence of subjectivity on Worship <§ 20).

Justification of Christian Analogies with Judaea-Ethnic Cults (§ 21).

Eucharistic Worship; Latria and Dulls (§ 22).

The Ethical Aspect of Worship (§ 23).

1. Definition.

Worship may be defined as the acknowledgment by some formal act of mind or body, or both, of God's supreme dominion, or (among pagans) of the exalted power of some divine or semi-divine being. In older English the word was used in a less limited sense, denoting honor or reverence in general. Traces of this usage are seen in the formula of the marriage-service in the English Prayer-book, where the bride-groom says to the bride, "With my body I thee worship, and with all my worldly goods I thee endow," as well as in the current application of the title "his Worship" and the epithet "worshipful" to the mayors of English towns; while to this day, among Roman Catholics, it would be possible to hear the expression "the worship of the saints" used without offense, although, as will be seen, nothing is clearer to them than the distinction between the supreme honor due to God alone and the subordinate or relative honor paid to even the highest and holiest of his creatures.

2. Necessity of Study of Primitive Religions.

The conception instinctively suggested to Christian people by the word in its narrower sense is inevitably stamped by the definition of the Founder of their religion, "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth" (John iv. 24); but an encyclopedic treatment of the subject must go beak for many centuries beyond the christian era, and patiently seek to penetrate the obscurity which veils the mental processes of primitive and uncivilized man. The modern study of comparative religion, also, has brought to light the profound significance of many rites of savage tribes which until recent years were contemptuously dismissed as mere barbarism or child's play, unworthy of the attention of serious thinkers. In them is often found the answer to many questions, which would otherwise have seemed insoluble, as to the manner in which primitive man regarded the supernatural and his relation to it. "It is ritual," says L. R. Farnell (Cults of the Greek States, i. 9, Oxford, 1896), "that is chiefly the conservative part of religion. And in ritual the older and cruder ideas are often held as in petrifaction, so that the study of it is often as it were the study of unconscious matter, in so far as it deals with facts of worship of which the worshiper does not know the meaning, and which frequently are out of accord with the highest religious consciousness of the community." So important is worship that one eminent German scholar (Otto Gruppe, quoted by Otto Schrader) has declared ritual to be the source of religion; but if this is going too far and putting the cart before the horse, at least the study of its development is one of the most interesting and instructive chapters in the history of the human mind.

3. Widely Divergent Theories of Comparative Religion.

When approach is made to what is logically the first step in the consideration of the subject-the origin to be assigned, according to the best results of comparative religion and anthropological science, to what is understood by worship, a wide divergence of views comes to light. This is not to be wondered at, if the fact is taken into consideration that Comparative Religion (q.v.) itself, the discipline which attempts to answer such questions by the inductive method, is of very recent growth, dating practically from the last third of the nineteenth century. For many ages it was considered that these methods were wholly inapplicable to the study of a question whose solution seemed to be already included within the province of revelation. Even so independent a thinker as Hobbes expressly excluded "the doctrine of God's worship" from philosophy, "as being not to be known by natural reason, but by the authority of the Church; and as being the object of faith and not of knowledge" (Elements of Philosophy, I., viii., London, 1656). The first stimulus came from the discovery and study of the sacred books of the East, followed by the deciphering of the Assyro-Babylonian and Egyptian texts; but the past forty years have been so fruitful of results for the scientific study of religion that a large body of data bearing on the subject of this article is now accessible, even though the conclusions to be drawn from them are not as yet by any means matters of general agreement. Working along these lines, one must start with some knowledge of the manner in which the idea of God may be supposed, apart from any case of an immediate revelation, to have grown up in the mind of primitive and utterly uncivilized man. It may be taken for granted that some more or less definite idea of the existence of a supernatural being or beings is to be found in all branches of the human race; writers who approach the question from such diverse points of view, as E. B. Tylor, T. Waitz, J. L. A. de Quatrefages, Max Müller, G. Gerland, and C. P. Tiele, are agreed upon so much.

4. The Theory of Fear.

One principal ground of controversy seems to be whether fear or veneration is the predominant sentiment in the attempt to enter into communion with these superhuman beings. Some observers are inclined to attach by far the greater importance to the motive of fear. Thus E. A. Westermarck says (Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, ii. 612, London, 1908): "In early religion the most common motive [for sacrifice] is undoubtedly a desire to avert evils; and we have reason to believe that such a desire was the first source of religious worship." And even in modern times Sir M. Monier Williams (Brahmanism and Hinduism, p. 230, 4th ed., London, 1891) asserts that "no one who has ever been brought into contact with the Hindus in their own country can doubt that the worship of at least 90 per cent of the people of India in the present day is a worship of fear." This view has been stated in various forms, the most often quoted of the earlier ones being the saying of Statius in the first century, Primus in orbe timor fecit deos- "First in the world fear created gods," which, says Hobbes in the seventeenth, "spoken of the gods (that is to say, of the many gods of the Gentiles) is very true"; and Renan in the nineteenth was equally convinced that religion began by endeavors to propitiate the hostile powers by which man found himself surrounded.

5. The Theory of Love.

Tiele, on the other hand, in his sober and thoughtful Gifford Lectures (Elements of the Science of Religion, Edinburgh, 1897-99), says deliberately that prolonged research and reflection have more and more convinced him of the inaccuracy of this view, and that he would far rather indorse the words of Robertson Smith (Rel. of Sem., p. 55) : "From the earliest times religion, as distinct from magic and sorcery, addresses itself to kindred and friendly beings, who may indeed be angry with their people for a time, but are always placable except to the enemies of their worshipers or to renegade members of the community. It is not with a vague fear of unknown powers, but with a loving reverence for known gods who are knit to their worshipers by strong bonds of kinship, that religion in the only true sense of the word begins." His distinction between religion in the proper sense and magic is one which deserves attention; but even those who, with F. B. Jevons, maintain that "it is in love and not in fear that religion in any true sense of the word has its origin" (Introduction to the History of Religion, p. 109, 4th ed., London, 1908) admit that "it is none the less true that fear-not of irrational dangers, but of deserved punishment-is essential to the moral and religious education of man; it is 'the fear of the Lord' that is 'the beginning of wisdom.'"

6. Rival Theories of Order of Development.

"Another much-controverted point is the order in which the various aspects of worship emerged. Many hold, following Robertson Smith, that the idea of communion with the supernatural being or beings is antecedent in time to the gift sacrifice. Tylor, on the other hand (Primitive Culture, ii. ch. xviii., 4th ed., London, 1903), believes that the gift sacrifice is the most primitive form, basing this conclusion on the analogy of man's dealings with his fellow men, and assuming that he treated his god as he would a chief (according to the usual ancient custom, illustrated in Gen. xxxii. 20; xliii. 11). He thus places as the stages in the development first the gift, second the idea of homage, and third that of abnegation or expiation.

7. Caution Requesite in Constructing Theories

The fact is that, in this as in all other questions which concern the history of worship, it is necessary to base a judgment upon a wide and patient investigation of data from different ages and different parts of the world. There has been too frequent a tendency to lay down a priori conclusions as certain, with the same finality as Hobbes (Leviathan, I., xii.): "For the worship which naturally men exhibit to powers invisible, it can be no other but such expressions of their reverence as they would use toward men; gifts, petitions, in thanks, submission of body, considerate addresses, sober behavior, premeditated words, swearing (that is, assuring one another of their promises) by invoking them. Beyond that reason suggesteth nothing; but leaves them either to rest there, or for further ceremonies to rely on those they believe to be wiser than themselves." Too often, again, a whole theory has been constructed upon observations relating to a single group of phenomena, and then boldly given forth as accounting for the origin and significance of worship in general, if not of religion itself. Thus, those who maintain that the origin of primitive religious worship was fear may be supposed to have neglected such records as the answer made to the early Spanish missionaries in America, questioning the Indians on their belief as to the origin of their gods; the usual reply was that they had come from the air or heaven, to dwell among them and do them good. Other investigators of aboriginal beliefs in the same continent have dwelt, and even with astonishment, on the prevalence of the worship of malicious spirits rather than good, led to their conclusion by the somewhat serious failure to take into account the totem-god in a land where totemism flourished to a degree unequaled elsewhere except in Australia. Again, among the Aryan races, which to this day are the most thoroughly known, the simple household worship, in no sense public, did not attract the attention of the poets, whose verses are filled with the more picturesque marvels of mythological legend. Very little testimony concerning this system of worship has made its way into literature; what is known about it has been largely recovered by a patient piecing together of information recovered from an illuminating interpretation of a sentence here and a paragraph there.

8. Probable Origin of Worship.

It is not, however, a rash speculation to see in the history of primitive man first a recognition of the existence of superhuman powers controlling his destinies, or at least intervening in them at times; then a tendency to see in these powers a personal will analogous to that of which he was conscious in himself; and finally a casting about for means of entering into relations with them to his own advantage. His sentiment of a certain kinship with the supernatural powers, combined with his conviction of entire dependence upon them, impelled him to seek communion with them, and to reestablish such communion when he thought it had been broken off through his own fault. From this impulse, according to Tiele, spring all those religious observances which are usually embraced in the term worship.

9. The Earliest Forms of Worship.

The content of this term, however, was very much smaller in prehistoric times. Holding strongly to the idea of blood-kinship; extending it beyond the visible family to include the deceased members with whom communion is still desired; then seeking, under totemism, for alliance with another tribe, some mysterious supernatural clan–a prehistoric race develops but slowly a definite idea of worship offered "to" some one. According to Jevons, worship in its rudimentary stage meant the sprinkling upon the altar of the blood of the totem-animal, with the sole purpose of renewing the blood-covenant and procuring the presence and aid of the totem-god. On this theory, the idea of offering a sacrifice "to" a god could be developed only in a later stage of totemism, when the stone had come to be identified with the god, and the god was no longer in the animal. The idea of worship, further, implies the existence, for the worshiper, not merely of a supernatural being as such, but of a supernatural being who "has stated relations with a community" (Robertson Smith, ut sup., p. 119).

10. Worship and the Kingship.

11. Relation of Fetishism to Worship.

Among strictly communal rites of worship, a time comes when disasters and distresses impress the tribe with the idea that they have offended their divine protector, and they seek to propitiate him by what are called piacular sacrifices. The development of this sentiment on a large scale may more fitly be treated later, when the discussion comes to the gradual loosening of the bonds of the predominantly tribal or national cult. The mention of it here will afford an opportunity to speak of what is somewhat loosely known as Fetishism (q.v.). The term calls up all the associations which are vaguely present to the minds of average people when they sing the words "The heathen in his blindness Bows down to wood and stone"; and indeed the objects supposed to be endued with supernatural power are often, to our minds, of a very inadequate and even ridiculous nature. But, as far as the mind of the African savage, for example, can be studied, it seems tolerably clear that the original source of these strange proceedings is nothing more than the desire to secure the countenance or protection of some mighty spirit, possibly one not already preoccupied with the tribal affairs, who chooses to take up his abode in or render himself accessible through some such object as a prominent rock or a curiously carved piece of wood. There is no longer likelihood of falling into the error, once so prevalent, of supposing that the African savage worships an inanimate object, knowing it to be inanimate. As Pfleiderer puts the matter generally, "what is really worshiped in the object anywhere is not itself but a transcendental x within and beyond it." Fetishism, in the sense of the worship which finds its way, frequently from the individual, to dimly conceived supernatural beings by and through such means of approach, leads to the next branch of the subject.

12. Ancestor Worship.

13. Worship of Trees and Plants.

14. Worship of Life-giving Forces.

WORTHINGTON, GEORGE

Protestant Episcopal bishop; b. at Lenox, Mass., Oct. 14, 1840; d. at Mentone Jan. 7, 1908. He was graduated from Hobart College, Geneva, N. Y., 1860, and from the General Theological Seminary, New York, 1863; was ordered deacon, 1863, and ordained priest, 1864; became assistant at St. Paul's Church, Troy, N. Y., 1863; rector of Christ Church, Ballston Spa, N. Y., 1865; was rector of St. John's Church, Detroit, Mich., 1868-85; and was bishop of Nebraska from 1885. His administration was marked by a great development in the affairs of the see.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. S. Perry, The Episcopate in America, p. 291, New York, 1895.

WORTHINGTON, JOHN

An English clergyman, known as a member of the school of "Cambridge Platonists" (q.v.), into whose inner life his Diary and Correspondence (ed. Crossley, for the Chetham Society, Manchester, 1847) gives valuable glimpses. He was b. at Manchester, Feb., 1618; d. in London, Nov. 30, 1671; was educated at Emmanuel College, Cambridge (B.A., 1635; M.A., 1639; fellow, 1641), where he had Benjamin Whichcote for his tutor and Nathanael Culverwel (qq.v.) for his friend; became a clergyman in 1646. Besides several parochial preferments, he was master of Jesus College, Cambridge, from 1650 to 1660, when he was displaced to make room for the restoration of a former master who had been ejected by the Puritans. He spent his remaining years between London and Lincolnshire, where he held the living of Ingoldsby, of which More was the patron, and a prebend in Lincoln cathedral. His original work consists mainly of a volume of Discourses (London, 1725), and a smaller volume of Miscellanies (1704); but he also edited with great care the works of Joseph Mead, from whom the Cambridge movement may in a sense be said to take its rise, and the Select Discourses of John Smith, one of its most important members.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Besides the literature under CAMBRIDGE PLATONISTS, and under the articles on the members of that school, consult Worthington's Diary and Correspondence, ut sup.; Simon Patrick's Autobiography, Oxford, 1839; J. Tulloch, Rational Theology and Christian Philosophy, ii. 426-433, Edinburgh, 1874; DNB, lxiii. 40-42.

WORTMAN, DENIS

Dutch Reformed; b. at East Fishkill, N. Y., Apr. 30, 1835. He was graduated from Amherst (B.A., 1857) and the Reformed Church Seminary, New Brunswick, N. J. (1860). He held pastorates at Brooklyn, N. Y. (1860-63), Philadelphia (1863-65), Schenectady, N. Y. (1865-1871); Fort Plain, N. Y. (1880-83), and Saugerties (1883-1901), He was debarred from regular pastoral work in 1871-76 by ill-health, and for the next four years acted as supply to various churches. Since 1901 he has been secretary of the Ministerial Relief Fund of the Reformed Church in America. In theology he holds "to the Reformed faith, with modifications as suggested by scientific learning and broader sympathies." He has written the two poems Reliques of the Christ (New York, 1888), and The Divine Processional (1903). Several of his hymns are in current use.

WRATH OF GOD

Old Testament.

WRATISLAW, ALBERT HENRY

WREDE, vrê'de, WILLIAM

German New-Testament scholar; b. at Bücken (25 m. s.s.e. of Bremen) May 10, 1859; d. at Breslau Nov. 23, 1906. He received his education at the gymnasium at Celle, the universities of Leipsic and Göttingen, and the theological seminary at Loccum; became inspector of the theological foundation at Göttingen, 1884; took a pastorate at Langenholzen, 1887; returned to Göttingen to teach, 1889; became extraordinary professor for the New Testament at Breslau, 1893, and professor, 1895. His principal works are Untersuchungen zum ersten Clemensbriefe (Göttingen, 1891); Ueber Aufgabe und Methode der . . . neutestamentlichen Theologie (1897); Das Messiasgeheimnis in den Evangelien (1901); Charakter und Tendenz des Johannesevangeliums (1903); Paulus (Tübingen, 1905; Eng. transl., Paul, London, 1907); and the posthumous Vorträge und Reden (1907); and Die Entstehung der Schriften des Neuen Testaments (1907; Eng. tranel., The Origin of the New Testament, New York, 1910).

The two works for which Wrede is best known, the Messiasgeheimnis and the Paulus, illustrate well both the excellences and the defects of their author as well as his services to theological science. Even in his first work on the First Epistle of Clement, he revealed himself as not only a learned, careful, and keen-sighted scholar, but also as an independent and thoughtful critic. Anew he proved the value of that letter as a source of knowledge not only for the Roman community but for the general tendencies and needs of the postapostolic generation. His interest was not in the details, but in the general relations both to the preceding and the following literature and events. So in his treatment of New-Testament theology he bound together religion and theology. His Paulus deals with a side of what he regarded as within the province of New-Testament theology. In all this work he consciously limited himself to certain lines of investigation, not because he had no interest in what lay beyond, but because in this chosen field he found problems that required answers which he felt he must find before he advanced to the wider field, in answering, which, too, he felt that he was preparing himself for advance. In his researches he did not permit himself to be fettered by tradition, no matter what its source. While he honored profoundly his teachers, he subjected himself to none of them; he neither belonged to a "school" nor did he build one. As a teacher he evinced these same qualities, took his work earnestly, and stimulated his pupils to thoroughgoing patience and industry in their labors.

His Paulus is rather a work of art than a popular book, though it belongs to a popular series. It does not concern itself with detail, but is a polished treatment of the essential life and work of the apostle, comparing that life with the life of Jesus. In that it does not furnish a purely historical decision it reflects Wrede's subjective standpoint. The author regards Paul as the second founder of Christianity, the builder of ecclesiastical orthodoxy, who changed, by his doctrine of the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ, the religion of Jesus. Not that he charges Paul with a fault here, but rather regrets that it was Paul who did what had to be done. As a check upon the unwholesome and panegyrical exposition of the life of Paul, Wrede's work was valuable; but Wrede does not present the entire Paul to his readers, it is a profile picture which he paints. Similarly in his treatment of the Gospel of John, only one side is presented, not a consideration of the entire problem. A one-sidedness of another kind comes to light in the Messiasgeheimnis. To bring up earnestly the question whether, according to the consensus of the New Testament, Jesus conceived of himself as Messiah was a great service and as a stimulus has borne good fruit. Since his work investigation concerning the self-consciousness of Jesus has taken a new start. The error of Wrede lies in the fact that he overestimated the conclusiveness and deliberateness with which the evangelists individually assumed one or another of the view-points possible in their time. He worked too much in logical categories, asked too often why and how; he handled Mark and Paul as though they were men of our times.

In spite of these defects his short period of work, shortened even beyond the actual time by calamity and illness, was uncommonly fruitful.. His plow went deep, and he scattered his seed beyond his own furrow.

(G. A. JÜLICHEA.)

WRIGHT, CHARLES HENRY HAMILTON

Church of England; b. at Dublin Mar. 9, 1836; d. in London Mar. 22, 1909. He was educated at Trinity College, Dublin (B.A., 1857; M.A., 1859), and was ordered deacon in 1859 and ordained priest in the following year. He was curate of Middleton-Tyas, Yorkshire, in 1859-63, chaplain of the English church at Dresden in 1863-68, chaplain of Holy Trinity, Boulogne-sur-Mer, in 1868-73, incumbent of St. Mary's, Dublin, in 1874-85, and of Bethesda Church in the same city in 1885-91, and vicar of St. John's, Liverpool, in 1891-98. After 1898 he was clerical superintendent of the Protestant Reformation Society. He was also Bampton Lecturer at Oxford in 1878, Donellan Lecturer at Trinity College, Dublin, in 1880-81, and Grinfeld Lecturer on the Septuagint at Oxford in 1893-97, besides being examiner in Hebrew at different times to the universities of Oxford, London, Manchester, and Wales. In theology he described himself as "evangelical and conservative, but quite willing to adopt opinions based on real evidence and not on mere conjectures or hypotheses of scholars however eminent." He wrote or edited A Grammar of the Modern Irish Language (Dublin, 1855); The Book of Genesis in Hebrew (London, 1859); The Book of Ruth in Hebrew (1864); Bunyan's Allegorical and Select Poetical Works (1866); The Fatherhood of God, and its Relation to the Person and Work of Christ, and the Operations of the Holy Spirit (Edinburgh, 1867); Zechariah and his Prophecies Considered in Relation to Modern Criticism (Bampton lectures; London, 1879); The Book of Koheleth, commonly called Ecclesiastes, Considered in Relation to Modern Criticism and to the Doctrines of Modern Pessimism(Donellan lectures; 1883); Biblical Essays (Edinburgh, 1886); The Writings of St. Patrick, the Apostle of Ireland (London, 1887); Introduction to the Old Testament (1890); The Bible Readers' Manual; or, Aids to Biblical Study (1895); The Service of the Mass in the Greek and Roman Churches (1898); Roman Catholicism: or, The Doctrines of the Church of Rome briefly examined in the Light of Scripture (1896; 4th ed., 1909); The Intermediate State and Prayers for the Dead examined in the Light of Scripture and Ancient Jewish and Christian Literature (1900); The Statutory Prayer Book (in collaboration with J. J. Tomlinson; 1902); A Protestant Dictionary (edited in collaboration with C. Neil; 1904); The Book of Isaiah, and other Historical Essays (1905); Daniel and his Prophecies (1906); Daniel and its Critics (1906); and Light from Egyptian Papyri on Jewish Hist. before Christ (1908).

WRIGHT, GEORGE FREDERICK

WRIGHT, THEODORE FRANCIS

Swedenborgian; b. at Dorchester (now a part of Boston), Mass., Aug. 3, 1845; d. at sea near Alexandria, Egypt, Nov. 13, 1907. He was graduated from Harvard (A.B., 1866) and the New Church Theological School (then at Waltham, Mass., 1868); in 1864-65 he served in the Union Army as first lieutenant of the 108th Colored Volunteers; after the completion of his studies was pastor of the Church of the New Jerusalem at Bridgewater, Mass, (1868-1889); and after 1889 was dean of the New Church Theological School at Cambridge, Mass., where he was professor of history after 1884. He was also honorary American secretary of the Palestine Exploration Fund after 1890. In addition to editing The New Church Review after 1893, he wrote The Realities of Heaven (New York, 1880); Life Eternal (Boston, 1885); The Human and its Relation to the Divine (Philadelphia, 1892); and Psalms from Swedenborg's Latin Translations (Germantown, Pa., 1900).

WRIGHT, THOMAS

Church of England layman; b. at Olney (51 m. n.w. of London), Bucks, May 16, 1859. He was educated at Buxton College, Forest Gate, London; since 1882 he has been principal of Cowper School, Olney. Besides being a trustee and the secretary of the Cowper Museum, formed by the gift of the poet Cowper's house to the town of Olney in 1900, he is the founder and secretary of the Cowper Society (founded in 1900) and of the John Payne Society (founded in 1905). Theologically he belongs to the Evangelical school of the Church of England. Besides being editor of all works published by the Cowper and John Payne societies, he has edited the letters of Cowper (4 vols., London, 1904); and has written: The Town of Cowper(London, 1886); The Chalice of Carden (1889); The Blue Firedrake (1892); The Mystery of St. Dunstan's (1892); The Life of William Cowper (1892); The Life of Daniel Defoe (1894); The Acid Sisters (poems; 1897); Hind Head (1898); Ianthe (1900); The Ivory Coffer (poems; 1903); The Life of Edward Fitzgerald (2 vols., 1904); The Life of Sir Richard Burton (2 vole., 1906); The Life of Walter Pater (2 vols., 1907); The Life of Colonel Fred Burnaby(1908); The Life of William Huntington (1909); and Joseph Hart. Being personal Memoirs . . . from unpublished Materials (1910).

WRIGHT, WILLIAM

Orientalist; b. at Mallye or Mallai, on the Nepal frontier, India, Jan. 17, 1830; d. at Cambridge, England, May 22, 1889. He early developed a fondness for oriental languages; studied at St. Andrews, from which he was graduated; then at Halle, devoting his main efforts to Syriac, but acquiring all the Semitic languages together with Sanskrit; and lastly at Leyden; was professor of Arabic at University College, London, 1855-56; and at Trinity College, Dublin, 1856-61, lecturing there on Hindustani; for the opportunity of original work, he held a post in the department of manuscripts at the British Museum, 1861-70; and was professor of Arabic at Cambridge, 1870-89, where he also became a fellow. As a member of the Old-Testament revision committee he had a field for the exercise of his extensive scholarship. His cooperative activity yielded such fruits as the oriental series of the Palæographical Society, drawn up under his editorship, and contributions to the lexical works of Payne Smith in Syriac, of Dozy in Arabic, and of Neubauer in Hebrew. He was an eminent teacher. He edited the book of Jonah in four Semitic versions (1857); Fragments of the Curetonian Gospels (1872); Fragments of the Homilies of Cyril of Alexandria on the Gospel of S. Luke (1874); translated and edited Caspari's Grammar of the Arabic Language (2 vols., London, 1859-62); collected and edited Opuscula Arabica (Leyden, 1859); and with English translation and notes Contributions to the Apocryphal Literature of the New Testament (London, 1865); edited and translated Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles (2 vols., 1871); edited with English translation and notes The Chronicle of Joshua the Stylite (1882); and wrote Lectures on the Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages (Cambridge, 1890); and A Short History of Syriac Literature (London, 1894).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: R. L. Benaly, in Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1889, pp. 708 sqq.; DNB, lxiii. 138-139.

WRITING AND THE ART OF WRITING, HEBREW.

I. The Biblical Statements.

Statements Implying Early Use of Writing (§ 1).

The Materials Employed (§ 2).

II. Information from Other Sources.

III. The North Semitic and Early Hebrew Script.

North Semitic Script (§ 1).

Development of the Alphabet (§ 2).

IV. Aramaic Varieties of Writing and the Hebrew Square Character

The Older Forms (§ 1).

Development of the Square Characters (§ 2).

Sacredness of the Square Character (§ 3).

Documentary Testimony to Hebrew Script (§ 4).

Printed Documents (§ 5).

I. The Biblical Statements

1 Statements Implying Early Use of Writing.

For an acquaintance of the Hebrews with the art of writing in the period before Moses there are no direct testimonies. Though on the signet of Judah (Gen. xxxviii. 18) was engraved probably some pictorial representation, the account in Gen. xxiii. of the transaction before witnesses between Abraham and Ephron can only by employing the argument from silence be used against the idea of the possession by the Hebrews of the knowledge of writing. The old name of the city of Debir was Kirjath-sepher (Josh. xv. 15-16; Judges i. 11-12; Septuagint, Kariassophar, Egyptian Bait tupar [the rendering of this is disputed: it has been interpreted "Book-town," and the claim founded thereupon that writing was widely diffused in Palestine and that books were numerous; the Septuagint suggests rather the rendering "town of the scribe," and this conveys a directly opposite meaning]). The "officers" of the Hebrews in Egypt (Ex. v. 6) are called in Hebrew shotarim; in Assyrian and Arabic the root of this word has the meaning "to write," and the corresponding noun in Aramaic carries the meaning "document." But does this involve anything regarding the employment of this art among the Hebrews of that period? At any rate, if writing was diffused as an art among the Hebrews of the time of Moses, it can not be reckoned a new invention. Moses wrote matter that was legal (Ex. xxiv. 4; 7 [in the E record], xxxiv. 27; Deut. xxxi. 9, 24), and historical (Ex. xvii. 24 [E]; Numbers xxxiii. 2 [P]); the Song of Moses (Deut. xxxi. 22; cf. also Num. xvii. 2). The priests wrote (Num. v. 23 [P]) the imprecation in the water of Ordeal (q.v., § 7); and according to Deuteronomy (vi. 9, xi. 20, xxiv. 1, 3) others wrote. The engraving of names and other words on stone and metal is mentioned ( [P]). Joshua is recorded as having written the law of Moses (Josh. viii. 32), as having the land of Canaan described in a book for purposes of allotment (xviii. 6, 8, 9), and himself as writing certain matters in the book of the law of God at the assembly of the people at Shechem (xxiv. 26). In the period of the Judges the ability to use writing must have been common, for a youth caught by chance was able to give in writing to Gideon the names of seventy-seven of the princes and elders of the city (scripRef passage="Judges viii. 14" parsed="Judges|8|14|0|">Judges viii. 14, margin). According to I Sam. x. 25 Samuel wrote down the "law of the kingdom." Poems like those in Num. xxi. and Judges v. were certainly set down in writing at an early period; in Num. xxi. 14 are some lines of a poem cited from "the book of the wars of the Lord"; citations are made from "the book of Jasher" in Josh. x. 13; II Sam. i.18, 19; and I Kings viii. 53 (according to the Septuagint-cf. J. C. Matthes in ZATW, 1903, p. 121, who would read in all three passages "book of the ode" instead of "book of Jasher," the difference being in the transposition of two letters). Consequently the assertion of T. T. Hartmann, W. Vatke, and P. von Bohlen is not defensible that not until shortly before Solomon, or even later, was the art of writing an accomplishment of the Hebrews. From the regal period there are numerous testimonies to the application of writing both in public and in private life; such are the letter concerning Uriah (II Sam, xi. 14), the letters of Jezebel concerning Naboth (I Kings xxi. 8, 11); the letters of commendation for Naaman to the king of Israel ( sqq.); the roll of Isaiah in Isa. viii. 1 sqq.; the letter from the Assyrian to Hezekiah (Isa. xxxvii. 14), and of Merodach-baladan to the same (Isa. xxxix. 1); that from Huram of Tyre to Solomon (II Chron. ii. 11); witness of the purchase of a piece of land (Jer. xxxii. 10); and the recording of accusations (Job xiii. 26, xxxi. 35). Not altogether clear is the activity of the royal officers called scribes, as under David (II Sam. viii. 17), Solomon (I Kings iv. 3), Hezekiah (II Kings xxii. 3); apparently their duty was to keep the archives and prepare the correspondence of the king; while according to II Kings xii. 11 the scribe had the overnight of the money applied to the restoration of the temple. From Isa. x. 19 it appears that in the time of that prophet a child could write.

2. The Materials Employed.