361	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Homiletfos
		Homilies
	imp, ib. 1884; H. Bassermann, Handbuck der peiatlidlien
	BeredeamkeiR Stuttgart, 1885; A. Stole, Honiletik, Frei
	burg, 1885; J. A. BroaAus, Preparation and Delivery of
	Sermons, New York, 1888 (Professor Broadue earned a
	wide reputation for his .kill in this branch); J. W. Etter,
	The Preacher and his Sermon, Dayton, O., 1888; C.
	Palmer, Evanpelische Homiletik, Stuttgart, 1887; A. J. F.
	Behrends, The Philosophy of Preaching, New York, 1890;
	A. T. Pierson, The Divine Art of Preaching, ib. 1892; T.
	Christlieb, Homiletik, Basel, 1893; R. F. Horton, Ve
	bum Doi, Londop, 1893; W. B. Carpenter, Lectures on
	Preaching, London, 1895; J. Jungmann, Theorie der paiat
	lichen Beredamkeit, 2 vole., Freiburg, 1895; J. stalker,
	The Preacher and his Models, London, 1895; 1. Stoek
	meyer, Homil6tik, Basel, 1895• Phillips Brooks, Lectures
	on Preaching, New York, 1898; H. Van Dyke, Gospel for
	an Age of Doubt, ib. 1898; J. A. Kern, Ministry to the
	Congregation, ib. 1897; T. H. Pattison, The Making of a
	Sermon,, Philadelphia, 1898; H. Hering, Die Lehre ton
	der Predipt, 2 vole., Berlin, 1897‑1904; J. S. Kennard,
	Psychic Power in Preaching, Philadelphia, 1901; F. Bar
	ton, Pulpit Power and Eloquence, 2 vole., Cleveland, 1901
	1902; T. H: Pattison, Hist. of Christian Preaching, Philadel
	phia, 1903; W. J. Fosell, The Sermon and Preaching, New
	York, 1904; J. J. A. Proudfoot, Systematic Homiletics, ib.
	1904; A. S. Hoyt, The Work of Preaching, ib. 19M;
	L. O. Brastow, The Modern Pulpit, ib. 1908; A. E. Garvie,
	A Guide to mss, London, 19118; H. C. Graves, Lco•
	lures on Homiletics, Philadelphia, 1908; W. Rhodes,
	Homiletics and Preaching, Baltimore, 1908; P. T. Forsyth.
	Positive Preaching and the Positive Mind, New York, 1907;
	S. Horne, The Ministry of the Modern Church, London,
	1904; P. Kleinert, Homildik, Leipsio 1907; H. Johnson,
	The Ideal Ministry, New York, 1908; C. R. Brown, The
	Social Message of the Modern Pulpit, London, 1908.
	For further literature see under PabACrr?Na, Harroa: or.
	HOXMIARIUM, hem'ri‑li‑eri‑um: A name ap
	plied from the beginning of the Middle Ages to any
	collection of homilies, or sermons and homilies.
	It came to be used also for complete collections of
	the sermons of a single theologian, or to anthologies
	from the works of various authors, in which ego
	getical extracts from different commentaries were
	intermingled with sermons actually delivered. Re
	cent investigations have shown that homiliaria may
	be divided into two main groups. The first contains
	those compiled for the benefit of congregations.
	Cmsarius of Arles required all the clergy who were
	not competent to prepare their own sermons at least
	to show themselves capable of reading a sermon of
	some one else every Sunday; and this was imposed
	as an obligation by the Second Council of Vaison in
	529. In consequence a great variety of homiliaria
	were current in Gaul, always including some of
Cslmrfus's own sermons.	The legislation of the
	Carolingian period repeated this prescription; ser
	mons in the vernacular were required on all Sundays
and feast‑days.	New collections were drawn up,
	and no parish priest's library was complete without
	one of them. The homilies of Gregory the Great
	seem to have been specially recommended. The
	polleetion of Bede, in two books of twenty‑five
	sermons each, had a long use and grew by addi
	tions to 140. The large collection of Alcum
	perished early; that which has been known as his
	since the fifteenth century is a rearrangement of
that of Paulus Diaconus.	Alcuin's original com
	pilation was in 1892 discovered in the Bibliotbbque
	Nationale in Paris. There.were two collections by
	Rabanus Maurus, both containing material from
	other preachers; of these nothing is extant except
	about a third of the section in the Scripture lessons
	for Sundays and feast‑days, extending from Easter
to the fifteenth Sunday after Pentecost. Another collection passes under the name of Haimo, but is probably not older than the eleventh century.
Meantime another class of homiliaria had grown up, intended primarily for reading in the choiroffices of the clergy. A characteristic example of this sort of collection is found first in the homiliarium of Bishop Egino of Verona (d. 802), containing 202 sermons, principally from Augustine and Leo. This was surpassed in popularity by the collection of Paulus Diaconus, undertaken at the instance of Charlemagne, after whom it is sometimes called. The work was done at Monte Camino between 786 and 797, and the book officially introduced by order of Charlemagne throughout the, empire. More than a fifth of the whole number of etracts from homilies come from Maximus of Turin; neat to him the favorite author is Bede, and then come Leo, Gregory, Augustine, and ten others. It appears that this collection was partly meant for popular use, and the absence of special reference to the monastic life caused Benedict of Aniane to draw up a homiliarium of his own for the Benedictines. For clerical use that of Paulus was exceedingly popular from the fifteenth century, although the first printed editions (Speyer, 1482; Cologne, n.d.) show that it had undergone radical changes; and in 1493 a revision so radical was begun by Surgant that scarcely any thing more than the old title was left. Of this later form the Cologne edition of 1539 is reprinted in 11iPL, gcv. The homiliarium of Paulus, had on the one hand, its effect upon the development of the breviary; and, on the other, set the model for Luther's Kirehenpoatille, so that the undertaking of Charlemagne had a far‑reaching influence.
(FRIHDRICn WIZ(IAND.)
BanrooaArar: Ranke, in TSK, ncviii (1855), 382‑398; F. Wieeand~ Dae Homiliarium Hark des Grosses, Leipsic, 1897; R. Cruel, Geschichte der deutaehsn Predipt im Mittdalter, pp. 18‑09, Detmold, 1879; L. Hahn, in Porsehurr pen sw deutwhen Gescbickfa, vies. 583‑625, Gottingen, 1884; A. Lineenmayer, Geschichts der Predipt in Deutschland, pp. 41‑03, Munich, 1888; Revue BJabdidine, 1892, pp. 49‑81, 311f‑328, 1894, 385‑402, 1898, pp. 97‑111, 1898, pp. 400‑403; Hauck, KD, ii. 246 sqq., 888‑b89. 836‑837. Much of the literature under ‑PRRAGHINa, Hnrvosr or, deals with the subject; e. g., E. C. Dwgan, Hitt. of Preacriirw, pp. 187, 199 .qq., 304‑305, New York, 1905.
HOMILIES: A collection of sermons issued by the Church of England with the title: The Two Books of Homilies Appointed to be Rend in Churches. The collection has had a noteworthy history. It relates to the labors of the English Reformers to establish their fellow‑countrymen in the distinctive theology of Protestantism. The first of the two books was prepared by Archbishop Franmer during the lifetime of Henry VIII. but prudently held back until after his death, and was published on July 31, 1547. The reading of at least a portion of one of these homilies was in the preface made obligatory, in King Edward's name, upon all pariah ministers every Sunday as part of divine service, unless the said minister had preached a sermon. It was also enjoined that the homilies were to be read over and over again. As sermons were rarities in many parishes the homilies were divided into sections which would not require more than fifteen minutes to read. The first book has twelve

Homilies
Honozlus
homilies, five from Cranmer. The second book has twenty‑one, similarly divided, only the homilies are much longer and the sections take nearly thirty minutes to read reverently. The collector of the second book was Bishop Jewel, who is the author of nine of the sermons. The topics treated in both collections are fundamental to training in sober living in the Protestant faith. Whether the style was sufficiently simple to accomplish this purpose may well be questioned, in view of the general illiteracy of priest and people.
In March, 1552‑53 Convocation in the thirtyfourth of the original XLII. Articles of Religion then passed, used this language: " The Homilies of late given and set out by the King's authority be godly and wholesome, containing doctrine to be received by all men, and therefore are to be read diligently, distinctly and plainly." Thus the Church endorsed the work. In July of that year Mary came to the throne and ordered the destruction of these homilies, but showed her appreciation of that kind of instruction by causing similar homilies setting forth Roman Catholic doctrine to be prepared and enjoined. In 1558 Elizabeth suoceded Mary and the homilies of Cranmer were revived and enjoined. It was not till 1652‑63 that the second book appeared. The two books were published separately, and the editions were not uniform till 1582. In 1632 for the first time they were united in one volume. In Art. XXXV. of the present XXXIX. Articles of Religion both in the Latin text of 1563 and in the English text of 1571 the homilies are commended and the contents of the second book given. Appended to this article as adopted by the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America in 1801 is a bracketed note which states that the reading of these homilies in churches is suspended " until a revision of them may be conveniently made for the clearing of them, as well from obsolete words and phrases, as from the local references."
It is probably now true that few persons living have read these homilies, although none can read the XXXIX. Articles of Religion without encountering in the eleventh article this language: " That we are justified by Faith only, is a most wholesome Doctrine, and very full of comfort, as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification." Curiously enough there is no homily which has this title.
BIBLIOGRAP8T: The edition issued by the Oxford University Press in 1859 is a preface which gives very full histonoa~and aritioal notes. Consult also: J. T. Tomlinson, The Prayer Book Articles and Homilies, chaps. lx.‑X.: London, 1897.
HOMILY. See HOMILETICS.
HOMINES INTELLIGENTLE (" Men of Intelligence ") : A heretical sect of mystics that flourished in Brussels 1410‑11. They were also called Free Spirits. The source of their heretical doctrine was undoubtedly the pantheistic mysticism of the Flemish poetess Hadewick Blommaerdine (q.v.), whose teachings had been opposed by Jan van Ruysbroeck early in the fourteenth century. The heads of the Brussels sect were lEgidius Cantoris, an untutored layman, and Willem van Hilderniasen, a Carmelite. Though differing in the details of their doctrine,
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
srsa
these leaders held in common the general view that only those in a state of mystical ecstasy and union with God are able to understand the Bible. Both boasted of the wonderful visions beheld by them; and on one occasion Cantoris, while in the ecstatic state, ran naked through the streets of Brussels calling himself the savior of humanity. That the sectaries expected freedom of spirit and beatification of all wicked spirits to come with the era of the Holy Spirit, which they regarded as imminent, was due to influence of the tradition of Joachimism (see JOACHIM OF FIORE). Serious complaints were made about their immoral mode of life. Two inquisitors who interfered in 1410 met with opposition on the part of the Brussels populace and barely escaped withtheirlivea. At that time Hilderniasen formally recanted, but the following year he was again tried for heresy and condemned to lifelong imprisonment. No account has been preserved of the trial of other members of the sect, or of the after‑effects of this movement, which was evidently deep‑seated.
HERMAN HAUPT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: P. Fr6dl;ri'(.Q, Corpus dOCBmGnEorRm inquisirionia Neeriandicte, i. 288‑279, Ghent, 1889; A. Jundt, HiaE, du pantheiame populaire au moyen‑8pe, pp. 111 aqq., Paris, 1875; J. J. Altmeyer, Lea FrJeuraeura de la reorme aux Pays‑Bas, i. 82 eqq., ib. 1888.
HOMOIAN, HOMOIOUSIAN, HOMOOUSIAN. See ARIANIBM, L, § 6, IL, § 1.
HOMOLOGUMENA. See CANON OF SCRIPTURE, 11.,5,7.
HONDURAS. See CENTRAL AMERICA.
HONE, WILLIAM: English author and bookseller; b. at Bath June 3, 1780; d. at Tottenham, London, Nov. 6, 1842. At the age of ten he was placed in an attorney's office in London, but in 1800 he gave up law and became a bookseller. On account of his various philanthropic schemes he was uniformly unsuccessful in business. In order to support his family he took up authorship in 1815 and published numerous political squibs and satires, which were illustrated by Cruikshank. For parodying the litany, the Athanasian Creed, and the church catechism, he was tried on three separate charges Dec. 17‑19, 1820, but was acquitted on each count. As a result of researches which he made in preparing his own defense he published The Apocryphal New Testament (London, 1820) and Ancient Mysteries Described (1823). He collected a dozen of his controversial pamphlets, including The Political House that Jack Bunt (1819), under the title Faceti7e card Miscellanies (1827). In the literary world Hone is remembered for his three compilations, The Every Day Book (2 vo1s.,1826‑27), The Table Book (2 vole., 1827‑28), and The Year Book (1832), in the preparation of which he had the approval and assistance of Robert Southey, Charles Lamb, and others. In the latter part of his life Hone became converted and frequently preached in the Independent Weigh House Chapel, Eastcheap.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gentleman'a Magazine, May, 1843; Some Account of the Conversion of yV. Hone, London, 1853;
DNB, xxvu. 243‑247 (where other sources are indicated).
HONIUS, CORNELIUS (CORNELIS HENRIK, HOEN): Dutch Protestant; b. probably at Gouda

353	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Homilies
		Honorius
(11 m. n.e. of Rotterdam); d. at The Hague 1524.
He studied at Utrecht and settled at The Hague as
an advocate. In 1509 he received a batch of papers
of the lately deceased Jacob Hoeck, canon and dean
of Naaldwijk and pastor at Wassenaar, among
which he found several works of Johann Weasel
(q.v.), including a treatise on the Lord's Supper, in
which Wessel, rejecting the doctrine of transubstan
tiation, sought to show (by combining John iii. 36
and vi. 54) that " eat " and " drink " can mean
nothing more than believing in Christianity and
assimilating it into our lives. In reflecting over this
work Honius concluded that eat in the words of
institution could mean only *nif cat. He com
municated thin view to several friends, particularly
to Johannes Rode (q.v.), rector of the Hieronymus
School at Utrecht. Rode and Honiua determined
to acquaint Luther and Zwingli with the new doc
trine, which Honius had cleverly formulated in a
short treatise, and to this end Rode visited Witten
berg, Basel, and Zurich in 1522. Zwingli was so
well pleased with the writing of Honius that in 1525
he had it printed at Zurich, though without any
mention of the author. By order of the inquisitor
Van der Hulst Honius was arrested and put into
chains in Feb., 1523, accused of being an adherent
of the " Sacramentists." At the close of a lengthy
trial The Hague was assigned to him as his
" prison," and he was forced to deposit 3,000 ducats
as security.		OTTO CLmMEN.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. G. de Hoop‑8eheffer, Geachichte der Re
	formation in den Niederlanden, ed. P. Gerlach, pp. 84 sqq.,
	158 aqq., 318 sqq., Leipsic, 1888; P. Fr€ddricq, Corpus
	doceumentorum inquinitionis . . Neerlandicm, iv., nos.
	58, 125, 127, 130, 149, 151‑153, 183, 168, 171, 172, Ghent,
	1900. Consult also C. Ullmann, Reformers before the Ref
	ormation, ii. 509, 519‑522, Edinburgh, 1877.
	HONOR: The recognition accorded by one per
son to another. None can value this more highly
than the Christian, yet 'no man is inwardly more
independent of honor than the Christian, though,
since it widens his sphere of activity, he is in duty
bound to seek it. Christians are not to be " the
servants of men " (I Cor. vii. 23), yet those who
seek only honor from men can not believe (John
v. 44), and Paul declares that he sought no glory
of men (I Thess. ii. 6). Christian honor is entirely
distinct from that of the ancient world. The Chris
tian seeks honor with God alone, and receives
through the Holy Spirit the assurance that he is a
child of God (Rom. viii. 16), but in proportion as he
strives for human honor he loses the freedom of the
children of God through envy of his fellow men
(cf. Gal. v. 25). Nevertheless, the Christian should
maintain his honor among men. If the Christian
protects his honor simply because he seeks honor
with God, he has a joy in that transitory earthly
treasure such as no other can have. The tendency
of this joy to become a struggle for honor is checked
by the realization that service alone is the way of
life, and it becomes clear that the desire to serve
includes striving after all necessary means so far
as they are accessible. Evident though it be that
honor among men is an extremely important means
of efficiency, the Christian should bear in mind that
striving for honor must be held in check.
		(W. HERMANN.)
V.‑23
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The subject is treated more oT less completely in treatises on Christian ethics. Consult: F. W. Reinhard, system der chrietlichsn Moral, iii. 47‑52, Wittenberg, 1807; W. M. L. de Wette, Chriatliche 3ittenlehre, iii. 282, Reimer, 1823; J. B. Hiraoher, Die cArietlicAa Moral, iii. 318, TObingen, 1851; KL, iv. 231‑238; and the lexicons, s.v. b6la.
HONORATUS, SAINT. See LARixe, MONASTERY OF.
HOfTORIUS: The name of four popes and one antipope.
Honorius L: Pope 625‑638. He came of a distinguished Campanian family, succeeded Bonifacius V. Nov. 3 (Oct. 30), 625, and died in Oct., 638. His policy was to continue the designs of Gregory I. (q.v.); and in this respect he was particularly successful in relation to the Anglo‑Saxons and the Lombards. He managed to abrogate the schism which had prevailed in Istria and Venetia since the ThreeChapter Controversy (q.v.), and to restore there the canonical sovereignty of the Church of Rome. It was probably the assistance furnished him then by the emperor Heraclius that persuaded him to side with the emperor at the outbreak of the Monothelite strife (see MONOTHELITEa), and to make common confession with the patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria concerning the dootrine of " one will " in Christ (cf. his Epist., iv. and v., to the patriarch Sergius, in MPL, lxxx. 470, 474). At the Sixth Ecumenical Council in Conatantinople, Mar. 28, 681, he was anathematized along with the leaders of the Monothelite party, and with the assent of the legates of Pope Agathos I. Leo II. confirmed the anathema in 682 (MPL, xcvi. 399), and characterized Honorius as one " who did not adorn this Apostolic See with the doctrine of apostolic tradition, but endeavored to subvert immaculate faith by profane treason." The anathema gained acceptance in the confession of faith which every pope had to pronounce at his elevation (cf. La'ber Diurnus,112PL, ev. 52). By degrees, however, the thought of this grave event died out, in the West at least, though Byzantine annalista and canonista recur to it quite often. To eliminate the obstacle herein implied to the doctrine of papal infallibility, Baroniua declared the council's acts and the papal briefs to have been falsified. Others (Bellarmin, Asaemani) viewed the anathem;s as an error of the council or modified the sentence (Garnier, Pagi), making the point turn, not on any heresy in the pope, but on his attitude favoring heresy. At the Vatican Council Bishop Hefele declared himself in favor of condemning the pope for heresy, but in the second edition of his Conrilien: geschichte, he qualified this view in the sense that Hoaorius had merely blundered in expression. Certain it is that Honorius, when committing himself to the Monothelite doctrine, could not yet forecast the fall sweep of the contest: nor did he survive its real development. He was at no time a conscious, deliberate Monothelite. G. KRtYoER.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The briefs are in MPL, laxx. 489‑484, Consult: Liber pontiftcalia, ed. Duehesne, vol. i.. Paris, 1888, ed. Mommeen, is MGM, (best, punt. Rom., i (1898), 170‑175; Jaff6, Regeata, i. 223‑228; C. J. von Hefele, Cauea Honorii Papa?, Naples, 1870; idem, Concilaengeachichte, vol. iii. passim, Eng. trans]., vol, v. passim; B. Jungmann, Dfasartationea eslecta, ii. 382‑458. Regenr

Honorius	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	364
burg, 1881; Ward, in DwUin Reoieta, zmii. 1879; J. Langan, Gidhts der romuehen Kiaahe, ii, 507‑680, Bonn, 1885; Mann. Popes, i. 304‑345 (luminous); H. Grisar, Analeda Romana, no. ix‑, Rome, 1899; B Platina, Lirow of Are Popes, i. 145 eqq, London n.d.; Chapman. Condemnation of Pope Hononus, ib., 1907; Milman, Latin Christianity, ii. 289; Bower, Popes, i. 432438.; and literature under MoxoTBzLrr$s.
Honorius IL (Cadalus) : Antipope 1081‑84. After Alexander II. had been elected and enthroned as the successor of Nicholas II., an assembly of German and Lombard bishops, convened at Basel by the empress Agnes, elected (Oct. 28, 1081) as antipope Bishop Cadalus of Parma, who bore the name of Honorius II. The status of Cadalus was irregular from the very outset; and the empress was unable to compel recognition of him. After some agitation in his behalf by Bishop Benso of Alba, as imperial envoy to Rome, Cadalus could advance as far as Sutri, and he even scored a victory over Alexander's troops before the gates of Rome. But at this juncture Duke Godfrey of Lorraine took part in the strife (May, 1081) and induced both rivals to submit the matter to the king's decision. Pending the outcome they returned to their dioceses. Inasmuch as the German king happened to be under the power of the imperial administrator, to refer the decision to him as umpire was only to refer the whole issue to Anno of Cologne. The matter came up for discussion at the Synod of Augsburg in Oct., 1082, which practically decided against Honorius; but it was agreed that a German bishop should first be sent to Rome to investigate charges of simony that had been urged against Alexander. This responsible office was assigned to Anno's nephew, Burchard of Halberstadt. The result was that Alexander was conducted to Rome by Duke Godfrey in Mar., 1063. Cadalus still proceeded aggressively, even advancing upon Rome, and, contriving to secure himself at Castle Angelo; but he was obliged to leave Rome again. The council at Mantua, May 31, 1064, decreed the definitive recognition of his opponent. Cadalus died as the year 1071 lapsed into 1072. See ALEXANDER II.; and
CARL MIRBT
BIBLIOGaAPHY: W. Martens, Besedzunp des p4pstlichen Stuhlea unter den Kaisers Heinrich III. and IV., pp. 118 oqq., Freiburg, 1888; G. Meyer von Knonau, Jahrbacher des
deutaden Reich# unter Heinrich IV. and V., vole. i.‑ii.
Leipsio, 189084; J. Langan, Gewhichts der r6mischari %irche, Vol. iii., Bonn, 1892; C. Mirbt, Die Publizietik im Zeitalter tlregors VII., Leipsie, 1894 Hauck, KD, Vol. F. Gregorovius, Hist. of City of Rome, iv. 130 eqq.,
London, 1898 (consult index under " Cadalus ").
Honorius II. (Lambert di Fagnano): Pope 11241130. He was elevated by Paschal II. as cardinal bishop of Ostia, and was one of the electors of Gelasius II., with whom he shared exile in France. As one of the six cardinals who, in France, elected Calixtus II. as successor to Gelasius II., he stood on very close terms with this pope, and was employed in the most difficult missions. It was he who concluded with the emperor Henry V. the socalled Concordat of Worms (see CONCORDATS AND DELIMITING BUL1$, I., § 1). He was consecrated Dec. 21, 1124, by the Frangipani, contrary to the wish of the cardinals of the Leoni party, who had already proclaimed their colleague Theobald as Pope Celestine II., though subsequently they ac‑
quiesced in the elevation of Honorius II. Hardly
had Honorius officiated in his pontificate half a year
when Henry V. was succeeded by Lothair III., who
addressed to the pope a petition for confirmation o£
the act as consummated by the German imperial
princes. Honorius, in return, excommunicated
Lothair's royal pretender, Conrad of Hohenstaufen
(1128). The chief aim of Honorius was to enlarge
the dominion of the Roman Church in Italy. While
he sued in subjecting some counts of the
Campagna to his supremacy, ha was not,strong
enough to wrest the duchy of Apulia from Count
Roger of Sicily, and in Aug., 1128, he was obliged
to invest the ruler of Apulia with that duchy. In
this contest he vainly awaited help from Lothair,
whom he repeatedly summoned to Rome for cor
onation. Honorius died during the night of Feb.
13‑14, 1130. 	CARL MIRBT.
Bn3LI0a8AP87: Sources are the letters from and to Hono• rius, found in MPL, clzvi. 1217‑1320, in Bouquet, Rscuail, xv. 258‑289, and in Jaff6, Repeats, i. 824‑839, ii. 755; the Vita by Pandulph, in J. M. Wstteriah, Vita. ponriJlcum Romanorum, ii. 167‑158, Leipsia, 1882 and that by Boeo, also in Watterioh, ii. 168‑169 Consult: W. Bernheim, Zur (luchichts des Wormser %nkordates, pp. 42 eqq. Gottingen, 1878 W. Bernhardi, Lothar won RuPPUnburp. PP. 45 eqq., 289 eq4.. LeiPsia, 1879; J. Langan, (hschichte der rSmischan %irehs iii. 305 eqq. Bonn, 1892; F. Gregorovius, Hiet. of the City of Rome, iv. 408‑410, London, 1898; B. Plating, Lives of the Popes, ii. 38‑39, ib. n.d.; Milman, Latin Christianity, iv. 144 e99.; Bower, Popes, ii. 481‑484.

Hoaorius III. (Cencio Savelli): Pope 1218‑27. He came of a race of possibly German origin which took its name from the fortress of Sabellum, near Albano, was educated for the Church, and became a canon of Santa Maria. Maggiore. Under Clement III. and Cslestine III. he was treasurer of the Roman Church. Celestine III. made him a cardinal deacon before Mar. 5, 1193; Innocent III. raised him to the rank of a cardinal priest before Mar. 13, 1198; and on July 18, 1216, he was elected pope at Perugia. He took up with special interest the idea of the crusade and strove to unite the princes of Europe in its interest. Far‑reaching prospects seemed to open before him when he was able to set the crown of the Greek empire upon the head of Pierre de Courtenay (Apr., 1217); but the new emperor was captured on his eastward journey and died in confinement. Honorius then looked to Frederick II. for help and urged him to come to Rome and be crowned as a preliminary to setting out‑for the East. But Frederick hung back, and Honorius repeatedly put off the date for the beginning of the expedition. Frederick had promised before Innocent's death that as soon as he should receive the imperial crown he would resign the crown of Sicily to his young eon Henry; but at the end of 1218 he summoned Henry from Sicily, and later withdrew from him the title of king of Sicily, assuming it himself. In Apr., 1220, he was elected emperor, and wrote to the pope requesting confirmation. At last he appeared in Rome, and mutual compromise seemed to bind him and Honorius closer. The crusade was again postponed until Aug., 1221; and on Nov. 22, 1220, Frederick was crowned in Rome. The advantage seemed by no means all on his side; the power of the Church

355	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Honorius
against heretics and the Italian states was strengthened; it gained possession of the donation of Matilda and full authority in the ecclesiastical territory (see PAPAL STATES); and Honorius was able to hold his place in Rome. In spite of the insistence of Honorius Frederick still delayed, and the Egyptian campaign failed miserably with the loss of Damietta (Sept. 8, 1221). June 24, 1225, was finally fixed as the date for the departure of Frederick; and Honor ius brought about his marriage with Isabella, heiress of the kingdom of Jerusalem, with a view to binding him closer to the plan. The treaty of San Germano in July, 1225, permitted a further delay of two years. Frederick now sought to upbuild his power in northern Italy, and presumed to summon the population of the states of the Church to, help him subject the Lombards, threatening penalties against the delinquents. The long‑suffering Honorius took up his subjects' cause. Frederick's plans in northern Italy were not very successful, and he met Honorius half‑way when conciliation was proposed. According to the pope's arbitrament (Jan. 5,1227), Frederick was to take the Lombards back into favor and, on condition of their keeping the peace, allow them the status quo and the recognition of their league, while penalties imposed upon them were such as served the ends of the Church.
Frederick now made serious preparations for the crusade. In the midst, however, of his hopes for the final attainment of the aim so eagerly desired Honorius died, Mar. 18, 1227. His policy had been one of general friendliness toward the emperor, because he could not do without his help for the crusade; and Frederick made ample use of this fact. In his failure to keep his promises to set out for the holy land, he had on his side the princes and the nations of Europe, among whom the old crusading enthusiasm had begun to die out. But Honorius really had too large a task; besides the liberation of the holy land, he felt bound to forward the repression of heresy in the south of France, the war for the faith in the Spanish peninsula, the planting of Christianity in the lands along the Baltic, and the maintenance of the impossible Latin empire in Constantinople. Of these duties the rooting out of heresy lay nearest to Honorius's heart. In the south of France he carried on Innocent's work, confirming Simon de Montfort in the possession of the lands of Raymond of Toulouse and succeeding, as Innocent had not, in drawing the royal house of France into the conflict. The most widely important event of this period was the siege and capture of Avignon. Both Honorius and Louis VIII. turned a deaf ear to Frederick's assertion of the claims of the empire to that town. Honorius confirmed the Dominican order in 1216 (see DobIUIIC, SAINT, AND THE DOMINICAN ORDER), and the Franciscans in 1223 (see FRANCIS, SAINT, OF Assisi, AND THE FRANCISCAN ORDER). His writings are published in Horoy's Medii &evi bLbliotheea patristica, vole. i.‑v., Paris, 1879‑‑83. The most important is the Liber censuum Romance ecclesice, which is the most valuable source for the medieval position of the Church in regard to property and the like, and also serves in part as a continuation of the L6ber pontificalis.
(HANS SCHULZ.)
BIBLroanAPHP: As sources consult the Letters, ad. C. Rodenberg; in MGH, Epist. awe. ziii., i (1883), 1‑260, 729730; ad. P. Presautti, vol. i., Rome, 1884; in Bouquet, RseueiE, iia. 809‑778; also the Opera omnia, ad. Horoy, vola. i.‑v., Paris, 1879‑83 (includes the Vita by 8. Majolo, ii. 397‑410); and cf. W. H. Bliss, Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers, i. 40‑117, in Roils Series, London, 1893. Consult further: J. Clausen, Papat Honoriua Ill., Bonn, 1895; P. T. Masetti, I Pontefici. Onorio III., Grepm^io IX ad Innocenso V. Rome 1884; A. von Reumont, Geachichte der Stadt Rom, ii. 500 aqq., Berlin, 1867; W. Wattenbach, Geachiehte des rbmiachen Papattuma, pp. 198 eqq., ib. 1870; F. Gregoroviue, Hiat. of the City of Rome, v. 110‑141 et passim, London, 1897; B. Platina, Lives of the Popes, ii. 73‑78, ib. n.d.; Milman, Latin Christianity, v. 221 eqq.; Bower, Popes, ii. 550‑552; and the literature under CRU8ADF.6 dealing with his period. A large list of books is given in Hauck‑Herzog, RE, viii. 318‑319.

Honorius IV. (Giacomo Savelli): Pope 1285‑87. He was a great‑nephew of Honorius III.; and was born about 1210. He was educated at Paris, made a cardinal by Urban IV. in 1261, unanimously elected pope at Perugia Apr. 2, 1285, and crowned May 20. The most pressing question that confronted him was that of Sicily, where the famous " Vespers " of Mar. 30, 1282, had rent away half the kingdom from the Church and its vassal, Charles of Anjou; Peter of Aragon had been crowned at Palermo as the husband of Manfred's daughter, and the Ghibelline faction was becoming more audacious all over Italy. The war between France and Aragon ended with a precipitate withdrawal of the French, and Philip IV. thought more of strengthening his power at home than of foreign conquest; Charles II., for eighteen months a prisoner, was anxious to secure his freedom at the cost of renouncing his claims to Sicily. The power of Aragon was now divided, the Spanish kingdom going to Peter's eldest son, Alfonso, the Sicilian to his brother James. Honorius refused to recognize him and maintained the claims of the Church to the island, treating as invalid the renunciation of Charles II., made at Barcelona Feb. 27, 1287. Edward I. of England had brought about a truce between Alfonso and Philip IV. (July 25, 1286), which Honorius approved; and when Alfonso's envoys came to Rome at Christmas, though he nominally maintained his predecessor's policy of hostility to the house of Aragon, he showed himself ready for further negotiations. He did not, however, live to see the end of these troubles, which came in 1302 under Boniface VIII. ‑ He had better success in the Continental portion of the kingdom of Sicily, where he asserted his rights as suzerain, limited the royal power, and enacted important statutes for the protection of the people against arbitrary tyranny. In regard to the crusading plans which he had inherited, he confined himself to collecting the tithes imposed by the Council of Lyons, arranging with the great banking‑houses of Florence, Sienna, and Pistoia to act as his agents. In his relay j tions with the empire, where no more danger was to be apprehended since the fail of the Hohenstaufen, he followed the via media taken by Gregory X. Rudolf of Hapsburg sent Bishop Henry of Basel to Rome to request coronation. Honorius appointed the envoy archbishop of Mainz, fixed a date for the coronation, and sent Cardinal John of Tusculum to Germany to assist Rudolf's cause. But general

8onorlas
Boater
opposition showed itself to the papal interference;	source of information says " he flourished under
a council at Wtirzburg (Mar. 16‑18, 1287) protested	Henry V.," the year 1135 may be assumed as the
energetically, and Rudolf had to protect the legate	culminating period of his activity.
from personal violence, so that both his plans and		The meagerness of biographical data is balanced
the pope's failed.	all f In Rome Honorius established friendly relations
with the citizens, who had been at daggers drawn
with his predecessor, and his brother Pandulf main
tained a strict but just government. Martin IV.
had carried on a continual and almost hopeless con
flict in the states of the Church with the Ghibellines,
under the leadership of Guy of Montefeltro; but
Honorius restored order here also, and by mild and
considerate government of the cities on which
Martin had laid an interdict succeeded in securing
a greater degree of tranquillity and submission than
any pope for some time before or after. Venice also
was now released from the interdict laid upon it by
the legate of Martin IV. because it had declined to
fit out a fleet in behalf of Charles of Anjou against
Peter of Aragon. Salimbene, the chronicler of
Parma, asserted that Honorius was a foe to the
religious orders, especially to the mendicant friars;
but his Regeata, as published by Prou, affords proof
of the contrary. As a matter of fact, he confirmed
and enlarged their privileges, often appointed them
to special missions and to bishoprics, and gave them
exclusive charge of the inquisition. He had a special
affection for the Williamites, to whom he gave the
monastery which he had built at Albano when he
was a cardinal. On the other hand, he gave orders
in a bull of Mar. 11, 1286, that the Apostolic Breth
ren (q.v.), whom Segarelli of Parma was then
attempting to organize, should be suppressed as
heretics. 	(HANG SCHULZ.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Las Repietres d'Honorius IV., ed. M. Prou, Paris, 1887,89 (especially the Introduction, pp. 1‑111); B. Pawlicki, Papat Honorius IV., Munster, 1898 O. Lorenz, Deutsche Gesehichte im 13. and 1¢. JahrhunderE, ii. 339 sqq., 388 sqq., 552 sqq., Vienna, 1887; A. van ReumOnt, GeeeAkAte der Stadt Rom, ii. 809 sqq., Berlin, 1807; W. H. Bliss, Calendar of Entries in the papal Registers, i. 479‑491, in Roils Series, London, 1893; Hefele, COncilien0eeehiAtB, vi. 211, 245‑253; F. Gregorovius, Hiet. 01 the City of Rome, v. 503‑507, 834‑838, 843, London, 1897; B. Platina, Lives of the popes, ii. 115‑118, ib. n.d.; Mil‑, Latin Christianity, vi. 172; Bower, popes, iii. 35‑37.
HONOORIt1S OF AUTUft: Theologian; d. 1152. He is the great unknown in the church history of the twelfth century. The annals of Pohlde, which extend to 1139, praise him as a learned recluse filled with spiritual wisdom. The Frenchmen claim him for France, more specifically for Autun, since he styles himself Auguatudonenais, which may, however, mean Augsburg. Indeed, it is the Austi
and Bavarian monasteries which' contain most o
Honorius's works. Munich alone possesses more
than 100, Graz thirty codices in which writing of his occur. Moreover, Honorius treats Ger
many more fully than any other country in
Imago mundi and mentions in this geographical de‑
scription only one city‑Regeneburg. Thus Rege
burg may be assumed as the field of his activity,
especially as Cuno, the friend of Rupert of Deutz
to whom Honorius was closely related, was bisho
there. Since Honorius in his Imago mundi close the list of rulers with Lothair, and since the oldest
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
by the mass of his writings, almost o which are
preserved. From these it may be inferred that
Honorius was a Platonist, a mystic, and a realist,
and at the same time a stanch defender of the
rights of the papacy against the secular power.
He agrees in his doctrines especially with Rupert
of Deutz, and with the latter and Gerhoh of Rei
chersberg belongs to that group of German realists
who opposed the nominaliets of France‑men like
Abelsrd, Gilbert of Poitiers, Roscellin, Peter Lom
bard, and others‑in the twelfth century, especially
on chrietological questions. The De imagine mundi
contains information on geography, climatology,
and chronology, and traces the history of the world
from Adam to Emperor Frederic I. In De animcs
exilio et patria Honorius shows that ignorance is the
exile of man; hence by gradual steps, such as
grammar, rhetoric, dialectics, etc., man passes to
wisdom. De luminari'bua eccleaice gives a list of
ecclesiastical writers, beginning with St. Peter and
closing with Rupert of Deutz. Among Honorius's
exegetical works may be mentioned his Hexaemeron,
in which he shows how the whole creation is centered
in the salvation of Christ. In his treatise on the
Egyptian plagues he indulges in the allegorizing
and typologizing methods of his time by comparing
them with the ten commandments. He divides the
Psalms into three groups according to the three ages
of the world‑the first group contains those without
the law (from Abel to Moses), the second those under
the law (from Moses to Christ), the third those under
grace (from Christ to the end of the world). Still
more numerous are Honorius's works on practical
theology, homiletics, liturgies, discipline, and on
the canonical position of the Church against the
worldly empire. He has a high opinion of the
cloister as the place of refuge and protection for
the children of God. The Scaly sell major, a con
versation between master and pupil in twenty‑three
chapters, shows the ordo graduum for spiritual
vision; the Scaly sell minor shows in six chapters
the steps of increasing charity. The 0ffendiculum
is directed chiefly against the " married and simon
iaeal presbyters "; the Speculum eccleaiae is a collec
tion of addresses to a convention of brethren on
saints' and apostles' days and of sermons. The
Stacramentarium speaks in 100 chapters on the
mystical sense of ecclesiastical rites. In Summa
duodecim quastioiwm Honorius discusses the ques
tion of rank between angel and man. The Summa
f glories de Agroatolico et Augusta has reference to the
re disputes between empire and papacy; as the sun
s is superior to the moon and the spirit to the soul,
‑ so sacerdotalism is superior to the empire; therefore
his the emperor should be chosen by the priests. Thus
is found everywhere the tendency of Cluny. In the
ns‑ Elucidarium Honorius develops his doctrine con‑
, cerning the trinity. He attacks the nominalists
who ignore the essential unity of God, making it a
p mere thought while they consider the hypoeteaes
s as real. In this way, he says, the hypostases are
t separated as realities, and we have three Gods.

867	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Honoring
		Honter
Honorius, on the contrary, maintained that the
whole created world is in the mind of God and
emanates from him. In Qumationea veto de angelo
et homvne Honorius discusses the question whether
man would have been created if the angels had not
fallen. He answers in the affirmative, since man as
the tenth order forms the necessary supplement to
the nine orders of angels. Christ would have been
born even if Adam had not fallen because the cause
of Christ's incarnation was the predestination of
human deification. Of greater importance is the
christological position of Honorius. As in the
doctrine of the trinity, so here he reveals his real
ism. The two natures are not only united in the
person of Christ, but with each other, and they per
meate each other with the entire communication
also of the attributes, hence also of the divine nature
to the human. If we speak of the person of Christ,
the natures are included. The name " Son of God "
pertains therefore to the substance also of the
natures, at least after the Resurrection and Ascen
sion. Since those events the human nature, the
flesh of Christ, has been received by the Logos into
the unity of his substance and is in no way circum
scribed; thus Christ according to both natures is
everywhere. 	(R. Rocaorl..)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: His works are in MPL, cluii. 10‑1270; the Summa totius de omnimodo hietoria and part of the first book of the Imago mundi dealing with Germany and the end of the third book, ed. R. Wilmans, are in MGH, Script., a (1852), 125‑134. Consult: O. Doberents, in zeitaehrart ffir deutaehe Philologia, Iii (1881), 257‑301, 387‑451, xuti (1882); 29‑57, 165‑223; Wattenbaoh, DGQ, i (1885), 83, ii. 230‑232, i (1893), 2, 86, ii. 258‑260; R. Rocholl, Rupert won Deuta, pp. 12 Hqq., GUteraloh, 1886• %L, vi. 268‑274; ADS, aiii. 74 eqq.; J. A. Endres, Honorius Aupuatodunensis, Kempten, 1906.

HONORIUS OF CANTERBURY: Fifth archbishop of Canterbury; d. at Canterbury Sept. 30, 653. He was one of the disciples of Pope Gregory, but when he came to England is not known. He was consecrated archbishop by Paulinus of York at Lincoln after the death of Justus (Nov. 10, 627). He sent Felix to preach to the East Angles, made Paulinus bishop of Rochester after his flight from Northumbria, consecrated Ithamar as Paulinus' successor in 644, and Thomas as second bishop for East Anglia. He received the gallium from Pope Honorius I. in 634, but did not exercise jurisdiction outside of Bent and East Anglia.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bede, Hist. accl., ii. 15‑20, iii. 14, 20, v. 19; Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, iii. 82‑98; W. F, Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, i. 110‑123, London, 1860; W. Bright, Early English Church History, p. 140 et passim, Oxford, 1897; DCB, iii. 153‑155; DNB, azvii. 249.

HONORIUS, FLAVIUS: Roman emperor 395423; b., probably at Constantinople, Sept. 9, 384; d. at Ravenna Aug., 423. He was the younger son of Theodosius I. and his devout wife, Mia Flaccilla, and assumed the government of the Western Empire upon his father's death, in 395, when he was not yet eleven years of age. Aroadius (q.v.) obtained the East. Agreeably to the father's wish, the Vandal Stilicho supported Honorius as a wise and powerful counselor during the heavy times of the barbarian invasions and of repeated usurpations. After Stilicho's assassination (408), the Asiatic Olympus
succeeded him, and he, in turn, was succeeded by others, with all of whom the amiable and pliant ruler proved a mere instrument, with scarcely any will of his own.
Honorius lived in the self‑conscious orthodoxy of his father. He was therefore seriously disposed not only to maintain intact the authority and the rights of the Church, but to extend and confirm theme.g., the right of asylum, and episcopal jurisdiction. The civil power was more than ever available for the annihilation of heresy. Teachers of error were excluded from court offices. Especially severe were the measures in force against the Manicheans and the Donatists.
The religious policy affecting heathendom was exercised along similar lines (cf. Victor Schultze, Der Untergang des griechisch‑ramiachen HeidenEuma, i., Jens, 1887, pp. 334 sqq.). The fanaticism which had even transferred its enmity toward the gods to antique works of art was resisted; but, all in all, the attitude to paganism was much harsher than under Theodosius. The temples lost their revenues, the priesthoods their last remnant of privileges, the still extant images of the gods were cast aside. Paganism was wholly outlawed. At the same time the bloody gladiatorial spectacles came to an end.
	To a degree beyond all precedent, the State now
fell under the influence of the Church. The govern
ment openly reflected the conviction that the
strengthening of the Church also signified the
strengthening of the State politically. But, in spite
of all‑ this, the civil right of supreme supervision
over the Church was maintained. Under this head
belong decisions in case of the Donatist and Pelagian
disputes, and stringent regulations against eccle
siastical improprieties. The emperor's moral be
havior is expressly lauded, and statements to the
contrary rest on gossip. He was the weakly son
and successor of a great emperor, whom he brought
to mind in scarcely anything but his face. After
him the destiny of the Western Empire fell into the
hands of his more resolute sister, Galls. Plaeidia.
		VICTOR SCHUVrZE.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: DOB, iii. 142‑150 (minute and detailed);
E. Von Wietereheim, Geschichte der V6Xkawanderunp, ii.
110 sqq., Leipsic, 1881; W. Smith, Dictionary of Greek
and Roman Biography and Mythology, ii. 513‑516, Lon
don, 1890; G. Rausehen, Tahrbacher der chrisuichen Kirehe
unter dem Kaiser The"‑, Freiburg, 1897 Gibbon,
Decline and Fall, claps. Imz.‑x3oi., zlmii.; L. 6. Is N.
de Tillemont, Hiatoirs des empereurs, 6 vole., Paris, 17201738; Neauder, Christian Church, ii. 92, 100‑102, 235236, 649, 651; Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 66‑67.

HONTER (HONTERUS), JOHANN: Hungarian Reformer; b. at Kronstadt (70 m. ex.e. of Hermannstadt) 1498; d. there Jan. 23, 1549. In 1515 he entered the University of Vienna. Fifteen years later he was attending lectures and teaching Latin grammar at Cracow, but he seems to have gone in the same year to Basel, where he remained until his native city recalled him in 1533. As early as 1519 the ideas of the German Reformation had found admission into Saxon Transylvania. A flourishing industrial and mercantile activity promoted prosperity, education, independence, and freedom which maintained its own convictions and rights in religion as well as in politics. Thus the

Honter
Hook
doctrine of Rome, which placed all power in the hands of popes and bishops, had never entirely supplanted the ancient privileges of the congregation. The influence of the University of Vienna, moreover, elevated the spirit of the Saxon youth and formed a contrast with the doctrines of Rome. Luther's doctrines had, accordingly, been firmly established in Hermannstadt since the beginning of the third decade of the sixteenth century, and had 'found a powerful patron in Markus Pempflinger, the royal judge. About the same time the new teaching had entered Kronstadt, but there it was Honter who first gave it definite direction, although prima rily he influenced it chiefly in a literary way by establishing a printing‑press. In him were united the two chief tendencies of the time, the regeneration of classical literature and of Evangelical Christianity. He proceeded with caution in introducing the new gospel, nor did he break openly with the established religion, since he drew his material from Augustine and looked upon the Reformation as a revival of old truths. In 1542, however, he boldly avowed the cause of Evangelicalism in his Formula reformotionia ecclesice Coronensis ac Barcenais totius provinciea. Thenceforth the Reformation made rapid progress. Jeremias Jekel, a priest of Kronstadt, married, the mass was abolished, and the sacrament was administered in both kinds. The deputies of town and country assembled for a final decision on the reformation of the Church, and shortly afterward a church visitation was instituted to test the lootrines of the clergy and to remove unworthy preachers from office. In 1544 Honter became preacher in Kronstadt, and in the same year the academy of the city was reorganized on the basis of the Comtitutio acholca Coronensia, which he had drafted in the previous year, Valentin Wagner, a disciple from Wittenberg, being its first president. In 1547 Honter recast his Formula reformationia of 1543 both in Latin (Reformatio eeclesiarum Saxonicdrum in. Transailvania) and in German (Kirchenordnung aller Deutachen in. Siebenbargen) in order to avoid dissension and to introduce uniform ecclesiastical governance. The main topics discussed were the appointment of the clergy, Christian doctrine, office of the clergy, baptism, the Lord's Supper, abuse of private mass, communion of the sick, power of absolution, excommunication, erection of schools, organization of relief for the poor, care of orphans, marriage, reformation of common abuses, annual visitations, matins, high mass, vespers, ‑and ceremonies in villages. The church order distinguishes itself by its moderation, and reveals the conservative principle of the Saxon spirit.
Honter was a prolific writer, his chief works being De grammatica libri duo (1530 or 1531); Rudimenh torum coamographice ltbri, duo (Cracow, 1530); Apologia reformationis (1543); Compendium juria civilis, in usum eivitatum ac aedium Saxoniearum colleetum (1544); and Agende fur die Seelaorger and Kirchen• diener in Siebenbiirgen (1547).
(F. THumacHt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The sources. which are greatly scattered,
are indicated in Hauck‑Herzog. RE, viii. 333. Consult:
O. D. Teutech, Usber Honterus and %ronetadt zu seiner
Zeit, Hermannetadt, 1878; T. Wolf, Johann Honterut,
Kronetadt, 1894; J. HSOhsnIann, Johannes Honter, der
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HEZROG
Refonmator ,giebenb2lrpena, Vienna 1898; O. Netolioska,
Johannes Honterue. Kronetadt. 1898: Moeller, Christian
Church, iii. 214‑215.
HONTHEIM, hent'haim, JOHANN NIKOLAUS VON: Bishop of Treves; b. at Treves Jan. 27, 1701; d. there Sept. 2, 1790. In his twelfth year his uncle procured him a pretend in the collegiate chapter of St. Simeon. He was instructed by the Jesuits, and from 1719 studied theology and canon law in his native city, at Louvain, and at Leyden. In 1728 he became priest and was formally admitted into the chapter of St. Simeon in his native city, at the same time being appointed assessor and spiritual councilor in the consistory, and in 1732 also professor of the university. In 1738 he removed to Coblenz, but returned to Treves in 1747, and became dean of the chapter and auffragan bishop of Treves in the following year.
Hontheim's most remarkable literary production was published under the pseudonym Justinua Febronius entitled Jtcsti7ai Febronii Jesu Christi de atatlc eccleaix et legitima. potestate Romani pontificis liter singularis ad reuniendoa disaidentes in religions Christianoa campositua (1763, ostensibly at Boulogne, but really at Frankfort). The views it expresses are known as " Febronianiam." The plan and purpose was to show the real significance of papal power, its abuses, and the mischief which it caused, and to urge the pope to drop curialism and return to the spirit of primitive Christianity. In nine chapters the following system is evolved: " Christ has left the power of the keys to the whole Church; for its execution ministers (clergy and prelates) have been chosen, the pope being the first among them, but subordinate to the whole. The Church has no monarchical constitution; the apostles were equal to each other, Peter having only a primacy. Only the whole Church possesses infallibility. The primacy of the bishop of Rome is not derived from Christ, but from Peter and the Church, and may therefore be transferred to another see. The duty of the primacy is not the government of the Church, but the maintenance of the social order; the pope has no power of decision in matters of faith, as he stands under a general council. The bishops have an equal power from Christ, not from the pope; they are necessary members of the general synods, and are to fill all offices, a privilege which at a comparatively late time has been usurped by the popes, to the disadvantage of the Church. In the course of time the popes seized many privileges against the canons, especially on the strength of the pseudoIsidorian decretals. The conditions at the time before these forged laws must be restored by opposing the papal court with all possible means. Although Hontheim did not develop any new thoughts, he so systematized and presented his ideas that the book had great influence upon ecclesiastical politics in Italy, Portugal, and Austria, and undoubtedly gave an impulse to the Congress of Ems (q.v.) and the new regulation of ecclesiastical conditions in the South German states from 1818. As early as 1764 Rome prohibited the circulation of the book, but it was not until 1778 that Hontheim was requested to recant. He did so after his numerous relatives had been threatened with dismissal from their

359	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Honter
		Hook
political offices. To justify and explain his recanta
tion he wrote Justini Febronii . . . Commentarius
in scam retractationem Pio VIL, pont%ftd maxima
kalendis novembribus 1778 submissam (Frankfort,
1781). This commentary does not reveal any es
sential changes of his former views, so that both the
elector and the pope were dissatisfied, but neither
of them disturbed the author as his influence had
been greatly diminished by his humiliation. Hont
heim wrote also a Historia Trevirensis (3 vols.,,
Augsburg, 1750); Prodromus historits Trevirensis
(2 vols., 1757); and various legal dissertations and
spiritual and academical addresses.
		(J. F. VON SCHULTE.)
BrHLIOa6APHT: O. Mejer, Febroniue, Weihbiachof Johann
	Nicolaus roan Honthedm and win Wiaderruf, Tabingen,
	1885; F. H. Reusch, Index der roabotenen Bticher, ii. 770,
	811, 940, Bonn, 1885) %L. vi. 276‑281.
	HOOD, EDWIN PAXTON: English Congrega
tionalist; b. in London Oct. 24, 1820; d. in Paris
June 12, 1885. He received only a meager educa
tion, but at the age of twenty began to lecture on
peace and temperance, and in 1852 entered the
ministry of his denomination. He held pastorates
at North Nibley, Gloucestershire (1852‑‑57), Offord
Road, Islington (1857‑62), Brighton (1862‑73),
Cavendish Street, Manchester (187380), and Falcon
Square, London (1880,85). He took an active part
in the welfare of the Royal Hospital for Incurables,
for which he raised large funds. In addition to
editing The Eclectic and Congregational Review, The
Preacher's Lantern, and The Argonaut for several
years, he wrote many books, among which special
mention may be made of The Age and Its Archi
tects: Ten Chapters on the English People in Relation
to the Times (London, 1850); Self‑Education (1851);
John Milton, Patriot and Poet (1852); Common
sense Arguments (1852); Swedenborg: A Biography
and an Exposition (1854); An Earnest Ministry:
Record of the Life aced Writings of B. Parsons (1856);
Lamps, Pitchers, and Trumpets (1867); The World
of Moral and Religious Anecdote (1870); Thomas
Binney, his Mind, Life, and Opinions (1874); Isaac
Watts, his Life and Writings, his Homes and Friends
(1875); Thomas Carlyle, Philosophic Thinker, Theo
logian, Historian, and Poet (1875); Robert Raikes
of Gloucester (1880); Vignettes of the Great Revival
of the Eighteenth Centu	(1880); Christmas Evens,
the Preacher of Wild	ales (1881); Robert Hall
(1881); Oliver Cromwell, his Life, Times, Battlefields
and Contemporaries (1882); The Throne of Eloquence:
Great Preachers Ancient and Modern (1885); and
the Vocation of the Preacher (1886).
BrawomAFBY: G. H. Giddings, E. P. Hood, Poet and
	Preacher, London, 1887.
	HOOD, JAMES WALKER: African Methodist
Episcopal bishop; b. in Kennett Township, Pa.,
May 30, 1831. He received but a meager education
in school, entered the ministry in 1858, and was
made a deacon in 1860 and ordained elder in 1862.
In 1860 he was sent by the New England Conference
to Nova Scotia as a missionary among the negroes
in that province, and remained three years. After
a brief service in Bridgeport, Conn., in 1863, he was
sent as the first negro missionary to the North
Carolina freedmen, being stationed within the lines
of the Union Army. He was a member of the Constitutional Convention of North Carolina in 1868, and assistant superintendent of public instruction from that year until 1871. In the following year he was elected bishop of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, and is now senior bishop of his denomination. He has written The Negro in the American Pulpit (Raleigh, N. C:, 1884); One Hundred Years of the Methodist Episcopal Zion Church (New York, 1895); and The Plan of the Apocalypse (York, Pa., 1900).
HOOGHT, EVERARDUS VAN DEN: Dutch Biblical critic and Orientalist; b. after 1650; d. at Nieuwendam (2 m. n.e. of Amsterdam), Holland, in July, 1716. He studied theology at Amsterdam, became minister at Marken, North Holland, in 1669, and pastor of the Reformed Church at Nieuwendam in 1680. During his long ministry here he devoted himself largely to linguistic and Biblical studies. He published several grammatical works, a GreekLatin lexicon to the New Testament, and edited the Hebrew Bible (Amsterdam, 1705). It is for this last work that he is remembered. His teat has been frequently reprinted and widely used.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: E. Riehm, Einkitung in das A. T., pp. 471
sqq., Halls, 1890.
HOOGSTRATEft, h6g'stra‑ten (HOCHSTRATEH), JAKOB VAN: Inquisitor; b. at Hoogstraten (20 m. n.e. of Antwerp), Belgium, 1454; d. at Cologne Jan. 21, 1527. He studied at the universities of Louvain (M.A., 1485) and Cologne (Th.D., 1506), entered the Dominican order in 1485, and in 1507 became prior of the order at Cologne and professor of theology at the university. In 1508 he was made inquisitor of the provinces of Cologne, Mainz, and Treves. He is known for his opposition to Luther, Erasmus, and other humanists; and particularly for the part he took against Johann Reuchlin (q.v.) in a controversy over the Jewish books. In 1513 he summoned Reuchlin to appear before him at Mainz, thus transcending his authority, as Reuchlin was a citizen of another state. In the end he lost his case and had to pay the costs of the proceedings. An appeal to Leo X. was unavailing, as the pope, though in sympathy with Hoogstraten, was unwilling to offend the humanists. This controversy was the occasion of ‑ the famous Epistolte obscurorum virorum (q.v.). Hoogatraten's works appeared at Cologne in 1526.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. W. H. Cremane, De jambd HocluhaN
vita et scriptie, Bonn, 1869; Meuser, in Zeitachrift fair. Wia
s‑cWt and Kunst, i (1844), 286‑295; %L, vi. 1158‑
1166; and see Rsucarrrr, Joasxx, and the literature there.
HOOK, WALTER FARQUHAR: Dean of Chichester; b. in London Mar. 13, 1798; d. at Chichester Oct. 20, 1875. He was educated at Winchester College and at Christ Church, Oxford (B.A., 1821; M.A., 1824; B.D. and D.D., 1837). He took orders in 1821 and spent the neat four. years as curate to his father at Whippingham, isle of Wight. In 1825 he was appointed to the perpetual curacy of Moseley, near Birmingham, and in 1827 also to the lectureship of St. Philip's, Birmingham. In 1828 he was appointed vicar of Holy Trinity, Coventry, where he remained till 1837, when he became vicar of Leeds. In the mean time he had become a royal chaplain,

Hooker
Hooper
and in 1838 he preached before Queen Victoria the memorable sermon, Hear the Church, in which he maintained that the bishops of the Anglican Church trace their succession back to the apostles. During an incumbency of twenty years at Leeds he rebuilt the parish church at a cost of £28,000, erected twenty‑one new churches, twenty‑three parsonages, and about thirty schools, and transformed the city from a stronghold of dissent into a stronghold of the Church. In 1859 he was appointed dean of Chichester. He was a prominent exponent of Highchurch principles, and was subjected to considerable persecution on account of his friendship for the Tractarians. His more important works are: The Last Days of Our Lord's Ministry (London, 1832); Hear the Church (1838), a sermon of which over 100,000 copies were sold; A Church Dictionary (1842; 14th rev. ed., 1887); An Ecclesiastical Biography (8 vols., 1845‑52); On the Means of Rendering More Efficient the Education of the People (1846); and Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury (12 vols., 1860‑76). Many of his sermons were edited by his son, Walter Hook, under the title The Church and Its Ordinances (2 vols., 1876).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. B.. W. Stephens, Life and Letters of Walter Farquhar Hook, 2 vole., London, 1878; DNB, xxvii. 276‑278.
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
HOOKER, RICHARD: The classic writer of the Church of England on ecclesiastical polity; b. at Heavitur (a suburb of Exeter), Devon‑
	Life.	shire, about 1553; d, at Bishopabourne
		(4 m. s.e. of Canterbury), Kent, Nov. 2,
1600. He was the son of poor parents and was
helped to a university education at Oxford (Corpus
Christi College; B.A., 1574; M.A. and fellow, 1577)
by an uncle and the letter's friend, Bishop Jewel.
He acted as tutor at his university, in 1579 was
appointed to deliver the Hebrew lecture, and in 1581
took orders. In his marriage, which occurred about
this time, he was, according to Walton, most un
fortunate. He was appointed to the living of
Drayton‑Beauchamp, in the diocese of Lincoln, 1584,
and the following year, at the recommendation of
Archbishop Sandys, to whose son he had acted as
tutor at Oxford, master of the Temple, London;
he shared the pulpit here with Walter Travers, and
opposed the letter's strenuous Puritanism. In 1591
he was presented to Boscombe, Wiltshire, and given
a minor pretend of Salisbury. In 1595 he was
transferred to the better living of Bishopsbourne.
Hooker was a tedious preacher; his manner was embarrassed, his sentences prolix and involved. Walton describes him as " of a mean stature and stooping, and yet more lowly in the thoughts of his soul, his body worn out, not with age, but study and holy mortifications."
Hooker's great reputation rests upon his work Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity. It consists of eight books, four of which were written
The Ec‑ in Boscombe, and published in London clesiastical in 1594, the fifth in 1597. The last
	Polity.	three books have an interesting history,
		which is given in full by Keble (pp.
xii.‑xxv.). Hooker's widow was accused of having
turned the manuscript; whether justly or not, it
was irrecoverably gone. The rough drafts, however,
were preserved. The sixth and eighth books were published in 1648, and the seventh in 1662. Of these the sixth, according to Keble, is probably not genuine. The other two contain the substance of what Hooker wrote. The immediate occasion of the Ecclesiastical Polity seems to have been an attack of Travers upon Hooker for extending salvation to Roman Catholics, and his lack of sympathy with Calvinism. With Jewel's Apology and Foxes Book of Martyrs it is the moat important original contribution to English ecclesiastical literature of the sixteenth century; and the first great ecclesiastical work written in English. Its style has been highly praised. Written in a temperate spirit, and with vigor of thought, it is free from the multitudinous and often unsifted quotations which deface the pages of most of the theological works of the period.
The contents are rather more philosophical than theological, and the work is more valuable for its broad and fundamental principles than for exactness of definition or clearness of argument. It is in effect an answer to Puritanism, which had been bitterly attacking the episcopal system for a generation. Conceived in an admirable temper, and free from the heat and vituperation which characterized the controversial writings of the period, it makes no attempt to discredit the Presbyterian system. Its object is to assert the right of a broad liberty on the basis of Scripture and reason. Hooker expressly denies that the practise of the apostles is a rule to be invariably followed, and asserts that a change of circumstances warrants a departure from the governmental policy and discipline of the early Church. He seeks to prove that things not commanded in Scripture may still be lawful, and he does it by appealing to the practise of the Puritans themselves (as in the case of the wafer which they used in common with the Roman Catholics, etc.). The assertion of this fundamental prerogative of reason is one of the moat valuable contributions of the work. Hooker has been claimed as a champion of the High‑Anglican doctrine of episcopacy, and, hardly less confidently, by the other side as the advocate of the view that church government is a matter of expediency. Isolated expressions can be found in favor of both, as even Keble qualifiedly admits (p. xxxviii.). But neither view is true. Hooker holds a position intermediate between the Anglican school of the Reformers, Archbishop Grindal (d. 1583) and moat of Elizabeth's bishops, and the school which grew up in the contest with Puritanism, and had its extreme representative in Archbishop Laud (d. 1645). Had he been more exact in his definitions, it might be possible to place him more confidently on the one side or the other. As it is, he stands as the representative of toleration in the sphere of ecclesiastical polity and the advocate of the claims of reason against that narrow Scripturaliam which assumes to tolerate nothing which the Scriptures do not expressly command.
Besides the Ecclesiastical Polity, several of Hooker's sermons have been preserved. The first collected edition of his wu:ka was that of J. Gauden (2 parts, London, 1662). The best is by J: Keble (3 vole., Oxford, 1836), corrected and revised by R. W.

381	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Hooker
		Hooper
Church and F. Paget (Oxford, 1888); it contains
the life of Hooker by Izaak Walton, first published
in 1665 to correct errors in a life by Gauden in his
edition of Hooker's works.	D. S. SCBAFF.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Since Walton wrote almost nothing new
	has been discovered. A " suggestive essay " is prefixed
	by Dean Church to his edition of the Ecclesiastical Polity,
	Oxford, 1878. Consult: F. D. Maurice, Modern Philoso
	phy, London, 1862; J. Hunt, Religious Thought in Eng
	land, i. b6‑70, its. 1871; Masters in English Theology, ed.
	A. Barry, pp. 1‑60, its. 1877; W. H. Frere, The English
	Church . . . (1668‑18,86), p. 182 et passim, its. 1904.
	HOOKER, THOMAS: Founder of the colony of
Connecticut; b. at Markfield (10 m. n.w. of Leices
ter), Leicestershire, probably July 7, 1586; d. at
Hartford, Conn., July 7, 1647. He was educated
at Cambridge, became a fellow of Emmanuel Col
lege, and about 1620 received the living of Esher,
Surrey. He held this position for six years, when he
accepted a lectureship, or post as supplementary
Puritan preacher, at Chelmsford, Essex, but though
orthodox in doctrine, his Puritanical objections to
Anglican ritual brought him into conflict with Laud.
In 1629 he appeared before the archbishop, but pro
ceedings were stayed for the time, and Hooker
opened a school at Little Baddow, Essex, with John
Eliot as his assistant. Renewed complaints of his
Puritanism in the following year, however, caused
him to leave England for Holland, where he re
mained three years, preaching successively at Am
sterdam, Delft, and Rotterdam. In 1633 he sailed
for America with John Cotton, and arrived at
Boston Sept. 4. On Oct. 11 he was chosen pastor
of the first church at Newtowne (now Cambridge),
and became a freeman on May 14 of the following
year. His influence increased rapidly, and in Oct.,
1635, he was one of the principal opponents of Roger
Williams. The rivalry between Newtowne and
Boston, as well as between their pastors, however,
caused Hooker, together with the greater part of
his congregation and accessions from the churches
of Dorchester and Watertown, to remove to the
Connecticut valley, where Hartford was founded in
1636. In the following year he was one of the
moderators of the Cambridge synod which con
demned the doctrines of Anne Hutchinson (see
ANTINOMIANIBM AND ANTINOMIAN CONTROVER
s1Es, II. 2), and in 1639 he addressed a letter to
Governor Winthrop of Massachusetts, in which he
advocated a confederation of the New England
colonies for mutual protection against the Dutch,
French, and Indiana. This proposal resulted in
the organization, four years later, of the " United
Colonies of New England," the earliest system of
federal government in America. In 1642 he was
invited by the Parliamentary Independents to be
a delegate with John Cotton and John Davenpo.‑:
to the Westminster Assembly, but declined.
	Hooker was a prolific writer, his principal works
being as follows: The Soul's Preparation for Christ
(London, 1632); An Exposition of the Principles of
Religion (1640); A Survey of the Sum of Church
Discipline (1648), an anti‑Presbyterian apology
which had much influence in the development of
American Congregationalism; The Application •~f
Redemption (1656); and The Poor Doubting Chris
tian Drawn to Christ (1684).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A selection of Hooker's works and a Memoir were published by a descendant, E. W. Hooker, Boston, 1849. Sources for a life are in Cotton Mather's Mapnaiia, vol. iii., London, 1702; B. Ttumbull, Complete History of Connecticut, New Haven, 1818. Consult: W. B. Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit, i. 80‑37, New York, 1859; Johns Hopkins University Studies, vo6 vii., Baltimore, 1881); G. L. Walker, Thomas Hooker, Preacher, Pounder, Democrat, New York, 1891; W. Walker, Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalism, pp. 137‑148 et passim, its. 1893; ides, in American Church History Series, vol. UL passim, its. 1894; idem, New England Leader#, passim, its. 1901; A. E. Dunning, Congregationalists in Amqicn, pp. 120‑150, its. 1894; L. W. Bacon. The Conprepationaliste, pp. 61, 92, its. 1904.
HOONACBER, ALBIN AUGUST VAN: Belgian Roman Catholic; b. at Bruges Nov. 19, 1857. He was educated at the episcopal college and seminary of his native city and at the University of Louvain (1880‑86; D.D., 1886), and was ordained to the priesthood in 1880. From 1887 to 1889 he was subdirector of the Collbge du Saint‑Esprit at Louvain, and in 1889 was appointed professor of Old Testament exegesis at the University of Louvain, where he has been professor of moral theology since 1894. He has written Nouvelle, nudes sur la restauration juive aprM 1'exile do BabylDne (Paris, 1896).
HOOP SCHEFFER, JACOB GYSBERT DE. See SCREMER.
HOOPER, JOHN: Bishop of Gloucester and Worcester; b. in Somersetahire toward the end of the fifteenth century; d. at the stake in Gloucester Feb. 9, 1555. He was educated at Oxford (B.A., 1519) and entered the Cistercian order. A diligent study of the Scriptures and the works of Zwingli and Bullinger on the Pauline Epistles convinced him of the errors of the papal Church, and made him an ardent advocate of the Reformation. When, in 1539, the Six Articles (q.v.) were enforced he retired to the Continent. He married in Basel in 1546, and in 1547 went to Zurich, where he stayed two years, becoming intimate with Bullinger, and carrying on a correspondence with Butzer concerning the sacraments.
In 1549 Hooper returned to England, identified himself with the radical wing of the Reformers, and immediately threw himself into an arduous activity, preaching at least once every day, and with great power. He was several times rebuked by Cranmer and the Council for his impetuous speech. During Lent, 1550, he preached before Edward VI. once every week, and soon after was nominated to the see of Gloucester. But unexpected impediments interfered with _. us acceptance. Hooper had fully imbibed the spirit of the continental Reformation. He had a strong aversion to clerical vestments, which he described as Aaronical and superstitious, and absolutely refused to take the oath of consecration, in which the candidate had to swear by the saints. The king removed the latter obstacle by erasing with his own hand the obnoxious clause. The former gave more trouble. Cramner and Ridley both attempted to relieve Hooper's mind of its scruples. But the controversy became so heated, and Hooper was so denunciatory from the pulpit against those who used vestments, that he was sent to the Fleet. Butzer and Peter Martyr were appealed to on the subject by both parties, and reoom‑

$OOp6T
MGM ne
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
mended Hooper to submit. Following their advice, he was consecrated Mar. 8, 1551. It was prescribed that he tshould wear the vestments on public occar sions, but at other times might use his own discretion. In the administration of his episcopal office Hooper was so indefatigable in preaching and Visitation as to call forth the friendly council of Bullinger and other friends to practise a prudent moderation. In 1552 he was appointed bishop of Worcester in
commendam.
Hooper and John Rogers were the first to be cited under Mary. On Aug. 29, 1553, the former was thrown into prison, where he received harsh treatment, and contracted sciatica. He complained that he was used " worse and more vilely than the veriest slave." In Jan., 1555, he was condemned on three charges‑for maintaining the lawfulness of clerical marriage, for defending divorce, and for denying transubstantiation. He called the mass " the iniquity of the devil." He was sentenced to die at the stake in Gloucester, and met his death firmly and cheerfully. To a friend bewailing his lot he replied in the oft‑quoted words, " Death is bitter, and life is sweet, but alasl consider that death to come is more bitter, and life to come is more sweet." In another conversation he said, " I am well, thank God; and death to me for Christ's sake is welcome." His execution was witnessed by a throng of people. The martyr was forbidden to address the crowd. A real or pretended pardon being promised if he would recant, he spurned it, saying, " If you love my soul, away with it." According to Canon Perry (DNB, xxvii. 305) the lower end of the stake to which Hooper was bound has been dug up.
D. S. SCHAFF.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hooper's works have been edited with a biography by C. Carr and R. C. Nevinson for the Parker society, 2 vole., Cambridge, 1843‑52; by the Religious Tract society in one volume, London, 1830; and another ed. in 2 vole., Oxford, 1855. The more important are A Brief and Clear Confession of the Christian Paith, London, 1551; A Declaration of Christ and His Office, Zurich, 1547; A Declaration of the Ten Commandments, London, 1548; Seven Sermons on Jonah; and An Answer to Bishop Gardiner, being d Detection of the Devil's Sophistry wherewith he robbed the unlearned people of the true belief in the most blessed Sacrament of the Altar, Zurich, 1547; and the Hist. of England and the Church of England.
On his life consult: J. Strype, Ecclesiastical Memorials, 3 vols., London, 1821; A. 8 Wood, Athena Oxonienses, ed. P. Bliss, i. 222, ib. 1813; J. stoughton, The Pen, the Palm, and the Pulpit, ib. 1855; J. C. Ryle. Bishops and Clergy of Other Days, ib. 1868; idem, John Hooper, his Times, Life, Death and Opinions, ib. 1868; S. R. Gairdner, Students' Hist. of England, pp. 417‑424, ib. 1895; J. Gairdner, The English Church in the 16th Century, passim, ib. 1903 (quite full); DNB, xxvii. 304‑306. A minute account is given by Foxe in his Book of Martyrs.

HOORHBEEg, hom'bfk, JOHANNES: Professor of theology in Utrecht and Leyden; b. at Haarlem Nov. 4, 1617; d. at Leyden Sept. 1, 1666. He studied at Leyden and Utrecht, in 1639 became preacher in Mulllheim‑on‑the‑Rhine, in 1644 professor of theology in Utrecht, and in 1645 also preacher. In 1654 he removed to Leyden, where he became the chief opponent of his colleagues Cocceius and Heidanus. He represents the type of an orthodox theologian of the Netherlands, combining with the scholastic method the most earnest zeal for a life of practical piety. He wrote Sociniw
nismus confutatua (3 vole., Utrecht, 1650‑64); Summa controversiarum religionis; cum inftdehtrus (Gentilibus, Judacis, Muhammedanis), haretieis (Papistig, Anabaptistis, Enthusiastis et Libertinis, Socinianis'), schismatic (RemonstrantZus, Lutheranis, Brouwnistis, Grwcis) (1653); Inatitutiones theologicte ex optimis audanbus concinnatte (1653); De observando a Christiania prcecepto Decalogi quarto (Leyden, 1659), directed against the abolition of the fourth commandment as advocated by Cocceius; Theologia practices (1663); Dissertatio de consociatione evangelica Reformatorum et Augustance confessionis, give de colloquio Casselano (Amsterdam, 1663).
(E. F. KARL M$LLER.)
BIaIjOGBAPBT: P. Bayle, Dictionary, Historical and Critical,
iii. 483‑484, London, 1736; A. J. van der Aa, Biographisch Woordenbook der Nederlanden, viii. 2, pp. 1230 sqq., Haarlem, 1852 sqq. (contains full list of literature).
HOPE: The expectation of joy and welfare in the future. Although requisite as a defense against the ills of life, it is invariably associated in the natural man with doubt and fear, since it is directed toward transitory objects and is exposed to disappointment. Only in revelation is it free from desire and fancy, and made the operation of the Holy Spirit: Hope is a basal component of godly life, and is presupposed in faith, so that hope is faith directed toward the future. The faith of the Old Testament was that God would glorify Israel and the Gentiles through Israel (Isa. xxv. 6‑7), and all that faith possesses in the present world is defined as " a shadow of good things to come " (Heb. x. 1). Since belief itself becomes hope in the glorification of the body, the congregation of Christ, and the world, it is based primarily on the resurrection of Christ, and Jesus is accordingly termed " hope " (Col. i. 27; I Tim. i. 1), while Christianity, subjectively considered, may be called hope (I Pet. 'iii. 15). The exaltation of Christ to the priesthood after the order of Melchizedec ushered in a better hope than could exist in the Old Testament (Heb. vii. 19), and the hope of the New Testament is summed up in the faithful expectation of the second coming of the glorified Christ.
This coacept of hope implies that those without Christ have no hope (Eph. ii. 12) and that it is by nature a quality which brings no reproach with it (Rom. v. 5). Nor is it something adventitious to faith, but hope is faith, and faith " is the substance of things hoped for " (Heb. xi. 1), while love is said to " hope all things " (I Cor. xiii. 7). Thus faith, love, and hope are closely associated as proofs of Christian life (I Thess. i. 3, v. 8), and they remain after all gifts are withdrawn (I Cor. xiii. 13). Such hope is not diminished by tribulation, but, on the contrary, is strengthened by it (Rom. v. 3‑4), and it is, accordingly, termed a helmet (I Thess. v. 8). Since hope is laid up in Heaven (Col. i. 5), it is a potent incentive to holiness, especially of, the body (Col. iii. 1‑2; I John iii. 3).
(CARL vCN BUCHRUCKERt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. Schultz, O. T. Theology, i. 325, ii. 368‑
369, Edinburgh, 1892; W. Beyschlag, N. T. Theology, i.
254, 342, ib. 1896; H. J. Holtamann, Lehrbuch der neu
teatamentlichen Theologie, ii. 162‑163, 305‑306, 310‑311,
Freiburg, 1897; G. B. Stevens, Theology of N. T., pp.
520, 521, New York, 1899; B. Weiss, Lehrbuch der bibti
when Theologie des N. T., 4$ 50, 82, 96, 101, 108, 125, 127,

363	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Hooper
Hopitine
157, Stuttgart, 1903; P. Wernle, Bepinnima of Christianity, L 279, 303‑313, ii. 297‑313, New York, 1903‑04; DC(7. i. 747‑748.
HOPITAL, MICHEL DE L'. See L'H6PrrnL.
HOPKINS, ALBERT: American Congregationalist, brother of Mark Hopkins (q.v.); b. at Stockbridge, Mass., July 14, 1807; d. at Williamstown, Mass., May 24, 1872. He was graduated from Williams in 1826, was elected a tutor there in 1827, and professor of mathematics and natural science in 1829, and retained his professorship till his death. In 1838 he was licensed to preach, and for many years thereafter he was stated supply to churches in and around Williamstown. He was a corresponding fellow of the Royal Society, London, and contributed to its transactions. He is known chiefly as an astronomer. By his discoveries in this field he aided in establishing a high reputation for American scientists.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. C. Sewall, Life of Prof. Albert Hopkins, New York, 1879.
HOPKINS, MARK: Congregationalist; b. at Stockbridge, Mass., Feb. 4, 1802; d. at Williamstown, Mass., June 17, 1887. He was educated at Williams College (B.A., 1824), where he was a tutor in 1825‑27; he then studied medicine and was graduated from the Berkshire Medical School in 1829. He engaged in practise in New York City, but in 1830 accepted the professorship of moral philosophy and rhetoric in Williams College, a position which he held six years (1830‑36). In 1836 he was chosen president of the same college, and for thirty‑six years (1836‑72) he exercised the duties of that office. In 1872 he resigned the presidency, and from that year until his death was professor of intellectual and moral philosophy, He was also pastor of the college church from 1836 to 1883, and in 1857 was elected president of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. His fame as teacher, preacher, and philosopher was almost world‑wide. President Garfield's remark expresses his significance: "A log cabin in Ohio, with a wooden bench in it, Mark Hopkins on one end and I on the other, would be college enough for me." He wrote Evidences of Christianity (Boston, 1846); Miscellaneous Essays and Discourses (1847); Leotures on Moral Science (1862); Baccalaureate Sermons and Occasional Discourses (1863); The Law of Love, and Love as a Law (a friendly controversy with President James MeCosh; New York, 1869); An Outline Study of Man (1873); Strength and Beauty (1874); and The Scriptural Idea of Man (1883).
	HOPKINS, SAMUEL: New England theologian;
b. in Waterbury, Conn., Sept. 17, 1721; d. in New
		port, R. I., Dec. 20, 1803. He was
	Ministry	graduated at Yale in 1741, and the
	at Great	same year began his theological studies,
Barrington. under the care and in the family of
		President Edwards, then of Northamp
ton,, Mass. He was ordained pastor of the Con
gregational Church in Great Barrington, Mass.,
Dec. 28, 1743. The church then had only five
members, but 116 joined it during his pas
torate. After a ministry of twenty‑five years,
he was dismissed Jan. 18, 1769. His ministry was sometimes interrupted by the French and Indian wars, which compelled him to flee with his family to other towns for safety. He preached often to the Housatonic Indians in his neighborhood. He remained intimate with President Edwards, and was better acquainted than any other man with the peculiar views of Edwards. He also held frequent and fraternal intercourse with Joseph Bellamy (q.v.), of Bethlehem, Conn.
Hopkins was installed pastor of the First Congregational Church in Newport, R. I., Apr. 11, 1770,
and continued in this pastorate thirtyMinistry three years. As the French and Indian
at wars had interfered with his parochial Newport. success in Great Barrington, so the Opposition Revolutionary War interfered with it to Slavery. in Newport. The town was captured
by the British in 1776, and remained in their possession more than three years. During these years the church of Dr. Hopkins was impoverished, the church edifice was nearly ruined, and he himself was compelled to seek refuge in other towns. On returning to Newport in 1780 he resumed a work which had already exposed him to severe persecution. Newport had been a principal slave‑mart of North America. As early as 1770 Hopkins began to preach against the slave system. He afterward published numerous essays against it in the newspapers of Newport, Providence, Boston, and Hartford. From 1780 onward he wrote elaborate letters on the subject to men of wealth and influence in this country, and to John Erskine, Granville Sharp, Zachary Macaulay, and other opponents of slavery in Great Britain, AB early as 1773 he united with his friend Ezra Stiles, of Newport, in issuing a circular plea for aid in educating two colored men for an African mission. In 1776 he united with Dr. Stiles in a second circular for the same object. Some time after 1780 he formed a more comprehensive plan for colonizing American slaves, which was followed by visible results. Two liberated negroes, who in their youth had been affected by his colonizing scheme, retained for about forty years their desire to go as colonists and missionaries to their native land; and in Jan., 1826, they sailed from Boston to Liberia with sixteen other Africans, all formed into a church, of which these two aged men were deacons.
Dr. Hopkins was a very unattractive speaker, but was more successful as a writer. By his love of
investigation, his patient and unreCharacter mitting thought, the independence,
	and	strength, and comprehensiveness of
Writings. his mind, by his honesty, humility,
and benevolence, his deferential study of the Bible, and his habit of communion with God, he was eminently fitted to be a theologian. His system was essentially Calvinistic, but was distinguished as " Hopkinsianism " (q.v.). He edited several of President Edwards' most important works, and published independently The Wisdom of God in the Permission of Sin (Boston, 1759); An Inquiry concerning the Promises of the Gospel (1765); An Inquiry into the Nature of True Holiness (Newport, 1773); A System. of Doctrines contained in

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Divine ReveWion (2 vols., Boston, 1793); and other less important theological works. His political writings were chiefly anonymous. His noted Dialogue concerning the Slavery of the Africans, together with his Address to Slaroeholdem, was published in 1766. See NEW ENGLAND Tamoloay.
(EDWARDS A. PARgt.) F. H. FosTzR.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A new ed. of the Works, with a Memoir, was published by E. A. Park Boston, 1852; the Memoir was issued separately, ib. 1854 (the best work on the subject). The Autobiography was published by Stephen West in Sketches of the Life of Samuel Hopkkins, Hartford, 1805. Consult: W. B. Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit, i. 428‑35, New York, 1859; A. E. Dunning, Congregationalists in America, pp. 278‑281, ib. 1894; W. Walker, American Church History Series, iii. 287‑292 et passim, ib. 1894; idem, New England Leaders, pp. 313‑361; ib. 1901; L. W. Bacon, The Congregationalists, pp. 137207, ib. 1904; F. H. Foster, Genetic Hiat. of the New England Theology, chaps. vi.‑vii., Chicago, 1907.

HOPKINSIANISM: A system of theology which was very prominent in New England in the later eighteenth century. Its roots are embedded in the published and unpublished writings of the elder Jonathan Edwards; hence it has been called the " Edwardean Divinity." The main principles of it are either taught or implied in the writings of Samuel Hopkins, of Newport, R. I. (whence the name; see HOPKINS, SAMUEL). Those principles which are merely implied in the system of Hopkins were unfolded and somewhat modified by his three friends Stephen West, Nathanael Emmons, and Samuel Spring (qq.v.). As logically connected with each other, and as understood by the majority of its advocates, the system contains the following principles: (1) Every moral agent choosing right has the natural power to choose wrong, and choosing wrong has the natural power to choose right. (2) He is under no obligation to perform an act, unless he has the natural ability to perform it. (3) Although in the act of choosing every man is as free as any moral agent can be, yet he is acted upon while he acts freely, and the divine providence, as well as decree, extends to all his wrong as really as to his right volitions. (4) All sin is so overruled by God as to become the occasion of good to the universe. (5) The holiness and the sinfulness of every moral agent belong to him personally and exclusively, and can not be imputed in a literal sense to any other agent. (6) As the holiness and the sin of man are exercises of his will, there is neither holiness nor sin in his nature viewed as distinct from these exercises. (7) As all his moral acts before regeneration are certain to be entirely sinful, no promise of regenerating grace is made to any of them. (8) The impenitent sinner is obligated, and should be exhorted, to cease from all impenitent acts, and to begin a holy life at once. His moral inability to obey this exhortation is not a literal inability, but is a mere certainty that, while left to himself, he will sin; and this certainty is no reason for his not being required and urged to abstain immediately from all sin. (9) Every impenitent sinner should be willing to suffer the punishment which God wills to inflict upon him. In whatever sense he should submit to the divine justice punishing other sinners, in that sense he should submit to the divine justice punishing himself. In
whatever sense the punishment of the finally obdurate promotes the highest good of the universe, in that sense he should be submissive to the divine will in punishing himself, if finally obdurate. This principle is founded mainly on the two following. (10) All holiness consists in the elective preference of the greater above the smaller, and all sin consists in the elective preference of the smaller above the greater, good of sentient beings. (11) All the moral attributes of God are comprehended in general benevolence, which is essentially the same with general justice, and includes simple, complacential, and composite benevolence; legislative, retributive, and public justice. (12) The atonement of Christ consists not in his enduring the punishment threatened by the law, nor in his performing the duties required by the law, but in his manifesting and honoring by his pains, and especially by his death, all the divine attributes which would have been manifested in the same and no higher degree by the punishment of the redeemed. (13) The atonement was made for all men, the non‑elect as really as the elect. See NEW ENGLAND TsxoLoar.
(EDWARDS A. PARgt.) F. H. FOSTER.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. H. Foster, Genetic Hist. of the New England Theology, chaps. vi.‑vii., Chicago, 1907; The Christian Examiner, xxciii (1842), pp. 169 sqq.; %. R. Hagenbaeh, Hie& of Doctrine, i. 436, 438, New York, 1861; W. (i. T. Shedd, Hiat. of Doctrine, i. 383, 408, ii. 5, 81, 489, ib. 1865; A. E. Dunning, Congregationalists in America, pp. 278 sqq., 294 328, ib. 1894; W. Walker, in American Church History Series, iii. 288‑292, 300‑301, 313, 332, 334, 337, 348‑352, 355, ib. 1894; idem, Ten New England Loaders, pp. 362‑365, 369‑370, 374‑377, 3x1‑385, 399‑405, ib. 1901; L. W. Bacon, The Congregationalists, p. 157, ib. 1904.
HORB (HORBE), JOHANN HEINRICH: German Pietist; b. at Colmar (40 m. s.s.w. of Strasburg) June 11, 1645; d. at Steinbeck (5 m. e. of Hamburg) Jan. 26, 1695. He was educated at Strasburg, receiving the degree of master in 1664, and afterward visiting several other German universities. He then accompanied some young men, as tutor, on their journeys through Holland, England, and France. During his travels he continued his studies, which included more especially dogmatics and patristics. He became court preacher at Bischweiler in 1671 and, shortly after, inspector and pastor in Trarbach, on the Moselle, where he became involved in disputes with his colleagues and was Suspended. To escape further unpleasantness on account of his Pietistic tendencies he accepted a call as superintendent to Windsheim, Franconia, in Jan., 1679. But even there he was not permitted to fulfil his duties in peace; he was accused of heresy and the people were stirred up against him. At the same time both he and Spener were attacked by George Konrad Dilfeld, of Nordhausen, Spener answering by a refutation in his own defense as will as in that of Horb. He accepted a call as chief pastor of St. Nicholas, in Hamburg, and was installed on Apr. 8, 1685. Here, too, in consequence of his relation to Pietism, he experienced great annoyance and trouble. His principal opponent was Johann Friedrich Mayer (q.v.), pastor of St. James, who, thinking himself offended by Spener, now found a vent for his hatred by attacking Spener's brother‑in‑law, Horb. Of the pastors of the five

gge	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	$ W sIsuiem
principal churches in Hamburg, S. Schultz, of St. Peter, stood on Mayer's side; the two others, J. Winckler, of St. Michael, and A. Hinckelmann, of St. Catherine, were, like Horb, in favor of Pietism. Schultz and Mayer complained continually of the enthusiasts and " quakers "; by which they meant Winckler and Horb. Two events, however, brought the dispute to open conflict and set the whole city in an uproar. On Mar. 14, 1690, Schultz requested all the clergymen in the city to sign a declaration " not to recognize as brethren all false philosophers, opponents of Scripture, too lax theologians, and other fanatics, especially Jacob Boehme." Winckler, Horb, and others refused to sign. On Dec. 31, 1692, Horb likewise distributed to the servants and children who were sent to him with New Years' gifts a little treatise on the education of children in the true grounds of Christianity. This treatise originated in a circle of French mystics, and contained incautious remarks of which Horb himself did not approve. However, the conflict which now broke out knew no bounds; Mayer set the whole city in a turmoil, especially the artisans. The contest was carried on in sermons, in controversial writings, in meetings of the citizens, even on the streets and in the market‑places, but without result. At last, in a very tumultuous meeting, N ov. 24,1693, Horb was dismissed from his office. AB his life was in danger, he fled to Steinbeck, where he died.
CARL BERTHEAU.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Geffcken, Johann Winekler and die ham‑
6urgiache Ruche seiner Zeit, Hamburg, 1861; J. Moller,
Cimbria litterata, ii. 355‑372, Copenhagen, 1744; K. J. W .
Wolters, Hamburg vor 200 Jahren, 161 sqq., Hamburg,
1892; ADB, mii. 120 sqq.

HORCHE, hdr'He, HEINRICH: Pietist and separatist; b. at Eschwege (26 m. ex.e. of Cassel), Hesse‑Nassau, Dec. 12, 1652; d. at Kirchbain (8 m. e. of Marburg), Prussia, Aug. 5, 1729. He became deacon at Heidelberg in 1683. He was appointed court preacher at Kreuznach in 1685; became preacher at Heidelberg 1687; and in 1690 pastor and professor at Herborn, whence he was dismissed Feb. 15, 1698.
Horche's dismissal was the signal for an open outbreak of separatism in Hesse and Nassau. He organized private meetings, which were frequented by separatists and chiliasts from far and wide. For ten years he led an unsettled life, vehemently teaching and preaching in various places'. Expelled from Nassau for open resistance to the authorities, he betook himself to Hesse, but was put under arrest at Marburg, and after his discharge was again arrested at Cassel for creating disturbances. In 1701 he was allowed to return to Eschwege; and he now endeavored to realize practically the Philar delphian form of society (see LzAD, JANR). However, the members of the association, in particular the notorious Eva Yon Buttlar (q.v.) with her following, being compelled to quit the country, Horche betook himself to Wesel, thence to Holland and England, and he contemplated emigrating to Pennsylvania. His wife being unwilling to follow him, he returned home. From 1703 his mental condition, which had caused apprehension, improved, and from 1708, apart from a brief sojourn at Mar‑
burg, he lived quietly at Kirchhain until his death. CARL MIRBT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. Hochhuth, Heinrich Horehe and die philadelphiathen Gemeinden in Hessen, Gutereloh, 1876.
HOREB. See SINAI.
HORITES. See CANAAN, § 9; EDOM.
HORMISDAS: Pope 514‑523. The Campanian Hormisdas ascended the papal throne July 20, 514, and was buried in St. Peter's Aug. 6, 523. After the Laurentian schism was healed (see SynxAcRus), he was chiefly interested in restoring the union with the Greek Church, broken since 484 (see FELIx III.), but the refusal of the Emperor Anastasius I. to admit the condemnation of Acacius of Constantinople thwarted the negotiations. The pope did not attend the synod at Heraclea, which therefore adjourned (515). Hormiedsa was gratified to have Justin I. and his court patriarch, John, turn to Rome (518) and acknowledge the condemnation of Acacius, thus completing the union (Mar., 519). The pope declared the Theopaschite formula (see THEorAscHITas), which the emperor wished to see accepted by the Church, useless and dangerous (Epist., 137). Hormisdas ordered Dionysius Exiguue (q‑v.) to finish a translation of the Apostolic Canons, and he also renewed the so‑called Decretum Gelar sianum (see GmmLAsius I.). His briefs and memorials are found in MPL, lxiii. 367 sqq.; CSEL, xxxv.; and in A. Thiel, Epistolte Romanorum pontifimm, pp. 739‑1006 (Braunsberg, 1868). G. KR$GER.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liber pontificalis, ed. Ducheme, vol. i., Paris, 1886, ed. Mommsen, in MGH, Oeat. pont. Rom., i (1898), 126‑132; JaffA, Repeeta, i. 101‑109; J. Langen, Geschichte der r6mischen %irche, ii. 250‑299, Bonn, 1885; G. 8ehnurer, in Hiatorisches Jahrbuch, a (1889), 258‑301; G. Pfailsobifter. Der 0etpotenk6nig Theoderich . . . and die katholische Kirde, pp. 138‑154, Munster, 1896; Hefele, Concilienpeschichte, vol. ii. passim; B. Platina, Lives of the Popes, pp. 118‑120, London, n.d.; Milman, Latin Christianity, i. 137 eqq.; Bower, Pope, 310‑324.
HORN, EDWARD TRAILL: Lutheran; b. at Easton, Pa., June 10, 1850. He was graduated at Pennsylvania College, Gettysburg, Pa., in 1869, and the theological seminary of his denomination at Philadelphia in 1872. In the latter year he was ordained to the ministry, and has held successive pastorates at Christ's Church, Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia (1872‑76), St. John's, Charleston, S. C. (1876‑97), and Trinity, Reading, Pa., since 1897. He was president of the Board of Missions of the Southern Lutheran Church from 1888 to 1896, and is a member of the Board of Foreign Missions of the General Council, and vice‑president of the American Tract Society. Theologically he holds that the formulas of the ancient creeds are capable of restatement in terms of present‑day thought, and that all conclusions of the Church demand continual and repeated revision. He has written The Christian Year (Philadelphia, 1876); Old MGtin and Vesper Services of the Lutheran Church (Gettysburg, Pa., 1882); The Evangelical Pastor (1887); Outlines of Liturgics (Philadelphia, 1890); Sources of the Common Service (Gettysburg, Pa., 1890); Annotations on St. Paul's Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, Thessaloniam, and to Phile»wn (New York, 1896; in collaboration with A. G. Voigt); Terms of Communion in a Christian Church (Gettysburg, Pa.,

Horn
Horse
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
1899); The Application of Lutheran P'r`inciples to Church Architecture (Pittsburg, Pa., 1905) ; and Summer Sermons (Reading, Pa., 1908). He has likewise contributed numerous liturgical articles to Lutheran periodicals, and has translated J. K. W. Loehe's Fragen and Antworten zu den aechs Hauptstiicken D. Martin Luthers (Columbia, S. C., 1893).
HORN, WILLIAM: Evangelical Association bishop; b. at Oberfischbach, Prussia, May 7, 1839. He was self‑educated, and after occupying a number of pastorates in his denomination from 1861 to 1871, became, in 1872, editor of the German Sundayschool literature of the Evangelical Association, a position which be held for seven years (1872‑79). He was then editor of the Christlicher Botschafter from 1879 to 1891, and since 1891 has been a bishop of his denomination. In theology Horn lays special stress on the love of God and on the redeeming work of Christ. He has written Prdsident James A. Garfells Lebena‑ and Leidenageschichte (Cleveland, O., 1881); Life of Bishop John Seybert (Stuttgart, 1894); Life of Bishop John J. Escher (Cleveland, O., 1907); and Wegeblvzhen (poems, 1907).
HORNE, GEORGE: Bishop of Norwich; b. at Otham, near Maidstone (8 m. s.sE. of Rochester), Kent, Nov. 1, 1730; d. at Bath Jan. 17, 1792. He studied at University and Magdalen colleges, oxford (B.A., 1749; M.A., 1752), and passed the greater part of his life at Magdalen, having obtained a fellowship there in 1750. In 1768 he became president of Magdalen, and in 1776 vice‑chancellor of the university. From 1771 to 1781 he was chaplainin‑ordinary to the king. In the latter year he was made dean of Canterbury, and in 1790 he was elevated to the see of Norwich. He was a good Hebrew scholar, a genial writer, and one of the beat preachers of his time. He sympathized with the Methodists, and adopted and defended the views of John Hutchinson (q.v.), who had much in common with the Methodists. Horse published frequent sermons, a defense of Hutchinsonianism, numerous pamphlets against Newton, Hume, Adam Smith, William Law, and others, and also a criticism of Benjamin Kennicott's plan to collate the Hebrew text of the Bible as a basis for a new English translation. His chief work, however, is his Commentary on the Book of Psalms (2 vols., Oxford, 1776), which occupied him twenty years. This work, which has passed through many editions, is characterized by a combination of exegetical treatment with devotional suggestiveness. Horse's Works were edited by W. Jones (6 vols., London, 1795).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: His Memoirs were prefixed by W. Jones to the Works, ut SUP. Consult: H. J. Todd, Some Account

of the Deans of Canterbury, Canterbury, 1793; J. H. covton and F. Relton, The English Church . . . 1714‑1800, pp. 203‑207, 351‑352, et passim, 1906; DNB, zavi. 356357.
BORNE, THOMAS HARTWELL: Biblical scholar and bibliographer; b. in London Oct. 20, 1780; d. there Jan. 27, 1862. He was educated at Christ's Hospital, London, where for two years he was a contemporary with S. T. Coleridge, from whom he received private instruction in the summer of 1790. In 1796 he became a barrister's clerk. To eke out
his meager salary he took up authorship and wrote, or edited, numerous works on such diverse subjects as theology, law, grazing, topography, and bibliography. In 1808 he undertook the compilation of the indexes to the three volumes of the Harleian manuscripts in the British Museum. After the completion of this work he remained in the employ of the Record Office. .He was sublibrarian of the Surrey Institution 1809‑23. Admitted to holy orders, he was curate at Christ Church 1819‑25 and assistant minister at Walbeck Chapel 1825‑33. He took the degree of B.D. at Cambridge in 1829. In 1831 he received a prebend in St. Paul's, London, and in 1833 he became rector of the united parishes of St. Edmund the King and St. Nicholas Aeons, London. From 1824 to 1860 he was also senior assistant librarian in the department of printed books in the British Museum. His chief work is An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures (3 vols., London, 1818; 11th ed., 4 vols., 1860), which at once became one of the principal class‑books for the study of the Scriptures in Protestant institutions in Great Britain and America. While this very comprehensive work has now been superseded, it remains monumental as the embodiment of the best scholarship of the time in the various departments of Biblical learning.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Reminiscences, Personal and Bibliographical, of T. H. Horne, with Notes by his Daughter, S. A. Cheyne, and a short Introduction by J. B. MaeCaul, London, 1862; J. B. MaeCaul, The Rev. T. H. Horne, a Sketch, ib. 1862; G. M. Turpin, Rev. T. Hartwell Horne, ib. 1862; DNB, gvii. 363‑364.

HORNEEWS, her‑nai'us (HORHEY), CONRAD: German Protestant; b. at Brunswick Nov. 25, 1590; d. at Helmstedt Sept. 26, 1649. He was educated at the school of St. Catherine in Brunswick, and at the University of Helmstedt, where he was a favorite pupil of the humanist Johannes Caselius. In 1619 he became professor of logic and ethics at Helmstedt, and in 1628 professor of theology. Like Calixtus, his colleague, he advocated the study of Aristotle and opposed the application of the doctrine and method of Petrus Ramus in philosophy, pedagogics, and theology; and like Calixtus he was attacked by the ruling orthodoxy on account of his liberal views in theology. In Nov., 1648, the three courts of Brunswick commissioned Calixtus and Horneius to furnish an exposition of the questions in dispute. Horneius treated the necessity of good works, the authority of ecclesiastical antiquity, and the study of concord and mutual tolerance. He wrote Compendium dialecticce (Helmstedt, 1623); Disputationes ethicee (1618); Compendium naturalis philosophies (1618); Disquisitiones meiaphysicte (1622); Inatitutiones logicw (1623); Institutiones philosophim moralis (1624); Exercitationes and Disputes bones logictE (1621). Against his theological opponents he wrote: Defensio diepulationis de summa. fidei . . . quo per caritatem operatur, necessitate ad salutem (1647); Iterata assertio de necessitate fdei per caritatem operands (1649); Repetitio doetrinm verse de necessitate bonorum operum (1649), and other works. After his death appeared Compendium historim ecclesiasticce (1649), on the three first centuries; commentaries on Hebrews (1654) and the

887	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Born
Catholic Epistles (1655); and a 'Compendium, theologize (Brunswick, 1655).
(PAUL TscHACSERT.)
BmLw6RAPHT: ADD, mii. 148‑149; E. L. T. Henke, G. Catixt and seine Zest, Halle, 1853‑60; G. Frank, Geacmchte der proteetantiachen Theodogie, ii. 8 sqq., Leipsia, 1882.
HORNER, JUNIUS MOORE: Protestant Episcopal bishop; b. at Oxford, N. C., July 7, 1859. He studied at the University, of Virginia in 187980, after which he was instructor in Latin and Greek in the Oxford School for Boys for several years. He then studied at Johns Hopkins University (B.A., 1885) and the General Theological Seminary (B.D., 1892), and was ordained priest in the following year. From 1890 to 1898 he was associated with his brother as principal of the Oxford School after the death of his father, and in the latter year was consecrated first missionary bishop of Asheville, N. C.
	HORNING, FRIEDRICH THEODOR: Preacher
in Strasburg, and champion of Lutheranism in
Alsace; b. at Eckwersheim (near Vendenheim, 6
m. n. of Strasburg), in Lower Alsace, Oct. 25, 1809;
d. at Strasburg Jan. 21, 1882. After the completion
of his theological studies at Strasburg in 1832, he
became vicar in Ittenheim in the following year.
In 1835 his father ordained him as preacher. In
1836 he was appointed pastor in Grafenataden, and
in 1846 at Strasburg. Until his removal to Strasburg
he professed a moderate rationalism, the reigning
tendency of that time. In 1841 he was elected
member of the committee for a revision of the hymn
book which was to serve the two Evangelical
churches. On his arrival in Strasburg, however,
Horning suddenly changed his views in favor of
confessional Lutheranism, opposing all Pietistic
tendencies and all attempts at a union between the
Lutherans and the Reformed. He declared partici
pation in the Basel mission a betrayal of the Lu
theran Church, and in opposition to its efforts
founded the Evangelical Lutheran Missionary So
ciety for the support of Lutheran missions in Leipsic
and Hermannsburg. He gathered a large congre
gation in Strasburg from all parts of the city, with
out regard to parochial divisions, and held it in
strict discipline. Outside of Strasburg only eight
or ten clergymen accepted the views of Horning at
first, but after 1860 the Lutheran circle expanded.
He rendered great service by reawakening the con
sciousness of Church and confession, directing at
tention again to the importance of pure doctrine
and the means of grace. After his death a collection
of his sermons on the Gospels was published (Stras
burg, 1884), and one on the Epistles (1898).
(K. HACKENSCHMIDT.)
BIHLIOanAPIrY: W. Horning, FriadricA Theodor Horning, W&aburg, 1885 (by his son).
HOROLOGION, her"o‑lb'ji‑on: An office‑book of the Greek Church, corresponding to the Latin breviary, and containing the office for the day and night hours of the Church, from matin to compline, with the variable antiphons and hymns, and various short offices, prayers, and canons for occasional use.
HORN, GEORGE EDWIN: Baptist; b. at Boston, Mass., Jan. 19, 1856. He was graduated at Brown University in 1876, and studied at Union
Theological Seminary (1876‑77) and Newton Theological Institution (B.D., 1879). After holding pastorates at the First Baptist Church, Tarrytown, N. Y. (1879‑84), and the First Baptist Church, Charlestown, Mass. (1884‑91), he was editor of The Watchman (1891‑1904). Since 1904 he has been professor of church history in the Newton Theological Institution, and since 1908 president. In theology he is a liberal conservative, and has written, in addition to numerous occasional sermons and addresses, Hid in the Heart (Philar delphia, 1902).

HORSE (Hebr. am, Parash; the latter word, however, often designates the rider): On the Assyrian and Babylonian monuments the horse is frequently represented. He was known and valued in those countries from the earliest times, but, judging from the representations, only for Tiding and for the chariot, and not as a beast of burden. The same is true of the Hittites, whose chariots formed an important part of their military equipment. Among 'the Egyptians the horse is represented only after the period of the Hyksos and exclusively for use in war. In the Amama Tablets the princes of Babylonia and Mitanni send horses and chariots as presents to Egypt; they were nearer to Central Asia, the habitat of the horse. Egypt could never excel in horse‑breeding, while Mesopotamia., with its vast plains, possessed special advantages in this direction. Horses and chariots appear to have been introduced into Syria by the Hittites; still the Amama Tablets state that the princes of northern Palestine sometimes requested horses from the Egyptian king. On account of the mountainous conformation of the country chariots were used only in restricted numbers in Palestine, principally on the plains and along the coast. The Israelites are said to have been terrified at the chariots of the Canaanites, and according to the sources it was Solomon who first introduced horses on a large scale from Kue and MuZri (in Cilicia and North Syria; see ABsYHIA, VI., 2, § 1; in the E. V. of I Kings x. 28‑29 rendered " Egypt "). Among the Israelites also they were‑ used almost exclusively for warlike purposes. To drive in chariots drawn by horses in time of peace was the prerogative of the king only (II Sam. xv. 1; I Kings i. 5); but in later times high officials assumed the prerogative (Jer. xvii. 25). Not until the Roman period, when roads were first built in Palestine, was the horse generally used in that country for driving and riding; in ancient times the ass, and, for the nobles, the mule, were the animals so employed (Isa. xxviii. 28 is faulty; cf. B. Duhm on the passage in Handkommentor zum Allen Testament, GBttingen, 1903, and T. K. Cheyne, Isaiah, in SBOT).
The Old Testament also mentions the breeding of horses; they were kept in a stable (urwah), and fed with barley and straw (I Kings iv. 26‑28). They were controlled by means of the bit (resen), the bridle (methegh), and the whip (shot). The poets admire the strength and swiftness of the horse (Jer. iv. 13, xlvii. 3; Hab. i. 8, etc.), and Job (xxxix. 19‑25) pictures it as a wonder‑work of divine
creation.	I. BENZINGE$.

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
BIBwOOBAPvY: J. G. Wood, Bible Animals, New York, 1883; F.oSchwally, in ZATW, viii (1888), 191; E. 0. A. Riehm. Handwartsrbuch die bibliachen Altertume. Pp. 11971202, Bielefeld, 1894; G. Maepdro, nDawn of Civilization, P. 32, London, 1896; idem, The Sirwwle of the Nations, P. 51, ib. 1899; V. Hehn, %ulturpllanzen and Hausthiers, ed. 0. Schrader, Berlin, 1902; DB, ii 417‑418; EB, 12113‑16.
HORSLEY, SAMUEL: Bishop of St. Asaph; b. at St. Martin's Place, London, Sept. 15, 1733; d. at Brighton Oct. 4, 1806. He received his early training from his father, and in 1751 entered Trinity Hall, Cambridge (LL.B., 1758). On leaving the university he became curate to his father, rector of Newington Butts, Surrey, and succeeded to the rectory in 1759. In 1768 he went to Oxford as tutor to Lord Guernsey, who secured for him the rectory of Albury, Surrey, in 1774. In 1777 he became domestic chaplain to Robert Lowth, bishop of London, who gave him a prebend at St. Paul's. Later in the year he succeeded his father as lecturer at St. Martin's‑in‑the‑Fields. Lowth presented him to Thorley in 1780, made him archdeacon of St. Albans in 1781, and presented him to the vicarage of South Weald, Essex, in 1782. Horsley was a scientist as well as a theologian, and won his first laurels by his scientific publications. He became a fellow of the Royal Society in 1767 and was one of the secretaries of the Society from 1773 till 1784. In this period falls his edition of Newton's works (5 vols., London, 1779‑55). He is now remembered chiefly for his famous controversy with Joseph Priestley. In his History of the CorruPbona of Christianity (2 vols., Birmingham, 1782) Priestley had attacked the doctrine of the Trinity. Horsley took up the gauntlet in A Charge . . . to the Clergy of the Archdraeonnf of St. Albans (London, 1783). During the course of the controversy, which lasted till 1790, he published Letters . . . in Reply to Dr. Priestley (1784) and Remarks upon Dr. Priestley's Second Letter (1786). These, with other writings, were included in Tracts in Controversy with Dr. Priestley (Gloucester, 1789). In this dispute Horsley proved more than a match for the eminent scientist and Socinian. For thus stemming the tide of Unitarianism he was rewarded by Lord Chancellor Thurlow with a prebend in Gloucester in 1787, and the see of St. David's in 1788. For his efficient support of the government in the House of Lords he was translated to the see of Rochester in 1793, with which he held the deanery of Westminster. He was translated to St. Asaph in 1802. Horsley was a man of overbearing temper, but a keen reasoner and a remarkable preacher. Other works are Sermons (3 vols., Dundee, 1810‑12); and the posthumous Psalms translated from the Hebrew (2 vols., 1815) and Biblical Criticism on . . . the Old Testament (4 vols., 1820). All of these are included in his Theological Works (6 vols., London, 1845).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Walter Wilson, History of Dissenting Churches in London, 1. 380, London, 1808; J. B. Nichols, Literary Anecdotes, iv. 673 sqq., viii. 509, ib. 1812‑14; H. P. Stanley, Hiztorieal Memorials of Westminster Abbey, P. 474, ib. 1868; J. Stoughton, Religion in England, ib. 1878; J. H. Overton and F. Relton, The English Church 171.¢‑1800, pp. 254‑257 et passim, ib. 1906; DNB, avii. 383‑‑386 (where further references to sources are given).
HORT, FENTON JOHN ANTHONY: English theologian and Biblical scholar; b. at Dublin Apr.
868
23, 1828; d. at Cambridge Nov. 30, 1892. lie went to school at Rugby, and in 1846 entered the University of Cambridge, where he won a fellowship in 1852. In 1853 he began to prepare, with B. F. Westcott, an edition of the Greek New Testament. In that same year he was entrusted with the description of some Greek manuscripts in the university library; he was appointed examiner, and he founded, with J. E. B. Mayor and J. B. Lightfoot, the Journal of Classical aced Sacred Philology, that first came out in 1854. In 1856 he was ordained priest, and in 1857 he became vicar of St. Ippolyts cum Great Wymondley, near Cambridge, but he felt himself that his sensitiveness and shyness hampered his work there, for all the vigor with which he threw himself into it. He was constantly busy with the edition of the Greek New Testament, as well as with other learned tasks, and his health suffered under it all. Cambridge called upon him again and again, especially after 1865. He was four times examiner in moral science, twice examiner in natural science, and in 1871 he gave the Hulsean lectures. He had become in 1868 one of the most important contributors to Smith and Wace's Dictionary of Christian Biography, and in 1870 one of the chief members of the New Testament Revision Company. Every good work in his neighborhood found in him a promoter.
The university finally received him again within its limits, for in 1871 Emmanuel College gave him a fellowship and lectureship for theology, and he moved to Cambridge in Mar., 1872. For six years he lectured in this college. At the same time he was a member of about fifteen boards and committees, two of which, the university library and the university press, demanded much time and strength. In 1876 his Two Dissertations appeared, on, MovGYe* Bebs and on Eastern creeds. It was in 1878 that he first wrote the rough draft of the introduction to the edition of the Greek New Tester went, and in the same year he became Hulsean professor of divinity. The work upon the revision of the English New Testament closed in 1880, but he then had to take up the revision of the Old Testament Apocrypha that busied him up to within a few days before he passed away. On May 12, 1881, the first volume of the great Westcott‑Hort New Testament appeared, and on the 17th of the same month the Revised Edition of the English New Testament, on which he had worked for ten years, and on Sept. 4 of the same year the second volume, the Introduction to the Greek Testament (see BIBLE TExT, II., 2, j 8). In 1885 he published a school edition of the Greek Testament, and superintended the issue of the Prolegomena to Tregelles' Greek Testament; and in 1884 he saw to the issue of a Greek Testament by Scrivener, containing the readings of the revisers in 1611 and 1881, and he practically rewrote the preface to it. His extraordinary knowledge of patristic literature enabled him in 1887 to contribute largely to the clearing up of the history of the Codez Amintinus. In Oct., 1887, he became Lady Margaret's professor of divinity. But all these detailed references to the outcropping of his learned researches need to be supplemented by a background of a full correspondence with all man‑

369	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8Hoorasesley
ner of men, friends and strangers at home and abroad, and of a constant care for and support of the work of younger men, which prevented his publishing his own work; among the volumes which, have appeared since his death are: The Way, the Truth, the Life (London, 1893); Judaistie Christianity (1894); Lectures on the Ante‑Nicene Fathers (1895); Prolegomena to Romans and Ephesians (1895); The Christian Ecclesia (1897); Village Sermons (1897);
I. conservative View.
The Hook of Hoses. Its Genuinenees U 1).
Date of Hosea's Activity U 2).
Contents of the Book (¢ 3).
The Complete Law Implied (! 4).
I. Conservative View: Hoses, son of Beeri, was all his life a subject of the northern kingdom, as is indicated in i. 2 and vii. 5 where
he speaks of the northern king as z. The " our king " and of the land as be‑
Book of longing to that realm. His book,
Hosea. Its moreover, shows a minute knowledge
Genuine‑ of that land, while the references to mess. Judah are cursory and due to the fact
that he regards salvation as possible only from it, where still exist the service of Yahweh and the Davidie line. The objection of Wellhausen to passages referring to David and Judah as interpolations because contrary to Hosea's view of the kingdom; of Stade to i. 7 and ii. 1‑3 as breaking the connection, and to iv. 15, viii. 4 as not in accord with Hosea's representation; and of Cornill, who sees in ii. 20 and xiv. proof of the spuriousness of the verses which look for a union of the two kingdoms, are all answerable. The reference to Gibeah in ix. 9 and x. 10 can, according to viii. 4, x. 10, refer only_to the separation of the kingdoms; i. 7 can not be ascribed to an interpolator because of its Hpseanic character; the repetition of Yahweh in iii. 5b speaks for the genuineness of the whole verse; the exhortation in ii. 1‑3 corresponds to the threat in i. 2‑9; while the references to a Davidic king are motived by the Messianic outlook of the prophet.
The note of time in i. 1 bespeaks an activity covering sixty years, in itself not incredible, since
at the beginning of his ministry Hosea 2. Date of appears as a young, unmarried man.
Hosea's But it is hard to explain omission to
Activity. mention the Syrian‑Ephraimitic war.
		It is better to place the book before
734 B.c. and to ascribe the mention of the kings of
Judah who appear in Ise. i. 1 and Micah i. 1 to the
dire to make Hosea appear throughout a contem
porary of those whose early contemporary he was.
The period of his activity was coincident with the
most glorious period of the northern kingdom, when
Jeroboam II. had reestablished the old boundaries
of his realm, but when at the same time religiously
and morally the conditions were low. Syncretism
of worship with the cults of surrounding states was
progressing rapidly. Under these conditions it was
Hosea's task to bear witness against the ruling sins
	V: 24
Second Series (1905); Cambridge Land Other Sermons (1898); 1 Peter i. 1‑ii. 17 (1898); Village Sermons in Outline (1900); and Notes Introductory' to the Study of the Clementine Recognitions (1901).
CAsI'AR RENfo GREGORY.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. F. Hort, Life and Letters q/ F. J. A.
Hort, by lie son, 2 vole., London, 1896; DNB, Supply tnent, ii. 443‑447.

HOSANNA. See Lrrvaoics, III.
HOSEA.
Literary Features (¢ 5). II. Critical View.
Questions of Text and Authorship (€ 1).
Problem of Chaps. i.‑iii. (¢2).
Chap. iii. a Continuation of Chap. i. (1 3).
Interpretations of Chap. i. The Literal View (5 4). A Possible Alternative (1 5). Date of Chips. i.‑iii. ($ 6). Features of Chaps. iv.‑uv. (f 7).
of the northern kingdom and to summon it to judgment, yet without forgetting the grace God had promised to his people.
The book falls into two parts: i.‑iii., where prophecy is united with the relation of personal experiences of the prophet; iv.‑xiv., 3. Contents where the personal element does not
	of the	appear. Internal evidence indicates
	Book.	that at the end of the prophet's life he
		put together the essential contents of
his prophecies condensed into short, separate
oracles. The book begins with the narration of
two prophetic experiences of the prophet, not put
in allegorical form, but as in the sphere of external
events which he was called upon to undergo in the
service of God. Chap. i. tells of his marriage to a
woman of whom it is implied that she will not be
true to him, to represent the case of Israel unfaithful
to its God, for which judgment comes, but with the
prospect of salvation (ii. 1 sqq.). The symbolic
names of the prophet's children (i. 6, 9) are changed,
in consequence of the people's repentance, to their
opposites (ii. 1), while Jezreel (i. 4) is changed in
significance from a place stained with blood to a
place sown with seed. Chap. iii. makes the expe
rience of the prophet with his unfaithful wife the
symbol of Yahweh's experience with unfaithful
Israel. A long‑continued deprivation of enjoyment
of political and religious associations (in exile) is
to bring the people to order aright its common life,
when that people will return to its God and its king.
The second part of the book, which unmistakably
exhibits the unrestful period following the death of
Jeroboam II., is composed of separate pieces. Chap.
iv. portrays the thorough religious and moral dete
rioration of the whole people; v.‑vii. impeaches the
leaders whose duties it had been to direct the people
in right ways; , viii.‑ix. 9 recounts anew the sins of
the people committed under a false sense of security,
which must lead to the destruction of the northern
kingdom; in viii. 10‑xi. the prophet three times
recalls Israel's beginnings only to show its repeated
fall from duty; xii‑xiii. shows that in spite of ex
periences of grace and of punishment the people
had opposed God and refused his help, with the
result that the death of Israel is decreed, out of
which a miracle of resurrection shall restore them,
meanwhile judgment must come; the book closes,

Hosea
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
chap. xiv., with exhortation to make confession of sin, which is to be accepted with the result of renewed prosperity.
Of the three reproaches of Hosea against the people, viz., ethical degeneracy, religious demoral‑
ization, and coquetting with world 4. The powers, the second is important here. Complete The tendency of Israel to idolatry, to
	Law	worship of Baal and to calf‑worship,
Implied. is bewailed by the prophet, also the
erection of altars and images, though they suppose that they worship in them Yahweh, the God of revelation. Of their Baal‑worship they are to be so ashamed that the name Baal as name for husband will be abandoned (ii.16‑17). The aim of the prophet is to portray the dire results of the syncretism of worship which made worship of their own God take the form of worship of Baal and so denied real honor to Yahweh. The prophet speaks of a torah (" law "), the infringement of which he deplores, and that this was in writing is indicated by viii. 12: " Though I record [not, as Wellhausen would have it: though I prescribe for him] myriads [of precepts] of my law, they are counted as a strange thing." The sense is that, if the law were even more comprehensive and more specific than it is, yet neither as a whole nor in its particulars would Ephraim regard it. Since the preceding complaint is grounded upon the fact that Israel, which should have had only one altar in the place chosen by God, had multiplied altars to the increase of sins, and since the prophet inveighs against idolatry, the precepts of the law can not have been simply ethical, but must have been cultic and of such a form as exist in the Book of the Covenant, in Deuteronomy, and in the Priest Code. The various kinds of sacrifice and of materials of sacrifice and the sacred times, persons, and seasons appear in one or the other of these books (of. Hoses ii. 13, v. 6,8, vi. 6, ix. 3‑5, xii. 10‑12; Amos ii. 11‑12, iii. 14, iv. 4‑5, v. 21‑22, viii. 5, 10). The position of the priests appears in Hosea iv. 4‑9, though their actual character is revealed in vi. 9.
That the sentence of disapproval which Hosea pronounces upon the northern kingdom relates to this only in its degenerate performance and to its syncretistic obacuration, and not to the matter of sacrifice in itself, is shown by ix. 1‑3, where the prophet tells Israel not to rejoice, since the days come when they will be able to bring to Yahweh neither wine as drink‑offering nor well‑pleasing sacrifices, for they are to return to Egypt and are to eat unclean food in Assyria where consecration of offerings will not be possible for them. When be says that God prefers mercy to sacrifice and knowledge of God to burnt offerings (vi. 6), he refers not to sacrifice in general but to sacrifice in which the soul does not join and by a people which can not distinguish between Yahweh and Baal. Indeed, Hosea does not appear as the herald of a new religious idea or of a new knowledge of the being of Yahweh and of the right method of worshiping him. He and Amos proclaim the God of the fathers of the people who had been known throughout Israel's history through prophetic instruction and revelation. If it be said that Hosea first developed
370
the idea of a marriage between Yahweh and Israel, it must be recalled that this idea underlies the " jealous God " of Ex. xx. 5; and, if he carried it out more thoroughly, it was not on a basis of legalism, but on one of mutual love (ii. 1718, 21).
The dependence of Hoses upon Amos is indisputable, and in part verbal (cf. iv. 3 with Amos viii. 8; iv. 15 with Amos v. 5; viii. 14 with
g. Literary Amos ii. 5; vii. 12 with Amos ix. 2).
Features. But while Amos and Hoses agree closely in the basis of their prophecies and in their liking for reviewing the history of their people, they differ in methods of speech and exposition. Hoses is full of uncommon words, forms, and collocations, and has a distinct northern cast of idiom. His style is leas polished than that of Amos, but more emotional; consequently there is more abruptness in his sentences, less sequence in his figures. The text is at times corrupt, and often the Septuagint, Indicates the method of emendation. Certain passages of the Masoretic text are full of difficulty, especially vii. 5‑6, viii. 10, and xiii. 1. (W. Voicgt.)
II. Critical View: There are several important questions in relation to the writings and even the person of the prophet Hosea about which it is unsafe to dogmatize. Here, to a greater
degree than almost anywhere else in the Old Testament, the principle holds true that no critic except the moat cautious and reserved can afford to make positive statements on difficult literary questions. Criticism, however,
has advanced so far that at least it may confidently be said (1) that the book as it stands is very loosely constructed and cab not be called a unit, even in the most general sense; (2) that large portions were not written by Hoses or in the northern kingdom or under eighth‑century conditions; (3) that many portions of the book can not be understood till the text has been radically amended; (4) that the original compilation of the discourses of Hoses was much simpler and plainer in its arrangement, its language, its rhetorical and poetical structure, its historical allusions and its general and particular argument than is the book accredited to him which has come down in canonical form.
From the point of view of structure the moat striking feature of the whole book is the difference in plan and contents between the two main sections (chaps. L ‑iii.; iv.‑xiv.). Each chapter of the former section has a separate motive and significance. Chap. i. tells of the prophet contracting a marriage with a woman of unchaste
	2. Prob‑	mind or habits at the command of
	lem of	Yahweh, and explains the symbolism
Chaps. i.‑iii. of the significant names given to the
		children born after this remarkable
union. Chap. ii. is, primarily at least, an indict
ment of Israel under the image of the unfaithful
spouse of Yahweh. Chap: iii. resumes the marital
history of Hosea and apparently represents him as
winning back by purchase his faithless wife, with
whom after a probation of " many days " he would
r. Questions of Teat and Authorship.

871	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Hones
resume conjugal relations, this to be a figurative expression of the idea that the recreant Israelites after their probation of a long exile would " again seek Yahweh and David their king." Disregarding meanwhile the irrelevant passages which are attached to these chapters, a brief judgment of the questions that present themselves as to the genuineness of the section may be offered and the relation of its contents to the actual life and work of Hosea and to the rest of the book.
Taking chap. iii. first as the least perplexing, it may be said with some confidence: (1) The action prescribed and ascribed to Hosea was considered by the original writer as in some sense symbolical. It would have been impossible for any respectable man to act literally as Hosea is here
3. Chap. commanded to do and is represented iii. a Con‑ as actually doing. (2) The woman tinuation described in chap. iii. is intended by of Chap. i. the writer to be the same person as that of chap. i. There would be nothing gained, but much lost, in the force of his message, if the prophet had to choose two different persons of precisely the same characteristics to symbolize the conduct and the fortunes of the same people, especially when he is told to " go once more and love a woman " of precisely the same character as that of the one presented in chap. i. Again, if two women so alike were different persons; the fact would naturally be indicated in some way, if only to preclude misunderstanding. Besides, no name is given to the woman in chap. iii. while all the other persons of the story are named, apparently because she had been named already in i. 3.
	Probably	chap. i. is the most diversely inter
preted chapter in all prophetic literature. The
most familiar and obtrusive of the many problems
of the chapter is the question whether the narra
		tive of Hosea's marriage should be un‑
4. Inter‑ derstood as a record of facts or as a pretations figurative representation of Yahweh's of Chap. i. relations to Israel. If the latter, it
	The	might be understood as an allegory
Literal related to a group of listeners, or an
	View.	object lesson given in a symbolical
		action. The figurative interpretation,
in one or other of its forms, had until recent times
perhaps the larger body of supporters. But, chiefly
through the influence of Ewald (Die Propheten des
alter Bundes, GBttingen, 186?) and W. R. Smith
(The Prophets of Israel, Edinburgh, 1882), the lit
eral view has of late been held in most favor. The
obvious difficulties in the way of giving to such a
matter‑of‑fact narrative an allegorical or symboli
cal interpretation in any ordinary form are very
great. On the other hand, the chief support of
the literal explanation is not its antecedent reason
ableness, but the belief that it was the prophet's
own experiences which enabled him to do the things
which he is declared to have done. Thereby did
he come to realize to such a degree as he did the
profound relations between Israel and Yahweh, the
perfidy and ingratitude of Israel in forsaking Yah
weh, and the grief and resentment of Yahweh in
losing the love of his people. It is doubtful, how‑
ever, if this sentimental inference is justifiable. It fails to distinguish between the personal subjective appreciation which the votary of Yahweh had of the love and faithfulness of his God, and the intellectual process which objectivized this conception and illustrated it by a figure. Historically the use by Hosea of the figure of the married state was not based upon or developed from any human marital experiences; it was probably an outgrowth from the old conception of the marriage between the god of the land and the land itself or secondarily, the people of the land, all three of whom, according to old Semitic notions, formed an inseparable trinity. The idea had been deepened, refined, and dignified by experiences of Yahweh's favor and devotion to his people, and the image had grown correspondingly in distinctness and reality. But the expansion and enriching of the similitude were accomplished by reflection and not by emotion, and the use which Hoses or any prophet could make of the figure of the marriage relation would be made through the imagination alone and merely for illustrative purposes (of. II., § 5 below). Accordingly one should exclude from consideration any argument for a literal interpretation of the story based on the plea that Hosea's own actual experience was needed to qualify him to set forth adequately the attitude of Yahweh toward his unfaithful people. Bereft of this support the defense of the literal acceptation of the narrative of chap. i. is not very strong. The anomalous character of the actions demanded of Hosea make it necessary for its advocates to hold that he did not know the adulterous character of his wife till years had passed and all his children had been born and endowed with their significant names. Accordingly to make it still a real experience in his life it has to be assumed that he did not regard his actions as having been done under the divine impulse and command until he learned of the gross and habitual adulteries of his wife. And further that he gave to each of the children a significant name without any perception that they were " children of harlotry "‑a fact which is of the very essence of the whole transaction (verse 2). Such $ view of Hosea's prophetic career would make him an absent‑minded visionary living entirely outside of that world of sin and folly which is so amply described in his own discourses. A literal interpretation, even when thus deliteralized, would eooordingly seem to be untenable (see further the overwhelming array of objections in Harper, Amos and Hosea, pp. 2011`210).
The defenders of the two leading views have in fact completely refuted one another, and it is one of the marvels of Biblical exegesis that a positive attitude is still stoutly maintained by eminent critics upon each side of the question. The only remaining assumption that seems g. A , compatible with Hosea's or any con‑
	Possible	temporary authorship is that the whole
Alternative.		proceeding was thought out by the
		prophet in the natural process of figur
ing or picturing to himself (not to his people) the
character of Israel's relations and conduct towards
Yahweh (of. §4). Its history would then perhaps

Hcs0906ns of Cordova
have been somewhat as follows: Without any reference to his own family life, the prophet, pondering on the problem of Israel's infidelity, adopted the most direct and natural way of objectivizmg the 'situation: he put himself in the place of Yahweh and an immoral woman, perhaps known as such to the community, in the place of the land of Israel (of. the application to the land in u. 4‑l6), and the children imagined as born of the union in place of the people of Israel viewed in various a&pects. The original conception of the marriage relation between Yahweh and Israel being thus objectivized by him, it became so vivid and concrete that it gave character to his whole prophetic ministry; and in right Hebrew prophetic fashion it was ascribed to the direct inspiration of Yahweh, while the successive mental images, thus visualized, were dramatised and recited as an actual personal experience.
Though fewer objections can properly be brought to this hypothesis of the origin of chap. i. than to the literal view, it still has this difficulty, among others, that the mass of detail may seem incompatible with an imaginary personal
6. Date situation. And those who can not
of Chaps. accept any solution involving Hoses 's
	L ‑iii.	own authorship of the narrative may
		have recourse to an assumption that
chaps. i.‑iii. are of later origin, as indeed much of
the remainder of the book (see II, 1 7 below) un
doubtedly is. The chief occasion of the composi
tion (if such an assumption be true) was possibly
the existence of a tradition with regard to the per
sonal history of the eccentric prophet (cf. ix. 7),
starting from stories which accompanied the cir
culation of his prophecies in Judah after the fall
of the northern kingdom and growing with in‑
creasing reflection upon the reaching ideas of his writings.
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
,..‑‑o...
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑ ‑
	But there is such a marked difference in
style and mode of treatment (see II, § 7) between
the two sections that they would in any terse pre
sumptively, be kept apart. The hypothesis of late
origin also accounts best for this difference in style
and logical method. Moreover, the use of the third
person in chap. i. and the first in chap. iii. is not
favorable to the view that Hoses himself was the
author of the section. 	`
	In the larger division of the book (chaps. iv.
xiv.) the student finds himself on more solid ground.
The main thread of the discourse is held steadily
to the end; the style is not smooth and flowing
like that of the earlier section (cf. II, § 6 above),
but nervous and somewhat abrupt. Yet, contrary
		to the general impression, the sen‑
	t'. Features fences are not unusually irregular or
of	obscure but simple and well‑balanced,
Chaps.	the supposed roughnesaea being due to
iv.‑aiv.	the corruption of the test which is
	doubtless to be accounted for in large
	part by its precarious fortunes in its early history
	after the fall of the northern kingdom. Another
	source of great difficulty in the interpretation is the
	fact that considerable additions have been made
	to the original utterances of Hoses, apparently by
	men belonging to different schools at different
	periods. These additions may be classified as fol
	lows: (1) repetitions or close imitations of more
	original passages; (2) explicative glosses; (3) am‑
plifying statements; (4) prophetic allusions to Judah; (5) promises of restoration from the impending exile and of a return of the divine favor. The last‑named class is the lengthiest and most valuable of all. References to Judah are found in chaps. i.‑iii. .also (II, 16), and if this section is of late origin they were of course added at a still later
profound and far‑ date and constituted the last important series of
After the fuller de‑
velopment of the figure of the marriage relation by Jeremiah (chap. iii.) anal Ezekiel (chap. xvi.) attention must have been all the more fixed upon the originator of the conception, the prophet of Samaria; and thus the tradition may have been handed down in one form and another that his appreciation of the marriage bond was due to his own personal experience. Finally some prophetic genius developed the story in literary form, giving it coherent significance throughout and adapting to it a detailed exposition of Hosea's dominating thought in chap. ii. This hypothesis suggests that nearly all of the section in question may have had a common author or literary origin. If the glosses and the additions relating to Judah and the exile
(i. 7, ii. 1‑3) are set aside, the whole three chapters may be read continuously without a break. Since from the later standpoint the restoration of Israel to favor came within the domain of prophecy relevant to the times and needs of the writer or writers, the two magnificent passages ii. 4‑15, lfi‑25 may be brought into close association. It may also be noted that these passages, the main prophetical utterances of the section, are not provided with the customary introductory formula giving the name of the, speaker‑a circumstance which might suggest that they belong to the main division, chaps.
872
supplementary insertions. The augmenting proo
ess went on in a constantly increasing ratio from
the beginning to the end of the main section of the
book. Thus the additions in chaps. iv.‑vi, that
may be fairly made out amount to 26 per cent of
the whole tent of these chapters; those in chaps.
vu.‑a. to 37 per cent of the whole; those in chaps.
xi.‑xiv. to 56 per cent, making an average for chaps.
iv.‑riv. of nearly 40 per cent of presumable addi
tions. It is not probable that the original text of
the prophet of Samaria will ever be separated from
the accretions with absolute accuracy throughout.
But ultimate approximate correctness is certainly
obtainable; and the result will be to enhance greatly
the simplicity, intelligibility, and value of the book
of Hoses. 	J. F. McCUxny.
Bzsicooawrsy: Commentaries worth consulting are: A. Simeon, Goths, 1851; A. Wiineche, Leipsic, 1888; Tgttermann, Heleingfore, 1879: W. Nowaok, Berlin, 1880, sad Gottingen, 1897; A. Scholz, WOrsburg, 1882; T. K. Cheyne. abridge, 1884: J. Sharps. London, 1884; J. T. de Vieear, Utrecht, 1886; J. J. P. Vsleton, Nijmwegen, 1894; W. R,. Harper, New York, 1903 (contains a complete bibliography, to which extensive references are made in the notes). Consult also the commentaries on the Minor Prophets by E. B. Pussy, London. 1877: F. Hitsig, ed. Steiner, Leipeic, 1881: C. von Orelli, N3rdlinBen, 1888, Eng. transl., New York, 1893; J, Wellhsueen, Berlin, 1892; and G. A. Smith, London. 1898 (especially good, aid with Harper, ut sup., constituting the best that can be had): R. Marti, Dodekaprophe<on,

373	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	go~ or Cordova
Tubingen, 1904. Consult also the appropriate section in the Introductions of Driver, London, 1897; W. H. Bennett, ib. 1899; J. E. McFadyen, New York, 1905; and F. E. C. Gigot, ib. 1906. Discussions of the various problems presented by the book are to be found in DB, ii. 419‑425; EB, ii. 2119‑26; JE, vi. 473‑475; and P. Vols, in ZWT, 1898, pp. 321‑335 (very valuable).
Teat‑critical matters are discussed in ThT, 1875, pp. 555 sqq., by Houtsma, and 1890, pp. 345 sqq., 480 sqq., by Oort; H. Billeb, Die uriehiipeten Sates der aiaestamentlichen Kritik vom Standpunke der Propheten Hones and Amps, Halle, 1893; J. Bachmann, Alttmtamsattiehe Untersuchunpen, pp. 1‑46, Berlin, 1894; P. Ruben, Critical Remarks upon some Passages of the O. T., London, 1896; Patterson, The Septuagint‑Text of Hoses, in Hebraiea, vol. vii. Various questions are taken up in: J. H. Kurtz, Die Eke dee Prophstan Hosea, Dorpat, 1859; S. oettli, Der Kultua bei Amos and Hoses, Greifewald, 1895; O. Seesemann, Israel and Juda bei Amps and Hoses, Leipsia, 1898; Smith, Prophets, Lest. iv.

HOSHEA: Nineteenth and last king of Israel. He was the son of Elah, was a usurper, and succeeded Pekah, whom he slew. His dates, according to the old chronology, were 731‑722 B.C., according to modern historians, 734‑722, the last three years of which were passed in captivity. The newer dating is due especially to an inscription of Tiglath‑pileser III. of Assyria (Schrader, KB, ii. 32‑33), recounting an expedition for the help of Ahaz pf Judah against Rezin of Damascus and Pekah of Israel. According to the pronouncement of the Book of Kings, Hoshea was a better king than most of his predecessors on the throne of Israel. He remained a vassal of the Assyrians under Tiglath‑pileser until induced by an Egyptian monarch, So (Assyr. Sib's), to renounce his allegiance. Though II Kings xvii. 3, 5 implies that Shalmaneser made two expeditions against Hoshea, it seems assured that he made only one to the ^ Westland," and that in order to punish Hoshea for his disloyalty to his suzerain. When Shalmaneser made this expedition, in 725 B.C., Hoehea seems to have thrown himself upon the mercy of his overlord, but what finally became of him is not determinable. His kingdom was overrun by the Assyrian army, but the city of Samaria held out for three years and was taken by Sargon after he had succeeded Shalmaneser upon the throne (see AssyRIA, VI., 3, §1 11‑12). W. LoTz.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The most important literature is given under ARAB, q.v.; consult also A. H. Sayce, Hipker Criticism and the Monuments, London, 1894; L. B. Paton, The Early Hist. of Syria and Palestine, New York, 1901; Schrader, KAY, i. 269‑271; DB, ii. 425‑427; EB, ii. 2126‑28; JE, vi. 478‑479; and the sourow in I7 Kings xv. 30, xvii. 1‑6, xviii. 9‑12.

HOSIUS OF CORDOVA. Earlier Life (1 1). At the Council of Niceza (§ 2). At the Council of Sardica (1 3). Unhappy Close of Life (¢ 4).
	Hosius, or Osius, of Cordova, though one of the
celebrated churchmen of the third century, desig
		nated by Athanasius with the title of
r. Earlier " the Great," found no formal biog
	Life. rapher, and left no writings except two
		letters, one to the Emperor Conatan
tius and one to Julius of Rome. All that is known
of him is derived from these letters, from casual
mention in contemporary documents and authors,
and from a few credible details of later tradition.
He must have been born about 257, where is unknown; since in 356 he had been bishop of Cordova " more than sixty years " (Athanasius, " Hist. of the Arians," xlii.), he must have been consecrated to that see about 295. That he was a confessor " when a persecution broke out under Maximian, the grandfather of Conatantius," is known from his own letter, but nothing as to the place or details. He was present at the Synod of Elvira (q.v.), but probably did not preside over it. He shared the rigorist tendency of the synod, and it may be argued from canon axxiii. that he was himself a celibate. His presence there has a bearing on the date of the synod; the theory which places it about 313 is weakened by the fact that from 313 at latest, if not 312, he is found in the neighborhood of Conatantine. What commended him to the emperor is unknown; but it is certain that for a number of years, perhaps up to about 326, he was near Conatantine as his chief adviser in matters ecclesiastical. The Donatists held him responsible, although he was not present at the anti‑Donatist Synod of Arles, for the repressive measures adopted against them by the emperor; the imperial ordinance as to the manumission of slaves in the churches (Apr. 1$, 321) was addressed to him; and it was he whom Conatantine sent to Alexandria. in 323 or 324 to settle the troubles there. A synod held there in his presence rebuked Colluthus, an ambitious presbyter who had assumed episcopal functions and a achismatical position, declared null and void the orders conferred by him, and forced him to renounce his claims to episcopal powers.
Hosius is known also from his relations with the Council of Nicasa. It was natural that the confidential adviser of the emperor should
s. At the have great influence upon its delibera‑
Council of tiona; and, although the expression of
	Ricaea.	Athanasius (art sup., xliv.) which at
		tributes to him the formulation of the
faith there adopted is too strong in its literal mean
ing, it is in a sense justified. None of the authorities
asserts that he presided formally over the council;
and the fact that his name appears with the Roman
legates first of all does not prove that he did. Still
less tenable is the Roman Catholic hypothesis that
he presided with the Roman legates as a represent
ative of the pope; if he had presided at all, it would
have been in virtue of imperial, not papal, delega
tion. After the Council of Nimes, Hosius disappears
from history for nearly twenty years. Presumably
he journeyed to the West with Constantine in the
spring of 326, and then, even before other influences
supplanted his, returned to Spain.
Nothing is definitely known of him until shortly before the Council of Sardica. The statement quoted by Hilary (MPL, x. 667 B) that he was
3. At the partially responsible for its calling is
Council of at least credible. In any case, with
	Sardica.	Athanasius, who met him in Gaul, he
		went to the place of meeting; and
there is no doubt that he presided over the sessions
of the majority (the Eastern minority excommu
nicated him). He seems to have been concerned in
drawing up the formula in the manner of a creed
which represented the faith of the majority, known

no ordova
HW
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
as the Creed 'of Sardica, although it is clear from Athanasibs that it was not formally accepted, but only proposed by " some " (" Book to the Antiochians," v.). Hosius and Protogenesof Sardica, who joined with him in the letter to Pope Julius that accompanied the formula, were among those who desired an exposition of the Nicene Creed; and it is probable that this formula was of his composition. Its main interest lies in the fact that it is the nearest approach to an " official " interpretation of the Nicene Creed; and from this point of view it deserves increased attention.
After the Council of Sardica Hosius disappears once more for ten years. The neat heard of him is that in the winter of 353‑354 Liberius 4. Unhappy of Rome sent him word of the steps
Close of he was taking in the direction of the
	Life.	convocation of a new, synod, and of the
		lamentable weakness with which his
legate, Vincentius of Capua, had yielded under
pressure at the Synod of Arles. A few years later,
however, the nestor of orthodoxy was in scarcely
better case than Vincent, in spite of the ingenious
constructions put upon the data by Roman Catholic
controversialists and of some difficulties which must
be admitted in the " History of the Arians." Hosius
had taken no part in the synods of Arles (353) and
Milan (spring of 355); but the bishops of the court
party were desirous, after Liberius had fallen a vio
tim to their wiles and been banished (summer or
autumn of 355), to draw Hosius by hook or by crook
into agreement with their course. Incited by them,
Conatantius summoned the aged bishop to his
presence, undoubtedly at Milan. But Hosius was
not to be induced to declare against Athanasius or
to hold communion with the " Arians "; and his
resistance so impressed the emperor that he allowed
him to return home undisturbed. The court bishops
again stirred up Constantino to write a threatening
letter to him; but Hosius stood firm, and to threats
and seductions alike made the brave and well
considered answer which Athanasius bas preserved,
containing an anathema against the Arians, warm
support of Athanasius, and earnest admonitions to
the emperor himself. Finally, finding a pretext in
the refusal of other Spaniards, presumably influenced
by Hosius, to sign against Athanasius, Conatantius
summoned him to Sirmium, and kept him there a
whole year, beginning (on the best computation)
not earlier than July, 357. It is known that Hosius
signed the " second Sirmian formula," the com
promise proposed by the court bishops which aimed
at avoiding " unscriptural " expressions as to the
ousia of Christ, and expressed itself in ante‑Nicene
and Biblical terms which now concealed a decided
Arian tendency. Hilary, in his treatise De synodis
(beginning of 359), which begins with this " blas
phemy at Sirmium," distinctly asserts that Hosius
was " carried away by the teaching of a new im
piety." It is not necessary to understand by
Hilary's strong expressions anything more than
Hosius' assent to the compromise formula; but
even this meant much. It was sent out far and
wide as approved by him; Phoebadius says in his
Lila contra Arianos (358) that his name was used
an a battering‑ram against the Gallic bishops; and,
according to Sozomen (IV., xii. 7), Eudosius had a letter at the Synod of Antioch in the spring of 358 in which, in the spirit of the Sirmian formula, Hosius declared against both hom=1sios and homoioueios, and which was thus taken as favoring the anomoios view. Whether this and other letters were genuine or not, the fact remains that the court bishops did not hesitate to make the aged man their standardbearer. It used to be thought that his yielding took place at the end of the " whole year " mentioned by Athanasius. But the Sirmian " synod " was held before Nov., 357, and Hosius, as has been seen, did not come to Sirmium earlier than July of that year,. He must have given way to the emperor's threats soon after his arrival‑according to Faustinus and Marcellinus, " lest he should suffer banishment "; and Athanasius expressly says that his detention at Sirmium was " in place of banishment." It was probably, therefore, to use him in the capacity of a' standard‑bearer that Constantius kept him there. The attempts to prove that he died Aug. 27, 357, or that he soon recalled his assent, are unsuccessful.
It is impossible to fix the date of his death; and
while the fact of his weak compliance seems only
too well proved, it is scarcely safe to attempt to
assign its motives, or to reconcile the courageous
firmness of the letter to Conetantius with the cour
tier‑like diplomacy that marks alike his entrance
upon, and his departure from the stage of history.
He seems to have had no importance as an author.
The Bententice published by Pitra (A>tateda sacra,
v. 117), under his name can not be shown to be
even probably his. 	(F~ Loops.)
Bcsraooavrar: His letters, prowled b9 a historical notice, are in MPL, viii, 1309‑32. Consult: P. B. Game, Xird"npruhirhte roan Spa»ien, ii. 1‑309. H. 2, pp. 484‑490• R0' geneburg, 1884‑79; A. W. W. Dale, Synod of XWra. London, 1882; O. Bceok, is ZXQ, xvii (1897), 1 71, 319382; 1511emont, MEnwiros, vii. 300‑321, 711‑718 of Venice ed.: CeiVier. Autaura aacrda, iii. 392‑398, 418‑426; Neander, Chriatia» Church, vol. ii, passim: Hefele, ConciiienDeachichEw vol. i, passim, EnB. travel. vole. i‑ii. passim: 13arnsck, Dogma, vol. iii. passim: DCB, iii. 182‑174 (de. tailed): xL, vi. 290‑296.
	gp3IU3 (ROSS), STAIRSLAU3: Bishop of Erm
land and cardinal; b. at Cracow May b, 1504; d. at
		Capranics (25 m. n.n.w. of Rome),
	Earlier Italy, Aug. b, 1679. He began his
	Life. humanistic studies at Cracow, and
		appears, even in boyhood, to have
turned away from the world in exaggerated fashion.
He owed his advancement to Bishop Tomicki of
Cracow, whose nephews he instructed as tutor.
Among his Epiatoke (published by the Cracow
Historical Academy, vol. i., 1879; vol. ii., 1888)
are several from this period‑to Dantiseus, bishop
elect of Cuhn, written at Venice, 1530 (voi. i., Elrist.
6); to the governor of Bologna, the celebrated
historical writer Francesco Guiceiaidini (i. 7;
written 1532); and to the papal legate Campeggi
(i. 8). Upon Hosius' return to Poland Tomicki
employed him as secretary, and after the bishop's
death (1b35) he obtained a potion in the royal
chancery. Though now, by the acquisition of a
canonry of Frauenburg, in possession of three bene
fices, he was not yet a priest; and not until 1543,
when still other benefices were added, did he deem
it time to receive ordination. He did not officiate

375	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Iiosiun of Cordovu
		Hospinian
in the pastorate assigned to him at Golombie, claim
	ing that his voice was too weak. Nevertheless, he
rose rapidly in the spiritual career. In 1549 he
became bishop of Culm by command of King Sigis
mund, who desired to send him, when vested with
this dignity, to King Ferdinand and the emperor.
Hosius returned to Poland with the design of sup
	pressing the Evangelicals there also; and the realiza
tion of this design served as his life‑work. In 1551
he was transferred to the bishopric of Ermland.
		His first achievement in this direction was at the
	Synod of Petrikau (June, 1551). He required the
				bishops, one and all, to subscribe to a
	Establishes Confessio fulei catholic, drawn up by
	the Coun‑ himself, which was published in an
	terreforma‑ expanded form at Cracow in 1553, and
		tion in	repeatedly afterward. This was to
		Poland.	offset the Augsburg Confession, and,
				in particular, to combat the Evangel
	ical tract of Secretary Fricius (Frycz Modrzewski).
De emendanda republica, dedicated to the king. By
this and other writings, by his example, and by
	stringent measures Hosius fanned the spirit of
strict ecclesiasticism; and he had the ground well
broken throughout the country when, in 1555,
	Bishop Lipomano, of Verona, appeared as papal
nuncio to restore the exclusive supremacy of the
Roman Confession in Poland. The Counterreforma
tion was first carried through in Ermland, and at
	Elbing and Danzig, both subject to Polish sover
	eignty, Protestantismwaspromptlyrepressed. Hand
	in hand with Lipomano, Hosius next proceeded to
	act in Poland proper. That a helper for the Evan
	gelicals arose in Petrus Paulus Vergerius (q.v.), who
	carried on his polemics against the Catholics from
	1556 to 1560, availed little. A second antagonist
	of Hosius, the Polish Johannes a Lasco (q.v.), was of
more consequence; but unfortunately his exertions
	for the Protestant cause were considerably impeded
	by the contrary action of Vergerius, who belonged
	to the " false brethren " mentioned by Johannes in
a letter to Calvin (OR, Epist. Calvini, xvi. 415).
		At the curia it was desired to incite the man
	who so effectively combated Protestantism in
				Poland to still greater activity; and
			Later	Paul IV. (q.v.) summoned him to
		Activity	Rome in 1558. The pope set before
			and	him (Epist. Hosii, ii., pp. 931, 954)
		Character. three tasks: ameliorations in church
				affairs, extirpation of heresy, and
	preparation for the reassembling of the suspended
	Council of Trent. Meanwhile, at Vienna in 1560,
	be was to confirm in the Roman faith the successor
	to the Austrian throne, Maximilian, who inclined
	to Protestantism; and arrange for the marriage of
	a second son of the emperor with Elizabeth of
	England. The latter design miscarried, but that
	Hosius wrought results in Vienna satisfactory to
	the curia appears from his elevation at this juncture
	to the rank of cardinal, and his nomination as one
	of the three papal presidents of the Council of Trent,
	reopened in 1562. Sarpi has no high estimation of
	his fitness for this post; and it is true that his
	peculiar ability lay in another sphere; namely, that
	of, the straightforward, inexorable suppression of
	heretics. The rest of his life he spent partly at home
and partly in Rome. From 1562 he carried on the Counterreformation most uncompromisingly in Ermland, at Braunaberg, at Elbing, and in all Poland. The measures he devised as bishop of Ermland and as member of the Polish Diet were cleverly reenforced by his literary activity; indeed, Hosius occupies foremost rank among Roman Catholic controversialists. He does not deserve the ascription of " fundamental dogmatist" or that of a " master in theology," awarded him in blind veneration by his latest biographer, Canon Eichhom of Frauenburg (vol. ii., pp. 563, 565). In his polemics he was quite unable to think good of an opponent; the aspirations of the heretics were prompted by the devil. This point of view appears alike in his Confessio, in De expresso Dei Verbo, and in the Confutatio Prolegomenon Brentii, his chief writings, which are accessible in the Cologne edition of his Opera (1584), with a large number of letters edited by S. Rescius. It is significant to note what Hosius writes in a letter to Cardinal Lothringen concerning the Massacre of St. Bartholomew, the tidings of which afforded him " incredible satisfaction (recreationem), particularly the death of Coliguy," " than whom I doubt if the world has ever produced a more pestilential man."
K. BEN11Aim.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Opera Boris appeared in Paris, 1582, Lyons, 1584, Antwerp, 1588 and 1571, Venice, 157$; the best edition is by 8. Rescius, 2 vols., Cologne, 1584, The chief Vita is by 6. Rescius, Rome, 1587, Germ. tranel. by J. B. Fickler, Ingolstadt, 1591. A second source is T. Treter, Theatrmm airtutum Stanialai Hosii, Rome, 1588. New material was consulted in A. Eichhorn, Der er»r hdndische Biachof and %ardinal Stanislaus Hosius, 2 vols., Mainz, 1854‑55. Illustrative and biographical detail will be found in much of the literature under POLAND.

HOSPINIAft, RUDOLF: Reformed preacher and theologian; b. at Altorf, in the canton of Zurich, Nov. 7, 1547; d. at Zurich Mar. 11, 1626. From 1565 he studied at the universities of Marburg and Heidelberg. In 1568 he taught at Zurich and preached in the vicinity. In 1576 he became head of the Schola Carolina, and held this office for nineteen years, without interrupting his pastoral functions. In 1588 he was appointed archdeacon, and in 1594 pastor of the cathedral of Our Lady. He undertook extensive studies in church history, desiring to show the papists the irrelevancy of their appeal to the supposed harmony of their doctrines and institutions with the primitive Church, especially in regard to baptism, the Lord's Supper, the church festivals, fasting, monastical orders, the rule of the pope, and funerals. There appeared in succession De oriyine et progressu rituum et ceremoni,arum ecclesiasticarum (Zurich, 1585); De templis, hoc est de origine, progressu et abuse templorum, ac omnio rerum omnium ad templa pertinentium (1587; revised ed., 1603); De monachis, see de arigine et Progressu nwnachatus ac ordinum monasticorum, equitu?w militarium tam sacrorum quam steeularium omnium (1588; 1609); De festis Judworum et Ethnicorum, hoc est de origins, progressu, ceremonies et riti(nts festorum dierum Christianorum (2 vols., 1592‑93; enlarged and revised, 1611 and 1612); Histaria sacramentaria (2 vols., 1598‑1603), the first volume directed against papistical errors, the

Hoapitalera
8ottinBer
second treating the sacramental disputes among Protestants under the title De origim et progressu controversies sacramentariee, de uena Domini inter Lutheranoa et orthodoxos, quos Zwinglianoa et Calvin nistas voeant, exortce ab anno 1617 usque ad annum 1618. His last work was Historia Jesuitica (1619; continued by Ludwig Lucius, 1632; partial Eng. tranal., The Jesuits Manner of Consecrating Persona and Weapons Employ'd for the Murdering Kings, and Princes, by them Accounted Heretics, London, 1678; Dublin, 1681). Of his polemical works against the Lutherans may be mentioned his Concordia discors, seu de oragine et progressu formula; concordice Bergensis (1607), which was directed against the Formula of Concord. Leonard Hutter, of Wittenberg, answered in his Concordia concors (1614). A collected edition of Hospinian's works appeared at Geneva, 1681 (7 vols.), with life by J. H. Heidegger. (E. F. KARL MOLLER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The life by J. H. Heidegger is used by P. Bayle. Dictionary Historical and Critical, iii. 502‑505, London, 1736; of. Nouvelle hiooraphit g, xxv. 211 sqq., Paris, 1888.
HOSPITALERS (HOSPITAL BROTHERS AND SISTERS): A general term for monks, nuns, canons, laymen, or knights spiritual, usually bound by the Augustinian rule, who devote themselves to the care of the sick in hospitals. .If closely connected with monastic orders or canonries, they are subject to the bishop, although some are controlled immediately by the Curia. Generally speaking, they do not take solemn vows, but bind themselves to poverty and hospitality, as well as to the care of the sick. The hospitalers probably arose in the early Middle Ages, though there is little direct evidence of the existence of such communities independent of monasteries of canonries before the crusades, the period which first evoked the chief orders and fraternities of this class, and gave independence to municipal hospitals which had previously been controlled by monasteries. Certain of these orders and congregations are treated in separate articles (see AGONIZANTS; ALExIANS; ANTHONY, SAINT, ORDERS OF; BETHLEHEMITES; CHARITY, BROTHERS OF; CROSS, ORDERS OF THE; HIPPOLYTUS, SAINT, BROTHERS OR HOSPITA1r ERB OF; HUMILIATE JOHN, SAINT, ORDER OF HOSPITALERS OF; SACK BRETHREN; TEUTONIC ORDER; VINCENT DE PAUL, SAINT; WOMEN, CONGREGATIONS OF). The following are less prominent orders of men: (1) The Hospitalers of Burgos, with Cistercian rule, founded in 1212 to protect pilgrims to St. James of Compostella, in 1474 united with the Order of Calatrava; (2) Bridge Brethren (Fratres pontiftces), said to have been established by St. Benazet in 1177 for building and maintaining bridges for pilgrims, but probably entirely legendary, like their founder; (3) Brethren of St. James of Hautpas (Altipassus), near Lucca, founded for a similar purpose, and with a mother house near Lucas as early as 1127 and a Hospital of St. James of Hautpas founded at Paris in 1322, as well as other houses, suppressed by Pius II. in 1459; (4) Penitential Brethren of Brussels; (5) Hospitalers of Albrac (Aubrac, in southern Auvergne); (6) Hospitalers of the Immaculate Conoeption; and (7) Triestines, or Brethren
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
378
of Love, founded at Ghent by Canon Trieat in
1810.
	The following are minor orders of hospital sisters,
who frequently added to their duties as hoapitalera
the education of girls, the care of orphans, and the
reformation of prostitutes: (1) Nuns of the Sack
(Saccarice, Sachdtes), corresponding closely to the
Sack Brethren, with a house at Paris beside Saint
AndrE; des Arcs, which is still commemorated by the
Rue Sachettea; (2) Hospital Sisters of St. Gervais,
who controlled the hospital of St. Gervaia, founded
at Paris in 1171, in which homeless men were given
shelter and care for three days; (3) Hospital Sisters
of St. Catherine (Cat.'IErinettes), Augustinian in rule
like the foregoing, whose Hospital of St. Catherine,
founded at Paris in 1188, was for women what the
Hospital of St. Gervais was for men, and who also
interred those who died in prison and other un
claimed corpses; (4) the Haudryettea, or Daughters
of the Assumption, established about 1250 by the
wife of Ptienne Haudry, the private secretary of
St. Louis, who later spread throughout France, and
survived until the Revolution; (5) Hospital Sisters
of the Hfitel‑Dieu, or " Daughters of God " (Fillea
de Dieu), who supervised the great hospital of Paris;
(6) Hospital Sisters of the Holy Spirit, Auguatinian
canoneasea who controlled the hospital built at
Poligny in 1212. A name similar to the last was
borne by other ca,noneasea who devoted themselves
to hospital work, and also by many non‑Augustinian
sisterhoods in France (at Abbeville, Beauvais,
Pontoise, Cambrai, and elsewhere), Germany, and
other countries. 	(0. ZtSCxLERt.)
BIaLI()aaApHy: On the Hospital Brothers: F. Hunter, in
TQ, xxviii (1842), 228 eqq.; G. Rstsinger, Guchichle den
kirchlichen Armenpfte, pp. 254 sqq., Freiburg, 1884;
G. Uhlhorn, Die chrieUiche Liebeath8tipkeit im Mitttlalter.
PP. 85 sqq., 199 sqq., 278‑279, 468 eqq.. Stuttgart, 1884:
Heimbueher, Orders and Konpregationen, ii. passim and
Index, " Hospitaliter "; Helyot, Ordru monaatiquse
vol. iii. passim. On the Hospital Sisters: M. du Camp,
Die Wohltletltigkeitaaneta7ten den chriatliclbn Barmherxip
keit au Paris, pp. 287 sqq., Mains, 1887; Little, in English
Historical Review, Jan., 1894, pp. 121‑122; Helyot, ut
sup., vol. iv. passim; Heimbucher, ut sup., Index, " Hoe‑
pitaliterinnen."
HOSPITALITY, HEBREW. See STRANGER.
HOSPITALS. See PHILANTHROPY.
HOSS, ELIJAH EMBREE: Methodist Episcopal bishop; b. at Jonesboro, Tenn., Apr. 14, 1849. He was educated at Ohio Wesleyan University and Emory and Henry College, Emory, Va. (B.A.,1869). He entered the ministry in 1869, and after holding pastorates at Jonesboro, Tenn., Knoxville, Tenn., San Francisco, Cal., and Asheville, N. C., was president of Martha Washington College, Abingdon, Va., from 1876 to 1881. He was then vice‑president of Emory and Henry College until 1886, and professor of church history in Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn., from 1886 to 1890. In 1890‑1902 he was editor of The Christian Advocate, and in 1902 was elected bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. He was a member of the ecumenical conferences of 1891 and 1901.
HOSSBACH, PETER WILHELM: German theologian; b, at Neustadt‑on‑the‑Dosse (45 m. n.w. of Berlin) Feb. 20, 1784; d. at Berlin Apr. 7, 1846.

377
He was educated at the universities of Halle and
Frankfort‑on‑theo‑Oder, and from 1806 to 1815 he
officiated as private tutor, as conrector at the gym
nasium at Prenzlau, and as pastor at Pliinitz‑on
the‑Dosse. In 1815 he was appointed minister at
a military academy in Berlin; and in 1821 became
third preacher at the Jerusalem Church of that city.
He was the author of Johann Valentin Andred and
sein Zeitalter (Berlin, 1819) and Philipp Jakob
Spener and seine Zeit (2 vole., 1828), two works
which established his reputation as a church his
torian of rank. He also published numerous collec
tions of sermons which enjoyed wide popularity,
and the first of these was dedicated to Schleier
macher, with whom he was on terms of intimate
friendship. 	(W. HorlurrBEBGt.)

HOST: The consecrated bread or wafer used in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper: The Latin hostia (properly " feast of sacrifice, sacrificial offering ") is used even as early as Cyprian (De unitate ecclesite, avii.) to denote the bread employed by the priest in celebrating the Eucharist. According to the definite formulation of the Roman doctrine of the sacrifice in the Mass (q.v.), this designation was properly applicable only to the bread transubstantiated by the priest into the body of Christ, whereas the name oblaEa (originating in the custom of having the natural products supplied by members of the congregation), which was likewise applied to the sacramental bread, belonged to the unconsecrated elements. That in the primitive Church the bread in use for the Lord's Supper, and furnished by the congregation, was the leavened bread which served for food is not to be doubted. But while the Eastern Church retained the leavened bread, unleavened bread became customary in the Western Church from the ninth century, and gained exclusive prevalence. The bread originally had a round, flat shape, though sometimes it was in the form of a large round disk, perforated in the center. From the eleventh century the present small form of the host appears; and this was the form best adapted to the proper sacrifice of the mass, wherein the priest alone communicated.
The sacramental wafers were quite early marked with the sign of the cross. At a later period there occur particular symbols, figures, the letters alpha and omega, and images of Christ. In 1834 the Congregation of Rites appointed the emblem of the crucifix. In early times the bread was zealously prepared by devout men and women; but after the adoption of the small host (of pure wheat flour, without any admixture) it devolved upon the monks, and called for the most painstaking care in the proem.
The Lutheran Church accepted, without hesitation, the use of the host for the eucharistic festival. Luther retained the wafers for the very reason that he was offended by the rude. scorn of certain fanatical spirits (e.g., Miinzer; cf. Werke, Erlangen ed., sz~i. 329). Johann Gerhard (Loci, sxi., chap. vii.) vindicated their use, though not rejecting the use of other bread. On the other hand, the Reformed Church vehemently combated the employment of wafers, although Calvin and Butzer had undertaken
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Hospitalsrs $ottinger
no alterations in this respect. Subepquently, however, the use of wafers was occasionally known in Reformed congregations. GEORG RI=~CHEL.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bingbam, Origin", XV. ii., ¢§ 5‑6 (where the history is traced and the literature given); E. Mart6ne, Ds antiquia ecclesim ritibua, i., chap. iii.. art. 7, iv., book ii., chap. iv., if 5‑6, 4 vole.. Bassanio, 1788; J. A. Schmid, De oblatis sucharistiia, Hehnetadt, 1733; J. C. W. Augusti, Denkwardipksitsn, viii. 274 sqq., Leipsic, 1826; F. X. Kraus, Real‑Encyklopddie der thriatlichen Alterthanur, 2 vole., Freiburg, 1886; %L, vi. 307‑310.

HOTTINGER, het'ting‑er, JOHANN HEINRICH: Semitic scholar, professor in Zurich; b. at Zurich Mar. 10, 1620; d. there June 5, 1667. Provided with a public stipend, he studied Semitic languages and theology in Groningen under Gomaras, Heinrich Alting, and Pasor, and in Leyden under Jacob Alting and Golius. He became private tutor in the house of Golius, but in 1642 returned to Zurich, where he was appointed professor of church history and later also of Semitic languages. In 1655 he received a call to Heidelberg to restore churches and schools after the heavy afflictions of the Thirty Years' War, and to reestablish the theological faculty. His main activity was directed toward the revival of Hebrew and cognate languagges. In 1656 he was elected rector of the university. In 1661 he returned to Zurich. He accepted a call to Leyden, but, with three of his children, was drowned in the river Limmat before he had arranged his affairs to leave Zurich. He published Exercitationes Am`iMoriniants (Zurich, 1644), a defense of the Hebrew test of Scripture against the Oratorian Morinus, who bad tried to disparage the Hebrew test in the interest. of the Roman Catholics; Erotematum linguta sandta (1647), a small Hebrew grammar for the use of schools; Thesaurus philologicus seu clavis scripturct (1649), a sort of introduction to the Old Testament; Historia ecclesiastica Non Testaments (9 vols., 1651‑67); Historia orzentalis (1651); Methodua legendi hidorias Helveticas (1654); Smegma orientale et promptuarium sine bibliotheca orientalis (1657 and 1658); Grammatica quatuor linguarum Hebraicw, Chaklaicw, Syraacm, et Arabicw harmonica (1658); Etymologicum orientale siroe lexicon harmonieum heptogloUon (Frankfort, 1661); Archteologia ordentalis (Heidelberg, 1662); Bibliothecarius site triotatua de officio bibliothecarii (Zurich, 1664).
(EMm EGLI.)
BIBIJOGBAPHP: The chief source of knowledge is J. H. Heidegger, Historic de vita et obitu Johann Heinrich Hottinper, Zurich. 1667. Consult: H. Steiner, Der Z9rdter Professor J. H. Hottinper in Heidelberg IB6"1, ib. 1886.

HOTTINGGER, JOHANN JAKOB: 1. Professor in Zurich, son of Johann Heinrich Hottinger (q.v.); b. at Zurich Dec. 1, 1652; d. there Dec. 18, 1735. He was a pupil of the three fathers of the Helvetic Consensus, Heidegger in Zurich, Gernler in Basel, and Turretin in Geneva. In 1680 he became pastor at Stallikon, in the canton of Zurich, 1686 assistant preacher of the. cathedral in Zurich, and in 1698 professor of theology. Some of his historical works are still of value, such as his books on the Pietistic movement in Zurich from 1689 to 1717 and on the history of the Formula Consensus (Latin and German, 1723). His principal work is Helvetische %irchengeschichte (4 vols., Zurich, 1698‑1729).

Houbigant
Hovey
2. Grandson of the preceding, professor of history in Zurich; b. at Zurich May 18, 1783; d. there May 17, 1860. He continued Johann von Miiller's Geschichte den Eidgenossen wahrend den Zeiten den Kirchentrennung (2 vols., Zurich, 1825‑29), and wrote a biography of Zwingli (1842).
(E MIL EGLI.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. J. Lavater, Gratio SnULupuratt8 . . . vita
J. J. Hottinweri, Zurich, 1736; ADS, Ivii. 193‑195.
HOUBIGANT, hii"bi"gall', CHARLES FRANgOIS: French Biblical Scholar; b. in Paris 1686; d. there Oct. 31, 1783. He entered the Congregation of the Oratory in 1704, and subsequently taught in the colleges of the order at Marseilles and Soissons. In 1722 he was called to Paris to conduct the conferences of St. Magloire. As a result of overwork in this position he became ill and almost totally deaf. He then devoted himself with remarkable energy to the study of Semitic languages. till a fall robbed him of his intellectual faculties toward the end of his long career. His principal works are: Racines Hebraiques (Paris, 1732); Prolegomena in Scripturam sacram (1746); and Biblia Hebraica cum criticis et versions Latina (4 vols., 1753), of which the Latin version also appeared separately under the title Veteris Testamenti versio nova (5 vols., 1753). This work, which is printed without vowel‑points, is based upon the text published in 1705 by Eberhard van den Hooght. The entire work was published at the expense of the Oratory.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Cadry, in Magwin encyclop6dique, vol. iii., May, 1806; G. W. Meyer, Geach"te den Schrifterktdrunp, iv. 154, 264‑265, 5 vole., Gbttingen, 1802‑08; KL, vi. 314‑315; Lichtenberger, ESR, vi. 386‑388.
HOUGHTON, LOUISE SEYMOUR: Protestant Episcopalian; b. at Piermont, N. Y., Nov. 22, 1838. She was educated privately and at Utica Female Seminary, Utica, N. Y., and in 1872‑75 was in Europe, where she became interested in the MeAll Mission (q.v.). Besides being connected with the English department of Vassar College in 1892‑95, she was literary editor (1888,89), associate editor (1889‑98), and editor‑in‑chief (1899‑1902) of the New York Evangelist, and from 1902 to 1904 associate editor of the Christian Work and Evangelist. She was a charter member and first vice‑president of the Jacob A. Riis Neighborhood Settlement from 1889 to 1904, and has been corresponding secretary of the New York auxiliary of the McAll Mission since 1888 and a director of the American MeAll Association since 1896. In theology she belongs to the Broad Church. Among her numerous publications special mention may be made of the following: TheSabbath Month (Philadelphia,1879); Life of David Livingstone (1881); The Bible in Picture and Story (New York, 1889); The Life of Christ in Picture and Story (1890); From Olivet to Patmos in. Picture aced Story (1891); Cruise of the " Mystery " in McAll Mission Work (1891); The Log of the " Lady Gray " (1896); Telling Bible Stories (1905); Hebrew Life arid Thought (Chicago, 1906); skid The Russian Grandmother's Wonder Tales (New York, 1906). She has also translated, among other works, Paul Sabatier's " St. Francis of Assisi " (New York, 1895); E. Stapfer's " Jesus Christ " (3 vole., 18961898); and Augusts Sabatier's "Religions of Authority and Religions of the Spirit " (1903).
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
878
HOURS, CANONICAL. See BREVIARY; CANONICAL HOURS; and VESPERS.
HOUSE, THE HEBREW, AND ITS APPOINTMENTS: The limestone hills of Palestine abound in natural caves, which served the primForm, itive inhabitants as dwelling‑places.
Material, By enlarging these caves and enclosing
etc. them in front by a atone wall, a form of house was gradually evolved, standing partly free and partly hollowed out in the rock. Examples have been found in ancient Jerusalem, on the slopes of the eastern hill. The Canaanitea had regularly constructed houses, but caves long continued in use in certain portions of the land, as at Bait Jibrin and Derat (Edrei). Jerome affirms that the Idumeana dwelt in caves, because of the heat. In the Old Testament caves are mentioned as places of refuge in time of war and the like (Judges vi. 2, xv. 8 aqq.; I Sam. aiii. 6, siv. 11). They were used also for cattle and as tombs. House architecture was influenced by the climate and the nature of the country. The former made necessary protection from the sun and rain, and also cool, cellar‑like rooms; at the same time it permitted light and airy structures.. Since the land did not afford abundance of timbfr, buildings were necessarily either of atone or brick; the former was used in the mountainous part of the country, where the easily worked limestone provided good building material, and the latter in the plains, where clay bricks were dried in the sun. In the excavations (at Taenach, for instance) it has been found that the simplest form of construction was with small atones set in clay, making so compact a mesa that no single block can be detached from the ruins. Regularly formed clay bricks, measuring nineteen and a half by thirteen inches, or thirteen by thirteen, constituted an advance upon this primitive material in a second form of building. A third style of house I was of small unhew stones carefully fitted together. These houses were small, at most thirteen feet in width. In larger buildings it was customary to construct the lower courses of the wall with mediumsized unhewn atones and to finish with courses of brick, hewn atones being used only for temples and palaces (I Kings vii. 9 aqq.; Iea. ix. 10). Plastering with lime was known at an early period (Ezek, aiii. 10, etc.), though clay was the more usual material (Lev. xiv. 41). Foundation sacrifice (performed by immuring human beings in the foundations during construction) is proven by excavations to have been employed in Palestine and by the Israelites. I Kings avi. 34 refers to this custom. Later the sacrifice was symbolical only, lamps and dishes being substituted for human beings. The so‑called leprosy of houses (Lev. siv. 33‑57) has not been satisfactorily explained. Nitrous efflorescence has been thought of, and also fungus growths, such as appear on weather‑beaten stones and walls.
The roofs of smaller buildings were made by laying poles across the walls and covering them, with branches and brush, over which a thick layer of earth was trodden down and the whole then covered with another layer of clay and straw. In the case of atone buildings arched roofs were in use

379	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8onbisant
		8ovey
at an early period; at first the false arch, and
	later the true one. Such heavy structures required
			strong foundations, and these rested
	Roofing on the rock or were at least carried
		and	to a considerable depth. , On the out
Interior. side the arched roof was built out
			so as to form a level roof‑terrace.
	A stairway led directly from the court to the
	roof, which, was a favorite place of resort
	(Judges xvi. 27; Josh. ii. 6; II Sam. xi. 2;
	Ise. xxii. 1), where the dwellers often slept in
	the summer (I Sam. ix. 25 Septuagint), and a booth
	often afforded protection against the sun's rays
	(II Sam. xvi. 22; Neh. viii. 16). For this reason
	the law required that the roof should be surrounded
	with a battlement (Deut. xxii. 8); nevertheless, it
was easy to leap from one roof to another and so
	pass along entire streets (Mark xui. 15). The or
	dinary house consisted only of a single room; the
more pretentious had also an upper room (II Sam.
	xviii. 33; I Kings xvii. 19; II Kings iv. 10); the
	houses of the rich contained several rooms‑a
	reception‑room at the entrance, a special sleeping
room, the women's apartment in the interior, and
	others (II Sam. iv. 7; I Kings i. 15; Jer. xxxvi. 22;
	Amos iii. 15). The low wooden door (Prow. xvii. 19;
	in the Hauran the door was often a stone slab)
	turned on a mortice fitting into a socket in the
	threshold, which was usually of stone (I Kings
	vii. 50; Prov. xxvi. 14). It was fastened with
	a bolt which could be thrown back by a key,
	either from the inside or.outside. At the door
	posts was the place of the household‑gods, and
	the magic signs for protection against evil spirits
	were also affixed to them (Isa. lvii. 8). In the
	Yahweh‑worship a sentence from the torah was
	used (Deut. vi. 9); to the posts was also applied
	the blood of the paschal lamb (Ex. xii. 7). The
	floor was a simple coating of clay. The win
	dows, which were not numerous, were provided
	with wooden lattices, as at the present day
	(Judges v. 28; I Kings vi. 4; II Kings i. 2).
		The increasing luxury of the dwellings was shown
	not only in their greater size (Jer. xxii. 14), but,
			above all, in the material employed for
Adornment their construction‑hewn stones (Amos
		and	V. 11) for the walls, painted decora
Furniture. tions on the latter (Jer. xxii. 14), olive
			or cedar wood for the doors and for
	wainscoting (I Kings vi. 31, cf. x. 27; Jer. xxii. 14;
	Hag. i. 4), ornamented with ivory and adorned with
	carvings (I Kings vi. 18, xxii. 39; Amos iii. 15).
	wooden planks for flooring, and the like (I Kings
	vi. 15). The Greco‑Roman style of architecture
	used in the Hellenic period was confined to the
	larger buildings. The furnishing of the house con
	sisted, according to II Kings iv. 10, principally of
	four articles: couch, table, chair, and lamp. As an
	open‑sir life was favored by climatic conditions, the
	Israelite required but few, conveniences in his house,
	which was, to him, primarily a resting‑place for the
	night; in the day‑time he was usually outside. A
	bed for sleeping was as unknown to him as to the
	present fellahin; he wrapped himself in his mantle
	(Ex. xxii. 26; Deut. xxiv. 13) and lay upon the
	floor or upon a pallet. The couch of the well‑to‑do
served as a sofa upon which they sat at table, with
crossed legs (I Sam. xx. 25; Ezek. xxiii. 41), and
as a bed for the sick (Gen. xlvii. 31; I Sam. xix. 13
sqq.); in later times it was also used as a bed at
night (Job vii. 13; Pa. vi. 6). It consisted of a
simple wooden framework with a cover; among
the rich it was inlaid with ivory and otherwise or
namented (Cant. iii. 10; Amos vi. 4) and bedecked
with rich coverings (Prov. vii. 16). The wooden
table was, quite low, and the ordinary family sat
about it at meal‑time, crouching on the floor; people
of higher station used chairs or sofas around a higher
table (Judges i. 7; I Sam. xx. 5), and this gradually
became the common usage. The chair, in its sim
plest form, had neither back nor arms; the more
pretentious armchairs of the higher classes may
have been similar to those of the Assyrians, of which
representations exist. The lamps preserved the
same form to the Greek period‑a flat, open saucer
with the edge bent upward to form a mouth for the
wick. Many such lamps have been found in the
excavations, among them some interesting speci
mens with seven mouths; they were plated on an
earthenware base. In the Greek period the closed
lamp came into use. To these four articles may be
added the coal‑pan, by means of which the rooms,
at least those of the better classes, were heated (Jer.
xxxvi. 22). Some means of heating is very necessary
in the mountainous part of the country during the
winter. 	I. BENZINGEH.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bensinger, Arch4olopie ; Nowack~ Archdologie; A. C. E. Edersheim, Sketches of Jewish Social
Life, pp. 93‑96, London, 1878; H. B. Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands, pp. 89‑98, London, 1894; E. Day, Social Life of the Hebrews, New York, 1901; DB, ii. 430‑436 (good); EB, ii. 2129‑33; JE, oi..485‑486. Illustrative matter from Egypt will be found in A. Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, pp. 167‑199, London, 1894. Much material of value is contained in the ZDPV and also in the PEF Quarterly Statemmta, especially those numbers which deal with excavations.
HOUSE COMMUNION, PRIVATE COMMUNION. See LoRD's SurPSm, V., ¢ 2.

HOVEY, hvv'g, ALVAH: Baptist; b. at Greene, N. Y., Mar. 5, 1820; d. at Newton Centre, Mass., Sept. 6, 1903. He was educated at Dartmouth College (B.A., 1844), and after being principal of New London Academy, N. H. (1844‑45), entered Newton Theological Institution, from which he was graduated in 1848. He then preached for a year at New Gloucester, Me., and in 1849 returned to Newton Theological Institution, where he was librarian and instructor in Hebrew (1849‑55), and professor of church history (1853‑55). In 1855 he was appointed professor of theology and Christian ethics, a position which he retained until 1900, when he retired from active life. From 1868 to 1900 he was also president of Newton Theological Institution. Besides translating F. M. Perthes' Life of St. Chryso8tom (in collaboration with D. B. Ford; Boston, 1854) 'and editing The Complete Commentary on the New Testament (7 vols., Philadelphia, 1881‑90); to which he himself contributed the volumes on John (1885) and Galatians (1890), he wrote The Life of Rev. Isaac Back= (Boston, 1858); The State of the Impenitent Dead (1859); The Miracles of Christ as Attested by the Evangelista (1864); The

How
Howie
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Scriptural Law of Divorce (Philadelphia, 1866); God with Us; or, The Person and Work of Christ (Boston, 1872); Normal Class Manual (in collaboration with J. M. Gregory; Philadelphia, 1873); Religion and the State (Boston, 1874); The Doctrine of the Higher Christian Life Compared with the Teachings of the Holy Scriptures (1876); Manual of Systematic Theology and Christian Ethics (1877); Biblical Eschatology (Philadelphia, 1888); Studies in Ethics and Religion (Boston, 1892); Christian Teaching and Life (Philadelphia, 1895); and Barnas Sears, a Christian Educator (Boston, 1903).

HOW, WILLIAM WALSHAM: Church of England, bishop of Wakefield; b. at Shrewsbury (38 m. s. of Chester), Shropshire, Dec. 13, 1823; d. in the west of Ireland Aug. 10, 1897. He was educated at Wadham College, Oxford (B.A., 1845), and was ordered deacon in 1846 and ordained priest in the following year. He was successively curate of St. George's, Kidderminster (1846‑48), and of Holy Cross, Shrewsbury (1848‑49), and rector of Whittington (1851‑79). He was likewise diocesan inspector of schools in 1852‑70, rural dean of Oswestry in 1853‑79, prebendary of Llanfynydd and chancellor of St. Asaph's Cathedral in 1859,88, select preacher at Oxford in 1868‑69, proctor of the diocese of St. Asaph in 1869‑79, and examining chaplain to the bishop of Lichfield in 1878‑79. After having declined no less than five bishoprics, a canonry, and three important livings, he accepted the suffragan see of Bedford, with episcopal supervision of East London, and was consecrated in 1879, drawing his income from the rectorate of St. Andrew Undershaft and St. Mary Axe, and from the prebend of Brondesbury in St. Paul's Cathedral, all of which he held from 1879 to 1888. In the latter year he was translated to the newly created see of Wakefield. While in East London he took a keen interest in the spiritual upbuilding of his diocese and founded the East London Church Fund, for which he raised large sums. Among his numerous writings special mention may be made of his Daily Family Prayers for Churchmen (London, 1852); Plain Words (4 series, 1859,8(1); Psalm li.: A Course of Seven Lenten Lectures (1861); Twenty‑four Practical Sermons (1861); Commentary on the Four Gospels (4 vols., 1863‑68); Pastor in Parochia (1868); Manual for the Holy Communion (1868); Private Ldfe and Ministrations of a Parish Priest (1873); The Revision of the Rubrics (1878); Holy Communion Companion (1882); Lectures on Pastoral Work (1883); Notes on the Church Service (1884); Words of Good Cheer (1885); Knowledge of God, and Other ,Sermons (1892); and The Closed Door: Instructions and Meditations given at Retreats and Quiet Days (1898). Bishop How was also an excellent writer of hymns, and besides revising Mrs. C. Brock's Children's Hymn Book (London, 1881), assisted T. B. Morrell in preparing Psalms and Hymns (London, 1854), and was one of the compilers of Church Hymns (1871). His own hymns are collected in his Poems aced Hymns (London, 1886). Among them some of the best‑known are " 0 Jesu, Thou art standing;" "For all the Saints who .from their labours rest;" "We give Thee but Thine own;"
"Lord, Thy children guide and keep;" "0 Holy Lord, content to live;" "0 Word of God Incarnate;" "Who is this so weak‑ and helpless?" and "Before Thine awful presence, Lord."
BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. D. How, Bishop Waleham How: A Memoir (London, 1898); B. W. Duffield, English Hymns, p. 442, New York, 1888; Julian, Hymnology, p. 540; DNB, supplement, iii. 1‑2.
HOWARD, EDWARD HENRY: Cardinal: b. at Nottingham, England, Feb.13,1829; d. at Brighton, England, Sept. 16;1892. He was educated at Oscott and Edinburgh, and after serving as an officer in the Second Life Guards, entered the Church and was ordained to the priesthood in 1854. In the following year he attached himself to the service of the pope, and his entire ecclesiastical career, except for a year in India, where he was sent to end the Goa schism, was spent in Italy. He was consecrated titular bishop of Neocaesarea in 187&and appointed bishop coadjutor of Frascati, although he retained the latter dignity only a few weeks. In 1877 he was created cardinal priest of San Giovanni a San Paolo on the Ccelian Hill, while in the following year he was appointed protector of the English College in Rome. Three years later (1881) he was made archpriest of the Basilica of St. Peter, and thus became prefect of the Congregation of the Fabric. He was elevated to the rank of cardinal bishop in 1884, and translated once more to his see of Frascati, but three years later (1887) was stricken with severe illness and was taken to England early in the following year, where he remained until his death.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: DNB, supplement, iii. 2‑3.
HOWARD, JOHN: English philanthropist and reformer; b. at Hackney, London, Sept. 2, 1726; d. at Kherson (92 m. e.n.e. of Odesaa), Russia, Jan. 20, 1790. He was educated in private schools at Hertford and London, and was apprenticed by his father, a retired merchant, to a firm of wholesale grocers in London. On the death of his father in 1742 he bought his release from his debentures and went on a Continental tour. On his return he settled at Stoke Newington. In 1756 he started for Lisbon, but the vessel in which he had embarked was captured by a privateer, and crew and passengers were thrown into prison at Brest. Having been released on parole, he returned to England and negotiated an exchange for himself. The same year he was made a fellow of the Royal Society. He now took up his residence at Cardington, Bedfordshire, where he busied himself in the erection of elementary schools and model cottages for his tenants. He visited Holland in 1767, but returned in a month. In 1769 he was again on the Continent and was gone a year. On Feb. 8, 1773, he was appointed high sheriff of Bedfordshire.
Howard now entered upon his career as a prieonreformer, in the course of which he carried his investigations into almost every large city in Europe and spent some £30,000 of his fortune. Shocked by the abuses incident to the fee‑system in the jails of his own county, he began visiting the jails of adjoining counties in order to find a precedent for putting the jailers of Bedford upon salaries. These investigations, which were gradually pushed further and further, till he had visited most of the county jails

391	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	How
in England, Ireland, and Scotland, strengthened his conviction that reform was necessary. The rooms were, in part, underground and damp, and, as a rule, gloomy and filthy, in one case the common sewer of the city running directly under one of the prisons, and uncovered. The bedding was usually straw, and the rations were unwholesome and insufficient. Jail‑fever and smallpox in its most virulent form were common diseases. In 1774 Howard was called to testify before the committee of the House of Commons. That body passed a resolution " recognizing the humanity and zeal which had led him to visit the several jails in this kingdom," and the same year passed two bills for the better treatment of prisoners, and care of jails.
Howard began his inspection of Continental prisons in 1775, visiting France, Germany, Belgium, and Holland. On other tours undertaken in 1776, 1778, and 1781 he studied prison conditions in the remaining countries of Europe. In 1783 he inspected the penal and charitable institutions in Spain and Portugal. With a view to mitigating the horrors of the plague he visited, in 1785, the lazarettos of various cities of France and Italy, went as far as Smyrna, and traveled unknown on vessels infected with the plague, in order to be able the better to find out the treatment of the disease, and the. nature of the quarantine regulations. At the time of his death he was making a study of Russian military hospitals. A monument to Howard's memory was placed in St. Paul's Cathedral. To his efforts are due the improved system of prison accommodation and the discipline which seeks to reform the criminal, not only in Great Britain, but, to some extent, throughout a large part of Europe. He published The State of the Prisons in England and Wales . . . and an Account of some Foreign Prisons (2 parts, Warrington, 177780; 4th ed., London, 1792); and Arc Account of the Principal Lazarettos in Europe (Warrington, 1789).
BIHLiof7BAPwT: Howard's Correspondence, with a Memoir by J. Field, appeared London, 1855. Consult: J. Aikin, View of the Character and Public Services of . . John Howard, London, 1790; J. B. Brown, Memoirs of the Public and Private Life of John Howard, ib. 1823; Life of John Howard . . . from the most Authentic Documents; Edinburgh, 1825; T. Taylor, Memoirs of John Howard, London, 1836; G. E. Sargent, The Philanthropist of the World; a Life of John Howard, ib. 1849; W. H. Dixon, Memoir and Records of John Howard, ib. 185¢; C. K. True, Memoirs of John Howard, the Prisoner's Friend, Cincinnati, 1878 ; J. Stoughton, Howard the Philanthropist and His Friends, ib. 1884; R. D. R. Sweeting, Essay on the Experiences and Opinions of John Howard, ib. 1884; W. H. Render, Through Prison Bars: the Lives of John Howard and Elizabeth Fry, ib. 1894; H. H. Scullard, John Howard, ib. 1899; E. C. S. Gibson, John Howard, ib. 1901; DNB, aviii. 44‑48.

HOWE, JOHN: English Puritan; b. at Loughborough (10 m. n.n.w. of Leicester), Leicestershire, May 17, 1630; d. at Smithfield, London, Apr. 2, 1705. At the age of five he went to Ireland with his father, who had been ejected from his living by Laud, but returned to England in 1641 and settled with his father in Lancaster. He studied at Christ's College, Cambridge, and at Magdalen College, Oxford (B.A., 1650; M.A., 1652), where for a time he was fellow and college chaplain. At Cambridge he came under the influence of Ralph Cudworth and
Henry More (qq.v.), from whom he probably received the Platonic tinge that marks his writings. About 1654 he was appointed to the perpetual curacy of Great Torrington, Devonshire. In this place, according to his own statement, he was engaged in the pulpit on fast‑days from nine to four, with a recess of fifteen minutes, during which the people sang. While on a visit to London in 1656 Cromwell prevailed upon him to preach at Whitehall, with the result that Howe, much against his preferences, became one of Cromwell's chaplains. Upon Richard Cromwell's retirement he returned to his former parish at Torrington. When the Act of Uniformity was passed he quitted his church, but remained for some time in the neighborhood, preaching in private houses. In this period he was cited before the bishop of Exeter, his old friend Seth Ward, who vainly urged Howe to be reordained.
In 1666 Howe accepted the Five Mile Act, but with the limiting clause, " so far as the laws of man are agreeable to the Word of God." In 1671 he became chaplain to Lord Massereene, of Antrim Castle, Ireland. Here he was a member of the Antrim Meeting, the precursor of the Presbyterian organization in northern Ireland. In 1676 he returned to London as the successor of Lazarus Seaman at Haberdashers' Hall. In 1685, on account of the greater severity shown to the dissenters, he accepted an invitation to accompany Lord Wharton to the Continent, and the year following settled at Utrecht. When James II. issued his declaration for liberty of conscience in 1687 Howe returned to his old position in London. From this time till his death he took an active interest in current discussions on predestination, the Trinity, and conformity. In 1688 he headed a deputation of dissenting ministers in an address of welcome to William.
Howe was conciliatory in disposition, catholic in spirit, anxious to promote Christian unity, and more than once he put his opponents in controversy to the blush by his moderation and firmness. His works, in spite of being somewhat prolix and tedious, are among the most suggestive and profound of Puritan writings. His principal works are: The Blessedness of the Righteous (London, 1668); Delighting in God (1674); The Living Temple (2 parts, 1675‑1702), his best‑known book; and The Redeemersa Tears Wept over Lost Souls (1684). His Works were issued with a Life by Edmund Calamy (2 vols., 1724), and edited by J. Hunt (8 vols., 1810‑22). There is also an American edition (2 vols., New York, 1869).
BIHLIoasAPBy: H. Rogers, Life and Character of John Howe, London, reprinted 1879; DNB, xxviii. 85‑88 (where
a list of scattered notices may be found).
HOWIE, JOHN: Scotch Presbyterian layman; b. at Lochgoin (2 m. from Kilmarnock), Ayrshire Nov. 14, 1735; d. there Jan. 5, 1793. He came of a family of Lochgoin farmers which for generations had been characterized by stanch devotion to religious frdedom. As the farm did not require all of his time, he found leisure for literary pursuits and the collection of antiquarian relics connected with the Covenanters. He was the author of the famous Scots Worthies, or, more fully, Biographic Scoticana; or a Brief Historical Account of . . . the

gOW6on
8uber
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Most Eminent Scots Worthies (Glasgow, 1774; 2d ed., 2 parts, 1781‑82; ed. W. MoGavin, 1827; ed. W. H. Carslaw, Edinburgh, 1870). This interesting work, which is still in print, contains pithy biographies of Scottish Reformers and martyrs from the Reformation to the Revolution of 1688. Howie also edited various religious works, including A Collection of Lectures and Sermons by Covenanting Clergymen (Glasgow, 1779; ed. J. Kerr, Edinburgh, 1880).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Biographies are usually prey to editions of Scots Worthies: DNB, xxviii. 121.
HOWSON, JOHN SAUL: Church of England; b. at Giggleswick‑in‑Craven :(36 m. n.w. of Leeds), Yorkshire, May 5, 1816; d. at Bournemouth (25 m. s.w. of Southampton), Hampshire, Dec. 15, 1885. He was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge (B.A., 1837; M.A., 1841), and after being a private tutor to the marquis of Sligo and the marquis of Lome, was ordered deacon in 1845 and ordained priest in the following year. In 1845 he became senior classical master at Liverpool Collegiate Institute, holding this position, except for a short time as tutor to the present duke of Sutherland, until 1849, when he was chosen principal of the same institution, an office which he discharged until 1865, meanwhile being active in the establishment of a girls' college at Liverpool. In 1866‑67 he was vicar of Wisbech St. Peter, and from the latter year until his death was dean of Chester. In this position he practically restored his cathedral and also founded in Chester King's School and Queen's School, for the education of boys and girls respectively. He was 'likewise Hulsean lecturer at Cambridge in 1862, and examining chaplain to the bishop of Ely in 1865‑fi7. He assisted materially in the revival of deaconesses in the Anglican Church, and theologically he was Evangelical rather than Highchurch, also being opposed to the Broad‑church, despite bit; friendship with Charles Kingsley (q.v.). Besides preparing part of the volume on Acts for P. Schaff 'a Popular Commentary (New York, 1880), Galatians for The Bible Commentary (London, 1881), and Titus for The Pulpit Commentary (1886), he wrote The Life and Epistles of St. Paul (in eollaboration with W. J. Conybeare; 2 vols., 1852his popular reputation rested on this work in which he had the historical and geographical portion, while Conybeare furnished the translation of the speeches and letters of St. Paul); Deaconesses; or, The Ofcial Help of Women in Parochial Work and in Charitable Institutions (1862); The Character of St. Paul (Hulsean lectures; 1864); Scenes from the IAfe of St. Paul, and their Religious Lessons (1866); The Metaphors of St. Paul (1868); The Companions of St. Paul (1871); Meditations on the Miracles of Christ (2 series, 1871‑77); " Before the Table": An Inquiry into the True Meaning (1875); Homely Hints in Sermons suggested by Experience (1876); Evidential Value of the Ads of the Apostles (Bohlen lectures at PhiladelphiaLNew York, 1880); Horn Petrinee: Studies in the Life of St. Peter (London, 1883); Thoughts for Saints' Days (1886); and the posthumous Diaconate of Women in the Anglican Church (with a brief memoir by his son; 1886).
BiHLIoGnAPHY: DNB, xxviii. 130‑132.
	HOYLE, JOSHUA: B. at Sorby, near Halifax,
Yorkshire, Eng.; d. Dec. 6, 1654. He was educated
in Magdalen Hall, Oxford, but became fellow of
Trinity College, Dublin, and took his degrees of
divinity and became professor of divinity m that
university. He devoted himself to Biblical studies
and the Roman Catholic controversy, and was a
friend and warm admirer of Archbishop Ussher.
He fled from the Irish massacre and returned to
England, and became vicar of Stepney, near London.
In 1643 he was appointed a member of the West
minster Assembly of Divines. He labored on the
committee on the Confession of Faith. In 1648 he
was appointed master of University College, Oxford,
and king's professor of divinity in the university.
His two published works are A Rejoinder to Mr.
Malone, Jesuit, his Reply Concerning Real Presence
(4to, pp. 662, Dublin, 1641) and Jehoiadah's Justice
against Mattan, Baal's Priest, a sermon (London,
1645). 	C. A. Balaos.
BrBwoGaAmY: A. a Wood, Athena: Oxonienees, ed. P. Bliss, iii. 382, 507, 1148, iv. 398, 4 vols., London, 1813‑20; DNB, xxviii. 134‑135.
HOYT, WAYLAND: Baptist; b. at Clevelaud, O., Feb. 18, 1838. He was educated at Colgate University, Hamilton, N. Y., Brown University (B.A., 1860), and Rochester Theological Seminary, from which he was graduated in 1863. He has held pastorates in Ninth Street Baptist Church, Cincinnati (1864‑67), Strong Place Baptist Church, Brooklyn (1868‑81), Memorial and Epiphany Baptist churches, Philadelphia (1882‑59, 1896‑1905), and First Baptist Church, Minneapolis (1890‑96). He now fills the chair of science and religion in the Theological Seminary of the Temple College, Philadelphia. In theology he is Evangelical and orthodox. For twenty years he has edited the prayermeeting department in the Homiletic Review, and has been a constant contributor to the religious press. He has likewise written Hints aged Helps for the Christian LVe (New York, 1880); Present Lessons from Distant Days (1882); Gleams from Paul's Prison. (1883); Along the Pilgrimage (Philadelphia, 1885); The Brook in the Way (New York, 1888); Saturday Afternoon (Philadelphia, 1889); Light for Life's Highway (1889); At His Feet (New York, 1892); Walks and Talks with Mr. Spurgeon (Philadelphia, 1892); For Shine and Shade (1898); Home Ideals (1904); and Teaching of Jesus Concerning his Own Person (1907).
HRARANUS MAURUS. See RABAirus MAVxus.
HUBER, JOHANNES REPOMU$: German Roman Catholic philosopher; b. in Munich Aug. 18, 1830; d. there Mar. 20, 1879. He studied at the University of Munich, became privat‑docent there in 1854, extraordinary professor of philosophy in 1859, and ordinary professor in 1864. He was one of the most fearless opponents of Ultramontanism, and later a leader in the Old Catholic movement. His more important works are: Die Philosophie der Kirchenvater. (Munich, 1859), which was placed upon the Index in 1860; Johannes Scotus Erigena (1861); Studim (1867); , Das Papattum and der Staat (1870); Die Lehre Darwins kritisch‑betrachtet (1871); and Der Jesuiteo‑Orden naeh seiner Ver‑

883	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Howson
Huber
fa8sung and Dodrin, Wirksamked and Geschichte charatter%aiert (Berlin, 1873), which was immediately placed upon the Index. He also had a large share in the famous book Der Papst and daa Kowa, root Janus (Munich, 1869).
BIHwoaaAFaT: E. Zirngiebl, Johann" Huber, Goths, 1881.
HUBER, SAMUEL: Swiss Protestant controversialist; b. at Burgdorf (11 in. ii.e. of Bern) 1547; d. at Osterwiek (42 m. w.s.w. of Magdeburg), Hanover, Mar. 23, 1624. He studied theology at Bern and at German universities, became pastor at Saanen in 1570, and at Burgdorf in 1581, where he obtained the office of treasurer, or vice‑dean of the chapter. On the occasion of the innovation of broken bread in the communion, in place of the hitherto customary wafer, he attacked Abraham Mikelin and the preachers of Bern with such success that the ancient custom continued in force till the beginning of the seventeenth century. Soon afterward he turned upon Theodore Beza, who had sanctioned, in writing, flight from the plague. Although Beza had retracted his opinion, by advice of friends, Huber continued to combat him, without even submitting his book to the prescribed censorship. Huber made a still greater stir when, in connection with the Miimpelgart Colloquy in 1586 (see M$MPELL(IART, COLLOQUY or), he expressed himself in sharp terms against the Reformed doctrine of predestination. For this he was obliged to answer before the superior chapter‑court in 1587, and in a disputation at the town‑hall of Bern in 1588. Shortly afterward be was deposed from his office, ano, on failing to observe the enjoined silence, he w banished from the country June 28, 1588.
In July, 1588, Huber repaired to Ttlbingen. Here he enjoyed the support of Duke Louis, who sought to bring about his reinstatement at Bern. When this was refused Huber subscribed the Formula of Concord, and became pastor at Derendingen, where he resumed his literary activity against his previous adversaries, as well as against the Jesuits. In 1589 he dwelt upon the importance of the sacrificial death of Christ for the sin of all mankind, thus incurring strife with the Wdrttemberg theologians. Nevertheless, he affirmed his doctrinal agreement with them, on quitting his appointment in 1592 to accept a call to the University of Wittenberg. Here he was cordially received by Egidius Hunn, Polycarrp Leiser, and Solomon Gesner, who hoped to find in him an aggressive opponent of Calvinists and CryptoCalvinists. But here, too, sharp differences soon came to pass, especially between Huber and Polycarp Leiser. When Hunn sought to mediate he, in turn, had to incur the reproach of Calvinism. Pacific overtures on the part of the rector of Wittenberg University, a colloquium in 1593, electoral commissioners and pleaders, as also Leipsic professors, could not effect a reconciliation. After negotiations at the imperial Diet of Regensburg, reenforced by foreign theologians, and further conferences at Torgau, had proved in vain, he was dismissed from his professorship, and banished from the country at the beginning of 1595. Though he never lacked for friends, he was now compelled to wander from place to place, an " embittered martyr of universalism." He appealed to the imperial
supreme court at Speyer for vindication, but without success, and also knocked in vain at the doors of Berlin, Helmstedt, and Dresden.
GEOR(i MeLLER.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. A. Schmid, Dissartatio . . . de 3. Hu‑
beri vita, fake d doctrsna, Helmstedt, 1708; A. Schweizer, Die protestantischmt Cenbaldoprnen, i. 501 sqq., Zurich, 1851:; TreeheeL in Berner Tasdunbueh, 1854; G. Frank, Gewhichte der protestantischan Theolopia, i. 271 eqq., Leipsie, 1862; G. Fineler, Bibliographic der reforrnierten Ruche in der Schweiz, i. 128, Bern, 1896; E. Bloesoh, Geschichte der lchweiasrisch‑reJonnierten Kirche, i. 256‑258, 398, Bern, 1898; G. Kawerau, Reformation and Geoemeformation, p. 388, Freiburg, 1899; dDB, xiii. 248‑249.

HUBER, VICTOR AIMS: Social reformer; b. at Stuttgart Mar. 10, 1800; d. at Wernigerode (40 m. s.w. of Magdeburg) July 19, 1869. After private instruction, he took up the study of medicine, languages, and history at Gottingen. Although baptized in the Roman Catholic Church, he was indifferent toward all confessions and without religious convictions. When twenty years old he passed his medical examination at WUrzburg. To complete his studies he went to Paris, where he enjoyed the friendship of Humboldt, Cuvier, Benjamin Constant, Lafayette, and others. In the course of time he became dissatisfied with the medical profession. Personal experiences and contact with many famous men changed his religious and social views and brought him nearer to Christianity. In 1828 he became teacher in the business school of Bremen. In 1833 he was appointed professor of modern philology at Rostock, in 1836 at Marburg. A call to Berlin in 1843 developed the ideals of politics and social reform to which his nature inclined him.
On account of his views regarding Church and politics Huber was received coldly, and as a teacher he was not very successful; so he was thrown chiefly upon writing. In 1845 he edited a periodical called Janus, Jahrbacher deutscher Gesinnung, Bildung and That, but with little success. Moreover, the year 1848 made him lose his faith in a regeneration of monarchy, and he was never reconciled with the idea of constitutional government. The cardinal points of his program were association and colonization. The working classes should be organized according to their occupations upon the material basis of a common property which was to be newly produced by them and upon the religious and moral foundations which Christian education offers according to the needs and customs of each class of people. If a certain locality possessed more people than it could support, he proposed a scheme of colonization by transplanting the surplus into another locality. In their efforts to redeem themselves the laboring classes should be assisted by the ruling classes. Huber's efforts at practical realization of his ideas in Berlin were met by indolence and indifference on the part both of the conservative party and of the laboring classes, and church people did not see any importance in his scheme for the building up of congregations. Isolated from all his friends, Huber left Berlin in 1851 and settled at Wernigerode, where he tried his ideals on a smaller scale, but also without sucoees. His most prominent works are Rsiaebriefe (2 vols., Hamburg, 1865); Socials Frayen

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	384
(7 parts, Nordhausen, 1883‑89); and Konkordia, a .periodical appearing at .irregular intervals. . A volume of ~usgeudhlte Schriften, ed. B. Munding, with biographical sketch, appeared at Berlin in 1894. (THEODOH SCBAFEB.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: & Elvere, Vidor AimE Huber, 2 vole., Bremen, 1872‑74; E. JBger, Vidor Aims Hub‑, Berlin, 1880; ADB. mi. 249.

HUBERINUS (HUBER), CASPAR: Writer of devotional books in the time of the Reformation; b., according to tradition, at Wilspach (a place otherwise unknown), Bavaria, Dec. 21, 1500; d. at Oehringen (33 m. n.e. of Stuttgart) Oct. 6, 1553. It is said that he became a monk, and at the beginning of the Reformation escaped from the monastery. In 1522 he was matriculated in Wittenberg and spent some years there. From about 1525 he appears in Augsburg, apparently as an assistant to Urbanus Rhegius (q.v.). His special gifts lay in the direction of devotional literature. When the Evangelical preachers had to leave Augsburg in 1530 Hubermus remained. As almost the only theological representative of Lutheranism, he labored in intimate union with a small circle in the interest of the Lutheran views, attacking especially the Zwinglians. As the Evangelical party of Augsburg was threatened with isolation by its attacks on the Romanists, the city felt the necessity of resuming negotiations with Wittenberg, and in 1535 sent Huberinus thither as mediator. As a consequence, Johann Forster, a strict Lutheran, was called to Augsburg, and the way was prepared for the Wittenberg Concord. For the strengthening of Lutheranism, Huberinus accepted an official position as assistant preacher to Wolfgang Musculus(q.v.). In 1544 he left Augsburg and followed a call as preacher to Oehringen. He surprised the friends of strict Lutheranism by accepting the Interim. In 1551 he was called back to Augsburg to introduce the Interim there, but after a few months was expelled from the city, with other advocates of the Interim, and returned to Oehringen. He wrote Ein tr6stlich Sermon von tier Urstendt Christi den Schwachen im Qlavben niltzlich zu lesen (Wittenberg, 1525); Trost aw der Schri,$t fur eynen, der inn angst vrid nott xu Gott vmb Rilfe schreid (1525); Yom Zorn and der Gilts Gotten, with a commendatory preface by Luther (1529). Against Schwenckfeld and the Anabaptists in Augsburg he published Etlich Schluaarede room gnadenbundt Christi, das ist room Tauf vrtd room Kinderglauben (1529) and Siebenzig Schluss rede odder Puncte von der Rechten handt Gotten vnd der gewalt Christi (1530; often reprinted). In his official activity as assistant of Musculus he wrote Vom wahren Erkenntnis Gotten (1537), containing the principal contents of his instructions for young people; Das Streitbtiehlein (1541); Katechismus mit roielen nch6nen Spraehen (1543); Der kleine Katechiamus (1544), an epitome of the preceding; Viertzig kurze Predigten fiber den Katgehumus fur die Ha‑usvtlter (1550?, edited in Latin by Johann Lonicer, 1554). He also wrote a commentary on Jesus Sirach (Nuremberg, 1553). His devotional writings were long popular and were reprinted as late as the
eighteenth century.	(T. KOLDE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. C. Wibel, in ForVeeetzte ndzliehe An‑
m‑kungan, pp. 16, 18, Weimar, 1738 sqq.; idem, Hohengird,. u„d gefornwtionshiatorie, Onolsbach,
1752 sqq.; H. Beck Die Brbauungdi#erotur der evaMe
liachsn Kircha DsutacMands, pp. 171 eqq., F•r1anBee. 1M.
	HUBERT, golNRAD: Friend and assistant of
the Strasburg Reformer Butzer; b. at Bergzabern
(8 m. s.w. of Landau) 1507; d. in Basel Apr. 23,1577.
He was the son of an artisan, and at twelve years
old went to the Heidelberg school. In 1526 he
was in Basel, where he became convinced of Evan
gelical truth. (Ecolampadiw, shortly before his
death in 1531, recommended the young man to
Butzer, whose assistant he became in Strasburg,
not only in the ministry, but also in his literary
work. After Butzer left Strasburg (1549) evil
times came for Hubert. The Lutheran theologians,
with Marbach at their head, gradually deprived him
of his offices (1562‑75), and he finally retired alto
gether from public life. In 1572 he edited the Stras
burg hymn‑book and composed some hymns. His
last years were spent upon an edition of Butzer's
works. Grindat, archbishop of Canterbury, was
active in procuring him such as were written in
England. But unfavorable circumstances delayed
the work; of the proposed ten volumes only one
was published, which contained especially the wri
tings published in England but unknown in Germany,
and is therefore known as " Tomus Anglicanus "
(Basel, 1577). 	PAUL GBt7NBEB(i.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. RShrich, Miaheitungen Gus der Geechichte
de‑ esangelischen Kirche des Blaaew, iii. 245‑274, Strasburg, 1855; J. W. Baum, Capito and Buts‑, pp. 586‑589, Elberfeld, 1880; F. W. Cullmann, Ehrengedachtnis Konrad Hub‑ts, Strasburg, 1882; ADB. riii. 281‑283.
HUC, tic, &ARISTE RfiGIS: French Roman Catholic missionary; b. at Toulouse Aug. 1, 1813; d. in Paris Mar. 31, 1860. He studied at Toulouse, joined the Congregation of St. Lazarus at Paris, and went to China as a missionary in 1839. After working in the southern provinces for a time, he proseeded to Peking, and eventually settled in the Valley of Black Waters, or He Shuy, to the north of Peking and just beyond the Great Wall. Late in 1844, accompanied by Joseph Gabet and a Tibetan convert, he set out upon his remarkable journey of exploration through Tibet. He reached Lhasa Jan. 29, 1846, and was in a fair way to establish an important mission there when the Chinese ambassador interfered and bad Hue and Gabet conducted back to China. Broken in health, he returned to Europe in 1852. Hue was the author of three works that have justly enjoyed great popularity: Souvenirs d'un voyage darts la Tartaric, le Thibet et la. Chime (2 vols., Paris, 1850; Eng. tranal., Travels in. Tartary, Thibet, and China during . . . 1844‑4B, 2 vols., London, 1851); L'Empire chinois (2 vola., Paris, 1854; Eng. trawl., The Chinese Empire, London, 2 vole., 1855), which was crowned by the Academy; and Le Chnstianume en Chine en Tartarie et au Thibet (4 vols., Paris, 1857‑58; Eng. trawl., Christianity in China, Tartary, arid Met, 3 vola., London, 1857‑58), which contains much valuable historical information. On account of the strangeness of the things described in the Souvenirs Hue was accused of fabrication; but the credibility of his account has been fully established by later researches.

385	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Hnberinus
		HnebmMer
	HUCBALD OF ST. AMAND: Flemish Benedictine;
b. about the middle of the ninth century; d. at St.
Amand (6 m. n.n.w. of Valenciennes) June 20, 930.
He studied at St. Amand under his famous uncle,
Milo, and at St. Germain d'Auxerre under Heiric.
He succeeded Milo as head of the monastery school,
apparently before his uncle's death (872), but the
fame of his learning brought him a call to St. Bertin,
and, about 893, to Reims, where, at the request of
Archbishop Fulco, he and his fellow pupil Remi
giua revived the school in that city. On the death
of Fulco, however, Hucbald returned to St. Amand,
where he spent the remainder of his life. He was
the author of various legends of the saints, among
which the lives of Rictrnd and Lebuin are of his
torical value. Of his verse, only two short hymns
have been preserved, together with two poems ad
dressed to Charles the Bald, one of them a eulogy
of baldness in 136 hexameters, exclusively composed
of words beginning with c. Hucbald is an important
figure in the history of music, since the beginning
of the musical notation and the use of the staff may
be traced to him; although Miiller, who allows him
only the authorship of the De harmonica inatitutione,
refers the beginning of choral music and the new
musical notation by means of letters to another
Hucbald, about a century earlier, to whom he
ascribes the De musica enchiriadia.
					(R. SCHMID.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: His poems are in MPL, caxxii.; in J. A.
	Giles, Anecdota Beds;, Lanfranci et aliorum, London, 1844,
	and were published at Paris, 1853; consult also E. de
	Couseemaker, M&noire sur Huebald moine de St. Amand
	et our sea trait& de musique, Dousi, 1841 (best; but very
	rare); G. Nisard, Hurbald, Paris, 1867; Histoire littfire
	de la France, vi. 210‑211; H. Miiller, Hucbadde echts and
	unechte Schriften 4iber Musik, Leipsie, 1884; Wattenbaeh,
	DGQ, i (1885), 125, 232, 282, 350, 352, 376, i (1893), 301,
	407, 408, ii. 515; Ceillier, Auteurs sacra, xii. 799‑803;
	KL, vi. 333‑334; Moeller, Christian Church, ii. 208, 213.
	HUEBMAIER (HUBMAIER,HIEBMAIER, FMB
MOER, HUBMOER), hiib'mai‑er, BALTHASAR:
German Anabaptist; b. at Friedberg (4m. ex.e. of
Augsburg) after 1580; d. at Vienna Mar.10,1528. In
				1503 he began the study of philosophy
		Early	and theology at the University of Frei
		Life	burg, where Eck, the future opponent
				of Luther, was one of his instructors. In
1512 he removed to Ingolstadt, where he received
a pastorate and the professorship of theology at the
university.	In 1516 he went to Regensburg as
preacher , at the cathedral, and in 1521 accepted
a call to Waldahut, a town of Lower Austria, which,
because of its situation and the peculiar character
of its inhabitants, was well adapted for the develop
ment of liberal ideas. In Mar., 1523, he made open
profession of the Reformed faith, visited Zurich and
St. Gall, and entered into communication with
Zwingli, Vadian, and G;colampadius. He attended
the Second Zurich Conference (Oct. 26‑28, 1523) as
a supporter of Zwingli. In the beginning of 1524
he published his Schlussreden, directed against the
mass, image‑worship, fasting, pilgrimages, purga
tory, and celibacy. At Pentecost, 1524, W aldshut
embraced the Evangelical faith and entered into an
agreement for the defense of Hiibmaier, whose
course had aroused the bitter hostility of the govern
ment of Lower Austria. When the latter made a
			V.‑25
show of force Hubmaier sought refuge for a time at Schaffhausen, but, returning in Oct., 1524, he became the director of the religious and political policy of the town.
About this time he showed a tendency to depart from the tenets of Zwinglianism and to adopt Anabaptist doctrines. Very soon Waldahut
Becomes became the center of religious, social,
an	and political ferment. Its bold attitude
	Anabaptist. toward the Austrian power had drawn
	the attention of Germany; it was re
	garded as one of the citadels of the new faith, and
	its leading citizen as a leading champion of Evan
	gelical faith. Probably at this time he fell under the
	influence of Thomas Milnzer; and he certainly was
	in communication with the Zurich radicals Grebel,
	Manz, and Reublin, who were preaching adult
	baptism. Hubmaier embraced ardently the doc
	trine of the Swiss leaders and became convinced
	that adult baptism and the Lord's Supper were the
only Chrisitan sacraments.	Meanwhile the Ana
	baptist community had been established in Zurich,
	but its members were forced to flee, and Reublin,
among others, sought refuge at Waldshut.	At
	Easter, 1525, Hiibmaier was baptized by Reublin,
	and his example was followed by a large number
	of the citizens, after which a radical change in the
form of public worship ensued.	In a controversy
	with Zwingli, which soon broke out, the Waldshut
	preacher issued two works, V on derv christlichen Tauf
	der Gldubigen and Ein Gesprtich von dem Kindertauf,
	both published in 1526. The essence of baptism,
	he maintained, is the expression of personal faith
	and of the obligation which that faith imposes. He
	rejected the arguments deduced from tile New Tes
	tament in favor of infant baptism, and argued that
	the practise is actually forbidden inasmuch as it
	falls under Matt. xv. 13, which prohibits idolatry.
	On the other hand, the baptism that proceeds from
	conscious and acknowledged faith is the necessary
	condition for the existence of a Christian commu
nity.
Waldshut was soon brought into close relations with the participants in the peasants' uprising. Hizbmaier'a attitude toward the revolt
	The	has been variously estimated. While
Peasants' he undoubtedly had some part in the
	War.	insurrection, the initial participation
		therein by Waldahut took place in
Hilbmaier's absence, and it is quite clear that he
did not advocate deposition of the authorities and
selection of new governmental officials. In Apr.,
1525, a closer union was concluded between the
peasants and the citizens of Waldahut, and the latter
supplied aid to the rebels. As a result, after the
defeat of the rebel bands; the town was occupied
by the troops of the government in December, and
in the same month under the auspices of Johann
Faber the Roman Catholic religion was reintroduced.
Hiibmaier fled to Zurich, where he was arrested,
and, from fear of being delivered to the Austrian
authorities, consented [under torture] to abjure his
views. This he did on Apr. 6, 1525, but, going to
Constance, he repudiated the act as having been
done under compulsion. This moved Zwingli to
characterize him as a man actuated solely by a de‑

88lnuebhmaier
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
sire for notoriety and gain. [Zwingli's participar tion in the torture of Hubmaier and his cynical remarks about the recantation are blots on his reputation. He wrote to a friend that Hubmaier had changed not his mind but his nerve. A. H. N.]
In July, 1526, Hubmaier came to Nikolsburg in Moravia, where, having gained the protection of
Martin GSschl, he transformed the inActivity in cipient Lutheran congregation into an Moravia. Anabaptist community, converting the
ministers Oswald•Glait and Hans Spittelmayer, and Von Lichtenstein himself. From all directions the Anabaptists flocked to Moravia, and Nikolaburg became for a time the center of the movement. Habmaier there entered on the most active period of his literary career. Besides a number of tracts directed against Zwingli and G;colampadius, he published 12 Artikel des christlichen Glaubens, in which he based true belief on the Lord's Supper and baptism; Ein einfattiger Unterricht and Eine Form des Nachtmals Christi have to do with the Lord's Supper; his tracts Von der braderlichen Strafe and Van chrtstlichen Bann deal with communal discipline; while Vom Schwert treats of the relations of Christians to established authority which he supported. He wrote also on the freedom of the soul, maintaining that thesis against the Reformed theologians. The Anabaptist movement spread from Moravia into the Tyrol, Salzburg, and the two Auatrias, and as a consequence systematic persecution began. In 1527 Habmaier's surrender was demanded and granted. He was taken to Vienna, where he attempted to make his peace by offering broad concessions based on opposition to Luther and Zwingli; but on the questions of the Lord's Supper and baptism he refused to yield, and on Mar. 10 he was burned. His place is undeniably in the front rank of German Anabaptists, along with Denk, Haetzer, and Hut. He differs from the last in his higher theological gifts, and from the first in his freedom from mystical elements. He represents the simple, conservative Anabaptist doctrine which grounded itself on the Scriptures.
(A. HEGLERt.) K. HOLL.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Apart from the biography in Bohemian by F. Hoschek, Brann, 1867, Eng. transl. by W. W. Everts, in Texas Baptist Historical Magazine, 1891‑92, the three works of value are: H. Schreiber, in his Taachenbuch jar Geschiehte and Alterthurn, Freiburg, 1839, pp. 1‑130, 1840, pp. 153‑234 (incomplete, third part never supplied); J. Loserth, Doctor Baldaaar Habmaier, Brunn, 1893; and H. C. Vedder, Balthazar Hammer, NewYork, 1005 (based upon thorough and independent study of the sources, including the writings of Hubmaier, which are now rare, with extended quotations from them; it contains an annotated bibliography, pp. xv.‑xxiv., which leaves little to be desired). Much material pertinent to the subject is contained in the literature under ZWINGLI, HBLDREICH; and ANABArrLers. Consult especially: A. H. Newman, Hint. of Anti‑Pedobaptiem, chaps. vii., viii., x., xiv., Philadelphia, 1897; S. M. Jackson, Huldrvirh Zwinpls, chap. xii., New York. 1903.

HUELS, PETER: German Roman Catholic; b. at Millingen Oct. 7, 1850. He was educated at the University of Munster from 1872 to 1876, and after being private tutor to Prince Radolin (1876‑81), was cathedral preacher at Munster (1881‑94). In 1894 he was appointed a member of the cathedral chapter, and since 1901 has been professor of pas‑
sae
toral theology and liturgies at the University of Munster. He has written Betstunden zur Verehrung ties Altarssakramentes (Munster, 1891); Das Vaterunser (a collection of sermons; 1893); and Gott meine Hilfe (1898).

HUELSEMANN, JOHANN: One of the most prominent literary opponents of Calixtus: b. at Esens (65 m. n.w. of Bremen), Hanover, Dec. 4,1602 (o.s.); d. at Leipsic June 13, 1661. He was educated at Norden, Stade, and .Hanover. Before he had reached the age of eighteen, he went to the University of Rostock, and two years later to Wittenberg. In 1627 he removed to Leipsic, where he was per‑
initted to lecture. In 1629 he was appointed pro‑
i
fessor at Wittenberg, where he achieved an authoritative position. In 1630 he was sent to Letpsic as a delegate to a convention in behalf of the Augsburg Confession, and in 1645 he took a leading position at the colloquy in Thorn.
So far Hiilsemann had leaned toward the Reformed teachings, although he did not openly confess them; but now, swept along by Calovius, who had become his opponent, he denied ail his former conduct and advanced the orthodox cause by becoming one of the most prominent adversaries of Calixtus. To clear his dubious position from the justified suspicions of the Lutheran theologians he wrote his Calvinismus irreconciliabilis (Wittenberg, 1644) as the counterpart of Bishop Joseph Hall's Rams irreconciliabilis, but the appendix entitled Qua dogmata sint ad salutem creditu neeessaria shows how little he liked the new position which was forced upon him. In this appendix he is conciliatory again in regard to the Lord's Supper and the personal union. As the influence of Calovius increased, the author denied this appendix in later years and wished to have it considered an immature. writing of his youth. His final rupture with Calixtus makes a still more unfavorable impression. Hulsemann was the friend of Calixtus, but after the disputation at Thorn he was forced to become his opponent. Calixtus had defended himself against the Wittenberg faculty by denying its sole authority and normative rule and by revealing some errors in their writings, among them in one of Hulsemann's books. Immediately the latter attacked his opponent, not only with the honest weapons of literary warfare, but by bringing down upon him an official denunciation.
Hiilsemann's principal works are his Breviaraum theologise (Wittenberg, 1640; enlarged with title, Exlensio breviarii theologite, Leipsie, 1655); Muster and Ausbund guter Werke (1650); Dialysis apologetics pt'oblematis Calixtini (1651); and Der Calixtinische Getoisaemmmrm (1653). (F. BossE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Tholuek, Der Geist der luateriachen Theolopen Wittenberpa, P. 164, Hamburg, 1852; J. F. Erdmann, Lebenabeschreibungen der wittenberpiachen Professoren, Wittenberg, 1804; W. Gass, Geschichte der proteatantiachen Dopmatak, i. 318, Berlin, 1854.
HUET, u" U', PIERRE DANIEL: Bishop of Avranches; b. at Caen, France, Feb. 8, 1630; d. at Paris Jan. 26, 1721. He was educated in the college of the Jesuits in his native city. In 1670, with Bossuet, he was made teacher of the dauphin; in 1674 he was received among the forty of the French

387	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	gher
Academy; two years later he was ordained priest. In 1678 the king granted him the Cistercian abbey of Aumy, near Caen. In 1685 he was elected bishop of Soissons, but before papal confirmation was received he exchanged the office (1689) for that of Avranches, being consecrated bishop in 1692. He now devoted himself to the restoration of church discipline in his diocese. In 1699 he resigned his bishopric and removed to the abbey of Fontenay, near Caen. In 1701 he retired to Paris.
Huet's great literary work was his edition of Origen (2 vols., Rouen, 1668), the product of fifteen years' labor, and the first complete collection of Origen's commentaries, with Latin translation. It was preceded by an introduction, Orageniana, discussing the life, writings, and system of the Church Father. In Demonstratio evangelica ad serenissimum Delphinum (Paris, 1679), he tried to prove the truth of the Christian religion; the book made a sensation, and led Samuel Pufendorf to expect the reunion of the Roman and Protestant communions. In Censura philosophies Cartesianw . (1689) and Alnetanee qwstiones de concordia rationis et fidei libri tres (Caen, 1690), Huet criticized Descartes. He also wrote De la situation du Paradis terrestre (Paris, 1691; Eng. transl., A Treatise of the Situation of Paradise, London, 1694); De navigalionibus Salomonis (Amsterdam, 1693); Histoire du commerce et de la navigation des ancients (Paris, 1716; Eng. transl., History of the Commerce and Navigation of the Ancients, London, 1717); as well as poems and other works, historical, geographical, philosophical, and literary. His autobiography, P. D. Huetii . . . commentarius de rebus ad cum pertinentibus (Amsterdam, 1718), was translated into English, Memoirs of the Life of Pierre Daniel Huet, with notes by J. Aiken (2 vols., London, 1810). His‑literary remains were published by J. T. d'Olivet under the title Huetiana (Paris, 1722).
(C. PFENDER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Besides the autobiography, ut sup., conSuit: C. Bartholmese, Huet, . . ou Is scepticisme the,'o7opique, Paris, 1849• F. A. de Gournay, Huet . . . sa vie et sea wurores, ib. 1854; J. B. M. Flottes, ‑Etude sun Daniel Huet, ib. 1857; K. s. Baraeh, Pierre Dan. Huet als Philosoph, Leipsic, 1862; C. Trochon, in Correspondant, Dec., 1876, Mar., 1877 (uses new sources).
HUG, JOHAIYN LEONHARD: Roman Catholic Biblical scholar; b. at Constance June 1, 1765; d. at Freiburg, in Breisgau, Mar. 11, 1846. After a brilliant career in the University of Freiburg he became (1787) superintendent of studies in the priests' seminary connected with the university, and in 1791 professor of Oriental languages and of the Old Testament, in 1792 of the New Testament. The remainder of his life was spent in the service of the university. Hug's chief work was in the field of Biblical criticism and isagogics. He furnished contributions of lasting value to the conception of New Testament isagogics as a historical science and to the careful division of its different spheres according to the requirements of historical criticism. In spite of his critical attitude and unprejudiced, fearless spirit of investigation, his results bear a thoroughly positive and essentially conservative character. His chief work is his Einleitung in die Schriften des neuen Testaments (2 vols., Stuttgart and Tubingen, 1808;
later eds., 1821, 1826, 1847; Eng. transl., An Introduction to the Writings of the New Testament, by D. G. Wait, London, 1827, and by David Fosdick, Jr., with notes by Moses Stuart, Andover, 1836). Of other theological works may be mentioned Die 'mosaischeGeschichte des Menschen (Frankfort, 1793); De antiquitate codiew Vaticani commentatio (Freiburg,1810); Das hohe Lied in einer noch unversuchten Deutung (1813); and Sehutzschrift fur seine Deutung des Hohenliedes and desselben weitere Erklarung (1815); De conjugii christiani vinculo indissolubili commentatio exegetica (1816); and De Pentateuchi versione Alexandrina tbmmentalio (1818).
(O. ZSCSLERt.)
BIHmOGBAPHY: A. Maier, Oedaehtnierede auf Johann Leon‑
hard Hug, Freiburg, 1847; idem, in %L, vi. 338‑341; K. Werner, Geschichte der katholuchen Theologie in Deutsehland, pp. 527‑533, Munich, 1866; ADB, ziii. 393‑394.

HUGH, SAINT: The name of two English saints, both connected with the city of Lincoln.
1. Bishop of Lincoln; b. at Avalon (26 m. s.e. of Auxerre), Burgundy, c.1135; d. in London Nov. 16, 1200. At the age of eight, with his father, he entered a priory of regular canons at Villarbenoit. Here he received his education in company with other children of noble birth. He was ordained deacon about 1155 and appointed to the mission chapel of St. Maximin about 1159. Shortly after 1160 he entered the monastery of the Grande Chartreuse and became procurator in 1170. At the request of Henry 11. of England he went to England about 1175 to take charge of a Carthusian monastery at Witham, Somersetshire. He became bishup of Lincoln in 1186, and took up his residence at Stow, about twelve miles from Lincoln. Hugh showed no alight moral courage. He never suffered encroachment upon his rights, fearlessly opposed the demands of Henry, Richard, and John, and won their admiration by his unflinching steadfastness. He was much esteemed in life, and after his death his tomb in the cathedral at Lincoln at once became a place of pilgrimage. He was canonized in 1220.
2. An alleged victim of ritual murder by the Jews, called " Little Hugh "; b. at Lincoln c. 1246; d. there 1255. The body of the boy, who had been missing for a month, was found Aug. 28, 1255, in a well on the premises of a Jew named Copin, and the Jews of Lincoln were at once accused of having crucified the child. There was no evidence to support the charge; but such accusations were common as a means of extorting money from the Jews. A " confession " having been forced from Copin, be and eighteen others were executed and their property confiscated. Ninety‑one other Jews were condemned to death, but were released in consideration of a large ransom paid to Richard, earl of Cromwell. The body of young Hugh was buried in great state in the cathedral at Lincoln, and a shrine was erected over his tomb. The martyrdom of Hugh has furnished the theme of various French, English, and Scottish ballads. Chaucer refers to it in his Prioress' Tale, and Marlowe in his Jew of Malta.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: 1. The early anonymous Vita is in MPL,
	cliii., also ed. J. F. Dimock, London, 1864; the same edi
	tor issued another Vita by Giraldus Cambrenais, ib. 1877,
	and also a Vita metrica, Lincoln, 1860; cf. T. D. Hardy,
	Descriptive Catalogue, ii. 542‑550, nos. 711‑724, in Rolls

g~heA
8ngo o! 6t. Cher
Series, no. 26, London, 1885. Other early material is in Roger de Hoveden, Chronica, ed. W. Stubbs, no. 51 of Rolle Series, London, 1888‑71. Consult: G. G. Perry, The Life of St. Hugh of Avalon, ib. 1879; P. Piolin. Voyage de S. Huguea . en I'annde 1199, Angers, 1890: C. Bellet, S. Hugues d'Avaion Grenoble, 1891; W. R. W. Stephens, The English Church IOBB‑197'0, pp. 187‑188 etpassim, London, 1901; DNB, ncviii. 186‑187; H. Thurston, ife of St. Hugh of Lincoln, London, 1898; C. L. Maroon, Hugh, Bishop of Lincoln, London, 1901.
2. Matthew of Paris, Chronica, ed. H. R. Lusrd, no. 57 in Rolls Series, v. 518‑519, 548, 552, 7 vols., London, 1872‑84; Annales Burtonienses, ed. H. R. Luard, no. 38 in Rolls Series, 1. 340‑341, 348, 371, ib. 1864; and Annalea . de Waverlaia, in the same no., ii. 346, ib. 1885; ASB, July, vi. 494‑495.
HUGHES, EDWIN HOLT: Methodist Episcopal bishop; b. at Moundsville, W. Va., Dec. 7, 1866. He . was educated at Ohio Wesleyan University (B.A., 1889) and the theological department of Boston University (S.T.B., 1892), and after being pastor of churches of his denomination at Newton Centre, Mass. (1892‑96), and at Malden, Mass. (1896‑1903), was president of De Pauw Univeralty, Greencastle, Ind., until 1908, when he was elected bishop, with his residence at San Francisco. In theology he terms himself " moderate‑progressive," and has written Letters on Evangelism (Cincinnati, 1906).

HUGHES, HUGH PRICE: English Wesleyan; b. at Carmarthen, Wales, 1847; d. in London Nov. 17, 1902. He studied at University College, London (B.A., 1869), and at the Wesleyan Theological College, Richmond. He was pastor at . Dover, 1869‑72; at Brighton, 1872‑75; at Stoke‑Newington, London, 1875‑78; at Mostyn Road, London, 18781881; at Oxford, 1881‑84; and at Brixton Hill, London, 1884,87. In 1887 he was made superintendent of the West London Mission, and carried the enterprise on with increasing success up to the time of his death, the three‑year rule being suspended in his case by the Wesleyan Conference. On Sundays he preached to large congregations at St. James's Hall, the public center of the mission, and was recognized as one of the most popular preachers and platform speakers in England. For twenty years he was prominent in every important religious or semi‑religious controversy. He was a leader of the Forward Movement aiming at social as well as individual salvation, and carried on with far‑reaching effect crusades against drinking, gambling, musio‑hall indecencies, and the inefficient state regulation of vice. From the beginning he was a leading spirit in the movement for the federation of the non‑conformist church, and became president of the National Council of Evangelical Free Churches. He was president of the Wesleyan Conference in 1898‑99, and for fifteen years was editor of the Methodist Times, the organ of the more advanced Methodists. He published The Atheist Shoemaker (London, 1889); The Philanthropy of God (1890); Social Christianity (1890); Ethical Christianity (1892); Essential Christianity (1894); and Morning Lands of History: A Visit to Greece, Palestine, and Egypt (1901).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A Life was written by his daughter, London, 1904; by J. G. Mantle, ib. 1901; and by A. Waiters, ib. 1907. Consult also: Hugh Price Hughes as we knew him, by the Dean of Westminster and others, ib. 1902.
THE NEAP SCHAFF‑HERZOG
sea
HUGHES, JOHN : First archbishop of New York; b. at Annaloghan, County Tyrone, Ireland, June 24, 1797; d. in New York Jan. 3, 1864. He came to America in 1817, and entered the Mount St. Mary's Catholic College at Emmittsburg, Md., in 1820. In 1826 he was ordained priest, and settled over a pariah in Philadelphia, where he remained until 1837, when he was appointed coadjutor‑bishop of New York. Soon after his consecration in 1838 he assumed the virtual administration of the diocese, and on the death of Bishop Dubois in 1842 he succeeded to the bishopric. In 1860, when the see of New York was made an archbishopric, he went to Rome to receive the gallium at the hands of the pope. In 1847 he delivered before both houses of Congress, and at their request, a discourse upon Christianity, the only Source of Moral, Social, arid Political Regeneration (New York, 1848). On Aug. 5, 1855, he laid the corner‑atone of St. Patrick's Cathedral, the high altar of which was dedicated May 25, 1879. In Nov., 1861, with Mr. Thurlow Wed, he made a semiofficial journey to Europe, at the request of Secretary Seward, to cure the friendly neutrality of European nations, especially of France.
Archbishop Hughes played a more prominent part
in America than any other Roman Catholic of his day and enjoyed much respect and popularity. He was, however, a determined Romanist, and took the Roman Catholic view of the public‑school system. He was ever ready to defend himself and his Church. He had memorable controversies with John Breckinridge, Nicholas Murray, and Erastus Brooks, editor of the New York Express. One of his acts as bishop was to remove the lay trustees of church property, and to secure the titles in his own name. In this way be stopped litigation, which had brought Romaniets into disrepute. He also established (1841) St. John's College, Fordham, N. Y. His Complete Works, consisting of occasional sermons and controversial writings, were edited by L. Kehoe (2 vole., New York, 1864‑65).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. R. G. Hansard, Life, Correspondence and Writings of Archbishop Hugh", New York, 1886; J. G. Shea, Archbishop J. Hughes, Boston, 1889; T. O'Gorman, American Church History Series, ix. 374‑37b et passim, New York, 1895.
HUGHES, JOSEPH: .English Baptist; b. in London Jan. 1,1769; d. there Oct. 12, 1833. He studied at Bristol College and at the University of Aberdeen (M.A., 1790), became classical tutor at Bristol College is 1791, assistant minister at Broadmead Chapel, Bristol, in 1792, and pastor of the Baptist Chapel at Battersea, London, in 1797. He was secretary of the Religious Tract Society sold of the British and Foreign Bible Society from their organization till his death. His writings include several sermons and the celebrated paper, The Ezceilertce of the Holy Scriptures (London, 1803).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Leifohild, Memoir of Joseph Hughes, London. 183b.

HUGHES, JOSHUA PRITCHARD: Church of England, bishop of Llandaff; h. at Llandovery (24 m. e.n.e. of Carmarthen), Carmarthenshire, Wales, Feb. 13, 1847. He was educated at Balliol College, Oxford (B.A., 1870), sad was ordered deacon in 1871 and ordained priest in the following year. He

889	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	8nahes
8ngo of 6t. Cher
Zeitalter Gregors VII., pp. 514‑515; Leipsic, 1894).
By his Vita S. Sacerdotis episcopi Lemovicensis
(d. 530; ASB, May, ii.14‑22, MPL, clxiii. 979‑1004),
and the continuation of the miracles wrought at
Fleury by St. Benedict (Les Miracles de Saint Benoit,
ed. E. de Certain, Paris, 1858, pp. 357 aqq.) Hugo
contributed his portion to aseetic literature. He is
reported also to have composed a commentareus
super Psalterium. 	CART. MIRBT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Parts of the Hist. ecel., ed. Ci. wait, is in MGM, Script., ix (1851), 337‑364, cf. MPL, clxiii. 805820. Consult: C. Mirbt, Die Wahl Gregora VIL, Marburg, 1892; E. 8ackur, in NA, xvi (1891), 369‑386; H. Bohmer, Stoat and Kirche in England and in der Normandie im 11. and 18. Jahrhunderk pp. 164‑168, Leipsic, 1899; KL, vi. 388‑389; Neander, Christian Church, iv. 141‑142.

HUGO DR SANCTA MARIA. See HUGO of FLEuRy.

HUGO OF ST. CHER (De Sancto Caro)
Dominican and cardinal; b. toward the end of
the twelfth century at St. Cher, a suburb of
Vienne; d. at Orvieto Mar. 19, 1263. He en
tered the Dominican monastery of St. Jacob at
Paris in 1224, and was soon promoted. In 1244
Innocent IV, made him cardinal, and under Alex
ander IV. he was an active member of the Commis
sion of Anagni (Charfulte universitatis Parisiensis,
i. 297, 333 sqq., 337 sqq.). Hugo was very active
as theological writer, and was one of the first to
write a commentary (not yet printed) on Peter
Lombard; his Postilla seu eommentariola junta
quadrupliem sensum on the whole Bible has often
been published, though it has no special merit.
He is regarded as the author of the oldest Biblical
correctorium, i.e., a list of more correct readings of
the Latin text of the Bible (Prologue in Denifle,
pp. 293 sqq.). He wishes to go back to the original
text, whereby, of course, two different tasks are
confounded: the restoration of the genuine text of
the Vulgate, and the restoration of the most correct
Latin version. Hugo's principles were adopted by
most of the later medieval correctors. Another, still
more important, work, whereby he became the
founder of a new kind of helps for the study of the
Bible, is his Sacrorum bibliorum concordantite, an
alphabetically arranged compilation of the inflected
words (substantives, adjectives, and verbs) found in
the ecclesiastical translation of the Bible, with all
the passages in which they occur. English Domin
icans soon enhanced the usefulness of the work by
adding the text of the different passages. The un
inflected words were also added, and in this form
the work was often printed in the sixteenth century.
The division into chapters is wrongly attributed to
Hugo; it had already been undertaken by Stephen
Langton (d. 1228). 	S. M. DEOTscH.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The beat edition of his works is that of Rouen, 1648 (3 vols.), reprinted in MPL, elxxv.‑elz:vii. Consult: J. H. H. 3asae~ugo von St. Cher. Seine Tolipkeit als Kardinal 124.44‑$S, Bonn, 1908; the Ristoire litteraire de la France, xix. 38 sqq.; R. Simon, His. toire critique des principaux commentateurs du Nouveau Testament, ii. 114 sqq., Rotterdam, 1693; t3. Berger, in Revue e Wolopie et de philoaophis, xvi (1883), 41 sqq ; H. Denise, Die Handaehriften der Bibebtorrektoren des dreizehnten Jahrhunderte, in ALKG, iv (1888), 263 sqq., 471 .qq • Neander, Christian Church, iv. 426, 618; KL, vi. 385‑387.
was curate of Neath, Glamorganshire (1872‑77), and vicar of Newcastle, Bridgend, Glamorganshire (1877‑84), and of Llantrisant, Glamorganshire (1884‑1905), in addition to being chaplain to the bishop of Llandaff from 1900 to 1905. In 1905 he was consecrated bishop of Llandaff.
HUGHES, THOMAS PATRICK: Protestant Episcopalian; b. at Henley (near Ludlow, 9 m. w. of Wariwck), Shropshire, England, Mar. 26, 1838. He was educated at Ludlow School, Islington College, and Cambridge University, but did not take a degree. He was ordained priest in 1864, and after being assistant at St. Silas, Islington, London, for a few months in the same year, went to India in 1865. From that year until 1885 he was a missionary of the Church Missionary Society and acting chaplain to the British troops at Peshawar, Afghanistan. He was also president of the Board of Examiners in the Afghan Language from 1875 to 1885, founder and editor of The Church Quarterly in 1882, and associate editor of The Civil arid Military Gazette, Lahore, in 1883. In 1885 he left India for the United States, and was successively rector of St. Savior's, Lebanon Springs, N. Y. (1885,88), assistant rector of All Souls', New York City (1888), rector of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, New York City (1889‑1902), and associate rector of the Church of the Epiphany, New York City (1902‑03). Since 1905 he has been on the staff of The New York Globe. He has written Poems of Abdur Rahman (Lahore, 1872); Kilid‑i‑Afghani (1872); Notes on Mohammedanism (London, 1875); Gany‑i‑Pukhto (Lahore, 1882); Dictionary of Islam (London, 1885); Ruhainah, the Maid of Herat (New York, 1886); American Ancestry (5 vols., Albany, N. Y., 1887‑90); Heroic Lives in Foreign Fields (New York, 1895); and The Stage from a Clergyman's Standpoint (1896).

HUGO OF FLEURY (HUGO DE SANCTA MARIA)
Historian; d. not before 1118. He first appears as an inmate of the abbey of St. Benedict at Fleury (Saint‑Benott_sur‑Loire, 20 m. ex.e. of Orl6ans), in the diocese of Orl(=ans, a famous home of scholarship and learning. Hugo composed the following historical works: (1) Historic ecclesiastica, extant in two editions; the first, in four books, comes down to the death of Charlemagne, and was produced in 1109 ; after Hugo had become acquainted with the Chronographia tripertita of Anastasius Bibliothecarius, he undertook a revised edition, and brought the narrative down to 855; this new edition came out in 1110, and contains six books (in MPL, elxiii. 821,854). (2) Ltber qui modernorum regum Francorttm continet adus comprises the time from Charles the Bald (892) to the death of King Philip (1108; MPL, clxiii. 873‑912). (3) Historsa Frarh corum brevis, from Lothair, son of Louis the Pious, to 1108 (MPL, clxii. 611‑616). Of greater interest than these historical writings, only the second of which has value as a sour, is the treatise dedicated to Henry I. of England, Tractatua de regia potestate et aacerdotali dignitate (MGH, Lib. de lite, ii., 1892, pp. 466‑494). The author advocates that the spiritual and the temporal powers shall take joint part in the government of the world, and let both work together peaceably (cf. C. Mirbt, Die Publizistik im

Hugo of 8t. victor
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
HUGO OF ST. VICTOR.
Life (¢ 1). Survey of Writings (¢ 2). His Mystical System (§ 3). The Eruditio didaecalica (¢ 4). The Summa and De sacramentis (¢ 5). His Influence (§ 8).
Of the life of Hugo, one of the three most influential theologians of the twelfth century, few details
are known. He was born in Saxony x. Life. or Flanders about 1097, and died at the monastery of St. Victor, in Paris, according to the most reliable authorities, Feb. 11, 1141. The assertion of his epitaph that he was " a Saxon by birth " is supported by the fact that he was educated up to his eighteenth year in the monastery of Hamersleben, near Halberstadt; by an autobiographical note in his Eruditio didascalica (iii. 20) , and by the later statements of old Saxon chronicles, which make him a scion of the family of the counts of Blankenburg and Regenstein, resident in the Harz Mountains. Impelled probably by his desire for knowledge, about 1115 he undertook a journey to France, accompanied by his uncle, Archdeacon Hugo of Halberstadt. Attracted by the fame of the school attached to the monastery of St. Victor in Paris, he and his uncle both joined the regular canons of St. Augustine there. Under the guidance of Gilduin as abbot, and Thomas, the successor of the famous William of Champeaux, as prior and prefect of studies, he had spent about fifteen years there when his remarkable learning and intellectual power marked him out as the successor of Thomas in the direction of the school; this position he held for about eight years. The importance of his influence is evidenced not only by thel,production of such brilliant scholars as Adam and Richard of St. Victor (qq.v.), but by the traces of the high consideration he enjoyed among his contemporaries found in the scanty remains of his correspondence. He seems to have left his monastery but seldom, and a delicate constitution rendered it impossible for him to share in all the ascetic exercises prescribed by the statutes of his order.
An accurate chronological arrangement of Hugo's numerous writings, some of which were begun at
Hamersleben, can scarcely be attained. 2. Survey of The more exclusively mystical treatises,
Writings. such as the three connected works,
De area morali, De drca mystics, and De vanitate mundi, the commentary on Ecclesiastes, etc., belong to the earlier period; while the great systematic works which show the scholastic and encyclopedic elements of his training in a richer development belong to the latter part of his life. In these, such as the Eruditio didascalica, the De sacramentis fidei, and the learned commentary on the Hierarchia ccelestis of Dionysius the Areopagite, the mystical element is rather confined to a definite sphere than allowed to color and dominate the whole; and it is precisely this proportion that has made Hugo's influence so far‑reaching in both mystical and scholastic theology. His exegetical writings, belonging to both the earlier and later periods, constitute another division. Dominated by the method of the threefold sense, they are the least original of his works, and have little interest outside
S90
of their practical and edifying aspect. To this class belong the short introductory treatise PrMnOtatiunculo; de acrapturis et scriptoribus sacris; the commentary on the Pentateuch, based largely on Bede, and specially full on the period before the fall; the similar Annotationes elucidatori(E on Judges and Kings; nineteen homilies on the first four chapters of Ecclesiastes; an allegorical‑mystical commentary on the Lamentations; and a more literal one on Joel and Obadiah. Other works of this kind attributed to Hugo are doubtful, such as the Qucestiones et decisiones in Epistolas D. Patdi, which Haurt;au and Denifle think to have been written by one of his pupils. The authenticity of the Summa sententiarum, one of his principal dogmatic works, has recently been attacked by Denifle, but successfully vindicated by Gietl and Kilgenstein, with the exception of the closing section on marriage, which they abandon. Some of the works long current under Hugo's name, but now generally given up, may contain sections of his genuine work. In the Histoire litt6raire de la France, as well as by Haurtsu, painstaking attempts have been made to distinguish these elements, which have resulted in the recovery of valuable bits of Hugo's real work. Among these may be mentioned the Annotationes elucidatorice in quosdam Psalmos which occur in the generally valueless Miscellaneorum libri, and certain parts of the Allegories in Vetus et Novum Testamentum. These are not only the Opusculum de quinque septenis and the Explanatio in canticum Maria, but also an Expositio orationis dominic&e which joins with an explanation of the seven petitions a warning against the seven deadly sins. Still a subject of controversy is the authenticity of the chronicle ascribed to Hugo in numerous manuscripts, under the title of Liber de tribes maximis circumstanciis gestomm, which consists of a summary of the history of the world from Adam to Christ, followed by chronological tables, and then, in two parallel columns of popes and emperors, a synchronism of Christian history down to 1035; a continuation by another hand brings it down to near 1200. It has been defended by Haurtau, but pronounced not to be Hugo's by the Histoire litt6raire de la France, apparently by Wattenbach, and by Waitz, who gives a critical edition of it (MGH, Script., xxiv. 88‑101).
Hugo's mystical system is dominated by the thought of a threefold progression in knowledge of divine things. In the introduction to
3. His the commentary on Ecclesiastes.he disMystical tinguishes three stages: cogitatio, or
	System.	conception by means of sensual no
		tions; meditatio, or searching into the
hidden sense of that which has been thus conceived;
and contemplatio, or the final free insight into the
inwardness of things. To the three organs of per
ception, the bodily eye, the speculative reason, and
the contemplative insight, correspond the three
fundamental objects, matter, soul, and God. This
Areopagite division of the stages of progress re
appears in various portions of his works, sometimes
with slight differences, as when the stages of cogita
tion and meditation are preceded by preliminary
steps; before cogitatio comes lectio, and before medi
tatio prayer and good works (oratio, operatic).

391	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA 	Hugo of St. Victor
Throughout the theoretical is subordinated to the practical, the mystical subjective to the ecclesiastical objective. The pantheizing element of the older mystical tradition is kept out as far as possible; even when he follows the speculations of the pseudo‑Dionysius most closely, he still teaches an Areopagitism which is converted into ecclesiastical orthodoxy. Even when he depicts the contemplative union with God under the aspect of complete annihilation of the human self, of the passing of the ego into God, and the like, there is no question of a pantheistic conception.
Hugo's mystical theories take their broadest sweep in the encyclopedic work in which, following
Isidore of Seville, the De uniroerso of ¢. The Rabanus Maurus, and the Imago mundi Eruditio of Honorius of Autun, he attempts to
Didascalica. give a comprehensive view of the whole
of secular and spiritual knowledge. The first half of the Eruditio didascalica offers in three books a survey of the secular or empirical sciences, while the second half, also in three books, forms an introduction to the study of Scripture and church history. What in some editions is appended as a seventh book under the title of De opere tKum dierum or De creations primi hominis is really a separate mystical treatise on the rise of human intelligence from the consideration of creatures to the Trinity. The first part of the large work divides knowledge into intelligence, or the higher; science, or the lower; and logic, or the formal. The last‑named, as a necessary tool, comes first in treatment, divided into the triviumgrammar, rhetoric, dialectic. The department of intelligence is divided into theoretical and practical or ethical; of these the former again falls into three divisions, theology, mathematics, and physics, while mathematics is once more subdivided into the branches of the quadrivium‑arithmetic, music, geometry, and astronomy; the latter has ethics, economics, and politics for its branches. The domain of science in this sense, also called mechanics, includes the knowledge necessary for trades, professions, and arts. The theological section of the work follows in the main, as to its methodological counsels, the works of Cassiodorus and Isidore, and Jerome for its introduction to Scriptural study, on the importance of which Hugo lays great stress. He seems to include with the Scriptures the Church Fathers, canons, and decretals‑at least he applies a great part of what he says about the system and value of Scriptural study to them, although elsewhere (e.g., De sacromentis, I., i. 17) he properly subordinates them to the canonical writings.
Hugo's fundamental religious views and doctrinal peculiarities may be seen most clearly, in the De
	a acramzntis chrastianx fades: or in the
g. The	shorter compendium Summa sententi
Summa	arum, works based principally on Au
and De	gustine and Gregory the Great, but
	Sacramentis.influenced by Erigena and Abelard.
	To the dialectic and skeptical tendency
	of the last‑named, however, Hugo's own ecclesias
	tical and dogmatic habit of mind is fundamentally
	opposed. None the less, he has evidently exercised
	a stimulating influence, and the treatment in the
	Summa of the Trinity and the Incarnation has
decided reminiscences of him. The traditional ecclesiastical teaching is more closely followed in the sections on the creation and fall of the angels and of man, on the sacraments of the old covenant and on the law as the basis of all ethical doctrine, and on the sacraments of baptism, confirmation, communion, and unction.
But the ripest fruit of Hugo's intellectual labors is found in the great work " On the Mysteries of the Christian Faith," the Sacramenta, composed about 1140. He lays down at the very beginning his objection to the more skeptical standpoint of Abelard, but agrees with him that the task of theology is to promote understanding of the faith. Its main objects are " not according to reason, but above reason," while all that is either a product of reason alone or contrary to reason is excluded from its province. It consists of two parts, rognitio, or the matter of faith, and afedus, or‑the act of faith. It is in this latter or subjective element that the real value of faith lies‑the direction of the heart, the apprehension of God by the will. The objects of faith are divided into two classes, works of creation and works of restoration. Starting from the existence of creation, he first considers the Creator in his various attributes, including the triune nature, as to which he is indebted not only to Abelard, but to Anselm. Next he treats the creation and fall of the angels, soberly and without the superfluity of idle questions in which later scholasticism indulged. In the doctrine of the nature and sin of man he shows himself a moderate Augustinian, and defines original sin (as did Melanchthon) as consisting in ignorance and concupiscence. In his doctrine of grace and the law he offers a number of weighty suggestions which were worked out by later scholastics. Thus he divides grace into gratin creatrix, the grace of the original condition, to which for the performance of actually good works by unfallen man must be added gratis apposita (the gratis superadditn of later scholasticism); and gratis salvatrix, which is subdivided into operans and cooperans. Similarly fruitful were his teachings as to the natural and the written law, and the means of grace corresponding to these two stages in human history. Like Anselm in Cur Deus homo, he teaches not an absolute necessity for the incarnation, but that it was the method of redemption most suitable and worthy of God. The consideration of the Church as the mystical body of Christ, of the constitution of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, of sacred vestments and the consecration of churches brings him to the doctrine of the sacraments in the narrower sense. He enumerates more than the four of the Summa, but without teaching the number seven as definitely as Peter Lombard was to do. After treating as of primary importance baptism with confirmation and the Lord's Supper, he discusses a number of subordinate ceremonies (the use of holy water, blessing of palms and candles, the sign of the cross, the insuffiation in exorcism, etc.), and reckons ordination and the blessing of sacred vessels among these minor " sacraments of administration and preparation," which he distinguishes from the necessary " sacraments of salvation "; but then he returns to more important sacraments, relatively if not absolutely necessary,

Hugo of 8t. Victor Huguenots
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
under which head he treats matrimony, confession and absolution, and unction. In his doctrine of vows and the chapter on virtues and vices he takes an allpost Evangelical position. After these valuable ethical sections, whose content is partly repeated in some of his smaller practical ascetic treatises, especially the epistle De laude caritatis, he has a relatively short sketch of eschatology, noteworthy for the sober, almost Scriptural, manner in which the invocation of saints is discussed.
It is the Sacraments. which gives Hugo his basic position in the development of Western theology
and makes it possible for Harnack to
6. His call him " really the most influential Influence. theologian of the twelfth century."
	If it is asked why later scholasticism
nevertheless adopted as the foundation of its system
not his De aacramentis, but the " Sentences " of
Peter Lombard, a work wholly dependent upon it,
but far inferior, especially in its doctrine of God and
in speculative depth, the answer is to be found in
‑the fact that the very independence, the subjective
quality of Hugo's theology, however useful it may
have been for the vivid conception of individual
truths, was not so well suited to the purposes of a
text‑book that should give a calm and clear survey
of the whole faith as the simple, objective presenta
tion of the Lombard, with its clear definitions, its
sharp and easily seen distinctions. None the less,
Hugo's importance in the history of religious thought
must not be underestimated. Apart from his in
fluence on dogmatic development, he was the most
powerful mystical thinker that France had‑ seen
since Erigena, and in fact the real founder of the
French mystical school of the Middle‑ Ages, since
Bernard of Clairvaux is dependent upon. him in all
the main lines of mystical speculation; and it is not
to be wondered at that admiring posterity called
him a second Augustine, or that Thomas Aquinas
said that his words "were those of a master and had
the force of authority." 	(O. ZbcxLERt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The editio prineeps appeared Paris, 1518;
	a better edition, 3 vols., ib. 1526, several times reprinted;
	best edition Rouen, 1648, reproduced, MPL, clxxv.
	eixxvii. Consult: J. B. Haurdau, Los (Euvres de Hupues
	de S. Victor: essai critique, Paris, 1886; K. T. A. Liebner,
	Hugo von St. Victor and die theoiopischen Richtunpen se iner
	Zeit, Leipsic, 1832; L. Gautier, Les (Euvres pofiquea
	d'Ada»I de S. Victor, Paris. 1858; W. Preger, Geschichts
	der deutechen Mystik, i. 227‑441, Leipeie, 1874; R. Bindel,
	Die Erkenntnistheorie Hugo# von St. Victor, Quakenbrtlek,
	1889; H. Ostler, Die Psychoiopis des Hugo von St. Victor,
	MUneter, 1906; Histoire littfrdiro do la France, xii (1830),
	1‑72; Ceillier, Auteurs sacrb, xiv. 347‑361; Neander,
	Christian Church, iv. 40P‑~ et passim; ‑Harnack, Dog
	ma, vol. vi. passim; and the works on the history of phi
	losophy by Ritter, Ueberweg, Windelband, and Erdmann.
HUGO THE WHITE (Candidus, Albua, Blancus): Cardinal; d. probably soon after 1098. He was one of the Lotharingians drawn to his court by Pope Leo IX., and had been a monk of Remiremont in the diocese of Toul. Leo appointed him cardinal priest about 1049. When, subsequent to the death of Nicholas II. (1061), the schism broke out, Hugo took sides with Bishop Cadalus of Parma (Honorius II.; see HONORIUB II., ANTIPOPE), and even played a decisive part in the latter's elevation. But on submitting to Alexander II. he not only obtained pardon, but was forthwith employed as
Roman legate in Spain. Most zealously he devoted himself to this commission, to enforcing priestly celibacy, and to supplanting the Mozarabie liturgy, by the ritual of Rome. In 1072 he was legate in France, though only for a short time; he was accused of simony, and the accusation came up for discussion at the Roman lenten synod of Alexander II. in.Mar., 1073. However, he does not appear to have been condemned.
Very intimate relations prevailed between Hugo and Hildebrand in 1073. Hugo bad done much to promote the election of Gregory VIL, and was straightway entrusted by him with an embassy to Spain. Before long, however, the cardinal sided with Gregory's opponents, and thenceforth combated him with implacable enmity. The breach probably occurred as early as 1074. Hugo's excommunication ‑was voted by the Roman lenten synod of 1075. Through Guibert of Ravenna, he now began to affiliate with the newly appointed Archbishop Theobald of Milan, and went as confidential agent of the anti‑Gregorian party to Germany, to King Henry IV. At the Council of Worms, Jan. 24, 1076, he exercised an unsalutary influence, and the inconsiderate resolutions of this assembly were primarily due to Hugo. At the Roman lenten synod of 1078 Gregory deprived him of St. Clement's Church, in Rome, degraded him from the priesthood, and anathematized him. Hugo was present at the synod convened by Henry IV. at Brixen (June 25, 1078) among the Italian bishops who formed the majority there, and was the first to subscribe the decree of deposition against Gregory. The former cardinal exerted himself passionately in favor of the antipope, Clement III., and his violent efforts bore fruit at Rome in 1084, when, conjointly with the successes of Henry IV., there occurred the great defection from Gregory VIL, wherein no fewer, than thirteen cardinals participated.
After the death of Gregory VII. Hugo continued to support Clement III., both under Victor II. (1086‑87), and under Urban II. (1088‑99). Clement created him bishop of Prmneste. Possibly Hugo was vested with this dignity as early as 1089; he certainly was in. 1093, and still in 1098,
CARL MIRBT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. Mirbt, Die Wall Gregor* VII., Marburg, 1892; idem, Die Pu6tiristik im Zeitalter Grepors Viz.,
pp. 6 eqq., 16, Leipsic, 1894; G. Meyer von Knonau, Jahrbacker des dmuchen Reichs unter Heinrich IV. and V.,
Leipsic, 1890‑94; w. Martens, Gregor VIL, ib.1894; F. Gregorovius, Hist. of City of Rome, iv. 2, pp. 124, 126, 149, 177, 189, 195, London, 1896; Neander, Christian Church, iv. 106‑107; KL, vi. 384‑385; and literature under the articles on the popes named in the text.
HUGUCCIO, hil‑gQ'chf‑o (HUGO OF PISA): Annotator of the Gmt1an decretals; b. in Pisa; d. at Ferrara 1210. He studied Roman and canon law at Bologna, where he also taught canon law; in 1190 he was bishop of Ferrara, where he began the work on which his fame rests, the Summa to the decretals of Gratian, using the CompiWio prima of Bernhard of Pavia.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. F. von Schulte, Geachichle der Quellen and Literatur des eanonischun Rechts, i. 156‑170, Stuttgart, 1875:

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Hn~o of.' St. victor Hugnenota
HUGUENOTS.
I. Huguenots in France.
Beginnings (§ 1).
History, 1525‑1534 (1 2).
History, 1534‑1547 (13).
Persecutions, 1547‑1580 (§ 4).
Growth of Protestantism, 1560‑1561 (¢ b).
First and Second Wars, 1562‑1588 (§ 6).
1. Huguenots in France: The term" Huguenots," a party name of uncertain origin, was applied by
their opponents to the Protestants of i. Begin‑ France from Mar., 1560, onward (posnings. sibly from Eidgenomen, " confeder‑
ates " or " conspirators "; possibly from Hugo in the sense of ghost of the night, from the popular superstition that the spirit of Hugh Capet wanders about at night, in allusion to the nocturnal and secret meetings of the persecuted people). The influence of the radical Evangelicals of the twelfth and following centuries, notwithstanding inquisitorial proceedings against them intended to be exterminating, still persisted in considerable force at the beginning of the sixteenth century. The interest of Francis I. (1515‑47) in ecclesiastical matters was political and humanistic. His sister Margaret drew around her a coterie of humanists and religious enthusiasts (see MARGARET of NAVARRE). Among the humanistic reformers who influenced Margaret, and were influenced by her, were Guillaume Briponnet and Faber Stapulensis (qq.v.). The last‑named anticipated Luther in denying the , efficacy of external works and in rejecting transubstantiation (1512). The excommunication of Luther (1520) and his condemnation by the Diet of Worms (1521) was followed by a denunciation of Luther's books by the Sorbonne and an order from the Parliament of Paris for the surrender of Brigonnet and Faber Stapulensis. Brigonnet submitted; Faber Stapulensis, protected by Brigonnet and Margaret, held his ground. Guillaume Farel (q.v.), a zealous young disciple of Faber, soon made his way to Switzerland. Gdrard Roussel (q.v.) was, like Faber, obliged to leave the diocese in Oct., 1525. A woolcarder, Jean Leclerc, provoked persecution by tearing down a papal indulgence bull and posting in its place a denunciation of the pope as Antichrist (Dec., 1524). His continued zeal led to his execution at Metz (July, 1525).
The defeat and imprisonment of the king by the emperor (1524‑26) left France bleeding and dis‑
couraged in the hands of the queens. History, mother, Louise de Savoie, who attrib‑
1525‑34• uted the misfortunes of France to the
divine displeasure at the toleration of heresy. An inquisitorial commission was established in Mar., 1525. Several of the leaders of the Reformation in Meaux, a town only a dozen miles east of Paris, had to flee for their lives. Having suffered such humiliation at the hands of the emperor, without effective protest on the part of the pope, it was natural that the king should allow his humanistic spirit of tolerance to control for the time his policy, especially as his sister Margaret had
Third and Fourth Were, 1588‑1573
Further Struggles, 1574‑1589 (¢ 8). Henry IV., Edict of Nantes, 15891824 (§ 9).
Richelieu and Meaarin, 1824‑1881
Revocation of Edict of Nantes
u. Huguenot Refugees.
The Netherlands and Switzerland
U 1).
England and America (§ 2).
Germany and Elsewhere (¢ 3).
Influence of Huguenot Refugees
entered into correspondence with Protestant nobles and led him to believe that he might retrieve his fortunes by forming an alliance with them against the house of Hapsburg. . The Meaux Evangelicals returned to France, and Faber Stapulensis became tutor to the king's son. The fact that two of the French princes were still held by the emperor as hostages to guarantee the treaty on which Francis had been liberated made alliance with the Lutheran princes impracticable. The sending of a Lutheran army by the emperor to capture and sack Rome and to imprison the pope provoked the indignation of French Roman Catholics, who, at an assembly of notables (Dec., 1527), offered to contribute to the exhausted royal exchequer 1,300,000 livres if the king would " uproot and extirpate the damnable and insufferable Lutheran sect." This he rashly promised to do. Cardinal Bourbon caused provincial ecclesiastical councils to be held (1528) at Seas, Bourges, and Lyons for the intensification of antiLutheran sentiment. The shocking mutilation of an image of the Virgin Mary with the infant Jesus in her arms by some overzealous Evangelical in a street of Paris precipitated the onslaught on the " Lutherans." Expiatory processions intensified Catholic zeal, while the martyrdom of Louie de Berquin (q.v.) made many friends for the Evangelical cause. The preparation of the Protestants of Germany for armed resistance to the emperor after the rejection of their confession at the Diet of Augsburg (1530) revived the hope of the king for an alliance with the Lutheran princes and with Henry VIII. of England. Persecution ceased; an Evangelical minister was invited to preach in the Louvre; and members of the Sorbonne were banished for accusing Margaret of Navarre of heresy. On Nov. 1, 1533, Nicholas Cop, rector of the University of Paris, delivered an Evangelical address, in the composition of which his young friend John Calvin is thought to have had a part, which created such commotion that both fled precipitately from France. Catholics and Evangelicals alike made large use of strongly corded broadsides, which were printed and posted in public places in Paris and elsewhere.
In Oct., 1534, an unusually denunciatory placard was posted throughout the principal streets of Paris entitled " True Articles respecting the
3. History, horrible, great, and insupportable
	1534‑47•	abuses of the Papal Mass." Pope,
		clergy, and monks were stigmatized as
" false prophets, damnable deceivers, apostates,
false shepherds, idolaters, seducers, liars, and exe
crable blasphemers, murderers of souls, renouncers of
Jesus Christ, . . . false witnesses, traitors, thieves,
and robbers of the honor of'God, and more detestable

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
than devils." A copy of the placard was affixed to the door of the king's bedchamber. The king, infuriated beyond measure, now became a violent persecutor. Margaret interceded in vain. He even went so far as to prohibit (Jan., 1535) any exercise of the art of printing, but when parliament refused to register the decree, its execution was suspended. It was reported that the Protestants had formed a plot on a certain occasion to assassinate Roman Catholics gathered for worship in all the churches. Large numbers were executed, and an expiatory procession aroused Roman Catholic enthusiasm to the highest pitch. At the close of the ceremony Francis declared that if one of his arms were infected with the poison of heresy he would cut it off, and if his own children were contaminated he would immolate them. The remonstrance of Lutheran princes and measures of toleration in the Netherlands may have influenced Francis to discontinue the frightful persecution that followed. He now (Mar., 1535) invited and urged Melanchthon to come to Paris to aid in restoring religious harmony, hoping to further an alliance with the Lutheran princes against the emperor; but the elector peremptorily refused to let Melanchthon go. Appeals for toleration came from Swiss and Lutheran theologians alike. Calvin dedicated his "Institutes" " to the Very Christian King of France," with the hope of allaying his persecuting fury. With the publication of this monumental work and his settlement in Geneva, Calvin soon became the recognized leader of French Protestantism, and Geneva the trainingschool from which hundreds of ministers returned to France (see CALvix, Jomv; and GEUSvA). Royal edicts (1538, 1539, 1540, 1542) intensified efforts for the extermination of heresy. The Waldenses of Piedmont had come into close relations with the Swiss Reformers (1532). Francis protected them until 1545, when he ordered their extermination. Twenty of their villages were burned, and nearly 4,000 were massacred, while 700 of the stronger men ware sent to the galleys. A considerable number fl:d to Switzerland. The Calvinists at Meaux were seiz4d at a meeting and many of them executed.
Francis died in Mar., 1547. Henry II., who had married Catherine de Medici, was influenced toward a thoroughgoing policy of extermination
4. Persecu‑ by his mistress, Diana of Poitiers, tions, the Constable Montmorency, and the rS47‑6o. Guises, who had risen to high consideration under Francis. Calvinists were now represented in every part of France except Brittany. Disguised evangelists traversed the country holding secret meetings and distributing literature. At the beginning of his reign Henry II. established a new inquisitorial tribunal, the Chambre Ardente, "the burning chamber." Many executions followed the Edict of Fontainebleau prohibiting the printing and importation of books pertaining to the Scriptures. In Nov., 1549, ecclesiastical judges were given power to deal independently with ordinary cases of heresy. The Edict of Chateaubriand (June, 1551) renewed and fortified the inquisitorial measures; so that the burning of heretics became a matter of almost daily occurrence. Just at this time (1551) Henry joined bands with Maurice of Saxony (q.v.) and Albert of
Prussia against the emperor, and assisted in saving German Protestantism from disaster (see CHARLES V.; and S^°'UrRArn AgTICLE6). Congregations had been organized at Meaux (1546) and at Nimes (1547), but these had been broken up. In 1555, following Calvin's advice and methods, an organizing movement was inaugurated. Paris led. Meaux, Poitiers, Angers, Saintonge, Agen, Bourgee, Issoudun, Aubigny, Blois, Tours, Lyons, OrlSans, Rouen, and many others quickly followed. By 1560 there were about fifty fully organized churches, besides many unorganized congregations. In May, 1559, the first national synod compiled a confession and s book of discipline. The confession was an adaptation of one prepared by Calvin two years before and addressed apologetically to.the king. The book of discipline provided for consistories in the local churches, colloquies of representatives from several consistories, provincial synods, and a national synod. No church was to have a rank above other churches. All ministers must sign the confession and subject themselves to the provisions of the discipline. For some years before the death of Henry II. several of the colleges (Angers, Bourges, Fontenay, La Rochelle, etc.) were accused of encouraging Protestantism. In 1559 a minority of the parliament of Paris protested against the cruel proceedinge of the Chambre Ardente. Four of the boldest members were sent to the Bastile. On the death of Henry II. (July 10,1559), Francis II. being a minor, the government fell into the hands of the Guises (Charles, cardinal of Lorraine, and Francis, duke of Guise). They compassed the death of the imprisoned members of parliament. The execution of Antoine du Bourg, a man of heroic type, provoked a reaction in favor of the Protestants. The Bourbon princes, Louis de Condo and Antoine de Bourbon, and their many friends among the nobles resented the obtrusive assumption of authority by the Guises. Antoine had married Jeanne d'Albret, daughter of Margaret of Navarre, who was a zealous Evangelical. Neither Antoine nor Louis was deeply religious; but the influence of Jeanne and hostility to the Guises made them willing to put themselves at the head of the persecuted Evangelicals. A fearful popular onslaught on the Evangelicals of Paris led to an appeal to Catherine for protection. As she had become jealous of the Guises, she gave encouragement to the persecuted.
Under the leadership of La Renaudie, a conspiracy was formed at Amboise for the seizure of the Guises (Feb., 1560). The betrayal of the plot
5. Growth led to a massacre. Under the influence of Protes‑ of Gaspard de Coligny (q.v.), soon to tantism, become the soldier and statesman of . ,56o‑6i. the Huguenots, and the Chancellor Michel de 1'H8pital (see L'HtirixAL, MICHEL DE), Catherine undertook to mitigate the persecution. At an assembly of the notables at Fontainebleau (Aug. 21, 1580) Coligny read a petition of the Evangelicals for toleration. He declared that 50,000 signatures could be secured in Normandy alone. Soon afterward another conspiracy was reported in which Antoine and CondS were involved. They were summoned to court and Condo was condemned to death. The

896	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Huguenots
Guises were thought to be preparing for a wholesale massacre. On the death of Francis II. (Dec. 5, 1560) Catherine assumed the regency on behalf of her young son, Charles IX. She associated with her in the regency Antoine de Bourbon, released Louis de Condd, restored to confidence Montmorency, and made L'Hopital chancellor. The States General assembled on Dec. 13. The Chancellor urged the unification of religion; and Coligny presented a petition of the Evangelicals for toleration. The royal " ordinance of Orldans " (Jan. 28, 1561) suspended persecution. .Rash proceedings on the part of the Evangelicals and mob violence on the part of the Catholics intensified the animosity of the parties. Many nobles, had now cast in their lot with the new religion. Vast assemblies, often armed for defense, were held in many places. Coligny, Jeanne d'Albret, and other nobles refused to obey a royal edict (July, 1561) forbidding‑such assemblies; and at the reassembling of the States General (Aug., 1561), nobles, and third estate demanded toleration and a national council for the settlement of religious difficulties. A suspension of persecution followed; prisoners were released; and fugitives returned. Charles IX. urged the Genevan authorities to withdraw their preachers, and threatened the city. Calvin replied that the city authorities had sent no missionaries and that the work was purely voluntary. Becoming convinced that there was a secret compact between Antoine and Catherine to turn France over to the Huguenots, Montmorency formed P. compact with Francis of Guise and St. Andrd (Apr., 1561) to thwart the scheme (Triumvirate). A conspiracy, in which the king of Spain was involved, for the destruction of the Calvinists and all the Bourbons; of Geneva, with the massacre of every inhabitant; and ultimately of Protestantism throughout Europe, was reported to have been formed. Riotous outbreaks led the government to prohibit the use of the terms " Papist " and "Huguenot" and the invasion of homes for interfering with religious meetings, though the Parliament of Paris protested against such recognition of the Huguenots.
In pursuance of Catherine's policy of conciliation, the Religious Conference of Poissy (q.v.) was held in Sept., 1561, between the Roman 6. First and Catholic bishops and representatives of
Second	the Evangelicals. A royal edict fol‑
Wars,	lowed (Jan., 1562) requiring the Evan‑
	1562‑68.	gelicals to surrender all church build
		ings that they had appropriated, and
forbidding Evangelical meetings inside of walled
cities, but permitting them in private houses within
the towns and anywhere outside the towns. This
compromise was regarded as highly satisfactory by
Calvin and by the Huguenot leaders. The peace was
broken (Mar., 1562) by a bloody attack on a Hu
guenot congregation at Vassy, a walled town, by
order of the duke of Guise, who was passing through.
This was followed by similar attacks in many places.
At Toulouse 3,000 Evangelicals were treacherously
slain. War was soon raging with Mon tmorencyand
Guise at the head of the Catholic forces, and Coligny
and Condd as leaders of the Evangelicals. Calvin
tried to assuage, as he had tried to prevent, the
religious war. Guise was shot by a Huguenot (Feb., 1563); Montmorency and Condd had been made prisoners; the marshal Saint‑Andr6 and Antoine de Bourbon died during the war. Catherine had abandoned her policy of conciliation; yet she desired peace, and the Edict of Amboise (Mar. 18, 1563) embodied the results of negotiations to this end. To nobles and gentry was accorded the right to practise the " religion which they call reformed " in their own houses. In every bailiwick the Evangelicals could on petition secure one suburban meeting‑place. In cities where Evangelical worship was already practised one or two places to be designated by the king might be retained. The Huguenots were to enjoy liberty of conscience, but were to restore Catholic property seized by them, and to dismiss all foreign troops. The nobles were to receive back all honors, offices, and dignities possessed before the war. A papal bull outlawing and turning over to the inquisition heretical prelates and nobles, including Cardinal Odet de Coligny (q.v.) and Jeanne d'Albret, called forth an earnest protest from the royal council. The close relations into which Catherine had been drawn with Philip II. of Spain (he had married her daughter in 1559) through the Duke of Alva (Conference of Bayonne, June, 1565) and the many indignities the Evangelicals were suffering led the latter to break the truce and to enter upon the second war. Coligny, Condd, and other leaders became convinced that a massacre was imminent, and decided to take the initiative. The plan, which came near succeeding, was to arrange a general uprising of Huguenots, to drive from court or capture the cardinal of Lorraine, dispel the Swiss guards, the chief instrument of royal tyranny, and take charge of the king. The Constable Montmorency was killed in the battle of St. Denis. Catherine was from the first anxious for peace, and the Huguenots were treacherously led (Condd and Coligny opposing) to agree to a cessation of hostilities (Peace of Longjumeau, 1568). The government proceeded to put large garrisons in Huguenot cities, quartering the soldiers upon families. Even if the government had bad the best intentions toward the Huguenots, it would have been impossible fully to protect them, especially when their zeal led them to acts of iconoclasm and to the use of opprobrious language.
The organization of zealous Catholics into a " Christian and Royal League " (1568) for the extirpation of Protestantism made the
q. Third situation still more critical. Papal,
and	Spanish, and Jesuit influences were at
Fourth	work. The government bad advanced
Wars,	to Condd and Coligny funds to pay off
	1563‑q3.	the German troops. The ruinous de
		mand for immediate repayment was an
effort to array the masses against the Evangelicals.
The Huguenots were still further embarrassed (Aug.
1568) by a requirement to take an oath of allegiance
to the king. For some time the cardinal of Lorraine
and Chancellor L'HBpital had striven for the mastery
in the direction of the government. The latter was
friendly to the Huguenots; but the cardinal now
triumphed. A plot to seize Condd and Coligny was
frustrated by their flight to La Rochelle. Seeing

Huguenots	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	896
that war was unavoidable, they hastily marshaled their forces. Louis d'Andelot gathered an army in Breton and Normandy; Jeanne d'Albret with her young son, Henry (b. Dec. 13, 1553), rode at the front of the troops of Gascony and Provence. Notwithstanding a crushing defeat at Moncontour, Jeanne and Coligny refused to submit, and by Aug., 1570, they had gained such advantages as to be able to secure in the Edict of St. Germain freedom of conscience throughout France, freedom of worship wherever it had been enjoyed before the war, the holding of La Rochelle, Montauban, Cognac, and La Charitk (strongly fortified towns) as pledges of the good faith of the government, and withdrawal of the king from alliance with Spain. Catherine had set her heart on the marriage of one of her sons with Elizabeth of England, and of her daughter with Henry of Navarre. Charles IX. now began to assert his kingship, and was anxious to assist the Dutch Evangelicals in their struggle with Spain. Coligny became his favorite adviser, and was the recipient of large gifts; and Henry of Navarre married (Aug. 18, 1572) the king's sister, Margaret of Valois. The ascendency of Coligny over the young king imperiled Catherine's influence and the continuance of peace with Spain. The Guises (a new generation) were intensely hostile to Coligny. Catherine resolved on the death of Coligny, and planned the massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day (Aug. 24, 1572; see COLI(iNY, GASPARD). Henry of Nar varre and Henry of Condb were spared, but compelled to bow before the altar. While most of the leaders had been destroyed, the great mass of the Huguenot membership remained. A fourth war resulted from efforts of the government to capture Sancerre and La Rochelle, still in the hands of the Huguenots. The former town, after enduring the horrors of a long siege, was obliged to surrender; the latter suffered much, but succeeded in driving away the besiegers. The Peace of Boulogne (July, 1573) restricted Evangelical worship to La Rochelle, Nimes, Montauban, and the houses of the nobles. The Huguenots went on with their preparations for war. Councils at Nimes and Montauban demanded freedom of worship throughout France, maintenance of Huguenot garrisons by the government, two cities of refuge in each province, condemnation of the massacre and punishment of its perpetrators, and a guaranty of their rights by the Protestant states of Europe. The massacre had called forth a vigorous national party (Len Politiqum) that was ready to join with the Huguenots in the struggle against the tyranny of the foreigners, Catherine, and the Guises in alliance with Spain and the pope.
Charles IX. (d. May 30, 1574) was succeeded by his brother, then king of Poland, as Henry III. His
younger brother, the duke of Anjou,
8. Further escaped from the court Sept. 15, 1575,
Struggles, and joined Henry of Cond6, who was
1574‑89• gathering an army of Huguenots and
Politiques (fifth war); Henry of Navarre escaped Feb. 3, 1576. In the following May the king issued the Edict of Beaulieu, which granted freedom of worship in all towns except Paris and places of royal residence, gave to the Huguenots
eight fortified cities, disowned all share in the massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day and gave the Huguenots representation in the parliaments. Henry III. soon repudiated the peace on the ground that it had been extorted from him, and, with the duke of Guise and Catherine, promoted the formation throughout the country of Catholic leagues. The Staten General (Dec., 1576) adopted a policy of drastic repression and brought on the sixth war. The Huguenots failed to receive the aid they had hoped for from England and Germany, and suffered heavy losses. The Edict of Poitiers (Sept. 15, 1577) ended the war and materially reduced the privileges of the Huguenots. The conference at Nerac between Catherine and Henry of Navarre, in which the former tried in vain to persuade the latter to give up the cities held by the
. Huguenots and to take back her daughter, from whom he had been separated for three years, resulted favorably to the Huguenots. Henry III.
~I	took Geneva under his protection to prevent its falling into the hands of the duke of Savoy. The conditions of the peace were repeatedly violated by the Huguenots as well as by the government. Henry of Navarre and Henry of Condb arranged for a general uprising of the Huguenots (Apr. 15, 1580). Only a minority of the Huguenots participated in the seventh war. The Peace of Fleix (Dec., 1580) did little more than confirm that which had just been broken. For nearly five years France enjoyed a profound peace. The duke of Anjou, Catherine's youngest son, who had been cooperating with the Huguenots, died June 10, 1584. As Henry III. had no son, Henry of Navarre now became the heirapparent. Urged to renounce Protestantism and to come to court, he resolutely refused. The League, made up of Catholic nobles supported by the pope and Philip of Spain, and led by Henry of Guise, weary of the dilatory measures of Henry III., and fearful of the succession of Henry of Navarre, published a manifesto (Mar. 30, 1585) in which the government was reprimanded for the toleration of heresy. The king sought to make peace with the League by promising to revoke all edicts of toleration and to banish all who would not embrace the Catholic faith (July, 1585). The pope declared Henry of Navarre incapable of succession.
~An eighth war, the " war of the three Henrys " (king, Guise, Navarre), broke out before the close of the year. The Leaguers gave the king only a conditional and partial support, and aimed to put Cardinal de Bourbon on the throne. After some early reverses Henry of Navarre steadily gained ground, and at Coutras (Oct. 20, 1587) he almost annihilated the main army of his opponents. An army of 8,000 German cavalry and 20,000 Swiss infantry, to whose equipment England had contributed, was marching to join Henry of Navarre, but was intercepted and driven out of the country. The Guinea, as leaders of the League, now insisted that the king should publish the decrees of the Council of Trent (q.v.), admit the Inquisition, execute Huguenot prisoners, and remove all army officers whose loyalty to Catholicism was doubtful. A secret government for Paris wan formed, and a plot to seize the king came near succeeding. The

king now brought into Paris 4,000 Swiss as an addi
tional body‑guard. Paris, under the influence of
the League, rose in revolt (" the day of Barricades,"
May 18, 1588), and the king was obliged to yield to
the demands of Henry of Guise in order to be per
mitted to flee from the city. The meeting of the
States General at Blois (Oct., 1588) further demon
strated that Guise was in control. The Estates gave
to Guise full control of the army. The Spanish
Armada had just been destroyed, and the king
hoped, by tolerating the Huguenots, to secure the
aid of England against the League. He had the
duke and the cardinal of Guise put to death and the
leading members of the League imprisoned. Revo
lution followed. Catherine de' Medici died Jan. 5,
1589. The king felt compelled to call to his aid
Henry of Navarre and the Huguenots. After a
number of victories Henry of Navarre and the king
had invested Paris and were preparing for an
assault, when the king was assassinated Aug. 1, 1589.
	Henry of Navarre was now the legitimate heir to
the throne; but he was deserted by the royalist
		troops, and the Leaguers declared
	g. Henry Cardinal de Bourbon king as Charles X.
	IV., Edict Catholic opponents of the League urged
	of Nantes, Henry to become a Catholic, promising
	I58g‑I6zq. him their support on that condition.
		He refused, but promised that Cathol
icism should remain the religion of the state. During
the ensuing year, with greatly inferior numbers and
resources, he more than held his own. When Charles
X. died (May 10,1590), some of the leading Leaguers
were in favor of offering the sovereignty of France
to the king of Spain. Finding his party in a small
minority, and his opponents resolved never to sub
	mit to a Huguenot king, Henry made up his mind
	that " Paris is worth a mass," and resolved, as the
	only way to give peace to the country and security
	to his kingship, to conform to the Roman Catholic
	Church. It must be borne in mind that Henry was
	a soldier and politician rather than a moral or
	religious hero, and that the throne of France had
	for years been the object of his aspirations. The
	League at once withdrew its opposition; Paris
	received him with acclamations of joy; the Spanish
	troops were dismissed; and universal amnesty was
	proclaimed. War with Spain delayed the formula
	tion of Henry's promised provision for the security
	of the Huguenots. In their General Assembly
	(1593‑94) they pledged themselves to continue in
	the faith, discussed fully the politieo‑ecclesiastiml
	situation, and appointed four delegates to confer
	with the king. By the Edict of Nantes of May 2,
	1598 (see NANTE6, EDICT OF), all public institutions
	and offices were thrown open to the Huguenots, and
	200 towns, several of them strongly fortified, to be
	garrisoned by state‑paid Huguenot troops, were
	left in their hands. The assassination of Henry IV.
	(May 14, 1610) put the Huguenots in a distinctly
	less favorable position. Though the Edict of Nantes
	was again and again confirmed by Logy III. and
Louis XIV., its provieons were frequently violated.
The Huguenots were naturally jealous of such
liberties as they enjoyed and resented even the
slightest infringement. They constituted a state
With a state' After ten years of irritation, for
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Huguenots
which both sides were to some extent responsible, war broke out early in 1621 and raged till Oct. 19, 1622. The Edict of Nantes was confirmed, but all recent Huguenot fortifications were to be demolished and political assemblies were strictly prohibited. Nearly one‑half of. their cities of refuge were left them, but their tenure was made dependent on the king's pleasure.
After a brief period a second war (Jan., 1625Feb., 1626) followed, resulting in severe loss of
military power and further narrowing Io. Riche‑ of privileges. The third war, in which lieu and the Huguenots were incited, aided and
Mazarin, abetted by the English, and of which
1624‑6z. the siege, the heroic defense, and the
fall of La Rochelle are the most striking features (1626‑29), resulted disastrously to the Huguenots. The terms of pacification were more favorable than might have been expected. The Edict of Nantes was reaffirmed; but all fortifications had to be given up, and freedom to raise and maintain armies was at an end (see N3mES, EDICT OF). Richelieu (q.v.), now the director of the government, assumed a conciliatory attitude, promised to make loyalty the only ground of discrimination among the king's subjects, and gained the confidence of the Huguenots to a remarkable degree. From 1629 to 1659, under the government of Richelieu and Mazarin (Louis XIII. and minority of Louis XIV.), the conditions of the Edict of Nantes were well observed on both sides. The government was too much occupied with international affairs to be willing to enter again upon civil strife, and the Huguenots were measurably contented with the privileges they enjoyed. This was for the latter a period of remarkable prosperity. " Rich as a Huguenot " became a proverbial expression. ManufaoLuring, commercial, and banking enterprises, with control of the merchant marine, were largely in their hands. The learned professions were filled with their members. Their educational institutions, liberally supported, became famous throughout the learned world. In their great churches the most eloquent preachers of the age preached to thousands of eager hearers. Among the most eminent preachers were Du Moulin, Le Faucheur, Mestrezat, Dailld, Amyraut, Gaches, Claude, Du Bose, De Superville, and Saurin. The school at Nimes came to represent an irenic tendency which led many to accept the Roman Catholic faith. Among its great teachers and alumni may be mentioned Viret, Ferrier? Petit, Turretin, Claude, De Serres, Baduel, Brousson, and Martin. Saumur became noted for its development of a liberal type of doctrine. Its great represent
Lives were Michel, B6raud, Boyd, Cameron, Amy raut, Placeus, and Pajon. Sedan and. Montauban stood for the defense of rigorous Calvinism. Among

Du Moulin, 	of the former may be mentioned
Des aresta, Jurleu, and Of the latter
Charmer, Pierre Bgraud, Garissolles, Abbadie, Bayle, Benoist, Rapin Thoyras, and Pglisson. Toward the close of Mazarin'sministry severe restrictive meas‑
uresagainst the Huguenots, fn response to urgent petitions of the prelates Were put in force, In 1656 Louis XIV. promulgated a law t~ effect that Huguenots were to be restricted to the privileges

Huguenots	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	398
of the Edict of Nantes, which in many cases they had transcended, and that all restrictive measures which had been added from time to time because of their rebellion should be enforced. Commissioners were appointed to see to the rigorous enforcement of repressive measures. Huguenot ministers were not to call themselves pastors, and were to use no other epithet but Catholic in speaking of the national church; were not to call together for consultation the principal members, to take collections, or to sing psalms at the execution of a criminal. In 1659 the last national synod was held. The use of the term " antichrist " in the liturgy, and of the terms "idolatry" and " deceit of Satan " in the confession, in condemnation of the Catholic faith, was prohibited. Huguenots were gradually excluded from public offices. Efforts to enforce the restrictions led to local disturbances, and insubordination was severely punished.
With the death of Mazarin (Mar. 9, 1661) the autocratic reign of Louis XIV. began. For twenty‑
four years systematic persecution was i r. Revoca‑ carried on, which culminated in the tion of revocation of the Edict of Nantes
Edict of Oct. 17, 1685. Public worship was
Nantes. prohibited, and ministers were to leave
France in fifteen days, or embrace Roman Catholicism. Huguenot schools were to be abolished at once. Refugees who did not return . would have their property confiscated. Thousands, some of them educated ministers, were sent to the galleys, where many died of hardship; thousands died in prison; and hundreds, if not thousands, were cruelly executed. The dragonnades were continued with increasing barbarity. Some hundreds of thousands professed conversion, while several hundred thousand left France, despite the fact that emigration was forbidden. It has been estimated that about 100,000 found homes in Holland, 100,000 in England, Ireland, and America, 25,000 in Switzerland, and 75,000 in Germany. Thus France lost a large proportion of its best intellect and manufacturing skill, and the exiled Huguenots, by establishing manufactures abroad, raised up ruinous competition for the French. In many parts of France the persecuted people took all risks and met secretly for worship. They maintained themselves in greatest numbers in the C6vennes mountains. From 1702 to 1710 the C6vennes Huguenots carried on a terrible guerrilla warfare against the Catholics (see CAMISARDS). With the death of Louis XIV. (1715) persecution was somewhat relaxed, but it was renewed with fearful vigor in 1724 under Cardinal Fleury (q.v.). ‑‑rom 1715 onward Antoine Court (q.v.) carried on a work of stupendous importance in truly apostolic spirit in reorganizing and planting churches. In 1730 he established at Lausanne a training‑school for preachers, from which scores of self‑sacrificing young men went forth to minister to the persecuted in France. Equally apostolic and fruitful were the labors of Paul Rabaut (q.v.). At the death of Fleury (1743) persecution almost ceased. As a result of agitation by the clergy, a furious persecution was carried on 1745‑52. Skeptical writers like Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, and
D'Alembert from the middle of the eighteenth cen
tury diffused a spirit of toleration that redounded
to the benefit of the Huguenots (see DEISM, II.;
and ENCYCLOPEDISM). Largely through the efforts
of Rabaut St. Etienne and Court de G6belin, sons
of Paul Rabaut and Antoine Court, an edict of
toleration was secured in 1787. A large proportion
of the Huguenots, as of the Catholics, were swept
into infidelity by the French Revolution (q.v.).
In 1802 Huguenots were placed by Napoleon side
by side with Roman Catholics as a state‑controlled
and state‑supported body. This relationship con
tinued until the separation of Church and State
in 1905. See FRANCE. 	A. H. NEwuAN.
II. Huguenot Refugees: 1. First Period, 15201680: The history of the Huguenot refugees begins with the history of the Reformation in France, though the name " Huguenot " was not used till about 1560. Frangois Lambert (q.v.) had to leave France in 1522, and Guillaume Farel (q.v.) in 1524. After the beginning of a general persecution in 1535 many refugees found a home in Geneva and other Swiss cities. In 1545 about 700 Waldenses sought refuge in Geneva, and under Henry Il. (1547‑59) 1,400 French families settled there. The churches established by Huguenot refugees were known as " churches of refuge " [for the article here condensed, cf. Hauck‑Herzog, RE, s.v." Rkfuge, Itglises du "]. On the initiative of John Calvin (q.v.) the first church of refuge was established at Strasburg in 1538. In 1575 the French refugees in this city alone numbered 15,398, though at the close of the Thirty Years' War there were only thirty‑six families left, and the parish did not secure complete freedom of worship till 1788. In 1550 Edward VI. placed the foreign Protestants in England under the care of Johannes a Lasco (q.v.). The French church established in London in 1550 became important as a center of organization for other churches in England and America. Under Queen Mary, Johannes a Lasco, with about 175 refugees, settled at Emden, in East Friesland, though on the accession of Queen Elizabeth most of these refugees returned to England. Altogether about 6,000 Huguenots sought refuge at Emden. Under Francis II. (1559‑60) thousands of Huguenots settled in the Netherlands, where, in 1562, there were over 100,000 Protestants. While the southern parts of the Netherlands were made almost entirely Roman Catholic by the Spanish Inquisition, numerous Huguenot settlements in the northern provinces continued to receive reenforoements up to the time of Henry IV. As a result of persecution in the Spanish Netherlands, Huguenot churches were established in various German cities, e.g., Stade, Altona, Frankfort, Mannheim, Heidelberg, Wetzlar, and Otterberg. Under Queen Elizabeth 3,000 or 4,000 French Protestants settled in England within a few years. They established a synod which was later strong enough to protest against the demands of Archbishop Laud. Several Huguenot settlements in America. (New Amsterdam [i.e. New York], Boston, etc.) date from the time of the persecutions of Laud. Cromwell was a warm friend of the French refugees.

899	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Huguenot.
9. The Second Period, 1881‑1791: Just as in the first,so in the second period of emigration, the refugees
settled largely in the Netherlands. On i. The account of the war with the NetherNefher‑ lands, there was a lull in both perseculands and tion and emigration during the years
Switzer‑ 1672‑79; but this was only the calm
	land.	before the storm of emigration in the
		years immediately preceding and fol
lowing the revocation of the Edict of Nantes (1685).
Friesland offered (May 1, 1681) a free asylum and
full citizenship to all who were driven from their
homes by religious persecution, and even freedom
from taxation for twelve years. The states of
Holland and Amsterdam soon followed this exam
ple; and the States General ordered (Dec. 3, 1682)
a collection.in all provinces for the emigrants. Am
sterdam alone had 15,000 Huguenots toward the
end of the seventeenth century, while about 60,000
were settled in other cities and provinces. In 1715
the emigrants were granted naturalization. Each
class took particular interest in the Protestants of
its own class, and assisted them by procuring work,
advancing money, etc. In 1688 there were in the
army of William of Orange 736 officers of French
birth, not to speak of privates in both army and
navy. At this time there were in the Netherlands
sixty‑two French churches. About 3,000 French
Protestants accepted the invitation of the Dutch
East India Company to settle on the company's
possessions on the Cape of Good Hope. Switzer
land became a haven of refuge to the Huguenots
from the eastern and southern provinces of France.
Geneva, the temporary headquarters for most of
them, was not able to offer permanent shelter, owing
to the threats of Louis XIV. Between 1682 and
1720 the citizens of Geneva distributed 5,143,266
florins among 60,000 refugees. Similarly, Zurich
assisted 23,345 emigrants between 1683 and 1689.
Other cities acted in the same spirit, although on a
smaller scale. About 25,000 Frenchmen are said
to have settled permanently on Swiss soil.
England was on the whole well disposed toward the Huguenots, though James II. did not favor them.
He had to yield, however, to popular s. England pressure, and a collection taken during
	and	his reign‑although by his orders
America. not recommended from the pulpits‑
amounted to £40,000. Between 60,000 and 70,000 Protestants had settled in England up to 1695, and London and neighborhood had at one time thirty flourishing French churches. William of Orange granted the French Protestants in England £17,200 annually, which was‑with intermissions and in a diminishing ratio‑continued until 1812, when a last paymept of £1,200 was made. But the large number of the emigrants awakened the distrust of the population, and their naturalization was granted and rescinded several times by parliament. The Huguenots were, nevertheless, gradually absorbed by the English people and the English Church. By the close of the seventeenth century thousands of Huguenots had settled in New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Pennsyl‑. vania. The largest number of Huguenots settled
in South Carolina; and in Charleston there is still a French church with a pure Calvinistic liturgy. One colony of Huguenots was established at Paramaribo, Dutch Guiana (South America.), where missionary work was begun among the Indiana.
Huguenot refugees to Germany settled chiefly in Brandenburg. In 1672 the Huguenots in Berlin
(about 100) were granted the right to 3. Germany hold services in French. When the and Edict of Nantes was revoked Fred‑
Elsewhere. erick William of Brandenburg openly
espoused the cause of French Protestantism and censured Louis XIV. publicly. He offered the emigrants a free asylum in his country, and extended them numerous privileges with full citizenship. He went even further by publishing an invitation to the Huguenots to come to Brandenburg, and by having his representatives in Hamburg, Cologne, Frankfort, Amsterdam, and elsewhere to look after the emigrants. Although Louis XIV. forbade the publication of this invitation, it soon became known all over France, and about 25,000 Frenchmen accepted it before 1700. The Margrave established a French college in Berlin (1689) and a French professorship at the University of Frankforton‑the‑Oder. Twelve French societies assisted newly arrived emigrants, and otherwise encouraged the immigration of their countrymen. There were thirty‑three colonies at one time in Brandenburg, but most of them became German during the eighteenth century. After the death of Frederick the Great and during the rebirth of Prussia during the Napoleonic wars the last bond was cut which united the emigrants with France. Berlin is the only city in Old Prussia where French services are still held regularly. Other parts of Germany, e.g., Ansbach, Baireuth, Baden, Wurttemberg, Saxony, and Hesse, extended to the Huguenots many privileges and always a free refuge. Nearly all of them soon became German. Among the free cities, Hamburg has the distinction of still maintaining a French service, in a new church since 1904. The other free cities, Frankfort‑on‑the‑Main, Bremen, and Liibeck, received many transitory emigrants; but they were soon absorbed by the Germans, though at Frankfort a small congregation still exists in connection with the Reformed synod. Denmark has a French Huguenot church in Copenhagen which dates from 1685; Sweden one at Stockholm; Russia two, one in Moscow and the other in St. Petersburg.
It is small wonder that the French Protestants were made welcome wherever they went, since they
	represented the most intelligent, moral,
	4. Influence and industrious portion of the French
of 	population. They carried with them
Huguenot the arts, scholarship, and knowledge of
Refugees. military affairs to various countries.
Frederick Willigm of Brandenburg had 600 French officers and thousands of soldiers in his army; French scholars were among the founders of the Prussian Academy of Sciences; mechanics and craftsmen of all kinds assisted in promoting the industries of that country, and the skilled farmers soon turned the sandy plains of Brandenburg into fertile fields. Frederick the Great had seven generals of French descent in his army, and the Prussian

Huguenots	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	400
Humanism
army has at present about 1,200 officers with
French names. The influence of the Huguenot
exodus upon France was as disastrous as it was
beneficial to other countries. The austerity of the
Huguenots had exercised a wholesome influence
upon the French; but when their number was
reduced from 1,800,000 in 1660 to 400,000 in 1700,
and when this small company was deprived of all
civil and religious rights, the corruption of the
French court under Louis XIV. had full sway. The
year after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes,
Vauban reported to the minister of war, Louvois,
that France had lost 100,000 inhabitants, 60,000,000
francs in cash, 9,000 sailors, 12,000 soldiers, and 600
officers. The Roman Catholic Church became the
sole arbiter of the destinies of France, but she lost
constantly in authority. The industries of France
suffered terribly. In Touraine there were left, in
1698, only fifty‑four tanneries out of 400, only 1,200
looms out of 8,000, only 4,000 silkweavers out of
40,000, only seventy mills out of 700. Normandy
had 26,000 empty houses; the Dauphins had lost
15,000 inhabitants, and other places in proportion;
e.g., Paris 1,202 Huguenot families out of 1,938.
Ferdinand Bruneti6re, a loyal Roman Catholic, says:
" The revocation of the Edict of Nantes arrested
the moral progress of France, because it drove into
exile the people who called themselves men of the
Bible, and who carried their morality, faith, and
intelligence everywhere .... From Dunkirk to Ba
yonne, from Brest to Besangon, he (Louis XIV.) cut
the nerve of French morality for the metaphysical
satisfaction of having God praised only in Latin "
(RDM, Oct. 15, 1898). (EUGEN LACHENMANN.)

BrBLIOGRAPRT: The literature has become extensive, particularly through treatment of Huguenots in the several parts in which they settled. Note the large number of titles given, e.g., in Hauck‑Herzog, RE, zvi. b22‑b24; in Fortescue's Subject Index of Modern Works, ii. 143‑146, and the volume for 1901‑05, pp. 471‑472. Bibliographies are found also in F. de Schickler, Les tplisea du refuge en Anpleterre, 3 vols., Paris, 1892; in R. S. Faber, Catalogue of the Library of the French Hospital, Victoria Park Row, Canterbury, 1901; and the Cambridge Modern History, iii. 771;(l1~904. The reader should consult also the literature under WLIGNT, GASPARD DE; FRANCE; MAROT, CLIEMENT; MMES, EDICT or; NANTES, EDICT OF; and WALDENSES. Among the sources should be named the publications of the Huguenot Society of London, of the Huguenot Society of America, and the Bulletin de la soeiete de Mist. du protestantisme frangais, Paris, 1853 sqq.; the Histoire ecclesiastique of Beza and Des Gallon, best edition, 3 vole., Paris, 1883‑89; ‑0dits, declarations et arrests concernant la religion pHtendue reformee IB88‑1751, Paris, 1885. For the English reader the history' of the Huguenots is perhaps best set forth in the works of H. M. Baird: Hist. of the Rise of the Huguenots, 2 vols., London, 1880; The Huguenots and Henry of Navarre, 2 vole., New York, 1886; The Huguenots and the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, ib. 1895. Other works to be referred to are: A. E. Bray, Revolt of as Protestants of the Cevennes, London, 1870; E. Hugues, Ant. Court, Riot. de la restauration du protestantisme en France au xviii. eiecle, 2 vole., Paris, 1872; S. Smiles, The Huguenots in France, London 1876; E. and Z;. Haag, La France prolestante, ed. H. Bordier, 10 vols., Paris. 1877; J. A. Martin, The Spirit, Principles, and Worship of the Huguenots, London, 1885; F. Sander, Die Hugenotten and do# Edikt von Names, Breslau, 1885; R. Heath, Reformation in France, 2 parts, London, 1888; G. Bonet‑Maury, Hist. de la liberte de conscience en France, Paris, 1890; C. Tylor, The Huguenots in the 17th Century, London, 1892; P. F. Willert, Henri of Navarre and the Huguenots of France, New York, 1893; P. de Fbliee, Les
Protestants d'autrefois, 6 vols., Paris, 1897‑1907; C. Be‑
noist, Condition des Protestants sow is ripime de 1'6dit d, Nantes et apras so revocation, ib. 1900; E. Wilmahurst, Fights and Flights of the Huguenots, London, 1901; Cambridge Modern History, vol. ii., chap. v., vol. iii., chap. i.. Cambridge 1902‑04; E. Armstrong The French Wars of Religion, Oxford, 1904; De Brimont, Le xvi. SiMe et lee guerres de reforms en Berry, 2 vols, Paris, 1905; Memoirs of a Protestant Condemned to the Galleys of France for his Religion, Translation by Oliver Goldsmith, Introduction by A. Dobson, 2 vols., London, 1895, and another rendering of the same in one volume, 1904; Memoirs of a Huguenot Family, tranal. and compiled from the Original Autobiography of the Rev. James Pontains by Ann Maury. Rs printed from the edition of 1868, New York, 1908.
On the Huguenots in foreign lands consult: W. G. Simms, The Huguenots in Florida, New York, 1854; C. Rahlenbeek, Le Protestantisme dare lea pays de Limbourp et Outrsrneux, Brussels, 1856; idem, Rapport sun Lea cudtes et documents eoncernam is protestantisme belpe, ib. 1872; R. L. Poole, Huguenots of the Dispersion, London, 1880; J. C. MSrikofer, Geschickte den evanpelischen Flachtlinpe in den Schweeiss, Leipsic, 1876; H. Fasy, La Saint‑Barthelemy et Genave, Geneva, 1879; 8. Smiles, The Huguenots . . in England and Ireland, London, 1880; F. de Schickler, ut sup.; C. W. Baird, Mist. q/ the Huguenot Emigration to America, 2 vole., New York, 1885; F. Parkman, Pioneers of France in the Near World, London, 1886; D. C. A. Agnew, Protestant Exiles from France, 2 vols., 8d ed., Edinburgh, 1886; T. G. Thomas, Contribution to the Riot. of the Huguenots of So. Carolina New York, 1887; J. A. F. .Pusux, Hist. de 1'Etablissement des Protestants frargais en Suede, Paris, 1891; R. Lefevre, Hist. of New Palts, New York, 1678‑1820, Albany, 1903; E. Daudet, Hist. de 1'emipration pendant la revolution frangaise, part i, Paris, 1904. Especially valuable to the special student is the bibliography in Hauck‑Herzog, RE, xvi. 522‑524.
HUIDEKOPER, FREDERIC: Unitarian; b. at Meadville, Pa., Apr. 7, 1817; d. there May 10, 1892. He studied at Harvard for a year (1834‑35), but was forced by failing sight to cease his studies. From 1839 to 1841 he traveled in Europe, and after his return studied theology privately for two years. In 1844 he aided in the organization of Meadville Theological School, in which he had charge of the New Testament department for five years (1844‑49), and where he was professor of church history from 1845 to 1877, being also librarian and treasurer for many years. From 1877 until his death he lived in retirement at Meadville, and in the latter years of his life was totally blind. Besides editing the Acts of Pilate (Cambridge, Mass., 1881), he wrote Belief of the first Three Centuries Concerning Christ's Mission to the Underworld (Boston, 1854); Judaism at Rome B.C. 76 to A.D. 140 (New York, 1876); and Indirect Testimony of History to the Genuineness of the Gospels (1878).
HULBERT, ERI BAKER: Baptist; b. at Chicago July 16, 1841; d. there Feb. 17, 1907. He was educated at Madison University, Union College (B.A., 1863), Hamilton Theological Seminary (M.A., 1865), and the University of Gottingen. He held pastorates at Manchester, Vt. (1865‑68), Coventry Street, Chicago (1868‑89), the First Baptist Church of St. Paul, Minn. (1869‑71), and San Francisco (1871‑76), and the Fourth Baptist Church, Chicago (1876,82). From 1882 to 1892 he was professor of church history in Baptist Union Theological Seminary, Chicago, and was professor of the same subject and dean of the divinity school of the University of Chicago (1892‑1907). He was also acting president of Baptist Union Theological Seminary in 1884‑85.

401	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Husu‑ots
		Humaai.m
	HULSE,'JOHN, and the HULSEAN LECTURES:
	An English clergyman and a course of lectures
	founded by him, for which he is chiefly remembered.
	He was born at Middlewich (18 m. e. of Chester),
	Cheshire, Mar. 15, 1708; d. there Dec. 14, 1790.
	He was graduated from Cambridge University
	(1728), took orders in 1732, and served as curate
	in several small places. He came to his inheritance
on his father's death in 1753, and retired on account
of delicate health.	By his will he bequeathed a
	large part of his property to Cambridge University,
	founding two scholarships, a prize essay, and the
	offices of Christian Advocate and Hulsean Lecturer.
	The latter, by the terms of the will, was to deliver
	and print twenty sermons each year upon the
	evidences of Christianity or upon Scriptural difficul
ties.	Subsequent changes in the provision have
	peen made by statute; thus the number of sermons
or lectures required was reduced, first to eight, and
	later to four; while the Hulsean professorship of
	divinity was substituted for the office of Christian
	Advocate (1860). Of the income eight‑tenths go to
	the support of the professorship, the other two
	tenths being divided between the essayist and the
lecturer.	A list of the published lectures up to
	1892‑93 may be found in J. F. Hurst, Literature of
Theqlogy, New York, 1896, pp. 32‑34.	The pub
lished lectures since 1892 are:
	1893‑94. M. Creighton, Persecution and Tolerance,
London, 1895, new ed., 1906.
	1894‑95. A. Barry, The Ecclesiastical Expansion of
	England in the Growth of the Anglican Communion, ib. 1895.
	1895‑96. W. M. Ede, The Attitude of the Church to some
of the Social Problems of Town Life, Cambridge, 1896.
	1896‑97. 8. Cheetham, The Mysteries, Pagan and Chris
tian, Lonaon, 1897.
	1897‑98. J. E. C. Weldon, The Hope of Immortality, ib.
1898.
	1898‑99. J. M. Wilson, The Gospel of the Atonement, ib.
1899.
	1899‑1900. A. J. Mason, Purgatory, The State of the
Faithful Departed; Invocation of Saints, ib. 1901.
	1900‑01. F. H. Chase, The Credibility of the Acts of the
Apostles, ib. 1902.
	1901‑02. F. R. Tennant, The Origin and Propagation
of Sin, Cambridge, 1902, 2d ed., 1906.
	1902‑03. F. J. F. Jackson, Christian Ditties in the
Second and Twentieth Centuries, ib. 1903.
	1903‑04. W. A. Whitworth, Christian Thought on Pres
ent Day Questions, London, 1906.
	1904‑05. . C. W. Stubbs, The Christ of Christian Poetry,
ib. 1906.
	1905‑06. H. J. C. Knight, The Temptation of Our Lord,
ib. 1907.
	1907‑08, J. H. B. Masterman, Rights and Responsibili
ties of the National Churches, Cambridge, 1908.
	1908‑09. J. N. Figgis, The Gospel and Human Needs,
London, 1909.
HUMANISM.
The Term (§ 1). The Italian Humanists (§ 2). Character of the Movement (¢ 3). Erasmus (§ 4). Effect on Theological Science (§ 5).
The exact point in time when the term Humanist was first adopted escapes our knowledge. It is, however, quite certain that Italy and the
:. The readoption of Latin letters as the staple
Term. of human culture were responsible for the name of Humanists. Liters; humaniores was an expression coined in conscious contrast, at the beginning of the movement into V. 26
current medieval learning, to the end that these " letters," i.e., substantially the classic literature of Rome and the imitation and reproduction of its literary forms in the new learning, might stand by themselves as over against the Literm sacrm of scholasticism. In the time of Ariosto, Erasmus, and Luther's beginnings, the term umanista was in effect an equivalent to the terms " classicist " or " cla&. sical scholar."
Dante, an earnest son of the Roman Catholic Church, was at the same time, as to his cultural
valuations and,aspirations, filled with a x. The certain awe and admiration for ancient Italian letters. He at first seriously intended
Humanists. to compose his great epic in Latin
verse. Petrarch considered his Africa a fair effort to reproduce Vergil; the choice of Scipio Africanus as the central hero reveals the new desire to consider the worthies of classic Italy as spiritual and cultural progenitors in the pursuits and concern of the new learning. In the exordium of his chief work Petrarch appeals to the Heliconian Sisters as well as to Jesus Christ, Savior of the world; also he reviews the epics of Homer (he never learned Greek), Statius, and Lucan. He was overwhelmed with the friendships of the most highly placed men of his day, among whom Cardinal Stephen Colonna was prominent. Petrarch is the pathfinder as well as the exemplar of the new movement. He idealized the classical world, he read into such Latin letters as he had, or extracted as he could, profound and surpassing verities. His classicist consciousness and his Christian consciousness are revealed in his writings like two streams that do not intermingle though they flow in the same bed. The experiences of life constantly evoke in him classic parallels, reminiscences, associations. Julius Ciesar, Papirius Cursor, are nostri, " our people "; Pyrrhus, Hannibal, Massinissa are externi, " foreigners." His epistles afford the best revelation of his soul. Of course, the craving for pure Latinity and the elevation of such practical power of imitation and reproduction involved an artificiality of which neither Petrarch nor his successors were aware. Boccaccio was not only' a humanist, but he, with appaling directness, revealed the emancipation of the flesh as one of the unmistakable trends of the new movement. Both he and Poggio, Valla, Beccadelli, Enea Silvio dei Piccolomini (in his youth) show that the hatred of the clerical class was a spur to literary composition. At the same time in the caricatures of foulness which these leaders of the new learning loved to draw, there is no moral indignation, but clearly like satyrs they themselves relish these things. For this reason the Humanists of Italy, as such, were not at all concerned in the efforts for a reformation of the church as attempted in the councils of Constance or of Basel (qq.v.). Poggio, apostolic secretary, came to Constance with the corrupt pope John XXIII., but spent most of his time in ransacking the libraries of Swiss monasteries for Latin codices. The defense of Jerome of Prague before the Council reminded him of Cato of Utica.; his correspondent Lionardo Bruni at Florence warns him to be more circumspect in his praise of a heretic. In the Curia itself a semipagan spirit was bred by

8gumsnism	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	402
the Humanists. In 1447 Parentucelli, an enthusiast for codices, became pope as Nicholas V. To him wrote (Easter, 1447) the eminent humanist Filelfo, from Milan, congratulating him on his elevation, expressing the general satisfaction of scholars, extolling learning and mental distinction, citing also the humanitas of Christ himself, as well as writing somewhat hypocritically of fucata gentilium . . . sapientia. Some time later, in 1453, Filelfo personally appeared at the papal court; Nicholas kept the vile " Satyrae " of the humanist until he had perused them, and gave to Filelfo, on parting, a purse of 500 ducats. Enea Silvio de' Piccolomini ascended the papal throne in 1458 as Pius II., another humanist pope, a worldly man, and formerly long a oounselor of princes.
A very clear view of the Humanistic movement may be gained from the writings of the biographer and beneficiary of Leo X., Paul Giovio 3. Character (Jovius). In his Elogia (Antwerp,
of the 1557) he presents a gallery of literary Movement. scholars, beginning with Dante, and including Petrarch, Boccaccio, Bruni, Poggo, Beccadelli (the pornographic poet), Valla, Filelfo, Platina, the Greeks Emanuel Chrysoloras, Cardinal Bessarion, Trapezuntius the Cretan, Theodorus Gaza, Argyropulos, Chalcondylas, Musurus of Crete, and Lascaris; also Lorenzo de' Medici, Ermolao Barbaro, Pohtian, Pico di Mirandula, and even Savonarola. But Savonarola's attacks on Pope Alexander VI., father of Cesare and Luorezia, are treated as treason and felony. The Platonic academy of Ficinus at Florence had certainly no power to regenerate the political and moral corruption of its patron Lorenzo. Bibienna, the favorite of Leo X., was witty at banquets; at Leo's court this cardinal produced his lascivious comedy, " Colandra," because Terence was too grave. Even Thomas More and Reuchlin are included. Among the latter's academic friends were the anonymous composers of the satiric Epistohe obscurorum virorum (q.v.)‑the flail of the new learning swung against the old. The Italian Humanists were not concerned in the reformatory movements of the fifteenth century. They drifted into a palpable paganism or semipaganism, curiously illustrated in the verse, e.g., of Politian, especially his Greek verse, and of him even the lax Giovio writes: " he was a man of unseemly morals." They all more or less emphasized " vera virtue " by which they meant " true excellence," the self‑wrought development of human faculties and powers. Still they knew how to maintain friendly relations with those higher clerics who had resources with which to patronize the new learning. They often accepted clerical preferment, as did Gisvio, who became bishop of Nocera. Often the Latin verse of their, youth proved very awkward when they entered upon their benefices. All were more interested " in viewing the early monuments of sensual enjoyment" than in study of the New Testament. As they greatly exceeded the corruption of the clergy in their own conduct, they could not take any practical interest in any spiritual or theological reformation. In all the correspondence of Filelfo, extending from 1428 to 1462, there is but once or twice a slight (deistic) utterance of
spiritual concern, when, in the siege of Milan by Francesco Sforza, 1449, the ducal city endured terrible sufferings. Jacob Burckhardt (Die Cultur der Renaissance, § vi., Basel, 1860) says of the Humanists that they were demoralized by their reproduction of Latin verse. But why did they delve in Ovid, Catullus, and the like with steady predilection? At best a mild deism or pantheism may be perceived in their more serious writings. Greek, on the whole, was a rare attainment among them, reproductive ostentation limited most of them to Latin.
Erasmus of Rotterdam (q.v.) in his person and career marks the point where the " new learning "
had arrived at the parting of the ways. 4. Erasmus. He felt an affinity for Lucian; his
Encomium Monce, a vitriolic satire, dealt not gently with clerical corruption. He edited the New Testament and dedicated it to Leo X. He had no desire to abandon the old Church; the bounties and pensions which he received were all derived from princes or clerics who adhered to the papacy. He pretended that he could not read the German writings of Luther. Erasmus wrote that " Luther's movement was not connected with learning," and, at the same time he wrote to Pope Hadrian VI.: " I could find a hundred passages where St. Paul seems to teach the doctrines which they condemn in Luther." Other utterances show his unwillingness to serve the Reformation or to be held responsible for any part of it: " I have written nothing which can be laid hold of against the established orders . . . . I would rather see things left as they are than to see a revolution which may lead to one knows not what. Others may be martyrs, if they like. I aspire to no such honor . . . . I care nothing what is done to Luther, but I care for peace . . . . If you must take a side, take the side which is most in favor." His keen sense of actual dependencies in the movement of things led him to see situations and realities with wonderful clearness; but his genius, like that of many scholars, was essentially negative. When he was fifty‑one, not long before 1517, he wrote to Fabricius at Basel: " My chief fear is that with the revival of Greek literature there may be a revival of paganism. There are Christians who are Christians but in name, and are Gentiles at heart." In the fall of that grave year 1525, when central Germany had been harried by the Peasants' War, he wrote (Oct. 10, 1525)
" You remember Reuchlin. The conflict was raging between the Muses and their enemies, when up sprang Luther, and the object thenceforward was to entangle the friends of literature in the Lutheran business, so as to destroy both them and him together."
It is customary to speak of German Humanists, also Colet and More and Linacre may be so called
perhaps as representing the new learning 5. Effect in Britain. But these in the main were

	on	men of great spiritual earnestness. As
Theological for the wider knowledge of Greek gram‑
Science. mar and letters of course it quickened
the study of the New Testament. As to the positive aspects of theological and spiritual regeneration, little, very little, can be attributed to the movement of the Humanists. The overvalua‑

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
403
tion of formal and literary and esthetical things, and
a profound indifference toward spiritual things has
been, and still is, a serious failing of much classicism
from Petrarch to the present time. The classicists
were secular to the core. 	E. G. SIHLER.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Burckhardt, ut sup. (somewhat vitiated by the underlying Hegelianism); G. Voigt, Die Wiederbelebunp des classischen Alterthums, 3 vols., Berlin, 18801881; P. Schaff, The Renaissance; Revival of Learning and Art in the 14th and 15th Centuries, New York, 1891; F. A. Gasquet, The Eve of the Reformation, London, 1898; R. C. Jebb, Humanism in Education, ib. 1899; Cambridge Modern History, vol. i., chaps. xvi.‑xvii., New York, 1902; L. Einstein, Italian Renaissance in England, ib. 1902; E. Borkowsky, Aus der Zeit des Humanismus, Jena, 1905; H. Hermelink, Die relipibsen Reformbeetrebunpen des deutwhen Humanismus, Tiibingen, 1907; J. S. Mackenzie, Lectures on Humanism, New York, 1907; J. M. Robertson, Pioneer Humanists, London, 1907; F. C. S. Schiller, Studies in Humanism, ib. 1907; Lichtenberger, ESR, vi. 409‑419. An excellent mirror of the point of view of the Humanists is given by P. Giovio's Elopia virorum literis illustrium, Antwerp, 1557.
HUMANITARIAN: A name applied both to such antitrinitarians as consider Christ a mere man, and to such parties as profess the " religion of humanity," whose fundamental dogma is the perfectibility of the human race without superhuman aid.

HUMBERT: Cardinal; d. May 5, 1061. He was of Burgundian birth, and a monk of the cloister Moyen‑moutier in Lorraine, when Pope Leo IX. called him to Rome in 1049. In the following year he was appointed archbishop of Sicily; in 1051 he obtained the bishopric of Silvia Candida, combined with the dignity of cardinal bishop. When Archbishop Leo of Achrida, in a circular addressed to Bishop John of Trani in Apulia, in 1053, sharply attacked a series of liturgical and ritual peculiarities of the Western Church, and, in consequence, the contention between Rome and Byzantium flamed up afresh, the Emperor Constantine IX., Monomachus, who needed the pope's alliance against the Normans, exerted himself to restore peace. In Jan., 1054, Leo IX. sent an embassy to the imperial court, consisting of Archbishop Peter of Amalfi, Cardinal Frederick of Lorraine, and Humbert. The patriarch, Michael Caerularius, was disposed to no advances, and treated his rival's messengers with haughtiness, while they accosted him superciliously. After termination of unpromising negotiations on July 16, 1054, the Roman envoys deposited on the high altar of St. Sophia a documentary excommunication of the patriarch and his adherents. They left Constantinople two days later (cf. Mirbt, Quellen, pp. 95 sqq.).
During this journey to Byzantium Leo IX. had died, on Apr. 19. Humbert was trusted by his successor, Victor II. (1055‑57), and by Stephen IX., who, after the death of Victor, had proposed Humbert as his successor. The energetic aggressive policy toward which the reformed papacy advanced under Stephen's guidance was reflected by Humbert's pen in the important treatise Libri tres adversus simoniaeos (ed. F. Thaner, MGH, Lib. de lite, i., 1890, pp. 95‑253). He preaches uncompromising antagonism to simony, and advocates a policy with reference to Investiture (q.v.) which proved fundamental in the treatment of this problem by the later Gregorian party.
Humanism Hume
After the sudden death of Stephen IX. (1058) Humbert took part in the election of Bishop Gerhard of Florence. Under this pope, Nicholas II., Humbert's influence continued strong. When the doctrine espoused by Berengar of Tours (q.v.) in relation to the Eucharist, after having already been condemned at synods at Rome and Vercelli, under Leo IX., in 1050, came up for discussion afresh, the accused was compelled to subscribe a confession of faith drafted by Humbert, who had attended the original synods, and had worked against Berengar. Humbert stands out as an energetic and straightforward personality of great power, who by no means shrank from blunt measures. Closer parallels between him and Hildebrand are not conspicuous. With Peter Damian, he rendered invaluable service in the cause of " reform " in the Church during the middle of the eleventh century. CARL MIRBT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY; C. Will, Acta et scripts quo de controversiis ecclesim . . . smculo xi. extant, Leipsic, 1861; E. Steindorff, Jahrbeher des deutachen Reichs unter Heinrich Ill., vol. ii., ib. 1881; H. Halfmann, Kardinal Humbert, G5ttingen, 1883; G. Meyer von Knonau,, Jahrbacher des deutschen Reichs unter Heinrich IV., vol. i., Leipsie, 1890; J. Langen, Geschichte der rtimiachen Kirche ... bis Gregor VIL, Bonn, 1892; C. Mirbt, Die Publizistik im Zeitalter Grepors VII., Leipsic, 1894; W. Martens, Gregor VIZ., ib. 1894; Histoire littlraire de la France, vii. 527; Neander, Christian Church, iii. 379, 513, 581‑584; KL, vi. 411‑414.
HUME, DAVID: Philosopher and historian; b. in Edinburgh Apr. 26 (o.s.), 1711; d. there Aug. 25, 1776. He was of good Scotch descent, his father tracing his ancestry to Lord Home of Douglas. His mother was " a woman of singular merit." In 1723 he appears to have been a student at the University of Edinburgh, but he was not graduated. He halted in his choice between several callings‑law, mercantile life, and that of the scholar and philosopher. His first work was a Treatise of Human Nature (vols. i., ii., London, 1739; vol. iii., 1740). For a time he turned aside to political subjects and published Essays, Moral and Political (2 vols., Edinburgh, 1741‑4~; final ed., 1 vol., 1788), which met with great success. In 1744, owing to opposition on theological grounds, he failed of election to the chair of ethics and pneumatic philosophy in the University of Edinburgh. He next published his Philosophical Essays concerning Human Understanding (London, 1748; 2d ed., 1750), and from 1749 to 1751 was engaged upon his Dialogues on Natural Religion (not published until 1779), Inquiry concerning the Principlesof Morals (1751), and Political Discourses (Edinburgh, 1752; Fr. transl., Amsterdam, 1754). His History of Great Britain appeared in 2 vols. at Edinburgh, 1754‑57 (with autobiography and final corrections, 8 vols., 1778), and the Natural History of Religion in 1757. From 1758 Hume lived in London, Paris (17637, where he was a member of the English embassy, and extremely popular with educated men and women), London again (1767‑69), and in St. David's Street (named after him), Edinburgh, from 1769.
Hume's early fame as a historian has been overshadowed by his philosophical writings. The principal subjects of these are the human understanding, liberty and necessity, the principles of morals, immortality, the idea of cause, theism, and miracles as re‑

$ mility	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	404
lated to credibility and the order of nature. Following Locke, he turned from speculation to experience and thus entered the path of criticism. In his theory of knowledge he divided perceptions into impressions ‑the original sensations and reflections, which are therefore the more vivid‑and ideas or thoughtsthe fainter and less vivid reproduction of the impressions. Thus the material for all our ideas is derived from impressions. With Locke, he defines the will as " the internal impression we feel and are conscious of when we knowingly give rise to any new emotion of our body or new perception of our mind." Liberty is " a power of acting or not acting according to the determinations of the will." Moral necessity is of the same nature as physical necessity, although the operation of motives is extremely subtle and perhaps impossible completely to trace. Responsibility is, however, not destroyed; this depends not on the cause of the action, but on the disposition of the person. Goodness is necessary to the good man and in the highest degree to God. Immortality appears to have been left an open question. Neither the idea of immaterial substance nor the doctrine of personal identity, neither the nature of divine justice nor the incompatibility of the noble powers of man with the swift span of earthly existence proves that the soul survives death. All this is rendered still more precarious when Hume resolves the soul‑i.e., the self‑into a series of perceptions which, if removed by death, would annihilate the person. He traces the idea of cause neither to external objects, nor to reflection, nor to the senses, but to an experience of unvarying succession or custom. This idea, which has exerted a profound influence on later thought, was completed 'by Kant, who showed the nature of the necessity which the human mind has associated with causality. On the subject of theism Hume finds no sure footing. Neither cosmology, nor teleology, nor the moral argument is adequate as a ground of belief in God. Polytheism appears to him not a stage in the progressive apprehension of the divine; " the gods of the polytheists are no better than the elves and fairies of our ancestors." Concerning miracles conceived of as " violation of the laws of nature . . . by a particular volition of the Deity," he argues that no amount of testimony would render them credible. " There is not to be found, in all history, any miracle attested by a sufficient number of men of such unqualified goodness, education, and learning, as to secure us against all delusion in themselves; of such undoubted integrity as to place them beyond all suspicion of any design to deceive others; of such credit and reputation in the eyes of mankind as to have a great deal to lose in case of their being detected in any falsehood; and at the same time attesting facts, performed in such a public manner, and so celebrated a part of the world, as to render detection unavoidable; all which circumstances are requisite to give us a full assurance of the testimony of men." This argument of Hume has force against the scholastic idea of miracles, but not against the view of Augustine. As a psychologist Hume was unsurpassed by any who preceded him. He was a philosopher, but not a theologian, and his fame justly
rests not as earlier on his historical or political writings, but on his inquiry into the nature, the source, and the limitations of human knowledge. His skepticism is not thoroughgoing, but only relates to speculative metaphysics. Starting with experience, he allows no deviation from this as providing the content of intelligence. His significance for religion and theology lies not so much in his direct discussion of these subjects as in the view of man and the world involved in his philosophy. It would have been glory enough for him had he done nothing else than waken Kant from his " dogmatic slumbers." See DEIsM. C. A. BEc$w1TH.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A rich bibliography is in Baldwin, Dictionary, iii. 1, pp. 271‑276. Sources for a life are his autobiography, prefixed to editions of the History and often reprinted separately; Private Correspondence of David Hume, Edinburgh, 1820; Letters of David Hume, ed. T. Murray, ib. 1841; Letters from Eminent Persona . . ; to David Hume, ed. J. H. Burton, ib.1849; and Letters of David Hume to William Strahan, ed. G. B. Hill, Oxford, 1888. The standard life is J. Hill Burton, Life and Correspondence of David Hume, 2 vols., Edinburgh, 1846. Consult farther: The Introduction prefixed by T. H. Green to the ed. of Hume's Philosophical Works, London, 1882; W. Knight, in Philosophical Claaska for English Readers, Edinburgh, 1886; T. H. Huxley, in English Men of Letters, London, 1887; idem, Collected Essays, vol. vi., New York, 1894; H. Calderwood, in Famous Scots Series, Edinburgh, 1898; DNB, xxviii. 215‑226, For discussions of his philosophy consult: G. Compayr6, La Philoaophie de David Hume, Paris, 1873; J. McCosh, Scottish Philosophy, pp. 113‑161, New York, 1875; G. von Gizyeki, Die Ethik David Hum", Breslau, 1878 ; L. Stephen, Hiat. of English Thought in 18th Century, pp. 43 sqq. et passim, New York, 1881; J. Orr, David Hume and his Influence on Philosophy and Theology, 'Edinburgh, !1903; and the works on the hist. of philosophy by Erdmann, Ueberweg, and Windelband.
HUME, ROBERT ALLEN: Congregationalist; b. at Bombay, India, Mar. 18, 1847. ,He received his education at Williston Seminary, at Yale College (B.A., 1868), Yale Divinity School (1869‑71), and Andover Theological Seminary, being graduated from the latter in 1873. He was a teacher in the Collegiate and Commercial Institute at New Haven, Conn. (1868‑69), and in the Edwards School at Stockbridge, Mass. (1871‑72). He has been a missionary of the Marathi Mission of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions since 1874, and principal of Ahmednagar Theological Seminary since 1878. During the year 1900‑01 he was chairman of the Christian Herald Indian Famine Relief Committee, and in 1900‑02 was secretary of the Americo‑Indian Famine Relief Committee, receiving the Kaiseri‑Hind gold medal in 1901 in recognition of his services. In theological position he is conservatively liberal. He has written Missions from the Modern View (New York, 1905), and has edited the Marathi weekly Dnyanodaya at Bombay for several years.
HUIIERALE. See VESTMENTS AND INSIGNIA, ECCLEBIAsTIcAL.

HUMILIATI, hiu"mil‑i‑d'ti: A religious order, also called "Barettines of Penitence," from their headcovering (Ital. barettino), which traced its origin to the period of Emperor Henry II. and Pope Benedict VIII. (d. 1024). The real founder, however, was probably Johannes Oldratus, a noble of Milan (d.

405	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Hume
		Humminty
about 1159), who is said to have established the first
house of the Humiliati about the middle of the
twelfth century at Rondenario, near Como. The
first actual Humiliate monastery was probably the
house established about 1178 near Milan, where
male and female penitents lived and worked to
gether. They were laymen, and many who were
closely affiliated with them still maintained the
family life. Refusing at the command of Alexander
III. to refrain from holding conventicles and
preaching in public, many of them were excom
municated in 1179 and developed into the Lombard
division of the Waldenses, while the remainder were
faithful to the Church and became the Ordo Vumi
liatorum. In the beginning of the thirteenth cen
tury the Humiliati formed three divisions, the first
of which, the original lay community, lived in their
own houses, married, and engaged in manual labor,
although they observed certain ascetic and religious
principles, abstaining from oaths and receiving
spiritual instruction on Sunday from one of their
number under the supervision of the bishop of
their diocese. The second division was the Hu
miliate monks and nuns, who led a celibate
cloister life, and the third was the Humiliate
canons, both these classes differing from the
lay brethren only in their monastic and priestly
character.
	All three classes were confirmed by Innocent III.
(d. 1216). Although theoretically the lowest, the
lay Humiliati were the most numerous and the most
influential, and they were later regarded as ter
tiaries of the order. In the sixteenth century the
corruption of the Humiliati led Pius V. to at
tempt their reform, but in 1569 an attempt
was made on the life of Carlo Borromeo, who
had been commissioned to carry out the wishes
of the pope, and in 1571 the order was suppressed,
a	portion of its monasteries being given to the
Barnabites.
	The Humiliate nuns (also called Blassonite Nuns
after their supposed first head, Clara Blassoni, of
Milan, who flourished about the middle of the
twelfth century; and likewise termed Observantine
Hospitaller Nuns) were exempted from the papal
condemnation and still exist, having five convents
in Italy, all independent of each other. Their habit
is white, with a black veil in Rome and Vercelli,
and that of the lay sisters is gray.
		(O. ZOCKLERt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Vita S. Johannie de Meda, ASA Sept., vii.
	343‑360; H. Tiraboechi, Vetera Humiliatorum monumen
	ts, 3 vols., Milan, 1766‑69; Helyot, Ordrea monastiques,
	vi. 152 eqq., K. Miiller, Die Anfiinpe doe M%noritenordem,
	pp. 162‑167, Freiburg, 1885; Heimbueher, Orden and
	Kongrepationen, i. 262‑263.
	HUMILIATION OF CHRIST. See CHRI8ToLOt1Y;
KEN0818; JESBS CHRIST, TWOFOLD STATE OF.
	HUMILITY: A virtue opposed to pride and ar
rogance, best defined, according to St. Augustine,
by Matt. xi. 29. It is clear from this passage that
the model of mankind is humility in Jesus, who
brought it to the world as a new virtue, whereas
humility in the sense of mere self‑abasement did
not first appear in Christ, but forms a part both of
all genuine religion and also of mysticism. Accord‑
ing to St. Augustine, humilitm implies the complete bowing of the sinner and the creature before God. Religiously speaking, this can only be Augustine's a work of God in man, for inasmuch as
	Definition.	it is dependent on God, it can become
		intelligible to man only when God
reveals it. Yet even in St. Augustine humility is
construed not alone as contemplation of God, but
also as study of self. This is, however, a fictitious
humility, and not the attitude of the " lowly in
heart," of whom Jesus speaks. Nevertheless, this
very definition of humility as self‑abasement pro
duced through self‑knowledge, taught both by St.
Augustine and St. Bernard, has become the prev
alent view, despite its divergence from the words
of Christ.
	The New	Testament clearly shows that Jesus
gave his disciples an entirely new teaching regard
		ing humility. The phrase " lowly in
Teaching heart " does not designate merely the of the pious, for in the few passages in the flew New Testament in which humility is
Testament. mentioned stress is laid upon abasement. Little that is definite, however, can be gained from this until it is determined how far Jesus voluntarily abased himself. It is clear, in the first place, that Jesus did not practise introspection, which would have been far different from the simple consciousness of his divine mission. His life was the recognition and the performance of the will of God, and he who loves God with all his heart is above conscious self‑examination. Only when it becomes difficult for him to perform the divine will does the thought arise that the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. In the second place, the. humility which the disciples learned from Jesus was a joyous devotion to humility, but such a feeling could not result from horror at one's own sin. The joyous desire of humility, in the third place, taught in the New Testament is by no means the result of selfknowledge. Despite the current definition of humility as the consciousness of falling short of the perfection of God, as well as of absolute dependence on divine grace and might, this does not imply the " lowly in heart." This connotes a task of the will which is solved in the following of Jesus, but the mental attitude produced by the self‑knowledge resulting from the revelation of God can not be feigned.
If the impulse toward humility, of which Jesus was conscious and which he wished his disciples to learn from him, is not the joyous submission
Humility	to the command of God, it can imply
Defined as only that Jesus desired them to have
	Service.	the same wish to serve God as he him
		self possessed. This is a humility
springing from the heart, by which man seeks
nothing for himself, but only to be a means to
something higher. Such humility characterized the
activity of Jesus and formed the thought and pur
pose of his life. An imitation in this sense is by
no means impossible, and such humility is declared
by Christ to be the measure of greatness in the
kingdom of heaven. While it is true that the man
of humility is not inclined to think highly of himself,
this is not because he consciously endeavors to

Humility $ungary
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
despise himself, but because in his service and his devotion he forgets self. Here, however, as in certain other cases, the result is regarded as the cause and is made a task which can and should be solved directly. Yet this very preoccupation with self gives the ego an importance which is fatal to real humility, and involves the danger of Phariseeism. If, on the other hand, humility be construed in the light of the teaching of Christ, this peril disappears, and the full possibility of the true fulfilment of the command in Phil. ii. 3 becomes evident.
The humility taught by Jesus is apparent everywhere in Christian life. He bade his disciples learn of him hearty willingness to serve, but
Possibility he alone is able to do this who is either
	of	abundant and joyous in himself, or
Realizing has one near him whose personality can
	Humility.	raise him above the necessity of think
		ing of himself. This the disciples found
in Jesus, and hereby they were enabled to perform
the impossibilities which he required of them, thus
explaining such passages as Matt. xix. 26 and Luke
xviii. 27. In his need, man is unable to conceive
of service as the highest incentive to action, this
motive being care for himself. Jesus, on the other
hand, opposed this attitude with the requirement
to serve, to deny one's self, and to lose one's life.
The difficulty of the realization of this ideal is ob
vious yet it may be attained by one who is over
whelmed by the personal life of Christ, since he
who alone is worthy to rule assumed the duty of
service as necessary and thus inspires obedience.
In like manner, the basal problem of history, the
unity of a life of power and self‑abnegation, finds its
interpretation in the personal, historic life of Jesus.
The humility inspired by the activity of the personal
Christ is the beginning of faith, for the new life of
actual faith is possessed by him alone who is over
whelmed by the deeds of Jesus and is ready from
his heart to live for others. (W. HERRMANN.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Wuttke, Christian Ethics, i. 175, ii. 298,
New York, 1876; J. Kbatlin, Christliche thik, pp. 285,
549 Berlin, 1899; J. Brett Humility, London, 1905; W.
A. Brown, Christian Theology in Outline, p. 386, New
York, 1906• K. Thieme, Die christliche Demut, vol. i.,
Giessen, 1906; the lexicons under ra*etvot, rarawsopoodv,
HUMPHREY, WILLIAM GILSON: Church of England; b. at Sudbury (19 m. w. of Ipswich), Suffolk, Jan. 30, 1815; d. in London Jan. 10, 1886. He was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge (B.A., 1837; M.A., 1840), and was elected fellow of his college in 1839, retaining this position, as well as those of steward and assistant tutor, until 1847, being also proctor in 1845‑46. After a brief trial of the law, he was ordered deacon in 1842, and ordained priest in the following year. He was examining chaplain to the bishop of London (1847‑55), rector of Northolt, Middlesex (1852‑55), and vicar of St. Martin‑in‑the‑Fields, London, from 1855 until his death. He was Hulsean lecturer in 1849‑50, Boyle lecturer in 1857‑58, prebendary of Twyford in St. Paul's Cathedral after 1852, and rural dean of St. Martin‑in‑the‑Fields after 1855. He was also one of the original members of the New Testament Company of the Bible‑Revision Commission, and for thirty years was a treasurer of the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge. Besides
408
editing Theophilus of Antioch's Ad Autolycum (Cambridge, 1852) and Theophylact's " Commentary on Matthew " (1854), he wrote A Commentary on Acts (London, 1847); The Doctrine of a Future State (Hulaean Lectures 1850); The Early Progress of the Gospel (Hulsean Lectures 1851); An Historical and Explanatory Treatise on the Book of Common Prayer (1853); The Miracles (Boyle Lectures 1858); The Character of St. Paul (Boyle Lectures 1859); A Commentary on the Revised Version of the New Testament for English Readers (1882); and the posthumous Occasional Sermons (London 1887) and The Godly Life (sermons; 1889).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: DNB, viii. 252‑253.
HUNDESHAGEN, hlin"des‑hiq'gen, KARL BERftHARD: Theologian of the Reformed Church of Germany; b. at Friedewald (33 m, s.s.e. of Cassel) Jan. 10, 1810; d. at Bonn June 2, 1873. Before he had reached his fifteenth year he began philological studies at the University of Giessen, but soon turned to theology, devoting himself chiefly to church history. Being expelled from the university for connection with the Burachenschaft, he went to Halle in 1829, but the next year returned to Giessen and established himself in the philosophical faculty, lecturing on church history and Christian antiquities. By a treatise on the mystic theology of Gerson (1833) he became licentiate of theology and in 1834 followed a call as professor to the newly established University of Bern. In 1836 he was received into the clergy of Bern, and in 1841 he became rector of the university. From 1847 to 1867 he was professor of New Testament exegesis and church history in Heidelberg, and from 1867 till his death he was professor at Bonn.
A work which caused a great sensation and made Hundeshagen's name famous in the theological world was his (anonymous) Der deutsche Protestantismus, seine Vergangenheit and seine heutigen Lebensfragen, im Zuaammenhang mit der gesammten naliondlen Entwickelung, beleuchtet von einem deutschen Theologen (Frankfort, 1846). It is one of the few theological works of the nineteenth century which influenced the general movement of culture beyond the smaller circle of professional theologians. He aimed to show in his book that the diseased conditions of the religious and national life in Germany were intimately connected with each other and could be healed only in their mutual relation. He starts from the idea of the Reformation as the fundamental factor in German history, and shows it to be in its innermost essence a matter of conscience, and not of knowledge. In the course of time this fundamental factor of ethics united with an intellectual factor‑the principle of free investigation for the sake of conscience. The soundness of the intellectual principle is conditioned by its synthesis with the ethical. The history of German Protestantism shows how the neglect of the ethical

factor and the one‑sided development of the intellectual principle was the cause of the old orthodoxy, then
of rationalism, and finally of the so‑called higher criticism in our modern time, and that always in connection with a condition in state affairs, which deprived the national spirit of its natural roots in a powerful principle of ethics and pressed it toward

407	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8°minty
Hungary
a one‑sidedly intellectual life. After the development of these fundamental thoughts Hundeshagen turns toward the ecclesiastical questions of the time, throwing light upon Pietism, ecclesiastical science, the theological and churchly reaction, the question of symbols from the standpoint of theology and church polity, the Christian State, the " Friends of Light," the question of church constitution, the supposed " mission of the German Catholics," and finally " Protestantism as a political principle."
	Hundeshagen's principal scientific work is the
presentation of his positive, though liberal, ideas
on church polity in his Beitrdge zur Kirchenver
fassungsgeschichte and Kirchenpolitik, insbesondere
des Proteatardismus (vol. i., Wiesbaden, 1864; no
more published). It consists of three parts. The
first treats " the religious and ethical condition of
Christian piety according to their mutual relation
and their respective influence upon the doctrinal
peculiarities and church organization of older Prot
estantism." The second part treats " the Reform
atory work of Ulrich Zwingli, or the theocracy in
Zurich," which may be designated as the moat
important and the classic presentation of the
Zurich Reformation. Hundeshagen finds the main
fault of Zwingli's Reformatory efforts in his theo
cratical organization. The third and most com
prehensive part discusses " the distinguishing
religious peculiarities of Lutheran and Reformed
Protestantism and their reaction upon the capacity
of both for church organization." Hundeshagen
finds little talent for church organization in the Lu
theran Church because doctrinal interests are con
founded with those of a churchly and religious
nature. 	(W. BEYSCHLAGt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A selection of the writings of Hundeshagen was published by T. Cbristlieb with a catalogue of the published works, Goths, 1874; Christlieb also issued K. B. Hundeahagen, Eine Lebenaskizze, Gotha, 1873. Consult also: Riebm, in TSK, 1874; P. Schaff, Germany, its Universities, Theology and Religion, pp. 399 sqq., Philadelphia, 1857.
HUNGARIAN CONFESSIONS: The chief supporter of the Reformed doctrine in Hungary was Mgtyas Bir6 D6vay (q.v.), who in his first efforts followed the lead of Luther, but after 1542 favored the Swiss tendency. Owing to the activity of Peter Melius, Debreczin became, after 1558, the spiritual center of the Reformed movement, to which almost all Hungarian Protestants submitted, while Transylvania remained Lutheran. The first confession of the Reformed was occasioned by the attempts at a Counterreformation by Bishop Anton Verantz of Erlau, who was under the influence of the Jesuits. The confession appeared in 1562 as Confessio Catholics . . . exht7rita sacratissimo et Catholico Romanorum Imperatori Ferdinando et flio sure Majestatis Regi Maximiliano . . . , and also as Confessio eccdesim Debreciensis. The document was not well digested or arranged, and was unsymmetrical. This, therefore, led to a still closer affiliation with the Swiss theology. A synod of Tarczal in 1562 adopted, with slight changes, Beza's Confessio Chridiante ftdei under the title Compendium dootrance Christianw, quam omnes pastores et ministri ecclesiarum Dei in Iota Ungaria et Transsylvania, qua incorruptum Jesu Christi evangelium amplexce
aunt, docent ac profttentur. This document was supplanted again by the Confessio Helvetica posterior of Bullinger, although, at the synod of Debreczin in 1567, the former confessions were not annulled. A number of other synods set up new orthodox articles occasioned by the antitrinitarian controversies and the controversy on the Lord's Supper, as, for instance, the Confewio Czengerina of 1570. The modern Reformed Church in Hungary and Austria accepts only the Helvetic Confession and the Heidelberg Catechism. (E. F. K. MDLLER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: K. Miiller, Bekenntnisachriften der reformierten K%rcha, Leipsie, 1903; E. BShl, Confessio Helvetica posterior, pp. zv sqq., Vienna, 1868; P. Bod, Hist. Run. parorum eccl., vol. i., Leyden, 1888; F. Balogh, in Reformed Church Review, July, 1906.

HUNGARY.
I. Roman and Greek	II. Protestant Churches.
	Catholic Churches.	Lutherans ($ 1).
	Roman Catholics (¢ 1).	Reformed C h u r c h
	Uniats (1 2).		(§ 2).
	Greek Orientals (4 3).	Other Bodies (¢ 3).
The kingdom of Hungary, in southern Europe, forms, with Austria, the Austro‑Hungarian monarchy (see AUSTRIA). The lands of the Hungarian crown, comprising Hungary proper (with Transylvania), Croatia and Slavonia, and the district of Fiume, have an area of 125,430 square miles and a population (1901) of 19,254,559, of whom 8,742,301 (45.4 per cent) speak the Magyar language; 2,135,181 (11.1 per cent) the German; 2,019,641 (10.5 per cent) the Slovak; 2,799,479 (14.5 per cent) the Rumanian; 429,447 (2.2 per cent) the Ruthenian; 1,678,569 (8.7 per cent) the Croatian; 1,052,180 (5.5 per cent) the Servian; and 397,761 (2.1 per cent) other languages. At the census of 1901 there were 9,919,913 (51.5 per cent) Roman Catholics; 1,854,143 (9.6 per cent) Greek Uniats; 2,815,713 (14.6 per cent) Greek Orientals; 1,288,942 (6.7 per cent) Lutherans; 2,441,142 (12.7 per cent) of the Reformed Church; 68,568 (0.4 per cent) Unitarians; 851,378 (4.4 per cent) Jews; and 14,760 (0.1 per cent) of other sects (Anglicans, Baptists, Nazarites, etc.). By law 20 of the year 1848 full equality and reciprocity were guaranteed to the Roman Catholic, Greek, Lutheran, Reformed, and Unitarian churches, the expenses of the above churches for ecclesiastical and school purposes to be borne by the State, but the complete fulfilment of this promise still lies in the future. Law 42 of the year 1895 added the Jewish religion, and the Baptists were recognized by the ministerial order of Nov. 2, 1905.
	I. Roman	and Greek Catholic Churches: The
Roman Catholic Church in Hungary was founded
		by King Stephen I., who was crowned
	I. Roman	with the apostolic crown given by
	Catholics.	Sylvester II., in the year 1001. Since
		his time the kings of Hungary have
exerted apostolic rights, and since 1404 they have
had the right of giving or withholding their sanction
to the papal bulls (in abeyance from 1855 to 1870).
The head of the Church in Hungary is the archbishop
of Esztergom (Gram), who has been the primate of
the kingdom since 1279. He crowns the king and
administers to him the oath; he has the right to
summon the national synod. Under his rule are

Hungary
Hunnius
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
part of the Greek Uniat churches. The organization of the Roman Catholic Church in Hungary is as follows: archbishopric of Esztergom (Gran; founded 1001), with the suffragan bishopric of Nyitra, Gy6r, Veszpr6m, P6cs, Vsez (all five founded 1001) Beszterczebdnya, Sz6kesfeh6rvdr, and Szombathely (all three founded 1777); archbishopric of Kalocsa (founded 1001, raised to archbishopric 1135), with the suffragan bishopric of Magyarcsangd (see at Temesvsx• founded 1001), Nagyvari£d (founded 1095), and Transylvania (see at Gyulafeh6rvsr; founded 1001); archbishopric of Eger (Erlau; founded 1001 raised to archbishopric 1804), with the suffragan bishoprics of Rozsnyb (founded 1776), Szepes (founded 1776), SzatmAr (founded 1804), and Kassa (founded 1804); archbishopric of ZAgrsb (Agram; founded 1093, raised to archbishopric 1853), with the suffragan bishoprics of Zengg (formed by uniting Corbav and Modrus 1833) and Diakovsr (formed by uniting Szer6m [founded 1230]
and the Bosnian diocese 1773); and the arch‑abbey of St. Martin (founded 1001). There are 112 archdeacons, 405 deacons, and 3,804 priests, not including the arch‑abbey, which has one deacon and 15 priests. There are 27 cathedral chapters with 424 canons (152 honorary), 180 abbots (150 honorary), and 146 provosts (109 honorary).
	Members of orders can be admitted to the coun
try, orders can be founded or dissolved only with
consent of the king or by decree of parliament.
Joseph II. (1780‑90) dissolved 134 monasteries,
with 1,544 monks and six convents with 191 nuns.
The present number of monasteries is 227, with
2,196	and 365 convents with 5,420 nuns.
Every= hopric and bishopric, with the excep
tion of three, has its theological seminary; there
were in 1909 for the seculars 18, and for the monastics
13, also a central institute in the University at Buda
pest. The language of instruction is Latin. Since
1868 the Roman Catholic bishops have tried to
create a movement against the influence of the
State in church affairs and for the acquirement of
real autonomy by the Roman Catholic Church, but
so far without success. Only in Transylvania does
the Church possess a kind of self‑government, where
under the presidency of the bishop, 68 clerical and
136 lay representatives yearly deliberate on financial
and educational matters. In the department of
church life and domestic missions are active several
organizations notably the St. Stephen's Union.
Through the influence of the archbishop of Esztergom, George Lippay, 400 clergy of the Greek Church from the midst of the Ruthen‑
	i. Uniats.	inn people in the neighborhood of
		Munkdes joined themselves to the
Roman Catholic Church, and consecratgd their first
bishop in 1655. Count Leopold Kolonics, also an
archbishop of Esztergom, with the help of the
Jesuits, induced more than 100,000 Greek Catholics
of the Rumanian population of Transylvania to
enter the union, and at the synod of Gyulafehdrvdr
the bishop Theophilus and twelve Greek deacons
subscribed to the union which was supported by
King Leopold I. (1697), and the bishopric of Fogaras
was founded for the united church. Fogaras was
raised by Franz Joseph I. in the year 1850 to an
408
archbishopric by the name of Gyulafeh6rv6,r, with the see at Balszsfalva. It has six suffragan bishoprics: Lugos (1850), Szamosujvgr (1850), Grosswardein (Nagyvsrad; 1777), Munks,cs (restored, 1771), Eperles (1816), and Kbros (formed from former Szvidnicz, 1751). There are seven cathedral chapters with 45 canons, 59 archdeacons, 155 deans, 1,361 priests, 731 chaplains, 9 monasteries, 44
monks, 5 seminaries, 228 students, and 34 professors. The legal statue of the Greek Orientals was fixed by law 27 of 1791, when they were given a share in
the privileges already granted to the
3. Greek Roman Catholics. Their bishops were
Orientals. given a seat in the upper house and
lands were also granted to them. The
Church is divided by nationality and speech, consequently since 1861 they have had two metropolitan dioceses. They have two archbishops, eight bishops, 92 archdeacons, 2,311 parishes, 283 chaplains, 2,906 priests, four seminaries, and 28 religious
houses with 158 monks. In order to escape from the oppression of the Turks, 38,000 Serviana, with their
patriarch, fled to the Hapsburg dominions and were granted ecclesiastical privileges by Leopold I. (1691). The head of the church is the patriarch of Karlowitz, and the governing body is the Servian National
Church congress, consisting of 25 clerical and 50 lay members, elected for three years. Besides the patriarchate there are the following bishoprics: BS,cs Ofen (Buds), Temesvar, Veraecz (all founded 1690), Karlstadt and Pakracz. The Roumanian
Church (independent since 1865) is governed by the national church congress of 30 clerical and 60 lay members, elected for three years. The archbishopric of Hermanstadt (founded by Joseph IL, 1780‑90; raised to archbishopric, 1864) has two suffragan bishoprics, Arad (founded by Leopold L, 1657‑1705) and Karansebes (1865).
II. Protestant Churches: The Evangelical Church of the Augsburg Confession is divided into two
'	bodies, of separate origin historically,
	z. Lu‑	and each with an independent constitu
	therans.	tion of its own; the church of the
		Hungarians, and that of the Tranayl
vanian Saxons. The Hungarian Lutheran Church
dates from the Reformation. It is divided into four
ecclesiastical districts, each with a superintendent
and an inspector. Since the time of Maria Theresa
(1774) there has been a general meeting of 90‑100
members chosen from all the districts. The four
districts (each governed by a bishop) are as follows:
the Bsnya (see at Budapest); the Cis‑Danubian
(see at Balassagyarmat); the Trans‑Danubian (see
at Pspa); and the district of the Theisa (see at
Miskolcz). The church has 39 synods, 661 congre
gations, with 665 ministers and 169 chaplains, and
1;085,603 communicants. There are three theo
logical academies, with 16 professors and 138 stud
ents. The communicants are Magyars, Germane,

and Slovaks. The church of Transylvania also dates from the Reformation. It consists of one district with its see at Hermanstadt (Nagyszeben).

It has 10 synods, 247 congregations, and 220,362 communicants, all Saxon, with German as their

mother tongue. They were called into the country in 1142, were granted many privileges, and have

409	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	g°=9
		Hunnine
kept intact their nationality until the present day.
The church was granted religious freedom in 1557,
and became independent under the rule of the prince
of Transylvania, and kept its autonomy when Tran
sylvania was united with Hungary in 1848. It has
one theological academy.
	At first the teachings of Luther spread among the
Magyar, the German and the Slavonic population
		of Hungary; but with the appearance
2. Reformed of Calvinism almost all the Magyars
	Church.	ranged themselves under the banner
		of the Reformed confession, and this
division of Protestantism was carried out from 1561
to 1591; it was fully completed by synods summoned
for that purpose (in Transylvania in 1564, in the
region of the Tizra in 1567). Since 1841 proposals
have been made for union, but with almost no
results. The constitution and organization of the
Reformed Church were settled by the synods of
1623 and 1646. The details of the organization have
been arranged lately by three general synods (1881;
1891‑92; 1904‑07). The church is divided into
five districts (each under the rule of a bishop): the
Cis‑Danubian (formed 1544; see at Kunezent
miklos); the Trans‑Danubian (formed 1591; see
at Komarom [Komorn]); the Cis‑Tibiscan (formed
1572; see	at Miskolcz); the Trans‑Tibiscan
(formed 1559; see at Debreczen); and the Transyl
vanian (formed 1564; see at Kolozsvdr [Klausen
burg]). The church numbers 57 consistories, 2,030
congregations with 1,981 pastors and 188 associate
pastors, and 2,452,773 communicants. There are
five theological academies. The Hungarian Re
formed Churches have shown great'sympathy for
the Alliance of the Reformed Churches holding the
Presbyterian System, which they finally joined in
1905. Both the Lutheran and the Reformed Church
maintain various domestic missions.
	Most of the Unitarians are in Transylvania. They
date from 1566 (religious freedom guaranteed in
		1568; full eqpality with other churches
	3. Other	in Hungary granted in 1848). They
	Bodies.	have a bishop, whose seat is at Kolozs
		vAr, nine deans, and 113 congregations
with 109 pastors and a theological academy. The
church has been largely supported by the English
and American Unitarians. The Unitarians are
mostly Magyars. Since the Revolution of 1848 a
new sect has arisen chiefly among the lower classes,
the Nazarites or " followers of Christ." Their
religion seems to be a mixture of that of the Ply
mouth Brethren, the Baptists, and the Mennonites.
The Baptists first appeared in Hungary in 1874;
their first church was in Budapest.	They were
recognized by the State in 1905. [This recognition
involved some measure of State aid, which some
were unwilling to accept, and controversy and a
schism arose. A mission from the English branch
of the Baptist World Alliance in 1907 succeeded in
settling some of the difficulties. The Baptists now
number about 16,000.	A. H. N.]
	In Hungary in 1904 there were 3,415,587 children
of school age, of whom 2,657,263 were actually at
tending school. There were 17,866 schools, of which
1,921 were State schools, 2,804 communal, 375 pri‑
vate, and 12,766 church (5,280 Roman Catholic,
1,991 Greek Catholic, 1,756 Greek Oriental, 1,362
Lutheran, 1,863 Reformed, 36 Unitarian, and 478
Jewish). There were 31,678 teachers. There were
89 normal schools with 10,362 students. There were
199 high schools in 1904, of which 63 were State
schools, 11 communal, 4 private, and 121 church.
There were 3,953 professors and 6,304 scholars.
There are three universities: at Budapest, with
328 professors and 6,586 students; at Kolozsvdr
(Klausenburg), with 110 professors and 1,925 stud
ents; and at Zdgrdb (Agram), with 83 professors
and 1,055 students. 	(K. Ri;v>az.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Most of the literature is in Magyar, cf. Hauck‑Herzog, RE, xx. 235. Consult further: E. Horn, Organisation religieuae de la Honprie, Paris, 1906; P. Bod, Hist. Hungarorum eccd., ed. L. W. E. Rauwenhoff and C. $zalay, 3 vols., Leyden, 1888‑90; V. Krasinski, Religious Hist. of the Slavonic Nations, London, 1851; E. L. Godkin, Hist. of Hungary and the Magyars, ib. 1853; Hist. of the Protestant Church in Hungary to 1850, ib. 1854; V. Franknoi, Papst Innocenz Xl. and Ungarns Befreiunp von der Titrkenherrachaft, Feriburg, 1902; G. Bart6k, A reformdtus egyhdzak preabyterfblis szervezete, Kolozsvart, 1904; A. Kiss, Tbrbk P8l 6lete, Budapest, 1904; J. 8chrbdl, " History of the Pressburg Evangelical Church Community " (in Hungarian), Presburg, 19(16; M. Zailinazky, A magyar protestans epyhaz t6rtl:nete, Budapest, 1907; W. B. Bovill, Hungary and the Hungarians, London, 1908; Protestdne K46pea Napthr (annual Protestant calendar).

HUNNIUS, hiin'nf‑us, AEGIDIUS: Lutheran theologian; b. at Winnenden (7 m. n.e. of Stuttgart) Dec. 21, 1550; d. at Wittenberg Apr. 4, 1603. He went rapidly through the preparatory schools of Wurttemberg, and studied from 1565 to 1574 at Tubingen. In 1576 Jacob Heerbrand recommended him as professor to the University of Marburg, where Hunnius exerted himself to do away with all compromises and restore Lutheran orthodoxy. He gained many adherents, and the consequence was a split in the State Church of Hesse which finally led to the separation of Upper and Lower Hesse. The cardinal point of all controversies was the doctrine of ubiquity which Hunnius maintained in his writing. De persona Christi. Bartholomaus Meier, one of Landgrave William's theologians, replied, but could not prevail against Hunnius' learned eloquence. In 1592 Hunnius removed to Wittenberg. In the electorate of Saxony, Calvinism had made great headway under the elector Christian, but his successor, Duke Frederick William, desired to introduce Lutheran orthodoxy, and for this purpose called the Swabian theologians, among them Hunnius, to Wittenberg. Immediately after his arrival he was made member of a committee on visitation, instituted for the purpose of purifying the country from Calvinism. For the same purpose he was called into other German territories, as, for instance, into Silesia by Duke Frederic of Liegnitz. Hunnius was the most able representative of the Swabian theology of Brenz, and consequently of the doctrine concerning the majesty and omnipresence of Christ as man. But he advanced the Lutheran cause also in reference to other doctrines, and his influence is traceable in the development of Lutheran dogmatics after his time. The later doctrine concerning the authority of Holy Scripture is based upon Hunnius' Tractatus de maiestate, fide, autoritate et certitudine saerce scripturm In the same way he established the orthodox Lutheran doctrine of

Hunnins	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	410
Hunting Among the Hebrews
predestination by following J. Damascenus in his
distinction between voluntas antecedens and corn
sequens, and considering faith as the instrumental
cause of election.
	The literary activity of Hunnius was mainly
polemical. His most important works are De
persona Christi (1585), which is an enlargement of
an earlier treatise entitled Bekenntnis von der Person
Christi (1577) ; Trattatus de maiestate, fide, auiordate
et certitudine sacrce scripturte (1588); Calvinus iu
doizans, sine Judaicte glossw et corruptelm in ex
plicandis testimoniisScripturmSacrw de trinitate, etc.
(1593); Anti‑Parens (1594); and Anti‑Parens alter
(1599). He wrote also numerous dogmatic mono
graphs and commentaries on the Gospels of Matthew
and John, the Epistles of Paul, and the first Epistle
of John. He composed several Biblical dramas in
Latin, among them Josephus, com&,dia sacra, which
was presented at Strasburg in 1597. A complete
edition of his Latin writings was edited by his son
in‑law, H. Garthius (5 vole.,. Wittenberg, 1607‑09).
		(JOHANNES KUNZE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Adam, Vita theologorum . . German
	orum, pp. 344‑347, Heidelberg, 1706, of. J. G. Neumann
	De vita Aeg. Hunnii exemplum, Wittenberg, 1704; L. W.
Fisehlin. Memoria theologorum Vitteberpeneium, i.. pp.
aviii. 51‑53, 253‑275 Leipeio 1710; F W Strieder Fleen
ache Gelehrtengeschiehta, vi. 213‑277, 8 vole., Cassel, 1780
1788; K. A. Credner, Philippe des Grossmatigen hessische
Kirchenreformationsordnung, pp. ccaxxv.‑cealiii., Giessen '
1852; A. Schweizer, Die protestantiechen Centraldopmen,
i. 529 eqq., 588 sqq., Zurich, 1854; G. Frank, Geschichte
der protestantischen Theologie, i. 248‑249, Leipsie, 1862.
HUNNIUS, NICOLAUS: Lutheran theologian; b. at Marburg July 11, 1585, third son of Egidius Hunnius (q.v.); d. at Liibeck Apr. 12, 1643. At the age of fifteen he entered the University of Wittenberg, where he studied philology, philosophy, and theology. In 1609 he joined the philosophical faculty and lectured in philosophy and theology. He followed the same theological direction as his father, inherited his temper and talent as a polemist, and was like him, possessed of great learnipg. In virtue of his ability Elector John George I. of Sagony appointed him, in 1612, superintendent of Eilenburg, where he won the respect of his superiors and the affection of his congregation. In 1617 Hunnius was called to succeed Leonhard Hutter, at Wittenberg, as professor of theology. In 1623 he was appointed pastor of St. Mary's Church at Liibeck; the following year he became superintendent. For the suppression of the enthusiasts who pervaded the region, Hunnius reunited the dioceses of Lubeck, Hamburg, and Liineberg (Ministrium tripolitanum), and at a convention held in 1633 at M611n measures were proposed and adopted for the same purpose. For the suppression of the adherents of Calvinism Hunnius frustrated the efforts of John Durie (q.v.), who tried to establish harmony between the Lutherans and the Reformed. To check the proselytizing tendencies of the Roman Catholics, he even invoked the aid of the secular powers. At the same time he made earnest efforts to elevate the religious and ecclesiastical life. It was however, chiefly his polemical literary activity that made him known among his contemporaries. He wrote against the Roman Church Ministerii Lutherani divini adeoque legitimi demonstratio (Wit‑
tenberg, 1614) and Capistrum Hunnio paratum, etc. (1617); against the Socinians, whom he considered as Photinians, Examen errorum Photinianorum, 1620); and against the enthusiasts, Christliche Betrachtung (1622), Nedder Sdchsisches Handtbmck (Lilbeek, 1633), Ausfuhrlicher Bericht van der neuen Propheten Religion, Lehr and Glauben, etc. (Labeck, 1634; 2d ed. by J. H. Feustking, Wittenberg, 1708, under the title Matmologia fanatica). Against the unionistic tendencies of John Durie he wrote Ministerii eccleaiastici Lubecenais theologica Consideratio interpositionis, seu pacifecatomm transaotionis, inter religionen Lutheranam ex una, et Reformatam ex alters parta profatentes, abs D. Johanne Durwo, ecclesiaste Britanno, his temparibus tentatm (Liibeck,1677). Another writing during his activity at Lfibeek is his Ate?KE*IS theologica de fundamertali, dissensu doctrinte Evangelicte Lutheranm et Calvinianle seu Reformat&, (Wittenberg, 1626), which is important in so far as the distinction between fundamental and non‑fundamental articles of faith may be traced to it. But the greatest sensation was created by his Consultatio oder wohlmeinendes Bedenken, ob and wie die evangelisch‑lutherisehen Kirchen die jetzt schwebenden Religiomstreitigkeiten entweder beilegen oder durch christliche and bequeme Mittel fortstellen and endigen mogen (L(lbeek, 1632). Here he proposed the institution of a perpetual theological senate for the purpose of investigating and settling all theological disputes. Among his didactic writings may be mentioned the Epitome credendorum oder Inhalt der christlichen Lehre, etc. (Wittenberg, 1625). This work ran through nineteen editions, and was translated into Dutch, Swedish, Polish, and Latin. It is a book of popular instruction in Christianity, was reprinted in 1844 for the seminary of American missionaries at Neuendettelsau, and a third edition appeared at Nbrdlingen, 1870. An epitome of it was made the basis of religious instruction in elementary schools.
(JOHANNES KUNZE.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The best source in C. H. Starek, Der Stadt
L4Fbeck Kirchenhistorie v. 741 sqq., Hamburg, 1724.
Consult: J. Moller, Cimbria literata ii. 376‑389, Copenhagen, 1744; L. Heller, Nikolaus Hunnius, Liibeck, 1843 (a careful monograph).
HUNT, JOHN: Church of England; b. at Bridgend (a north suburb of Perth), Perthshire, Scotland, Jan. 21, 1827. He was educated at the University of St. Andrews, matriculating in 1847, and was ordered deacon in 1855, and ordained priest two years later. He was curate of Deptford, Durham (1855‑59), of St. Mary's, Lambeth (1866‑74), and of St. Nicholas', Sutton, Surrey (1876‑78). Since 1878 he has been vicar of Orford, Kent. He has translated Poems from the German (London, 1852) and Luther's Spiritual Songs (1853), and has written Essay on Pantheism (London, 1866; revised and enlarged under the title Pantheism arid Christianity, 1884); Religious Thought in England (3 vols., 1871‑73); Contemporary Essays in Theology (1872); and Religious Thought in England in the Nineteenth Century (1896).
HUNT, WILLIAM: Church of England; b. at Clifton (a west suburb of Bristol), Gloucestershire, Mar. 3,1842. He was educated at Trinity College, Oxford

(B.A., 1864), and was vicar of Congresbury‑cumWick, St. Lawrence, Somersetshire (1867‑82). Since 1882 he has resided in London, devoting himself to literary work and reviewing. He was examiner in history at Oxford in 1877‑79 and 1881‑82, and since 1905 has been president of the Royal Historical Society. His works include History of the Diocese of Bath and Wells (London, 1883); The English Church in the Middle Ages (1888); and History of the English Church, 597‑1066 (1899), besides an edition of Two Chartuldries of Bath Priory (London, 1893). He has also edited the Historical Towns Series in collaboration with E. A. Freeman, and contributed to it The History of Bristol (London, 1887), while he wrote The Political History of England, 1760‑1801, as the tenth volume of the Political History of England, edited by him and R. L. Poole (1905).

	HUNTING AMONG THE HEBREWS: In Pales
tine there was no lack of animals of the chase.
		The so‑called Persian lion (leo persicus),
	i. Beasts now long extinct, was found in ancient
	of Prey. times in great numbers in the thickets
		near the Jordan (Jer. xlix. 19; Zech.
xi. 3), in the desert of southern Judea, and in the
Lebanon (Cant. iv. 8; cf. II Kings xvii. 25 aqq.).
It was caught in pitfalls (Ezek. xix. 4, 8) and strong
nets were also used. The bear was equally common,
but less feared (I Sam. xvii. 34; II Sam. xvii. 8;
Hos. xiii. 8; Amos v. 19). The Syrian bear (ursus
syriacus), now found but rarely in the Lebanon, is
somewhat smaller than the usual type of brown bear.
The wolf appears to have been the special enemy of
sheep (Matt. x. 16; Luke x. 3; John x. 12), and
was much employed in literary imagery as a type
of rapacity. The striped hyena (hyena striata) is
still found throughout Palestine, especially where
rock‑tombs and caves offer a refuge. The only
allusions to it in the Old Testament are Isa. xiii. 22,
and perhaps Jer. xii. 8. The jackal (canis aureua)
appears i n the Old Testament as lurking in ruins
and desert places (Isa. xiii. 22, xxxiv. 13). Its
howling serves as a type of the bitterest lamentation
(Job xxx. 29; Mic. i. 8). The leopard (felis pardus),
still quite common in the Lebanon, is mentioned as
a dreaded beast of prey (Isa. xi. 6; Jer. v. 6; Hos.
xiii. 7), and was admired for its beautiful skin (Jer.
xiii. 23) and its swiftness (Hob. i. 8). The fox is the
destroyer of vineyards (Cant. ii. 15; Neh. iv. 3),
and was a type of craft and malice (Ezek. xiii. 4;
cf. Luke xiii. 32). In the northern part of Palestine
the Syrian fox (rulpes flavescens) is found, and in
the southern part the Egyptian fox (vulpes nilotica).
	Of larger game animals, the gazelle (antilope
dorcas) takes the first place, and is even to‑day the
		most common of such animals. For
	Game the Hebrews the gazelle, as its name,
	Animals. zebhi, signifies, is one of the most beau
		tiful of animals; it figures often in
poetry as a type of grace (Cant. ii. 9, 17; Prov. v.
19); its name was frequently given to girls (II Kings
xii. 1; Acts ix. 36). Shy and fleet as are few other
animals (Prov. vi. 5; Isa. xiii. 14), the gazelle was
difficult to take (Cant. ii. 17). It was caught in pit
falls and snares, and its flesh was much prized (Deut.
RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA	Hu"nius
Hunting Among the Hebrews
xii. 15, xiv. 5; I Kings iv. 23). Among the antelopes belongs the dishon (Deut. xiv. 5; probably the antilope addax), the te'o (Deut. xiv. 5; Isa. li. 20; the antilope leucoryx or bubalis), and in all probability the yahmur (Deut. xiv. 5; I Kings iv. 23) which, however, is often understood to mean the fallow deer or the roe‑buck. Next to the gazelle, the stag is the most common game animal (Deut. xiv. 5; I Kings iv. 23); it is very rare at the present time, but was well known to the ancient Hebrews and admired for its grace (Prov. v. 19; Cant. ii. 71) and its nimbleness and speed (Ps. xviii. 33; Cant. ii. 9; Isa. xxxv. 6; Hab. iii. 19). The ibex, at the present day, is found principally in the mountain‑cliffs of the western shore of the Dead Sea and in the mountains of Moab, as well as in the cliffs of Sinai, whence it takes its name (copra sinaitica). Hares (Lev. xi. 6; Deut. xiv. 7) and rock‑badgers (hyrax syriacus) were considered to be unclean, and were therefore rarely hunted.
Of game‑birds the partridge is represented by various species, especially the stone‑partridge (caccabis saxatilis) and the amnwperdix
Game	heyi, the latter particularly in the
	Birds.	desert of Judea. To judge from the
		metaphor used in I Sam. xxvi. 20,
partridges were hunted at that time exactly as they
are at present‑they were persistently pursued until
they became exhausted and could be killed with
a stick. For doves, which were regarded as domestic
birds, see DovEs. Quails are mentioned only in the
account of the wandering as food for the lustful
people (Ex. xvi. 12‑13). These birds make their
appearance in Palestine during their migrations to
the south. Sparrows and other small birds were a
welcome prey of the bird‑catcher (Prov. vii. 23;
Lam. iii. 52; Amos iii. 5; Matt. x. 29), and were
often eaten. On the other hand the swallow (Ps.
lxxxiv. 3; Isa. xxxviii. 14; Jer. viii. 7), with the
exception of one species, is in the Talmud pro
nounced unclean.
According to all the statements in the Old Testament the hunting of animals of prey seems to have been pursued only in self‑defense;
Purpose shepherds and peasants were forced to and defend themselves against them in hard
Methods	battles (Gen. xxxvii. 33; I Sam. xvii,
of the 34 aqq.; I Kings xiii. 24; Isa. v. 29);
	Hunt.	and the acts of heroism shown in
		these combats received full recognition
(Judges xiv. 6, xv. 4; II Sam. xxiii. 20). Edible
game was always hunted for the flesh, which was
highly esteemed (Gen. xxv. 28, xxvii. 3 aqq.; I
Kings iv. 23). Hunting was rarely a pastime.
Nimrod, the " mighty hunter before the Lord," was
a strange figure which had no parallel in Israelitic
legend. Esau is probably also an ideal figure. It
is not mentioned of the Israelitic kings that they
were fond of hunting. This is all the more notice
able since at the Egyptian and Assyrian courts the
taste for hunting was general. Only of Herod
Josephus asserts (Wars, I., xxi. 13) that he was an
eager huntsman. The same writer also mentions
pleasure‑hunts on horseback of birds and wild
animals with trained falcons and hunting‑dogs (Ant.
XV., vii. 7, XVI., 10, 3). On the way in which the

Huntingdon
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	412
hunters pursued the chase there is little information. Hunting‑dogs are never mentioned in the Old Testament, but Josephus speaks of their use as though it were an old custom (Ant. IV., viii. 9). Bow and arrow were the usual weapons of the chase (Gen. xxvii. 3; Isa. vii. 24); the ordinary weapons, spear and sword, served also in contests with wild beasts (Job xli. 26). The shepherd relied upon the use of slings (I Sam. xvii. 40) and club (Job xli. 26). Bird‑catching, especially, was carried on by means of different kinds of nets (Prov. i. 17; Jer. v. 26; Hos. vii. 12; Amos iii. 5). Tame partridges used as decoys in hunting partridges are mentioned by Sirach (xi. 30); from the Romans the Hebrews learned the art of falconry. (I. BENZINGER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bensinger, Archdolopie, pp. 204‑205; Nowack, Archholopie, i. 221‑222; DB, ii. 437‑438; EB, iii. 3396, iv. 5248‑49; JE, vi. 504; the articles on the different animals and birds in the Bible dictionaries.

HUNTINGDON, SELENA HASTINGS, COUNTESS OF: English religious leader and founder of the Calvinistic Methodists known as the Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion; b. at Stanton Harold, an estate near Ashby‑de‑larZouch, Leicestershire, Aug. 24, 1707; d. in London June 17, 1791. She was the daughter of Washington Shirley, second Earl Ferrers. In 1728 she married Theophilus Hastings, ninth earl of Huntingdon, and took up her residence with him at Donington Park, Leicestershire. Converted through the influence of her sister‑in‑law, Lady Margaret Hastings, who afterward married Benjamin Ingham (q.v.), she allied herself with the Methodists, attended constantly the meetings held by the Wesleys in Fetter Lane, and joined the first Methodist society formed there in 1739. After the death of two of her sons in 1743 and of her husband in 1746 she devoted herself uninterruptedly to the advancement of Methodism. Her social position enabled her to be the chief means of introducing the new movement into aristocratic circles. In 1747 she made George Whitefield one of her chaplains and threw open her London house for religious services. Here Whitefield frequently preached to audiences that included such men as Chesterfield, Walpole, and Bolingbroke. Lady Huntingdon built, or acquired, numerous chapels in various parts of England and filled them with her domestic chaplains. In 1768 she founded at Trevecca, South Wales, a special seminary for the training of her chaplains. To reach upper classes she chose as her strongholds such places as Bath, Tunbridge, and London. She had been under the impression that as a peeress she had a right to employ as many chaplains as she pleased; but in 1779 an adverse decision of the consistorial court of London compelled her to take shelter under the Toleration Act. She and her ministers were thus placed in the position of dissenters, and her chapels were registered as dissenting places of worship. At this time several of her chaplains, including William Romaine, Henry Venn, and John Berridge, withdrew from the Connexion. When the breach occurred between Wesley and Whitefield, Lady Huntingdon sided with Whitefield, and at his death became sole trustee of his institutions in Georgia. To perpetuate her work after her death she organized her chapels into an
association in 1790, and at her death bequeathed them, together with her seminary, to trustees. Her interests were not confined to her " connexion," and her influence was wider than the bounds of Methodism. See METHOWSTS.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Life and Times of Selina, Countess of Huntingdon, 2 vols., London, 1844; Mrs. H. C. Knight, Lady Huntingdon and her Friends, New York, 1853; A. H. New, The Coronet and the Cross, or Memorials of Selina, Countess of Huntingdon, London, 1857; J. H. Newman, Essays Critical and Historical, A, 386‑424, ib., 1873 (reviews the first book named above); Henrietta Keddie, The Countess of Huntingdon and her Circle, Cincinnati, 1907; DNB, xxv. 133‑135, and the lives of George Whitefield, John and Charles Wesley, John William Fletcher, and Rowland Hill.
HUNTINGTON, FREDERIC DAR: Protestant Episcopal bishop of Central New York; b. at Hadley, Mass., May 28, 1819; d. there July 11, 1904. He was educated at Amherst (A.B., 1839) and at Harvard Divinity School (1842). He was minister of the South Congregational Church (Unitarian), Boston, Mass. (1842‑55), after which he ws3 professor of Christian morals, as well as college preacher, at Harvard (1855‑60). In 1860 he withdrew from Unitarianism and was ordered deacon in the Protestant Episcopal Church, being priested in 1861. He was rector of Emmanuel Church, Boston, which he had organized (1861‑69), and in 1869 was consecrated bishop of Central New York. He lectured repeatedly at the Episcopal Divinity School, Cambridge, Mass., and the General Theological Seminary. Among his works mention may be made of his Lessons on the Parables of Our Saviour (Boston, 1856); Sermons for the People (1856); Christian Believing and Living (sermons; 1860); Divine Aspects of Human Society (New York, 1860); Elim: or, Hymns of Holy Refreshment (Boston, 1865); Steps to a Living Faith (New York, 1870); Helps to a Holy Lent (1872); Christ and the World (1874); New Helps to a ‑Holy Lent (1876); Christ in the Christian Year and in the Life of Man (1878); The Fitness of Christianity to Man (1878); Sermons on the Christian Year (2 vols., 1881), and Personal Religious Life in the Ministry and in Ministering Women (1900).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. S. Huntington, Memoir and Letters of F. D. Huntington, Boston, 1906.
HUNTINGTON, WILLIAM REED: Protestant Episcopalian; b. at Lowell, Mass., Sept. 20, 1838. He was educated at Harvard (A.B., 1859), where he was instructor in chemistry in 1859‑60. He received his theological training privately,, was ordered deacon in 1861, and priested in 1862. After being curate at Emmanuel Church, Boston, in 186162, he was rector of All Saints', Worcester, Mass., until 1883, when he became rector of Grace Church, New York City. He has been active in the cause of church unity and in the revival of the order of deaconesses, and was a protagonist in the movement to revise the liturgy, being secretary of the joint committee of the general convention for the enrichment and better adaptation to American needs of the Book of Common Prayer, while in 1892 he was joint editor with S. Hart of the Standard Prayer Book. His writings include: The Church Idea: An Essay toward Unity (New York, 1870); Conditional Immortality (1878); Popular Miscon‑

413	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	$ura ngdon
ceptians of the Episcopal Church (1891); The Causes of the Soul (sermons; 1891); The Peace of the Church (Bohlen lectures for 1891; 1891); Short History of the Book of Common. Prayer (1893); The Spiritual House (1895); Psyche, a Study of the Soul (1899); Four Key Words of Religion (1899); Sonnets and a Dream (1899); Theology's Eminent Domain and Other Papers (1902); and A Good Shepherd and Other Sermons, (1906).

HUPFELD, HERMANN (CHRISTIAN KARL FRIEDRICH): German Biblical scholar; b. at Marburg Mar. 31, 1796; d. at Halle Apr. 24, 1866. At the age of seventeen he entered the University of Marburg (Ph.D., 1817), where he studied philology and theology. From 1819 till 1822 he was a gymnasium professor at Hanau, until his shattered health compelled him to return to his parents' house. Here, on resuming his theological studies, he soon discovered a firm theological basis. In 1824 he proceeded to Halle, where he enjoyed the society of Gesenius, and became privat‑docent in Hebrew. A few months later he went to Marburg as privatdocent. On being appointed extraordinary professor of theology at Marburg in 1825, Hupfeld promoted the study of Semitic grammar by his incisively discriminating Exercitationes Xthiopiae (Leipsic, 1825), which at once attested their learned author to be an investigator of the first rank. With the regular professorship of Oriental languages, which he obtained in 1827, Hupfeld combined, in 1830, the regular chair of theology at Marburg. He finally found his largest sphere of action, in 1843, as successor to Gesenius at Halle. Here, for several decades, he conscientiously, thoroughly, and fruitfully taught the special branches of Old Testament science.
Only cursory mention may be made here of Hupfeld's varied work. He not only wrote upon university topics, but also composed manifold political tracts, wherein he proclaimed in advance the revolution of 1848, and fought for genuine liberty against undisciplined anarchy. He repeatedly took an active part in the ecclesiastical controversies of the time. In 1837 he prevented the introduction of an inferior hymn‑book; and as late as 1849 he was active as a politico‑ecclesiastical writer in the cause of a free internal upbuilding of the Church upon a positive Christian foundation. Undoubtedly, too, in the saddest days of the reaction, Hupfeld, by reason of his quiet academic work, was a valiant colaborer toward the inauguration of better conditions.
In view of the great multitude of Hupfeld'a literary achievements, any complete enumeration of titles is out of question. The list of his writings in his autobiography fills five pages. Unfortunately his early projected Ausfiirliche hebrdische Grammatik (Cassel, 1841) was never completed. To be mentioned for its epoch‑making influence is his Kritische Beleuchtung einiger dunkeln and misverstandenen Stellen der alltestamentlichen Textgeschichte (TSK, iii. 1830, and x. 1837), and also the work Ueber Begriff and Methods der sogenannten biblischen Einleitung (Marburg, 1844), which is still worth reading. An ingenious essay is that on Die Stellung
and Bedeutung des Ruches Hiob im A. T. nach seinem didaktischen and dramatischen Charakter (Deutsche Zeitschrift fiir christliche Wissenschaft, Berlin, 1850). Interesting, again, are his investigations respecting the Hebrew festivals, published in four Latin Easter programs (Halls, 1851‑64). To be mentioned also are the classic essay on Die Politik der Propheten des A. T.'s (tVeue evangelische Kirchenzeitung (Berlin, 1862), and Die heutige theosophische oder mythologische Theologie and Schrifterkltirung (Berlin, 1861), which is important for the history of theology in Germany.
It remains to mention Hupfeld's two major works, and first, Die Quellen der Genesis and die Art ihrer Zusammensetzung von neuem untersucht (Berlin, 1853). One who is not repelled by the somewhat wearisome elaboration of these disquisitions will even nowadays find them profitable, the book having permanent value, and being renowned for the scrupulousness of its research, as well as for the strictness of its method. Hupfeld's most extensive work is his commentary on the Psalms, Die Psalmen iibersetzt and ausgelegt (4 vole., Gotha, 1855‑61). Of its merits and shortcomings, suffice it to say that Hupfeld sought to ascertain, in the case of difficult and contested passages in the Psalms, the earliest advocate of every interpretation he adduced, and that he sometimes made assertions that are untenable. The second edition, revised by Edward Riehm (4 vols., 1867‑71), contains a great many improvements. The very serviceable third edition by W. Nowack (2 vols., 1888) is such a decided recasting of the preceding one's that to recognize the work of Hupfeld and Riehm one must have recourse to the first and second editions. A. KAnapaAusEN.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hupfeld furnished accounts of his life for the Grundlage zu einer hessisd en Gelehrten‑, Schriftstellerund Kunatler‑Geschichte, by K. W. Justi, Marburg, 1831 and by O. Gerland, Cassel, 1865. Consult also E. Riehm, Hermann Hupfeld, Lebens‑ and Charakterbild, Halle, 1867, K. F. Keil, Introduction to . . . O. T., i. 177‑179, Edinburgh, 1869; F. Bleek, Einleitung in das A. T., ed. J. Bleek and A. Kamphausen, pp. 569, 617, 626, Berlin, 1893; E. K6nig, Einleitunp in das Alte Testament, pp. 7, 12, 147, 193, Bonn, 1893.

HURD, RICHARD: Bishop of Worcester; b. at Congreve (6. m. a. of Stafford), Staffordshire, Jan. 13, 1720; d. May 28, 1808. He studied at Emmanuel College, Cambridge (B.A., 1739; M.A., 1742; B.D., 1746; D.G„ 1768), and became a fellow there in 1742. By a judicious compliment in the preface of his annotated edition of Horace's Ars poetics (London, 1749) he won the patronage of Bishop Warburton, through whose recommendation he was appointed one of the preachers at Whitehall in 1750. He was presented to the rectory of Thurcaston, Leicestershire, in 1757, appointed preacher at Lincoln's Inn in 1765, and collated to the archdeaconry of Gloucester in 1767. He was elevated to the see of Litchfield and Coventry in 1774, and appointedpreceptor to the prince of Wales and the duke of York in 1776. He was translated to Worcester in 1781. Two years later he was offered the tree of Canterbury, which he declined. Hurd was a moderate Tory and churchman and a man of considerable literary ability. His principal works are: the Commentary published with his edition of

Hurlbut	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	41
Horace's Ars poetics (London, 1749; Moral and Political Dialogues (1759), in which historical personages discuss various topics; Letters on Chivalry and Romance (1762), which helped to initiate the Romantic movement; An Introduction to the Study of the Prophecies Concerning the Christian Church (1772; 5th ed., 2 vols., 1788, being Warburton lectures delivered at Lincoln's Inn; and Sermons (3 vols., 1776‑80). He edited, among other things, Warburton's Works (7 vols., 1788), and left materials for an annotated edition of Addison's Works (6 vols., 1811). His own Works were published, with an autobiography, in 8 vols., 1811.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. Kilveit, Memoirs of the Life and Writinge of Richard Hurd, London, 1880; John Nichols, Literary Anecdotes of the 18th Century, London, 1812‑15; DNB, xzviii: 314‑318.
HURLBUT, JESSE LYMAN: Methodist Episcopalian; b. in New York City Feb. 14, 1843. He was educated at Wesleyan University, Middletown, Conn. (A.B., 1864), and after teaching for a year (1864‑65) in Pennington Seminary, Pennington, N. J., entered the Methodist Episcopal ministry. He held various pastorates from 1865 to 1879, when he was appointed an agent of the Sunday School Union of his denomination, a position which he held five years. From 1884 to 1888 he was assistant Sunday‑school literature editor, and from 1888 to 1900 was full editor, and also secretary, of the Sunday School Union and Tract Society. In 1900 he resumed the ministry, and was pastor at Morristown, N. J., and since 1904 has held a pastorate at South Orange, N. J. He has been active in Chautauqua work, and was one of the founders of the Epworth League, of which he was secretary in 1889‑92. Special mention may be made of his American History (New York, 1880); Life of Christ (1882); Manual of Biblical Geography (Chicago, 1884); Studies in the Four Gospels (New York, 1889); Studies in Old Testament History (1890); Traveling in the Holy Land through the Stereoscope (1900); From Saul to Solomon: Studies in Old‑Testament History (1903); Story of the Bible told for Young and Old (Philadelphia, 1904); Stories from the Old and New Testaments (1904); Outline Studies in the Old Testament for Bible Teachers (New York, 1905) ; and Sunday Half Hours with Great Preachers (1908). He has prepared numerous volumes on Sunday School lessons, many of them in collaboration with J. H. Vincent.

HURST, JOHN FLETCHER: Methodist Episcopal bishop; b. at Salem, Md., Aug. 17, 1834; d. in Washington, D. C., May 4, 1903. He was educated at Dickinson College, Carlisle, Pa. (A.B., 1854), where he taught classics for two years (1854‑56), after which he studied theology at the universities of Halle and Heidelberg (1856‑57). He was then a pastor in the Newark (N. J.) conference of his denomination from 1858 to 1866, after which he was professor of theology in the Mission Institute of the Methodist Episcopl Church for the training of German ministers for his denomination, first at Bremen (1866‑69), and later at Frankfort (1869‑71), where the institution was removed in 1869. Returning to the United States, he was professor of historical
theology in Drew Theological Seminary, Madison, N. J., from 1871 to 1880, and president of the same institution from 1873 to 1880. In 1880 he was elected bishop of his denomination. In 1898 he was elected chancellor of the American University, Washington, D. C. Besides translating K. R. Hagenbaeh's History of the Church in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries (2 vols., New York, 1869); J. J. Van Oosterzee's Apologetical Letters on John's Gospel (Edinburgh, 1869); Romans in J. P. Lange's Commentary (New York, 1870); and a number of the moral essays of Seneca (in collaboration with H. C. Whitney, 1877), he was the author of a large number of works, among which special mention may be made of the following: History of Rationalism (New York, 1866); Martyrs to the Tract Cause (1872); Outlines of Bible History (1873); Outlines of Church History (1874); Our Theological Century (1877); Bibliotheea Theologica (1883); Short History of the Reformation (Cleveland, O., 1884); Theological Encyclopadia and Methodology (New York, 1884); Short History of the Early Church (Cleveland, 1886); Short History of the Mediwval Church (1887); Short History of the Modern Church in Europe (1888); Short History of the Church in the United States (1890); Indika, the Country and the People of India and Ceylon (New York, 1891); Short History of the Christian Church (1893); The Literature of Theology (1895); History of the Christian Church (2 vols., 1897‑1900); and History of Methodism (7 vols., 1904).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Osborn, John Ftetder Hurst, New York,
1905.
HURTER, FRIEDRICH EMANUEL VON: Roman Catholic historian; b. at Schaffhausen, Switzerland, of Protestant parents, Mar. 19, 1787; d. at Graz Aug. 27, 1865. He studied theology in GSttingen; in 1824 was chief pastor in Schaffhausen, and in 1835 dean of the synod, but was converted to Roman Catholicism through his historical studies, especially those made for his history of Innocent III., and in 1844 entered that church. He was called to Vienna in 1845 as imperial councillor and historiographer. Besides controversial writings, he was the author of the famous Geschichte des Papstes Innocenz 111. and seiner Zeitgenossen, 4 vols., Hamburg, 1834‑42; Denkwiirdigkeiten Gus dem letzten Dezennium des achtwhaten Jahrhunderts, Schaffhausen, 1840, an account of his conversion, which is said to be one of the best books of its class; Geburt and Wiedergeburt, 2 vols., 1845; Geschichte Ferdinand 11. and seiner Zeit, 11 vols., 1850‑64; and other works dealing with Austrian history.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. von Hurter, Friedrich von Hurter . .
and seine Zeit, 2 vols., Gras, 1876 (by his son).
HURTER, HUGO ADALBERT FERDINAND VON: Austrian Roman Catholic; b. at Schaffhausen (25 m. n.e. of Zurich), Switzerland, Jan. 11, 1832. He was educated at Rome, and was ordained to the priesthood in 1855. Two years later he entered the Society of Jesus, and in the following year (1858) was appointed professor of dogmatic theology at the University of Innsbruck, a position which he retained until his retirement as professor emeritus in 1903. He has written Ueber die Rechte der Vernunft and des Glaubens (Innsbruck, 1863);

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
415
Nomenclutor literarius reczntwris theologies eatholiae (5 vols., 1871‑1903); Theologize dogmatiese compendium (3 vols., 1878; 11th ed., 1903); and Medulla theologise dogmaticce (1880); besides editing Sanotorum Patrum opuscula seleeta ad usum prsesertim studiosamm theologise (48 vols., 1868‑85; 2d series, 6 vols., 1884‑92); Leonardi Lessii de summo bono etseterna beatitudine hominis libri quatuor (Freiburg, 1869); D. Thomse Aquinatis serntonea (Innsbruck, 1874); and S. Storehenau's Der Glaube des Christen, wie er sein Boll (Freiburg, 1895).

HUSCHKE, GEORG PHILIPP EDUARD: Jurist and authority on church government; b. at Miinden June 26, 1801; d. at Breslau Feb. 7, 1886. In 1817 he went to G6ttingen and studied law. He was attracted by Savigny in Berlin, but returned to Gdttingen and established himself as privat‑docent, lecturing on the orations of Cicero, on Gains and the history of law; then he was appointed professor in Rostock, He accepted a call to Breslau as professor of Roman law in 1827. Soon after his arrival he became interested in the dissensions caused by
I.	The Life and Work of Hues.
	Early Life and Studies (§ 1).
	Influence of Wyclif in Bohemia (¢ 2).
	The Papal Schism (§ 3).
	Indulgences (§ 4).
	Further Dissensions (15).
	The Council of Constance (¢ 8).
	Trial of Huss (§ 7).
I. The Life and Work of Huss: John Huss, the famous Reformer of Bohemia, was born at Hussinetz (Husineez; 75 m. s.s.w. of Prague)
:. Early July 6, 1369, as commonly given; but
Life and the day is an inference from the fact
	Studies.	that his followers honored his memory
		on July 6, the day of his death, and
the year is probably too late; he was burned at the
stake in Constance, June 6, 1415. John Huss is his
common English designation, but the name is more
correctly written, according to Slavic spelling, Hus.
It is an abbreviation from his birthplace made by
himself about 1399; in earlier life he was always
known as Johann or Jan Hussinetz, or, in Latin,
Johannes de Hussinetz. His parents were Czechs, in
narrow circumstances. Like Luther, he had to earn
his living by singing and performing humble services
in the Church. He felt inclined toward the clerical
profession, not so much by an inner impulse as by
the attraction of the tranquil life of the clergy. He
studied at Prague, where he must have been as early
as the middle of the eighties. He was greatly in
fluenced by Stanislaus of Znaim, who later was long
his intimate friend, but finally his bitter enemy.
As a student Huss slid not distinguish himself.
The learned quotations of which he boasted in his
writings were mostly taken from Wyclif's works.
A hot temper and arrogance were traits of his char
acter, and he was not free from sophistry. In 1393
he became bachelor of arts, in 1394 bachelor of
theology, and in 1396 master of arts. In 1400 he
was ordained priest, in 1401 he became dean of the
philosophical faculty, and in the following year
Hurlbut
Huss
the Evangelical Union which were forced upon the
orthodox Lutherans by the state rulers, and took
a prominent part in them. Huachke tried to solve
the problem practically as soon as he came to
Breslau. Out of the dispute originated the inde
pendent Lutheran Church, and Huschke, as the
defender of its rights, was appointed head of the
supreme church college. He was intensely hostile
to the papacy, in which he saw the realization of a
demoniac power. He was an eager student of the
apocalypse. The fruit of his studies was a work
entitled Das Buck mit sieben Siegeln (Dresden, 1860).
His exegesis, however, is not always sound. His
ideas on church government are laid down in Die
streitigen Lehren von der Rirche, dem Kirchenamt,
dem Kirchertregiment and der Kirchenregierung (Leip
aic, 1863). He published many important writings
on law. 	(R. ROCHOLL.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Feldner, Die Verhandtungen der Kommission xw Er6rterunpderPrinxipianderKirchenverfaasunp, Halls, 1880; J. F. von Schulte, Oeaehichte der Quellen and Literatur du eanoniaehen Rechts, iii. 241 eqq., Stuttgart. 1880; J. H. Iteinkene, Melchior von Diepenbrock, p. 333. Leipeic, 1881; J. Nagel, Wider Wange»wnn, Cottbus, 1882.
HUSS, JOHN, HUSSITES.
Condemnation and Execution (18).
Hues' Character, Writings, sad Teachings (§ 9).
Source of his Influence (§ 10). IL The Hueaitea.
Effect in Bohemia of the Death of Huss (¢ 1).
Two Parties in Bohemia (§ 2).
The Four Articles of Prague (§ 3).
Caliatinesor Utraquiste, and Taborites (§ 4).
The Hussite Ware (¢ b).
The Council of Basel and Compactata of Prague (§ 0).
Final Disappearance of the Huseites (§ 7).
rector. In 1402 he was appointed also preacher of
the Bethlehem Church in Prague, where he preached in the Czech language.
After the marriage of King Wenceslaus' sisteir, Anne, with Richard II. of England in 1382, the philosophical writings of Wyclif bes. Influence came known in Bohemia. As a student of Wyclif in Huss had been greatly attracted by
	Bohemia.	them, particularly by his philosophical
		realism. His inclination toward eccle
siastical reforms was awakened only by the ac
quaintance with Wyclif's theological writings. The
so‑called Hussiam in the first decades of the fifteenth
century was nothing but Wyclifiam transplanted
into Bohemian soil. As such it maintained itself
until the death of Hues, then it turned into Utra
quiem, and with logical sequence there followed
Taboritiem (see below). The theological writings of
Wyclif spread widely in Bohemia. They had been
brought over, as is said, in 1401 or 1402 by Jerome
of Prague, and Huss was greatly moved by them.
The university arose against the spread of the new
doctrines, and in 1403 prohibited a disputation on
forty‑five theses taken in part from Wyclif. Under
Archbishop Sbinko of Haeenburg (from 1403), Huss
enjoyed in the beginning a great reputation. In
1405 he was active as synodical preacher, but on
account of his severe attacks upon the clergy the
bishop was compelled to depose him.
The development of conditions at the University of Prague depended to a great extent on the question of the papal schism (see 3cHrsrs). Ding Wenceslaus, who was on the point of assuming the reins of

Hums	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	416
government, but whose plans were in no way furthered by Gregory XII., renounced the latter
and ordered his prelates to observe a
3. The strict neutrality toward both popes,
Papal	and he expected the same of the uni‑
Schism. versity. But the archbishop remained
faithful to Gregory, and at the university it was only the Bohemian nation, with Huss as its spokesman, which avowed neutrality. Incensed by this attitude, Wenceslaus, at the instigation of Huss and other Czech leaders, issued a decree according to which there should be conceded to the Bohemian nation three votes in all affairs of the university, while the foreign nations, principally the German, should have only one vote. As a consequence many German doctors, masters, and students left the university in 1409, and the University of Leipsic was founded. Thus Prague lost its international importance and became a Czech school; but the emigrants spread the fame of the Bohemian heresies into the most distant countries.
The archbishop was then isolated and Huss at the height of his fame. He became the first rector of the Czech university, and enjoyed the favor of the court. In the mean time, the doctrinal views of Wyclif had spread over the whole country. As long as Sbinko remained obedient to Gregory XII., all opposition to the new spirit was in vain; but as soon as he submitted to Alexander V., conditions changed. The archbishop brought his complaints before the papal see, accusing the Wyclifites as the instigators of all ecclesiastical disturbances in Bohemia. Thereupon the pope issued his bull of Dec. 20, 1409, which empowered the archbishop to proceed against Wyclifism‑all books of Wyclif were to be given up, his doctrines revoked, and free preaching discontinued. After the publication of the bull in 1410, Huss appealed to the pope, but in vain. All books and valuable manuscripts of Wyclif were burned, and Huss and his adherents put under the ban. This procedure caused an indescribable commotion among the people down to the lowest classes; in some places turbulent scenes occurred. The government took the part of Huss, and the power of his adherents increased from day to day. He continued to preach in the Bethlehem chapel, and became bolder and bolder in his accusations of the Church. The churches of the city were put under the ban, and the interdict was pronounced against Prague, but without result.
Sbinko died in 1411, and with his death the religious movement in Bohemia entered a new phase‑
the disputes concerning indulgences
4. Indul‑ arose. In 1411 John XXIII. issued his
genres.	Cruciata against King Ladislaus of
Naples, the protector of Gregory XII. In Prague also the cross was preached, and preachers of indulgences urged people to crowd the churches and give their offerings. There developed a traffic in indulgences. Huss, following the example of Wyclif, lifted up his voice against it and wrote his famous Cruciata. But he could not carry with him the men of the university. In 1412 a disputation took place, on which occasion Huss delivered his QuwsOo magistri Johannis Hus . . . de indulgentiis. It was taken literally from the last chapter of
Wyclif's book, De ecclesia, and his treatise, De obsolutione a pena et culpa. No pope or bishop, according to Wyclif and Huss, has a right to take up the sword in the name of the Church; he should pray for his enemies and bless those that curse him. Man obtains forgiveness of sins by real repentance, not for money. The doctors of the theological faculty replied, but without success. A few days afterward the people, led by Wok of Waldstein, burnt the papal bulls. Huss, they said, should be obeyed rather than the fraudulent mob of adulterers and simonists. Under the pressure of the opposing party, the long was forced to punish every public insult of the pope and all opposition against his bulls. Three men from the lower classes who openly contradicted the preachers during their sermons and called indulgences a fraud were beheaded. They were the first martyrs of the Hussite Church. The theological faculty requested Huss to present his speeches and doctrines to the dean for an examination, but he refused. In the mean time the faculty had condemned the forty‑five articles anew and added several other heretical theses which had originated with Huss. The king forbade the teaching of these articles, but neither Huss nor the university approved of this summary condemnation, requesting that the unscripturalness of the articles should be first proved.
The tumults at Prague had stirred up a sensation, unpleasant for the Roman party; papal legates and
Archbishop Albik tried to persuade
g. Further Huss to give up his opposition against Dissensions. the bulls, and the king made an un‑
successful attempt to reconcile the two parties. In the mean time the clergy of Prague, through Michael de Causis, had brought their complaints before the pope, and he ordered the cardinal of St. Angelo to proceed against Huss without mercy. The cardinal put him under the great church ban. He was to be seized and delivered to the archbishop, and his chapel was to be destroyed. Stricter measures against Huss and his adherents, the counter‑measures of the Hussites, and the appeal of Huss from the pope to Jesus Christ as the supreme judge only intensified the excitement among the people and forced Huss to depart from Prague, in compliance with the wish of the king; but his absence had not the expected effect. The excitement continued. The king, being grieved by the disrepute of his country on account of the heresy, made great efforts to harmonize the opposing parties. In 1412 he convoked the heads of his kingdom for a consultation, and at their suggestion ordered a synod to be held at Bbhmisch‑Brbd on Feb. 2, 1412. It did not take place there, but in the palace of the archbishops at Prague, Huss being thus excluded from participation. Propositions were made for the restitution of the peace of the Church, Huss requiring especially that Bohemia should have the same freedom in regard to eccIesiastical affairs as other countries and that approbation and condemnation should therefore be announced only with the permission of the state power. This is wholly the doctrine of Wyclif (Sermones, iii. 519, etc.). There followed treatises from both parties, but no harmony was obtained. " Even if

417	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Hess
I should stand before the stake which has been prepared for me," Hues wrote in those days, " I would never accept the recommendation of the theological faculty." The synod did not produce any results, but the king did not yet give up his hope‑he ordered a commission to continue the work of reconciliation. The doctors of the university required from Huss and his adherents an approval of their conception of the Church, according to which the pope is the head, the cardinals the body of the Church, and that all regulations of this Church must be obeyed. Huss protested vigorously against this conception since it made pope and cardinals alone the Church. Nevertheless the Hussite party seems to have approached the standpoint of their opponents as closely as possible. To the article that the Roman Church must be obeyed, they added " so far as every pious Christian is bound." Stanislaws of Znaim and Stephan of Palecz protested against this addition and left the convention. The king exiled them, with two other spokesmen. Of the writings occasioned by these controversies, that of Huss on the Church (De ecckaia) has been most frequently quoted and admired or criticized, and yet it is in the first ten chapters but a meagre epitome of Wyclif's work of the same title, and in the following chapters an abstract of a work by the same author (De potentate pape) on the power of the pope Wyclif had written his book to oppose the common view that the Church consisted only of the clergy, and Huss now found himself in a similar condition. He wrote his work at the castle of one of his protectors in Kozf hradek, near Austie, and sent it to Prague, where it was publicly read in the Bethlehem chapel. It was answered by Stanislaus of Znaim and Palecz with treatises of the same title. After the most vehement opponents of Huss had left Prague, his adherents occupied the whole ground. Huss wrote his treatises and preached in the neighborhood of Kozi hradek. Bohemian Wyclifism was carried into Poland, Hungary, Croatia, and Austria.; but at the same time the papal court was not inactive. In Jan., 1413, there assembled at Rome a general council which condemned the writings of Wyclif and ordered them to be burned.
To put an end to the papal schism and to take up the long desired reform of the Church, a general council was convened for Nov. 1, 1414,
6. The at Constance. The Emperor Sigismund, Council of brother of Wenceslaus, and heir to the
Constance. Bohemian crown, was anxious to clear the country from the blemish of heresy. Huss likewise was willing to make an end of all dissensions, and gladly followed the request of Sigismund to go to Constance. From the sermons which he took along, it is evident that he purposed to convert the assembled fathers to his own (i.e., Wyclif's) principal doctrines. Sigismund promised him safe‑conduct. Provided with sufficient testimonies concerning his orthodoxy, and after having made his will as if he had divined his death, he started on his journey (Oct. 11, 1414). On Nov. 3 he arrived at Constance, and on the following day the bulletins on the church doors announced that Michael of Deutschbrod would be the opponent of Huss, the heretic. In the beginning Hues was at V.‑27
liberty, making his abode at the house of a widow, but after a few weeks his opponents succeeded in imprisoning him, on the strength of a rumor that he intended to flee. He was first brought into the residence of a canon, and thence, on Dec. 8, into the dungeon of the Dominican monastery. Sigismund was greatly angered at the abuse of his letter of safe‑conduct and threatened the prelates with dismissal, but when it was hinted that in such a case the council would be dissolved, there was nothing left for him but to accommodate himself to the circumstances. Thus the fate of Huss was sealed. On Dec. 4 the pope had entrusted a committee of three bishops with a preliminary investigation against him. The witnesses for the prosecution were heard, but Huss was refused an advocate for his defense. His situation became worse after the catastrophe of John XXIII., who had left Constance to evade the necessity of abdicating (see John XXIII.). So far Huss had been the captive of the pope and in constant intercourse with his friends, but now he was delivered to the archbishop of Constance and brought to his castle, Gottlieben on the Rhine. Here he remained seventy‑three days, separated from his friends, chained day and night, poorly fed, and tortured by disease.
On June b he was tried for the first time, and for that purpose was transferred to the Franciscan
monastery, where he spent the last
Trial weeks of his life. He acknowledged of Hues. the writings on the Church against
Palm and Stanislaus of Znaim as his own, and declared himself willing to recant, if errors should be proven to him. Hues conceded his veneration of Wyclif, and said that he could only wish his soul might some time attain unto that place where Wyclif's was. On the other hand, he denied having defended Wyclif's doctrine of the Lord's Supper, or the forty‑five articles; he had only opposed their summary condemnation. The king admonished him to deliver himself up to the mercy of the council, as he did not desire to protect a heretic. At the last trial, on June 8, there were read to him thirty‑nine sentences, twenty‑six of which had been excerpted from his book on the Church, seven from his treatise' against Paleez, and six from that against Stanislaus. Almost all of his articles may be traced back to Wyclif. The danger of some of these doctrines as regards worldly power was explained to the emperor to incite him against Huss. The latter declared himself willing to submit if he could be convinced of errors. He desired only a fairer trial and more time to explain the reasons for his views. If his reasons and Bible teats did not suffice, he would be glad to be instructed. This declaration was considered` an unconditional surrender, and he was asked to eonf(1) that he had erred in the theses which he had hitherto maintained; (2) that he renounced them for the future; (3) that he recanted them; and (4) that he declared the opposite of these sentences. He asked to be exempted from recanting doctrines which he had never taught; others, which the assembly considered erroneous, he was willing to revoke; to act differently woula be against his conscience. These words found no favorable reception. After the

Hum	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	418
trial on June 8, several other attempts were made to induce him to recant, but he resisted all of them. The attitude of Sigismund was due to political considerations‑he looked upon the return of Huss to his country as dangerous, and thought the terror of execution would not be without effect. Huss no longer hoped for life, indeed martyrdom responded to an inner desire of his being.
The condemnation took place on July 6 in the presence of the solemn assembly of the council in the cathedral. After the performance
8. Condem‑ of high mass and liturgy, Huss was led
nation and into the church. The bishop of Lodi
	Execution.	delivered an oration on the duty of
		eradicating heresy; then some theses of
Huss and Wyclif and a report of his trial were read.
He protested loudly several times, and when his
appeal to Christ was rejected as a condemnable
heresy, he exclaimed, " O God and Lord, now the
council condemns even thine own act and thine own
law as heresy, since thou thyself didst lay thy cause
before thy Father as the just judge, as an example
for us, whenever we are sorely oppressed." An
Italian prelate pronounced the sentence of con
demnation upon Huss and his writings. Again he
protested loudly, saying that even at this hour he
did not wish anything but to be convinced from
Holy Scripture. He fell upon his knees and asked
God with a low voice to forgive all his enemies.
Then followed his degradation‑he was enrobed
in priestly vestments and again asked to recant;
again he refused. With curses his ornaments were
taken from him, his priestly tonsure was destroyed,
and the sentence was pronounced that the Church
had deprived him of all rights and delivered him
to the secular powers. Then a high paper hat was
put upon his head, with the inscription Hcaresiarcha.
Thus Hues was led away to the stake under a strong
guard of armed men. At the place 6f execution he
knelt down, spread out his hands, and prayed aloud.
Some of the people asked that a confessor should
he given him, but a bigoted priest exclaimed, a
heretic should neither be heard nor given a confessor.
The executioners undressed Huss and tied. his hands
behind his back with ropes, and his neck with a chain
to a stake around which wood and straw had been
piled up so that it covered him to the neck. Still
at the last moment, the imperial marshal, Von
Pappenheim,, in the presence of the Count Palatine,
asked him to save his life by a recantation, but Huss
declined with the words " God is my witness that
I have never taught that of which I have been
accused by false witnesses. In the truth of
the Gospel which I have written, taught, and
preached I will die to‑day with gladness." There
upon the fire was kindled. With uplifted voice
Hues sang, " Christ, thou Son of the living God,
have mercy upon me." When he started this
for the third time and continued " who art born
of Mary the virgin," the wind blew the flame
into his face; he still moved lips and head, and
then died of suffocation. His clothes were thrown
into the fire, his ashes gathered and cast into the
nearby Rhine.
The Czech people, who in his lifetime had loved Huss as their prophet and apostle, now adored him
as their saint and martyr. He possessed high virtues, but in his struggles with the University of Prague and his ecclesiastical opponents he can not
be freed altogether from the reproach g. Huss' of slander and abuse. His learning
Character, was not of a universal range; wherever
Writings, he goes beyond Wyclif, he falters and
	and	becomes dull or verbose. He left only
Teachings. a few reformatory writings in the proper
sense of the word, most of his works being polemical treatises against Stanislaus and Polecz. It is doubtful whether he knew all the works of Wyclif. He translated the Trialogus, and was very familiar with his works on the body of the Lord, on the Church, on the power of the pope, and especially with his sermons. The book on the Church and on the power of the pope contains the essence of the doctrine of Huss. According to it, the Church is not that hierarchy which is generally designated as Church; the Church is the entire body of those who from eternity have been predestined for salvation. Christ, not the pope, is its head. It is no article of faith that one must obey the pope to be saved. Neither external membership in the Church nor churchly offices and dignities are a surety that the persons in question are members of the true Church. What he says in his sermons on the corruption of the Church, clergy, and monks, on the duties of secular powers, etc., he has taken almost literally from Wyclif. His three great sermons, De sufcientia legis Christi, De fcdei sum elucidatione, and De pace, with which he thought to carry away the whole council at Constance, are exact reproductions of Wyclif's sermons. He claims not to have shared Wyclif's views regarding the sacraments, but this is not certain. The soil had been well prepared for this very doctrine in Bohemia. There are reasons to suppose that Wyclif's doctrine of the Lords' Supper had spread to Prague as early as 1399. It gained an even wider circulation after it had been prohibited in 1403, and Huss preached and taught it, although it is possible that he simply repeated it without advocating it. But the doctrine was seized eagerly by the radical party, the Taborites, who made it the central point of their system.
The great success of Huss in his native country was due mainly to his unsurpassed pastoral activity,
which far excelled that of the famous :o. Source old preachers of Bohemia.. But even of His here Huss was the docile pupil of the
Influence. Englishman. Huss himself put the
highest value on the sermon and knew how to awaken the enthusiasm of the masses. His sermons are often inflammatory as regards their contents; he introduces his quarrels with his spiritual superiors, criticizes contemporaneous events, of appeals to his congregation as witness or judge. It was this bearing which multiplied his adherents, and thus he became the true apostle of his English master without being himself a theorist in theological questions. In the art of governing and leading masses he was unexcelled. Huss' warm friend and devoted follower, Jerome of Prague (q.v.), shared his fate, although he did not suffer death till nearly a year later.

419	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	8u"
II. The Hussites: The arrest of Huss had excited considerable resentment in Bohemia and Moravia. In both countries the.estates appealed
r. Effect repeatedly and urgently to Sigismund in Bohemia to deliver Huss. On the arrival of the of the Death news of his death disturbances broke
	of Huss.	out which were directed at first against
		the clergy, especially against the
monks. Even the archbishop saved himself with
difficulty from the rage of the populace. In the
country places conditions were not much better.
Everywhere the treatment of Huss was felt as a
disgrace inflicted upon the whole country, and his
death was looked upon as a criminal act. King
Wenceslaus, prompted by his grudge against Sigis
mund, at first gave free vent to his indignation at
the course of events in Constance; and his wife
openly favored the friends of Huss. Pronounced
Hussites stood at the head of the government. A
league was formed by certain lords who pledged
themselves to protect the free preaching of the
Gospel upon all their possessions and estates, and to
obey the power of the bishops only in case their
orders accorded with the injunctions of the Bible.
In disputed points the decision of the university
should be resorted to. The entire Hussite nobility
joined the league, and if the king had entered it,
its resolutions would have received the sanction of
the law; but he refused, and approached the Roman
Catholic league of lords, which was now formed,
the members pledging themselves to cling to the
king, the Roman Church, and the Council. Signs
of the outbreak of a civil war began to show them
selves. Pope Martin V., who, while still Cardinal
Otto of Colonna, had attacked Huss with relentless
severity, energetically resumed the battle against
Hussism after the enactments of the Council of
Constance. He intended to eradicate completely
the doctrine of Huss. For this purpose the coopera
tion of King Wenceslaus had to be obtained. In
1418 Sigismund succeeded in winning his brother
over to the standpoint of the council by pointing
out the inevitableness of a religious war if the
heretics in Bohemia found further protection.
Hussite statesmen and army leaders had to leave
the country, and Roman priests were reinstituted.
These measures caused a general commotion which
hastened the death of Wenceslaus by a paralytic
stroke in 1419. His heir was Sigismund.
Hussism had organized itself during the years 1415‑1419. From the beginning two parties were found: the closer adherents of Huss z. Two clung to his standpoint, leaving the
Parties in whole hierarchical and liturgical order
	Bohemia.	of the Church untouched; the radical
		party identified itself more boldly with
the doctrines of Wyclif, shared his passionate hatred
of the monastic clergy, and, like him, attempted to
lead the Church back to its condition during the
time of the apostles, which necessitated the removal
of the existing hierarchy and the secularization of
ecclesiastical possessions. The radicals among the
Hussites sought to translate their theories into
reality; they preached the sufcientia legis Christi
only the divine law (i.e., the Bible) is the rule and
canon for man, and that not only in ecclesiastical
matters, but also in political and civil matters. They rejected therefore, as early as 1416, everything that has no basis in the Bible, as the adoration of saints and pictures, fasts, superfluous holidays, the
I oath, intercession for the dead, auricular confession, indulgences, the sacraments of confirmation and extreme unction, admitted laymen and women to the preacher's office, chose their own priests. But before everything they clung to Wyclif's doctrine of the Lord's Supper, denying transubstantiation, and this is the principal point by which they are distinguished from the moderate party.
The program of the more conservative Hussites is conllw,ined in the four articles of Prague, which were agreed upon in July, 1420, and 3. The Four promulgated in the Latin, Czech, and
Articles German languages: (1) Freedom in
of Prague. preaching; (2) communion in both kinds; (3) reduction of the clergy to apostolic poverty; (4) severe punishment of all open sins.
The views of the moderate Hussites were represented at the university and among the citizens of Prague; therefore they were called 4. Caliatines the Prague party; they were also
or Utra‑ called Calixtines or Utraquists, because quists, and they emphasized the second article,
	Taborites.	and the chalice became their emblem.
		The radicals had their gathering‑place
in the small town of Austie, on the Luschnitz,
south of Prague. But as the place was not defen
sible, they founded a city upon a neighboring hill,
which they called Tabor; hence they were called
Taborites. They comprised the essential force of
Hussism. Their aim was to destroy the enemies
of the law of God, and to extend his kingdom by
the sword. For the former purpose they waged
bloody wars, for the second purpose they established
a strict jurisdiction, inflicting the severest punish
ment not only upon heinous crimes like murder and
adultery, but also upon faults like perjury and
usury, and tried to apply the conditions required
in the law of God to the social relations of the world.
The news of the death of King Wenceslaus produced the greatest commotion among the people of Prague. A revolution swept over the
g. The country; churches and monasteries
Hussite	were destroyed, and the ecclesiastical
	Wars.	possessions were seized by the Hussite
		nobility. Sigismund could get posses
sion of his kingdom only by the power of arms.
Martin V. called upon all Christians of the Occident
to take up arms against the Hussites, and there
followed a twelve‑years' war which was carried on
by the Hussites at first defensively, but after 1427
they assumed the offensive. Apart from their
religious aims, they fought for the national interests
of the Czechs. The moderate and radical parties
were united and they not only repelled the attacks
of the army of crusaders, but entered the neighboring
countries.
At last their opponents were forced to think of an amicable settlement. A Bohemian embassy was invited to appear at the council of Basel. The discussions began on Jan. 10, 1432, centering chiefly in the four articles of Prague. No agreement was

8ntien	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	420
arrived at. After repeated negotiations between Basel and Bohemia, a Bohemian‑Moravian state assembly in Prague acoepted the Coma. The pactafm of Prague on Nov. 30, 1433.
Council of Communion in both kinds was granted
Basel and to all who desired it, but with the Compactata understanding that Christ was en‑
	of Prague.	tirely present in each kind. Free
		preaching was granted conditionally;
priests must be. approved and sent by their supe
riors, and the power of the bishop must be considered.
The article which prohibits the secular power of
the clergy was almost reversed. The Taborites
refused to conform, and the Caliatines unitdld with
the Roman Catholics and destroyed the Tabor
ites in a battle near Lipan (May 30, 1434). From
that time the Taborites lose their importance. The
Compactata were confirmed at the state assembly
of Iglau in 1436 and received the sanction of law.
Thus the reconciliation of Bohemia with Rome and
the Western Church was accomplished, and now
Sigismund first obtained possession of the Bohemian
crown. His reactionary measures caused a ferment
in the whole country, but he died in 1437. Wyclif's
doctrine of the Lord's Supper, which was obnoxious
to the Utraquists, was rejected as heresy at the
state assembly in Prague in 1444. Most of the
Taborites now went over to the party of the Utra
quiets; the rest joined the " Brothers of the Law
of Christ" (see UNITY OF THE BRETHREN; also
BOHEMIAN BRETHREN).
The Utraquists had retained hardly anything of the doctrines of Huss except communion in both kinds. In 1462 Pius II. declared the
7. Final Compactata null and void, prohibited Disappear‑ communion in both kinds, and soance of the knowledged George of Podiebrad as
Hussites. king under the condition that he would promise an unconditional harmony with the Roman Church. This he refused, but his successor, King Vladislaus II., favored the Roman Catholics and proceeded against some zealous clergymen of the Caliatines. The troubles of the Utraquiets increased from year to year. In 1485, at the diet of Kuttenberg, an agreement between the Roman Catholics and Utraquists was obtained which lasted for thirty‑one years. But it was considerably later, at the diet of 1512, that the equal rights of both religions were permanently established. Luther's appearance was bailed by the Utraquiet clergy, and Luther himself was astonished to find so many points of agreement between the doctrines of Huss and his own. But not all Utraquists approved of the German Reformation; a schism arose among them, and many returned to the Roman doctrine, while the better elements had long before joined the Unitas Fradrum. Under Maaimilian II., the Bohemian state assembly established the Confesaio Bohemica, upon which Lutherans, Reformed, and Bohemian Brethren agreed. From that time Hussism began to die out; but it was completely eradicated only after the battle at the White Mountain (Nov. 8, 1620) and the Roman Catholic reaction which fundamentally changed the ecclesiastical conditions of Bohemia and Moravia. (J. LosERTH‑)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: An edition of the works which shall distinguish between the works of Hum and those of Wyclif which he used and translated has long been a desiderstum; of an ed. of the works of Huss by J. R. Vilimek, Opera mnnia, the following have appeared: Expositio deoalopi, ad., W. FlajBans, Prague, 1903; De corpore Christi, ib. 1904; De sanguine Christi, ib. 1904; Super IV. Sententiarum, ed. W. Flalehans and W. Kor,fakova, ib. 1905; Sermones de sanetis, ib. 1907‑08; the works in Bohemian were published by B. J. Ermen, Prague, 18851888; other sources are K. HSfler, Geechichtaschreiber der Ausitischen Beweeunp in BMmen, in Pontes rerum Austriaoarum, 3 vole., Vienna, 1856‑88; Hietoria et monumenta J. Rua a4ue Hisrongmi Prapsnaie, 2 vols, Nuremberg, 1715; the most available and so far the best source is Documents Mapiab^i Johannis Rua, ed. F. Palaek§, Prague, 1869 (contains essays on the life and teachings of Huss); a volume of Letters attributed to John Hues has been edited with introduction and notes by H. B. Workman and R. M. Pope, London, 1904 (the one Eng. tranal. direct from the originals).
On the life and teachings and contemporary history consult: J. Dobneck (Cochlaeus), Hot. Hunitarum, Mainz, 1549; F. Palaek§, Oeschiclue roan BMmen, 5 vole., Prague, 1836‑67; idem, Beitrape zur Geschichte des Hussitenkriepea, 2 vole., ib. 1873‑74; F. P. E. Boisnormand de Bonnechose, Lee R6Jormaleurs avant k rlfarme, Paris, 1845, Eng. tranal., New York, 1844; J. A. van Heffert, Hue and Hieronymus, Prague, 1853; G. L. Herman, John Huss, Dublin, 1854; A. Jeep, Gerson, Wielefue and Hue, GBttingen, 1857; C. Becker, Die beiden bdhmischen Reformatoren and Mdrtyrer, NSrdlingen, 1858; J. Friedrich, Die Lrhre des Johann Rua, Regensburg, 1882; E. L. T. Henke, Johann Hue and die Synods roan Constans, Berlin, 1886; E. H. Gillett, Life and Times of John Huss, 2 vole., New York, 1870; L. Srumml, Johannes Hut, Heidelberg, 1870; W. Berger, Johannes Hue, and %6nip Sigmund, Augsburg, 1871 (a careful study); F. van Bezold, %6nig Sipismund and die Reichakriepe pepan die Husiten 3 vole., Munich, 1877‑75; idem, Zur GeschidUs des Husitenthums ib. 1874; E. Denis, Russ at is guerre des Huaaites, Paris, 1878 (reproduces Pstackg's studies); A. H. Wratislaw, John Hus, London, 1882; G. V. Lechler, Johannes Hue, Halle, 1889; idem, John Wiclif and hit English Precurwa, London, 1884; J. Loserth, Hue and WidiJ, Prague, 1884, Eng: tranal., London, 1884; D. Naemith, Makers of Modern R;Wt, vol. i., New York, 1892; K. MVller, Rdnip Sipiamund's Gelsit fir Hue, 1898; H. B. Workman, The Dawn of the Rejmmation, vol. ii., The Age of Hue, London, 1902; Neander, Christian Church, vol. v. passim; Milman. Latin Christianity, vii. 433‑506; Hefele, Concilienpesohiehte, vol. viii. passim; Pastor, Popes, i. 181‑163; Creighton, Papacy, vole. i: ii (contain much valuable matter). Auapewaklte Predigten of John Huss were published by W. van Langadorff, 1,eipsic, 1894. Consult the literature under BAazL, COUNCIL OP; CON&rANCE, COUNCIL Or.
HUT (HUTT), HANSS: A eader of the Anabaptists; b. at Hain, near Grimmenthal, in Franconia; d. at Augsburg Sept., 1527. As an itinerant book pedler he traveled over a large part of Germany and Austria and imbibed radical ideas. At Weissenfels, probably in 1524, he came into contact with the Anabaptists. His tentative adhesion to their ideas and his promulgation of the writings of Mtinzer led to his expulsion from Bibra. He joined in the peasant uprising, was with Mtlnzer during the battle of Frankenhausen where the peasant bands were overwhelmed. At Pentecost, 1525, he appeared at Bibra, and summoned the peasants to rise against the authorities. Expelled once more, he resumed his wandering life, and in the summer of 1526 was finally won over by Denk to the tenets of the Anabaptists. He now entered upon a tremendously active apoatolate. A man of simple and fiery eloquence, and of passionate convictions, he wandered through South Germany and Austria preaching, baptizing, and appointing apostles to carry on the

421
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
HUBS
Hutton
work. In the mighty rise of the Anabaptist movement in Bavaria, Franconia, Swabia, and Austria between 1526 and 1528, his labors were of primary importance. Around his personality, mysterious and partaking somewhat of the prophet's, legend gathered. There was a popular belief that he made use of a magic potion to win men to himself, and he was reputed to be the possessor of a book given by the Lord to the prophet Daniel. He was personally convinced of his divine mission, and regarded himself as the prophet sent to announce the approaching end of things. He presented a detailed scheme of the final judgment and the resurrection and promulgated his ideas with a vehemence that brought him into conflict with the moderate Anabaptists. Thus toward the end of 1526, while at Nikolsburg, dissension arose between him and Htlbmaier. A disputation took place in the presence of the territorial lord, Von Liechtenstein, in the course of which Hut is said to have formulated certain articles which, in different editions and the general designation of the Nikolsburg Articles, played an important part in later Anabaptist history. What is certain, however, is that Hut, in opposition to H(ibmaier, upheld ideas of an extreme chiliastic nature and argued for the exemption of believers from secular authority, and that he was declared defeated and forced to flee. [He insisted upon community of goods, and asserted that Christians should not pay taxes to the civil powers because the money might be used in carnal warfare. A. H. N.] Hiibmaier presented fifty‑two articles as emanating from Hut, the authorship of which the latter denied. Nevertheless, it is certain that some of the propositions, such as that announcing the advent of Christ within two years and the coming destruction of the godless, were taught by Hut, while more extreme statements like that asserting the humanity of Christ were held in circles with which Hut stood in close connection. In Aug., 1527, Hut came to Augsburg to attend the general assembly of Anabaptists. He was arrested on Sept. 15, and was subjected to torture, confessing, however, to no more than was already known of his teachings. Anticipating conviction, he is said to have set fire to his prison cot and died of his injuries after eight days.
(A. HEGIICat.) $. HolL.
Bmncoossray: C. A Cornelius, Oesdhie" des nltanatviachen AufruArs, ii. 39 eqq., 251 eqq., 279 eqq., Leipeic, 1880; J: E. JSrg. Deutaddand in der Reoolueiontyeriads, pp. 677 eqq., Freiburg, 1851; F. Roth, Aupsiurpirehe Reforn,ationapeschiahte, pp. 199 eqq., Munich, 1881; A. Nicoladoni, Johann Btanderlin, Berlin, 1893; Q Meyer, in ZRO, zvi (1893), 248 sqq.; A. H. Newman, Hiat. of AntipedobapSam, pp. 151‑219, Philadelphia, 1897.
HUTCHINSON, ANNE. See ANTINouIANmM AND ANTINOMIAN CONTROVERSIES, II, 2.
HUTCHINSON, JOHN: English theological writer; b. at Spennithorne (36 m. w.n.w. of York), Yorkshire, 1674; d. in London Aug. 2$, 1737. Such education as he bad he received chiefly from a gentleman who lodged in his father's house. He served as steward in several families, being last employed in this capacity in the household of the duke of Somerset, who secured for him a sinecure worth £200 a year to enable him to write an exposition of his system. Hutebinebn's beet known
work is Moses' Principia (2 parts, London, 17241727), in which he defended what he considered the Mosaic cosmogony and attempted to refute Newton's theory of gravitation. He interpreted the Bible mystically, and regarded it as the infallible source of all true religion, philosophy, and science. He maintained that the original Hebrew, when read without points, would confirm his teachings. At one time his writings exerted considerable influence, and his followers, who were called Hutchinsonians, included such men as Duncan Forbes, John Parkhurat, George Horns, and William Jones of Nayland. His Phaosophiatl and Theological Works were edited by two of his disciples, Robert Spearman and Julius Bate (12 vole., London, 1748; Supplement, 1765). There is an Abstract from the Works of J. Hutchinwrt (Edinburgh, 1753), which has been attributed to Horns.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Life, by R. Spearman, is, prefixed to the supplementary vol. of the Works, ut sup.; John Nichols, Literary Aneodotee,of the 18th century, i. 421‑#22, iii. 154, 9 vole., London, 1812‑15; L. Stephen, Hist. of English Thought in the 18th Century, i. 389‑391, ib. 1880; DNB, uviii. 342‑343.

HUTTER, hut't9n, ULRICH VOA: Knight, humanist, and popular writer; b. at the castle of Steckelberg, near Fulda, in Franconia, Apr. 21, 1488; d. on the island of Ufnau, in the Lake of Zurich, Aug.' (or Sept.), 1523. He descended from a noble Frankish family, and was placed in the abbey of Fulda at the age of eleven, but after six years he fled from Fulda and broke with his father. Impelled by a glowing zeal for education and culture, the knight entered the University of Cologne and became a humanist and classical scholar. He then studied in Italy, the Beulah of the humanists. During a temporary sojourn in Germany he came forward as the avenger of his family against Duke Ulrich of Wurttemberg, who had assassil+ated Hans van Hutten, the head of the Hutten family, and in a number of satirical pamphlets depicted the duke as a monster and tyrant. In 1517 he settled permanently in Germany, and immediately took part in the struggles of the time; the great aim of his life was to free Germany from the yoke under which it was held by the pope and the Curia, and for this cause he wrote and fought with great valor. He took the part of Johann Reuchlin (q.v.), contributed money for the publication of the Epiatotte obacurorum varorum (q.v.), and published satirical dialogues. His poetical achievements induced Emperor Maximilian to crown him with the laurel (1517). Then Hutten served at, the court of Archbishop Albert of Mainz. His eyes were first opened to the real importance of the Reformation at the disputation at Leipsic in 1519. Thenceforth his only aim was to aid Luther in his struggle to deliver Germany from the Roman yoke. He demanded a restriction of papal rights in Rome as well as in Germany, a reduction of the number of ecclesiastics, and an abolition of the monasteries. Instead of benefice‑hunters pious men should administer the spiritual offices. From the emoluments of prebende and monasteries and from annats, a fund should be established for the formation of a standing army of knights and common soldiers (Laadakneckte), for the protection of the

Hutton Hyde
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
4142
empire, as a counterbalance against the habitual appeal to the support of the pope.
	The motive power of Hutten's plans was political
and social rather than religious, and he lacked a
deep understanding of the religious side of Luther.
This does not exclude, however, a mutual influence.
Luther undoubtedly received an impulse from
Hutten's edition of the famous work of Lorenzo
Valla on the donation of Constantine (1518) and
from his Romisehe Dreifaltigkeit (1519); and, on
the other hand, Hutten owed a great deal more
to the theologian, especially the Biblical and Evan
gelical atmosphere of his later productions and his
decision to address the masses in their mother
tongue. After Rome had demanded the arrest and
extradition of Hutten, he found a refuge at the
castle of Franz von Sickingen(1520). In his writings
his language became more threatening and inflam
matory. Hope that the emperor would relax toward
the Reformation was destroyed by the Diet of
Worms. Without trial Hutten was put under the
ban and compelled to leave the security of Sick
ingen's castle. He tried to uphold his friends, who
were on the point of forsaking his cause, but the
days of his glory had gone, and his efforts had
failed of tangible results. His great plans of uniting
the. German nobility and free cities against the
princes, and of eliminating all benefice‑hunters from
spiritual offices miscarried completely. He sought
refuge in Schlettstadt, Basel, and Miihlhausen, but
none of these cities tolerated him. Robbed of his
fortune, and suffering from illness, he finally came
to Zurich, where Zwingli took care of him until his
early death. 	(H. ULMANN.)
BIBLTOGSAPHY: His Opera were collected by E. B&cking,
	5 and 2 vols., Leipsic, 1859‑70. On his German writings
	consult S. Szamatolski, Ulrich& von Huuen deutache Schrif
	ten, Strasburg, 1891. For his life consult: D. Strauss, Ul‑ j
	rich von Hutten, Leipsic, 1871, Eng. trans]., abridged Lon
	don 1874; P. Bayle, Dictionary Historical and Critical,
	pp. 539‑541, London, 1735; ADB, vol. xiii.; J. Deckert,
	Ulrich von Huttens Lben and Wirken, Vienna, 1901; S. M.
	Jackson, Huldreich Zutnpli, pp. 213‑220, New York, 1903.
NUTTER, ELIAS: German Biblical scholar; b. at G6rlitz 1553; d. in Augsburg or Frankfort between 1605 and 1609. He devoted himself to Oriental languages as a student at Jena and university teacher at Leipsic; in 1579 he taught Hebrew to the elector Augustus of Saxony. He gave his life with self‑sacrificing industry to the issuing of Holy Scripture. The first product of these labors was a Hebrew Bible (1587), which was later incorporated in the " Hamburg Polyglot " (see BIBLES, POLYGLOT, V.). After several unsuccessful attempts he produced, at Nuremberg (1599), the Old Testament as far as the Book of Ruth in six languages, giving in five columns the Chaldee, Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and German versions, while the sixth column presented either the Low German, French, Italian, or Slavic text. _ In the same year the New Testament followed in twelve languages, and in 1602, the Psalter, in quadruple translations, the whole constituting the " Nuremberg Polyglot " (see BIBLES, POLYGLOT, V.). He also issued the Prophets in twelve, and the Gospels in four languages. Owing to Hutter's arbitrary treatment of the text, these issues are no longer important. Their contemporary
success fell short of his indefatigable efforts, even
though he enjoyed plenty of powerful patronage.
In 1600 Charles IX. of Sweden applied to him to
produce a Swedish Bible. As pedagogical reformer,
Hutter exerted himself to found a school of lan
guages at Nuremberg, where Hebrew, Greek, Latin,
and German should be learned within four years
a thing at that time without precedent in any
school or university. One of his precious possessions
was the manuscript of Melanchthon's Loci com
munes. 	GEORG MtLLER.
BIBuodHAPHY: Unachuldiye Nachrichten von alter and neuen
	theologiachen Sachen pp. 39200, 580‑583, Leipsic, 1716;
	G. A. Will, Nfrnberper Gelehrtenlexikon, ii. 213, vi. 147,
	8 vols., Nuremberg, 1755‑1808; J. G. Walch, Bibliotheca
	theolop~a selects, iv. 8, 36 sqq., Jena, 1765; J. B. Glaire,
Introduction hiatoriqve at critique aux livres de Z'A. et du N. T., i. 226 sqq., Paris, 1839; ADB, xiii. 475‑476.
BUTTER (HUTTERUS), LEONHARD: German Lutheran; b. at Hellingen (near Blaubeuren, 10 m. w.n.w. of Ulm), Wfrttemberg, Jan., 1563; d. at Wittenberg Oct. 23, 1616. He studied at the universities of Strasburg, Leipsic, Heidelberg, and Jena, took his doctorate in theology at Jena in 1594, and became professor of theology at Wittenberg in 1596. After the reiterated overthrow of the Philippists in electoral Saxony in 1574 and 1591, the University of Wittenberg took the first rank as a school of Lutheran orthodoxy, and Hutter was the most orthodox of the orthodox Lutherans. He has been regarded as the prototype of orthodox Lutheran dogmatics and polemics. No one has confined himself more strictly within the borders of the Lutheran doctrine as authorized and formulated by the Church; no one has adhered with greater faithfulness not only to the spirit, but to the letter of the Lutheran symbols, especially of the Formula of Concord, to which he ascribed almost the character of inspiration. He did not recognize a developing dogmatics; for him dogma was fixed and crystallized, and he considered it as the objective norm against all attacks of other churches and sects.
Hutter's literary activity is almost entirely confined to the two sciences which at his time formed the gist of theological encyclopedia‑dogmatics and polemics. His earliest writings were devoted to the explanation and defense of the Lutheran symbols, e.g. his Analysis methodicd articulorum Confessionis Augustanw. etc. (Wittenberg, 1594), his Collegium theologieum sive xl disputationm de articulis Confessionis Augustanee et libri ehrdstiante Concordia (1610), and especially his extensive commentary on the Book of Concord entitled Libri christiance Concordia explieatio Plans et perspicua (1608). But his principal work is his Compendium locorum theologicorum ex Scriptura Sacra et lZro Concordia, collectum (1610 and often). It owes its origin to the order of Elector Christian II. requesting the Wittenberg faculty to write a simple and clear compendium in strict accordance with the Formula of Concord. This new book was to take its place as the official text‑book in the learned institutions of Saxony. It consists of thirty‑four loci following in the main Melanchthon's order and method, and is arranged in oatechetical form, the questions and answers being adapted to the needs of three different stages of pupils. As far as possible, the Lutheran doctrine

428	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
is set forth in the very words of the Augsburg Confession and the Formula of Concord. Besides translations of the work into various modern languages, there appeared many commentaries, compilations, and enlarged editions. Hutter's other important work, entitled Loci communes theologici (1619), is an enlargement of the compendium. In his polemical writings Hutter attacked the Calvinists and Roman Catholics and all tendency to harmonize the two Protestant confessions. Against the ironical efforts of the Heidelberg theologian, David Pareus, he wrote Irenieum vere christianum (1616), and against the Calvinists he addressed his Calvinists AulicoPoliticus (1610). When the Formula of Concord was attacked by Rudolf Hospinianus in a treatise entitled Concordia discors (Zurich, 1607), Hutter replied with his Concordia concors de origins et progresau Formulee Concordite ecelesiarum Auguatano Confessianis (1614). In the same way he defended the Lutheran Church against Roman Catholic opponents such as Bellarmine, Gretser, and others.
(JOHANNES KUNZE.)
BrnLroGRAP87: H. Wine, Memorim theoloqorum noetri eeeuK Frankfort, 1674; F. Jani, De L. Huttero eiueque aompendie, Leipsic, 1727; A. Weyermann, NacAri,chten won Geishrten . . . sue Uhn, pp. 343‑355, Ulm, 1798; C. A. Hase, Hutterue redivivue, odor Dopmatik der esanqeli8eh4uffariwhen Kirche, Leipeic, 1839; A. G. Hoffmann, in Ersch and Gruber, Encyk1opadie, IL, riii. 222‑229; W Gass, Gatchidde der proteetantiecden L$opmatik, i. 251‑259, Berlin, 1854; G. Frank, Geschichte der proteetanhsohen Theolocie, i. 330‑332, Leipeie,18s2.
HUTTON, ARTHUR WOLLASTON: Church of England; b. at Spridlington (28 m. s. of Hull), Lincolnshire, Sept. 5, 1848. He was educated at Exeter College, Oxford (B.A., 1871), and was ordered deacon in 1871 and ordained priest in 1872. He was curate of St. Bamabas, Oxford, from 1871 to 1873, when he succeeded his father as rector of Spridlington. In 1876 he was received into the communion of the Roman Catholic Church by John Henry Newman. He was then a member of the Birmingham Oratory until 1883, in close association with the cardinal. He was librarian of the National Liberal Club from its foundation in 1887 to 1899. He returned to the Church of England in 1898, became rector of Easthope, Shropshire, in 1899, curate of St. Luke's, Richmond, in 1901, and rector of St. Mary‑lo‑Bow, Cheapside, London, in 1903. In theology he is a liberal Evangelical. His writings include: Our Position as Catholics in the Church of England (London, 1872); The Anglican Ministry (1879); Cardinal Manning (1892); Eccleaia discena (1904) ; Burford Papers (1905); The Church and the Barbarians (1906); and William Stubbs (1906). He edited S. R. Maitland's Essays on Subjects connected with the Reformation in England (1899); J. H. Newman's Lives of the English Saints (2 vols., 1900); and J. Tauler's The Inner Way 1901).
HUTTON, WILLIAM HOLDEN: Church of England; b. at Gate Burton, Lincolnshire, May 24, 1860. He studied e;, Magdalen College, Oxford (B.A., 1882), and in 1884 became a fellow and tutor of St. John's College, Oxford. He was Birkbeck Lecturer in ecclesiastical history at Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1895‑97, and examining chaplain to
Bishop Compton of Ely from 1896 to 1905, also Bampton Lecturer in 1903, and select preacher at Oxford (1898‑1900), Dublin (1903), and Cambridge (1905). He became curator of the Indian Institute, Oxford, in 1900. His publications include The Political Disturbances which Aeeampanied the Early Period of the Reformation in Germany (London, 1881); The Misrule of Henry 111. (1887); Simon de Montfort (1888); Marquess Wellesley (1893); Sir Thomas More (1895); William Laud (1895); King and Baronage (1895); Philip Augustus (1896); Hampton Court (1896); The Church of the Sixth Century (1897); History of St. John Baptist College, Oxford (1898); A Short History of the Church in Great Britain (1899); St. Thomas of Canterbury (1899); Constantinople (1900); Influence of Christianity upon National Character Illustrated by Lives and Legends of the English Saints (Bampton lectures, 1903); The English Church, 1625‑1714 (1903); and By Thames and Cotswold (1903). He edited Letters of Bishop Stubbs (London, 1904), and The Burford Letters (1905).

HYACINTH, FATHER. Sea LoysoN, CHARLES.
HYDE, THOMAS: English Orientalist; b. at Billingsley (20 m. s.e. of Shrewsbury), Shropshire, June 29, 1636; d. at Oxford Feb. 18, 1703. He studied Oriental languages under his father, and in his sixteenth year entered King's College, Cambridge. A year later he was invited to London to assist Brian Walton on his Polyglot. He corrected the Arabic, Persian, and Syriac versions, transcribed into Persic characters the Persian translation of the Pentateuch, which had been printed in Hebrew characters at Constantinople, and appended a Latin version of his own. In 1658 he entered Queen's College, Oxford (M.A., 1659; D.D., 1682), where, in the same year, he became reader in Hebrew. In 1659 he was appointed under‑keeper of the Bodleian Library, and from 1665 to 1701 he was librarian‑in‑chief. In 1666 he was made prebendary of Salisbury Cathedral, and in 1773 archdeacon of Gloucester. He became Laudian professor of Arabic at Oxford in 1691, and regius professor of Hebrew and canon of Christ Church in 1697. Under Charles II., James II., and William III., he was interpreter and secretary in Oriental languages to the government. His principal work is the Histmria religionis veterum Persarum (Oxford, 1700; 2d ed. by T. Hunt, 1760), which was the first attempt at a scholarly treatment of the subject. Other writings were collected by Gregory Sharpe and published, with a Vita, under the title Syntagma dessertationum (2 vols., 1667).
BIHwoGRAFH7: A. h wood, Athena Ozonieneee, ed. P. Me% iv. 522627, London, 1820; DNB, uviii. 401‑4o2.
HYDE, WILLIAM DE WM: American Congregationalist; b. at Winchendon, Mass., Sept. 23, 1858. He was educated at Harvard (A.B:, 1879), Union Theological Seminary (1879‑80), and Andover Theological Seminary, from which he was graduated in 1882. After a pastorate of two years at Paterson, N. J., he became president of Bowdoin College in 1885. He has written Practical Ethics (New York, 1892); Social Theology (1895); Practical Idealism (1897); The Evolution of a College Student (1898);

$raetatee	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	484
Hymaology
G'ood's Education of Man (Boston, 1899); The Art
of Optimism (New York, 1900); School Speaker and
Reader (Boston, 1900); The Cardinal Virtues (New
York, 1901); Jesus' Way (Boston, 1902); The New
Ethics (New York, 1903); From Epicures to Christ
(1904) ; and Abba Father; or the Religion of Every
Day Life (1908).
	SYDROPARASTATZ (AQUARII) : A sect that
used water instead of wine in the Lord's Supper.
They were named in three edicts of the Codex
Theodoaianus (lib. zvi. 5, 7, 9 and 11) in connection
with the Manicheans, and were also called Encratitcs,
Apotactita and Saccophori. Theodoret (MPG,
170‑111. 369) associated them with the Encratites
as adherents of Tatian (cf. Chrysostom, MPG, liii.
740; Phi]$strius, Hier. lxxvii.; Augustine, Hair.
Ixiv.; Praelestinatus, Har. briv.). The existence
of the sect in earlier centuries is not attested, al
though, undoubtedly, at a still earlier date than
that of the Aquarians, encratistic tendencies might
well have led to the disuse of communion wine. On
the other hand, the practise which Cyprian censured
(ANF, v. 359), of administering bread and water
	7. Introduction.
		Definitions and Terms (1 1).
		General Survey ($ 2).
	11. Hebrew Hymns,
III. Early Christian Hymns.
IV. Hymns of the Eastern Church.
	V. Hymns of the Latin Church.
		The Earlier Period (f 1).
		The Middle Ages (1 2).
HYMNOLOGY.
Individual Hymniete (¢ $). VI. German Hymns.
	The Reformation Period (§ 1
	Since the Reformation (l 2).
VII. French Hymns
VIII. Scandinavian Hymns.
Danish Productions (f 1).
Norway and Sweden (1 2).
I. Introduction: A hymn is a spiritual meditation in rhythmical prose or in verse, the chief constituents of which are praise and prayer to God. r. Definitions It is the communion of the soul with
	and Terms.	God. The modern conception of a
		hymn is, therefore, larger than that of
Augustine, who says: " [A hymn] is a song with
praise of God. If thou praisest God and singest not,
thou utterest no hymn; if thou pingest and praisest
not God, thou utterest no hymn; if thou praiwst
aught else, . . ,. although thou singest and praisest,
thou utterent no hymn. A hymn, then, oontaineth
these three things, song, and praise, and that of
God" (on Ps. eslia.; NP‑NF, lot ser., viii. 677).
On the other hand, the Greek and Latin churches,
differing here from the Protestant churches, include
among hymns metrical songs‑to Mary and the saints.
The writers of the New Testament employ three
terms, paalmos, hymrws, and odd pneumatiacB (Eph.
v. 19; Col. iii. 16). The word hymnos was common
to Greeks and Romans, who sang songs to their
divinities and in honor of men of renown. The
poems of Homer contain such hymns, and Hesiod
represents the Muses as singing hymns to the gods.
Pindar calls his odes hymns. Egyptian literature
also contains hymns, one of the most noted of which,
to the rising and setting sun, is found in the Book
of the Dead (chap. cav.; cf. P. le Page Renouf,
Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion, as
Illustrated by the Religion of Ancient Egypt, London,
1880). Paul, on Mare Hill, quoted from a hymn
of Aratus of CI11Ci9 (third century s.c.) the words
at communion, was not encratistie, but founded on the fear that by the use of wine in the early morning, people might betray themselves to be Christians.
G. g310GE1t.
Brawooaspar: F. Cabrol, Didionnaire d'archdoiopie chr6.
timne, part ix. 2848‑54 (exhaustive); DCB: iii. is3• Schaff, Christian Church, ii 495; $urts, Church History, i. 118, New York, 1889; A. Soheiwiier, Die Elements der Sucharistie in den erefan drei Jahrhunderten. Main:, 1903.
	HYGINUS, hi‑jai'nvs: A bishop of Rome in the
second century. In the oldest lists his name stands
eighth, between Telesphorus and Anioetus, and his
episcopate is assigned to the years 136‑40. But
no dependence can be placed on the chronological
data in this case. All that is definitely known of
him is that he was a prominent member of the
collegV of presbyters in Rome before the middle of
the second century. 	(A. HAuca.)
BrnuomsraT: sources are: Irenseue, Har. iii. 3; Eueebius,
Hint. ecd., iv. 10. 11, v. 6; Liber pondifioalis, ed. Ducheme, i. 131, Paris, 1886, end. Mommsen, in MGH, Best. pont. Rom., i (1898), 13, 234. Consult: dSB, Jan, i. 866; R. A. Lipdus, Chronolopie der rom%echsn Biechofe, pp. 169 bqq., Kiel. 1869; Harnaek, Gesehichte, ii. 1, pp. 144 eqq.; Bower, Pop", i. 11‑12; DCB, iii. 184; %L, vi. 518‑517.
IX English Hymns. Before the Reformation ($ 1). The Pealtere (¢ 2). The Rise of the Hymnals (f 3). Individual Hymniete ($ 4). Recent Hymnology (¢ 5). %. American Hymns. General Description (J 1). Individual Hymniste (¢ 2).
" for we are also his offspring " (Acts avii. 28) . The Christian hymn differs from the hymn of heathen antiquity in its spirit and object of worship, but not necessarily in form. It is addressed to God, or to one of the three persons of the Trinity, and admits nothing unchaste.
Hymns from the earliest time have been an important element in the services of the sanctuary,
and in all periods have contributed to s. General the piety of the Church. The Old and Survey. the New Testament frequently represent the heavenly bodies and the heavenly hosts as praising God (Job asxviii. 7; Is&. vi. 3; Rev. v. 9 sqq.), while the best periods of both Hebrew and Christian history expressed religious fervor in sacred song (cf. Acts awi. 25). In the Greek and Latin churches, from the sixth century on, the singing of hymns was confined to the churches and convents, and in the churches was restricted to the clergy, though in Germany the congregation sang the Leisen‑certain hymns closing with the Kyrie eleison. The Flagellants of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries sang hymns in the Latin or in the vernacular (see FLAGELLATION, FLAGELLANTs), while the English Lollards of the fourteenth century and the Bohemian Hussites of the fifteenth century revived the popular use of sacred song. The Reformation re:ntroduoed congregational singing in worship. The English revival of the . eighteenth century was marked by a great impulse to the composition of hymns, in which members of the national church (Toplady, Newton,

428
and others) vied with the leaders of the Methodist movement. Hymns " have consoled the sad, checked the joyful, subdued the enraged, refreshed the poor " (Nioetius of Treves, De psalmodid bono). They have been on the tongues of believers in the first ardor of their faith, and have ascended as the last fervid utterance of martyrs at the stake. They are the common heritage of believers, and bind together all ages. In them denominational distinctions are effaced. The hymns of Ambrose, John of Damascus, Luther, Terateegen, Wesley, Toplady, Muhlenberg, and Newman stand side by side in the hymn‑books, consentient in praise of the cne God and in love for the one Savior. For hymn tunes, We MUSIC, SACRED; see the sketches of prominent hymn‑writers, etc.
17. Hebrew Hymns: Hebrew psalmody had an early origin. The songs of Miriam, Moses, Deborah, and Hannah (Ex. xv.; Deut. xxxtii.; Judges v.; I Sam. ii. 1‑10) are sacred poems full of sublime imagery and inspired with a fervid devotion to Yahweh. The Book of Psalms is the beat of hymnbooks, and in all ages of the Christian Church it has been a living fountain of devotion and praise. See PSALMS, BOOK OP; PSALMODY; and HzBaaw LANGBAGE AND LITERATURE, III.
III. Early Christian Hymns: From the threshold of the Christian dispensation have come down hymns which are known generally by their Latin titles, usually derived from the first words in the Latin versions. These are the Magmfcat of Mary (Luke i. 46‑55), the Benedidua of Zacharias (Luke i. 68‑79), and the Nunc dimiWa of Simeon (Luke ii. 29‑32). Other parts of the New Testament suggest by their form that they are fragments of hymns (Acts iv. 24‑30; Eph. v. 14; I Tim. iii. 16; James i. 17; Rev. xv. 3). At the institution of the Lord's Supper (Matt. xxvi. 30), Jesus and his disciples sang a hymn, possibly a part of the Hallel (q.v.; cf. C. A. Briggs, Commentary on . . . Psalms, i., New York, 1906, pp. lxxviii‑Ixxiz). Christians of the Apostolic Age used hymns as a means of edification (I Car. xiv. 26; Eph. v. 19; Col. iii. 16): It seems probable that in the public‑assembly the hymn, like prophecy and preaching, was sometimes the spontaneous product of the moment (I Cor. xiv. 26). From the sub‑apostolic age testimony to the use of hymns in Christian public service comes from heathen as well as from Christian sources. Early in the second century Pliny informed Trajan that the Christians were in the habit of meeting before daylight and singing songs to Christ as God (Epiat. a. 97). Eusebius (Hilt. ecc1. V., xxviii. 5) quotes an author from near the end of the second century who speaks of the "many psalms and hymns, written by the faithful brethren from the beginning, [which] celebrate Christ the Word of God, speaking of him as divine " (NPNF, 2 ser., i. 247). The oldest Christian hymn in use, apart from those mentioned above, is probably " Shepherd of tender youth," by Clement of Alexandria (c. 200), which has gained currency in the rendering of Henry M. Dexter, made in 1846 (of. Schaff, ChrWian Church, ii. 228‑31). The hymn " Light of gladness, beam divine," still sung in the Greek Church, was formerly attributed to Athenagenes (d. 169); but Basil of
RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
Hydroparastatse Hymnology
Caesarea (d. 379) denies his authorship, though he refers to the hymn as an ancient composition: The Gnostics early created a body of hymns, and Origen speaks of the large number in use. Bardesanes (q.v.) and his son, Harmonius, were among the Gnostic poets (cf. E. Preuschen, Zwei gnoatische Hymnen, Giessen, 1904).
IV. Hymns of the Eastern Church: The custom of singing hymns was so general and popular in the third century that one of the charges by the Third Synod of Antioch (269) against Paul of Samoeata was that he had suppressed hymns in honor of Christ. Theodoret states (Hint. eccl., ii. 19; NPNF, 2 ser., iii. 85) that antiphonal singing began in Antioch and spread thence in all directions in the fourth century. While Chryaostom was bishop of Constantinople, the Trinitarian party used to assemble in the squares and then march in midnight processions through the city singing sacred songs as a means of combating the Arians, who also had their own songs. Cardinal Pitra states that the number of Greek hymns is very great, sufficient having been published to fill fifteen or twenty volumes, while an equal number survive in manuscript only. Ephraem Syrus (d. about 378) in the father of Syrian Christian hymnody. Theodoret speaks in high praise of Ephraem's hymns, which commemorate the great facts in the life of Jesus, the deaths of Christians, and the lives of martyrs (cf. H. Burgess, Select Mehioal Hymns . . . of Ephraem, London, 1853). Gregory Nazianzen (d. 390) and Anatolius (see ANAToLius OF CoNsTANTINOPLE) are the two greatest writers in the earlier period of Greek hymnody. The hymn " Fierce was the wild billow " is attributed to the latter. The best hymns of this branch of the Church were written in what John Mason Neale calls the second period, 720,820. To this period are assigned Romanus (d. about 720), to whom Cardinal Pitra ascribes twenty‑five hymns which exhibit originality and vigor; Andrew of Crete (d. 732); Comas (if there be not two writers of this name, cf. DCB, i. 694‑695); John of Damascus, the great theologian of the Greek Church, whose "'Tie the day of resurrection " has passed into many English hymnals; and Stephen of the monastery of Mar Saba (d. 794), whose " Art thou weary, art thou languid " is the most simple and restful lyric based on the words of Jesus, "Come unto me, all ye that labor." Three later writers are Theodore the Studite (d. 826), who wrote " That fearful day, that day of dread "; Joseph the Studite (d. about 830), who wrote. " Jesus, Lord of life eternal "; and Theoctistus the Studite (d. about 890), author of " Jesus, name all names above."
V. Hymns of the Latin Church: The founders of Latin hymnology were Hilary of Poitiers (d. 368)
and Ambrose of Milan (d. 397). Hilary :. The Ear‑ was banished from Gaul to Asia Minor Her Period. and so came into contact with the
Eastern Church, and on his return to his diocese made the book of hymns of which Jerome makes mention. Daniel gives six hymns as his, but it is doubtful whether there is a single hymn by Hilary extant. The singing of hymns was very popular in Milan, where Ambrose wan bishop, and

Hymnology	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	428
to him is due the so‑called Ambrosian music (see AMBRosIAN CHANT) used by the congregation, to which Augustine gives testimony (Conf., ix. 7). Ninety‑two hymns are attributed to the Ambrosian school, a few of which are by Ambrose himself (see AMBROSE, SAINT, OF MILAN). They combine vigor with simplicity and commemorate the great facts and doctrines of Christianity. Good specimens are the Veni, Redemptor (" Redeemer of all nations, come "), and the Deus Creator (`° Maker of all things, glorious God "). Some of the finest Latin hymns are by Prudentius, a Spanish layman (d. not earlier than 405), which, to the number of about fifteen, are taken from longer poems. Two much admired, are "Bethlehem, of noblest cities," on the birth of Christ, and " Hail, infant martyrs," on the murder of the innocents. In the fifth century Sedulius, possibly of Rome, and not to be confused with Sedulius Scotus of the eighth century, was the composer of some good hymns.
Gregory the Great (d. 604) and Fortunatus of Poitiers (d. 600) mark the transition to the medieval
	period of Latin hymnody. The Am
p. The	brosian music was supplanted by the
Middle	Gregorian (see Music, SACRED, II.,
Ages.	i., § 2), the recitative was introduced,
	and public song in the church service
was restricted to the choir of priests, the congregar
tion joining only in the responses. The best hymns
of Fortunatus are the Vexilla regis (" The royal
banner is unfurled "), and the Pange, lingua (" Sing,
my tongue, the Savior's battle "). The hymns of
the Middle Ages do not exhibit the joyous and
jubilant tone of the Ambrosian and Prudentian
hymns, but are set in the minor key. Born of the
cloister, they echo the subdued tones of coatem
pIative devotion. The singers linger near the cross
and ponder its agonies rather than breathe the clear
air of the resurrection morning; they depict the
awful solemnities of the judgment and the glories
of heaven. The chief centers of production of sacred
poetry were the monasteries of St. Gall, St. Martial
in Limoges, Cluny, Clairvaux, and St. Victor, near
Paris. A vast collection of the religious poems thus
produced has been made by Dreves and Blume, all,
with a few exceptions, being printed for the first
time. They served the purpose of devotional read
ing, few of them having passed into the church
service. They employed rime universally after
1150, and include the varieties of proses, hymns,
sequences, psalteries, and rimed prayers for the
rosary, called roadrio. The psalteries are divided
into 150 parts in imitation of the Psalms, and are
addressed to the Trinity, Jesus, and Mary. The
term " Sequence " (q.v.) was originally applied to
a melody, Notker of St. Gall being the first to adapt
poems to sequences. Tropes were verses inter
polated in the offices of the liturgy and joined
to the gloria, the hosanna, and to other parts of
the service; they originated in France and became
very popular in England. Most of the religious
poetry of the Middle Ages was produced in France
and Germany. Some of the hymns were in Ger
man, and often Latin and German lines or words
were intermingled.
Among the sacred poets of the Middle Ages were Gregory the Great, Notker of St. Gall (d. 912), Peter
‑	Damian (d. about 1072), Aneelin of
3. Individual Canterbury (d. 1109), Hildebert of
Hymnists. Tours (d. about 1134), and Abelard
(d. 11"42). The best compositions by an Englishman are those of John Peckham, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1292), from whose rimed office to the Trinity three hymns were taken (Daniel gives all three, i. 276 sqq.; cf. Drevee saiii. pp. 5‑6). Bernard of Clsirvaux (d. 1153), one of the great hymn‑writers, introduced the mystic strain into his compositions. Mabillon doubted the genuine. ness of all but two of his poems, while Vacandard (Vie de S. Bernard, ii., Paris, 1895, p. 103) and Haureau (Lea Poemea lotires allr"o h S. Bernard, Paris, 1890) doubt them all. But the earliest tradition ascribes them to St. Bernard, and no other can be found so likely as he to be their author (see BERNARD OF Cr.AIRVAUx). About 1150 Bernard of Clung (q.v.) gave to the Church his poem on the " Contempt of the World," consisting of about 3,000 lines, from which have been derived " Jerusalem the golden" and two other hymns. The most prolific medieval hymn‑writer was Adam of St. Victor (flourished c.1170), called by Gautier, Neale, and Trench " the foremost among the sacred Latin poets of the Middle Ages." From Bonaventura (d. 1274) came the Recordare aancto crucis (" Jesus, holy cross and dying "). Thomas Aquinas contributed three hymns to the breviary. Two of them, Pangs, lingua (" Sing, my tongue, the mystery telling "), and Laude, Zion (" Zion, to thy Savior singing ") belong to the ritual of Corpus Christi, are addressed to the host, and teach transubstantiation. The most famous hymn of the Middle Ages, perhaps of all ages, is the Dies irce ascribed to Thomas of Celano (q.v.), the friend and biographer of Francis of Assisi. As a sublime and reverential description of the awe and terror of the last judgment it has never been surpassed, and it has exercised the skill of many translators, among them Sir Walter Scott. Philip Schaff calls it " the acknowledged masterpiece of Latin poetry, and the most sublime of all uninspired hymns " (Christ in Song, New York, 1868, p. 372). The most tender hymn of the Middle Ages is the Stabat mater doloroaa (°° At the cress her station keeping, stood the mournful mother weeping," attributed to Jacopone da Todi (q.v.; d.1306). The first line is taken from John xia. 26. To this class of hymns, though later in time, belong those of. St. Francis Xavier (d.1b62), " Jesus, I love thee, not because," and of St. Theresa (d. 1552). In general it may be said that the best of the later hymns of the Latin Church, such as those of Madame Guyon, John Henry Newman (`° Lead, kindly light "), and Faber, are set in the key of medieval hymnody.
VL German Hymns: Germany possesses s more voluminous hymnology than any other country.
In 1786 Ludwig von Hardenberg pre. :• The pared a list of ?2,732 German hymns,
Reforms‑ and the present number can not fall lion Period. far short of 100,000, among them
many of the choicest pieces of this kind of literature. One of the first results of the Reformation in Germany was the use of

487	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Hyma01067
hymns in congregational singing, consequently there was in that country a considerable body of hymns before any were written in English. The father of German hymnology was Martin Luther. He possibly received his stimulus from the hymns of Huss, sent him by the Bohemian Brethren, and made a free translation of the martyr's Jesus Christus, nostra salus. In 1523 Luther published eight hymns of his own, and by 1545 had written 125. These were carried by traveling singers from village to village and sung into the hearts of the people. Protestants and Catholics alike testify to the effect of Luther's hymns; Coleridge regards Luther as doing " as much for the Reformation by his hymns as by his translation of the Bible," while the Roman Catholic Conzenius asserted that the " hymns of Luther have destroyed more souls than his writings and sermons." His hymns are marked by a joyful and robust faith. Thoroughly characteristic is Ein' feste Burg fist unser Gott (" A mighty fortress is our God"), which was the battle hymn of the Reformation and became the great favorite of the entire German people. But he struck other notes than those of challenge and war, as in his thoughtful Nun freut euch, liebe Christengemein (" Dear Christian people, now rejoice "). Among the colaborers of Luther in this field were Justus Jonas, Paul Eber, and Michael Weiss, the last of whom edited (1531) German translations of hymns of the Bohemian Brethren and added some of his own. [The Anabaptists of the seventeenth century produced a remarkably rich hymnology. The best of their hymns have been collected in Auss Bundt (modern ed., Basel, 1838). Most of these hymns are supposed to have been composed by martyrs shortly before execution. a. H. N.]
	The leadership thus achieved by the Lutheran
Church in the department of hymnody has been
		continuously maintained by a chain of
a. Since‑the eminent writers. Among the more
Reformation. noteworthy of the sixteenth century
		was Philipp Nicolai (d. 1608), who,
during the pestilence of 1597, wrote a hymn noted
for its majestic sweetness, Wachet auf l rift uns die
Stimme (" Wake 1 the startling watch‑cry pealeth ")
and Wie sehdn leuchtet der Morgenstern ("How
lovely shines the morning star "). To the same pe
riod belongs Ludwig Hehnbold (d. 1598), whose
Von Gott toill ich nwht lassen has been translated
often, as by Miss Winkworth, " From God shall
naught divide me." The period of the Thirty Years'
War produced some noted hymns, among which
may be mentioned the battle‑song of Gustavus
Adolphus, Verzage nicht, du Hdufein klein (" Fear
not, O little flock, the foe "), and the rugged thanks
giving hymn of Martin Rinkart (d.1649), Nun danket
alle Gott (" Now thank we all our God "), which has
been called the German Te Deum. Among the
most fertile writers of the seventeenth century was
Johann Heermann (d. 1647), whose experience of
severe suffering is embodied in hymns of exceeding
richness. With him should be placed Johann Rist
(d. 1667), who wrote some 680 hymns, among them
0 Ewigkeit, du Donnerwort (" Eternity, thou word
of fear "). The culmination of German hymnody
was reached in Paul Gerhardt (q.v.; d. 1676). Of,
his 123 hymns more than thirty are classic, among which his 0 Haupt volt Blut and Wunden (ut sup.) and Befehl du define Wege (" Give to the winds thy fears ") are representative. For the Reformed Church the first hymn‑writer was Joachim Neander (d. 1680), who reflects the influence of Spener. One of the hymns most popular in Germany is his Lobe den Herren, den mlichtigen Konig der Ehren (" Praise to Jehovah, almighty king of creation "). The Pietists were fertile producers of hymns during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Philipp Jakob Spener wrote nine hymns, three of which have been translated into English. August Hermann Francke (d. 1727) and Johann Anastasius Freylinghausen (d. 1739) were the most eminent writers of this school. Benjamin Schmolke (d. 1737), a pastor in Silesia, wrote many hymns of high merit and permanent value, the most popular of which was Mein Jesu, wie du toillat, rendered into the favorite English " My Jesus, as thou wilt." For the Moravians of Hermhut, Count Zinzendorf (d. 1760) wrote a large number of hymns of peculiar and glowing fervor, over 200 of which have come over into the English‑Moravian hymn‑book, and a large number appear in other English collections. Wesley used his compositions with freedom. A good example of Zinzendorf's composition is his Christi Blut and Gereehtigkeat (" Jesus, thy blood and righteousness "). Contemporary with Zinzendorf was Gerhard Tersteegen (d. 1769), a layman of the Reformed Church, the most popular of whose 111 hymns is Gott fist gegentotirtig, lasset una anbeten (" Lo, God is here, let us adore "). Georg Friedrich Philipp von Hardenburgh (d. 1891 at the age of twenty‑nine), who wrote over the pseudonym of " Novalis," composed, among other hymns, Ich sage jedem dass er lebt (" I say to all men far and near ") and Wenn ich ihn nur hate (" If I have only thee "). Several of the hymns of Johann Caspar Lavater (d. 1801) have been rendered into English, especially 0 Jesus Christ, wachs du in mir (" O Jesus Christ, grow thou in me ").
The early part of the nineteenth century witnessed a revival of interest in hymnody in Germany, contemporary with the national Luther tricentennial in 1817, if not a product of that celebration. This movement was led by Schleiermacher, Claus Harms, and Ernst Moritz Arndt. One of the purposes of the leaders was the reversal of the tendency, led by Justus Gesenius (in his collection of hymns published 1647), to mutilate and change the hymns of the older writers. Material assistance was given to this movement by the collections of C. C. J. von Bunsen, Ewald, Rudolf Stier, H. A. Daniel, and Albert Knapp. The most fertile contributors to recent hymnology have been Karl Johann Philipp Spitta (d. 1859) and Albert Knapp (d. 1864); but many fine hymns have been added to the literature by Ernst Moritz Arndt (d. 1860), Friedrich Rilckert (d. 1867), Meta Heusser (d. 1876), and Karl Gerok.
VII. French Hymns: Calvin, like Luther, was an advocate of congregational singing, and contributed to the literature of hymnology. A hymn . of his composition, To to salue, mon certain redempteur (" I greet thee, who my sure redeemer art "), was discovered in an old Genevan prayer‑book (of. P.

Hymnology	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	428
Schaff, Christ in Song, New York, 1868, pp. 678
sqq.). While Calvin was at Strasburg he came into
possession of twelve of Clement Marot's versions
of the psalms, not knowing they were his, and had
them set to music, along with original versions of
Pss. xxv., xxvi., xci., oxxxviii., the Deealogue in
verse, and with the Apostles' Creed and the Song
of Simeon. This book, published at Strasburg, 1539,
consisting of twenty‑one pieces with the tune at
the head of each psalm; but without preface and
signature, was the first collection of pieces for con
gregational use for the French Reformed Church.
Clement Marot (q.v.) received in 1541 permission
to publish his Trente Pwaumm, which appeared the
following year dedicated to Charles V., and in 1543
he published Cinquanto Pwaumes. After Marot's
death Beza continued the work of translating the
Psalms, but a complete collection of the Psalter
appeared only in 1562. Marot's versions, with few
changes, continue in use in the French churches.
They were set to music by Claude Goudimel. In
hymns proper, however, the French church is very
poor. Vinet accords to C6sar Malan the honor of
restoring to it this means of devotion. In connec
tion with Paul Bost he published. Chants de Sion,
improved and issued as Chants chrotiens in 1841,
which incorporated hymns and psalms from Roman
Catholic sources (e.g., Bishop Godeau, d. 1672, who
had issued a collection of excellent translations of
the Psalms; Corneille, d. 1684; Racine, d. 1699;
Madame Guyon, d. 1717). Malan is credited with
the composition of more than 1,000 hymns. Many
of the hymns of Madame Guyon, marked by grace
and devotion, were translated by Cowper, who was
in close sympathy with the mystical temper of the
author. 	D. S. ScaA".
VIII. Scandinavian Hymns: Before the Reformation the northern countries possessed few hymns in the vernacular outside of transla‑
	i.'Danish	tions of Latin originals. The hymns
Productions. of the Roman Catholic service were
		rendered into Danish and Swedish
prior to the Reformation (G. E. Klemming, Latinska
Sdnger, 4 vols., Stockholm, 1885,87; the Danish
Tidebog is reproduced in C. Pederson, Danske
Skrifter, vol. ii., Copenhagen, 1851), and after that
event Norway, Denmark, and Sweden developed a
hymnology. In Denmark the post‑Reformation
poetry began with satire and irony. The first
Danish hymn‑book was by Claus Mortensen T6nde
binder, the Reformer of Mahn6, and was called the
" Mahn6 Hymnal," issued in 1528, reprinted the
next year, enlarged in 1533, with a later edition by
Hans Taufer, 1544. A large hymnal, with tunes to
each hymn, containing 261 Danish and eight Latin
hymns, was issued by Hans Thomissen, pastor of
the Vor Frue Kirke in Copenhagen, in 1569, among
the contributors to which were bishops Peter
Palladius, Tyge Asmusen, Hans Albertsen, the
nobles Knud Gyldenstjerne, Erik Krabbe, Elizabeth
Krabbe Skram, the celebrated theologian Niels
Hemmingsen, and others, including the editor, who
contributed forty‑nine hymns to the cqllection.
The principle of arrangement was " the chief articles
of the Christian faith." By the beginning of the
seventeenth century the issue of hymn‑books in
Denmark was so frequent as almost to amount to an industry. In 1699 the " Ringo Hymn‑book " was prepared by Bishop Thomas Hansen Ringo (q‑v.), and in a few places this is still in use. A rival to this was issued in 1717 by Pastor B. C. Gj6desen, used in some congregations until 1850. Another, by Erik Pontoppidan, appeared 1740, was the first to designate the hymns by numbers, and had the favor of the court. It was Pietistic, and one of its contributors was Hans Adolph Brorson (q.v.). A third Danish issue was by the minister of state, Ove Hoegh‑Guldberg, and L. Harboe, bishop 'of Seeland, was issued in 1778, and was known as the " Guldberg Hymnal." In 1698 a new departure was made in the " Evangelical Christian Hymnbook " under the direction of Nicolai Edinger Balle (q.v.), bishop of Seeland, marked by a timid supernaturalism and a varied rationalism. A supplement to this was added by a later bishop of Seeland, Jakob Peter Mynster (q.v.), in 1845. In 1855 appeared the Boskilde Konventa Paalmebog, to which Nicolai Frederik Severin Grundtvig (q.v.), B. S. Ingemann, and C. J. Boye made contributions, and supplements were added in 1873 and 1890. In 1899 the official hymn‑book of the Danish Church was issued with the title Psalmebog for Kirke og Hjem.
In Norway the change in political conditions paved the way for the abandonment of the " Kingo,"
" Guldberg " and " Evangelical Chris‑
". Norway tian " hymn‑books which had been emend Sweden. ployed there as well as in Denmark,
and in 1869 an official service of song was issued under the care of M. B. Landstad, and in 1873 a second authorized hymn‑book under the care of A. Hauge. There is also a collection of hymns in the peasant dialect. In Sweden a little collection, Svenska stinger eller visor, was issued by the Reformer, Olaus Petri, and contained ten hymns, four or five of which were by the editor. This was enlarged in new issues of 1530 and 1536. Petri's brother, Archbishop Laurentius Petri, made a new edition of this in 1543, and in 1567 appeared the " Laurentius Petri Hymn‑book," containing about 100 hymns, many of them polemics against the Roman Catholic Church. Other hymn‑books of no particular moment continued to appear at frequent intervals, until an official publication was published in 1645, containing 166 Swedish and fifteen Latin hymns. A new hymn‑book was projected by Jesper Svedberg, assisted by the learned Urban HjArne and a commission. This began to appear in 1694, but aroused a storm of opposition by the polemic bishop, Carl Carlson. Under a new commission the projected and partly completed book was revised by a new commission, and became known as "The Hymn‑book of 1695," the year of its issue. The spread of Pietism to Sweden led to the publication of Mom og Lambaens visor, continually reprinted until the present. The diffusion of the Herruhut movement in Sweden led to the issue of Zions nya stinger by Anders Karl Rutstr6m, serving for that movement the same end as the Mose og Lambaens visor for Pietism. A revision of the Svedberg book was undertaken by C. J. Lohmann, Samuel Troilius, and the historian Olof Celsius, two parts appearing in

429	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Hymnology
1765‑67, but the result was received with strong
disapproval. The entrance of rationalism into
Sweden led to a desire for a new hymnal, which
was provided in 1793 in the " Upsala Hymnal,"
practically revised in 1814 by a commission. More
popular was the hymnal by Johan Olof Wallin,
Stockholm, 1816, and supplements were made to
this from time to time. 	(F. NirraaNt.)
I%. English Hymns: From the Anglo‑Saxon pe. riod of history only faint indications of sacred song
have come down. Thus Bishop Aldr. Before the helm (q.v.; d. 709) is said to have Reformation. mingled sacred and secular songs as
an aid to Evangelization. The hymn of Caedmon (q.v.) was not intended for the service of song. There are Latin hymns extant with AngloSaxon glosses (cf. The Latin Hymns of the AngloSaxon Church, ed. J. Stevenson for the Surteea Society, Newcastle, 1851), and there are, besides, paraphrases of the Lord's Prayer and the Gloria Patri; but these are properly meditational and do not belong‑ to hymnody as a part of divine service. Further indications of early English hymnody are carols and hymns to the Virgin. But all that can be said with assurance of the period before the Reformation is that the practise of the Latin Church governed, that much material is known out of which hymns might be made, and some of it was utilized in later periods, but that this material was not intended as more than pious meditation on religious themes. The best of this material is represented in the so‑called Primers, founded on the Sarum Use and the Roman Breviary, which are known to have been in use at least during 138(1‑•‑1700. They contained prose or rimed translations of parts of the service, including prayers.
After the Reformation the intensity of the contest between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism and
the large place taken by the English s. The Bible in popular affection made the
Psalters. use of even the great Latin hymns dis‑
tasteful. Consequently, while singing became a part of public worship, hardly. anything was used except versions of portions of Scripture, of which large parts, especially the Psalms,. were put into metrical form (see PSALMODY). As a result, the period 1550‑1700 has been called the period of the Metrical Psalters, during which more than 350 versions of the Psalms were begun, and about 125 were completed. Yet throughout there were indications that the hymnody of the Church was not to be confined to Scriptural material. Thus Miles Coverdale's Goodly Psalmes and Spiritual Songs (before 1539) represents the desire to embody the spirit of the German Reformers, and it consequently includes translations of some of the hymns of Luther as well as paraphrases of Latin hymns and versions of the Psalms. The principal trend of the period, however, is exhibited by what came to be known in later times as "The Old Version," begun by Thomas Sternhold (q.v.), an official at the courts of Henry VIII. and Edward VI. Sternhold'a purpose in publishing was to provide sacred songs for the people, though the version was begun for his own " godly solace "; the pieces were set to music by him. The meters employed were the short and
common meters of popular ballads. The first edition (undated, probably 1548) contained only nineteen psalms, but the number in subsequent editions was enlarged with the aid of Sternhold's disciples, John Hopkins and Thomas Norton, till all the psalms were rendered into English verse as early as 1582, the result being the well‑known " Sternhold and Hopkins Psalter " or " Old Version," which, being combined with the Book of Common Prayer, continued in use for about a century. This was followed by two varieties which had more or less of popular favor, the Genevan, influenced by the French version of Marot, and the Scottish, put forth by the General Assembly of 1564, which had more than 140 tunes attached. Another version, known as " The Scottish Psalter," included mainly settings by F. Rous, and was completed by the General Assembly of 1649 and authorized by that of 1650, to which Biblical Paraphrases was added in the period 1745‑Sl. Meanwhile, in 1559 Queen Elizabeth gave permission to use at the beginning and end of divine service " any hymn or such like song to the praise of Almighty God," and this permission both shows that hymn‑writing had already begun, and gave a distinct impetus to this kind of composition. Six hymns were appended to the Sternhold and Hopkins Psalter and were publicly used, and for seventy‑five years such writers as Robert Herrick (1591‑1674), John Donne, and George Herbert, (qq.v.) composed hymns which were sung, while renderings were made of parts of the treasures of the Latin Church, including " Hierusalem, my happie home."
The first attempt at a hymn‑book as distinguished from a psalter was Hymns and Songs of the Church by George Wither (q.v.,) issued in
g. The Rise 1623 with a patent from James I. per‑
of the mitting it to be bound with the PsalHymnals. ter. It consisted of two parts, (1) metrical paraphrases of Scripture, (2) hymns for the church festivals and special occasions. It was republished in enlarged form as Hallelujah, Britain's Second Remembraneer in 1641. But the Puritan sentiment, which soon became dominant, preferred the Psalms in meter, while the hymn‑writers were principally royalists. This led the way in England to "The New Version " known also as "Tate and Brady" (1st ed. 1696; 2d ed. 1698; with supplement, 1702), issued with the approval of William III., and in America to the Bay Psalm Book (q.v.). The New Version differed from the Old in that it was written in varied meter, and it became the standard and influenced all subsequent hymnody. In 1782 five hymns were added to it, and later others were admitted. Meanwhile such writers as Henry Vaughan, Jeremy Taylor, Thomas Ken (morning and evening hymns and the Doxology), and Joseph Addison (" The spacious firmament on high ") had been writing hymns which, in original or revised form, have been permanent possessions. In 1683 John Mason published Songs of Praise, which ran through many editions, and furnished the basis for several hymns still in current use. But under lingering Puritan sentiment the singing of hymns was still prohibited. The Baptists became involved in con‑

8ynnaolosy	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	480
troversy over the propriety of using them, and
divided into "singing and non‑singing congrega
tions." The Independents began to use hymns
about 1690 (Collection of Divine Hymns, 1694), and
the time was ripe for Isaac Watts (q.v.; 1674‑1748),
who has been called the creator of English hymnody.
The public sentiment of the time has been indicated
by the fact that Watts considered it necessary to
preface his Hymns (1707) with an apologetic argu
ment. The comparative excellence of his com
positions forced them into acceptance, rendered
psalm‑singing as the only means of public praise
obsolete, and made his hymns necessary to every
hymnal since his time. He left about 875 hymns
and psalms, and his significance lies in his departure
from the literalness of the Psalters and the employ
ment of modern thought and sentiment. Watts
opened the flood‑gates of English hymnody, and
from his time the flow of hymns has been steady.
Philip Doddridge (q.v.; 1702‑51) composed nearly
400 hymns, many of which were written and sung
as supplement to his sermons. He had as younger
contemporaries Simon Browne (1680‑1732), who
left 170 hymns, among them " Come, gracious Spirit,
heavenly dove," and Robert Seagrave (1693‑1755),
who left about fifty hymns, including " Rise, my
soul, and stretch thy wings." The creations of
hymnals under these influences was rapid. The
Moravian hymn book was made in 1742 and stand
ardized in 1789; a Unitarian collection was made
in 1757; the Church of England's hymnal began
with Martin Madan's Collection of Psalms and
Hymns (1760), using the previous sources; the first
Wesleyan hymnal was put out in 1780; and the first
Baptist hymn‑book was Rippon's (1787).

	The eighteenth and nineteenth 'centuries witnessed the
rise of a large number of " poets of the Church " who pro
duped compositions which became deservedly popular and
seem assured of lasting fame. Some of these are the fol
		lowing: Joseph Hart (1712‑68), "Come, Holy
4. Individual Spirit"; Anne Steele (1716‑78), "Father,
	Hymnists. whate'erof earthly bliss ".William Williams
		(1717‑91), a Welsh hymnist, who wrote 800
hymns, including " Guide me, O thou great Jehovah "•
John Cennick (1718‑55), " Children of the heavenly king ";
John Newton (1726‑1807) and William Cowper (1731‑1800),
who cooperated in producing the " Olney Hymns "; Will
iam Hammond (1719‑83), " Awake and sing the song ";
Thomas Gibbons (1720‑85), " Now let our souls on wings
sublime "; Edward Perronet (1726‑92), " All hail the power
of Jesus' name"; Samuel Stennett (1727‑'85), " Majestic
sweetness site enthroned "; Thomas Haweis (1732‑1820),
who wrote 256 hymns; the brothers Wesley, foremost of
whom as a hymn‑writer was Charles (1739‑86), who wrote
some 6,000 hymns, 3,000 of which were left in manuscript;
John Fawcett (1739‑1817), " Bleat be the tie that binds ";

eft, forr me M11 anted 132 thersy Mrs.	L®titiaMr	Rock of AM
	cl(1743‑1825), " Come, said Jesus' sacred voice " and 143
	others; Rowland Hill (1744‑1833), " Cast thy burden on
	the Lord "; James Montgomery (1771‑1834), " Ohl where
	shall rest be found "; Harriet Auber (1773‑1862), " Our
	bleat Redeemer, ere he breathed "; Reginald Haber (1783
	1826), " By cool Siloam's shady rill "; Charlotte Elliott
	(1789‑1871), " Just as I am, without one plea "; Henry
	Kirke White (1785‑1806), " Oft in danger, oft in woe "•
	Sir Robert Grant (1785‑1838), " Ohl worship the king, all
	glorious above "; Sir John Bowring (1792‑1872), " in the
	cross of Christ I glory "; James Fdmeeton (1791‑1867),
	" Savior, breathe an evening blessing "; Henry Francis
	Lyle (1793‑1847), " Abide with me, fast falls the eventide ";
	Sarah Flower Adams (1805‑48), " Nearer, my God, to thee ";
	Christopher Wordsworth (1807‑85), " Ohl day of rest and
	gladness "; Horatiue Boner (1808‑89), " I heard the voice
of Jesus say "; Henry Alford (1810‑71), " Come, ye thankful people, come "; Thomas Take Lynch (1818‑71), " Gracious Spirit, dwell with me " and 166 others; William Walsham How (1823‑97), " For all thy saints who from their labors rest "; Edward Henry Bickereteth (1826‑1906), " O God, the rock of ages "; Catherine Winkworth (1829‑78) who produced the Lyra Germanica which has so influenced modern church singing; Frances Ridley Havergal (18361879), " I gave my life for thee" : and George Matheson (1842‑1906), "O Love that will not let me go." Not mentioned in the foregoing are the members of a little circle, all connected with the Oxford movement, who influenced English hymnody less by the number of hymns which they produced than by the high value of their compositions as expressions of devotion. This circle comprised: John Keble (1792‑1866), who produced the Christian Year; Frederick William Faber (1814‑83), " Paradise, O paradise " and " Harkl hark, my soul "; John Mason .Neale (18181866), whose rendering. " Jerusalem the golden " is in every hymnal of note, and who produced also the splendid Medieval Hymns and Sequenua (London, 1852); Edward Caswell (1814‑78), who produced Lyra Catholics; and John Henry Newman (1801‑90), whose " Lead, kindly light " is one of the best known of English hymns.
While, during the whole period just sketched, the production of hymnals was steady, with 1830 began a better use of the earlier material,
	5. Recent	evident in more careful editing and
Hymnology. a larger employment of the earlier
		treasures of the Church, made avail
able by the writers named above and others whose
work was perhaps no less worthy. Critical study
was made of sources, attention was .paid to the
reproduction of the spirit of the originals, and
greater faithfulness was manifested in the employ
ment of earlier hymns, while the tunes used were
not only of a higher quality in composition, but were
made to accord in their flow with the rhythm of
the hymns. In this way improvement almost in
estimable has been brought about in the song service
of the Church. In this movement one.of the most
influential leaders was Sir Henry Williams Baker
(1821‑77), whose famous Hymns Ancient and
Modern was at the time of its appearance high
water mark as a medium of congregational devotion.
This compiler is hardly less celebrated for his setting
of Psalm xxiii., " The king of love my shepherd is."
In this movement the Church of England has taken
great interest, and at present its hymnals are reoog
nized as models for the compilation of service‑books
of song.
B. American Hymns: The connection between the colonies and England was so close until about 1770 that American hymnody had
	r. General	little distinctively its own. The first
Description. American praise‑book was the famous
		Bay Psalm‑Book (q.v.), which was
often reprinted. Then Tate and Brady's Psalter
came into popular use, with a supplement of hymns
largely by Watts, of which many editions were
issued. After the War of the Revolution, denom
inational activity in the production of hymnals
became intense, and this movement, stimulated
by the production of meritorious hymns, soon passed
beyond the use of the versified psalms. Official
hymnals were issued by the Protestant Episcopal
Church (1789, 1808, 1826), by the Baptists (The
Philadelphia Coltedion, 1790), by the Methodists
(prior to 1790); the Universalists published two
collections in 1792, the Unitarians one in 1795, the
Congregationalists one in 1799, while the first official

431	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Hy=olory
Presbyterian hymnal appeared in 1828‑29. While denominational activity has continued throughout the history of this country, in later times hymnologists like Edwin F. Hatfield, Thomas Hastings, Philip Schaff, who collaborated with R. D. Hitchcock, and Charles Seymour Robinson compiled hymnals which were intended for interdenominational use, and were so employed. Two movements have contributed to the volume, if not to the quality, of American hymns, the Sunday‑school movement and the revivalist services under the leadership of Dwight L. Moody with the assistance of P. P. Bliss and Ira D. Sankey. Unfortunately the majority of these hymns are such that their continued use is not to be desired, while the quality of the music to which they are sung is even poorer than that of the hymns.
Among the individual writers whose work justifies the perpetuation of their memory are: Samson Occom (Ocknm, Ooaum, 1723‑92), a Montauk Indian and successful missionary to his own people, who wrote " Waked by the gospel's joyful sound," and with Joshua Smith and others compiled a
small hymnal originally published at WilkesZ. Individual barre, Pa.; Samuel Davies (1723‑61), who
Hymnigte. wrote sixteen hymns, among them " Lord.
I am thine, entirely thine "• Nathan Strong (1748‑1816), principal editrof the Hartford Selection (1799) and author of " Swell the anthem, raise the song "; Timothy Dwight, the editor of Barlow's revision of Watts and the author of " I love thy kingdom, Lord "; Francis Scott Key (1779‑1843), the author of the Star‑Spangled Banner,

who also wrote several hymns; Amhel Nettleton (17831844), the compiler of Village Hymns (a constant source for later hymnals) and is said to have written " Come, Holy Ghost, my soul inspire "; Thomas Hastings (1784‑1872), known both for his services to the music of hymnody as distinguished from the words and for the hymn " Gently, Lord, ob, gently lead us "; William Cullen Bryant (1794‑1878), whose hymns have not the celebrity of his other poems; William Augustus Muhlenberg (1796‑1877), " I would not live alway "; George Washington Donne (1799‑1859), " Softly now the light of day ";, James Waddell Alexander (1804‑59), whose splendid rendering " O. sacred head now wounded " so faithfully reproduces the spirit of the original (see GnsaAamr, PAOr.); Frederic Henry Hedge (18051890), author of the favorite rendering of Luther's battle hymn, " A mighty fortress is our God," which is rivaled only by Carlyle's rendering " A firm defense our God in still "; John Greenleaf Whittier (1807‑92), " We may not climb the heavenly steeps ". Ray Palmer (1808‑87). perhaps the most prolific of fine hymns of all Ameican hymnodiete, "My faith looks up to thee "; Samuel Francis Smith (1808‑95), "Myoountry,'tisof thee "; OliverWendell Holmes (1806‑94), "Lord of all being, throned afar "; James Freeman Clarks (181088), compiler of hymnals and writer of " Father, to us thy children humbly kneeling "; Samuel IAndellow (1819‑92), editor of hymnals and author of " Go forth to life, O child of earth "; Frances Jane van Alstyne ("Fanny Crosby," 1823‑ ), " 'Tie the blessed hour of prayer." Phoebe Cary (1827‑71) collaborated with Dr. Deems on Hymns for all Christians (1869) and wrote " One sweetly solemn thought"; and Washington Gladden (1836‑ ), ..O , let me walk with thee."
Geo. W. Glrasoas.
BIHLIoa8AP8Y: The two dictionaries sae Julian, Hymnology,
and A. F. Fischer, Kuceksndisder Lexicon, Goths, 1879. In Julian special sections deal with the subject as treated in the text, with Latin, English, German, etc, hymnology. For sources the reader is referred to: H. A. Daniel,
Thesaurus bymnolopiew, 5 vole., Leipsiq6 1841‑56 (in
which a vast number of texts are given): Anadeda hym
nica medii avi, ed. C. Blume and G. M. Droves, vole. i: xfix.,
Leipeic, 1886‑1908 (the largest collection of sources);
C. U. J. Chevalier, Repertorium hymnologeeum, 3 vols.,
Louvain, 1892‑1904• P. Waekernagel, Das deutsche iir
ehenlied von der dliestea Zeit bit . . . l;. Jahrkundert, 5
vole., Leipsio, 1864‑77; idem, Das deutsche Kirehun lied
van Martin Luther bis auf Nicolaus HermanN Stuttgart,
1841; MOH, Poet. Lat. arai Car„ and Poet. Lot. mod. alai;
F. J. Furnivall, Hymns to the Virgin and Christ, London,
1895 (edited for the English Teat Society); J. H. Todd, The Book of Hymns of the Ancient Church of Ireland, 2 parts, Dublin, 1855‑69 (edited for the Irish Archeological Society); J. H. Bernard and R. Atkinson, The Irish Liber Hymnorum, 2 vols., Oxford, 1898 (with glossary and translation).
Of anthologies the following may be mentioned: A. J.
Rambach, Antholopie chriaawher Gesdngs aus allen Jahrhunderten der Kirche, Alton&, 1817; J. M. Neale, Hymni ealeaioz et sequentio= London, 1851‑52; F. Mone, Lakini8che Hymnen des Mittelalttrs, 3 vole., Freiburg, 1853‑55; F. Blister, Auswahl dtchriadicher Lister, B. 16. Jahrhundert, Berlin, 1858; F. D. Huntingdon, Hymns of the Apes, 3 vols., Boston, 1860‑64; R. C. Trench, Sacred Latin Poetry, London, 1864; K. Simrock~ Lauda Sion, Cologne, 1868; P. Schaff, Christ in Song, New York, 1860; W. Christ and M. Paraaikas, Anthologies Graoa oarminum Christianorum, Leipsic, 1871; D. T. Morgan, Hymns of the Latin Church Translated. London, 1871; W. J. Loftie, The Latin Year, ib. 1873; F. A. March, Latin Hymns with English Notes, New York, 1874; P. Sohaff and A. Gilman, Library of Religious Poetry, New York, 1886; D. Morrison, Great Hymns of the Chwak, London, 1890; W. A. Merrill, Latin Hymns Selected and Annotated, Boston, 1904; D. J. Donahoe, Early Christian Hymns; Translations of the Verses of the mod notable Latin Writers of the Early and Middle Ages, New York, 1908.
On the hymnody of the Eastern Church consult: J. B.
Pitra, Hymnagrapkie de 1'6 lies grecque, Rome, 1867• E. Bouvy, PoitesetMflodes. tudesur leaorigines du rhythms tonique clans i'hymnopraphis de 1'Eglise grecqua, Mmes, 1886; J. M. Neale, Hymns of the Eastern Church, London, 1888; G. S. Barrett, The Earliest Christian Hymn, ib. 1897; R. M. Moorsom, Renderings of Church Hymns from Eastern OJtm Books, London, 1901 J. Brownlie, Hymns of the Eastern Church, Paisley, 1902.
On the hymns of the Latin Church consult: P. A. Schu‑
biger, Die Sdngerschule St. Galena, 8.18. Jahrhundert, New York, 1858; J. Pauly, Hymni bresiarii Romani, 3 vols. Aachen, 1868‑70; J. C. F. Bahr, Die chrialichen Dichter Rome, Carlwuhe, 1872; S. G. Pimont, Les Hymnes
du brdviaire romain, vols. i.‑iii., Paris, 1874‑84; K. A. Beck, Geschiehts des katholiechen Kirchsnllwdea von semen ersten Anfangen, Cologne, 1878; S. W. DuMeld, Latin Hymn Writers and their Hymns, New York, 1887; A. Devaux, De 1'Aymnologis "no, Lyon, 1890; M. Manitius, Geechichts der chaistiich‑latnniachm Poesis bit zur Mi#e des 8. Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart, 1891; C. U. J. Chevalier, Pobsie lilurgique du moyen dye, Paris, 1893; idem, Po6sis liturgique de 1'dglib catholique en Occident, Tournai, 1894; A. Deolmvrens, Du rhythms dans Mymnographis latine, Paris, 1895; N. Spiegel, Untersuehungen fiber die allere thriediche Hymnanpoesie, 2 parts, W Oraburg, 1896‑97; C. Blume and G. M. Droves, Hymnologische Beitrdge. Quellsn and Porschungen zur Geschithte der lateiniaehen Hymnendidtung, vols., i.‑iii., Leipsic, 1897‑1901; C. F. S. Warren, The Dies Iran, London, 1897; C. Albin, La Podsie du brdviare, vol. i., Lyons, 1899; F. Leitner, Der gottesdisnstlwhs Volkagesang im fadischen and chuutlichaa Altertum, Freiburg, 1906.
On German hymnody: K. Severin Meister and W.
BBumker, Das katholiacha deutsche Kirchenlied . . . bis . 17. Jahrhundert, 2 vols., Freiburg, 1862‑83; Cath‑
erine Winkworth, Christian Singers of Geemany, London, 1869; idea, Lyra Germanica, new issue, ib. 1901; E. E. Kooh, Geschiehte des Kirehendieda . . . der dsutsch‑ceargeliachea Kirrhe, 6 vole., Stuttgart, 1866‑72; O. Wetetein, Des deutsehe Kirchenlied im 1tl. 18. Jahrhundert, Neuatrelita, 1888; T. Odinga, Das deutsche Kirchentied der Schweiz im Reformationsadter, Frauenfeld, 1889; P. Wolfram, Du Entstehung du deutwAen emngeliachen Kir ehanlisdes in musikalisrher Beziehung, Leipsic, 1890; R. Wolkan, Das Kirchenlied der BBAmischen Brdder in 16. Jahrhunderte, Prague, 1891; R. von Liliencron, Zur Liederdichtung der Wiedermufer, Prague, 1892; E. Wolff, Das deutsche Kirchenlied des IB. 17. Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart, 1894; J. Westphal, Das ssangelieche Kirchenlied each seiner geschichfichefr Enlwickelung, Leipeic, 1901; A. F. W. Fischer, Dag deutadee evangelieche Kirchenlied des 17. Jahrkunderts, 3 vole., Gatereloh, 1902‑05; W. Nelle, Unsero Kirchenliederdichter, Hamburg, 1905.
On French hymnody: F. Bovet, Hint. du paautier des
Wien reform6at, NeuchAtel, 1872; O. Douen, Clemamt

$yp'pa"t°	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	489
Hyssop
	Marot et 1s peautier hugvenol, Paris, 1879; E. Levy, Po"iu
rdip:waas prosanpales et franpaiaes, ib. 1887.
	For Scandinavian hymnology consult: C. J. Brandt
	and L. Helweg, Den danaks Psalmediptninp, 2 vole.; Co
	penhagen, 1848‑47; J. N. Skaar, 1Vorske Balmehistorie,
	Bergen, 1879‑80; C. J. Brandt~ Yore dansW Kirk,‑Balme
	boiler, Copenhagen, 1886; Klemming, Hymni et sequentia
	in repno Suecia, vol: i., Hall% 1886; H. Sohfisk, Scenek
Litaraeurhistoria, vol: i., Stockholm, 1890.
	On English and American hymnology (remembering
	that many of these volumes deal also with the hymns of
	the other branches of the Church) consult: J. C3adeby,
	Memoirs of the Hymn Writers of the 17th‑l 9th Centuries,
	London, 1861; C. D. Cleveland, Lyra sacra Americana,
	2 vole., New York, 1868; J. C. Miller, Singers and ,Songs
	of the Church, London, 1869; H. Butterworth, Story of
	the Hymns, New York, 1875; E. F. Hatfield, Posts of the
	Church, ib. 1884; J. King, Anglican Hymnology, London,
	1885; S. W. Duffield, English Hymns, New York, 1886;
	H. S. Burrage, Baptist Hymn Writer,,. Portland, Maine,
	1888; H. A. (Sloes, Story of tU Psalters, London, 1888;
	H. E. Lewis, Sweet Singers of Wales, ib. 1889; D. Morri
	son, Great Hymns of the Church, ib. 1890; A. Palmer,
	Hymne, their History and Development, lb. 1892 (compre
	hensive); S. W. Christopher, Hymn Writers and their
	Hymns, reissue, New York, 1898; W. (1. Horder, Hymn
	Loser: Riss and tirouth of Bnplish Hymnody, London,
	1900 (of unusual excellence); D. B. Breed, Hiss and Use
	of Hymns and Hymn Tuna, Chicago, 1901; (3. A. Leask,
	Hymn Writers of the 18th Century, London, 1902; C. S.
	Nutter, Hymn Studies, reissue, New York, 1902 (based on
	the Methodist Hymnal); J. A. Jones, Famous Hymns and
	their Authors, ib. 1903; R. M. Moorsom, Historical Com
	panion to Hymns Ardent and Modern, London, 1903;
	W. B. Bodine, Some Hymns and Hymn Writers, Philadel
phia, 1908.
	Further literature may be found fn Hauck‑Hersog, RE,
x. 399‑438.
	HYPAPAIYTE, hip"a‑pan'tt or t5 (late Gk., equiv
	alent to the classical hypantgeis, "a meeting"): A
	festival of the Greek Church commemorating the
	meeting of the infant Jesus and his mother with
	Simeon and Anna in the temple (Luke ii. 21‑40).
	It corresponds to the Purification, or Candlemas, of
	the West. See CANDLvMA6; MARY THE MOT81M of
Jesus CHRIST.
	HYPATIA: Neoplatonie philosopher; b. in Alex
andria c. 350; d. there Mar., 415.	She was the
	daughter of tie philosopher and mathematician
	Theon, from whom she received her first philosophic
	training. On her return from Athens, whither she
	had gone to continue her studies, she became a
	distinguished lecturer on philosophy, and ultimately
	the recognized bead of the Neoplatonic school at
Alexandria.	She exerted a wide influence and
	attracted to her classroom students of philosophy
from all quarters.	Among her devoted disciples
	was Synesius of Cyrene, afterward bishop of Ptole
	mais, several of whose letters to her are still extant.
	She was universally venerated for her beauty and
	purity, no less than for her wisdom and eloquence.
	By her friendship for the prefect Orestes, she in
	curred the enmity of Cyril, then bishop of Alex
	andria, who, in the name of Christianity, incited a
superstitious mob against her.	The story of her
	tragic fate is related by Socrates (Hilt. eced., vii. 15).
	As she was driving through the streets in her chariot
	she was seized by a band of Christian fanatics led
	by Peter the Reader, and dragged to the church
	called Ceesareum, where she was stripped and cast
	into the street to be pelted to death with shells.
	Her body was then torn to pieces, and later com
	mitted to the flames at a place called Cinaron.
Her writings have not been preserved. She is the heroine of Charles Kingsley's historical romance, Hypatia (London, 1853).
HYPERDULIA. See DQLLA.
HYPERIU9 (GERHARD), AIQDREAS: A Lutheran theologian and preacher; b. at Ypres (30 m. s.s.w. of Bruges) May 16, 1511; d. at Marburg Feb. 1, 1584. The name Hyperdus, from his birthplace, is that by which he is commonly known. He was early grounded in the classics by prominent humanist teachers, and pursued his education especially at Tournay and Paris. In 1537 he visited prominent scholars at the universities of Central Germany in the interest of the Evangelical cause, and then spent four years in England. In order to get a letter of introduction to Butzer he went, in 1541, to Marburg to his friend Gerhard Noviomagus, whose substitute and (1542) successor as professor of theology he became. A fruitful writer, endowed with great gifts, he soon attracted great crowds of students, paying special attention to the education of preachers. He was not a strict Lutheran, but rather influenced by Butzer, who enjoyed the highest regard of the Landgmve Philip and left an indelible stamp on Hessian Protestantism. Hyperius distinguished himself in various linesexegetioal, historical, encyclopedic, and homiletic. His exegetical works (In D. Pauli ad Romanos epistolam exegema, 1549; Maria opuacula, 1589‑70, his commentary on the Hebrews, 4 vole., 1582 sqq.) are distinguished by acuteness and attention to the history of exegesis. His acquaintance with church history induced the Magdeburg centuriators to ask his advice as to method, whidh he expounded in 1550 in the treatise De mdhodo in eonacrtbenda historic emleaiastica crontilium (first published by Mangold, Marburg, 1888). His efforts in the encyclopedic and homiletic departments are almost epoch‑making, and became the basis of Evangelical homiletics. In the former, his principal work is De rations atudii theologid (Basel, 1558). The first book treats of the religious and scientific presuppositions for the study of theology; the second of exegesis and the profit derived from study of the Scriptures; the third of systematic theology, including catechetios; the fourth of the theory of practical theology. By his insistence in this, the most important of the four, on the importance of a study of church history, canon law, the method of the cure of souls, and liturgics, he became the father of practical theology. No less important*are his efforts in the homiletical department, which he defines as popular exegesis. Theoretically the sermon is hereby tied to the Holy Scripture and its theological character assured. Following II Tim. iii. 18 and Rom. xv. 14, he distinguished five modes of preaching, from which originated in Lutheran: orthodoxy. the fivefold application of each sermon. His principal homiletic work is entitled De formandis conciontbus sacria seu de interpretation, Scripturarum poptilan (Marburg, 1553). The homilists of the succeeding centuries followed Melanehthon's rhetorics; Hyperius remained an almost solitary prophet till the time of Schleiermaeher. From 1542 to 1584 Hyperius was the spiritual head of the Hessian Church. His

433
principal work in the practical fiela is the first Hessian national church‑order, which he drew up in 1568 in conjunction with the Marburg preacher, Nikolaus Rhodingus, and which is still the basis of the constitution of the church in Hesse. Characteristic of him is the union of Evangelical catholicity, which can prove from the Holy Scripture and the Fathers that " in substance and nature, fundamentally one and the same doctrine has always existed," with a strong Calvinistic tendency in such things as the necessity, supposed to follow from the New Testament, of the three " major orders " of bishops (superintendents), elders, and deacons.
Church and university life in Hesse was disturbed by controversy soon after Hyperius' death. The man of peace was forgotten, until the second half of the nineteenth century, when his memory was revived by the works of Steinmeyer and Mangold. E. C. ACHELIs.
BrswoaitmHY: The biographical source used in all sketches
of the life is Oratio de vita et obitu Andrew Hyperii a Vuipando Orthio . . . habits, appended to H. Victor's ad. of Hyperius' MeOodi theofogici libri iii., 1587. Various phases of his activity are discussed in F. W. Haeeencamp, Heeaiache %irchenteechia'W wit dem Zeitalter der Reformation, ii. 453‑464, Frankfort, 1884; F. L. 8teinmeyer, Die Topik im Dienate der Pradipt, Berlin, 1$74; H. Heppe, Rirehenpesehirhts beider Heaven, i. 286‑288, Marburg, 1878; K. F. Holler, Andrew Hyperiua, Kiel, 1895; M. Bahian, in Zsitachrift far praktische Theolopie, gviii (1896), 289‑324, aia (1897), 27‑88, 120‑149.
HYPOCRISY: The simulation of qualities, convictions, or sentiments which are really foreign to the person simulating them, particularly the assumption of moral and religious virtues which one does not possess. With the Greeks the word hypokrinesthai meant to act a part on the stage; and the hypokriMs was originally only an actor. From this idea of assuming a character for purposes of the stage came the more general conception of hypocrisy. It includes all affectation or ping by which one seeks to appear as something which one is not; and it is not confined to the field of religion. The intellectual hypocrite, who affects certain views in order to appear clever or strong‑minded, is a familiar type. The tendency to limit the application of the term to conscious deception rests upon a superficial psychology. Properly speaking, hypoorisy is present wherever there is discord between the actual life and character of a person and the impression of his life and character which he would convey to others, whether consciously or uneoneciously.
The basis of this discrepancy between appearance and actuality in human life is the discord between what is and what ought to be in man's ethical life. In his moral and religious consciousness man has a conception of the norm of character willed by God, but, since he is prevented by egoistic motives from realizing this ideal, his tendency is to allow the will or imagination to construct a false norm, by which he then directs his life before his fellows as if this false appearance were the reality. Since moral progress requires that one shall keep before him an ideal, the danger of falling into hypocrisy is always present. It frequently happens that the moral consciousness does not keep pace with the moral judgment (Matt. vii. 3‑5; Rom. ii. 21‑23). In V.‑28
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
persons of limited moral perception hypocrisy is encouraged by the laws and conventionalities of society. To secure a certain standing before the world they may appear to conform to certain outward requirements of society, and yet remain morally vile in their private life. Similarly, the more highly developed the religious organization, the greater the occasion for hypocrisy. In this case there is a tendency to put on the empty appearance of godliness without the inner reality (II Tim. iii. 5; Acts v. 3‑1; Matt. vi. 2‑5, 16, vii. 15‑20, xv. 7‑19; Titus i. 16).
	The essence of hypocrisy is egoism; and, since
only true Christianity excludes all selfish interests,
this is the only form of religion incompatible with
hypocrisy (Matt. xv. 7‑9, xxiv. 51), the specific
Satanic sin (II Cor. xi. 14). It was in this sense
that Jesus designated hypocrisy as " the leaven of
the Pharisees " (Luke xii. 1). Jesus branded the
Pharisees hypocrites because they allowed egoistic
motives to enter into their religion, and then de
ceived themselves and others into the belief that
theirs was the true religion (Matt. xxiii. 27‑33;
John v. 42). Other characteristics of religious
hypocrisy are self‑righteousness (Matt. vi.; Luke
xviii. 11‑12), loss of true religious insight (Luke
xii. 56), and inability to distinguish between essen
tials and trivial details (Matt. xxiii. 23‑25; Luke
xiii. 15‑16). 	(L. LEMME.)
B1HL1oa8APHY: J. Beth, Study of Ethical Principle, p. 268,
	New York, 1898; the lesoone under bxospiv@o0sa, vwoK
	par4s, Drdep4mt,
HYPOSTASIS. See TRINITY.
	HYPSISTARIAIYS: A Cappadocian sect of the
fourth century. Recent investigations by Schtlrer
and Cumont have shown how widely spread was
the worship of " the most high God," and how
manifold the influences that cooperated with it.
" It was reinforced by all the religions of Asia
Minor, Egypt, Syria, Persia; but the strongest
monotheistic strand in its variegated texture was
contributed by Judaism." Such a mixture of pagan
ism and Judaism offered the Cappadocian sect of the
Hypsiatarii (Hypsiatiani), mentioned by Gregory
Nazianzen (MPG, xxxv. 990 sqq., NPNF, vii. 256)
and Gregory of Nyssa (MPG, xlv. 482 sqq.). From
the pagan element, rejecting idols and sacrifices,
they borrowed the worship of fire and light; from
the Jewish element, rejecting circumcision, they
adopted the hallowing of the Sabbath and certain
dietary rules. The " Most High God," moreover
they did indeed call " the Almighty," but not
" Father." Gregory Nazianzen's father belonged
to this sect before embracing Christianity. There
is some affinity between the Hypsistariaos and the
Euphemitcs or Masaadiani, described by Epipiuanius
(Hter., lxxx.); and the Thevwbeia of Cyril of Alex
andria. (MPG, 1xviii. 282). Doubtless, too, the
western Cdlicolm (q. v.) are a further variation of
the same stock. 	G. gn$dER.
BIBLroaBAPHY: E. 8oh&er, Die Judan im boeporaniaehen Reichs, in SBA, 1897, pp. 200‑225; idem, GewAichta. iii. 124; F. Cumont, Hypeistos, Brussels, 1897; the literature under Mae9AwANe.
HYRCANLTS. See HAsmoNxexs.
HYSSOP: A herb mentioned in the Bible in connection with purification, and known to have

lobland	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	484
been used from remote antiquity as a condiment and flavoring. Lev. xiv. details its use in purification from leprosy; Num. 8a. 6, 18 shows its use in purification from contact with the dead; Eg. iii. 21, 27 gives the details for its employment at the Passover; in Ps. li. 7 it is a synonym for purification from sin; and Ryssel suspects that the mention in John aia. 29 is intended to recall the resemblance between the Lamb of God and the Passover offering. The identification of the hyssop of the Old Testament has been sought in the most varied kinds of labiated flowers. Unfortunately, in part through a misunderstanding of I Kings iv. 33, it has been taken to be the Hyasopus ofd»alia. The passage in Kings expresses a contrast between a very common and comparatively valueless herb and the costly cedar. Hyssop has been identified with Capparm epdnosa through the resemblance between the Hebrew name 'ezobh and the Arabic name for capparis, 'awf‑eapparit; with the Hebrew should, however; be connected the Arabic zuJ4, the common name of which is za'tar or Origanum Maru. This plant is common enough in Palestine, is valued by the inhabitants for its aroma, serves well as a sprinkler on account of its scaly stems, yet is stiff enough to bear a sponge. R. ZZvrsQND.
$muoos"a:: The most authoritative discussion is by (1. E. Poet in DB, ii. 442, and in his Flora of Syria, Palestine and Sinai, p. 818, Beirut, 1898. Consult also: E. Boissier, Flora orientalis, iv. 553, Geneva, 1887; L. Fonck, in Biblische Studian, v. 1 (1900), 105 .qq., 148: B'B, ii. 2142. Post regards the commentators on the synoptic parallels to John zi:. 29 as astray in their eaplanationa.
HYSTASPES (Hydaspes) : A fictitious Persian sage, the reputed author of a prophecy in circulation in early Christian times, an Oriental appendix to the Christian Sibylline Boobs. Justin is the first to mention these " oracles of Hystaspes," though he gives no key to their contents (ANF, i. 169, 178). But the following data are given by Clement of Alexandria (ANF, ii. 490) : In the second century there was a Greek book that was circulated in Christian and heathen circles under the name of Hystaspes, in which the Christians discovered, even more clearly than in the Sibylline books, references to Christ and to his kingdom; especially to his divine sonship, to the sufferings ordained and still impending for him and his believers from the world and its:rulers; though likewise to the persevering patience of the faithful, and the second coming of their Lord. Lactantius, too, referred twioe to Hystaspes. According to him (ANF, vii. 213), Hystaspes prophesied the downfall of the Roman empire; again (ANF, vii. 215), the tribulations preceding the end of the world; in which he foretold that " the pious and faithful, being separated from the wicked, will stretch forth their hands to heaven with weeping and mourning, and will implore the protection of Jupiter: that Jupiter will look to the earth and hear the voices of men and will destroy the wicked." " All which things," Lactantius added, " are true, except one, that he attributed to Jupiter these things which God will do." There were, furthermore, certain eschatological prognostications adduced in Lactantius (ANF, vii. 255) which were declared to agree with those of Hystaspee, Harmes and the Sibyl, on the one hand, and
with Christian future hopes on the other. According to an unknown writer of the fifth century (ed. by Buresch in his Claros, pp. 87‑128, Leipsic, 1889), the revelations of Hystaspde treated " of the Savior's incarnation."
	Neither Clement nor Justin gives any information
about Hystespea personally; but according to
Lactantius he was a very ancient Median king
before the Trojan war. Despite the confused chro
nology, he was probably confounded with the father
of Darius I., about whom it was told (Ammianus
Marcellinus, XXIII., vi. 32,33) that, he learned
among the Brahmins the laws of the movement of
the world and the constellations, together with
his religious practises, which he then communicated
to his Magi. At all events, it is reasonable to, assume
that the " oracles of Hystaepes " were bsed on
reminiscences of Persian religious history and doc
trine. The doctrines of Zoroastrianism as to the oon
fiict between Ormazd and Ahrimsn; as to the
grievous tribulations in the last times; as to the ap
pearing of the Soahyant, " savior," and his millennial
kingdom; as to the great universal conflagration,
and the ultimate reign of peace‑‑all 'these might
well have impressed a Christian of the first centuries
as being so many echoes of Christian ideas. For
that matter, indeed, even Zoroaster was regarded
as a prophet of Christ; and both an apocalypse
and some alleged mystic or cryptic books were
designated as " Zoroastrian " (Harnaek, Iritteratur,
i.163,173, 862, 932). Possibly; again (cf. Harnack),
we have to deal with an originally Jewish writing.
The limited information on the subject is, unfor
tunately, insufficient for shaping a definitive verdict
as to the origin, contents, form, and purpose of
the " oracles." 	G. KNOanR.
BrswoasAmy: Scharer, Geschicbte, iii. 460‑M, Eng. transl. II., iii. 292‑294 (gives the literature); E. Kuhn, Eire soroostrische Wsusapunp in drristlichern Gewands, in Pestprvss an Rudolf van Both, p. 217, Stuttgart, 1893; DCB, iii. 189; Neander, Christian Church, 9. 178.
HYVERNAT, EUGENE XAVIER LOUIS: French Roman Catholic; b. at St. Julien‑en‑Jarrf (7 m. n.e. of St. Etienne), Loire, June 30, 1858. He was educated at the Petit S6minaire de St. Jean, Lyons (bachellier & lettres, University of Lyons, 1876), S6minaire de St. Sulpioe, Issy (1877‑79), and S6minaire de St. Sulpice, Paris (1879‑82): He was then chaplain of San Luigi de' Franceei, Rome, in 18821885, and interpreter of Oriental languages for the Propaganda, Rome, in 188"9, as well as professor of Assyriology and Egyptology in the Pontificio Seminario Romano, Rome, in 1885‑88. In 1888‑89 he was in Armenia as chief of a scientific mission of the French government. Since 1889 he has been chief of the department of Semitic and Egyptian literatures in the Catholic University of America, Washington, D. C. Besides his work as editor of the Coptic portion of the Corpus Scriptorum ChrWianorum Orientalitsm, he has written Los Ades des martyrs de 1'Egypte tins do# manuscrits ooptea do la btWiothaqua roaticans d du muses Bor*, i. (Paris, 1887);. Album de psUographie arpte pourr servir d l'intmdts;tion paUOgmphiqne des aetea des martyrs de i'Egypte (1888); and Du Caucase au goVe peraique, a travera d'Armirue, Is Kurdistan.d la He'sopoaamis (in collaboration with P. MUller,Silonis, 1892).

485	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
133AS (Syr. Yehtba, generally shortened into HtbQ, ‑ Donatus) : Bishop of Edema, succeeding Rabulas (q.v.) in 435; d. Oct. 28, 457. His election and retention of his office till the Second Synod of Ephesus shows that he must have been an influential person; for the views of the school of Antioch, with which he aided, were then dealfning. He was accused before the patriarch Produs and the emperor Theodosius II. of spreading the Nestorian heresy in all the Orient by means of the writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia, which, with two other Edemenes, Cumas and Probus, he .translated into Syriac. Consultations in Tyre and Berytus led to a friendly understanding on Feb. 25, 449, but on Aug. 22 of the same year Ibas was deposed by the " Robber Synod " of Ephesus. The Council of Chaloedon recognized his orthodoxy on Oct. 28, 481, and restored him to his office. During 449‑451 he was replaced by Nonnus, who became his successor. A letter of Ibas to Maria, partly preserved in Greek translation in the acts of the Council of Chaloedon (Mansi, Concilia, vii. 241), is important for the history of Nestorianism and the views of the author. The Emperor Justinian and the Fifth Synod. of Constantinople (553) condemned it as one of the three chapters (see Ta=n CHAPTER CoxmnovEMr), but did not object to the orthodoxy of Ibas. The Jaoobites do not recognize him. E. NasThm.
BnswoaHAPHT: J. S. Aesemanf, Bibliogsaa orientaie, L 200, iii. 1, p. 85, Rome, 1719‑28; Acts of the Soopnd Coandg of EPheAus, ed. S. G. F. Perry. Oxford, 1878, Eng. transl:, Dartford, 1877; Hallier, in TU, ix. 1 (1892); J. B. Chabot, L'Pcols de Nisibe, in JA, lzzv (1890); R. Duval, La Lit. thaftre syriaqw, Paris, 1900; F. X. E. Albert, The School qfNisibie, in Catholic Uniroemity Bulletin, nL 2, pp. 180181; DCB, iii. 192‑198 (quite full).
IBN EZRA. See ABEN EZBA.
ICARIA.	See CommomsM, II., 7.
ICELAND. [The island of Iceland, situated in the North Atlantic Ocean and belonging to Den‑
mark, is about 600 miles west of Nor
	The First	way, 550 miles northwest of Scotland,
	Christians.	and 225 miles southeast of Greenland.
		The extent from north to south is about
225 miles, from east to west 300 miles; area, a
little more than 40,000. square miles; population
(1901), 78,489; the capital is Reikiavik]. The first
Norse settlers (after 870) found Christian Irish
hermits already in the island, and among the colo
nists there were some at least nominal Christians.
They came to Iceland mostly by way of the British
Ides, where they became acquainted with Chris
tianity, and where many of them for practical
reasons accepted baptism, or at least, allowed them
selves to be signed with the cross. These Christians,
however, during the first century of Icelandic
history, did not constitute a compact party, nor
was their religion recognized by the state. The
first missionary effort was made by Thorvaldr
Kodransson Vidforli (°' the Far‑Traveled "), in 981,
but the attempt miscarried and Thorvaldr and his
associate, a Saxon cleric named Frederick, were
outlawed and, in 986, left the island. A systematic
conversion of the islanders to Christianity took place under the Norwegian king, Olaf Tiyggvason, who devoted the five years of his reign (995‑1000) almost exclusively to the introduction of the new religion into Norway and its " daughter " lands (Iceland, Shetland and Faroe Islands, Greenland). After ineffectual attempts on the part of Stefnir Thorgihson, there came to Iceland, under commission by King Olaf, the Saxon priest Thankbrandr, in 997. In spite of a good measure of success, be, too, returned to Norway in 999, convinced that the Icelanders were never to be converted to Christianity. Nevertheless, the Christian party in Ice. land was materially strengthened. Upon the report brought back by his commissioner, Olaf was fain to have all the Icelanders in Norway that were still heathen put to death; but he desisted from his purpose when the Christian Icelanders Gisurr and Hjalti Skeggiason promised him to undertake a mission to their countrymen. They went to Iceland in the year 1000, and after severe conflict, won the victory for Christianity.
Houses of worship, like heathen temples, were built entirely by private persons. Whoever would might build a house of God, but he had
Character‑ also to provide for the clergyman: So
istics and he either became a clergyman himself
Difficulties or hired one, who was treated quite
of the Early as a servant of the proprietor. In the
	Church.	earliest period the priests were mostly
		foreigners: German, English, or Irish.
In 1058 Iceland received its first native bishop,
Isleif, who had no fixed income, but was constrained
to locate his see at Skalholt, his ancestral estate,
In this way Skalholt became the episcopal residence
of the island, and was fixed there by Isleif'e son and
successor in office, Gizurr, who endowed the bishop
ric with the estate, that the bishop might thence.
forth have a fixed see and an established fund.
Furthermore, in 1097, and on the German plan,
Gisurr instituted the tithe system in Iceland. The
extent of the island also led, under Gizurr, to the
creation of a second episcopal see; the bishopric
of H61ar was founded, for the North, whose first
bishop was Jon Ogmundarson. The island was
made suffragan to the archdiocese of Lund (from
1103). Owing to the dependence of the bishop and
the priests upon the State and upon private persons,
the clergy lapsed into worldliness, and fell even
tually into the greatest immorality and ignorance.
The medieval Church in Iceland until about 1150
stands in abrupt contrast to the Church in other
parts of the West; celibacy did not prevail; lay
patronage was everywhere the rule; the Church
had no legislative power, and the clergy were sub
ject to the temporal law and not exempt from
taxation.
Dating from 1152, Iceland was suffragan to the archdiocese of Nidaros (Trondhjem). Now began a conflict between Church and State which evoked the wildest turmoil, and finally compelled the archbishop of Nidaros to draw. the reins tighter, and to force Norwegian bishops upon the island

Iceland	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	438
Idealism
(c. 1238). These, naturally, were doubly energetic
in their advocacy of the canon law, and above all
		they antagonized lay patronage.
	Conflict	From the middle of the thirteenth
	between century, most of the Icelandic bishops
	Church	were foreigners. However, the few
and State; native ones labored zealously in the
Degeneracy. spirit of the metropolitan. The conflict
		between Church and State flamed up
with especial vehemence when, in 1275, Bishop Arni
Thorlaksson of Skalholt attempted to carry the
new church law, thoroughly based on the canon
law, through the Alting (the Icelandic legislative
assembly). By the introduction of this new church
law, the ecclesiastical power triumphed over the
temporal, and the authority of the spirituality was
on a like footing with that in other countries of the
West. But by the same process the great national
interest which the clergy had exhibited in earlier
times vanished. From the earliest times, in fact,
there had flourished not only at the episcopal sees,
but also about a number of priestly residences,
schools of science and especially of national history.
Priests like Saemundr and Ari were at the same time
students of the history of Iceland. These priestly
schools were supplemented by schools in connection
with the cloisters. The oldest cloister of Iceland
is the Benedictine at Thingeyrar, founded in 1133,
and this was followed by six more for monks and
two for nuns, all founded by the Benedictine and
Augustinian orders. The stirring intellectual in
dustry of the clergy, which prevailed in the island
until about the middle of the thirteenth century,
now began to ‑cease. Stress was laid on externals,
and people were generally satisfied if the layman
knew his Credo and Paternoster, and perchance the
Ave Maria. Conduct was for the most part dis
regarded by the clergy, who shut their eyes to
superstition and immorality, and became them
selves avaricious and immoral. An improvement
did not set in until the Icelanders had absorbed the
spirit of the Lutheran doctrine in " flesh and blood."
	The Reformation, like the introduction of Chris
tianity, in Iceland was helped forward by royal
		mandate. From the fourteenth cen
The Refor‑ tury the island, along with Norway,
	mation.	had accrued to Denmark. After Chris
		tian III., in 1536, had adopted Lu
ther's doctrine in his dominion proper, he labored
zealously to advance the same in Iceland as well.
A number of clergymen were already on the ground
who had learned to know the new doctrine, but they
met with vehement opposition on the part of the
Icelandic bishops and the Icelandic people. Among
them was Oddr Gottskalksson, who rendered into
Icelandic the New Testament according to Luther's
translation. A command of King Christian III.
was read aloud in the Alting, to the effect that the
new church r6gime should be adopted in the island,
but Bishop Jon Arason of Holar and the people of
the North, as well as many in the diocese of Skal
holt, stayed loyally papal. Only after these men
were out of the way was the opposition broken.
At the Alting of 1551 the Danish church system
was recognized as binding for all Iceland. Most of
the church and cloister estates were confiscated
by Danish officials for the king; church revenues, such as the episcopal tithes, likewise flowed into the royal exchequer. By this process the incomes of the clergy, who were elected by the congregation and inducted by the government, became somewhat meager. There consequently ensued a dearth of suitable preachers, and not infrequently one pastor would assume charge of several parishes combined. At the head of these clergymen stood the bishops of Holar and Skalholt, likewise designated by the Danish king. Of the episcopal sees, that of Holar came to an end in 1801, whereas, prior to that event, the bishopric of Skalholt had been transferred to the present capital, Reikiavik. Moreover, the immorality among laity and clergy remained very much the same as of old. For this reason the adherents of the new doctrine deported themselves with a fanaticism that calls to mind the uprising of the Anabaptists. Cloisters were destroyed, churches plundered, and many valuable literary treasures were obliterated. .Hence the introduction of the Reformation has been repeatedly described by the Icelanders themselves as a national misfortune. Only in the course of the seventeenth century did Luther's spirit penetrate deeper into the hearts of the people; by which time, thanks to the fostering of the art of printing (introduced about 1550), and the founding of the Latin schools at Holar (1552) and Skalholt (1553), scientific interest had been awakened anew. No inconsiderable influence in this direction had also been contributed by Bishop Gudbrandur Thorlti,ksson of Holar, who published, in 1584, the first complete translation of the Bible in the mother tongue, and issued several collections of good spiritual hymns. The devotional poetry inaugurated by Gudbrandur achieved its crowning success about one hundred years later, in the passion psalms of Hallgrimur Pjetursson.
Iceland is now thoroughly Protestant, although according to the law of the year 1874, there prevails
complete freedom of belief. All atPresent tempts to reinstate Roman CatholConditions. icism in the island have miscarried.
	At the head of the church system
stands the bishop of Reikiavik, who supervises the
common‑school system. The country is divided
into twenty church districts, each directed by a
superintendent. There are 141 parishes in Iceland,
comprising 299 churches. The junior clergy are
trained in the theological school at Reikiavik, where
they are accustomed to spend three years after
completing the gymnasium course, and are then
practically inducted into the pastoral office by an
older clergyman. 	E. MOGg.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A very rich list of Icelandic literature and of books about Iceland is given in the British Museum Catalogue, where is found also a list of the " Icelandic postReformation Bishops." Sources for study are: Area Isldnderbuch, ed. W. Golther, Halle, 1892; Biskupas6gur, 2 vols., Copenhagen, 1858‑78; Sturlunga Saga, ed. G. Vigfusson, 2 vols., Oxford, 1878; Diplomatarium Ialandicum, vols. i.‑viii., Copenhagen, 1857‑1908; important contents are in the Heimakringla of Snorri, ed. F. Jonsson, Copenhagen, 1893‑1901. The oldest Christian statutes are in theGrhgfis, ed. with preface, V. Finxn, 3 vols., Copenhagen, 1850‑83. For later times, of service are: Biskupa annalar ions Egilssonar, ed. J. Sigurdson, i. 15‑136, Safn til Sbgu Islands; and Annalar Bjiirns a Skardsa (1400‑1645),

487	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Iceland
2 vols., Hrappseym, 1774‑75. Consult further: Finnur Johannsaus, Hiet. eccl. Islandia=, 4 vols., Copenhagen, 1772‑78; J. Espolin, Islands arbaekur (1263‑1832), 12 vols., ib., 1824‑55; P. Petureson, Hist. awl. Islandfa (1740‑1840), ib., 1841; P. A. Munch, Dot Norake Folks Historie, 6 vols., Christiania, 1852‑63; K. Maurer, Die Bekehrung des norwegisehen Stammes rum Christentum, 2 vols., Munich, 1855‑58; idem, Island von seiner erden Entdeekung bis rum Untergang des Freistaates, ib., 1874; J. E. W. Sam Udsigt over den norske Historie, 4 vols., Christiania. 1873‑91; A. D. Jorgensen, Den nordisks Kirkes Grundlteggelse, 2 vols., Copenhagen, 1874‑76; C. A. V. Conybeare, Iceland; its PlaceintheHist. of European Inatitutions, London, 1877; Letitia M. Macooll, The Story of Iceland, ib. 1887; Stories of the Bishops of Iceland 10661330, ib. 1895; The Book of as Settlement of Iceland, transl. by T. Ellwood, Kendal, 1898; L‑ Livre des Islandais du prltre Ari le Savant, Lidge, 1898; Bjorn Olsen, Um Kriatnitbkuna arid 1,000, Reikiavik, 1900; P. Herrmann, Island in Verganpenheit dnd Gepenwart, Leipsie, 1907.
ICON. See EASTERN CHURCH, III., § 6.
ICONOCLASM, ICONOCLAST. See IMAGES AND ImAGE‑WoRsHIP, II., §§ 2‑3.
ICONOSTASIS, aVloo‑nes'ta‑sis: In the Eastern Church, a screen, generally decorated with pictures, which stands before the altar and conceals it. From the first, it was customary in the Christian Church to mark off the bema by rails, but, these being very
I, Various Types of Idealism. IL German Idealism. The Movement Characterised (§ 1). Leibnitz and the Pietists (§ 2). Kant's Transcendentalism (§ 3). Lessing, Herder, and Others (§ 4). Goethe, Schiller, and Others (§ 5).
I. Various Types of Idealism: In metaphysics idealism, as the opposite of materialism (q.v.), is the doctrine that ultimate reality is of the nature of mind, or thought‑content; in epistemology it is the view that knowledge is merely subjective, i.e., limited to ideas and states of mind. The terns is also employed in art, where it denotes an effort to realize the highest types of natural objects by eliminating all defects peculiar to individual specimens. In its popular acceptation idealism represents an imaginative treatment of subjects and a striving after perfection. Plato was the earliest representative of metaphysical idealism. Dissenting from the view of Heraclitus that everything is in a state of flux and flow, he formulated, in the interest of ethics, his doctrine of eternal unchanging ideas. These ideas, or incorporeal essences, exist objectively in a supersensuous world and form the background and basis of the ever‑changing phenomenal world. Reality is not inherent in the individual object, as, for instance, a horse or a tree, but in the general idea of horse or tree. The highest idea is the idea of the Good‑‑a self‑realizing end.
In modern philosophy at least three kinds of metaphysical idealism are distinguished, viz., subjective idealism, objective idealism, and absolute idealism. The first is represented by Fichte, who found the source of the object, or external world, in a universal subject or ego. Starting with this universal ego he regarded its antithesis, the nonego, which is created by the ego, as an obstacle
low, the altar was not hidden until pillars were
placed before it and curtains were used. The
iconostasis became more and more frequent as the
Greek service increased in symbolism. Thus orig
inated the modern templon, which is generally a
latticed screen, more or less gilded, with three doors,
the middle and largest of which is called the royal
and opens toward the altar. This screen is deo
orated with pictures,, and hence derives its name
(Gk. eikonoatasis, " picture‑place "). The pictures
are usually four in number, one representing the
saint in whose honor the church is dedicated; the
second representing Mary; the third Christ; and
the fourth John the Baptist They are impressive,
are painted on a gold background, are often gor
geously set with jewels or paste, and are brightly
illuminated by the lights and lamps placed or sus
pended before them. The so‑called " Painters'
Book of Mt. Athos " (2d ed., Athens, 1885) gives
technical directions for the production of these
screens. 	PHILIPP MEYER.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Symeon of Thessalonica, Heel ro'v ayiov vao‑v, in MPG, clv.; Nicholas of Bulgaria, sarftnoLc iepa, Venice, 1681; H. Brockhaus, Die Kunst in den AtkosKl6stern, Leipsic, 1891.
IDEALISM.
Early Views of Fichte and Schelling ($ 6).
Romanticism (§ 7).
Later Views of Fichte and Schelling (§ 8).
Hegel's system (§ 9).
Sehleiermacher (§ 10).
Herbert (§ 11). Schopenhauer (§ 12).1 Idealism in the Positive Sciences (§ 13).
III. English and Amerioan~Idealism. Early Phases (§ 1). _ Modern Idealism (§ 2).
necessary to the realization of the intelligent and ethical self. The ego (not the phenomenal self, but the universal self common to all finite selves) sets up an object as a limit, but only to transcend it, thus giving free play to its own activity. This is done in the successive stages of knowledge, beginning with sensation and ending with moral perception. Fichte's thought is ethical, and in his view nature exists only as material for the realization of duty. Since his system describes what ought to be, rather than what is, he called it practical idealism. If all limiting non‑egos, including that of finitude, could be actually transcended, the universal self then attained to would be God. The term objective idealism may be applied to any system of metaphysics that recognizes a spiritual reality existing independent of a conscious subject (Plato, Leibnitz, Herbart, etc.); but this term has usually been reserved to describe.the system of Schelling. By combining Fichte's doctrine of the universal ego with the Spinozistio idea of a neutral basis of all existence, Schelling developed his system of identity. In the Absolute object and subject, the‑real,and the ideal, nature and spirit, are identical. This original undifferentiated unity, which is perceived by intellectual intuition, breaks up into the polar opposites of object and subject, nature and spirit, negative or positive being. Though the subjective and objective phases of being are always coexistent in the phenomenal world, in pronsciousness there is a preponderance of the subjective, while in nature,

xacul.m	. THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	488
the negative pole of being, there is a preponderance of the objective. Hegel is the originator and greatest representative of absolute idealism. According to this metaphysical doctrine, existence is not only spiritual, but it is a single, all‑inclusive (therefore absolute), self‑conscious being, which manifests itself as nature and spirit. In this view phenomena are neither subjective products, nor copies, nor effects, of a transcendent reality, but are parts of the living reality itself. They are phenomena per se, and exist objectively as the thoughtcontent of the absolute mind, or Absolute Idea, to use Hegel's expression. The phenomenal world, therefore, is the real world, and there is no other world. With Hegel existence is rational throughout; and, indeed, the entire process of history is only the self‑unfolding of the one universal divine reason. Absolute idealism has now almost completely vanished from German speculation, though it has gained a strong foothold in English and American thought. Prominent representatives of the doctrine are F. H. Bradley and Joaiah I1,Oy08.
	In its epistemologicalreference idealism is the
opposite of realism. While the realist asserts that
we have knowledge of an external reality, the ideal
ist maintains that we can know only phenomena
or ideas in the sense of Locke. If the idealist denies
the existence of such an external reality,, holding
that ideas are only modifications of the mind, he
becomes a subjective idealist in the epistemologi
cal sense. If he be consistent, he will deny the
existence of other persons than himself and become
a solipsist; for in his view such persons could exist
only as ideas in consciousness. Perhaps the nearest
approach to such a view was made by Bishop
Berkeley, who held, though not consistently, that
esse is percipi. If the idealist admits that phe
nomena are not purely subjective, that they have a
certain problematical existence, he becomes a cos
mothetic idealist. Descartes, Kant, and most
English philosophers have been coemothetic ideal
ists. 	HUHzRT EvANs.
Il. German Idealism: By German Idealism is meant that phase of intellectual life that had its
origin in the Enlightenment (q.v.), as i. The modified by German conditions. Eng
	!love‑	lish and French representatives of the
went Char‑ Enlightenment, giving precedence to
acterlze& sensation, had become empiricists and
skeptics. They viewed the world as a great mechanism, adopted hedonism as their ethics, and interpreted history from a subjectiveoritical point of view. The situation in Germany was just the reverse. There thought was given precedence over sensation; and, instead of empiricism, idealism was dominant. Ethics was based upon norms of universal validity, instead of upon individual whim; history was interpreted genetically as a rational progress; and for the mechanical conception of the world the organic, or dynamic, view was substituted. Nature was seen to be spiritual, as well as spatial, and was interpreted teleologically. In the hands of Jacobi and Kant Hume's skepticism became the weapon that destroyed the influence of empiricism. and thus paved the way for idealism. For the Germans, at least, Rousseau's
radicalism brought into question the value of the culture‑ideals of the Enlightenment, and impelled them to seek the basis of culture in the creative power of the mind. For the philosopher German idealism usually means the philosophy of Kant and his immediate followers, while for the historisu of literature it may mean little more than the personality of Goethe; and it is not unusual to characterize the literary aspect of the movement as neo‑Humanism. However, there is a unity in the movement that cannot be ignored; and all its varied manifestations, whether in science, philosophy, literature, art, or, social life, are properly treated under the title " German Idealism."
Several factors contributed to give the Enlightenment in Germany its peculiarly independent
character; but notable was the ins. Leibnitz fluence of Leibnitz, and that of the
and the Pietists. Leibnitz was an essentially Pietists. religious personality, and in trans‑
planting the spirit of the Enlightenment into Germany he imparted to it that distinctively ethical and religious flavor which became characteristic of German Idealism: It was he who was chiefly instrumental in substituting the teleological for the mechanical view of nature. He transformed the atoms of the materialists into monads, or psychical entities, and substituted for natural law his theory of preestablished harmony. He asserted the absolute worth of the individual against the. destructive monism of Spinoza, and saw in the progress of history a movement of the monads toward some divine end. On the one hand, he made the development of materialism and skepticism impossible in Germany, and, on the other hand, he brought about the teleological explanation of the history of the univerbe as a whole. The teleological and idealistic tendencies of Leibnitz were strengthened through Pietism (q.v.). Klopstock, Herder; Jacobi, Goethe, and Jean Paul, all betray in their works the Pietistic influence.
The conceptual framework of German Idealism was provided by Immanuel Kant (q.v.), who was
the first to reconcile the conflicting 3. Kant's empirical and rationalistic elements of
Tranacen‑ the prevailing dogmatic philosophy.
dentalism With one stroke he secured for mind
priority over nature, and yet without endangering in the least the validity of the principles of scientific investigation; and, by giving the primacy to the practical reason, he placed religion and ethics on a sure footing and broke the ban of rationalism. In the first instance Kant's work was purely epistemological. He made it particularly his problem to rescue natural science front the (epistemological) skepticism of Hume, and then to rescue religion from rationalism. It was Kant who utterly demolished the rationalistic arguments of Anselm, Descartes, and others, for the existence of God. Science is valid, but it has to do only with phenomena. This phenomenal world, however, is produced a priori by the activity of consciousness, reacting upon that external reality whose nature cannot be known. The very fact that the world as we know it is only the sum total of phenomena accounts for the constancy of experience, and. is

489	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
the basis of the universal validity of certain principles of explanation. Space and time, and the categories of the understanding are subjective, ideal. Taken together they form a mold in which we shape the impressions coming from the transcendent reality. Thus, the principles of science and the laws of nature are universally valid because they are in the subject, not in the object. Knowledge of ultimate reality comes through the practical reason, particularly through the a priori moral, law in us. Kant's idea of inner freedom became the inspiration of the creative genius. The phase of German Idealism manifested in the art and poetry of the period has been called esthetic‑ethical idealism. The leaders of this artistic movement, who really popularized idealism and made it part of the life of the time, were not intent upon solving the old philosophical problems. For conceptual thought they substituted the creative imagination:
Klopstock and Wieland mark the turning‑point toward idealism, though their oontempotary,
Leasing, was the first representative of
4. Leasing, the movement to liberate himself comHerder, pletely from conventional theology and
and Others, all that was arbitrary and external in German culture and find in the inner esthetic and ethical development of the mind the ideal to be followed. Idealism in the sense in which the word is here used became even more effective in the work of Herder., His break with the Enlightenment was complete. In his large application of the idealistic method to the interpretation of science, art, and history, he practically reformed all the intellectual sciences. He, too, proceeded from an analysis of the poetic and artistic impulse, and in the creative activity of the mind he found the key to ethics, esthetics, and religion. From this subjective, or idealistic, view‑point he saw the panorama of history as a spiritualistic development. If Leming's great work was to introduce idealism into esthetics, particularly the esthetics of dramatic poetry, Herder's greatest service to the idealistic cause was his application of idealism, as a method, to the interpretation of history: What Wieland, Leasing, and others had done for poetic art, this Winckelmann did for plastic art. He too found in the conception of the free creative mind the basis of ethics, esthetics, and religion.
The great representatives of the idealistic type of mind in German poetry were Goethe and Schiller.
Against the exclusive claims of the
g. Goethe, esthetic view of nature, and a morality
Schiller, essentially classical, Goethe emphasised
tad Others. the moral and religious worth of the individual, thus approaching the rigorous ethical. teachings of Kant. Schiller combined the epistemology of Kant with the pantheism of Goethe. With him esthetic values were the chief types of intellectual norms; and his ethics and religion might be regarded as a phase of esthetics. However, the esthetic harmony that he found in the universe reacted on his ethical and religious nature; and, despite his esthetic view‑point, he must be classed with Kant and Fichte as one of the great moral ,teachers of Germany. Schiller's only ooasistent follower was Wilhelm von Humboldt,
who was instrumental in bringing about the neoHumanistic reform, on the basis of the new esthetioethical culture. Jean Paul was a brilliant representative of the anti‑classical type of idealism.
The basis of the eathetio‑ethical movement was Kant's transcendental idealism; but, while Kant had made the idealistic position seem,
6. Early he had not accounted for the reality of
Views of the world of nature, with all that it
Fichte and means to the poet as the expression of Schelling. some divine purpose. In order to get at the bottom of the matter it was felt that the human consciousness as a starting‑point would have to be abandoned and an absolute consciousness posited, from which reality could be deduced in a manner analogous to that employed by Kant for human consciousness. The first to attempt such a comprehensive solution of the problem was Johann Gottlieb Fichte (q.v.). Starting from Kant's idealistic position he endeavored to overcome the dualism involved in Kant's doctrine of a " thing in itself " by bringing this mysterious reality into consciousness. To do this he dropped the Kpatian distinction between the practical and the theoretioal reason, and conceived of the absolute mind, or ego, as the moral reason. In his view all existence is psychical, and the human mind is only a manifestation of the absolute ego. Thus, the last trace of a transcendent reality is obliterated. The absolute ego has divided itself into a large number of relative egos, and through these it is moving progressively toward its own destiny. The core of reality lies in human personality, in the finite mind, but this is caught up in an endless process of development; and; hence, in order to transcend his own consciousness and explain the progress of history, with reference to the past and the future, the philosopher must look at existence from the point of view of the absolute ego. In this way Fichte developed his subjective idealism, bringing into this scheme of idealistic evolution every phase of human experience. Under his treatment ethiae, sociology, esthetics, and religion become a part of the history of the Absolute. The dualism between mind and nature be overcame by dissolving nature in mind. Schelling, starting from the Kant‑Fichte point of view, extended the conception of the Absolute to objective nature. His system may be char aeterized as a sort of spirituslized pantheism. The world is a continuous process from inorganic unconscious nature to organic conscious nature, and then from organic nature back to inorganic nature.. 'While in man the Absolute reaches consciousness, nature remains essentially objective, but not in a materialistic sense, of course. Nature with Schelling is a system of spiritual forces similar to the monads of Leibnitz. Extending to the absolute consciousness the view that in consciousness subject and object are identical, Schelling worked out his so‑called Idemitdtsphz'loaophie. The sum total of existence then becomes the Absolute as perceived by itself. Naturally all distinctions and qualities, which are created by a finite relational consoiousnesa, disappear in this self‑contemplation of the Absolute by itself, and existence become, neutral: If Fichte had interpreted existence ethically, 8ohel.

Idealism	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	440
ling interprets it esthetically. While with Fichte the Absolute distributes himself in finite minds in order to work out his own moral development, with Schelling the Absolute comes to consciousness in man in order that man may enjoy the esthetic contemplation of the unity of mind and ,nature, the identity of mind with its sensuous content.
The immediate result of the metaphysical systems of Fichte and Schelling was that revival of poetic production and criticism known as
y. Roman‑ Romanticism, which sprang from the
	ticism.	school of Goethe and Schiller. The
		union of poesy with the metaphysical,
or religious, view of life became a recognized prin
ciple of art; and it was this combination that secured
for idealism the final triumph over the narrow
naturalism and rationalism of the Enlightenment.
Romanticism brought to light the connection of
poetry with Christianity. Just as Schiller had taken
Kant's epistemology as a basis for the explanation
of the relation of esthetics to ethics, so now the
Kantian position was utilized to explain the rela
tion of religion to esthetics. Thus, from Kant's
idealism came a new analysis of religion; illuminating
with a new light the problems of culture. Roman
ticism gave breadth and depth to the historical
view and dissolved into thin air those time‑worn
conceptions of a "law of nature," " common sense,"
and innate norms of the reason, just as formerly the
Enlightenment had disposed of the idea of a super
natural, ecclesiastical norm, which rested upon
these conceptions. The leading spirits in the
romantic movement were the two Schlegels, though
Fichte, Schleiermacher, Hegel, Schelling, Novalis,
and many others took a part in it. Out of Roman
ticism sprang a new impulse for systematic thinking;
and through the political catastrophes of the time
and the moral earnestness of the intellectual leaders,
idealistic speculation was forced to apply its norms
to practical social problems.
The first to feel the pressure of the realistio‑historical problems were the founders of metaphysical idealism, Fichte and Schelling. Both
& Later betray the influence of Schleiermacher.
Views of Realizing the inadequacy of their phi‑
Fichte and losophy to meet practical needs, they
	ScheMng.	now sought an ethical and religious
		ideal which should unify the concrete
content of spiritual life and at the same time be a
necessary deduction from the metaphysical back
ground of existence. Fichte retained his idea of the
moral state as the consummation of the historical
process, but he no longer considered this state
merely as a postulate of progressive freedom, but
as a concrete civilized state, in which all members
of society share in the blessings of religion, morality,
and art. In this remodeled view of Fichte religion
is dominant; for he finds that only religious faith
makes possible the realization of the moral idea,
and thus the reality of the external world. The
world is ethical. It is religious faith that gives an
ultimate aim to ethical conduct, that makes possible
a union of the empirical ego with its metaphysical
basis, i.e., God. His ethics is thus deprived of its
formal character as an endless progress and given
a definite aim. This ethical and religious view
necessitates a modification of his metaphysics. The background of empirical consciousness is no longer an endless progression of the Absolute, but a fixed and unchanging divine being. In this being the empirical ego has its, origin, and through ethical conduct it returns to its source. Similarly, in view of moral and esthetic needs, Schelling was forced to change his views.. In applying the principle of identity he had destroyed all the manifold variety of existence, and thus its reality; and in describing the universe as a qualityless neutrum he had only caricatured the Absolute. His philosophy was belied by every phase of experience. Just as Fichte, so Schelling sought in religion the key to the origin and destiny of man. The phenomenal world takes its rise in the absolute, self‑determined will of God, and, on account of its origin, it necessarily works, its way up to God again. This movement back to God is a religious progress, through mythology, or natural religion, up to Christianity, at which stage the union of man with God takes place. Thus, Christianity, whose dogmas are interpreted evolutionistically by Schelling, becomes the end and purpose of history; and it is upon Christianity that ethics, politics, and esthetics are to be based.
If Fichte and Schelling had endeavored to find the purpose of existence in some concrete content, say the moral state, or the Christian g. Hegel's religion, deducing this content from
	System.	the conception of God, Hegel solved
		the problem by a systematic and
logical exploitation of the conception of evolution,
which with him was both a constituent and a teleo
logical principle. The conception had been variously
and obscurely employed by Leibnitz, Lessing, Kant,
Herder, Goethe, Schiller, and F. Schlegel. Then,
on the basis of Kant's .transcendental deduction,
Fichte and Schelling interpreted the process of
development in a purely idealistic manner as the
unconscious opposition of the Absolute to itself,
and the conscious and gradual removal of this
opposition by self‑absorption, the double process
following necessarily from the very nature of mind.
Hegel makes the impulse of the absolute mind a
gradual and self‑determined process, by which the
Absolute lifts itself from mere possibility and
actuality to conscious, free, and necessary possession.
Viewed cub specie aternitatia the whole process is
timeless, and only to a finite mind does it appear as
an endless procession in time and space. However,
it is just in this finite view that the ethical, esthetic,
and religious character of Hegel's philosophy man
ifests itself. In the finite consciousness there is a
separation of the natural, the actual, and the em
pirical from the spiritual, the free, and the necessary.
In the unity reached by overcoming this divoroe
ment of the finite from the infinite lies religious
blessedness, perfect beauty, and moral freedom.
Every phase and stage of this inner teleological
development is necessary to the life of the Absolute,
and all variety in finite experience is preserved in
the higher unity. Nothing is lost. Instead of being
an undifferentiated substance, or a qualityless
neutrum, the Absolute is the living, vital reality
that manifests itself in human experience. This

441	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
reality is spiritual, and the guiding principle of its upward movement is the fulfilment of its own divine purpose, which is religious, ethical, esthetic. Religion and ethics are thus a necessary product of the self‑explication of the Absolute, or God.
The religious turn that idealistic metaphysics had taken was due directly, or indirectly, to the
influence of Schleiermacher, the most ro. Schleier‑ specifically religious of all the great
macher. philosophers. In his own system be
made use of the religious consciousness in an original and striking manner to solve the practical and theoretical problems growing out of Kant's critical philosophy. In the field of ethics he was the most conspicuous exponent of German idealism. What Hegel had deduced from the Absolute by his application of the conception of development, Schleiermacher, following the critical method of Kant, sought to attain by an analysis of empirical consciousness. In its theoretical attitude toward being, consciousness is receptive and seeks to combine the data of sense into the highest possible conceptual unity; in its practical attitude consciousness is active and transfers the aim of reason from the world of sense to the world of conscious freedom. However, in both cases thought and being always remain separate for the finite understanding. On the other hand, that essential unity of reality which makes possible any relation of thought to being, such as volition to being, is present in religious feeling. While Hegel had employed a deductive, dialectical method to show that all being is in God, Schleiermacher reached this unity by an inductive process, which was guided by feeling, instead of by pure reason. Instead of starting with a timeless and apacelcss Absolute, he started with the phenomenal world. His task was to analyze the reason that dominates the actual world of history, to bring to light its various purposes, combine them into a totality representing the absolute divine purpose of the universe, the summum bonum, and to show that the power to realize this ideal lies in religious consciousness. Schleiermacher's practical religious interests now took him into the field of theology. For his religious philosophy see SCHLEIERMACHER, FRIEDRICH ERNST DANIEL.
Herbart stuck even more closely to the Kantian view‑point, but, like other followers of Kant, he
sought to eliminate the conception of ii. Herbart. an unknowable reality, and press for‑
ward to the ultimate nature of things. He adopted Kant's analysis of consciousness, but in a psychological sense, and found that the transcendental reality consists of a plurality of simple substances. These he called " reals." They are psychical in nature and analogous to the monads of Leibnitz. Through their relations to one another and to human consciousness the phenomenal world is brought into existence; and from their teleological cooperation Herbart deduces a divine, creative intelligence, analogous to the Monadmonadum of Leibnitz, thus opposing sharply current poetic naturalism and Spinozism. Herbart's practical and, social philosophy, which is based upon the judments of the soul as to the relations of the " reals " to each other, particularly upon
judgments expressing like or dislike, also tends toward rationalism. On account of the method employed here, Herbart calls the result esthetics, to which he subordinates ethics. In his view the ideal society Would be one based upon the insight and activity of the educated, and upon the rational education of youth, and realizing in its organization the natural and fundamental ethical ideas. Herbert thus became not only a reformer of psychology, but of pedagogy as well.
The last great representative of German Idealism in systematic philosophy was Schopenhauer. While with him the phenomenal world is
is. Schop. ideal, i.e., existing only as a subjective
	enhauer.	idea, its objective basis is not a " thing
		in itself," as Kant taught, but a univer
sal will. This Schopenhaugr interprets as a blind,
illogical, aimless impulse, without any original
ethical tendency whatsoever. Through the blind
impulse of this world‑will arises human intelligence
and the phenomenal world. History loses all tel
eological significance and becomes an irrational
and endless progression. Ethics, therefore, as the
philosophy of the ultimate purpose of the world,
can only proclaim the aimlessness of the cosmical
process and seek to put an end to it by stilling the
will. This quietizing of the will is effected by r6cog
nizing the aimlessness of the process and resign
ing oneself to incompletely. For these teachings
Schopenhauer found a support in Buddhism, which
was then just becoming known in the Occident.
He was bitter in his hatred of what he thought the
selfishness and sensuality of Judaism, in which he
found the roots of deceptive theism. The pure
Christianity of Christ he regarded as a sort of
mystical quietism. Though his metaphysical work,
Die Welt ala WiUe and Vorstellung, appeared as early
as 1819, his teachings found no popular reception
till after the wane of Hegel's influence is Germany.
The effects of this idealistic development are apparent in the positive sciences not less than in metaphysics. In accordance with the
i3.Ideal‑	idea of the oneness of the world, the
ism in the natural sciences have been given a Positive subordinate position, or else reduced
	Sciences.	to natural philosophy. The new spirit
		is manifested even more~clearly in the
historical sciences, where the genetic method is
everywhere employed and individual facts are
treated in relation to the whole development. For
instance, the historian of literature or art now seeks
to bring the facts with which he is dealing into
relation with other phases of life and thus grasp
the life and ideals of a nation as a whole. Similarly,
the philologist is no longer satisfied with the study
of one language, but seeks to correlate it with
kindred tongues and reconstruct the inner life of
the people. Even in the field of jurisprudence the
genetic method has been adopted and particular
stress laid on the development of common law.
The effect of this idealistic movement may also be
observed in theology. Here deistic efforts to base
Christianity on a general theory of religion have
been replaced by a more penetrating psychological
analysis, together with a genetic view of religious
history; though it should be added that repeated

Ids
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
and earnest attempts have been made to rescue the core of Cjtristianity from the general flux of history and give to it a fixed character. Since it is in the universities, chiefly, that the sciences are cultivated, naturally the universities have been reorganised in conformity to the changed ideals. It was in the University of Jena that German Idealism got its first foothold. From here the new educational ideal went forth to the newly established universities of Berlin, Heidelberg, Bonn, Breslau, and Munich, and into the secondary schools. The effect of this reform has been to rescue philosophy from its servile position in the faculty of liberal arts and give it the position of that pure and true science which determines the principles of all other science, whether theoretical or practical.
(E. TsomnTecH.)
Ill. English and American Idealism: In Great Britain the earlier' representatives of Idealism were Ralph Cudworth, Samuel Clarks, and George Berkeley (qq.v.). Cudworth, one of the Cambridge PlatonisU (cj.v.), in opposition to the sensualistic philosophy of Hobbes, in his True Intellectual‑System of the Universe (1878), maintained
that the human mind participates in
:. Early the archetypal ideas which are eter‑
Phases. nal in the mind of God; by divine il‑
lumination these ideas are quickened in the soul. Clarke's idealism appears in his famous argument for the being of God, based upon innate conceptions 'of space and time, of being, of necessary existence, and of the infinite (Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of (Sod, 1705), and in his doctrine of the absolute right‑the " eternal fitness of things "derived from his Gootrine of God (The Unchangeable Obligations of Natural Religion, 1708). Berkeley affirmed that all ideas are only states or motions of the . spirit. So‑called material properties have no existence outside of the spirits in which the perception arises; accordingly, the universe consists only of spirits and their ideas. The source of these' ideas is God, by whom they are impartially and immutably created (Selections from Berkeley's Works, edited by A. C. Fraser, London, 1891). In America during this period, Idealism found a voice in Jonathan Edwards (1758). In his Notes on the Mind, penned ere he bad reached early manhood, is a doctrine of the world quite in the spirit of Berkeley, although not dependent on him, which in sole aspects anticipates the absolute idealism of Hegel. " The material universe exists nowhere but in the mind." "All material existence is only in idea." "That which truly is the substance of all bodies is the infinitely exact,. and prise, and perfectly stable Idea, in God's mind, together with his stable will, that the same shall gradually be communicated to us, and to other minds, according to certain fixed and established Methods and Laws" (Notes $4, 40, 13, in his Works, New York, 1830).
In recent thought Idealism has well‑nigh supplanted other forms of interpretation, of the world. The point of view is that "mind hs the importance of a universal and coemical principle of reality." The field is, however, divided into various sections. (1) As applied to epistemology or the
grounds upon which our thought of reality is shown to be valid, the principal representatives are
B. P. Bowne (Theory of Thought and 2. Modern Knowledge, New York, 1897) and Idealism. G. T. Ladd (Philosophy of Knowledge,
New York, 1897). (2) In metaphysics, F.H. Bradley (A ppearaxceand Reality, London, 1897) holds that all finite things of every variety are in the last analysis unreal, yet these are aspects of the one Absolute, and it or he is their reality. J. Royce (The World arid the Individual; 2 vols:, New York, 1900‑01) presents the ultimate reality as the " internal mete of an idea." In agreement with Royce, A. lJ. Taylor (Elements of Mdaphysies, New York, 1907) declares that the Absolute is a conscious life which simultaneously and in perfect unity includes in its experience the totality of existence, i.e., existence is ultimately mental. (3) In the philosophy of religion treated from the idealistic point of view, the principal writers are J. Caird (Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion, Glasgow, 1880), with profound reliance upon Hegel's great work on the same subject, and G. T. Ladd (Philosophy of Religion, New York, 1905). (4) In ethics, in which the end is presented as realisation of the rational self, the more significant works,are those by F. H. Bradley, Ethical Studies (London, 1876); T. H. Green, Prolegomena to Ethics (ib. 1883); J. H. Muirhead, Elements of Ethics (ib. 1892); J. 8. Mackenzie, Manual of Ethics (4th ed., New York, 1901); ‑ G. H. Palmer, Field of Ethics (Boston, 1901); idem, Nature of Goodness (ib. 1904); G. T. Ladd, Philosophy of Conduct (New York, 1902), and J. Royce, Philosophy of Loyally (ib.1908). (5) As an interpretative principle as applied to the history of religion and especially to the development of Christian doctrine, vindicating the rational element in these, against the denial of the same in a proposed return to the simplicity of the Gospel on the one hand, and on the other against the principle of external authority, the reader is referred to E. Caird, Evolution of Religion (Glasgow, 1893) and Evolution of Theology in the (reek Philosophers (ib. 1900‑02)., end J. Watson, Philosophical Basis of Religion (lb. 1907).
C. A. B.
BanrsoaanrsT: The beet means for a study of Idealism, outside the works of the individual philosophers, are the treatises on the history of philosophy, suoh an: E. Zeiler, Die Philosophic Gar liriechea, TObingen, 1844, new ed., 1892, Eng. tranal., 2 vols., London, 1897; W. Windelband, tleeckidds der PhilowpW Freiburg, 1890‑92, Eng. transl., New York, 1898; J. E. Erdmann, GadsichRS der Philosophic, 2 vole., Berlin, 1896‑98, Ena. tnansl., 8 vols., London, 1891‑98; F. Ueberweg, Geecbichk der Philosophic, $th ed. by Heinse, Berlin, 1903‑05, Eng. tranal. of 4th ed., London, 1875‑78. Consult further: C: L. Hendewerk, Der Idealiamus des ChristinAwiw, Konigsberg, 1882; A. Grant, in Porlniphtly Review, aR (1871), 383‑374; H. Tame, History of Enplieh Literatwe, London, 1877; T. Carlyle, Characteristics, in his Works, London, 1882; W. L. Davidson, in Mind, siii (1888): 89‑98; J. Wedgwood, Ideals of Life, New York, 1888; A. Bioardqu, De 1' idfia1, Paris, 1891; A. Drewe, Deatuhe $pekulatim sail Rant, Leipsio, 189,3; R. Euolrm li'rrundbeprite der Gemnwart, ib., 1893; idem, Lehensanwiauunpms der prossen Denbor, ib., 1899; M. Pujo, L'Id6diesse inUlr4 Paris, 1894; J. Mors, Erropean. Thought in the 18th Centwy. 2 voles, Edinburgh, 1898‑1903; C. Benouvier, InbWudio» d la philwophia analytiqw de r hietoire, Paris, 1898; idem, Philoaophie analytiew de 1'hisAviro, vols. iii.‑iv., ib., 18P7:

448	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Idolatry
A. Vierkandt, Nature#lker and %ulturvGLEer, Lmpsic. 1898;
C. F. d'Aray, Ideation and 7~, i2. 1899; T. Ziegler,
1)ie peisapen uwd soaiauR 8drdmanpen, Berlin, 1899; A. R.
Dsrron, in Ideal Review, July, 1901; H. Start, Personal Idealism, London, 1902; W. R. Inge, Personal Idealism and Mysticism, London, 1907; H. Hughes, Ideen and Ideals, Waraburg, 1907; L W. Riley, American PhQoeophy, pp. 81 eqq., New York, 1907; F. J. Schmidt, Zur Wiederpebart des Idaaliemue, Leipsie, 1907.
IDIOMATA. See CommvmcAmo IDIOMATUM.
IDOLATRY: In this article Idolatry means not so much the worship of images (see INAOffs AND
IMAGE WoRsHir) as the worship Early of other than the national God of
Divine the Hebrews. The oneness of God,
Names through which objects of religious
	and Con‑	regard outside of himself are conceived
	ceptions.	as idols, is, at the first glance the dis
		tinguishing characteristic of Old‑Tes
tament religion: It is this also which binds together
the great monotheistic religions of the world and
guarantees thelh their place in the science of the
spirit over against the natural science of religion.
The Old Testament does not regard this as a new
idea in Mosaic times, but as then associated with
the name of Yahweh, the God who had led Israel
out of Egypt. It is this conception of unity which
must be kept constantly in the mind in making
the demarcation between worship of God and of
idols in the New‑Testament sense. From this
standpoint the old name Elohim was inappropriately
kept in use in the Old Testament for Yahweh, and
no difficulty was felt by the writer of Gen. ii. 4 sqq.
in employing the term Yahweh‑Elohim. The
" Fear " whom Isaac invoked (Gee. xxxi. 42, 53,
RX.) was the forefathers' God whom the children
call Yahweh. And while the priestly historian of
the past uses with force the name El Shaddai as
preceding the use of Yahweh (Ex. vi. 3, of. Gen.
xvii.1), the identification of the Canaanitic El Elyon
with Yahweh is explicit in the mouth of Abraham
(Gee. xiv. 22). These combinations with the word
El express generally the idea of divinity. A similar
content is implied in, the other Semitic names for
God as Lord (see BAAL) or as king (see MOLOCH),
which in the beginning of the Yahweh religion were
ethically inapplicable to Yahweh. The protest of
Hoses and of Jeremiah are marked against the ideas
which were bound up in the application of these
names to Yahweh.
But ever stronger appears the revulsion against the worship of other gods which the worship of the
one true God caused as their irreconNative cilable opposition to his unity ap‑
Conceptions peared and, they were rejected as Dangerous heathenish. That this took its roots to the Idea in the popular religion of Israel appears of Oneness. from the fact that personal ‑names from the time of Joshua nowhere contain the names of heathen deities, and are for the most part compounded with the name of Yahweh or with what were regarded as equivalents, Adhon, Baal, Melekh, or,Zur. But among the neighboring peoples deity had been split up into a large number of deities, a process which might easily have been accomplished in Israel. Patriarchal narratives knew of an El. of Beth‑el, an El‑'Olam of Beer‑sheba,
an El Elyon and an El Shaddai; Mons built an altar to Yahweh Nisri and Gideon one to Yahweh `Olam, Abraham's offering was to Yahweh Yireh, and Absalom had a vow to " Yahweh‑in‑Hebron." The keen insight of the prophets discerned the danger in this apparent multiplicity, and the formula in Deut. vi. 4 is aimed not so much at any plurality as at the possible splitting of the personality of Yahweh into many gods. With this went the protest in the northern kingdom against the mixing of the names of Baal and Yahweh which might produce a confusion with the Baalim of the heathen, instanced in the substitution of Boshdh, " shame," for Baal (see BAAi.). Similar in intent was the campaign against the high places (q.v.).
Not less dangerous than this possible dissolution of the unity of Yahweh from within was the obtrusion from without of the survivals
External of nature religion in the form of wor‑
Dangers ship of stones of various sorts (see
Menacing MEMoRiALs AND SACRED STONES)
	Unity.	which were associated with the worship
		paid by the patriarchs, Moses, Joshua,
and Samuel. How strong a vehicle for an evil
syncretism these objects might become‑ is recognized
in such passages as Micah v. 13; Deut. vii. 5; Lev.
xxvi. 30. With these must be mentioned the Asherah
(q.v.), which, as the usual accompaniment of the
Canaanitic altars, had gained entrance into the
Hebrew cult, and was found even in the temple
(II Kings xxi. 7), and obscene figures (I Kings
xv. 13). A similar danger arose from the groves
and from the tree‑cult (see GROVES AND TREES,
SACRED) so often brought into connection with the
patriarchs and with later leaders (e.g., Gen. xiii. 18;
Judges iv. 5, vi. 11) and equally with Canaanitic
cults (Gee. ail. 6), betraying a community of wor
ship in earlier times. Against this such protests
were filed as that in Hos. iv. 13. Other indications
of syncretism are found in the sacred prostitution
of males and females (I Kings xiv. 24), which even
entered the temple (II Kings xxiii. 7), in self
mutilation (see MUTILATIONS, I Kings xviii. 28), and
in the offering of children in sacrifice (II Kings
xvi. 3). Indeed, the Old Testament is full of tes
timony to the fact that the people of Yahweh, even
while recognizing itself as such a people, was at
times open to the allurements offered either by
the indulgence or the ritualistic abstinence fostered
by the native cults about it. This tendency is
registered early in the history by such passages as
Judges x. 6. Yet that the great number of place
names in Palestine derived from the names of
heathen deities indicates always Israelitie worship
of idols in those places is more than the facts war
rant. The Amarna tablets prove that these names
are the legacy of a period anterior to that of the
Judges in a land already thickly populated. Still,
the earlier material in the Book of Judges proves
that in ancient times the people indulged in prac
tises which were not merely debased forms of Yah
weh worship, but were lapses into practise of Car
naanitic cults. The effect of the establishment of
the kingdom was the realization of a fact known be
fore, the national character of the worship of Yah
weh.

Idolatry
Ignatius
Yet this political development opened a new way for the infiltration of worship of other deities.
While doubtless the large harem of
Develop‑ Solomon was not formed without refment in erence to political contingencies, it the Regal was only one of the causes of the Period. erection of sanctuaries to other gods.
More significant is the domestication in Israel of the Phenician Ashtoreth (q.v.), the Moabitic Chemosh (q.v.), and the Ammonitic Moloch (q.v.), under whose protection the capital was placed. Thus three motives contributed to the introduction of a syncretistic worship; political motives which in part underlay Solomon's gathering of a harem; the syncretism of calf‑worship in the northern kingdom by appropriation of a Baal‑cult in Yahweh‑worship; and the introduction of new deities under the dynasty of Omri, which passed them on into Judah through Athaliah. In the eighth century, through the development which brought the Mesopotamian powers into the West, a new stream of foreign religious customs began to cut its channel into Israel. New deities, new objects of cultic meaning, were borne on this stream (Jer. xix. 4; Ezek. xxviii. 14), and the worship of the stars was included (II Kings xvii. 16). Amos (v. 26), Isaiah (ii. 5),and the author of the Books of Kings knew of hosts of deities derived from these sources (cf. Jer. xxxix. 3), and in Judah Manasseh opened wide the gates for their entrance. The temple and private houses were made the dwellingplaces of these new deities (II Kings xxi. 3‑7, xxiii. 4‑12; Ezek. viii. 12). The worship of the sun and of the signs of the zodiac came into prominence, as well as that of the " Queen of Heaven." Tammuz, the Babylonian Adonis (Ezek. viii. 14), and Philistine and Egyptian deities found entrance. While the reformation of Josiah removed the emblems of these cults, the cult itself was not destroyed but continued, not merely in Samaria, but in Jerusalem itself, until the Exile, in syncretistic union with the cult of Yahweh. The persistent strength of the religion of Yahweh in the midst of these assaults was manifested in the opposition of prophecy, contending for the unity of that deity. A point of rebuke is found for Israel in the fact of the fidelity of the heathen to their deities. And the prophet rises to the conception of the world‑wide rule of the God of Israel.
While externally the Babylonian exile drew a boundary line between the idolatrous tendencies of
the earlier people and the post‑exilic Exilic and iconoclastic type, there are many signs Post‑Exilic among the exiles of relapse into the
Develop‑ old idolatry and of lapses into newer meat. forms (Ezek. xiv. 1‑8; Isa. xlii. 17).
While it cannot be proved that the Babylonian chief gods Bel, Marduk, Nebo, obtained firm lodgment, a sort of fatalism appeared in the worship of Gad and Meni (qq.v.) as is indicated by Isa. lxv. 11. Traces of adoption of cults from the Persians are hard to discover. The little book of Tobit suggests a mingling from the side of demonology (see AsmoDEUS). The period immediately before the exit of the religion of the Old Testament shows that intimately connected with the development of
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
444
a faith is degeneration and rankness of growth.
Thus the Maccabean epoch revealed a last mighty
flaring‑up of the idolatrous inclination as the prelude
to a period of martyrdom and victory for Israelitic
faith. Greek religion found ready entrance and firm
standing‑ground among the Jews. The high priest
Joshua, who changed his name to Jason, and Al
cimus appeared as leaders of the Greek party.
Not only was there sent a contribution to the great
official feast of the Melkart‑Heracles of Tyre, but
in Jerusalem a sanctuary was consecrated to Olym
pian Zeus and on Gerizim one to Zeus Xenios. Not
only this, but there arose in the city before the
gates altars to Greek deities like Artemis, Apollo,
and Hecate. This time it was not the living word
of prophecy which armed the opposition to these
doings, but for the first time the written word,
through which alone not merely the national re
ligion, but the religion of mankind could be estab
lished. 	(P. KLEINERT.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The literature under IMAGES AND IMAGE WORSHIP and the appropriate sections in works on the History of Israel (see under ARAB) should be consulted. Also: F. Creuzer, Symbolik and Mythologic, vol. ii., Darmstadt, 1841; E. M. de Vogiici, M~lanpes d'arcVologis orientale, Paris, 1868; A. Kuenen, Godsdienst van Israel, 2 vols., Harlem, 1869‑70; R. Smend, Lehrbuch der alttestamentlichen Religionageschichte, Freiburg, 1893; C. P. Tile, Geschichte der Religion, vol. i., Gotha, 1895; G. B. Gray, Hebrew Proper Names, London, 1896; H. Winekler, ThontaJeln von Tel‑Amarna, Berlin, 1896, Eng. transl., ib., 1896; Chantepie de la Saussaye, Religionsgeschichte, i. 384‑467, Tiibingen, 1905; DB, ii. 445‑448; EB, ii. 2152‑2158; JE, xii. 568‑569.
IDUMEA. See EDOM.

	IGNATIUS (ig‑n6'shi‑us) OF ANTIOCH: Little
is known of the life of Ignatius of Antioch except
		what may be gathered from the letters
	Life of bearing his name. IrenaBus (Hmr. V.,
	Ignatius. xxviii. 4) quotes him as a martyr who
		was condemned to be thrown to the
beasts; Origen quotes him once (Prologue to Cant.),
and in the sixth homily on Luke mentions him as
the successor of Peter in the bishopric of Antioch,
giving the same account of his death as Irenmus.
Eusebius knows no independent facts, and the
chronology of the lists of the bishops of Antioch
which he gives is doubtful. He too calls him the
second bishop; though the Apostolic Constitutions
(vii. 46) combine two traditions by making Peter
appoint first Euodius, the immediate predecessor
of Ignatius, and then Ignatius. Purely legendary
are the assertions that Ignatius was the child men
tioned in Matt. xviii. 4, and that he was a disciple
of John or of Peter. The Acta Martyrii relating to
him must also be abandoned as historical sources.
Two independent accounts exist, the Martyrium
Colbertinum (first published by Ussher in a Latin
version, 1647, then by Ruinart in Greek, 1689),
which is identical with the Syriac version given in
part by Cureton and in full by Mtisinger (1872);
and the Martyritura Vaticanum, published by
Dressel from a Vatican manuscript, after Ussher
had given a slightly different text from one at
Oxford. Besides these there are three others
formed by a combination of the two; but the
authenticity of even the Colbertinum, which has the
best claim, is now seldom defended. This result

446	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Idolatry
Ignatius
has been reached on the basis of contradictions between it and the letters, of its frequent unhistorical statements, and of the fact that it was not known to any ancient writer. It cannot have been composed earlier than the fifth century. The one source is therefore the epistles, which purport to have been written during the journey of Ignatius from Antioch to Rome to suffer martyrdom.
In all there are fifteen letters bearing the name of Ignatius, evidently of varying age and value.
Seven of these (Ad Ephesios, Ad Mag‑
	The	nesios, Ad Trallianos, Ad Romdnos, Ad
Ignatian Philadelphenos, Ad Smyrnmos, Ad Poly‑
Letters. carpum) are found in a shorter and a
longer Greek recension. The latter adds five more (Ad Mariam Cassobolitam, with a letter from Mary to Ignatius, Ad Tarsenses, Ad Antiochenos, Ad Heronem diaconum Antioehenum, and Ad Philippenses); and finally there are three found only in a Latin text, two to St. John and one to the Virgin Mary, with her reply to it. These last are wholly worthless, and were probably composed originally in Latin. Of the shorter Greek recension (known as G') there is only a single manuscript, the Codex Mediceo‑Laurentinus, and two copies made from it; but there is alsa a Latin version (first published by Ussher, 1644, from two manuscripts, of which one has since been lost), quite accurate and of value for the restoration of the text; a Syriac one, incomplete, and an Armenian one based upon it; and a fragment of a Copto‑Sahidic one. This shorter recension was first published in Greek by Vossius, 1644. Of the numerous later editions, those of Zahn and Lightfoot are the most scholarly. The longer or interpolated Greek recension (G') exists in several manuscripts, as does also a Latin version of it; and the Armenian version mentioned above contains the additional letters. It was first published by Paemus in 1557 and independently by Gessner two years later; of modern editions Zahn's is the most reliable. Finally three letters (to the Ephesians, the Romans, and Polyoarp) were discovered in a still shorter recension, though only in a Syriac version, and first published by Cureton in 1845 from two manuscripts found in the Nitrian desert in 1839 and 1843, and again in 1849 with the additional use of a third, found in 1847.
In view of the great importance of these letters for the early constitutional history of the Church,
the question of their authenticity has
	Their	been much discussed. The first period
Authen‑ in the history of their criticism goes
	ticity.	down to the discovery of G'. In it at
		least the three Latin epistles were
abandoned, even by Baronius. As to the others,
Roman Catholic theologians were usually inclined
to defend the authenticity of all those contained
in G', and the Protestants to deny it. With the
publication of G' begins the second period, in which
G' was generally recognized as a nearer approach
to the original text, G' as interpolated. The latter
was defended by Meier as late as 1836, but this
question may be regarded as finally settled. Opin
ions varied greatly during the second period as to
the authenticity of G'. The third period began
with the discovery of the shortest or Syriac recen‑
sion (S). The first editor, Cureton, strongly expressed his belief that now at last the really genuine letters were found, which had later been recast so as to support the developed doctrine of the divinity of Christ and the developed constitution of the Church, while four entirely new letters had been added. A large number of scholars declared substantially for this view, though still more refused their assent. The demonstration begun by Denzinger and Uhlhorn, carried further by Merx, and completed by Zahn, that S represents merely an excerpt from G', may now be regarded as conclusive. Many of the original upholders of S have now abandoned it, while no new defenders have appeared; and its part in the history of Ignatian criticism may be regarded as a closed incident. The present position of the controversy is this: either G' gives what are substantially unchanged, genuine letters of Ignatius, or none of his letters are extant. It may be safely said that the upholders of the former view, represented with learning and thoroughness by Zahn and Lightfoot, have increased in number. Harnack has abandoned his former attempt to date the letters in the last years of Hadrian or the first of Antoninus Pius, and decided that they are genuine, and composed toward the end of the reign of Trajan (110‑117), or possibly, though not probably, a little later.
Four principal reasons are urged against the authenticity of the letters as found in G'. (1) It is
asserted that the historical data afArguments forded by them are incorrect. The Against fact is, however, that the data of the
Authen‑ letters themselves (not of the Acta)
tieity.	correspond perfectly to the conditions
of the time. Christians suffered martyrdom under Trajan, and there is no reason to doubt the account of Ignatius being brought to Rome to die there. The law forbidding provincial governors to send condemned prisoners from one province to another is not earlier than Severus and Antoninus, and that which regulated their transportation to Rome probably later still. There is nothing improbable about the route assigned, nor the fact that Ignatius was able to have intercourse with the local churches and wrote letters on the way. Similar examples are found in Lucian (De morte Peregrini), and in the Acta of Perpetua and Felioitas. The anxiety of Ignatius lest the Roman Christians should take steps for his liberation is easily understood when it is known that appeals on behalf of a condemned prisoner might be set in motion by others, even against his will. In a word, the whole line of argument represented by the first objection may now be largely disregarded. (2) The second deals with the personality of Ignatius, as set forth in the epistles, which Baur considered much more suited to a deliberate invention than to actual history, objecting especially to its " affected humility,, and its " false heroism." This point, made most strongly by Bunsen, is now not so much pressed; it is an entirely subjective one, and is decided in an opposite sense by equally good judges, Rothe and Harnack seeing throughout the stamp of an actual personality. (3) Somewhat more impressive is the contention that heresies

Taaatfus	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HEIUOG	448
Igmtiua of Loyola
are abated which belong to a later period than
the opening years of the second century. It is
still a question whether one heresy or two (a
Gnostic‑Docetic and a Judaising) may be discerned.
In favor of the view once held by Baur, that the
epistles presuppose the existence of the great
Gnostic system; that of Valentinus and Marcion,
Hilgenfeld is almost alone.	Lipsius places the
Dooetiam attacked by Ignatius later than Satur
nmus, though still before Valentinus, and thus dates
the letters between 130 and 140. But a careful
study of the question makes it fairly certain that
they must have been written before Gnosticism
grew to threatening dimensions, which occurred
precisely in those years. In any case, too little is
known of its earlier stages to assert that no such
heretics as are described in the letters existed in
the opening years of the send century; and it is
safe to say that if their genuineness is accepted on
other grounds, this offers no reason to doubt it.
(4) It is also contended that the organisation of
the Church, especially the episcopate, belongs to a
later period. It is perfectly true that the epistles
know three orders‑bishops, presbyters, and dea
cons, of which the second i® already subordinate to
the first‑and Ignatius lays great stress upon the
function of the episcopate in the interests of unity.
But if there is here a step in advance of Clement of
Rome and the " Shepherd of Hernias " the stage
which appears in Irenaeus is still more advanced.
There are abundant traces of a recent and as yet
incomplete elevation of the episcopate over the
presbyterate; it is a local, not a universal, office,
and does not carry with it the guardianship of the
teaching tradition; it is valued largely as a center
of unity for the local church, a safeguard against
centrifugal tendencies, and a guaranty for the
future permanence and purity of Christianity.
	While it would, then, be too much to say that
all difficulties have been removed, the discussion
has reached a stage when such as remain are not
to be set against a single piece of strong external
evidence; and such evidence exists in the epistle
of Polycarp to the Philippians, which is itself
definitely attested by Irenaeus. This can only be
met by declaring it forged or largely interpolated.
The former view offers great difficulty in the face
of the evidence; the latter, more often put forward
(most acutely by Ritschl), falls before the unity
of the whole letter and the fact that such very
extensive interpolations would have to be supposed
in order to remove all tram of the Ignatian epistles.
		(G. UHLHoHNt.)
	It seems highly probable that even the shorter
Greek form hag suffered extensive interpolation,
how extensive no one is in a position to determine.
The cautious student of the history of polity and
doctrine will decline to base important conclusions
on the unsupported testimony of these writings.
Even if the reference to Ignatian epistles in the
epistle of Polyearp be genuine, this would not prove
the authenticity of the epistles in their present form.
			A. H. N.
	BIHLIOGILAPHT: A very full list of works Is given in ANF.
	Bibliography, pp. 10‑15. The earlier editions of note are
	those of J. E. Grabs, in his $pidkyium, Oxford, 1700;
T. Smith, London, 1709 (Greek‑Latin, shorter form); W. W. Whistoa, in his Primitive Christianity. London, 1711 (Greek‑English, longer and shorter forms, Smith's teat). Modern editions are: MPG, v. 843 eqq.; W. Cuetoa, no Ancient Syrwe l7meion of the Epistles q< .9t. lyratiw, London, 1845; idem, Corpus Ipnatiaaum, ib., 1849; T. Zahn, Pabrues apostauccrufn opera, VOL ii., Leipsio, 1878; P. de Iagorde, Gottingen, 1882 (sborter Latin recension); F. %. Funk, Opera pafrum apostotioorum, Tdbingen, 1887• idem Pabee apoBdiei voL L, ib, 1801; J. B. Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, part IL, 2 vola, London, 1889 (both forms). The most accessible Erg. tfnaL in in ANF, L 46 sqq.
All of that editions noted above are rich in notes and introductions upon the critical questions involved. Consultfurther: J. Pearson, Yindieis Ipnatiana, Cambridge, 1872, reissued Oxford, IW2; R. Rothe, Die AnfAnps der ehrieliahsn Kirdhe, pp. 713‑084, Wittenberg, 1837; WCaeeton, Findido lynagana, London, 1848; C. C. J. von Bunsen, Ignatius con Antioch, Hamburg. 1847; idem, Hippolytus and His Ape, L 88‑103, London, 1854; F. C. Baur, Die iynatiamiscden Briefs, Tnbingen, 1848; H. Densinger; Usber die Awhfhsit des Tsxtes des Ipnatiue, Wt<rsburs, 1849; A. Ritschl, Die Rntatehunp der altkalkolisehen Kirche, pp. 577‑889, Bonn, 1850; R. A. Liysius, in ZHT, 1858; idem, in ZWT, avii (1874), 209 eqq.; A Merz, Ma;temda Ipnatiana, Have 1881; T. Zahn, lpnogue roon Anlioakisn, Gotha, 1873; E. Reran, Les Asanpitm, Paris, 1877; A. Harmak, Die Zeit Ass Ignatius eon Antiodien, Leipsio, 1878; idem, Lilreratur, L 73 eqq. et passim, ii. 1, pp. 881‑400; idem, in TU, i1 1 and 2, 1884; F. $. Funk, Die Rehtheit der ipnatianiseken Briefs, TQbingen, 1888; idem, in HL, v1 581‑69p; W. D. Killen, The lpnalian B snbrdy Spurious, Edinburgh, 1888; D. W1te;, Die tpnatianischen Briefs, Tttbingen, 1892; J. Ravine, Les Oripines de r6piscopat, pp. 442‑481, Paris, 1894; G. A. 8imooa, in Ths Academy, Nov. 24, 1894; J. 13. 8rawley, Bpistks o,/ 8t. Ignatius, 2 vola., London, 1900; H. de Genouillao, L'Aolise ehrltienns ¢u temps de S. Ipnooe d'An. forAe, Paris, 1908; Schaff, Christian Church, ii. 47 eqq., 851 eqq.; Moeller, Christian Church, i. 112 sqq.; Krager, History, pp. 28‑84; DCB, iii. 209‑222; and, in general. modern treatments of thepost‑apoetolio period of church history.
IGNATIUS OF CONSTANTINOPLE: Patriarch of Constantinople 846‑857, and 887‑•878 (or 877); b. about 799; d. at Constantinople Oct. 23, 878 (or 877). He was a son of Emperor Michael I., and his real name was Niketas. On being shut up in a monastery by Leo V. he called himself Ignatius. He wag early chosen abbot and consecrated priest, and in 846, at the instigation of Theodora, the widow of Emperor Theophilus, he was elected patriarch. He found a vehement opponent in Gregory Asbesta, archbishop of Syracuse, who from the beginning disputed the legitimacy of the election of Ignatius. The matter was .‑brought before Pope Leo IV., who was on the side of Igna. tius, but Leo died before he was able to give a documentary decision; and on Nov. 23, 857, Ignatius was deposed. The occasion for this act was given by the attitude of Ignatius toward Bardas, the brother of Theodora, who lived in incestuous relation with the widow of his son. In 857, at the Feast of Epiphany, Ignatius prohibited him from ‑participating in the Lord's Supper and refused to offer him assistance in the removal of his mother, whom he disliked. Bardas avenged himself by deposing the patriarch. Photius (q.v.) became his successor, and from this time dates the controversy which ended in the separation of the Churches of the Orient and Occident. Despite the support of Pope Nicholas I., Ignatius was degraded at a synod held in Constantinople in 861, was cruelly treated, and forced to retire to the monastery on

RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
I ,
Igaatimaaatinr of Loyal&
the island of Terebinthos.	In Sept., 867, Basil
became emperor after the assassination of Bardas
and Michael. One of his first acts was to recall
Ignatius, in order to obtain the favor of the people,
who still honored Ignatius. At the eighth ecumen
ical council (Oct. b„869TFeb. 28, 870) the reputation
of Ignatius was rehabilitated, and his election was
confirmed by the Pope Adrian II. But Ignatius
did not suoceefl in pacifying the opposition, and his
death gave Photius his longed‑for opportunity to
regain his former position. Ignatius is esteemed
as a saint in the Greek and Roman Churches, in the
Roman Church evidently because he was looked
upon as an important adherent and even martyr
of the papal primacy; in the Greek Church on
account of his personal piety and because in reality
he did not acknowledge the absolute supremacy of
Rome. 	(F. KAmr=Buscm)
Bmwoaasrar: Early sourae% including a life and an en
	comium by contemporaries, are collected in XanA Coa
	cilia, avi. 209‑‑301; and letters to him from Nicholas I.
	and Hadrian lI. are in the same, xv. 159 eqq., 819 eqq.
	Caneult: J. Hergenrother, Photiru, vole. L‑ii.. 3 vole..
	Regensburg, 1887‑M; R. Baxman, Die Politik der Papste,
	L 3be‑357, ii. b eqq., 29 eqq., E3b erfeld 1888‑M; Hefele,
	Concilienpesehiehte, iv. 384 eqq., et passim; RL, vi. 590
	eqq•; Hrumbacher, Gesrhidts, passim.

IGNATIZTS DIACOAUS: Older contemporary of Igdatius, patriarch of Constantinople, with whom he is frequently confounded; b. about 780. He became diaoonus and ekeuophylaa of the " great church " at Constantinople about 810, and after 830 metropolitan of Nitwa. Useful go sources of history are his biographies of the patriarchs Tarasioe (ed. J. A. Heikel, Heleingfors, 1889) and Nicephorus (ed.. De Boor, in the Opuacula hiatorcea of Nioephorus, Leipsic, 1880). Ignatius seems to have compiled also a V%fa Gregoni Dtoapolitma. He also wrote poems, including one on the fall, remarkable for its dramatic form. Among the dmmatia peraonce are God, Adam, Eve, and the serpent (ed, C. F. Milller, Kiel, 1886).
(F. KATTENBUSCH.)
Batavessraz: grumbaohm Gewhddlte, pp. 718‑rT17 et passim; F. Hirsch, Bysontinsedys Studies, Leipsio, 1876.
IGNATIUS, FATHER: See Lyxs, JoszrH LBxcsarBB.
	IGNATIUS OF LOYOLA (I11IGO LOPEZ DR
RRCALDR): Founder of the Jesuit order; b. at
		the castle of Loyola, near Aspeitia
	Youth, (16 m. e.w. of San Sebastian) in the
Conversion, province of Guipuscoa, Spain, prob
	and ably Christmas night, 1491; d. at
	Education. Rome July 31, 1556. He came of a
		knightly family, spent his youth at the
court of Ferdinand, had few educational advan
tages, and,early entered the army. He was highly
sentimental and fond of stories of chivalry: So
verely wounded at the battle of Pampeluna (May
20, 1521); he was .for months an invalid in his
father's castle. During this period of severe suffer
ing a life of . Christ and legends of the saints tame
into his hands. He read them with avidity, and
became fired with an ambition to follow Christ in
a life of self‑denying labor and to emulate the heroic
deeds of Francis of Assisi, Dominic, and other great
monastic leaders. Amatory and ambitious thoughts 1e attributed to Satan, and aspirations after holiness and Christian service to the Holy Spirit. $e resolved to devote his life to the conversion of infidels in the Holy Land. On recovering he exchanged clothes with a beggar and visited the Dominican monastery of Montserrat (Mar. 25,1522), where he hung his military accouterments before an image of the Virgin. He soon entered the monastery of Manrees, where he practised the most rigorous asceticism with frequent confessions and masses and the performance of the most disagreeable and menial tasks. He is said to have bad visions of the Trinity, of the mystery of the creation, of the union of deity and humanity in Christ (in the Eucharist). The contemplation of any religious act or meditation on any of the great facts of redemption brought before his susceptible mind realistic images of the, events concerned. The Virgin became the object of his chivalrous (almost idolatrous) devotion: Greatly concerned about his sins and the sins of the world, he pictured most vividly the continuous conflict between Christ and his hosts and Satan and his hosts. Military imagery played a prominent part in his religious toatemplar tions. Before he left Maine" he had‑ wrought out his " Spiritual Exercises;'.' which were to exert a potent influence in the winning and training of converts and in revolutionizing the methods of propagandism in the papal Church; " the mill into which all Jesuits are cast; they emerge with charaoten and talents diverse; but the imprint remains ineffaceable " (Cr6tineau‑Joly). In the summer of 1523 he left Manresa for Jerusalem via Barcelona and Venice. He journeyed wholly without money or supplies. On Sept. 4 he visited the Holy Sepulcher. Finding no way to maintain himself in missionary work in Palestine, he returned to Venice (Jan., 1524), convinced that he could accomplish little without scholastic training. Early in the year he went to Barcelona and took his place (though thirty‑three years old) among the school‑boys to learn the rudiments of Latin. In two years he was able to enter the. University of Akcals, and in the autumn of 1527 he removed to the University of Salamanca. At both universities he incurred the censure of the authorities through his efforts to win converts among the students by inducing them to subject themselves to coursee of training in the " Spiritual Exercises." Early in 1528 he entered the University of Par* where he remained over seven years, perfecting,his literary and theological education and winning associates. For disturbing the students by getting them absorbed in the " Spiritual Exercises " he narrowly escaped disgraceful punishment at the hands of the authorities. He spent the .vacations in the Netherlands among his fellow countrymen, who generously supplied his wants. By 1534 he had won to his mode of life and inspired with his purpose and enthusiasm Peter Faber, Francis Xavier (q.v.), Alfonso Salmeron, Jacob Laines, and Nicholas Bobedilla (Spaniards), and Simon Rodrigues (a Portuguese).
On Aug. 15, 1534, these brethren with Ignatius, in the St. Mary's Church at Montmartre, vowed on the completion of their studies to enter upon hoe‑

	atins of Loyola
~wainati
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
pital and missionary work in Jerusalem, or, opportunity failing, to go without questioning wherever the pope might direct. Early in 1585
Institution Ignatius went to Spain to attend to of His some business matters for Xavier,
	Order‑	Lames, and Salmeron, not wishing, (t
		may be, to expose them to the tempta
tions of home and family or to interrupt their
studies.	It was arranged that the companions
should meet him at Venice in Jan., 1537. He visited
the castle of Loyola, but chose to abide at thb alms
house. His preaching in the community attracted
wide‑spread attention. While he was in Spain his
c P Ong gained three recruits, Claude Le Jay,
Jean Codure, and Pasquier‑Brouet, all able and
well‑educated. The reunion at Venice occurred
as Pte. They found it no easy matter to
gain papal approval of their enterprise. Caraffa,,
under whose auspices the Theatinea (q.v.) had been
constituted for a similar purpose, tried to persuade
Ignatius and his companions, who had attracted
his attention by their zealous and self‑denying
labors in the hospitals and among the poor and
outcast; to join the older order. Aware of the
sentiments of Camffa, Ignatius thought a visit to
the Pope inadvisable; but Paul III., when he
learned of their seal and their purposes, sent for
them, gave them his commendation, and permitted
them to be ordained priests. They were ordained
at Venice by the bishop of Arbe (June 24). Just at
this time tie emperor, Venice, and the pope de
clared war against the Turks and made Ignatius's
proposed mission impracticable. The company now
devoted themselves with great zeal and success to
preaching and charitable work in various parts of
Italy. With Faber and Lainez, Ignatius made his
way to Rome Oct., 1538, under a deep impreosion
(based on a vision) that the pope would approve
of the constitution of the new order. He found
the pope conferring with some of the cardinals
regarding a reformation of the city. Paul III.
received Ignatius and his two companions with open
arms, appointed Faber and Lainez to chairs in the
Sapientia college, and charged Ignatius with the
task of reforming Rome. Early in 1539 all seven
of his coadjutors were in Rome. With consuming
zeal and wonderful acceptance they preached in the
market places, the streets, and in such churches as
were open to them; in the universities they sought
to win the students; in caring for the multitudinous
poor and sick their labors were abundant. The
evenings they spent in prayer and in perfecting
their organization and plans. Charges of heresy
that had been made against them now received
little attention in the general applause. Several
of the associates were sent by the pope on important
missions, which they performed to his entire satis
faction. Xavier and Rodriguez were invited to the
Portuguese court. The former was encouraged to go
as a missionary to India; the latter became the
king's counselor.
The time for the confirmation of the order had arrived. A congregation of cardinals reported favorably upon the constitution presented, and Paul III. became convinced that it was the work of the Holy Spirit. He confirmed the order through
the bull Regtmini militantia (Sept. 27, 1540), but limited the number of its members to sixty. This limitation was removed through the bull Injunctum nobia (Mar. 14, 1543). Ignatius was unanimously chosen general by the members who were then in Rome, and with great solemnity they pledged him absolute obedience and recognized him as " holding the place of God " in relation to them.
From this time onward the life of Ignatius was identified with the history of the Company of Jesus
(see JEsu1*. No doubt he had much
Ignatius to do with the preparation of the as General; " Constitutions," " Rules," " InstiHis tutions," ate. Many of his letters
	Writings.	have been preserved. His tract " On
		the Virtue of Obedience" and his
" Spiritual Exercises " best set forth the spirit of
the man and of the order as he founded it. As
general he spent most of his time in Rome, where,
in close touch with the pope and the curia, he
directed the work of the order that soon became
world‑wide in its scope. It is probable that no
man ever combined so much of religious enthusiasm,
often verging on fanaticism, with such fixity of
purpose and such a wise adaptation of means to
ends. He identified the " greater glory of God "
to which he professed devotion, with the universal
triumph throughout the world of the papal Church,
which he wished to see brought up to his own
standard of seal and self‑sacrifice.
A. H. NEwMAN.
Biawoa8APaT: The " Spiritual Exercises," editio prineeps, Rome, 1548, has been reproduced in most European languages and in many missionary tongues and in innumerable editions. His letters appeared in incomplete form in Cartaa de S. Ignacio do Loyola, 6 vole., Madrid, 187489. The earliest lives are collected, with commentary, in ASB, July, vu. 409‑853. The most of the lives of Ignatius are by Jesuits. Among the most noteworthy biographies are: N. Oriandinu% Rome, 1615; D. Bartoli, Rome, 1650, Venice, 1673; new ed. by J. Terrien, Lille, 1893 (regarded in the order as the official biography); D Bouhours, Paris, 1679, republished Avignon, 1821, Eng trAnal., ed. A. Butler, London, 1841; 8. Du Terrial Paris, 1844; C. Genellt Innsbruck, 1848, ed. V. Kolb, Vienna, 1894; H. Bamr;Rgarten4 Strasburg, 1880; E. Gthein, Halle, 1885; C. Clair, Paris, 1891; Stewart Rose (Caroline Rose Erskine, Countess of Buchan), New York, 1891; T. Hughes, Ignatius de Loyola and the Educational System of the Jesuits, London, 1892; M. Malaaa Iprwce de Loyola, assai do psychologis religieuee, Paris, 1898; H. July, Paris, 1899; W. van Nieuwenhoff, 2 vole., Regensburg, 1901; N Greff, Der heaipe Ignatius von Loyola and seine Zeit, Kaldenkirehen, 1903. The works on the history of the order generally contain a sketch, more or less ambitious, of the life of the founder. Consult also: J. Crdtineau.Joly, Hint. de 14 eompapnie de Jiaus, 6 vole., Paris, 1859; Ranke, Popes, i. 135‑149, 164 177. The bull Repimini militantis in in Reich Documents, pp. 216‑219, and is condensed in Robinson, European History, ii. 161‑165.
IGNOORANTINSS. See CmuarlAN BRoTHEB8.

IN LS, LUDWIG HEIRRICH: German Lutheran; b. at Middels, a village of East Frisia, June 29, 1858. He was educated at the universities of Leipsic (1878‑79), Erlangen (1879‑80, 1882‑83),
Gdttingen (188081), and Berlin (1883), was assistant pastor in West‑Rhauderfelm, East Frisia (1881‑
1882), pastor at Baltrum (1883), Nesse (1884), and
Detern (1885‑94; all in East Fri®ia). He was then director of studies and a member of the monastery

449	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
of Loccum (1894‑98); was appointed professor of systematic theology at Erlangen (1898); and at Leipsio (1903). In theology he represents orthodox Lutheranism. He has written Reehtfertigung des Sfnders vor Gott (Brunswick, 1888); Wie warden tar der chriatlichen Wahrheit genies t (Leipsie,1900); Die Selbatsondigkeit der Dogmatik gegenllber der Religionaphilmophie (1900); Die christliche Wahrheatsgewmeheit, thr letater Grund and thre Entatehung (1901); Die tagliche vergebung der Sunden (1901); Die Bedeutung dee Autoritdtaglaubens (1902); Theonomie and Autonomie in Licht der chriatlichen Ethik (1902); Jwue Chriatus die Wahrheit and das Leben (2 sermons, 1903); Wer war Jeans, was wollte Jesus t (1905); Die AWerstehung Jesu Christi (1906); and Eins ist Not (sermons; 1906).
I. H. S. See JEaUB CHRIST, MONOGRAM O8.
	ILDEPHONSUS, fl"d&fen'svs: Archbishop of
Toledo; b. at Toledo 607; d. there Jan. 23, 667.
Of his life little is known. At an early age he
became inspired with love of the monastic life and
entered a cloister in his native city, despite the
strong opposition of his father. He later founded
a nunnery near Toledo, and about 630 was ordained
Levite by Helladiue. Some time afterward he
became abbot of the monastery, and in Nov., 657,
he was consecrated archbishop of Toledo. He is
best known as the champion of the worship of the
Virgin Mary in Spain, and his views were advanced
in his Libellua de virginitate aanctte Marim contra
tree iafWelea, which at once met with high esteem.
He also wrote an extension of Isidore's De roir.
ill. in fourteen chapters, beginning with Gregory
the Great, and treating of seven bishops of To
ledo and five of other Spanish dioceses, and
the monk Doriatus. The treatment is not free
from superficialities, although it must be borne
in mind that at that period ecclesiastical author
ship was at a low ebb. A third work of this
author which has been preserved is the twofold
Annotationes de cognitione baptismi and de progresau
apiritualis deserti. The latter part is a description
of life from baptism to heaven, with a panegyric
on the desert and a curious interpretation of a
number of Biblical names from botany and zoology.
The Cognitio baptismi reproduces a work of the
sixth century, possibly by Justinian of Valencia on
regeneration in baptism. The first twelve chapters,
as well as the concluding sections and a citation
from Gregory the Great, were added by Ildephonsus.
Some of his letters have been preserved, and the
wording of his masses caused the Adoptionists, a
century later, to regard him as one of their fore
runners. He was buried at Toledo, and the napkin
given him by the Virgin when she appeared to him
was treasured at Oviedo. A small church at Rome
is dedicated to him and St. Thomas of Villanova.
		(EDGAR HENNmmcss.)
Bmwoos"a:: The works are most easily scoemble in
	MPL, zcvi. The Vita by Julisnus HisWwue is in ABB,
	Jan., ii. 536‑09, and MPL, sovi. 43‑48. Consult:
	F. Qs" Rirdhenpeschic" Syaniens, IL, ii. 135‑138,
	Regensburg, 1874; A. Ebert, Alxpemeine GnAiaW der
	Liuautur dea Mitfdaltws, L b88‑802, Leipsio, 1889; (1. von
	Dsialoweki, in Kirwhie7dNide Swim iv. 2, pp.
	125 sqq., Maneter, 1898; Ceillier, Autsurs *an*, IL 773
	778, Iav. 412; DCB, iii. 223‑225.
V.‑29
ILLGEN, CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH: German theologian; b. at Chemnitz (20 m. e.n.e. of Zwickau), Sept. 16, 1786; d. at Leipsie Aug. 4, 1844. He studied in the University of Leipsic, where he was appointed associate professor of philosophy in‑1818, and of theology in 1823, becoming full professor in 1825. He was later appointed canon. He was the author of a number of programs, of which the most important were the following: Vita Lcelii Socini (Leipsie, 1814‑26); Memmra utriusque catechismi Lutheri (1829‑30); and Historia t:i philoWici (1836‑40). He likewise wrote Ueber den Werth der chrastlichen Dogmengeschichte (Leipsic, 1817), a work of little value, and Die Verk1drung des irdisehen Lebena durch daa Evaagelium (1823), a volume of sermons. In 1814 he founded the Leipziger hutoriwh‑Meologiache Gese4achaft, and in 1832 established the Zedachrift fur historiac)te Theologie (Leipsic and Goths, 1832‑75), which he edited from 1832 until his death, when the editorship Aevolved on C. W. Niedner and later on K. F. G. Kahnis.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: B. Lindner, in ZHT, 1848, P. 8.
ILLUMINATI: A name given by the Church Fathers to the baptized, and at a later time borne by several societies. It was given to a mystical sect that appeared in Spain in 1524 under the name of Alumbrados or Alombrados (q.v.). This society was abolished by the Inquisition, but reappeared in 1623 in France under the name of Guerinets, to perish there in 1635. A similar sect, originating about 1722 in southern France, existed until the Revolution, (1794). In more recent times the name "Illuminati" refers principally to the members of a secret society founded on May 1, 1776, by Adam Weishaupt (b. at Ingolstadt Feb. 6, 1748; d. at Goths Nov. 18, 1830), professor of .canon law at Ingolstadt, and patterned after thr model of the Jesuit order. Aside from gratifying his ambition, Weishaupt's object was to combat religion and further rationalism. From Ingolstadt he spread his propaganda to Eichstadt, Freising, Munich, and other places. Every candidate had to give a written promise to tell nobody of this society. He learned nothing of his superiors and of the origin of the society, but was confirmed in the belief that the order could be traced back to antiquity, and that its members included even popes and cardinals. The candidate was bound by an oath to seize every opportunity to serve humanity and to better knowledge; he further vowed eternal silence and strict obedience. Every month he bad to send a report to his superior, whom he did not know. Each member received a name usually borrowed from classical literature, such as Socrates, Alcibiades, Cato, Marius; Weishaupt called himself Spartacus. Weishaupt had at heart the collection of a large library, for the purpose of establishing an academy of scholars. In order to obtain books, his associates were not to shrink from the theft of manuscripts; for Weishaupt taught them " sin is only that which is hurtful, and if the profit is greater than the damage, it bees a virtue."
The faatastio work of Weishaupt would have fallen to pieces if Baron von Zwaek (Cato) had not secured for the society a firmer hold by con‑

Imnmiaatt
Imsre of Clod	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	450
necting it with freemasonry. Lodges already in existence were quietly brought under the rule of. the Illuminati, and new lodges were established in which the degrees of the Illuminati were treated as higher grades of masonry. By identifying itself with freemasonry, the order was largely increased, freed from financial difficulties, and protected from persecution. In 1780 the Marquis Von Conetanzo (Diomedes) succeeded in winning at Frankfort Baron Adolf von Knigge, to whom the Illuminati owed the complete structure of their system as well as the larger part of their adherents in Middle and North Germany. Three classes of Illuminati were now formed, one of novices and " minervals," one of freemasons, and one of the students of the mysteries.
The most successful apostle of the order besides Knigge was Bode, a councilor of Duke Ernst of Gotha, who, in Thuringia and Saxony, as well as on the Rhine, secured numerous men of high mnkacholara, poets, and even princes. The movement soon extended from Italy to Denmark, from Warsaw to Paris; the number of members is estimated at 2,000. Goethe, Herder, Ernst II, of Gotha, Karl August of Weimar, Ferdinand of Brunswick, the Prince of Wied, and other secular and spiritual lords were at some time either actual members of the order or counted on its list. But it was inevitable that the morally offensive character of the order and its danger to the state should be detected. In Aug., 1784, a decree was issued in Bavaria prohibiting all secret societies. Embittered by the ungratefulness and arrogance of Weishaupt, Knigge bad retired from the order in 1784. Weishaupt now lost his position at the university and went to Regensburg, then to Gotha, where Duke Ernst granted him the salary of a privy councilor. In 1785, after the discovery of the moral baseness of the order from secret correspondence of Weiehaupt, a sharp persecution began which soon brought the whole institution to collapse.
PAUL TBCHACBERT.
BIHuoa6A?aT: For a list of literature on the subject consult G. Kloss, Bibliographic der Freimauremi, nos. 32113275, Frankfort, 1844. The sources are the works of Weishaupt, of which the principal ones are Volleondipe tieschidte der Vwfolpunp der luuminaten, Frankfort, 1786; Apologia der Illuminoten, ib., 1787; Doe roabassats $gstem, ib., 1787; %urae Redhtfartdgunp meinar Abeidfen, with Nadlrap, ib., 1787; Einige Orspiualachriften des Illumir natmordens, Munich, 1786; Svatem and Pokes des l1‑luminatenordene, ib., 1787; Die mueden Arbsitm doe Spartacue and PAilo, ib., 1794. Consult also: J. P. 1.. de la Roche du Maine, Essai cur la sods des Illuminbes, Paris, 1792; J. A. Stark, Triumph der Philoeopkie, ii. 259 ®qq., Regensburg, 1847; H. Brack, Die rationalistiechen Bestrebungen im katholisehen DmtaAland, Mains, 1865.

ILLUMINATION (Let. Wuminatio ; Gk. photiamoa) : In Protestant dogmatics a name of a part of the ordo salutia (see ORDER of SALVATION), signifying an activity of the Holy Spirit closely connected with the Calling (q.v.). So far as the New‑Testament usage of photimoe and phott&ein is concerned, it may be said, on the one hand, that the light brings forth ethical fruits in the children of light (Eph. v. 9‑10; cf. Isa. ii. 5, la. 3), and, on the other, that these children, as instruments appointed by God, illuminate the world and convert
it unto God and his light (Matt. v. 14, 16; II Cor. iv. 5‑6; cf. Rom. ii. 19; Acts xxvi. 18). But .the real illuminator is Christ; the true light (John i. 9; cf. II Tim. i. 10). The apostolic preaching of the Gospel is itself " illumination," and its purpose is '° to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ" (11 Cor. iv. 6). The Christians, accordingly, are those who have been " once enlightened" (Hob. vi. 4, a. 32). It is important for the mystical conception that illumination and contemplation take place only upon the basis of a moral purification. It was, significant for Protestant theology that Luther in his Smaller Catechism inserted the illumination in the ordo 8atutis (" calls, gathers, illumines, sanctifies "). The Apology and the Formula of Concord represent the illumination as taking place through the Word, and regard it as a fanatical error to teach an illumination without the Word. This difference gives the conception its peculiar stamp: the illumination is subordinated to the calling and is effected only through the Word. And this is the reason, too, why the older Protestant dogmaticians use the term only occasionally. Hollas was the first to give it a place of its own in the ordo aahutis (Ezamen theologicum, Stockholm, 1741, pp. 813 sqq.). This is due to the importance which the illumination. received in the mystical and Pietistic literature. For Hollas, in introducing the idea, takes the position that the illumination may be present in an imperfect degree in the human intellect without any sanctification of the will. Johann Arndt, however, in his Biicher room wahren Chrietentum (Magdeburg, 1610), defends the mystical usage of the term rejected by Hollas, declaring that the Holy Spirit illuminates only those who renounce the world and on this wise follow Christ (I. zxxvii. 16, xcaix. 4, ITI. i. 2, 11). In this way the illumination is made a special divine act, surpassing the vocation, inasmuch as it is realized only in the case of those who "desist from all that which God himself is not, from oneself and all creatures," "and keep their inmost souls pure from the creatures and the world. Thus God illuminates from within, for all must stream forth from within God's being. This inner light then shines forth in the works " (III., u.). It is from the point of view of this opposition that the view of Hollas is to be understood. The conception of Hollas was also that of the Pietistic dogmaticians: " illumination itself consists in this, that the Holy Ghost in his light by means of the Word of God pictures and makes known heavenly truth to the human understanding with such clearness, force, and conviction that man thereby recog nizes it as truth, believes it with divine assurance, and thus knows what God has graciously given him, and is able to judge spiritual things spiritually " (Freylinghausen, Grundlegung der Theologce, p. 166, Halle, 1705). The same is true also of the rationalistic dogmaticiane (e.g., Wegecheider, I=tihtUones theoi*ce, Halle, 1815, ¢ 158, pp. 497‑498). In the same direction, moreover, tend the views of the more modern dogmaticians so far as they employ the term at all (e.g., Domer, Glmtbenalehre, ii. 2, p. 727, Berlin, 1881, and, especially, Frank, System der ChrisUichen Wahrheit, ii. 333, Leipsic, 1894).

451	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	nluminati
		Image of Clod
	The dogmatician's attitude to the term will vary,
according to his conception of the call as a mere
offering of Salvation, or as the effectual appropria
tion of it. If the Biblical conception of vocation
as an effectual divine influence through the Word
is retained, it is difficult to vindicate a special place '',
for illumination. But this conception is to be pre
ferred for the obvious reason that, by the other
theory, the call could not at all be reckoned among
the proper acts of grace meant for the individual,
but would amount to a mere presupposition for
this work of grace. Thus considered, vocation
denotes the effectual influence of the revelation of
salvation upon the personal life; illumination the
transference of the person into the sphere of God.
In this connection there is just as little need, so
far as Scriptural usage is concerned, of restricting
illumination to the intellect as there is of supple
menting the conception of vocation in any such
way as that. Illumination is to be regarded as a
synonym of vocation, without having any special
locus in systematic theology. Both terms denote
the influences of God in the Word, the effects
of which are seen in regeneration and conversion.
These influences address themselves to the whole
man; they move the will as well as the intellect.
That is as true of the calling as of the illumination.
It would be well if the practical discussions based
upon Luther's Catechism should likewise put the
two terms together; not, therefore, as if the call
outwardly offered the Word and the illumination
inwardly appropriated its content, but in such a
way that with the call and through it the illumina
tion of man takes place.	R. SEEBERG.
BIHLIOQRAPHT: Besides the works mentioned in tile text,
	consult the teat‑books on Dogmatics in the department of
	Soteriology, and J. H. Blunt, Dictionary of Doctrinal and
	Historical Theology, p. 324, London, 1870; A. A. Benton,
	Church Cycdopoadia, p. 374, Philadelphia, 1884.
	ILLUMIIIATION, THE. See ENLIGHTENMENT,
THE.
	ILLUSTRATED BIBLES. See BIBLES, ILLUS
TRATED.
	IMAGE OF GOD: The conception that man was
created in the image of God is stated as a fact in
Gen. i. 26, 27, v. 1 (cf. Eph. iv. 24; Col. iii. 10;
I John iii. 2). It comes from God and is reproduced
in the race (Gen. v. 3), a principle followed in the
genealogy by which Jesus is made Son of God
through Adam (Luke iii. 23‑38). It is. so unmis
takable that Paul appealed even to ethnic testimony
in favor of it (Acts xvii. 28). Obviously without
this conception the thought of adoption as children
would be impossible. It is the race made in the
image of God which is destined for such adoption,
and likens to God is the blessing, the law, and
the hope of adoption (I John iii. 1, 2). How much
this thought of likeness to God is contained in that
of adoption is suggested by the injunction to be
holy and perfect, as God is holy and perfect, " that
ye may be the children of your Father which is in
heaven " (Matt. v. 45, 48; cf. Eph. v. 1, " be ye there
fore followers of God, as dear children," R.V. " imi
tators of God "). To be like God is the gift, the
task, and the purpose of the Christian (I John iii. 1‑3).
In the Church the conception was froth the begin‑
Ding that the image of God consisted in the reason and freedom and free will with which man was endowed, and that this endowment rested on the activity of the Spirit in him. Some referred the image of God to the body also, in connection with the Christian hope of resurrection from the dead and with the doctrine of immortality. But these are unessential notions. The anima rationalis was the essential one, which was always emphasized. The differences in opinion which still exist arise from the mistake which makes the doctrine of the divine image of man the doctrine of the original state.
From the very beginning the view of the image of God in man has been that it was a good wholly or partially lost. Justin seems to be an exception. That man is endowed with reason and freedom, is to him a sign of likeness to God. But this endowment he regards neither as lost nor impaired by Adam's sin. Humanity indeed suffers under the predominance of the passions over reason. But this predominance is caused only indirectly by the sin of the first man and depends not on a degeneration of human nature brought about by him and continued in the race. By the influence of sin existing in the world since Adam's fall, every one repeats the fall, becomes like Adam in this respect, and falls into judgment and condemnation instead of receiving immortality in a God‑like existence. Only the revelation of the whole Logos in Christ and the remission of sin connected herewith enable man successfully to apply to the realizing of his destiny his inherent ability, which does not differ from Adam's endowment.
A difference has been made between the expressions in Gen. i. " in the image " and " in the likeness," referring the former to the intellectual powers of reason and freedom, and the latter to moral righteousness, which was lost through the fall. This distinction was preserved by the ;scholastics, with whom the question became one of justitia originalis. In the Roman Catholic Church the distinction was maintained, but the justitia originalis, " man's original righteousness," was declared to have been a superadded gift. The Protestant Church, ignoring this distinction, located the image of God in the religious and moral nature, and defined it as the original righteousness in which man was created. Socinianism and Arminianism defined it as man's dominion over the animal creation. Modern dogmatics distinguishes distinctly between the divine image in man and the original state, and Christianity favors such a distinction in harmony with Scripture and without contradiction to Col. iii. 10 and Eph. iv. 24. A difference of opinion, however, exists as to how far the present condition differs from that at the beginning, orhow far the original state is still the present. The difference between Schleiermacher, Biedermann, Pfleiderer, Lipsius, Ritachl, on the one hand, and that of Nitzsch, Dorner, Kghler, Hofmann, Kahnis, Frank, on the other, is practically over the use of a historical anthropology. Some (Schleiermacher, Biedermann) refuse this, and require a dogmatic treatment (Ritschl, Wendt); others regard man's original condition a4 a state of innocence of which

Images and Image‑Worship	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	452
it can no more be said than that no law of sin ruled (Kaftan), whereas Nitzsoh, Dorner, and Frank acknowledge " an essential relationship to the good and the rational, and consequently to God . . . a natural tendency to the good, a natural love for God."
The preservation of man for redemption by the might of the divine will of love makes it conceivable that sinful man is still in the image of God, but in such a manner that he can accomplish his task and destiny only through the power of redemption. This affords him not only freedom of choice, but also the power to achieve liberty (cf. John i. 12). The teaching of II Cor. iv. 4; Col. i.15 (cf. Heb. i. 3) that Christ is " the image of the invisible God " means that there is in him what there is in none else, the evident realization of God (cf. John xvi. 9).
(H. CREMaat.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The earlier literature in cited in Hauek‑
Hersog, RE, v. 113; E. W. Grinfield, The Image and
Likeness of God in Man, London, 1837; G. Bull, State of
Man before as Fall, in Works, vol. ii., Oxford, 1846; C. H.
Zeller, Rurse Seelenlehre, Calw, 1850; F. C. W. K. Bell,
Ueber die Goubildlichksit den Menechen, Friedberg, 1856;
F. Delitaech, System der biblischen Psycholopie, Leipsi0.
1861, Eng. transl., Edinburgh, 1867; P. F. Keerl, Der
Menach dae Ebenbild Gottes, Basel, 1861; C. G. van Rud
loff, Die Lehre von Menechen auf deco Grunde der . .
Ofenbarunp, Gotha, 1863; C. Wittichen, Die Idea des Menechsn, Gottingen, 1868; O. Z8okler, Die LeAre room Uratand des Menschen, Gatersloh, 1879; H. H. Wendt, Die ehriatlicbe Lehre van der menachlichen Voilkommenheit, Gottingen, 1880; J. H. Oswald, Relipibae UrpewAichte der Memchhait, Paderbom, 1881; R. R6etsohi, Geschichte and %rifk der kirchlichen Lehre roan der . . . Vollkommenheit and vom $sindenfall, Leyden, 1881; E. Warner, Bibliade Anthropolopie, Stuttgart, 1887; 8. R. Driver, Sermons on Subjects connected urith he O. T., pp. 173‑174, London, 1892; J. Laidlaw, Bible Doctrine of Man, ib., 1895; DB, ii. 452‑453; the treatises on Theology of the Old Testament, and those on Dogmatics in the sections on Creation and Anthropology.

IMAGES AIfD IMAGE‑WORSHIP.
T. Among the Hebrews. Legislation and Prophecy (f 1). Tmage‑worship in History (¢ 2). Terms and Their Meaning (1 3). Effects upon Hebrew Art (§ 4).
II.	In the Church.
	Variant Opinions up to 400 (¢ 1).
	Eastern Abuses Lead to. Iconoclasm (1 2).
	Iconoclasm under Leo the Daurlaa sndUter (1 3).
	Growth of (ilt after 850 (1 4).
	Modern Ecclesiastical Use& (§ 5).
I. Among the Hebrews: Tacitus (Hiet., v. 4‑5) points out as a characteristic of the Mosaic religion opposition to a portrayal of the deity.
i. Legisla‑ This is in accord with the Old Tests. tion and ment. All strata of the law bear witProphecy. ness to this opposition. The first two commandments of the decalogue expressly put the prohibition of image‑worship beside the prohibition to worship any other god than Yahweh (Ex. xx. 1 eqq.; Deut. v. 7‑8; Lev. xix. 4). The narrators of the patriarchal stories knew no worship of the god of the patriarchs in the form of an image, and there is no mention of images of God at the central sanctuaries in Shiloh and Jerusalem. The Certainty that Yahweh was ever present with his people found its expression in the ark of the covenant (q.v.), but that contained no image of God. Scripture‑prophecy manifested an
uncompromising hostility to image‑worship, without indicating that it was prevalent, and attempted to establish and confirm popular opposition to the same. An image in a work of man (Amos v. 26; Hos. xiii. 2; Is&. ii. 8), ,an imitation of creatures (Deut. iv. 16 sqq.) out of dead and created matter (Hoe. iv. 12; Isa. xliv. 9‑10; Ps. cav.); therefore its worship is folly, since God, who alone is to be worshiped, is a living creator, a spirit who can not be pictured.
But, on the other hand, there is nothing in the primitive history of this people to prove that this
peculiarity of imageless worship was a. Image‑ an inborn inheritance or the result of
Worship a natural development of the people.
in History. The ancestors of the people beyond
the Euphrates had idol‑worship (Josh. xxiv. 2, 14); Jacob's wives carried religious images with them from their Syrian home (Gen. xxxi. 19, 34, xxxv. 2 eqq.). The recollection of the struggle between the imageless worship of Yahweh as the God of revelation and the representation of Yahweh as the national God go back as far as the wandering through the wilderness. For the golden calf of Ex. xxxii. is not an image suggested by the Egyptian religion, since the Egyptian Apis was not an image, but a living animal (see CALF, THE GoLnax). On the contrary, Aaron proclaimed a feast of Yahweh, and the rejoicing of the people proves that with the image it received nothing new and strange, but something that it expected (Ex. xxxii. 4‑5, 18); in that way the shepherd people had been accustomed to think of its god. And from the tenacity of habit it is intelligible that after the disruption of the kingdom, in order to destroy the attraction of the central sanctuary at Jerusalem, Jeroboam set up calves representing Yahweh at the sacred places in the northern kingdom (I Kings xii. 27 sqq.). The " calves " of Bethel, Dan, Gilgal outlasted not only the Phenician cults favored by later kings in the northern kingdom, but even the powerful' assault of prophecy (Amos v. 4 sqq., viii. 14; Hos. vi. 10, viii. 4 sqq., ix. 15; 11 Kings x. 25 sqq.; Judges xviii. 34). Even after the carrying away of the ten tribes the cult of Bethel survived (II Kings xvii. 27), and it was left for Josiah to abolish the last traces (II Kings xxiii. 15).
The more general term for image is peael (Ex. xx. 4), which includes images of stone and wood,
whereas the term for metallic images is 3. Terms massekha, i.e., a cast, then the molten
and Their image itself (Hog. xiii. 2; Deut. ix. 12).
Meaning. It must, however, not be understood
of the massive molten image, but of the molten golden or silver coating with which a wooden core is covered (Ex. xxxii. 20; Hog. viii. 6; Isa. xxx. 22). There are several other terms (as `azabbim, nesekh, nusikh, semd, elilim) and opprobrious names (ahikkuzim, gillulim, to'ebhoa), as well as general terms like zelem, "image," tabnith, " figure," rnaskith, " form,"all of which proves how important a part idol‑worship played at times in the life of .Israel. These names, however, mark no difference between images of Yahweh and idols. The mantic use of ephod and teraphim (see EPaoD; TERAPHIM; Cf. Judges xvii., xViii.; Has. iii. 4; Zech.

RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA	Imares and Image‑Worship
x. 2; I Sam. xv. 23) appears to be Hebraic and not imported with a foreign religion; and for the image of the brazen serpent (see SERPENT, BRAzEN), which was abolished in the time of Hezekiah (II Kings xviii. 4; cf. Num. xxi. 4 sqq.), an Israelitic origin is positively attested. With this epoch the prophetic opposition to Yahweh images became determined, and the whole energy of the prophetic attack was concentrated upon Idolatry (q.v.).
In freeing the deity from the fetters with which sensual limitations chain man's inclination to worship images made by himself, art was
4. Effects not rejected by the spirit of the Old
Upon Testament. There may be discovered Hebrew working in it a mental impulse of Art divine origin (Ex. xxxi. 1 sqq.; cf. II Kings xvi. 11 with Isa. viii. 2). But the exclusion of plastic art from the highest spheres which employed it in heathenism denied to it that powerful development among the people of God which it obtained elsewhere by illustrating divine ideal forms (see ART, HEBREW). With emphasis the narrator in I Kings vii. 13 aqq. points out that the artistic outfit of the buildings of Solomon was mainly due to Phenician art. So far as it did not serve idolatrous purposes, the art of the Old Testament did not go essentially beyond the purposes of ornamentation and decoration. Imitations of flowers, garlands, fruits, trees, whether of beaten work (Num. viii. 4), or carving (I Kings vi. 18), or graven work (I Kings vii. 36), or in wool, formed the adornment of buildings for sacred and secular uses (Ex. xxv. 31 sqq., xxviii. 33 sqq.; I Kings vi. 18, 29, 32, 35, vii. 18 sqq.; Ezek. xli. 185 aqq.; Ps. oxliv. 12). Even the animal world, in distinguished types, was laid under contribution. Lions appeared as throne‑keepers of the earthly king (I Kings x. 19 sqq.); lions and oxen were beneath the bases of the lavers of the temple; the latter carried also the brazen sea (I Kings vii. 29, 36, 25). That in later times profane art applied itself to mural painting and advanced so far that it portrayed men can be seen from Ezek. xxiii. 14. In a very peculiar manner there entered into the older art an object which was not intended as an imitation of nature, but represented a religious conception, viz., the images of the bearers and keepers of the divine majesty, the cherubim (nee ANoEIS), which found frequent employment as images in the Holy of Holies, as ornaments on the folding‑doors, bases, and curtains of the sanctuary. In the post‑exilic period there is discernible an increasing tendency to oppose the employment of art. The stricter exposition of legal enactments narrowed the original life of the nation, as when, because of the abuse of the name of Yahweh, it prohibited employment of that name, as, in connection with the prohibition to worship images, it rejected the portraiture of living creatures, and by the influence of classical art after the time of the Seleucidee (Josephus, Ant. XII., iv. 9, XV., ii. 6, XIX., ix. 1; Life, 12) this prohibition was rather intensified than diminished. In Herodian times it was regarded as a law, and was supported by the authority of prominent scribes, that images of living creatures might not be erected in the Holy Land
(Josephus, War, I. xxxiii. 2; Argil. XVIL, vi. 2). With a death‑defying courage the observers of the law knew how to elicit a promise from a Pilate, a Vitellius, or a Petronius, not to bring the standards adorned with the emperor's image into the holy city, or to carry them through Jewish . territory (Ant. XVIII., iii. 1, v. 3; War, II., ix. 2‑3, x. 4). In describing the ancient sanctuaries, Josephus, who refers to this rigor, attempted to post‑date it, but not without disingenuousness (Ant. III., vi. 2, VIII., vii. 5). Classic heathenism avenged itself on the nobility of the early Mosaic opposition to its gods by the malicious invention that Pompey, when he entered the Holy of Holies of the temple, found an ass under the golden vine, the only and the main idol of the Jewish worship of God (Florus, i. 40; Petronius, Fragum 35). P. KLEINERT.
II. In the Church: Although the primitive. Church was 'not averse to art, yet it had no images of
Christ, and Irenieus reproached the
I. Variant Carpocratians (Hcer. I., xxv. 6) for
Opinions possessing such figures. In the Acts of
zoo‑4oo. John, the apostle sharply reproved an
artist who had made a portrait of himself (Zahn, Acta Joannis, 223 sqq.). The prohibition of images by the thirty‑sixth canon of the Synod of Elvim (Hefele, Concaliengeschichte, i. 1'70) aimed to forestall any hindrance to the spiritual worship of God, thus showing that this danger already existed. Eusebius also opposed images of the apostles and of Christ (Hilt. ecd. vii. 18), and exhorted Constantia, the widow of Licinius, to seek the image of Christ in the Scripture. It is a wellknown fact that Epiphanius once tore in pieces a curtain on which an image of Christ or of a saint was painted (ed. Dindorf, IV., ii. 85), although Ambrose and Jerome state that there were portraits of the apostles, while Augustine mentions pictures of the Savior and the worship of images. Gregory the Great had but faint disapproval for a bishop who destroyed images in his church because of the adoration shown them (Epist. xi. 13).
The use and adoration of images were especially popular in the East, this tendency being increased
both by the assimilation of pagan cons. Eastern cepts, customs, and forms of worship,
Abuses and by the Alexandrian Christology Lead to with its emphasis on the permeation Iconoclasm. of the earthly nature by the divine.
The pseudo‑Areopagite writings which made the symbols the actual representation of things invisible thus laid the theological foundation for a religious veneration of images, and consequently for their. adoration. The word of Basil (De apiritu sando, xlv.), " the honor paid to the image passes on to the prototype," became the classical phrase in justification of this adoration. The extravagance of this worship was emphasized by the iconoclasts (cf. the letter of Michael the Stammerer, Mansi, xiv. 417 sqq.), who state, among other things, that images were asked to act as sponsors, that coloring‑matter scraped from them was mixed with the bread and wine of the sacrament, and that the Eucharist was received from the hands of images.. The opposition to image‑worship became acute in the iconoclastic controversies,

Images and Image‑WOrahiD	THE NEW SCFIAFF‑HERZUG	464
Immaanlate Ooaoeption
which were caused by factors not yet clearly known,
but it is certain, at all events, that the spiritual
atmosphere produced by the development of
Mohammedanism increased the opposition to images.
In a church which believed that the mystery of the
redemption was present in the image, every move
ment for reform naturally assailed ieonolatry.
	This is plain both from the religious opposition
of the Paulicians and from the political antagonism
			of Leo the Isaurian, so that a mutual
	3.Icono‑ influence is not improbable. Leo's
		clam	prohibition forms a part of his reform
	under Leo story efforts to give new vitality to
		the	his empire, which he felt authorized to
Isaurian undertake in his double capacity of
	and Later. king and priest. In 726 he seems to
			have begun at once with the removal
of	images (Hefele, Concilimgewhichte, iii. 378),
while the council of state and the new patriarch
were in harmony with the second edict, which was
issued in 730. Leo was opposed, however, by John of
Damascus in three orations and by the popes Greg
ory II., who harshly reproved him, and Gregory III.,
who condemned the enemies of the images, even at
the cost of forfeiting valuable ecclesiastical prov
inces. Still more reckless in his measures against
the image‑worshipers was Leo's son, Constantine V.
The Council of Constantinople (754), which was
intended to be ecumenical, denounced image‑wor
ship as heresy and idolatry. The monks still re
sisted, but had to feel the severity of the imperial
wrath. Ecclesiastical goods were confiscated, and
relics were thrown into the sea. In 766 Constantine
undertook to impose an oath against the worship
of images on all his subjects, and even had the
matter brought before a synod at Gentilly, near
Paris. But the Lateran synod of 769 anathematized
the synod of 754, and after the death of Leo IV.,
the regency of his widow, Irene, caused an entire
change.	Tarasius, an advocate of images, was
made patriarch in 784, and after the abortive
attempt to hold an ecumenical council at Constan
tinople two years later, the synod at Nicesa was
held in 787, and ascribed to the images a " respectful
reverence," but reserved " true worship "for God
alone. The Caroline Books (q.v.), however, ex
	plicitly denied all religious value of the images, and
the same decision was reached by the synod con
voked by Charlemagne at Frankfort in 794 (see
FRANSB'03rT, SYNOD ox, 794). In the East, Leo
	V., the Armenian, emphatically reaffirmed the pro
hibition of images, and Theodore the Studite,
the advocate of images and ecclesiastical liberty,
was again exiled. Michael the Stammerer opposed
the public worship of images, at least after 823,
and a synod hell at Paris in 825 again expressed a
view in harmony with the Caroline Books. During
the reign of Theophilus the persecution of images
and of monasticism reappeared as in the days of
Constantine V., but the early death of the emperor
	changed the condition.
		During the reign of his widow, Theodora, the
	worship was restored, probably Mar. 11, 843 (cf.
de Boer, ByzarWniache Zeitschrift, iv. 445 sqq.).
The basal doctrines of the advocates of ioonolatry
were developed especially by John of Damascus, the
patriarch Nicephorus, and Theodore the Studite. They draw their arguments both from the Bible and
tradition, and from the nature and the 4. Growth attested miracles of the images. Over
of Cult against the prohibition of images in the after 85o. Old Testament attention was called
to the difference between " reverence of worship " and " reverence of respect," and the progress of the plan of salvation, as well as the more perfect knowledge of God on the part of the Christian, was pointed out. Since and because the divine Logos has become manifest in the phenomenal world, he, may also be represented pictorially. Hence the significance of the image is not restricted to him who can not read, but it is the real bearer of the prototype, differing from it only as to substance. Every virtue of the prototype belongs relatively to the copy, so that which happens to the one has reference to the other (MPG, xcia. 425 D, 1184 A). A rejection of images is a denial of the incarnation of God (1188 D), and Theodore even declares that " Christ is not Christ unless he be graven " (1225 D). By the image the eyes of the spirit are to be raised to the spiritual essence of God. This latter distinction between prototype and copy was, however, lost in lower types of Christianity. It was thought that idolatry might be avoided in merely making a copy and confining it mainly to painting.
The ordinary Russian is in the habit of designating the icon as his God, and those " not made
with hands " enjoy great veneration. 5. Modern To the image of the " mother of God Ecclesias‑ at Kasan " is ascribed Russia's delivtical Usage. eranee in 1812; the same trust in
	icons showed itself in the Japanese
Russian war of 1905 ; while the Iberian icon of
the Virgin is the most celebrated healer of Moscow,
and Russia is richer in wonder‑working images
than Italy and Spain. In general ioonolatry has
never been so prominent in the West as in the
East, yet even Thomas Aquinas has declared that
an image of Christ claims the same veneration
as Christ himself (Summa III., qu. 25, art 3‑4).
The Council of Trent in its twenty‑fifth session
expressed itself with caution and justified the wor
ship of the image from its relation to the proto
type. In religious practise, however, the line here
drawn is not observed. 	N. BONwETBCH.

BraLIoGRAPHY: ><. For sources: J. Belden, De this Syria, with A. Beyer's additions, Amsterdam, 1872, Eng. tranal., The Fabulow Gode denounced in the Bible, Philadelphia, 1880; Schrader, RAT. For discussions: M. de VogOE, Melanges d'arch6olopis orientate, Paris, 1888; W. Baudissin, Jahve et MolwA Leipsic, 1874; idem, Studien sur semitisdun Relipionepewhichte, Leipsie, 1878;' E. Nestle, Die israsti<isdun'Eigennamen in ihrer reliyionapuchichtLidun Bedeutung, Leipsic, 1878; P. Sehols, GGtzsndienst and Zaubenoesen bei don alien Habraern und den benachbarten Y6lkern, Regensburg, 1877; F. Baethgen, Beitrdpe sur aesnitisehsn Relipionaoexhidda. Der GoU laraele and die Gd#er der Reiden, Berlin, 1889 Nowack, Ardrdolopie, vol. ii.; Smith, Rot. of Sam.; F. Weber, Jadiwhe Theoloyie, index " GStsendienst, Leipsio,1897; A. von Gall, Altiaroelilischa Kul:ueekitfen, Giessen, 1898; R Smend, AletatamsnWidw Relipionsueechidte, Freiburg, 1899; DB, ii. 445449; BB, ii. 2152 aqq.; JE, xii. 588‑689. For studies of ethnic idolatry, E. B. Tllor, Early History of Mankind, chap. vi., London, 1878; idem, Primitive CuUwV, London, 1903 (authoritative); J. G. Fraser, Golden BowA, 3 vole.,

455
London, 1900; especially Frazer's edition of Fausanius's Greece, London, 1898 (a monumental work).
IL The sources of the history of the iconoclastic movements are given in M. $ Goidmt, Imperiaiia deaata de cultu imaginum, Frankfort, 1808; Manek Concilia, vole. mi.‑uv.; VPG, xoviii‑c.; in the writings of John of Damascus (St. John Damascene on Holy Images, En& travel. by Mary H. Allies, London. 1898), Nioephorus, Theodore the Studite, and the Byzantine ohronographers, especially Theophanes, whose works are to be found in CSHB. Consult: L. Maimbourg, Hiat de 1'h&esie des iconoclaAm 2 vole, Paris, 1879‑83; F. Spanheim, Historia imapinum restitufa, Antwerp, 1888 (combats Maimbourg); C. w. F. watch, Hi.torie der %etzereien, vols. x., xi., 11 vole., Leipsic, 1782‑Bb; J. E. Tyler, Image Worship of the Church of Rome, London, 1847; J. M. Neale, Hitt. of the Holy EChurch, 5 vols., ibt, 1850‑73; J. Hergenrbther, Photius, f. 228 eqq., Regensburg, 1887; J. H. Blunt, Dictionary o1 Seda, Heresies, Ecclesiastical Parties, pp 215‑221, Philadelphia, 1874; K. Schanck, Raiser Leon 111. Bin Beitrap our Gsschichts des Bilderatre4 Halls„ 1880; F. W. J. H. Gaze, Symbolik der grischiaehen %irche, i. 315 sqq., ,Berlin, 1881; .K. Sehwarsloee, Der Bilderatrsit sin %ampf der priechizchen Hirche um Are Eigenart and ihre PreihcA Goths, 1890; F. W. F. Kattenbuaeh, Lehrbueh der . . . Honfessionewkunde, i. 458 sqq., Freiburg, 1892; C. Thomas, Theodor von Studion and sein Zeitalkr, Leipsic, 1892; R. Seeberg, Dagmenpeschichte, f. 247 eqq., Leipsic, 1895; Dobechilta, Christwbilder, in TU, xviii. 1, 2, 1899; A. H. Hore, Eighteen Centuries of the Orthodox Greek Church, pp. 18, 41, 42, 285, 335‑338 et passim, New York, 1899; J. Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire, pp. 38‑39, 48, 85, 154, 341, New York, 1904; Hefele, CmicWenpeeehiokte. iii. 388 sqq.. Eng. travel., v. 280 zqq.; Neander, Christian Church, i. 71, 291‑293, ii. 322‑331, iii. 197‑243, 532‑553; Schaff, Christian Church, iv. 447‑474; Harnack, Dogma, iii. 159180, iv. passim, v. 304‑309; DCB, iii. 198‑2D5; and in general, the works on church history.
IMAM: A term used among Mohammedans in four distinct senses. (1) It is used in the Koran to mean a leader, model of character, pattern; e.g. Sura ii. 118, xvii. 73, xxv. 74, xv. 79. (2) It is the Shiah term for Cal(ph, applied solely to the twelve (or six) successors of Mohammed, of whom the last is yet to appear. (3) It designates the founder of a system of doctrine or practise based upon the Koran. (4) Its most common employment is to the officiant who leads the devotions in any place of public worship.

IMMACULATE CONCEPTION.
Preparation for the Dogma (1 1). The Dogma (§ 2). Scriptural and Patristic Support Lacking (; 3). Scholastic Opinions (1 4). The Feast (§ 5).
	The doctrine of the immaculate conception of the
Virgin Mary is a modern dogma of the Roman
		Catholic Church which declares the
	:. Prepare‑ mother of Jesus absolutely free from
	tion for all implication in the fall of Adam and
the Dogma. its consequences. Like most doc
		trines, it was the result of a long
development, and embodies in its history the story
of a struggle between the Thomist and Saotist
parties in the Church which was not ended till 1854
(see 1 5 below). At the Council of Trent the Fran
ciscans demanded the explicit exception of Mary
in the dogmatic decree on the universality of original
sin, and found valuable support from the learned
Jesuits Lainea and Salmeron. The Dominicans
entered a lively protest, and when the perplexed
legates asked for instructions from Rome, they
were ordered to try to satisfy both factions. In
RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA A 	10_0‑"‑:;Wt100‑1r*h1V
this spirit was drawn up the decree on original sin published June 17, 1546. For a time the more sober‑minded, even among the Jesuits, held to the decree. Bellarmine declared the object of the festival to be simply the conception, not the immaoelate conception, of Mary. Petavius, while personally believing in the immaculate conception, denied that it was of faith. Even when, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, the Spanish Franciscans, aided by the Jesuits, stirred up fresh excitement over the question, and Philip III. and Henry IV. sent embassies to Rome, the apostolic see preserved its diplomatic attitude. In 1617 Paul V. forbade both parties to engage in public disputes on this question, and Gregory XV. extended this prohibition even to private discussion, answering to the king of Spain that the eternal wisdom bad not yet revealed the heart of the mystery to men. But the tendency in Rome favored the Scotist view more and more. Alexander VII. called the view very ancient and pious, while still declining to pronounce the opposite view heretical. Clement IX. gave an octave to the feast of the conception of the Virgin Mary; Clement XI. raised the festival in 1708 to the rank of a holy day of obligation for the whole Church. Under Gregory XVI. a strong inclination toward dogmatic definition showed itself. Several French bishops and one German received permission in 1844 to insert the term " immaculate " in the mass of the festival. Pius IX. had a special, almost romantic, devotion to the Virgin, to whose protection he attributed his preservation on the occasion of his flight from the Vatican in 1848. While still an exile, he asked the bishops, in his encyclical of Feb. 2, 1849, to say how far a dogmatic definition would agree with their wishes and those of their people. A number of voices were raised in warning, and only three‑fourths of the bishops agreed with the pope's desire; but the influence of the Jesuits was too powerful to be resisted. Perrone had already published (1847) an extended treatise to prove that the question was ripe for decision. In 1850 Pius named a commission to investigate the question, in which Perrone and his fellow Jesuit, Passaglia, were the most influential members. It reached no result until 1853, when it reported that no evidence from Scripture was needed for a dogmatic declaration, but that tradition alone sufficed, and that even this need not be shown in an unbroken line up to the time of the apostles.
Since these views were in harmony with the inclination of the pope, he called together in the autumn of 1854 a number of prelates The (54 cardinals and about 140 bishops),
	Dogma.	who, in a preliminary meeting, greeted
		the papal decision with loud applause.
On Dec. 8 the pope solemnly took his seat in St.
Peter's; the deanaf the Sacred College came before
him, and in the name of the whole Church begged
him to pronounce a final decision on the question
which had so long been discussed. The actual
terms of the decree, made public by the bull in
efaUlis Deus on Dec. 10, are as follows: " In honor
of the holy and undivided Trinity, for the glory of

Immer Tinnisculate conception
the Virgin Mother of God, for the exaltation of the Catholic faith and the Christian religion, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, and of our own office, we declare, pronounce, and define the doctrine which holds that the most blessed Virgin Mary was, in the first instant of her conception, by the singular grace and privilege of Almighty God, with regard to the merits of Christ Jesus the Savior of the human race, preserved free from every stain of original sin, has been revealed by God, and therefore is to be firmly and constantly believed by all the faithful."
The dogma was not sanctioned by an ecumenical council; but since the Vatican Council of 1870 declared the pope infallible, independent of a council, the decree of 1854 must be received as an infallible utterance, and cannot be changed. Pius IX. had previously, by an encyclical of Feb. 2, 1849, invited the opinion of the bishops on the subject, and received more than 600 affirmative answers; only four dissented from the pope's view; and fiftytwo, while agreeing with him in the dogma itself, deemed it inopportune to define and proclaim it. The dogma of the immaculate conception is the culmination of the steadily increasing veneration of Mary, which appears also in the multiplication of her festivals (see MARY, THE MOTHER of JEsue). It and the Vatican dogma of papal infallibility are the characteristic features of modern Romanism, as distinct from the Romanism of the Council of Trent, and have widened the doctrinal breach between it and the Greek and Protestant Churches.
No passage in favor of the dogma can be found in the Old or the New Testament; the interpretation of the protevangelium (Gem. iii. 15)
3. Scrip‑ which makes it refer to Mary and
tural and Christ is ruled out by the Hebrew teat.
Patristic	The Bible declares all men ‑to be sin‑
Support	ners, and in need of, redemption, and
	Lacking.	exempts Christ alone from this uni
		versal rule. Mary herself calls God
her. Savior (Luke i. 47), thereby including herself
in the number of the saved, and implying a sense
of personal sin and guilt. With this corresponds the
predicate given her by the angel (Luke i. 28)
" endued with grace " (E.V. " highly favored").
The Christian Fathers, though many of them (even
Augustine) exempted Mary from actual trans
gression, know nothing of her freedom from original
sin, but always imply, and often expressly teach,
the contrary. Some (as Ireneeus, Tertullian, Origen,
and Chrysostom) interpret Christ's words at the
wedding of Cana (John ii. 4) as a rebuke of her
unseasonable haste and immoderate ambition. The
origin of the dogma must be sought in the apocryphal
gospels. Its development was favored by the
medieval sentiment of chivalry.
The schoolmen all agreed that Mary was exempt from actual transgression, but divided
4. Scholas‑ on the question whether she was contic ceived without sin and so was immao‑
	Opinions.	ulate from the very instant of her con
		ception, or whether she was in the
first instance tainted by original sin and made im
maculate while she was yet in her mother's womb.
The latter view was taken by Anselm, Hugo of St. Victor, Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, and Bonaventura (In senlentiaa, iii. b, iv. 3). Bernard of Clairvaua (d. 1153) rebuked the church of Lyons for celebrating a festival of the conception on the ground that it lacked the approval of the Church, of reason, and of tradition. If Mary, he wrote, was conceived without sin, why might not sinless conception be affirmed of all her ancestors back to the beginning. However, he expressed a willingness to yield in case the Church should appoint the festival (Epiat. clgiv.). Bonaventum and others argued against the doctrine on the ground that the conception of the body precedes its " animation " (i.e., the first association of the soul with the body). In the conception of the body there is always concupiscence, so that Mary's body, having been received in the usual way, was sinful, and contaminated the spirit when the spirit came into contact with the body. Duns Scotus (d. 1308) argued for Mary's exemption from hereditary sin from the first moment of her conception by a threefold chain of conjectures. (1) God's grace would be enhanced by releasing one individual from all taint of original sin from the very beginning. (2) By conferring this benefit upon Mary, God would bind Mary to Christ by the strongest ties. (3) The vacancy, left by the fallen angels in heaven, could be best filled by Mary, if she were preserved immaculate from the beginning. As the second Adam was preserved immaculate, so it was fitting the second Eve should be. Duns expressed his conclusion in these words: " If the thing does not contradict the Church and the Scriptures, its reality seems probable, because it is more excellent to affirm of Mary that she was not conceived in sin " (In sententioa, iii. 3; cf. R. Seeberg, Dusa Scotus, Leipsic, 1900, pp. 247 eqq.; J. Sehwane, Dogmengeaehichte, Freiburg, 1890, pp. 424 eqq.). A warm controversy ensued over the immaculate conception between the followers of Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus. The Synod of Paris in 1387 decided in favor of the Scotist position, but the controversy became so disturbing that Sixtus IV. in 1483 threatened with excommunication either party which denounced the other. The Council of Trent left the doctrine unsettled and referred back to the decree of Sixtus IV. The Jesuits took it up and became its unyielding champions against the Jansenists and all other opponents. To their seal and their influence over Pius IX. the triumph of the Scotist view, in 1854, is largely due.
(PBILIP Sca.7t.) D. S. Scsaag.
The festival of the Inimaculate Conception, of importance since the Reformation, is purely Western; the feast of the Conception of St.
g. The Anne, which the emperor Emanuel
	Fast.	Comnenus (d. 1180) commanded to
		celebrate on Sept. 9, for which George
of Nicomedia (c. 880) wrote a homily, was rather a
commemoration of the miraculous deliverance of
Anne from the cures of sterility as narrated in the
apocryphal gospels. The history of the feast in
closely connected with that of the dogma. Although
Augustine declares (De natura et gratis, alii.) that
out of reverence for the Lord he intends to exclude

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
467
Christ's mother whenever sin is the subject of discussion, it may be shown by other passages that he is thinking only of actual sin. It was believed, however, that the Scripture spoke of Jeremiah (Jer. i. 5) and John Baptist (Luke i. 15) as being sanctified before their birth, and, although this obviously relates only to their preparation for the prophetic office, it was explained in both cases as signifying their purification from original sin. When Mary came to be placed higher than all the other saints, it was natural that at least an equal prerogative should be asserted of her. This contention is found as early as Paschasius Radbert (De partu trirg£nia). Anselm, indeed (Cur Deus horror, II., xvi.), says that Mary was not only conceived, but born in sin, as all have sinned in Adam. In 1140 certain canons at Lyons defended the theory of her immaculate conception, and celebrated a special festival (festum conceptionis, not immaculate; conceptionis) in honor of it. St. Bernard (Epist. clxxiv., c. 1140 A.D., Eng. trawl. Works of Bernard, ed. Eales, ii. 512‑518) controverted their opinion as in opposition to Scripture and tradition, asserting that the prerogative given by them to Mary was one which belonged to Christ alone, and admitting Mary's sinleseness only from her birth. Alexander of Hales, Albertus Magnus, Bonaventura, and Thomas Aquinas similarly confined themselves to asserting her sanctification before birth; a synod of Oxford, 1222, pronounced the feast unwoemary. The belief in the immaculate conception, notwithet~nding, became increasingly wide‑spread, and was supported especially by the Franciscan order. The authority of Thomas Aquinas was first definitely contested by Duns Scotus (d. 1308), who taught the absolute preservation of Mary from original sin as highly probable. This doctrine became one of the principal points of controversy between Dominican, and Franciscans, Thomists and Sootists. The dispute was especially warm in the University of Paris, which pronounced in favor, 1380. The propositions in which the Dominican Johannes de Montesano (d. 1412) attacked the Scotist doctrine as contrary to the faith were condemned both by the university and by the pope in 1389, and Pierre d'Ailly and the chancellor Gerson declared themselves in favor of the Franciscan teaching. The Council of Basel (Sept. 17, 1439) affirmed it as a dogma of the Church, in full harmony with Scripture, tradition, and actual usage; but since by this time the council had taken a schismatic attitude, its decision had no effect. The papal policy, also, did not favor too speedy a decision in the controversy which so stirred the two powerful orders. Even the Franciscan pope, Sixtus IV., who before his elevation had written a treatise in support of the theory of his order, and as pope had confirmed the mass and office of the conception, endowing the festival with a plenary indulgence, yet threatened both parties with excommunication in 1483 if they ventured to secure each other of heresy, since the Church had not formally decided the question. On Mar. 3, 1496, the Sorbonne resolved to receive no one into its fellowship who would not take an oath to defend the doctrine to the best of his power; and 112 doctors of theology immediately tobk the oath.
Imms,otslste 0onoeDHon Immer
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The subject is discussed in the works of the principal snhoohnen, iris., Thomas Aquins. Bonsventurs. Albertus Magnus, and Duns Scotus. Cf. F. Morgott, Did Mariolopie dos . . . Thomas iron Aquinas, Freiburg, 1878; B. Hander, Do Maria plenihAne pradia secundust S. Beraardum, ib., 1901. In favor of the doctrine are: J. Perrone, Do immaeulato . . . Maria concephb Rome, 1883; C. Paasglia, Do immaculate . . . virginia conceptu, 3 vols., Rome, 1854‑b8; W. B.'Ullathorne, The Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God, London, 1866; E. Proves, The Romish Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, London, 1887; J. B,‑Ferrier, La Mire de dieu, 2 vole., Paris, 1900. Against it are: E. B. Pusey, Eirenicon, part if., London, 1870; J. J. I. iron D611inger, Dee Papettam, ad. J. Friedrich, Munich, 1892; K. Base, Handbook to the Controversy with Rome, 2 vols., London, 1908. Of the older Roman Catholic works may be mentioned: J. Turrecremats, Do roeritata eoaceptionia beato rirpinis. Rome, 1647, ed. E. B. Pussy, Oxford, 1889; and J. de Launoy, Prmeoipbons de conoeptu . . . Marie, Louvain, 1877 (by a Jansenist). Consult also the works on the history of doctrine, e.g., Hsrvaak. Dogma, v. 235, vii. 99; Schaff, Crmda, f. 108 sqq„ 188, 211‑212, 549; and the theological dfotioawies. A special collection of works on the subject exists in the library of Union Theological Seminary, New York.
EIIMACULATE HEART OF MARY: The title assumed by several Catholic religious orders.
1. Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary: Founded at Monroe, Mich., in 1845 through the efforts of Rev. Louis Gilet, a Belgian Redemptoriet. The establishment began with two nuns originally from Baltimore, Sister Ann and Sister Teresa, who assumed a blue habit with a dark veil. The object of the society is the education of the young, the care of asylums, hospitals, etc. In 1856 a branch of the congregation was established at Villa Maria, Westchester, Pa., and this foundation became the mother house for the dioceses of Pennsylvania. At present the sisters conduct establishments in the dioceses of Detroit, Grand Rapids, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Scranton, Altoona, Oregon, Boise City, and Seattle. The professed sisters number 925, the novices 144.
2. Sisters of the Holy and Immaculate Heart of Mary: Founded in 1848 at Pico Heights, Los Angeles, Cal., where the mother house and novitiate are located. The sisters conduct educational and charitable institutions in the dioceses of Monterey and Los Angeles.
3. Sister‑Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (Good Shepherd): An order the mother house of which is in Quebec. Besides many institutions in Canada, the sisters of this institute have convents and teach in parochial schools at Biddeford, Me., and at Lawrence, Mass., but these establishments are subject to the superiors residing in Quebec.
	4. Missionary Sons of the Immaculate Heart of
Mary: An order of men founded in Spain in 1873.
Besides the Spanish province, there is one in Africa
and another in America, where the fathers conduct
establishments in the dioceses of San Antonio and
Monterey, Cal. 	JA‑a F. DalaconL.
Bmmoaserei: Currier, Ralipiow orders: The Qpial Catholic Directory, Milwaukee, Wia, 1908.
IIIIMANUEL SYNOD. See LvmasaAms, II. § 4,
IMMER, ALBERT: Swiss theologian; b. at Unterseen (26 m. s.e. of Bern) Aug. 10, 1804; d. at Bern Mar. 23, 1884. A strong desire for knowledge, together with an " awakening " which he himself expressly attributed to the spirit of God, made him

ImAnar
Immortality
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
resume Ys interrupted study of theology in 1835, and three years later he was ordained to the ministry. For a time he acted as assistant preacher, visited Bonn and Berlin in 1840, and in 1845 was appointed pastor at Baren‑on‑the‑Aar, whence he was called, four years later, to the chair of New Testament exegesis and dogmatics at the University of Bern. He sought to serve both science and the Church by allowing his pupils full freedom of belief, but while he won the confidence of the students, he failed to meet with sympathy among those who considered piety inseparable from confession of faith. As a consequence he was attacked in various periodicals, and wrote in his own defense two pamphlets: Die theologische Fakultdt and ihre Gegner, and Was wir glauben and lehren, sine Verwahrung gegen Missverstdndnisse, both of which appeared at Bern in 1864. Two years later he opposed the demands of the so‑called reform party that the results of scientific researches be made known to the people from the pulpit as well as in the schools, and was accordingly accused of deserting his fundamental principles, whereas his attitude was really due to the fact that his concepts of God and revelation deviated from those held by the party.
	Immer was the author of a Hermeneutik des
Neuen Testaments (Wittenberg, 1873; Eng. tranal.,
Hermeneutics of the New Testament, by A. H. New
man, Andover, 1877) and a Theologie des Neuen
Testaments (Bern, 1877), besides several collections
of lectures. In 1852 he was appointed rector of
the University of Bern. 	(E. Br6scHf.)
BIBLIOa8AP8r: F. Treeheel, Der Goueapelehru H. A. Immer, Bern, 1899; E. Miner, in Volksblau far die reformi_rte %irche der Schweiz. 1884, pp. 105 sqq.; R. Steek, in Protestantiache Kirehenaeitang, 1884, no. 17; R. RQetschi, in Theolopilulhs Zeitachrift sue der Schweiz, i. 35"82.
IMMERSION. See BArrisM.
IMMORTALITY.
I.	Biblical Views.
	Old‑Testament Teaching (¢ 1).
	Apocryphal and Later Jewish Views (1 2).
	New‑Testament Teaching (1 3).
II. Ethnic Doctrine of Immortality.
III. In Dogmatim
IV. Proofs of Immortality.
V. The Original Motives.
VL The Principal Elements of the Christian Idea of Immortality.
VIL The Truth of These Forms of Experience. VIII. Additional Note.
L Biblical Views: Existence after death, when not
directly denied, is problematical (Pa. lxxxviii.11‑13).
		Yahwism found in ancient Israel, as part
	:. Old‑ of the traditional Semitic religious be
Testament liefs, the idea of a shadowy world (see
	Teaching. SsEOL, and cf. C. Gruneisen, Der Ahnen
		kuUus and die Urreligion Israels, Halle,
1900; Smith, Rd. of Sem.). But neither the prom
ism which inspired the patriarchal, nor the motives
of the Mosaic, legislation contain clear indications of
the endurance of the individual. The account of
Elijah's translation is indecisive, as are the ease
of Enoch and the saga concerning Moss's death.
Loss of immortality consequent on sin is presented
only in Gen. ii. 17, iii. 22; cf. Wisdom i. 13, ii. 24.
458
Near the close of the exile faith in immortality is expressed in poetio‑rhetorical fashion: " deliverance from Sheol" or from "death" (Ps. xxxiii. 19, ciii. 4); "eternal life" is "length of (earthly) days" (Ps. xxf. 26, xxx. 3, xxxvu. 28, xli. 12). In communion, with God the pious one has life and happiness, and neither heaven and earth nor death and transitoriness can disturb him (Pa. baiii. 22‑25); God is the " life " of the pious (Deut. xxx. 20). So far as death is regarded as the punishment of sin, the Hebrews sought to overcome this by the doctrine of resurrection. Previous to the time of the Maccabees, hope of a new and perfect form of existence beyond the grave is rarely met. The chief passage is Job xix. 25 sqq., which may signify either God will finally justify the dead (H. Schultz), or God will indemnify him in another life (Dillmann), or " God will after my death appear as my advocate " (G. Runze, Studien zur vergleichenden Religionswissenschaft, ii. 199‑203, Berlin, 1894), or, in spite of his hopeless condition, God will yet snatch him from death. In prophetic teaching, as Hos. xiii. 14; Isa. xxv. 8, xxvi. 19; 1 Sam. ii. 6; Ezek. xxxvii., the ideal of national regeneration was transferred to individual renewal, and the ethicizing of the personal relationship to God led to more distinct hopes of a future life‑the " resurrection of many " (Dan. xii. 2). Denial of a hope of resurrection in Ecclesiastes does not indicate an opposite tendency at this time; the judgment there referred to (xi. 9‑10, iii. 22) is not future; the spirit of life is the breath of God which returns to him. Hope for the future was also bound up with the Messiah, yet not without mythological features (Dan. x. 13). The relation of this post‑exilic doctrine of the resurrection to the ancient Persian religion is not yet cleared up (A. Kohut, Ueber die jitdisehe Angelologie wnd Daemanologie, Leipsie, 1866; E. Stave, Einfluss des Parsismus auf das Judentum, ib. 1898). The works of Habschmann, Wiinsche, and P. Gr6bler (Die Anaichten fiber Unaterblichkeit and Atiferatehung in der jiidischen Littvatur der beiden letzten Jahrhunderfen vor Chriatus, in JSK, 1879, pp. 651 sqq.) give an insight into the Persian, the pre‑Christian Jewish (Apocryphal, pseudepigraphical, and Talmudic) doctrine of immortality. The resemblances are striking, the historical connection not certain. Kohut thinks that Parseeism owes more to Judaism than Judaism to Parseeism; e.g., the doctrine of the seven paradises, and hell, and that at the end of.the world grievous plagues will precede the coming of the Savior.
The Jews before Christ took a threefold attitude toward the doctrine of immortality, in general corresponding to the views of Phar‑
z. Apoc‑ isees, Sadducees, Essenes. The preryphaland dominant Daniel‑Pharisaic view reLater Jew‑ sulted in II MAecabees, in which belief
	ish .Views.	in the resurrection of all Israelites
		was regarded as a moral obligation
(xii. 43‑45). Death was punishment for sin (vii.
18, 32, 38); but God will raise the bodies of the
pious. The torment of sinners is strongly em
phasized in IV Ezra. Baruch, Sirach, Tobit, and
I Maccabees still represent the old Mosaic doctrine

469	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	rm
		Immortality
	of Sheol; on the other hand, in individual paeud
	epigraphies, the hope of the future is more definitely
	presented. Enoch teaches an absolutely universal
	resurrection (xxxvii.‑taxi.), yet other chapters (i.
	xxxvi. and lxxii.‑cv.) and also the Psalms of
	Solomon mention only a resurrection of the pious.
	II Maccabees teaches the resurrection of all. The
	result of the development of this hope is: belief
	in a conscious life after death in a bright paradise
or a dark hades, a communion with the pious of
	all ages. Some of the pious, like Enoch and Elijah,
	pass at once into perfect communion with God.
	A general resurrection precedes the judgment; it
	closes with the annihilation of the godless. The
	resurrection is variously pictured as a sudden divine
	deed, or a gradual development. In the latter por
	tion of Enoch (lxi. 12) Paradise (in the east between
	heaven and earth) is the meeting‑place of all the
	blessed; in the other sections only for Enoch and
	Elijah. Hades lies in the west. The earth is to be
	without men for seven days, then come resurrec
	tion, judgment, and damnation for the majority.
	The Sadducees denied the resurrection and endurance
	of the soul in connection with a body (Josephus,
	Ant. XVIII., i. 4; Mark xii. 18; Acts xxiii. 8), orat
	least either regarded it as problematical or ignored it.
	The Talmud distinguished the mere continuance of
	the soul from the miracle of resurrection by which
	body and soul were permanently reunited. The
	F.asenes appear to have taught a natural immor
	tality of the soul (cf. Matt. x. 28). Philo regarded
	the soul as essentially imperishable, temporarily
	imprisoned in the body. The Book of Wisdom
	combined natural immortality and an intimation
	of preexistence (viii. 19 sqq.) with the general
	Pharisaic hope. Death, the consequence of sin, due
	to the devil's envy, but unnatural to man, is to a
	pious and just man a fortunate gift of God; the dead
	return to their true form of existence. According
	to the Talmud the departed have knowledge of
	earthly events; after the judgment some of the
	justified have opportunity for moral improvement
	(cf. Wisdom xiii. 9). Others are the perfectly pious
	who, according to Shammai, having never sinned,
	are sealed in the book of life; while a third class,
	the hopeless transgressors, are written in the book
	of damnation and are handed over to Gehenna (cf.
	A. Edersheim, Zrife and Times of Jeans the Mee",
	ii. 791‑796, New York, 1884). The school of Hillel
	taught that obdurate sinners, whether Jew or
	Gentile, after a twelvemonth's torment in Gehenna,
	are destroyed by fire. After Christ the prevailing
	doctrine vacillated between eternity of the punish
	ment of hell, absolute destruction by fire, either
	outer or inner, or additions to the doctrine of
	restoration or of a gradual purification, transforma
	tion, and glorification.
		Jesus and Paul sided with the Pharisaic eschatol
	ogy (Matt. xxii. 23 sqq.; Acts xxiii. 6 sqq.). The
			notion of zM aianios fluctuated be
		3. New‑	tween "everlasting" and " eternal,"
		Testament the latter in the sense of the Fourth
		Teaching. Gospel is not strange to the synoptics
			(cf. Matt. xxii. 32; Mark xii. 26 aqq.).
	Jesus' idea of the future is distinguished from that
	of the Pharisees (1) by the apiritualizing and ethici‑
zing of the aims and means of the resurrection (Matt. xvi. 25 aqq.); (2) through the conscious distinction between form and content (cf. Matt. xi. 14‑15 with xiii. 9‑13); (3) by transcending a natural in favor of a universal ideal (Matt. viii. 11, xxi. 43, xxiv. 31 sqq.); instead of the judgment of the Gentiles by pious Israelites, the Son of Man judges men out of their own mouths (Matt. xxv. 31‑46, xii. 37; of. John xii. 47‑48). Traces of "metempsychosis " also appear (Matt. xi. 14, xvii. 12). Herod Antipas's identification of Jesus with the murdered Baptist witnesses to the popular conviotion that earlier prophets may be reincarnated as heralds of the Messianic time (Matt. xiv. 2; Luke ix. 7‑9). Soul and body were sharply distinguished (Matt. x. 28). In this general belief, the resurreotion of Christ became a new factor.
Paul spoke now of simply passing over into the future life (Phil. i. 23), now of a transformation (I Cor. xv. 51). But it is uncertain whether the glorified man is more properly described as his trite self (II Cor. iv. 16), as a new planting upon the ruins of the old man (I Cor. xv. 35‑55), or (cf. Rom. xi.) as a grafting into the latter; also, whether the " departure " of the soul " to be at home with the Lord " (II Cor. v. 8) is a sleeping, a dreaming, or a conscious entrance into another sphere of existence. Paul's presentation is enriched with such figures as the " book of life " (Phil. iv. 3), " sting of death " (I Cor. xv. 55). From his reference to the stars and the seed‑corn (I Cor. xv. 37) one must not infer that the resurrection body was not specifically different, a newly fashioped duplicate of the perishing body. The Apocalypse pictures (1) a repose of many of the blessed for more than a thousand years (xiv. 13) until the second resurrection (xx. 5 aqq.), from which some are excepted (ver. 4), others experience a yet earlier quickening (xi‑ 11). (2) A speedy recompense for the pious sufferers (cf. iii. 11‑21 with xii. 10‑12). These pictures are to be regarded not as dogmatic constructions, but as the impress of pious feeling, even the distinction between first and second resurrection (chap. xx.), and between the first and second death (ii. 11, xx. 14), as well as between the temporary rule of the risen martyrs on earth (Chiliasm) and the future changeless life (see Miry iarrxiUnr, MILLENARIANISM). Many of these piotures, as xx. 3‑7, originate in pre‑Christian Messianic hopes (Daniel, Enoch, IV Ezra); also " resurrection of the just," of the good to life, of the wicked to judgment (Luke xiv. 14; Matt. iFxv. 46; John v. 29), and relation of Hades to Gehenna (Matt. xi. 23). The figurative forms in which the future hope is realistically painted are almost everywhere referred to the spiritual‑ethical new creation as this should have been fulfilled in this world: palingeneaia, kaini‑ktisis, anastasis, z6opoiesis, enduaasthai. For the dwelling of God in mankind, cf. John i. 14 with Rev. xxi. 3 and both with II Cor. vi. 16: since this is as truly future as present, transcendent and becoming as well as already immanent and existent, the figurative character of this aspect of the immortal life is evident, especially when Lev. xxvi. 11‑12; Num. xii. 8; Ex. xxiv. to are compared with Matt. v. 8; John i. 18; and I Tim. vi. 16.

Immortality	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	480
II. Ethnic Doctrine of Immortality: Among the civilized races of antiquity the idea of imperishableness was variously related to the soul. Whether the idea of infinity developed early (Max Milner), or late (Lubbock, Tiele), and how it was thought of, depends on the character and language of particular peoples. The development of ideas concerning a higher power of life, in accordance with the idea of everlasting joy or everlasting grief and with the conception of infinite, eternal being, corresponded more to the character of the Aryan peoples than to that of the Semites or even the Egyptians. The Phenicians rarely transcended the limits of the present world. The Egyptians, as indicated by the custom of preserving the body, were more serious concerning death and immortality. The Persians required the future life for the ethical fulfilment of their feeling of honor, war, and virtue. To the Hindu the change and transiency of this world were a dream from which he was to waken to the true changeless being. The people of the WestGreeks, Romans, Germans‑had a more realistic sense of the relation of time and eternity; they thought of the gods as living the true life. Confucius (q.v.) hesitated to give a decisive judgment as to the fate of souls after death. Lao Tse (q.v.) taught a supernatural form of existence which belonged to the divine principle (tao="way", "word," "logos ") and to the" heavenly man." The ancient Egyptian doctrine of immortality was based on the conflict of light with darkness and the conquest of the former. The light‑souls share in the conflict. Later emerges the thought of retribution, judgment of the dead, individual immortality, and reincarnation. For the earlier doctrine of immortality of the ancient Semites, see A. Jeremias, Hblle and Parodies bei den Babyloniern, Leipsic, 1903. For the Mohammedan view dependent on ancient Arabian and Christian ideas, cf. A. Sprenger, Das Leben wnd die Lehre dea Mohammed, chaps. 6, 7, 11 sqq., 1861‑65. For the ancient Aryans (" soma," " devas," " asuras "), cf. Max Milner, Origin and Growth of Religion, London, 1898. For the Brahmanic doctrine of the Vedantas, cf . P. Deussen, Dos System der Vedanta, Leipsie, 1906. For Buddhism in its conflict with Brahminism, cf. H. Oldenberg, Buddha, pp. 273 eqq., 291, Berlin, 1881. For Paraeeism and its doctrine of souls enduring as guardian spirits, of. Hiibachmann, JPT, 1879.
III. In Dogmatics: (1) Is the human soul mortal or immortal? An affirmative answer is given (a) by many Greek philosophers, especially the Orphics, Pythagoreans, and individual Stoics; (b) by anthropological dualists following Descartes, Leibnitz, Wolff, and Kant; (c) by philosophers emphasizing personality: C. H. Weisee, J. H. Fichte, LThici. Epicurus, Lucretius, Spinoza, Hume, Hegel, Schleiermacher, Feuerbach, Dilhring, Strauss, and the materialists answer in the negative. Voltaire, La Mettrie, Fries, and Darwin are non‑committal. Hardly any philosopher asserts absolute annihilation, and even Democritus, Epicurus, and Pyrrho do not silence the voice of hope. On the other hand, no one affirms absolute immortality, not even John Scotus Erigena, J. G. Fichte, Schelling, or G. Th.
Fechner. (2) How is the imperishable element of the human soul thought of? Opposed to natural immortality, which corresponds to preexistence without beginning or is conceived of at least as correlative to natural inheritance through generation (Tmducianism), is endurance according to God's will in spite of natural mortality‑for all (Cyprian), or for patriarchs, prophets, martyrs (Ireneeus, Tertullian); according to other Church Fathers, there is an intermediate state (Justin, Hilary, Cyril of Alexandria) which either quickly passes (Hilary on Pa. lxv. 22) or is of longer duration, wherein is a, sleep of souls (psychopannyche), or for some of the righteous a purifying (either purgatory, Zech. xiii. 9; I Cor. iii. 13; Jude 23), or a migration of soul (metempsychosis), or change of body (metamorphosis). With the universal resurrection comes the idea of a partial awaking or restriction of bodily renewing to the pious (B. Weiss). That prayer and alms avail for the dead (II Mace. xii. 44‑45) found early representatives; since 1439 masses and other services for the dead in purgatory have come to the front (see PuRGAToRr). (3) Teleologically, to what is the certainty of an imperishable existence necessary? (a) The individual eudemonistie wish; (b) the sympathies of friendship and family‑love, hope of reunion with those who have gone home, desire for an imperishable enjoyment of the ideal, as art and science; (c) the ethical will permanently to cooperate for the realization of the idea, and confidence in the worth of all moral action and suffering; (d) before all, the thought of the universal harmony of the world, the miracle of existence, necessitates the religious appreciation of God as the Wise and Good.
IV. Proofs of Immortality: These may be summed up in: (1) The consent of all people (G. Roskoff, Daa Religionswesen der rohesten Ndturvolker, Leipsic, 1880; O. F. Peschel, Volkerkunde, Leipsic, 1875; Bastian, Beitrage zur vergleichenden Psychologie, Berlin, 1868). (2) Proofs ab utili and a tutiori. The former conceives of the maintenance of the dogma of immortality as in the interest of public morals; the latter treats the theoretical uncertainty as if it were true for the sake of its benefit in this life. (3) The teleological proof. In the destination of the personal individual for perfection is found a means for the completion in a future world of the aim only partly attained here (J. H. Fichte, Idee der Peraonlichkeit and der individuuellen Fortdduer, Leipsic, 1855). (4) The analogical proof. The analogy of metamorphosis (the chrysalis, the sleep of winter, the seed‑corn). (5) The astronomical proof is founded on the existence of a multitude of otherwise aimless heavenly bodies, and on the probability that even the particular life of each star is for the sake of enriching human knowledge. (6) The moral proof. According to Kant, the aim of life is the furthering of holiness as complete conformity to moral law; this becomes the postulate of an infinite progress. (7) Proof from the idea of righteousness. Virtue must be rewarded, sin punished, and since both are imperfectly realized here, another sphere of life is required (Athenagoms, Justin, Socinians, Arminians, Rationalists, Calvin Leibnitz). On ~ the other hand, the Stoics and

461	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Immortality
Clement of Alexandria (Stromata, IV., vi. 22) emphasized the immanent righteousness which strikes even the wicked in this world. Spinoza holds that although duty is filled with an infinite content, it does not need to be capped with an endless existence (Ethics, v. 41‑42). Hant's moral proof, combined with the Christian estimate of life; has lost none of its validity. (8) Metaphysical proof, derived from the simplicity or the immateriality of the soul. From the mere heterogeneity of the spirit, one could infer (a) with Epicurus indifference to being or not being: " while we exist, death is not present; when death is present, we do not exist" (Diogenes Laertius, x. 27) or (b) an extension of immortality to animals. (9) . Ontological. On the ground of a genetic development in language and psychology, one may make use of a metaphysical inference which, in harmony with the total rational view of the world, proves the certainty of the final triumph of life over death, from the immanent eternity of the spirit already manifested in the ethical religious conquest of death (cf. Plato's play on words in the Pbmdo: the soul (a) life, accordingly "not‑death," hence (b) " not‑dead "‑a‑thanatoe).
V. The Original Motives: The original motives of belief in immortality correspond to the natural causes of the idea of God, which may be psychologically traced to a fourfold root. (1) Subjective: wish, fear of death, and hope of life. tuod volumus, credimus. Feuerbach: " Man thinks of his god as of his heaven. . . God and immortality are identical. Both originate in the wish" (cf. Ri9veda, x. 14, 8). According to the Talmud, Paradise is a place of bliss which, surpasses the joy of the Messianic time. " The pious are satisfied with the flesh (of the Leviathan) which was preserved for this end since the first day of creation, and they drink wine from clusters which were prepared since the bringing in of the world " (Wilnaehe, Die Vorstellungen vmn Zustonde nach dem Tode each Apokryphen, Talmud uttd Kirchenvaxern, in JPT, 1880, p. 449). On the other hand, the wish for reunion with the dead often yields to fear of the dead and to the desire not to be disturbed by them (cf. the words at the obsequies of Bodo in northeast India: "Take and eat; formerly hast thou eaten and drunken with us, but now thou canat no more; thou Overt one of us, thou art so no more; we come no more to thee, and come not thou nearer to us "). Like the funeral pyre, the funeral meals often celebrate only the separation as a symbolic agreement with the dead. (2) The influence of striking experiences in dreams on the imagination and the view of the world is noteworthy in the lower stages of culture (see!COMPARATIVz RELIGION, III., vi., 1 2; and cf. E. B. Tylor, Primitive Culture, vol. i., London, 1871). The New Zealander thinks that the dreaming soul departs from the body and returns again after wandering in the realm of the dead and there communing with its friends. The land of the blessed reflects the popular ideals. The dreaming Indian visits his hunting‑ground, the Greek beholds the Elysian fields, the German thought that life in Walhalla consisted of bloody battles. Still more significant are the associations of ideas by which the character of a dream is attributed to the earthly
life‑life a dream; death the moment in which one awakes from the dream of life to its true reality. The Old Testament increasingly discredits the prophetic dream (cf. Deut. xiii.; Jer. xxiii.; Eool. v. 2‑6). Yet the actual present is designated as a " being like those who dream " in relation to a higher form of existence (Ps. exxvi. 1). (3) In the lower stages of culture the intellectual riddle of death leads to the idea of a brief extension of life beyond the grave. After death there is to be a separation which either completes the death or prepares for a further lifetime in other regions (so the Fijis, the Guinea negroes, the Greenlanders); or only the chief men continued to exist (so the Tonga Islanders), or only the souls of the good (so the Nicaraguans). The funeral‑pyre may condition the continued existence of the dead. For the enduring connection between soul and body, cf. Odyssey, xi. 51 aqq., 73; Iliad. xxiii. 71 sqq.; Vergil, Xneid, vi. 325 aqq., 362 aqq.; Job xiv. 22; Isa. lxvi. 24, xiv. 19; Deut. xxviii. 26; Tylor, ut sup. vol. ii. Danger of the future death of the soul is not excluded. The " second death " is the greatest evil. One can imagine neither unchanging continuance nor absolute annihilation. (4) The idea of retribution is expressed by the ethical faith in a supreme righteousness. The fatal crisis which, according to the belief of the Fijis, awaits the souls of those just dead, visits annihilation upon those who have remained unmarried; perhaps a reference to natural immortality by means of procreation. In all stages of religious culture many ethical arguments for immortality appear; the imperfect adjustment in this life between duty and destiny shapes the thought of future retribution. Mosaism is favorable to the idea of retribution, but it deserves no credit for the existence of the hope of immortality. Greek mythology distinguished the regions devoted to retribution ruled over by Minos and lE&cuS from the shadowy abodes for the undisturbed life of the soul. Hercules' soul prolonged its shadowy existence below while his bodily existence was enthroned in the circle of the blessed (cf. Iliad, i. 4). According to the Greeks, bodily existence is the real existence. The Christian doctrine of hell as Sheol and Gehinnom was made up of two different motives which the Talmud combined in Gehinnom‑‑darkness and fire (cf. Enoch ciii. 8, 9). " Hell " originally signified the dark place, but was gradually blended with the idea of the bright, the fiery. The valley Gehinnom was the place of sacrifice to Moloch, of divine judgment, and of eternal destruction Per. xix. 2, 6; II Kings xxiii. 10; Matt. x. 28). Since the exile in conneotion with the transformation of the Messianic idea, the present life was a vestibule for the future, where the final judgment must assign the proper ethical condition (but cf. Enoch xc. 26, xxvii. 2, 3). The fundamental idea is that of a moral world‑order. In the New Testament penal judgment is associated with the continued existence of the departed. Psychological motives for retribution first arose in connection with the Messianic idea, foreign domination, and influenoss of Zoroastrianism. With reference to the eschatology of both the Old Testament and the New Tests‑

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Immortality
went, there is need to preserve the Christian estimate of life so far as this is a matter of feeling and will,, without surrendering the free scientific approach. It must also be recognized that the forms of the creative ideas by which men seek to give expression to the content of these conceptions are changeable and dependent upon the usage of language at a given time (see FUTURE PUNISHMENT).
VI. The Principal Elements of the Christian Ideal of Immortality: The Christian estimate of life subordinates all motives of the hope of immortality to belief in God; he is " not the God of the dead, but of the living." Presuppositions for correct deduction are: (1) Negatively: proof maynot be adduced from rational psychology. If the soul of man is immortal because it is simple and immaterial, the same must be true of animals and of plants: these no less than the soul of man may be regarded sub specie o=tewnitatis. Moreover, the thought of immortality is developed from simple psychical experiences. The child lives in the joy of the unending moment. Many savages have need only to project thought forward for a year or a month; the abstract idea of immortality matures first with monotheism. Even then " absolute endlessness " remains only a half‑understood problem. The question of immortality retires to the background in comparison with the ethical social interests and with faith in God in which the true endlessness is felt (Ps. lxxiii.). If with Berkeley, Fichte, and Schopenhauer one conceives the idea not as result, but as cause of the entire world, including time and apace, then the thinking subject as thinking can not be destroyed by the object which it has itself produced‑time. The notions of subject, object, idea, time, infinite, and the like are not original; still more elementary is language, which originates in a practical motive. (2) Positively; the verbal condition of the solution of the problem. (a) Soul is the man as a unity; body is the man as an organism of many factors. The word " soul " in popular use is associated with the idea of the sea in motion. In the notion of soul lies life, change, inconstancy, death. The nature of psychg is perishableness. Even knowledge will not shield from destruction (Gen. iii. 17‑19). Yet the soul, according to its notion, is essentially life. (b) The negative ideas of the intransient, the infinite, arose from the power of abstraction and negation. The underworld (cf. the notions of the Egyptians, New Zealanders, Enoch, the Greeks, and the Middle Ages) was identical with the place of the sun setting in the west. (c) Both the sun (cf. Egyptian and Aecadian‑Babylonian myths) and the seed‑corn are at the same time result and cause, and this sensuous form of imperishableness has contributed to the terms dealing with immortality (the cult of Persephone; I Cor. xv.; poetical uses, as Schiller's Noch kostlicheren Samen bergen). Metempsychosis is only a further step forward (degradation and elevation; punishment and purification). In the Christian view the soul as substance of the body is wakened by the light of the creative sun of God to a new individual corporeity (John xii.; I Cor. xv.). The soul rests " in God " (Col. iii. 3; Rev. xiv. 13), receives a new glorified body whose principal' features have already on
earth been developed through ethical growth, suffering, and victory (cf. Matt. xxii. 30; Acts ii. 31 sqq. with Pa. xvi., Rev. xxi. 4 with Isa. xxv. 8 ).
VII. The Truth of These Forms of Experience: In the degree to which the naturally true and ethically grounded idea creates a corresponding expression can the truth of its affirmation be removed from doubt. This is proved by the religion of Buddhism. Although one may never say that the soul is or is not in Nirvdna, yet this is designated as the " land of peace," the " immeasurable, abysmal sea of eternity." Even to a philosopher such experiences compel the thought of a positive, ideal imperishableness. Mightier than with the Buddhist is the Christian's longing for absolute emancipation and blessedness. The fulness of God's love, as it fills the Christian heart absorbed in the kingdom of God, is immediately infinite. In the degree to which there is given the real basis for an idea true to life must the positive joy in the picture of the Christian hope of glory be affirmed.
In conclusion, the attitude toward immortality will be positive in case (1) the certainty of God as the supreme concrete content of the consciousness is presupposed, (2) the one miracle which lies in the being of the entire world is beheld under the correct figure of a creative divine deed, and accordingly (3) the hope of the future which corresponds to the Christian valuation of life is directly related to the. idea of the creative divine deed. The twofold contents of the Christian spirit of life are (1) the idea of the Father‑God as the free creative love, and (2) the hope that nothing hereafter can separate from the " infinite " worth of the love of God. If the real grounds of both of these ideas are inexhaustible, then the endeavors after a formal presentation of faith in God and immortality must be just as enduring as the power of language (see also ESCHATOLOGY).
	For extended discussion and proof of this thesis
cf. G. Runze, Btudien zur wgleicAenden Religions
wasaenschaft; II., Die Psychologie des Ur:sterblich
keit8glaubens and der Unsterblichkeitaleugnung, Ber
lin, 1894. 	G. RuNzE.
VIII. Additional Note: The arguments from data furnished by the Society of Psychical Research, to the effect that authentic messages have been received from those who have passed from the earthly life, lack convincing cogency (cf. F. W. H. Myers, Human Personality, London, 1903). Not to accentuate the still incomplete evidence for the alleged communications, this, if valid, would at best prove only that some who have ceased to live here continue their life in other conditions. But whether this is true for all, or whether any or all of those who have been supposed to manifest themselves from the other world will live forever does not yet appear. The Biblical evidence for the immortality, i.e., the resurrection, of all, including the wicked, is not perhaps decisive. This involves the critical interpretation of three passages which are open to other values than those which have been assigned to them (Luke xx. 34‑38; John v. 28, 29; Acts xxiv. 15). In the last reference Paul is reported as teaching the resurrection of the wicked, no trace of which is found in his own authentic writings.

483	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
The words in John, alleged to have been spoken by Jesus, are alien to the rest of his teaching both in this Gospel and in the synoptics. The statement in Luke is not so conclusive as it seems at first eight, for it must be interpreted by the practical interest which elsewhere dominates the Master's teaching, and particularly by verses 35, 36. With Jesus, life was a supremely ethical affair, and neither he nor Paul appears to have considered life or immortality from $ speculative point of view. The argument that the permanence of life is based on the fact that life is a thought of God, and God will no£ suffer his thought to perish, is open to three serious questions: (1) Whether in the sight of God human life is such a thought that even though it is at present the highest expression of his will, God can not permit it to fall back into the order from which it arose, as is the case with all other forms of existence. (2) Whether this preservation would be true of all souls or only of those who cooperate with him in the fulfilment of his thought. (3) Whether, finally, the human type is the basis of a yet higher disclosure of the divine purpose, and this being realized, the type as such shall pass away. Conditional immortality may not be ruled out of court as if it had no rational standing (see ANNIHILAT1oNlsm). For, first, appeal may be made to the biological law that function determines structure and ultimately organism: accordingly degeneration even to the loss of important organs is as truly characteristic of evolution as is progress. Secondly, it is especially true of man that the ideals of personality are either achieved by conscious striving, or lost by ,inattention. In comparison with lower orders of life, man may have reached that degree of stability whereby he survives the shock of death (cf. J. Fiske, Destiny of Man Viewed in the Light of His Origin, Boston, 1884), but even this would not necessarily involve for every one an endless existence. That which has been gained by the " will to five " (Schopenhauer) may also ultimately perish by refusal to live. According to the Gospel of John life is not a necessitated natural duration, but an ethical endeavor: Greek immortality gives place to " eternal life'; (John xvii. 3). After all, the truest description of man's relation to a future life may be " immortality " (cf . S. D. McConnell, Evolugora of Immortality, New York, 1901; W. R. Huntington, Conditional Immortality, ib. 1878. See EscHAToLooy). The deepest reason for immortality is teleological: on the one hand, in the infinite ideals addressed to the human will; on the other hand, in the progressive realization of these ideals in which alone the universe becomes intelligible for consciousness. In the partial but increasing meaning of reality which is disclosed in individual consciousness is a ground of hope that this consciousness will endure as a center in which the purpose of the universe shall be both revealed and realized (cf. J. Royce, Corue
ptian of Immortality, Boston, 1900). Since all life is controlled by ends that attract and yet are hidden, and man does not fully reach these ends in this world, and can progressively attain them, if at all, only in an endless advance, his very incompleteness is his mightiest witness to immortality. For the perplexing problem of the relation of personal
identity and memory to the life after death, of. H. Mtunsterberg, The Eternal Life (Boston, 1905). The most important recent literature bearing on this subject is the series of Ingersoll Lectures on Immortality given annually at Harvard University as follows: G. A. Gordon, Immortality and the Neto Theodicy, Boston, 1897; W. James, Human Immortality, Boston, 1898; B. I. Wheeler, Dionysiua and Immortality, Boston, 1899; J. Royce, Conception of Immortality, Boston, 1900; J. Fiske, Life Everlasting, Boston, 1901; W. Osler, Science and Immortality, Boston, 1904; S. M. Crothers, The Endless Life, Boston, 1905; H. Milnsterberg,, The Eternal Life, Boston, 1905; C. F. Dole, Hope of Immortality, New York, 1906; W. Ostwald, Individuality and Immortality, Boston, 1906; W. S. Bigelow, Buddhism and Immortality, Boston, 1908. C. A. B.
Bramoossrar: The earlier literature in wonderfully complete and classified form is in E. Abbot,' The Literature of the Doctrine of a Future Life, included in W. R. Alger's Destiny of the Bout, a Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life, Boston, 1880; cf. J. H. Hurst, Literature of Theology, pp. 496‑497, New York, 1896. For the Biblical belief, besides the O. T. Theology 'of H. Schultz, London, 1892, and the N. T. Theology of W. Beyxhleg, Edinburgh, 1896, consult: J. Challis, An Essay on the Scripture Doctrine of Immortality, London, 1880: F. Sehwally, Das Leban nach deft Tode nach den Voretetlunpen des alien Israel and des Judenthums, Giessen, 1892• A. Chambers, Ow Life q/tw Death: or, the Teaching of the Bible concerning the Unseen World, London, 1894; J. Frey, Tod, Seaknglaubs and Swlsnkuu im alfrn larast, Leipsie, 1898; L. A. Muirhead. The Terms Life and Death in the old and New Testament, Glasgow, 1908.
On the general subject, besides the works named in the text, consult: H. Schultz, Die Voraueastmngen der chriat lichen Lshre von der Unsferbliehkei4 GSttingen, 1861; A. lmmer, Der Uneterbliahkoeuglaube im Lwhte der Gewhichte and der pe0erewdrtiqen Wiwmaehaf4 Bern, 1868; R. S. Candlish, Life in a Risen Savior; an Exposition of .
1 Cor. xv., London, 1883; K. wilmarehof, Due jenseus, tin wisaenechafelicher Versuch sur LGeung der UnsterbliChkeiitafrage, Leipsia 18&3‑66; L. Figuier, The To‑morrow of Deal,% or, the Future Life according to SeiencA Boston, 1872; T. A. Goodwin, The Mode of Man's Immortality, New York, 1874; A. B. Blackwell, Physical Basis of Immortality, New York, 1876; B. Stewart and P. G. Teat, The Unssen Universe, London, 1876 (from the standpoint of physical science); J. W. Rinck, Vom Zudandt der Seele nach deft Tode. Basel, 1878; G. Teichmilller, Usber die Unetarblirhkeft der Seele, Leipsic, 1879 W. R. Hart, Eternal Purpose; a Study in the Scripture Doctrine of Immortality, Philadelphia, 1882; G. A. Gordon, The Witness to Immortality in Literature, Philosophy' and Life, Boston, 1883; L. Schneider, Die Unetwbiichkeitaidet im Olauben and der Philosophic der Vdlker, Reganeburg, 1883; E. Neville, La Vic ltermlle Paris, 1884; E. Petavel‑Ollif, Le Probalme de limmortolitE, 2 vole., Lausanne, 1891‑92, Eng. tranel., The Problem of Immortality, New York. 1893; A. 8abstier, Essai cur l'immortalitt au point de vue du naturalisme 6rolutioniete, Paris, 1895; E. Rohde, Psyche, Freiburg. 1898 (a classic; dels with Greek and Roman ideas); V. L. Bernier, SpirituadiM et immortalitd, Le Chapelle‑Montligeon, 1901; H. Cremer, Ueber don Zustand reach deft Tede, Gptersloh, 1901; S. D. F. $eamond, The Christian Doctrine of Immortality, Edinburgh, 1901; w. Schneider, Due andere Leben, Paderborn, 1902; A. Chambers, Our Life after Death, London, 1903; W. Chest, Immortality a Rational Faith, New York, 1903; G. T. Feohner. Barhtein von den Leben reach den. Tode, Hamburg, 1903; C. W. Leadbmter, The Other Side q/ Death Seienfiftcouy Examined, Chicago, 1903; H. A. A. Kennedy, St. Paul's Conarptiane of the Last Things, London, 1904; L, Elb6. La Vie future, Paris, 1906; J. H. Hyslop, Science and a Future Life, London, 1906; K. Andersen, Die Vnetarbliehkeifafrape, Leipsio, 1906; G. Fell. Immortality of do Human Soul Philosophically Explained, London, 1906; L. Elb6, Future Life in the Light of Ancient Wisdom and Modern Science, London,

T‑mortality	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	'1484
Imputation
	1907; H. Q. Keyserling, UnaterbliehkeiE Munich, 1907;
	R. J. Thompson, Proofs of Life after Death: a Collation of
	Opinion., London, 1907; E. E. F. A. Albe, New Light on
	Immortality, London, 1908; F. C. Kempeon. Future Life
	and Modern Difficulties, ib. 1908. The subject of course
	receives treatment in the various works on systematic
	theology.
	IMMORTALITY, CONDITIONAL. See ANNIBILA
TIONISM; CONDITIONALISM; IMMORTALITY.
	IMMUNITY: In the stricter sense, the freedom
of certain persons or property from public duties
and taxes. The word is Sometimes, however, used
in a wider sense, to include especially the right of
Asylum (q.v.). . After Christianity was recognized
by the Roman Empire, the Church acquired for its
possessions immunity from the class of imposts
known in Roman law as munera aordida, and at the
end of the fourth century also from extraordinary
land taxes. The clergy, like the heathen priests
before them, were free from all public service, and
from inheritance taxes up to a certain point,
though complete freedom from personal taxation
can not be demonstrated. While these immunities
were maintained in the Eastern Empire and in
the Code of Justinian, they led, in the West to
difficulties which brought about their almost total
abolition by Valentinian III. Nor is there any
thing like a general immunity of church property
in the Frankish kingdom. The clergy were exempt
from military service, and apparently from the
poll tax where it was levied; but land taxes and
feudal services resting upon property belonging to
the Church or the clergy were not remitted. Under
the Merovingians and Carolingians first certain
churches and then whole dioceses and greater
monasteries gained immunity by special privilege,
as the temporal magnates also often did: From
the sixth to the tenth century these privileges,
based in their conception on the old immunity of
the royal domain, remained essentially the same.
Public officials were forbidden to visit the immune
territory for the collection of taxes from its possessor
or his subjects, or to use any force against the latter,;
where these taxes were still due to the king, they
were to be paid through the landlord. Moreover,
besides the collection of fines and similar payments,
he enjoyed the right of jurisdiction in minor matters,
though in those involving life or liberty he was still
bound to defer to the regular courts.
	After the tenth century the greater landowners,
temporal and spiritual, began to acquire the higher
jurisdiction also over the people on their estates.
In the Carolingian period church property was pro
tected by a heavy fine (600 soldi) against any one
who violated it. This did not last long as applied
to the whole estate, but was continued for the
churches, cemeteries, and dwellings of the clergy.
Freedom from military service continued as long as
the old methods of raising an army were in force;
but bishops and abbots were early summoned to
the field, and when the feudal system was devel
oped the duty of supplying men‑at‑arms rested
equally on spiritual and temporal lords. The most
determined opposition to any infringement on
ecclesiastical immunities was not made against
arbitrary royal imposts so much as against regular
municipal taxation such as came into vogue in the German and Italian towns in the twelfth century.
	The decrees of the Third and Fourth Lateran
Councils (1179, 1215) mark the beginning of efforts
to secure complete immunity for the Church, which
has been demanded constantly ever since. The
Council of Trent asserted this claim, though in
rather general terms; the bull In cwnd Domini
(q.v.) threatened the violators of immunities with
excommunication; and a special " Congregation of
Jurisdiction and Immunity " has been in existence
at Rome since 1626, though it is without significance
to‑day. The Syllabus of 1864 decisively main
tained the essential right of the Church to immunity,
although modern Roman Catholic writers generally
leave the question open as to its derivation trom
divine right, or even frequently deny it. Since the
Reformation, however, the personal immunity of
the clergy and the real immunity of property not
serving directly for religious purposes have tended
to disappear; and even in the European countries
where the Roman Catholic Church has a history of
special privilege, they are usually conceded, so far
as they exist at all, to all organized religious bodies.
		(SIEGFRIED RIETBCHEL.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bingham, Oripines, V., HL; L. Thomassin, Vetus et nova eeclesix diecipiina, vol. iii., lib. i., chaps. :exin.‑alvid., Paris, 1728; P. Hinsohius, Kirdenrech4 i. 123 sqq., Berlin,' 1869; E. Friedberg, Die Grsnsen twdschen Stoat and Kirche, TVbingen, 1872; idem, Lehrbuch des . . . Birchenrechts, pp. 142 sqq., 474 eqq., Leipsio, 1895; A. L. Richter, Lshrbuoh dea . . . %irehenrechts, ed. W. Kahl, pp. 374 eqq., 1293 eqq., ib.. 1886; F. Chemed, De l'immunitb eaWastique et monastique, Paris, 1878; W. E. Addis and T. Arnold, Catholic Dictionary, pp. 474478, London, 1903; KL, s. 443‑448; and the literature cited under ABTLUH, Riasr or.
IMPANATION: One of the many modifications of the doctrine of the real presence of the flesh and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, which arose in opposition to the doctrine of transubstantiation. Rupert of Deutz (d. 1135) is the father of this idea. In commenting on Ex. ii. 10 (Opera, i. 267, Cologne, 1602), he explains how God connects the real flesh and blood of Christ with the real bread and wine in the Eucharist, without disturbing the substance of either, just as, in the womb of the virgin, he connected the Word and the human nature without changing the character of the latter. So, in theological terminology, the relation existing between Christ and the elements in the Eucharist would be, according to this theory, a hypostatie union similar to that existing between the divinity and the humanity in Christ. The word " impanation," however, was first used by Alger of Lfege (d. 1131), who wrote against Rupert in defense of transubstantiation. In the period of the Reformation Carlstadt accused Osiander of holding the view of impanation; and the same accusation was preferred by the Romanists in general against Luther, who denied it.
IMPOSITION OF HANDS. See LATINQ oN of HANDS.
IMPOSTORIBU3, DE TRIBUS: The title of a writing often mentioned but little known, connected with an accusation in the year 1239 by Pope Gregory IX. against Emperor Frederick IL, who

465	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
was reported to have said that the world had been deceived by three ‑impostors, Moses, Christ, and Mohammed. Frederick repudiated this allegation as untrue; and, in fact, the saying with reference to the three chief impostors occurs prior to Frederick's time. A specific document bearing the title does not appear before 1598 (published from a copy in Dresden by E. Weller, Leipsie, 1846; 2d ed., Heilbronn, 1876). There was much discussion about the work among scholars of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and it appeared in repeated translations. The contents are skeptical and show dearth of religious understanding. That God exists is held to be disproved by the absence of a uniform universally acknowledged conception of God. The heathen conceptions are rated as not far inferior to the Christian, and to the offensive heathen myths are opposed what are represented as equally offensive Christian myths (the Trinity, the virgin birth, etc.). Yet even were it granted that God exists, the question would still arise, how shall he be honored? Surely no one can appeal to special revelations, for this were impoatura. The work has been ascribed to various scholars of the sixteenth century. Campanella would seem to have mentioned Muretus as the author, and likewise to have remarked that he saw it in the hands of the Florentine F. Pumi. Florimond de Raemond (L'Histoire de la na%ssanee . . . do 1'hefdsie, pp. 236‑237, Rouen, 1629) affirms the same of Petrus Ramus. The question of authorship does not appear open to solution. At all events, the work was not written by Guiliehmus Postellus.
K. BENMTH.
BinmoanApay: K. Rosenkranz, Der 7weifel an Glaubn Halle, 1830; F. W. Qenthe, De impostura religionum brew comperndroum, em liber de tribus impoetoribua, Leipsie, 18.93.

IXPUTATIOIV.
Origin and Meaning of the Term (1 1). Three Acts of Imputation (1 2). Pelagian Opposition to the Doctrine (f 8). Importance of the Doctrine (1} 4). 8ocinian, Arminian, and Rationalistic Opposition (f 5). La Place and Later Theologians and Schools (§ 6).
The theological use of the term " imputation " is probably rooted ultimately in the employment of the verb imputo in the Vulgate to x. Origin translate the Greek verb logimsthai in and Mean‑ Ps, xaxii. 2. This passage is quoted ing of the by Paul in Rom. iv. 8 and made one
Term. of the foundations of his argument that, in saving man, God sets to his credit a righteousness without works. It is only in these two passages, and in the two axiomatic statements of Rom. iv. 4 and v. 13 that the Vulgate uses imputo in this connection (of,, with special application, II Tim. iv. 16; Philemon 18). There are other passages, however, where it might just as well have been employed, but where we have instead reputo, under the influence of the mistaken rendering of the Hebrew haahabh in Gen. xv. 6. In these passages the Authorised English Version improves on the Latin by rendering a number of them (Rom. iv. 11, 22, 23, 24; II Cor. v. 19; James ii, 23) by " impute," and employing for the rest synonymous terms, all ‑of which preserve the " metaphor from V.‑30
accounts " inherent in togizesftuti (and eltogetn) in this usage (of. Sanday‑Neadlam, Commentary on Romans, iv. 3), such as " count " (Rom. iv. 3, 8), " account " (Gal. iii. 6), and " reckon " (Rohr. iv. 4, 9, 10); the last of which the Revised English Version makes its uniform rendering of logizeesthai. Even the meager employment of imputo in the Latin version, however, supplied occasion enough for the adoption of that word in the precise language of theology as the technical term for that which .is expressed by the Greek words in their so‑called " commercial " sense, or what may, more correctly, be called their forensic or' judicial ' sense, " that is, putting to one's account," or, in its twofold reference to the credit and debit sides, " setting to one's credit " or " laying to one's charge."
From the time of Augustine (early fifth century) at least, the term " imputation " is found firmly fixed in theological terminology in this
s. Three sense. But the applications and relaActs of Im‑ tions of the doctrine expressed by it
	putation.	were thoroughly worked out only in
		the discussions which accompanied and
succeeded the Reformation. In the developed
theology thus brought into the possession of the
Church, three several acts of imputation were es
tablished and expounded. These are the imputa~
tion of Adam's sin to his posterity; the imputation
of the sins of his people to the Redeemer; the im
putation of the righteousness of Christ to his people,
Though, of course, with more or less purity of con
ception and precision of application, these three
great doctrines became the property of the whole
Church, and found a place in the classical theology
of the Roman, Lutheran, and Reformed alike. In
the proper understanding of the conception, it is
important to bear in mind that the divine act called
" imputation " is in itself precisely the same in
each of the three great transactions into which it
enters as a constituent part. The grounds on which
it proceeds may differ; the things imputed may
be different; and the consequent treatment of the
person or persons to which the imputation is made
may and will differ as the things imputed to them
differ, But in each and every case alike imputation
itself is simply the act of setting to one's account;
and the act of setting to one's account is in itself
the same act whether the thing set to his account
stands on the credit or debit side of the account,
and whatever may be the ground in equity on which
it is set to his account. That the sin of Adam was
so set to the account of his descendants that they
have actually shared in the penalty which was
threatened to it; and that the sins of his people
were so set to the account of our Lord that he bore
them in his own body on the tree, and his merits
are so set to their account that by his stripes they
are healed, the entirety of historical orthodox
Christianity unites in affirming.
Opposition to these doctrines has, of course, not been lacking in the history of Christian thought. The first instance of important contradiction of the fundamental principle involved is presented by the Pelagian movement (see PELAQIUB, PE1,AafAmsm) which arose at the beginning of the fifth century. The Pelagians denied the equity and, therefore,

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
under the government of God, the possibility of the involvement of one free agent in the acts of anoth‑
‑	er; they utterly denied, therefore,
3. peUtgian that men either suffer harm from
Opposition Adam's sin or profit by Christ's to the merits. By their examples only, they
	Doctrine.	said, can either Adam or Christ affect
		us; and by free imitation of them alone
can we share in their merits or demerits. It is not
apparent why Pelagius permitted himself such
extremity of denial. What he had at heart to assert
was the inadmissibility by the‑human, subject of plen
ary ability of will to do all righteousness. To safe
guard this he had necessarily to deny all subjective
injury to men from Adam's sin (and from their own
sins too, for that matter), and the need or actuality
of subjective grace for their perfecting. But there
was no reason growing out of this point of sight
why he might not allow that the guilt of Adam's
sin had been imputed to his posterity, end had
supplied the ground for the infliction upon them
of external penalties temporal or eternal; or that
the merits of Christ might be imputed to his people
as the meritorious ground of their relief from these
penalties, as well as of the forgiveness of their own
actual sins and of their reception into the favor of
God and the heavenly blessedness. Later Pelagian
izers found this out; and it became not uncommon
(especially after Duns Scotus' strong assertion of
the doctrine of " immediate imputation ") for the
imputation of Adam's sin to be exploited precisely
in the interest of denial or weakening of the idea
of the derivation of inherent corruption from Adam.
A very, good example of this tendency of thought
is supplied by the Roman Catholic theologian
Ambrosius Catharinus; whose admirable speech to
this effect at the Council of Trent is reported by
Father Paul (Hist. of the Council of Trent, Eng.
transl., London, 1676, p. 165). Even Zwingli was
not unaffected by it. He was indeed free from the
Pelagianizing attenuation of the corruption of na
ture which is the subjective effect on his posterity of
Adam's sin. With him, " original sin " was both
extensively and intensively a total depravity, the
fertile source of all evil action. But he looked
upon it rather as a misfortune than a fault, a dis
ease than a sin; and he hung the whole weight of
our ruin on our direct participation in Adam's
guilt. As a slave can beget only a slave,‑ says he,
so all the progeny of man under the curse are
born under the curse.
In sharp contradiction to the current tendency to reduce to the vanishing‑point the subjective injury wrought by Adam's sin on his poster‑
;. Impor‑ ity, the churches gave themselves to tance emphasizing the depth of the injury of the and especially its sinfulness. Even the
	Doctrine.	Council of Trent acknowledged the
		transfusion into the entire human race
of "sin, which is the death of the soul." The
Protestants, who, as convinced Augustinians, were
free from the Pelagianizing bias of Rome, were
naturally even more strenuous in asserting the evil
and guilt of native depravity. Accordingly they
constantly remark that men's native guilt in the
sight of God rests not merely upon the imputation
to them of Adam's first sin, but also upon the nor ruption which they derive from him‑‑a mode of statement which meets us, indeed; as early as Peter Lombard (`° Sentences," IL, xxx.) and for the same reason. The polemic turn given to these statements has been the occasion of a remarkable misapprehension, as if it were intended to subordinate the imputation of Adam's transgression to the transmission of his corrupted nature as the source of human guilt. Precisely the contrary is the fact. The imputation of Adam's transgression was not in dispute; all parties to the great debate of the age fully recognized it; and it is treated therefore as a matter of course. What was important was to make it clear that native depravity was along with it the ground of our guilt before God. Thus it was sought to hold the balance true, and to do justice to both elements in a complete doctrine of original sin. Meanwhile the recovery of the great doctrine of justification by faith threw back its light upon the doctrine of the satisfaction of Christ which had been in the possession of the Church since Anselm; and the better understanding of this doctrine, thus induced, in turn illuminated the doctrine of sin, whose correlative it is. Thus it came about that in the hands of the great Protestant leaders of the sixteenth century, and of their successors; the Protestant . systematizers of 'the seventeenth century, the threefold doctrine of imputation‑of Adam's sin to his posterity, of the sins of his people to the Redeemer, and of the righteousness of Christ to his people‑at last came to its rights as the core of the three constitutive doctrines of Christianitythe sinfulness of the human race, the satisfaction of Jesus Christ; and justification by faith. The importance of the doctrine of imputation is that it is the hinge on which these three great doctrines turn, and the guardian of their purity.
Of course the Church was not permitted to enjoy in quiet its new understanding of its treasures of doctrine. Radical opponents arose in
5. Socinian, the Reformation age itself, the most Arminian, important of whom were the Socinians and Ra‑ (see SOCINUB, Socixmxism). By them tionalistic it was pronounced an inanity to speak Opposition. of the transference of either merit or demerit from one person to another: we can be bad with another's badness,, or good with another's goodness, they said, as little as we can be white with another's whiteness. The center of the Socinian assault was upon the doctrine of the satisfaction of Christ: it is not possible, they affirmed, for one person to bear the punishment due to another. But their criticism cut equally deeply into the Protestant doctrines of original sin and justification by faith. The influenoe.of their type of thought, very great from the first, increased as time went on and became a factor of importance both in the Arminian revolt at the beginning of the seventeenth oentury and in the rationalistic defection a hundred years later. Neither the Arminians (e.g., Limborch, Curcellaeus), nor the Rationalists (e.g., Wegscheider) would hear of an imputation of Adam's sin, and both attacked with arguments very similar to these of the Socinians also the imputation of our sins to Christ or of his righteous.

487
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
IN
to us. Rationalism almost ate the heart out of the Lutheran Churches; and the Reformed Churches were saved from the same fate only by the prompt extrusion of the Arminian party and the strengthening of their position by conflict with it. In particular, about the middle of the seventeenth century the " covenant " or " federal " method of exhibiting the ‑ plan of the Lord's dealings with men (see COCCEIUS, JOHANNES, AND HIS SCHOOL) began to find great acceptance among the Reformed Churches. There was nothing novel in this mode of conceiving truth. The idea was present to the minds of the Church Fathers and the Schoolmen; and it underlay Protestant thought, both Lutheran and Reformed, from the beginning, and in the latter had come to clear expression, first in Ursinus. But now it quickly became dominant as the preferable manner of conceiving the method of the divine dealing with men. The effect was to throw into the highest relief the .threefold doctrine of imputation, and to make manifest as never before the dependency of the great doctrines of sin, satisfaction, and justification upon it.
About the same time a brilliant French professor, Josue de la Place (see PLACEUs, JosuA), of the Reformed school at Saumur, reduced
6. La Place all that could be called the imputation
	and Later	of Adam's sin to his posterity simply
Theologians to this‑that because of the sin in
and Schools. herent in us from our origin we are
		deserving of being treated in the same
way as if we had committed that offense. This
confinement of the effect of Adam's sin upon his
posterity to the transmission to them of a Sinful
disposition‑inherent sin‑was certainly new in the
history of Reformed thought: Andreas Rivetus (see
RIVET, ANDR1k) bad no difficulty in collecting a long
line of " testimonies " from the confessions and
representative theologians explicitly declaring that
men are accounted guilty in God's sight, both
because of Adam's act of transgression imputed to
them and of their own sinful disposition derived
from him. The conflict of views was no doubt
rendered sharper, however, by the prevalence at
the time of the " Covenant .theology " in which the
immediate imputation of Adam's transgression is
particularly clearly emphasized. Thus `° imme.
diate" and "mediate" imputation (for by the latter
name La Place came subsequently to call his view)
were pitted against each other as mutually exclusive
doctrines: as if the question at issue were whether
man stood condemned in the sight of God solely
on account of his "adherent " sin, or solely on ac
count of his "inherent" sin. The former of these
doctrines had never been . held in the Reformed
Churches, since Zwingli, and the latter had never
been held in them before La Place. From the
first both "adherent " and " inherent " sin had
been confessed as the double ground of human
guilt; and the advocates of the " Covenant theol
ogy " were as far as possible from denying the guilt
of " inherent " sin. La Place's inapvation was as
a matter of, course condemned by the Reformed
worlds formally at the Synod of Charenton (1649‑45)
and in the Helvetic Consensus (1675): slid by argu
ment at the hands of the leading theologians=
Rivetus, Turretin, Maresius, Driessen, Leydecker,
and Marck. But the tendencies of the time were
in its favor and it made its way. It was adopted
by theologians like Wyttenbach, Endemann, Stap
fer, Roell, Vitringa, Venema; and after a while it
found its way through Britain to America, where
it has had an interesting history :forming one of
the stages through which the New England Theol
ogy (q.v.) pawed on its way to its ultimate denial
of the quality of sin involving guilt to anything
but the voluntary acts of a free agent; and finally
becoming one of the characteristic tenets of the
so‑called " New School Theology " of the Presby
terian Churches. Thus it has come about that there
has been much debate in America upon " imputa
tion," in the sense of the imputation of Adam's sin,
and diverse types of theology have been framed,
especially among the Congregationalists and Pres
byterians, centering in differences of conception of
this doctrine. Among the Presbyterians, for exam
ple, four such types are well marked, each of which
has been taught by theologians of distinction:
These are (1) the " Federalistic," characterized by
its adherence to the doctrine of " immediate im
putation," represented, for example, by Dr. Charles
Hodge; (2) the " New School," characterized by
its adherence to the doctrine of " mediate imputa
tion," represented, for example, by Dr. Henry B.
Smith; (3) the " Realistic," which teaches that all
mankind were present in Adam as generic humanity,
and sinned in him, and are therefore guilty of his
and their common sin, represented, for example, by
Dr. W. G. T. Shedd; and (4) one which may be
called the " Agnostic," characterized by an attempt
to accept the fact of the transmission of both guilt
and depravity from Adam without framing a theory
of the mode of their transmission or of their rela
tions one to the other, represented, for example, by
Dr. R. W. ‑ Lan".	See ADAM; ATONEMENT;
JUSTIFICATION; REDEMPTION; SATISFACTION; SIN.
	BENJAMIN B. WARFIELD.
BIBLIoaHAPHY: The literature of the subject is the literature of ORIGINAL Sir, ATONEI(ENT, and JBBTmCATION (qqx.). Special treatment in usually given also in the systems of doctrinal theology, especially of the Calvinistic type. Consult: A. Revetus, Opera, iii. 798 sqq., Rotterdam, 1580; R. Ruesebi, OeschicAte and Kritik der kirehlichen Lehre room Siindenfall, Leyden, 1801; C. Hodge, Theological Essays, pp. 128‑217, New York, 1846• A. Schweizer, Die protestantischen Ceatraldopmen, Zurich, 1854‑56; W. Cunningham, The Reformers and the Theology of Ova Reformation, pp. 371 Hqq., Edinburgh, 1866; J. Buchanan The Doctrine of Justification, pp. 279, 321‑323, 334, 337, ib., 1867; G. P. Fisher, in the New Englander, July, 1868; J. Wider, The Christian Doctrine of Sin, ii. 32 sqq., Edinburgh, 1868; T. J. Culwford, Doctrine of Holy Scripture Respecting the Atonement, pp. 181‑183, 424, ib., 1871; R. W. Landis, The Doctrine of Original Sin as Received and Taught by the Churches, Richmond, 1884; W. G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, ii. 29, 42, 57‑63,. 192‑194, New York; 1888; H. B. Smith, System of Christian Theob opy, ed. W. S. Karr, pp. 283‑323, ib., 1890; R. V. Foster. Systematic Theology, pp 408‑413, Nashville, 1898• W. A. Brown, Christian Theology in Outline, pp. 285, 290‑291, 3,11, 362, New York, 1906.

INCAPACITY: The state of being unqualified to receive holy orders. It exists in the cam of unbaptized persons and women. As to, the former, it is obvious. that a person who is to hold an ecclesiastical office must be a member of the Church, and this

Inoaraatian incense
membership is gained only by baptism. The canon
law provides in a number of places that if a priest
is found not to have been baptized, he must receive
that sacrament and then be reordamed. The in
capacity of women has never been questioned in
the Church. According to I Tun. if. 12; I Cor.
xiv. 34, 35, they are not to teach, and Tertullian
(De trirg. vet., viii.) expresses the prohibition of
any official acts by them in the meet absolute terms:
The Council of Laodicea (372) forbids their ordina
tion as wee (viduce), and the first Counbil of
Nicwa (325), with several others, as diacmrce or
daacoaissm. 	(O. Mist.)
BnBLro6R•Pn7: B'mgham, Orepiaw, XIV., iv. b.
INCARNATION. See CHHIS'1br.OGY XI., § 2; and Vm(3rN BIRTH.
IRCE, WILLIAM: Church of England; b. in London Jane 7, 1825. He was educated at King's College, London, and Lincoln College, Oxford (B.A., 1846), was ordered deacon in 1849 and ordained priest in 1852. He was fellow and tutor of Exeter College, Oxford (1847‑78), and subrector (1857‑78). He became regius professor of divinity and canon of Christ Church, Oxford, in 1878, and subdean in 1901. He was likewise junior proctor of the University, 1856‑57, Whitehall preacher, 1860‑62, and chaplain to the bishop of Oxford, 1871‑89. Among his publications special mention may be made of Sosse Aspects of Christian TrAh (London, 1862); 12eUgtoa in the Unite of Oxford (1874); The Post Hiy and rrD,,of the Faculty of ThedMg is Oxford (Oxford, 1878); and LOU‑ on the Declaradiios of the English Church Unimt (1900).
INCENSE.
L Pre‑Christian Usage. 	The Ritual of Incense (¢ b).
Universality of Its Em‑ II. In the Christian Church.
	ployment (§ 1).	In the Patristic Period
The Hebrew Altar of In‑		(¢ 1).
	sense (¢ 2).	In the Roman Catholic
The Materials (13).		Church (12).
Symbolism (1 4).	Ritual of Incense (¢ 3).
L Pre‑Christian Usage: The Orientals, from time immemorial, had an extraordinary predilection for fragrant spices, particularly for such
:. Univer‑ aromatics as exhale an agreeable odor sality of when consumed on coals. Not only in Its Em‑ connection with worship, but also in ployment. private life, large outlay was bestowed upon perfumery and ins. This is especially true of the ancient Egyptians (d. Plutarch, De Iside, lass.‑lxxxi.), who could not conceive even the subterranean world without such enjoyment. It was a mark of honor, among Oriental nations, to sprinkle incense over persons or guests of high estate‑a. practise still current in contemporary Egypt. Censers were carried before those commanders or princes whom they desired to honor, or were set up in the streets through which they passed (cf. Quintus Curtius Rufus, De rebus geatia Alexandri, V., i. 20, VIII., ix. 23; Herodian, Hsatoria, IV., viii. 19, and xi. 3). The ancient Israelites appeared equally fond of sweet savors (Prow. aavii. 9). Rooms, clothing, stuffs of all kinds, were garnished with spices and ins on occasions of festivity (Pa. x1v. 8; Cant. iii. 6; Prov. vii. 17).
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
In the sphere of worship, as well, incense was from early times a demonstration of honor in relation to the deity, so employed in Western Asia among the Babylonians, Syrians, Phenicians and Canaanitea. From Asia, in turn, the practise pawed over to Greeks and Romans, sad was prominent in the voluptuous rites in honor of goddesses. In the Bible the use of incense in ceremonial is frequent. Indeed the offering of sacrifice sometimes takes the form of expression commonly used for incense, the idea being that sacrifice is productive of sweet savor before God. Just as in Israel it was prescribed, with reference to many a sacrifice, to salt it with incense, the same, beyond ell doubt, was also frequently the case with the heathen offerings, whereof the Bible speaks (cf. the " strange incense," Ex. axc. 9, in contrast with Israel's worship). The modern theory that the offering of incense came into the Israelite worship from abroad only shortly before Jeremiah's day is neither demonstrable nor inherently probable. From the very fact that in Israel's pristine antiquity, no less than in Babylonia and Egypt, there prevailed the intention of produring, along with the sacrifice, a " sweet‑smelling savor" for the deity (Gem. viii. 21; of_ Dent, xasiii. 10), it becomes a matter of course that fragrant woods and aromatics were employed. Indeed by the very burning of the first‑fruits snit of other vegetable substances, dire for sweet savor was implied. If it is therefore probable from the outset that the Hebrews contemplated the burning of fragrant substances in the sanctuary, the silence of the Prophets (but cf. Esek. asiii. 41) does not invalidate the Pentateachal evidences of the offering of incense from the time of Moses (Lev. a. 1 sqq., avi. 13; Num. zvi.). On the other hand, it is easily conceivable that the material for incense could.be, and was, refined in the course of time by employing exotic spite (Jer. vi. 211; Isa. Ix. 6). The offering of incense had a symbolic significance. Usually a symbol of prayer is discerned therein, and not unreasonably (Ps. rail. 2). The ascending cloud of incense was a symbol o£ the prayer with which the congregation accompanied the rite (Luke i. 8‑10). A further symbolism involved is the transfer to the deity of the noblest sad best the earth has to give. According to Lev. avi. 13, there is an expiatory signification attached to the oblation of incense. What is for sinful man the deadly majesty of God becomes veiled over by this manner of offering.
The altar of incense, described as furniture of the tabernacle (Ea, ass. i‑10, awii. 25), was a cubit is length and a cubit in breadth, two z. The cubits in height, of acacia wood over_
	Hehrew	laid with gold, whence it is called the
	Altar of	golden altar (Ex. axaia. 38). Like the
	Inca.	altar for burnt sacrifice, it was pro
		vided with horns, projecting from the
four corners. Huff‑way between top cad base it
was decorated with a " crown round about," the
Mme as in terse of the ark and ahowbread table.
Handles, or " staves," likewise of acacia, wood and
overlaid with gold, were inserted through golden
rings, two on each side, below the,, mown." Above
the altar, a ‑ roof 11 was adjusted; that is, a flat

469	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	In°`xnati°"
		Incense
surface in the style of oriental roofs: This altar
stood in the middle of ‑the sanctuary, and, further
more, immediately before the curtain of the Holy
of Holies. Burnt offerings, meal offerings, and drink
offerings were to stay far from it; only incense was
to burn thereon; save that by way of expiation the
horns were to be stained by the high priest with
blood on the day of atonement, and on other ooca
sions the blood of sin offerings was thus applied
(Lev. iv. 7). A matter that strikes attention is
the late context of the passage Ex. xxx. 1 sqq.,
while the appointment of the altar of incense was
to be expected in the earlier context of chapter xxvi.,
where the Samaritan copy inserts it (xxvi. 34).
Wellhausen, followed by most of the moderns,
arms that the era of 'the priest code was not
	acquainted with an altar of incense; the passage in
	question being of later origin than the remainder
	of the description of the tabernacle. The explanar
	tion for this context of the altar of incense in Ex.
xxx. (again in xxxvii.) is not to be given conclusively.
	It is not impossible that in the early age they per
	formed the incensing merely with incense pans or
	censers, and that only in the course of time was
	there an altar set up for that purpose expressly.
	But the erection of an incense altar in Solomon's
	temple ought not to be doubted, since frequent
	mention occurs (e.g., I Kings vi. 22, vii. 48, ix. 25).
	The dimensions are not reported, although by anal
	ogy they were possibly greater than in the taber
	nacle. In like manner, this adjunct, being an in
	alienable factor in the worship of Yahweh as
	regulated by Moses, could not have been wanting
	in the temples of Zerubbabel and Herod. According
	to the testimony of I Maoc. i. 21, iv. 49, this golden
	altar was carried off by Antiochus Epiphanes, along
	with the other utensils of the sanctuary, though
	reconstructed anew by Judas Maccabeus, on the
occasion of rededicating the Temple.	Josephus,
	again, was acquainted with this jewel of the sano
	tuary (War, V., v. 5). Similar evidence is gained
	from Heb. ix. 4, which attests the actual presence
	of this altar in the last age of. the temple. In the
	face of such weighty evidence, it is of little signif
	icance that Josephus, who knew that altar so well,
	does not expressly mention the altar of incense in
	connection with Pompey's visit to the temple
	(Ant. XIV., iv. 4; War, I., vii. 6), but dwells on
	the golden censers and the great quantity of incense.
	The absence of any picture of the altar on the Arch
	of Titus and in the description by Josephus (War,
	VII., v. 5) is probably to be explained by the
	supposition that it had perished in the conflagration.
	It is obvious that the material for the ceremonial
	incense consisted of fragrant substances. The sub
	stance most frequently employed was
3. The	frankincense (q.v.), a resin (etymo
	Materials. logically, of ' a whitish sort; cf. Pliny,
	Hint. nW. xii. 14), which the Hebrews
	obtained from southern Arabia (from Sheba, ac
	cording to Jer. xi. 20; Isa. Ix. 6). For the inner
	sanctuary there is prescribed a special composition
	of fragrant spices (Ex. xxx. 34‑38). Just as the
	Egyptians had a prescription for ceremonial use
	compounded of from ten to thirty‑six ingredients
	(Plutarch, De Iside, lxxxi., enumerates sixteen sub‑
stances), so in the tabernacle and in the temple an exclusive composition of four ingredients in equal parts was to be employed‑and this might not be prepared for profane uses. The three aromatics that were to supplement frankincense are named: (1) nataph, " atacte," an exuding gum, according to some authorities, of the myrrh shrub (elsewhere expressed by the Heb. mor; verse 23), according to others, of the stoma; (2) sheheleth, " incense nail," " sea clove," the shell of a mussel, strongly pungent under combustion; (3) helbendh, Lat. galbanum, " heart resin," abundant in Syria, which when alone emits an unpleasant smell, but, when duly proportioned with other ingredients, contributes to the potency and exhilarating effect of the aroma. These substances were to be mingled " after the art of the perfumer " [after the manner of the ointment mixer], and salted (cf. Lev. ii. 13), the same as was prescribed for the ceremonial offerings: hence, too, they would be crushed or pulverized. Later Jewish observance did not confine itself to the four substances here mentioned, but added seven other aromatics (cf. %erithoth 6"°; Maimonides, Hilkoth kele hammikdash, ii. 1‑5). Of the four specified ingredients, there were to be taken, according to the rabbis, 70 pounds each. However, 368 pounds appear to have been used for the yearly requirement. • The residue may have been composed of the accessory substances intermixed in smaller portions. The seven additional aromatics. are as follows: myrrh (Ex. xxx. 23; Cant. iii. 6), cassia (Ex. xxx. 24; Ps. xlv. 8; Ezek. xxvii. 19), spikenard (Cant. i. 12; cf. John xii. 3), saffron (Cant. iv. 14), costus, calamus (Ex. xxx. 23), and cinnamon (Ex. xxx. 23; Cant. iv. 14). Thus ten, or more usually eleven, aromatics were enumerated, according as frankincense was or was not included among them. Josephus (War, V., v. 5) speaks even of thirteen perfumes which went up from the altar of incense, but this is explained by the fact that still other aromatics were intermingled with the compound. Quantity and component proportions are more specifically defined by the Talmud.
	The four	statutory ingredients of the sacred
incense have been interpreted in a variety of
		symbolic ways. Philo gives a cosmo‑
	4. Sym‑	logical turn to the number four, stacte
	bolism.	having reference to water, sea clove
		to the earth, heart resin to the air,
frankincense to fire (Quis rerum div. here,, p. 397).
Josephus says that the thirteen kinds of odors, pro
ceeding from the sea, the inhabited and uninhabited
earth, denote that all is God's, and all is designed
for him. In connection with the symbolical iden
tity of incense and prayer, some have sought to
correlate the four kinds of material for incense with
the four categories of Christian prayer (praise,
thanksgiving, petition; and intercession; cf. I Tim.
ii. 1); or with the four emotional attributes indis
pensable to prayer (faith., humility, love, hope).
All this is conjecture, and only this is certain, that
there was contemplated an ascension of the mys
terious aroma within the holy abode, and that the
drawing near to God is also to be prefigured by
ennobling and enrichment of the elements of
worship.

Incense
In Ccena Dog
	In	al for incense, the effusions of incense
that were combined with the meal offerings, where
the frankincense was put over the same 5. The on the sacrificial altar, are to be dis‑
Ritual of tinguished from the separate oblations
Incense.	of incense, which took place only
within the second enclosure. More particular procedure with the incense is not reported. The directions are equally brief in respect to incense in the sanctuary (Ex. xxx. 7 sqq.); morning and evening, as the priest " dresseth the lamps," and when he " lighteth " them, he shall also kindle the perpetual incense offering. More detailed regulations, in, so far, at least, as they apply to the ritual of Herod's temple, are furnished by the Mishnah Tamidh, iii. 6, vi. 1‑3; cf. Maimonides, Yadh hachaaaka, iii. 1‑9. As early as the Torah, two utensils are mentioned which were used in offering incense: (1) the firepan (Ex. xxvii. 3, xxxviii. 3; Num. xvi. 6‑7), whereon the hot coals lay. The incense was poured upon these out of (2) a bowl fitted with a handle, the golden incense spoon (Ex. xxv. 29; Num. vii. 84, 86). By means of this firepan, or of the censer (Ezek. viii. 11; 11 Chron. xxvi. 19), which does not appear to have been essentially different from the firepan, incense could be offered without an altar; and this was always the case in the Holy of Holies. Here the high priest entered on the day of atonement, with the pan of coals in his right hand and the vessel of aromatics in his left hand; he placed the former vessel down and from the latter took incense and placed it upon the firepan. If, however, as on occasion of the daily morning and evening offering of incense, the oblation was performed on the inner altar, then a priest, at least according to later observance, first carried the basin full of hot coals into the sanctuary and poured it over the altar of incense; whereupon a second priest brought in the aromatics in the incense ladle, and completed the solemn offering as he spread the spices over the coals and uttered his prayer therewith. The quantitative portion to be offered every morning and evening is prescribed in the Talmud as half a pound. The service of offering incense alternated, as determined by lot, among the officiating priests (Lev. i. 8 sqq.). In course of time the two daily offerings of incense coincided with the two daily burnt offerings, and marked, conjointly with these, the hour of morning and evening prayer for the whole congregation, when many frequented the temple. As the ceremonial of incense began, both priest and people were admonished to solemn stillness and devout prayer by the sound of small bells.
C. VON ORELLI.
Il. In the Christian Church: Notwithstanding the important r81e assigned to incense in the Jewish
ritual, and the mention in Rev. viii. i. In the 3, 4 of one of the symbolical meanings
Patristic	attached to the same, there is no satis‑
Period.	factory evidence of the use of incense
in the Christian Church during the first three centuries. Indeed, the early Apologists are emphatic in disclaiming its use. Thus, Tertullian (APol. xlii., cf. xxx.) declares formally: " We have nothing to do with incense," and Athen‑
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
470
agoras (" Plea for the Christians, " xlii., in ANF, ii. 134‑135) explains that the God of the Christians, being himself the most exquisite of all aromas, has no need of incense. It is plain from the context of these and other passages that the opposition of the early Christians to incense rested chiefly, if not solely, on the fact that its use was identified with the religious ceremonies of the pagans, and it is well known that for a Christian to burn incense before an idol was one of the most conspicuous marks of apostasy. It appears that the earliest extant references to the use of incense in the Christian liturgy occur in the Apostolic Constitutions (canons 3, 4) where, among the objects declared necessary for the offering of the sacrifice, mention is made of the thumiema, and in the work of the PseudoDionyaius (De hierarch. eccl., iii.‑iv.), where it is stated that every offering of the sacrifice should be preceded by the ceremony of thurification. It would seem, therefore, that the custom began to prevail in the Christian Church from the fourth century onward. The Oriental liturgies of Basil and Chrysostom and others speak of incensing the elements or oblates of the Eucharistic service; as to the West, the use of incense in the ceremonies of the mesa seems to have originated in the churches of Gaul.
The Roman ritual regulates in greater detail the liturgical use of incense, specifying the formula of words that should accompany each of
	s. In the	the various thurificationa. The earli
	Roman	est usage seems to have been connected
	Catholic	with the ceremonies of the mass, but
	Church.	it was later extended to other religious
		functions, such as ecclesiastical bene
dictions and consecrations, funeral rites, and litur
gical processions in which the thurifera walk at the
head, preceding the cross‑bearer. In the liturgical
works of the Middle Ages mention is made of
several kinds of vessels connected with the' keeping
and use of incense: e.g. the Lhuraraum or incenaa
rium, denoting a box or chest of variable pattern
and dimension in which the different kinds of
incense were kept; the thymiotorium, a large recep
tacle placed near the altar, and which diffused in
all directions the odor of the incense burned therein;
and the thuribulum, or thurible proper, a portable
vessel suspended by small chains and thus capable
of being swung. Thuribles vary in design, and are
often objects of great art, being exquisitely chiseled
and set with precious stones. Besides the practical
utility of incense to counteract the disagreeable
odors incidental to large and confined gatherings
of people‑a purpose which had probably some
thing to do with its introduction into the liturgical
services‑it has several symbolical significations.
Thus, according to Bellarmine (De miasn, ii. lb),
it symbolizes (1) the " sweet savor of the knowledge
of Christ " (II Cor. ii. 14 eqq.); (2) the prayers of
the saints (Rev. viii. 3, 4); (3) the majesty of God
veiled by the clouds. Others see in the consump
tion by fire of the incense before the Lord a symbol
of the completeness and generosity with which
Christians should consecrate and devote them
selves to God and his service.
~,	In liturgical functions the celebrant always

471	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Incense
		in Qaeas Domini
blesses the incense when putting it into the thurible,
except on Good Friday and when he is about to
			incense exclusively the blessed sac
	3. Ritual rament. Three blessings of the incense
of Incense. occur during the ceremonies of the
			solemn mass: (1) before the introit;
(2) before the chanting of the Gospel; (3) after the
offertory. In the service for the dead .this last is
the only one. When the liturgical office is solemnly
chanted, incense is blessed in lauds at the Bene
dictus, and in vespers at the Magnificat; and in each
case the altar is incensed and afterward the cele
brant and the other officiating ministers. The in
censing of persons occurs three times during the
solemn high.mass: (1) the celebrant is incensed
by the deacon after the introit; (2) the same after
the chanting of the Gospel; (3) after the offertory
the deacon incenses the celebrant, then, in order of
dignity, the prelates and other members of the
clergy occupying places in the sanctuary;, and finally
the subdeacon, after which one of the inferior
ministers incenses in globo the congregation of the
faithful. The number of swings of the thurible is
regulated by the ritual with reference to the greater
or less canonical dignity of the persons or things
incensed.	Thus, e.g., three swings are prescribed
for the blessed sacrament exposed, and for the
cross on the altar; also for the celebrant, cardinals
or bishops present in the sanctuary. Two strokes
are allotted to lesser ecclesiastical dignitaries ‑and
to sacred relics exposed on the altar, while the
ordinary priest present in the sanctuary receives
but one. Ali persons incensed must be standing.
For further particulars in this connection see the
Rituade Romanum and the Ceremonials EPiscopomm
(1, I., xxiii. n. 3 et passim).
				JAMES F. DRIOCoLL.
	During the last half century the use of incense
has been to some extent restored in the Anglican
communion, where it caused a violent and acri
monious controversy. The Catholic , Apostolic
Church also employs it (see this work, ii. 459).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On T.: The earlier literature is given in
	Hauck‑Herzog, RE, xvi. 404. Consult the commentaries
	on the passages cited in the text; J. wellhRusen, Pro
	legomena, pp. 64 eqq., Berlin, 1895; Bensinger, Arehoolopie,
	pp. 401‑402, 444‑445; Nowack, Arddolopie, ii. 246‑247;
	DB, ii. 467‑848; EB, iL 2165‑2169; JB, vi. 568‑571. On II.:
	Bingham, Oripinue, VIII., vi. 21; C. de Vert, Explication
		. des cArrimonies de i'Eglise, iv. 52 sqq., Paris, 1713;
	P. Lebrun, Explication . . . de la mmse, i. 146 eqq., ib.,
	1726; N. 8. Bergier, Dictionnaire de thtologie, ii. 422 sqq.,
	Besancon, 1830; Baltimore Ceremonial, Philadelphia, 1894;
	Migne, Encyclop4die thdoWiqae, 1 ser., xv. 1166 eqq.;
	DCA, i. 830‑831; Lichtenberger, EBR, iv. 415‑416.
	INCEST: Sexual intercourse between those who
are allied by ties of consanguinity or affinity.
Canon law followed in this field in the track of the
Roman law, though with various modifications.
With the Mosaic law in mind, a distinction was
made between inceatw jtaras ditini, the violation of
the prohibitions contained in Lev. xviii. and xx.,
and incesttta juris hummni, the violation of other
laws on the subject. Another distinction is made
between incestus simplex and qualifimtua or con
junctus, the latter being where it is complicated
by the addition of some other crime, such as adul‑
tery or bigamy. Punishments for this offense
became more severe under the	later Roman im
perial law (Cod. Theod. iii. 12;	Cod. Juwri. v. 5).
Section xii. of Justinian's Novella prescribes that
both men and women guilty of it shall forfeit their
property, and those of a higher station shall be
banished. The specific cases became more numer
ous under the canon law, which	treated affinity on
the same footing with consanguinity, and even
regarded the spiritual affinity contracted by joint
sponsorship in baptism as an impediment to
marriage. Special attention was paid to the pro
visions of the Mosaic law, as by the third Synod
of Arles (538), the Synod of Tours (567), and in
numerous passages of the Pseudo‑Isidorian Decre
tals. In all these places incestuous offenders are
treated as personce infames, who lose their 'civil
rights and must undergo penance, while, of course,
the connection itself must be dissolved in the abso
lutely inadmissible cases. Gratian shows his agree.
ment with this conception by including the author
ities referred to in his Decretum. The more minute
later treatment of the question may be seen in
Ferraris's Btbtiotheca canonira,	s.v. Luxuria. In
the Middle Ages the punishment of incest, as of
other sins of the flesh, was partly regulated by the
Church, partly by the civil government. AS the
latter gradually came to take a	more independent
line, it followed the principles of the Roman law;
thus, for example, the penal ordinance of Charles V.
in 1532 points to the punishments of that code,
though in practise they were gradually mitigated.
	(E. FRIEDBERG.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bingham, Origines, XV I., xi.' 3‑4, XXIL, ii. 3; J. Freisen, Oeschiehte des kanonischen Eherechts, pp. 575 sqq., TObingen, 1888; KL, vi. 629.
IN CCENA DOMIIII: A papal bull issued annually on Holy Thursday for several centuries, famous in European history as formulating the condemnation of numerous heresies. According to ancient custom, on certain days proceedings were instituted and excommunication pronounced in the Church against persons obstinately disobedient. Such days were the Thursday in Holy Week, Ascension Day, and the festival of SS. Peter and Paul. The first seems to have been the most usual; it was dies indulgentite, the day on which penitents were received again into the Church, and ‑thus the excommunication of the impenitent made a proportionately stronger impression. The excommunication of Henry IV. by Paschal II. was pronounced on that day in 1102, and that of Frederick II. by Gregory IX. in 1227. These acts were directed against individuals; but in the thirteenth century the so‑called "general proceedings,) became customary at Rome, and on Thursday before Easter whole classes of persons were excommunicated. These proceedings were aimed especially at heretics; and the proclamations issued at various times against them were combined into one decree by Nicholas II. in 1280. Later popes, especially Urban V. in 1364, made use of and revised this collection, to which additions were made from time to time, especially after the reforming movements of the fifteenth century. Luther and his adherents were included in.1524. Supplementary condemnations were appended by Paul III. (1536), Pius V.

Inehofer India,
(1566), Gregory XIII. (157883), Paul V.,(16M), and Urban VIII. (1627). In its latest form the bull begins with an excommunication of various heretics and schismatics individually, and condemns also those who appeal from papal decrees to a general council, pirates, wreckers, etc. It is not to be wondered at that this bull was regarded by secular powers as an infringement of their rights and its proclamation prohibited. Clement XIV. discontinued its publication at; Rome in 1770, and Pins IX. finally abolished it by the constitution APosWicm sedis of Oct. 12, 1869, though this constitution is in certain points, especially as concerns heretics, practically a repetition of the Bulls Carne'.
(E. FRIEDBERG.)
BisLioassrav: The bull of Nicholas TII. is given in Thatcher and McNeal, Source Book, pp. 309‑310. Consult: Le Bret, Prapmagsdie Gearchichte des . Bulls in cans Domini, Ulm,1709; F. H. Reuseh, Der Index der roerbotsnen Bscher, i. 71, 88, 603, Bonn, 1883; J. J. T. Von Dbllinger, Das Papsasn4 pp. 215 .qq., Munich, 1892.

INCHOFER (UIHOFER), MELCHIOR: Roman Catholic theologian; b. at Vienna (according to others at Gains [55 m. n.e. of Graz], Hungary) 1584 or 1585; d. at Milan Sept. 28, 1648. In 1607 he entered the order of the Jesuits in Rome, and after the completion of his novitiate went to Messina, where he taught philosophy, mathematics, and theology. In his Egdstolm Beatm Marim Virg£nis ad Messanenses roeritas vindicate (Messina, 1629) he endeavored to prove the genuineness of the epistle and the apostolic activity of Paul at Messina, but the Congregation of the Index summoned him to Rome and suppressed the first, edition, although he was permitted to remove all objectionable features from his work and republish it under the title De Eppisiola Beaten Virginia Manor and memanemes Conjectatio (Viterbo, 1631). In 1634 he resumed his professorship in Sicily, where he remained until 1636, when his order called him to Rome that he might devote himself entirely to literary labors. His dispute with Joachim Pasqualigo on the immorality of making castrati, and his appointment as member of the congregation of the index and of the holy office dissatisfied him with Rome, and at his own request he was transferred in 1646 to the college at Macerata, where he intended to devote his leisure hours to the compilation of a history of martyrs. For this purpose he undertook a journey to the Ambrosian library at Milan, but died on the way. In addition to the works already noted, he wrote Annales mdeeimtici rrgni Hungarim (Rome, 1644), and Historia sacrce Latiaidatis (Messina, 1635), in which he elevated Latin to the rank of a heavenly court language and regarded it as the speech of the blessed. He was also the author of some astronomical works, and in three polemical treatises (1638‑41) he defended the order of the Jesuits and its mode of education. He attained his chief fame, however, by the anonymous Lucia emncdii Europmi monarchia Solipaorum, ad virum clarissimum Leonem AlWium (Venice, 1645), which was incorrectly attributed to him.
(G. .E. STEITZt.)
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
478
BIHLIOasApHT: Nio&on, Mhwires, xxzv. 322‑346; xxxix.
166‑230: A. and A. de Baoket.‑BibliofAkue do la cmwpapnie de Jim, ed. Q Sommervogel, iv. 661 eqq., Paris, 1893; KL, vi. 629‑831.
INCLBSI, INCLUSE: The name given to a monk or a nun who was permanently enclosed in a cell near or within a cloister, from which withdrawal Inight take place only by permission of the bishop. The life of the secluded nun is portrayed in the Regina sfve I:nstutdw incluslw;um ascribed to Ailred (q. v.), MPL, czcv., cf‑ xxxii. 1451 sqq.
INCORPORATION: As applied to an ecclesiastical benefice, its union with a spiritual corporation, such as a monastery, with reference to things spiritual and temporal. Such incorporations oocurred frequently as early as the ninth century. The effect was that the office connected with the benefice ceased to exist as an independent qfi'ice, and .passed over, with the temporalities, to the corporation, which was charged with the performance of all duties attached thereto. In the case of a parochial benefice, the corporation was required to appoint a vicar, who exercised the actual cure of souls. Different from these complete incorporations were others which related only to the temporalities of a benefice. These came into the possession of the monastic or collegiate body, which was required to set apart a sufficient sum (porno congrua) for the maintenance of the priest in charge. His spiritual functions remained untouched, and he was appointed by the bishop on the nomination of the corporation. Though he was called vicarius, and not parochus, he differed only in name from a regular rector, and was subject only to the bishop in regard to the exercise of his spiritual functions. The Council of Trent struck at the root of the many abuses which this system had brought about, and forbade the union of parish churches with monasteries, collegiate chapters, hospitals, etc. Since that time such incorporations have occurred but rarely, by special permission of the pope and where a good reason could be shown. (F. W. H. WAssEBsaHLEBENt.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. C. Neller, De genuina idea et sipnis paroehiddahs prunitioa sjusque principto incorporatdone, and De juribsa parochi primitivi, both in A. Schmidt, Thesaurus isris ealsaiaat" vol. vi., Bamberg, 1772; Richter. Kirchenrorht, pp. 464, 617; E. Friedberg, Lehrbuck des . . . Kirrhenrach4, p. 302, ib..1895; P. Hineohius, Kirchemecht . . . in Deutedaand, ii. 395, 436, 464, Berlin, 1871‑78.
INCORRUPTICOLA: A name given to the Aphthartodoeetdj. See MGNGPHysrrEB.

INDEPENDENT METHODISTS. See MzTHODIST8, IV., 9.
INDEPENDENT (POLISH) CATHOLICS. See
OLD CATHOLICS, III., § 1.
INDEPENDENTS: A name given to the Congregationalists in England. See CONGREGATIONALISTS.
INDEX LIBRORUK PROHIBITORUM, sometimes called INDEX E%PURGATORIUS. See CENSORSHIP AND PROHIBITION 08 BOOBS.

473	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Inchofer
I. History.
1. To 650.mc.
Early Peoples°and their Dons ($ 1)..
Developments of , Literature, and Philosophy (; 2).
The Art of Writing (J 3).
Amalgamation of Civilizations (¢ 4).
2. 550 ax.‑1ODI A.D.
Rise of Buddhism and ishism (f 1).
L History.‑1. To Sao 8.0.: The history of India before 563 B.C., the probable date of Buddha's birth, is obscure, but its general outlines have
:.‑Early been inferred from the Vedic writings. Peoples The mountains and forests were inand Their habited by wild tribes of dark color Religions. and rude habits, now represented by the Bhils, Kola, and other tribes, and classed under, the name Kolarian. These appear to have been the true aborigines. A more civilized race, classed under, the name Dravidian, and now represented by the Tamils, Telugus, Kanarese, and other peoples of Southern India inhabited the great plains, living in settled communities and under fixed laws. They probably represent a later wave of emigration. The inference from many sources is that these. Dravidians were tree and serpent worshipers, with a phallic cult. At the same early period, before the dawn of authentic Indian history, a hardy race with fair features lived on the steppes of Southern Russia. They appear to have been nomads, and wandered according to the exigencies of their pastoral life. As they increased in numbers, their tribes migrated in different directions. Some going westward occupied Europe. One tribe settled in Persia, becoming known as the Iranians. Another, now named Indo‑Aryans, overcame the great mountain barriers, and, making its way through the high passes of the Himalayas, occupied what is now Eastern Afghanistan and the Punjab. This invasion met with resistance from the Dravidian aborigines, but the Aryans were a stronger race and overcame them. This invasion occurred perhaps about 1500 B.C. Judging from the earliest Vedic hymns, the Aryans were nature worshipers. The natural phenomena witnessed is tie nomadic life made an impression of power, and the nomads inferred deities as the cause; hence they worshiped tile sun, the moon, the sky, wind, fire, and other phenomena as gods and goddesses. A second Aryan invasion is believed to have cccurred, perhaps about 1000 B.C., resisted by the earlier invaders; but ending in the amalgamation of Aryans and Dravidians in a national life extending as far as the Vindhya Mountains and Narmada River. In this amalgamation the Aryan influence predominated. Their religious ideas, though more or less modified, by contact with the religious ideas of the aboriginal peoples, became the prevailing religious ideas of all Northern India. The religious as well as political center in this period of amalgamation of the two Indo‑Aryan waves. and the aborigines, from say 1000 B.C. to 550 B.C., was the
INDIA.
Renascence of Brahmanism: the Philosophers (1 2).
Decadence of Religion (f 3).
3. The Period of Mohammedan ‑Influence, 1001‑IM A.D.
The Mohammedan Conquest‑(f 1).
First Effects upon Hindu Institutane (3 2).
General Results: Rise of the Beets (¢ 3).
4. Periodof Contact with Christianity.
Alexander the Great to Vasco da Gams Q 1).
Englishmen in India (1 2). IL Christianity in India.
Roman Catholic Missions (; I).
Protestant Missions (f 2).
Effects on Native Life and Thoaght (¢ 3).
IIL Native Theistic Societim
1. The Brahmo Somaj.
2. The Prarthsna Soma] of Bombay.
3. TIN! Arya 8onssj.
Madhya desha, now the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh.
The classes into which the Indo‑Aryans naturally fell, as religion and war were emphasized and material civilization advanced, gradually
2. Develop‑ stiffened into fixed divisions or castes ments of which allowed no passing from one to Caste, the other. These were: the Brahman
Literature, or priestly taste; the Kshatriya or and warrior; the Vaishys, a general name philosophy. for artizan castes; and the Sudm or aborigines, who were added as a fourth caste, with its subdivisions. That there were ever only four castes is not probable. The names of the four castes were artificial designations, given to groupings of similar occupations, gradually becoming fixed in religious and social nomenclature, both as to number and supposed divine origin. In this period, 1000 s.c. to 550 B.C., the influence of the priests, or Brahmans, gradually increased until they became supreme. Learning was confined to them, and every institution of State and every private enterprise became dependent upon them. It was in this period that tie Vedic literature arose. The Vedic hymns (see BRA$MANIBM, L, if 2‑4), in the language of early Sanskrit, had come down through tradition in connection with the religious ritual. They were unwritten, but had been gathered into a Samhita or collection, known as the $igroeda. Other collections were made, having in view the special purpose of the hymns. Those containing sacrificial formuh formed the YajtAroeda; those with sacrificial chants, the Samaveda; and in a somewhat later period the Atharvaveda, a collection of incantations. These collections, or Samhitas, were already unintelligible except to the most learned, and hence an explanatory literature arose, called the Brahmanaa. Among the Brahmans there were those who were philosophically inclined, and answered speculative questions regarding God and the universe in the Aranyakas and Upanishads (see BBA131IANISH, IL, ¢ 1). This speculation led to a monistic explanation of the universe and its origin, though the existence of gods and goddesses, as subordinate beings, was still believed. Thus the Vedantic philosophy took its rise, which, in one form or another, has dominated Indian thought from that time to the present day. In substance this philosophy taught that there is but one real substance, Brahma. The universe and all intelligences are but modes of Brahma's existence. The mode is temporary, and hence lacks reality. The only real thing is Brahma. Tim only way of deliver‑

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
ance from the evils of existence is to have the self‑consciousness of the individual pass into the unconsciousness of the universal Brahma.
It was during the latter part of this period, about 600 B.C., that the art of writing was introduced
into India: There had long existed
3. The Art trade relations with Babylonia through of Writing. the Persian Gulf, and India had
become acquainted with the Aramaic alphabet. This alphabet, somewhat modified, came into use in northwestern India. It now goes under the name of Kharoshti, but did not long survive. Another script, probably the invention of Indian minds, and now known as the Brahmi script, supplanted the former and spread over India, becoming the parent of all Indian scripts. The introduction of the art of writing had a marked influence on Indian religious history, traceable from the time when Buddhism and Jainism (qq.v.) used the vernacular to spread their faiths. The Brahmans, however, .partly because of the perishable nature of the material used for writing, partly because of a natural conservatism, and partly because the Sanskrit was held too sacred to be committed to writing, did not use the new invention for the preservation of what came down to them from the sacred past. Thus Vedic hymns still passed from generation to generation through (;he avenue of memory.
This long period, from unknown times to the rise of Buddhism and its contemporary Jainism, about
550 B.C., which included in its latter
4. Amalga‑ portion the amalgamation of two differ‑
mation of ant civilizations, Aryan and Dravidian,
Civiliza‑ and the commingling of their religious tions. ideas, but with supremacy to the
Aryan, may be considered the preparatory .period in the development of the religious history of India. Not until the amalgamation of the two races was complete could there be a history proper of Indian religious life. The Aryan race supplied India with her philosophy suited to the intelligent; the' Dravidian race supplied the elements for. worship and the practical religious life. Each was made to explain the other, and so far as can be gathered, a common elastic faith, suited to different intelligences, and undisturbed by heresies, pervaded the civilized part of India.
2. 650 B.C.‑1001 A.D.: During the second period, the amalgamation of the Aryan and Dravidian
civilizations and faiths having been
x. Rise of previously completed, Indian religious
Buddhism thought and life developed undisand turbed. The invasion of India by
Jainism. Alexander the Great in 327 B.C. was a
temporary exception to freedom from foreign invasion, as was the Mohammedan occupation of the valley of the Indus 711 A.D. to 829 A.D. These invasions left no permanent mark on the religious history of India. Syrian Christians had settled on the west coast in the second century, and had increased in numbers, but whatever influence these adherents of Nestorian Christianity exerted, it was, so far as it can be traced, purely local. The rise and spread of Buddhism and Jainism were natural developments of Indian thought in its
474
struggle to answer the great problems of existence, and of practical life. Indian religious thought and life thus separated into three main streams, the old form of Brahmanism and the heresies of Buddhism and Jainism (qq.v.). The heresies spread with
!a est effect among the masses of non‑Aryan 7Witn' and soon became serious rivals of the old faith: The philosophy of both being essentially Vedantic, it was not against the philosophy as such that the revolt came, but against the particular explanation and application of this philosophy to the experiences of human life. The propaganda of both these heresies was conducted with vigor. Their spread was among non‑Brahmanical castes, and especially among those who were the descendants of the aborigines. Thus Brahmanism, Jainism, and Buddhism contended amid the lower forma of religious belief and worship of the great mass of the non‑Aryan aborigines. Under the inspiration of Asoka, 150 B.C., who, by his wide conquest, founded the first Indian empire, Buddhism spread over the larger part of India. The inscribed pillars and rocks, the Buddhist stupas and cave temples, still found over India, are witnesses both to the spread of Buddhism, and to its command of the intelligence and wealth of the country. Buddhism subsequently divided into two schools, the Hinayana or " Little Vehicle," or adherents of the primitive faith, and the Mahayarea or " Great Vehicle," the faith of the great mesa of the Buddhists. In this latter form Buddhas, Bodhiaatvas, and numerous deities and demons came to be worshiped, and their images in temples form a marked contrast to the simplicity and absence of images of primitive Buddhism. The cave temples of Nasik, Kuda, and the transformations in the Karla caves, by which the older and simpler sculptures are cut away, and others more sensuous are produced in their stead, are illustrations of the later form of Buddhism as recorded in atone.
The Second Indian Empire under the Gupta Dynasty, 320 A.D., saw a decided revival of Brah‑
manism, manifested in several ways. s. Renal‑ There was first the gradual assimilation
cence of of Buddhism and the lower strata of
Brahman‑ religious ideas of the masses into a
ism: the conglomerate of ideas and practises
Philos‑ which goes under the name Hinduism
ophers. (q.v.). Among the outer manifesta‑
tions were the development of religious architecture, that assumed wonderful proportions and beauty, and attracted to itself the religious life of the people. A further manifestation was a revival of Sanskrit literature, resulting in the eighteen Puranas, the Dhorma Shaatras, and Tantras. Claeaical Sanskrit literature also took its rise at this time. In the centuries from 320 A.D., the beginning of the Gupta era, to 1001, the date of the first great Mohammedan invasion, India was divided into many minor states, continually warring with one another, and yet those troublous times were not unfavorable to the development of the philosophic spirit or to the application of philosophy to the daily religious and social life. The great Sankaracharya, who gave Vedantism the fixed form that has continued to the present day, flourished about

475	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	ludis
800 A.D. He was a Brahman of southern India who attempted to bring into one logical system the philosophic teachings of the Upanishads. He was a man of vast learning, and clear philosophical insight into the deepest problems of existence, who advanced Indian thought to its supreme expression. His philosophy is called the Advaitd, or pure monism. Two other philosophers of note, although connected in date with the period of Mohammedan influence, belong really to the latter part of this period of undisturbed development. R,amanuja, a Brahman of southern India (b. 1017), taught a modified Vedantism, called the Vish%shtadvaita, or modified monism, which admits that Brahma may be said to possess qualities. Madhavacharya, also of southern India (b. 1119 A.D.), taught the Dvaita philosophy, or dualism, the reality of Brahma and of finite souls and matter as distinct essences. As the Mohammedan period approached, however, both literature and philosophy declined, and the ethically lower forms of worship and ritual assumed a dominating place.
	During this long period of about 1,500 years of
quiet from foreign influences, which yet showed
		much of internal political commotion,
3. Deca‑ religious thought was by no means
dence of stagnant. New thoughts of life, new
	Religion.	explanations of phenomena, new prae
		tises in worship, and new moral ideas
were developed. In the process of amalgamation
of the higher religious ideas of the Aryans with the
lower ideas of the aborigines, the higher did not
maintain their moral excellence, but descended to
the plane of the lower, so that the Hinduism of the
period immediately preceding the Mohammedan in
vasion became corrupt and superstitious. Buddhism
had disappeared as a moral force by assimilation
with Brahmanism, and Jainism had no moral power
to withstand the prevailing darkness. This period
was consequently the darkest and most superstitious
in the religious life of India.
	S. The Period of Mohammedan Inauenoe, 1001
1781 A.D.: A temporary contact of Mohammedan
ism with Hinduism occurred soon after the death
		of Mohammed (632). The new faith
	r. The made rapid progress, and those who
	Moham‑ were inspired by it were soon moved
	medan to the conquest of other nations.
	Conquest. Hardly fifteen years after the death
		of Mohammed, an expedition from
Arabia, under Othman, sought a foothold in Sindh.
In 711 Kasim conquered and settled in the Indus
valley. But by 829 the invaders were driven away,
and the Hindus regained their hold in the Indus
valley. This temporary contact with Mohammed
anism left no visible marks on Indian religious his
tory. The permanent contact of this religion with
Hinduism may be said to have begun with the
successful raid of Mahmud of Ghazni in 1001,
resulting in the defeat of Jaipal, the Hindu raja of
Lahore. Wave after wave of Mohammedans from
beyond the natural frontier of India now flowed
through the high paeeaa of the Himalayas, and over
whelmed the northern plains. They met with
fierce resistance, but one by one the divided king
doms fell before the superior foreign force, till at
length the larger part of India fell into their hands. The last effort to extend Mohammedan power resulted in the conquest of the great Hindu kingdom of Vijayanagar in southern India in 1565. This period may be said to have ended with the battle of Panipat in 1761, in the victory of the Afghans over the rising. Mamtha power. The Marathas; however, instead of being crushed, turned upon their foe, and before their triumphal march the Mohammedan power melted away.
This period was one of humiliation for Hinduism. While many of the Mohammedan kings were tolerant of Hinduism, others were fanatical
s. First iconoclasts. Aside from the pages of
Effects written history, the signs of this fanatupon icism may be read in the ruined tem‑
Hindu ples, in the transformation of temples
Institutions. into mosques, and in the large Mohammedan population of Indian origin, descendants of those who were forcibly converted, or became converts through mercenary motives. The Emperor Akbar, 1542‑1605, was the most tolerant of the Mohammedan rulers; and took a lively interest in Hindu literature and religion, his tolerance going even so far as the promulgation of an eclectic creed which included what seemed to him the best in Mohammedanism, Hinduism, Christianity, and other creeds with which he sought to make himself familiar. Mohammedan influence on Hinduism during this period appears to be twofold. On the one band it led Hindus to cling more tenaciously to their traditional faith. Their hatred of their fanatical rulers burst into fierce flame whenever possible; rebellion was ever ready to break out against those who treated them and their faith so cruelly: On the other hand, the higher moral character of the Mohammedan creed could not but affect Indian thought, and thus a strong monotheistic current began to set in, which in one form or another is still exerting influence.
The resultant of these two influences, combined with the natural development of Hinduism within itself, was the springing into existence
3. General of innumerable sects. Among the
Results:	founders of those sects representing
Rise of monotheistic teaching, may be men‑
	the Sects.	tioned Kabir (d. c. 1449). He was a
		disciple of Ramanand, and taught the
worship of one God, truth as the great moral code,
retirement from the world as the remedy against
the passions and desires, and as the best path to
meditation on God, the chief way of salvation.
Nanak Shah (b. near Lahore 1469; see stuns,
SmHIsM) taught a doctrine which differed little from
that of his predecessor, Kabir. His philosophy was
practically Vedantism, while with the Mohammedan
he taught the oneness of God, whether as Allah or
Hari‑ He opposed caste and taught the brother
hood of man, and his followers developed into a
sect of no small dimensions. Through the stress of
Mohammedan persecution this sect, under Guru
Govind; one of Nanak's sucoeseors, took on a
military constitution, and developed later into the
Sikh nation. The followers of these religious leaders
in course of time subdivided into many sects.
Chaitanya, a Vishnuite Brahman (b. in Bengal

THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
India
14$5), in the age of twenty‑four became as ascetic, and began a wandering life preaching the doctrine of BlwJtti. He admitted as his disciples members of all castes, even Mohammedans. The doctrine of Bhektro, or salvation through impassioned devotion to some god or goddess, was his fundamental tenet; and it took the place of the more sober ways of " knowledge " and " works " (Dyamlmarga And Karmamarga). Through Chaitanya and his disciples Bhaktd became an accepted form of religious worship, and largely supplemented the practise of seeking salvation through contemplation, or through moral deeds. Bhakt£ practically diaaaeociated morals from worship, and made possible forma of worship that were almost the embodiment of immorality. The later grosser forms belong, however, not to the teachings of Chaitanya, but to the departure of his successors from his ideals. Aside from the regular orthodox recta with their philosophy and worship, many special nests arose in this period. Vishnu, Shiva end Shako (the female principle) began to be worshiped in special forma, many of them extravagant and even immoral. The followers of Shakti divided into the Dakahania, or right‑hand followers, and Yamia, or left‑hand followers, the latter developing s secret worship of extravagant immorality. On the other hand, near the close of this period a number of philosophers and religious poets arose, who tried to lift the people from the moral degradation into which they had fallen to a higher life and thought supplied by the beat of Hindu philosophy and practical religion. In western India may be mentioned such men as Tukaram and Ramdas, who founded no sect, but whose loftier thoughts were a reforming power, while their influence continues to the present. With the rive of the Marathae under Shivaji (b. 1627; d. 1880) and the gradual extension of their power over the larger part of India, sad with the resulting decline of the Mohammedan power, the environment of Indian religious life changed, and Hinduism had an opportunity to develop along linen natural to it.
4. Period of Contact with Christianity: Frown early times India has been in contact with the West,
though no effects upon the religious :. Alezaa‑ life can be detected. There are trader the ditions of Indiana visiting the " White
Great to Land," Shwefadroipa, but Indian soVasco counts of this land are mythical. The
da Gama, first important contact came with the
invasion of northern India by Alexander the Great in 327 s.c. From that time to the arrival of the Portuguese very little accurate knowledge of India reached Europe. Rome, however, traded with both coasts of India. There is a tradition, not fully authenticated, that in 883 Alfred the Great of England sent an ambassador named Sighelmus to India to the court of some prince, and tb visit the tomb of St. Thomas. But it is not until the end of the fifteenth century that India began to feel the influence of European nations. Thin modern and permanent contact of India with the West began in 1498, when Vases da Gams landed at G'aliout, and when later, in 1510, Goo was captured by Admiral Alfonso d'Albuquerque. Along the
47e
west mast Di,, Russia, Bombay, Goa, Mangalore, Cannanore, Ctauganore, Caliout, and Cochin were soon after occupied by the Portuguese, as also St. Thomas, Masulipatam, and Negapatam, on the east coast. In 1580 the archbishop of Gas tried to force the people to become Christians, when Portuguese cruelty in these mistaken efforts excited the hatred of both Hindus and Mohammedans (see below, IL, 11).
The first authenticated visit of an Englishman to India occurred in 1579, when Thomas Stephens (b‑
in Wiltshire o. 1549, educated. at New s. $atllah‑ College, Oxford, to escape pesecution men went to Rome, and there joined the in India. Society of Jesus) was selected to be a
missionary to India, and arrived at Goa in Oct., 1579. He acquired a thorough knowledge of Sanskrit and Marathi, and in his forty years of active labor produced many works, of which those extant are a catechism on Christian doctrine, a grammar of the Konkani Ian~, a Christian Puran in Marathi in the Honkani dialect, and an account of his voyage to Goo, reprinted in J. H. Moors, New and Complete Collection of Voyages and Travels (2 vole., London, 1785). The Puran.haa no little literary merit, and covers the ground from the Biblical account of the Creation to the closing scenes in the life of Christ. The neat Englishmen to arrive in India were James Newberry, Ralph Fitch, William Bote, and James Story, who came overland from the Persian Gulf in 1583. The Portuguese suspected them of being traders and threw them into prison, but they were soon released through the mediation of Thomas Stephens. As a result of thA interest awakened by these and other English travelers the East India Company was formed in 1800 and England's permanent contact with India began. Gradually India passed into the hands of the Fast India Company. In 1868 by net of parliament the East India Company wen abolished, and the government of India wan transferred to the British crown in the person of Queen Victoria. The religious policy of both the East India Company and of the British government was contrary to that of the Portuguese. There was no interference with the religious life of the people; and Indian thought in contact with Christianity, directly presented by missionaries And indirectly through literature and personal contact with European Christians, has been in process of natural development, and is approaching the Christian point of view regarding the relations of God and man. Thin change . is mostly confined to the classes affected by the higher modern education. Missionary effort in the peat two centuries has oleo borne fruit in organized Christian churches, the result of which appears in the census returns.
II. .Chrlstisaity In India: Contact with Roman Catholic Christianity began in the arrival of Vasco
da Game in 1498. The Portuguese eai.1Romsn hibited a proselytising seal, both among
Catholic the Syrian Christians and the Hindus.
Hiaioas. The first regularly equipped Roman
minion, consisting of friars, arrived from Portugal in 1500. 9t. Francis Xavier (see Fxarrcre Xevnos, Seurx) arrived in 1542, and under

477	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
his personal zeal and direction of missionary effort large numbers were converted to Christianity. In 1560 the Inquisition was established at Goa and its cruel labors stained the Christian name. With varying fortunes Roman Catholic missionary enterprise has continued to the present day, and is participated in by priests from many of the European nations. They derive their chief support from the Association for the Propagation of the Faith, and from the Society of the Holy Childhood. They take an honored part in the education of Indian youths, maintaining many schools and colleges. Their colleges are at Calcutta, Bombay, Negapatam, and Mangalore. See MISSIONS TO THE HEATHEN, ROMAN CATHOLIC.
The first Protestant missionaries to arrive in India were Lutherans, Bartholomew Ziegenbalg (q.v.) and Heinrich Plutschau, in 1705. They
2. Proteg‑ came under the patronage of the king
tant of Denmark to the Danish settlement Missions. at Tranquebar. Ziegenbalg began the translation of the Bible into Tamil. In 1719 Benjamin Schultze arrived and carried on his successful labor in Tanjore. He completed the translation of the Bible in 1725, which was the first translation of the Bible into an Indian language. The East India Company were not favorable to missionary enterprise in their sphere of influence, and deported back to England those who attempted to work within it. William Carey (q.v.), of the Baptist Mission, arrived at Calcutta in 1793, settled at Serampur, fifteen miles from Calcutta, at that time a Danish settlement, and he and his colleagues began at once the task of translating the Bible into many languages. Within ten years this book was translated and printed in part or whole, into thirtyone languages. The London Missionary Society began its work in 1798, when Nathaniel Forsyth was sent to Calcutta, who was joined in 1812 by Mr. and Mrs. May. They devoted themselves to educational work so successfully that by the end of 1815 Forsyth,had under his charge twenty schools with 1,651 pupils, 258 of these being Brahmans. The same society began work in Ceylon in 1805, in Travancore in 1806, in Surat, Western India, in 1815, but transferred its work in Gujarat to the Irish Presbyterian Mission in 1847. The East India Company refused to allow missionaries to India to be carried in any of its vessels, and in order to reach India the first missionaries had to go to Copenhagen, whence, in a Danish vessel, they sailed to Tranquebar, and thence to Ceylon. The first missionaries to western India, Gordon Hall (q.v.) and Samuel Nott, arrived at Bombay Feb. 11, 1813, sent by the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. Owing to the policy of opposition to all missionary enterprise which characterized the East India Company, and on account of suspicion because they were Americans, they were forbidden to work in Bombay, and were about to be deported, when a change in the charter of the Company left them at liberty to prosecute their work. They assumed the name of the American Marathi Mission. Educational work was actively pressed; the first school for boys in western India on modern methods was started by this mission in the city of Bombay
in 1815, and the first school for girls in India in 1824. The Church Missionary Society of England sent out its first representative in 1814. In 1807 five Anglican chaplains in Calcutta had obtained a grant of money from the Church Missionary Society in London for the translation of the Scriptures and the employment of Indian Christian readers. The first reader employed was Abdul Masih, a converted Mohammedan. The first missionaries of this society were Charles Theophilus Ewald Rhenius and J. C. Schnarr6, sent in 1814 to Madras; later Schnarr5 Was transferred to Tranquebar. Norton, Greenwood, and Gattbald Schorter followed in 1815. The first missionary of the Church of Scotland, D. Mitchell, arrived in Bombay Jan., 1823, and started work at Bankot, on the coast south of Bombay. Under the same agency Alexander Duff arrived at Calcutta in 1830, and began a ,work ranking among the most effective yet accomplished. The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel began its work in India in 1826. Since then many societies and many missionaries from many lands have been engaged 'in spreading a knowledge of Christianity throughout the length and breadth of India. Protestant acti‑ity has been shown (i) in the direct preaching of the Christian faith, (2) in translating and circulating the Bible, (3) in preparing and circulating a vernacular Christian literature, (4) in education from primary village schools to colleges, (5) in medical work, (6) in industrial education, and (7) in a great variety of philanthropic institutions. Protestant missionaries were the pioneers in modern education for both boys and girls.
The influence of Christianity on Indian thought and life is, however, more distinctly marked is the
change of sentiment that ha: been 3. Effects taking place almost unconsciously in
on Native the native mind. This may be seen j Life and in the rise of theism, essentially Chris‑
Thought. tian on its spiritual and ethical side.
It first found its clear expression in Rammohan Roy (q.v.), who founded the Atmiya Sabha, which later developed into the Brahmo Soma] (see below, III., 1), and was followed by Devendranath Tagore (see TAOOPE, DEVENDRANATH), and he by Keshav Chandra Sen (see SEN, KESaAV CHANDRA). Under the leadership of the last‑named the theistic movement, as expressed in the Sadharan Brahmo Somaj in Bengal and the Prarthana Soma] (see below, IIl., 2) in Bombay, has become practically Christian in philosophy, sentiment and practise. 'Similar effects may be discovered also in the Arya Somdj (see below, III., 3), which has its chief strength in northern India. Christian influence is also clearly discernible in the general sentiment of the people who have been reached by modern education. This influence is reflected in Indian literature of both ephemeral and permanent type. It is distinctly recognized on the platform in public speech. It is noticeable in the nobler moral lives of those who come into prominence as leaders of popular movements. It shows itself in increasing forms of benevolence and philanthropy. It is conspicuously felt in the growing ease with which the Christian and Hindu find a common ground of spiritual and ethical belief and

India
corresponding practise. The social reform Movement has a growing influence, advocating female education, widow remarriage, restrictions on the caste system, the elevation of the masses, and the abolition of the seclusion of women. Christmas week of each year focuses many of those interests that point to the awakening of India. The National Congress, a political gathering, made up of representatives of various associations in the different provinces, meets at some large center every Christmas week. It professes to voice the feelings of India regarding desired political reforms. This large gathering makes it convenient for other conferences to meet and discuss important subjects. The National Social Conference discusses and urges the necessity of internal reform; the Industrial Conference brings together those who are desirous of encouraging the industries of the country. An industrial exhibition is also held, in which the chief place is given to such things as are manufactured in India. The theistic conference is composed of delegates from the Brahmo and Prarthana Somajes. There are many other religious gatherings held at the same time. Christmas week has thus grown to be a period which registers'the progress of India in her political, social, industrial, and to some extent in her religious life.
Ill. Native Theistic Societies.‑1. The Brshmo 8oma,1: The history of the Brahmo Somaj in its early period is the history of its leaders, Rammoban Roy (q.v.), Devendranath Tagore (see TAaoRE, DEVENDRANATH), and Keshav Chandra Ben (see SEN, KESHAT CHANDRA). The movement appears as the result of the thought not of the many, but of the few. These great leaders did not voice the multitude; the multitude voiced them.
Raja Rammohan Roy (b. May 22, 1772 or 1774; d. Sept. 27, 1833) was of orthodox Brahman family, and through contact with Mohammedanism became an earnest opponent of polytheism and idolatry before his sixteenth year. A study of religions led him to a belief that all religions were based on monotheism which had became debased into polytheism, while an acquaintance with the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures gave his monotheism a Christian tinge. In 1814, on moving to Calcutta, he began to propagate his beliefs, became the leader of a band of young men, and founded the Atmiya Sabha, which ultimately developed into the Brahmo Sabha, the name of which was subsequently changed to Brahmo Smnaj. The Sabha was a platform for discussion and in no sense a church with a creed. This active propaganda bore abundant fruit, and the year 1830 saw a building completed, dedicated to monotheistic worship and serving as a center for the spread of theism. Rammohan Roy's life marks the period from the conception of the theistic movement through what may be called its philosophic stage. The movement ran along lines of philosophy and ethics, but not of spirituality, philanthropy, or social reform. This first period may be styled the intellectual period.
Eight years after the death of Raja Rammoban Roy the leadership of the theistic movement fell to Maharishi Devendranath Tagore, who, at the age of eighteen, passed through a great change. Wealth
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
478
and all its accompanying ease became distasteful to him, and a passion to realize God's presence possessed his soul. An accident led him to the deep study of the Upanishads and to become a religious teacher. He founded the Tafabodhina Sabha and gathered around him sympathetic friends. In 1842 he first came into contact with the Brahmo Somaj, then in a languishing condition, and was attracted to it by common sympathy. Becoming its leader he brought at once new life to the society. Intensely devotional and spiritual, he led his followers out of the intellectual coldness of their condition into a spiritual life and the fellowship of a common faith. A manifestation of this new life was the signing of a covenant which separated them into a distinct religious body on a theistic basis.
The next leader was Keshav Chandra Sen. He had come early into contact with Christian literature and missionaries, and his whole mode of thought was molded by western ideas. His advent into the Brahmo Somaj in 1859 was the signal for social reforms in the Somaj itself, such as the removal of the sacred thread, liberty for women, intercaste dining and marriages, and the like. In 1862 the conservative religious element representing the Tatwbodhini Sabha was reorganized as the Adi Somaj. The application of theistic principles to the social life led to a secession, in 1866, from the conservative party of the Brahmo Somaj, and the founding of the Brahmo Somaj of India, making the third period of development, that of applied them. Unfortunately Keshav Chandra Sen lost his mental balance. Coming under the influence of the Vishnuites of Bengal of the Bhakti school, he introduced their fervent religious exercises into the worship of the Somaj, a backward step which led to disastrous results. He began to imagine himself endowed with higher power than other men, and his followers, led by this delusion, gave him divine worship, which, instead of rejecting, he accepted. A strong party, however, refused to follow the eccentric course of their leader, and when the climax was reached in the Cuch Behar marriage case, they withdrew in 1878, forming the Sadharan Brahmo Soma] (q.v.), while the old Somaj continued under the name of the " New Dispensation." The Adi Somaj, the New Dispensation, and the Sadharan Somaj have all continued, but the Sadharan Somaj has been the progressive branch, active in religious and social reform.
The stages of development in this theistic movement are as follows: The first stage was intellectual breaking away from polytheism and idolatry, with its inspiration largely sought for in Vedic literature; the second stage, the spiritual and devotional added to the first, with inspiration still largely Vedic; with the third stage, under a more decided Christian inspiration came the application of theism to the social life. In the fourth stage there is development along all lines under a stronger Christian influence than ever before in its history.
8. The Prarthana Somai of Bombay: English education in the Western Presidency early led to an interest in religious and social reform. As one of the results a secret society was formed in Bombay, called the Paramhana Mandali, under the

479	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
leadership of Dadoba Pandurang. The object of the society was the encouragement of social reform, such as the abolition of caste, the introduction of the custom of widow remarriage, and the renunciation of idolatry. The intention was to have the society become public when its membership numbered 1,000, but in the meantime a spy divulged the secrets of the society, and such was the excitement resulting that the society was practically broken up. Under the influence of education and the work of Christian missionaries the religious and social ferment, however, still went on, and the soil became ripe for a theistic movement among the thoughtful. Keshav Chandra Sen paid a missionary visit to the Bombay Presidency in 1865, and soon after a branch of the Brahmo Somaj was started in Bombay. The 31st of March, 1867, is considered the anniversary day of the Bombay Somaj, which took the name of the Prarthana (" Prayer ") Somaj. ‑On Dec. 9, 1872, the foundation‑stone of the Prarthana Somaj Mandir was laid by Pratab Chandra Muzamdar. Among the prominent men who have had a leading part in the growth of this Somaj are Atmaram Pandurang, Chintaman Namyan Bhat, Narayan Mahadev Paramanand, Waman Abaji Modak, Mahadev Govind Ranade, and at the present time Justice N. G. Chandavarkar.
Branches of the Prarthana Somaj have been formed at Ahmedabad, Puna, Ahmeduagar, Satara, and Ratnagiri. The Bombay Prarthana Somaj has a membership of 130, and carries on various philanthropic agencies, chief among which is the Orphanage at Pandharpur, and night schools for the poorer classes in Bombay. Its S‑day services are conducted by the learned scholar, Dr. Gopal Krishna Bhandarkar, the Hon. N. G. Chandavarkar, and others. It supports a missionary, V. R. Shinde, who gives himself to the interests of the Somaj in Bombay and in other cities of the Presidency. The creed of the Prarthana Somaj is as follows: (1) God is the creator of the universe. He is the only true God; there is no other God beside him. He is eternal, spiritual, infinite, the store of all good, all joy, without parts, without form, one without a second, the ruler of all, all pervading, omniscient, almighty, .merciful, all holy, and the savior of sinners. (2) His worship alone leads to happiness in this world and the neat. (3) Love and reverence for him, an exclusive faith in him, praying and singing to him spiritually with these feelings, and doing the things pleasing to him constitute his true worship. (4) To worship and pray to images and other created objects is not the true mode of divine adoration.‑ (5) God does not incarnate himself, and there is no one book which has been directly revealed by God or is wholly infallible. (6) All men are his children; therefore they should behave toward each other as brethren. This is pleasing to God, and constitutes man's duty.
8. The Art's Soma,1: The founder of the Arya Somaj was Dayanand Saraswati (q.v.). Unwilling to live the ordinary worldly life, he left his home and after few years of instruction began to traverse India proclaiming the Vedas as the only inspired revelation from God. He denounced idolatry, and
preached reform in such social customs as seemed at variance with the direct or indirect teachings of the Vedas. In 1875 the first Arya Somaj was organized, and later many others were organized in northern India. The society has not thrived south of the Vindhya Mountains, but has found its best soil in the Punjab, the united province of Agra and Oudh, Rajputana, and Sindh, where there are reported about 700 branches. Its principles are directed against the caste system, and while its members are principally from the higher castes, many are from the lower castes. On its practical side the Somaj takes an interest in education, and maintains a college at Lahore and many schools for the teaching of the vernacular, English, and Sanskrit, and encourages female education by supporting numerous institutions. The Somaj approves early marriages, and encourages marriage of child‑widows. The " Ten Principles " of the Arya Somaj are as follows: (1) God is the primary cause of all knowledge, and of everything known by its means. (2) God is all‑truth, all‑knowledge, allbeatitude, incorporeal, almighty, just, merciful, ‑begotten, infinite, unchangeable, without beginning, incomparable, the support and the Lord of all, all‑pervading, omniscient, imperishable, immortal, exempt from fear, eternal, holy, and the cause of the universe. To him alone worship is due. (3) The Vedas are the books of true knowledge, and it is the paramount duty of every Arya to read them or hear them read, to teach and preach them to others. (4) One should always be ready to accept truth and renounce ‑truth. (5) All actions ought to be done conformably to virtue, i.e., after a thorough consideration of right and wrong. (6) The primary object of the Soma] is to do good to the world by improving the physical, spiritual and social condition of mankind. (7) All ought to be treated with love, justice, and a due regard to their merits. (8) Ignorance ought to be dispelled and knowledge diffused. (9) No one ought to be contented with his own good alone; but every one ought to regard his prosperity as included in that of others. (10) In matters which‑ affect the general social well‑being of the whole of society, one ought to discard all differences and not allow his individuality to interfere, but in strictly personal matters every one may act with freedom.
JusTirr E. Aasorr.
DurramuwON of POPBLATION ACoowIw To RnwOIoN,
CENSUS or 1901.
Religion.
Brahmanic 13iadu...
ABrya 	........
Sikh......
Jain...............
Buddhist. . . . . . . . . .
	Perm
	Mohammedan
	Christina
	Jew	o
Animist... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Minor Re ' '	r Uaolari6ed .. . . . . . . . . . . .

Total Population ........................
Numbers.
1,	148
,1S8
0,l78,7b9
82,!693

	a0g	;22g
		81584.148
		129,900
		204,881,066
	Eumpesas .	180.877
	Eurae,am	80,241

a of North Amerios

Christian Denominations.
	Abyssinian	....		".
Anglican..................................
	Armenian	___
	Baptist 	.....
G	tionspot. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lutheran.................................
Methodist ..........................
Presbyterian .....................
	..........................
	Quaker...................................
Roman	...........................
	Salvation Army ............................
	Jacobite Syrian ............................
Roman Syrian...:..	...............
	Minor Denominations .......................
	Unclassified 	,
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the subject of populations and castes, as well as of religion, an essential is the General Report of the Cons" of India, 1901, London, 1904. Consult further: E. W. Hopkins, Mutual Relations of the Four Casks, Leipdc. 1881; H. H. Risley , Tribes and Casks of Bengal, 4 vole., Calcutta, 1891; I. F. Hewitt, The Ruling Rao" of Prehistoric Tribes in India. Westminster, 1894; Bhattacharya, Hindu Cad ‑a and Sects, Calcutta, 1898; W. Crooke, Tribes and Castes of the North‑Western Provinces and Oudk 4 vole., Calcutta, 1898; P,. SBnart, Lea Castes dans 1'Inde, Paris, 1898; B. Hagen, Anthropologiacher Atlas oataaiatiacher V81ker, 2 parts, Wiesbaden, 1898; T. W. Webber, The Foreste of Upper India and Their Inhabitants, London, 1902.
On the history of India consult: J. T. Wheeler, Hiet. of India from as Earliest Ages, 4 vole. in 5, London, 18671881; P. Anderson, The English in Western India, Bombay, 1858; H. M. Elliot, Hint. of India as Told by its owns Historians, 8 vole., London, 1887‑77; J. T. Wheeler, India undder British Rule, London, 1888; H. G. Keene, The Fall of the Mophul Empire of Hindustan, ib. 1887; W. W. Hunter. The Indian Empire, its Peoples, Hiat., and Products, ib., 1893; idem, A Brief Hiet. of Indian Peoples, ib. 1893; J. C. Marabman, Abridgment of the History of India, Edinburgh, 1893; L. J. Trotter; Hint. of India, ib., 1899; W. St. Clair, India, its Hiat., Darkness and Dawn, ib., 1901; C. H. Forbes Lindsay, India Past and Present, 2 vole., Philadelphia, 1903; Stanley Lane‑Poole, Medieval India under Mohammedan Rule, New York, 1903; A. V. W. Jackson, ed., Hist. of India, 9 vole., ib., 1907; V. A. Smith, Early Hint. of India from 600 B.C. to she Mohammedan Conquest, Oxford, 1908; L. D. Barnett, The Heart of India; Sketches in the $iet. of Hindu Religion and Morale, New York, 1908; J. Jones, India: its Life and Thought, ib., 1908. For the early traditions of Englishmen in India consult the Anglo‑Saxon Chronicle, ed. B. Thorpe in Rolls Series, 2 vole., London, or ed. C. Plummer, 2 vole., Oxford, 1892‑99; William of Malmesbury, De geatis ponti*um Anylorum, ed. N. E. S. A. Hamilton, in Robe Series, London, 1870; idem, De gedia regurn Anglorum, ed. W. Stubbs, in Rolls Series, 2 vole., London, 1887‑89.
The literature on the religions is quite fully given under BnaIIduwrem; BUDDHISM; HrrrDVISM; JAwmM; SIKHS, SncHISM.
For the history of Christianity in India, consult the literature under Mlssioxa;. CAGEY, WILLIAM; DUFF, ALEXANDER; and MASSHMAN, JOSHUA. Useful adjuncts are: J. Hough, History of Christianity in India from the Commencement of the Christian Era, 5 vole, London, 18391880; B. Gogerly, The Pioneer,; a Narrative of Facts connected with Early Missions in Bengal, ib., 1871; George Smith, A Short History of Christian Missions, ib., 1884; idem, The Conversion of India, ib., 1893; M. A. Sherring, Hint. of Protestant Missions in India, ed. E. Storrow, ib., 1884: Hint. of Christianity in India, Madras, 1895; L. R. Lovett, Primer of Modern Mission,, London, 1894; idem, Hid. of London Missionary Society, 2 vols., ib., 1899; J. M. Thoburn. India and ,Southern Asia, Cincinnati, 1907; Mrs. M. B. Fuller, Wrongs of Indian Womanhood, ib. 1900; Mrs. M. M. Clark, A Corner in India, Philadelphia, 1907 (on the Nags Hills); J. Chamberlin, The Kingdom in India; its Progress and its Promise, New York, 1908; J. Richter, Hist. of Missions in India, ib., 1908; the histories of the various missionary agencies with their reports, and H. O. Dwight, H. A. Tupper, and E. M. Blue, The Encyclopedia of Missions, ib.„ 1904.
For the history of theistic societies consult as sources: Indian Mirror, Calcutta, 1881‑80; Sunday Mirror, ib.,
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Numbers.
463
1,
221,
37,8748
	155,455
	78,907
	53,931
		1,809
1,202,189
	18,980
	248,741
	322,586
		22,899
	108,292
480
1880‑82; The Liberal and the New Dispensation, ib. 1881 eqq.; Theistic Annual, ib.. 1872 eqq.; Theistic Quarterly Review, ib., 1879. Consult also: The Adi Brahma samaj, its Views and Principles, Calcutta, 1871; Mary Carpenter, Last Days in England of Ramohun ROY. London. 1888; B. Chunder Son, Brahmo 3omah ib., 1870; J. Hesse, Dar Brahma Samaj . . . in Bailer M4aaiona‑Mapazin, 1878, pp. 385 &19.~ Sivanath Shaetri, The New Dion and the Sadharan Brahma Samaj, Madras, 1881; Sen, xeehav Chandra, Brahmo Somaj. Calcutta. 883; Rsmaohandrs Vaeu, Brahmoism, New York, 1844; F. Mss MNler, in Biographical Essays, London, 1884 (gives accounts of recent religious movements); T E. Slater, Keahab Chundra San and the Bmmha Samaj. Madras. 1884, P. C. Moaoomdar, Life and Teachings of Chunder San, Calcutta, 1887; H. Baynes, Evolution of Religious Thought in India. London, 1889 (a full account); L. J. Frohmeyer, Nauera Raformbestrebun9an in Hindutemua, m Basler Mw aaona‑Mapaxin, 1888, pp. 129 eq9.; The Offering of DevendranaUt Tapora, travel. by M. M. Chatterji, Lahore, 1889; Rsmmohun Roy, English Works, 2 vole., London, 1888; Navskanta Chattopadhyaya, Life and Character of Ram Mohun Roy, Daces, 1890; C. N. Aitchison, The Brahmo Sommj, in Church Missionary Inteld%genar,1893, pp. 181 eqq.; Pancha Mafia Yajna Vidhi, travel. by Arjsn Singh, Lahore, 1898; Bawa ChhsWjin Singly The Teachings of the Arya Samaj, Lahore, 1903; Dayanand Saraewsti, Vedic Religion. ib. 1903; Hem Chandra Sukea. The Religion of As Brahmo Samaj, Calcutta, 1908; the literature under DAYANAND SAaASwwmI; RAMMOHSx ROY; ,.9EN, KEeawv G8AND8A; and TwaOaE, DEYENDSANATH.
INDIANS OF FORTH AMERICA, MISSIONS TO
THE.
Roman Catholic Mission Presbyterians (16).
(¢ 1).	Congregationalists ($ 7).
In New England (§ 2).	Baptists ($ 8).
The Quakers (§ 3).	Methodists (¢ 9).
The Church of England and 	Lutherans and (§ 10).
Protestant Episcopal The National Indian Asao‑
Church (¢ 4). 	ciation (§ 11).
Moraviane (§ 5).
Christian missions among North American Indi‑
ana began in Spanish territory before the early
		settlement farther north. Probably
	:. Roman the earliest in what is now the United
	Catholic States were missions in the Southwest
	Missions. conducted by Spanish Franciscans,
		Fathers Juan de Padilla, Juan de la
Cruz, and Descalona, who began work among the
Quivira (Wichita), the Pecos, and the Tigua in
1542 or 1543. Two years later another Spanish
Franciscan, Francisco Andrea de Olinos, began to
mission the tribes in the Texas wilderness. In 1565
St. Augustine was founded in Florida, where the
work of Christianizing the natives was begun by the
Jesuits and continued by the Franciscans. Within
twenty years several mission stations were estab
lished along the coast from St. Augustine to St.
Helena, in South Carolina. In 1633 English Jesuits
began work among the Conoy and Patuxent tribes
of Maryland and some of the Virginia tribes. By
1642 the Jesuits had established work in the North,
founding what was known as the New York Mission
among the Mohawks. This was soon followed by
successful work among the Oneidas, the Cayugas,
and the Senecas. About 1660 Jesuit missionaries
began work among the tribes in Michigan, founding
a mission on Keweenaw Bay, and work among the
tribes of the upper lake region soon followed. By
1685 some of the New England tribes were reached
and Jesuit missions established among the Penob
scots and the Paseamaquoddies, and about ten years
later the Abenaki mission on the Kennebec was

481	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Indiaof North Amerios
started. The most noted, perhaps, were the Franciscan missions. of California, the story of which is part of the history of the Pacific coast. The year 1769 saw the first of such missions established at San Diego, and by 1828 a chain of prosperous missions extended northward to San Francisco Bay. In 1833 these missions were disbanded by the revolutionary government of Mexico. Since that date the Roman Catholic Church has vigorously prosecuted its work among the various Indian tribes in the country, and in 1908, according to the Ofcial Catholic Direc", claimed to have 95 Indian churches, 67 priests, and 48,194 adherents.
The work of Roger Williams (q.v.), begun in 1636, may be considered thA first Protestant mission work
for American Indians, with the excepa. In New tion that a clergyman of the Church of
England. England is said to have baptized an
Indian convert in 1587. The story of Williams' work among the Pequots and Narragansetts is closely interwoven with the early colonial history of Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Williams speedily acquired the language of the tribes among whom he labored, published a " key " to it, and soon carried the Gospel to large numbers of Indians about Providence. His work, however, seems to have been of purely personal initiative, and on his death in 1683 was not continued by any organization. It was greatly reinforced and extended by the labors of the Congregational missionaries, Experience Mayhew and John Eliot (qq.v.), who entered the same field in 1646. Eliot applied to the General Court of Massachusetts and obtained a grant of land on which the Indians might build a town where they could live together, cultivate the arts of civilized life, and enjoy the benefits of religious instruction. In less than twenty‑five years there were fourteen such settlements, to all of which Eliot extended his labors, and in 1660 the Indians at Natick were formed into a church. During these years he got together twenty‑four regular congregations in Massachusetts and had gathered about him and trained more than twenty native preachers from various tribes, besides translating both the Old and New Testament into one of the Indian tongues‑the first Bible to be given to the Red Man. This period of wonderful advance was sued by King Philip's War; Eliot's " praying Indians " were scattered, and the twentyfour congregations were reduced to four. A time of great hardship for the Indians followed when the General Court collected the remnant and removed them to the islands in the bay. Following the labors of Eliot, Congregational work was carried on among the Nauset Indians of Cape Cod and other tribes in eastern Massachusetts. About 1651 a mission was begun among the Qumnipism in Con_ necticut, and during the next century the Congregational Church carried on a most sucoessful work among many of the tribal remnants of New England.
In 1643‑48 a Lutheran minister, John Campanius Holm, chaplain of a Swedish colony in Delaware, did some mission work among the neighboring Indians.
In 1682 William Penn made his celebrated treaty with the Indians under the elm at Shackamaxon, V.‑31
on the banks of the Delaware River, presaging mutual "good faith and good will, openness, brotherhood, and love." As early as 1791
3. The the noted Seneca chief, Complanter,
	Quakers.	sent greetings to the Philadelphia
		yearly meeting, saying " we wish our
children to be taught the same principles by which
your fathers were guided, and such other things
as you teach your children, especially the love of
peace." Two years later the Delawares told certain
Friends who visited them that they wished to be of
their religion, and asked for teachers. In 1796 the
yearly meeting began regular work among the
Iroquois in New York, and established three workers
among the Oneidas and the Tuscaroras. In 1798
they began a mission to the Senecas, and, later, at
Cattaraugus and Tunesassah, with good results.
In 1807 the New York meeting started schools
among the Stockbridge and Brotherton tribes.
During the past century, through the work under
taken by various yearly meetings, and later through
the Associated Executive Committee, a delegate
body representing ultimately all the yearly meet
ings, mission stations have been established among
many tribes, and the record is one of loyal faithful
ness, on the part of Friend and Indian alike, to the
compact of brotherly love entered into on the banks
of the Delaware River two hundred and twenty‑five
years ago. The Indian work of the Friends for the
past few years has. been largely confined to ten
mission stations among the Modoc, Seneca, Wyan
dotte, Ottawa, Otoe, Iowa, Kickapoo, and Shawnee
tribes in Oklahoma and Indian Territory.
With the possible exception of the baptism of an Indian convert mentioned above, the efforts of the
Anglican Church to evangelize the
4. The Indians began in 1702, when the So‑
Church of ciety for the Propagation of the Gospel
England sent to America a missionary to the
and Prot‑ Six Nations in the Mohawk valley.
estant Six years later four Iroquois sachems Episcopal crossed the Atlantic and presented an
Church. address to Queen Anne with belts of
wampum as a token of the sincerity of the Six Nations. In that address occurs the following: " Since we were in covenant with our great Queen's children we have had some knowledge of the Savior of the world. If Qur great Queen would send us instructors they should find a hearty welcome." This address was referred to the Society, and it was at once resolved to send missionaries, to provide translations in Mohawk, and to endeavor to stop the introduction of intoxicating liquors among the Indians‑this being the earnest request of the sachems themselves. The work met with varying success. At one time there appears " a regular sober congregation of five hundred Christians among the Mohawks, of whom fifty were devout communicants of the Episcopal Church." During the Revolution the Mohawks and some others of the tribes belonging to the"" Long House " (a federation of tribes) abandoned their possessions under a sense of loyalty to the crown, and finally took shelter in tea. Those who remained were without religious influences for several years until, in 1811, Bishop Hobart of New York gave atten‑

Indiana of North America	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	482
tion to the religious instruction of the Indians within his jurisdiction. In 1821 the Oneidas left New York under the leadership of the Rev. Eleazer Williams and went to Green Bay, Wisconsin. Religious work among them prospered, and within a few years a stone church edifice was erected by the Indians themselves. In 1852 the Episcopal Church began work among the Indians in Minnesota, and in 1860 among the Santee Sioux. Henry Benjamin Whipple (q.v.), bishop of Minnesota, especially devoted himself to this work. In 1868 a mission was established among the Yanktons, and shortly afterward the full charge of Indian missions of the Protestant Episcopal Church was assumed by its domestic committee. In 1877 Bishop Hare held his first confirmation among the Upper Bru16 Sioux, the Yanktonnais, and the Cheyenne River Indians in South Dakota. One year later missions were started among the Shoshones and Bannocks in Idaho, and, in 1881, among the Cheyennes in Indian Territory. In 1886 a mission in Alaska was organized, and in the same year work was undertaken among some of the tribes in Wyoming. This was followed six years later by a mission to the Seminoles in southern Florida. In 1906 the Protestant Episcopal Church was carrying on work among Indians in a field covering a vast area, including the Indians living along the banks of the Yukon River in Alaska; the Shoshones, Bannocks, and Arapahoes in Idaho and Wyoming; the Pillager Cass Lake, and Red Lake Pillager Chippewas in Minnesota; the Hupas of California; and the Oneidas in Wisconsin. In North Dakota the Church has centers of work at Fort Totten, Cannon Ball, and at Turtle Mountain reservation, while in South Dakota, under Bishop Hare, the work is divided into ten departments with a clergyman in charge of each. In Oklahoma and Indian Territory the work is largely among the Cheyennes and Arapahoes at the reservation at Whirlwind, and in southern Florida among the Seminoles living in the Everglades. A notable feature of this Church's work is the lace‑making industry for which ten schools are maintained at various points.
In 1735 a band of Moravians from Germany under Augustus Gottlieb Spangenberg (q.v.) began religious work among the Yamacraw
g. Mo‑ Creeks, a few miles above Savannah,
	raviana	Ga. In 1739 they were forced to with
		draw on their refusal to take up arms
against the Spaniards. Settling on the Lehigh River
about fifty miles from Philadelphia, they founded
the town of Bethlehem, which soon became a center
of missions to various Indian tribes. Their mission
aries worked first among the Six Nations, but their
efforts met with small success. In Pennsylvania,
however, their work among the Delawares and
portions of various other tribes scattered throughout
that State was very encouraging. In some of the
New England States, notably Connecticut and
Massachusetts, their labors were eminently success
ful. From 1746 to 1798 twenty‑five settlements
were established. In 1801 the Cherokee mission at
Spring Place, Ga., was begun, and in 1821 a mission
was started at Oothcaloga in the same section.
Both of these continued until the missions were
broken up by the State of Georgia in 1843. Among missionaries to the Indians in those early days none are more worthy of honor for their lofty heroism than some of the Moravians, notably Rauch, Heckewelder, Count Zinzendorf, and David Zeisberger, the " Apostle to the Delawares." Since those days the Moravian Church has missioned various tribes, but within the past few years has confined its work to the so‑called " Mission Indiana " of California. In 1906 the Church had three mission stations in southern California‑on the Morongo, the Torres, and the Rincon reservations.
In 1741 the Presbyterian Church began its Indian work, when the Rev. Azariah Horton was sent to the Indians on Long Island, New York.
6. Pree‑ Two years later David Brainerd (q.v.)
	byterians.	began his missionary work, which was
		continued after his death, in 1747, by
his brother John (q.v.). In 1751 the Synod of New
York " enjoined" all churches to take collections
for the purpose of sending missionaries to the In
dians, and missions were begun among the Dela
wares and neighboring tribes. On the breaking out
of the Revolutionary War in 1775, the Indians be
came restless and suspicious, and most missionary
efforts among them were suspended. Early in the
nineteenth century the Presbyterian Church began
missions in South Carolina and Georgia, and schools
for the education of the youth of the Catawba and
Cherokee tribes were opened. Up to 1812 these
missions were conducted by individual churches and
by one or two synods. Between 1812 and 1831 the
Presbyterian Church carried on its Indian work
through the American Board, organized in 1810.
Within a few years the Board began missions among
the Cherokees, Choctaws, and Chickasaws, supple
menting the work of the Presbyterian synods of
South Carolina and Georgia. By 1830 there were
eight churches in Georgia, a Cherokee alphabet and
written language had been prepared, and a large
number of Cherokees were able to read. These
tribes rapidly adopted the ways of civilized life;
schools, courts, and a legislature were established,
and stringent laws against intemperance enforced.
But the injustice of Georgia, confirmed by the
national government, took from these Indians the
lands made theirs in perpetuity by treaty. The
lands were sold by lottery to white men, and after
sixteen years of suffering and struggle to obtain
their rights, 16,000 of these Indians were driven
forth from their homes, their churches and schools,
to the wilderness of the far West, several mission
aries accompanying them to their new home in
Indian Territory. One after another of the tribes
followed until the settlement in the Indian Territory
was completed in 1832 by the removal of the Sem
inoles from Florida. In addition, other tribes were
afterward sent to the Indian Territory by the
government, and among them the Presbyterian
Church opened missions. Most of the mission sta
tions had to be abandoned during the Civil War,
and many of the churches, school‑houses, and
missionaries' homes were destroyed. At the close
of the war the work was resumed, though under
conditions less favorable, owing to the influx
of bad white elements into the Territory, which

488	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Indiana of North America
soon abounded in lawlessness. But the missionaries
of the various denominations went forward with the
work until marvelous success crowned their labors
among the " Five Civilized Tribes," as also among
the neighboring tribes of Kiowas, Comanches, Ara
paho, Osages, and Cheyennes. Much of the dis
tinctively Presbyterian work done by the American
Board was transferred to the Presbyterian Board of
Foreign Missions on its organization in 1837, the
latter Board continuing all work of the Presbyterian
Church‑ among Indians until 1865. Since that year
the work has been carried on by the Presbyterian
Home Board and the Women's Board of the Pres
byterian Church. Among early missions of the
Presbyterian Church was one to the Senecas in
New York State, begun in 1812, and to the Chip
pewas and Ottawas in northern Michigan, begun
in 1838. About the same time missions were estab
lished among the Sioux in North and South Dakota,
Montana, and Nebraska. The story of the mission
to the Nez Perck Indians by Dr. Marcus Whitman
and the Rev. H. H. Spaulding in 1836 is one of
the most thrilling in the history of Indian missions.
Abandoned in 1847, owing to the martyrdom of
Dr. and Mrs. Whitman, it was reopened in 1871
when Mr. and Mrs. Spaulding returned to the field.
The Sac and Fox tribes were reached by the Pres
byterian Church in 1837, the Omahas and Otoes
in 1846, and the Kickapoos ten years later. In
1868 a missionary was sent to the Winnebagoes,
then dwelling to the north of the Omahas. In the
same year an independent mission was started
among the Pimm and Papagos in Arizona, which
some years later came under the care of the Presby
terian Board. In 1877 the first Protestant mission
among the Zufiis of New Mexico was opened
through the efforts of Presbyterian women, and
other tribes of Pueblo have been reached. In 1895
a mission was opened by the Presbyterian Board
among a band of Spokanes in Washington, and the
following year one among the Makahs at Neah Bay.
In 1901 the missions to the Hoopas and the Shasta
Indians, in California, were taken over by the Pres
byterian Board from the National Indian Associa
tion.
	The Indian work of the American Board (Con
gregational) rapidly extended. In 1820 it estab
		lished a mission station for the Ar‑
7. Congre‑ kansas Cherokees on Illinois Creek,
gationalists. Arkansas. This grew to be one of the most important mission stations in the Southwest until the removal of the tribe to Indian Territory. The following year a mission was opened among the Choctaws at Eliot, Miss. In 1834 the great work of the Congregational Church among the Sioux was begun by the starting of a mission to the Santee Sioux on Lake Calhoun, near what is now St. Paul, Minn., by two brothers named Pond. They began as volunteer workers, but afterward became regularly ordained missionaries of the American Board. Other mission stations were established from time to time among the Santee Sioux at other points. The work was eminently successful until the Sioux outbreak in 1862, when the missions had to be abandoned. As a result of the outbreak the Santee Sioux were
removed to Niobrara, Nebraska. A mission was started among them in 1866, and the work was gradually extended to all the neighboring bands of Sioux. Among missionaries to the Great Sioux nation none perhaps are more widely known than the Williameons and the Riggses, fathers and sons. To Congregational work, and the various missionaries engaged in it, most of present knowledge of the Sioux language is due. In 1843 the Board began work among the Creeks, and, a few years later, among the removed Seminoles. By 1852 it had twenty‑one missionaries among the Indians in the Northwest. In 1882 the Indian work as a whole was committed to the American Missionary Association. Including their well known missions at Standing Rock and Cheyenne River agencies, North Dakota, Fort Berthold in South Dakota, and Skomish, Washington, and their work for Alaskan Indians, the Association had in 1906 twenty‑two Indian churches, fifty‑seven missionary out‑stations, and eighty‑five missionarieb and teachers on the field.
Organized work by Baptists for Indian tribes began in 1801, when the Shaftesbury Association of
Vermont appointed missionaries to
8. Bap‑ labor among the Tuscaroras and other bats. tribes of western New York. Six years
later the New York Missionary Society cooperated with the former association, and missions were established among the Oneidas and Stookbridges of New York. In 1817 the Board of the Baptist General Convention opened missions to the Kickapooa and the Miamis, and, a few years later, work was begun among the Potawatomies, the Ottawas, and the Ojibwas in Michigan. In the same year successful work was begun among the Cherokees in North Carolina and Georgia, and shortly afterward among the Creeks. Baptist work among Indiana extended rapidly, and soon included missions among the Otoes and Omahas west of the Mississippi (1833), and among the Delawares and Stockbridges in their new home in eastern Kansas. From 1842 to 1855, much of the work was sustained by the American Mission Association, but in the latter year its missions were transferred to the Southern Baptist Convention. After the division of the denomination on the slavery question in 1845, the American Baptist Missionary Union continued much of the work of the General Convention, and in 1851 had missions among the Ojibwas and Ottawas of Michigan, the Shawanees, Delawares, and Ottawas of Indian Territory, besides its chief work there among the Cherokees. In 1865 these missions were transferred to the American Baptist Home Mission Society, which had for some years previously maintained a mission to the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico. The work of the Baptist Home Mission Society has been carried on chiefly among the tribes in Indian Territory and among the Wichitas and Caddoes, the Kiowas, Arapahoea, Apaches, and Comanches of Oklahoma. Successful missions have been sustained among the Hopis, among the Indians of the Round Valley Reservation, California, and among the Nevada Indians at Pyramid Lake. In 1903 a mission was begun among the Copper River Indians in Alaska, and, later,

Indians of North America	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	484:
Indulgences
among the Crows of Montana. In much of the In
dian mission work the Women's Boards of the Bap
tist Church have effectively cooperated with the
general society.
	The Indian work of the Methodist Episcopal
Church began in 1814, when John Stewart, a colored
			Methodist convert, started a mission
	g. Meth‑ among the Wyandottes in Ohio. The
		odists.	success of that mission led to the or
			ganization of the Missionary Society of
the Methodist Episcopal Church, and various mis
sions were carried on among the Indiana of the
southern States from 1821 to 1830. In 1844 the
Indian Mission Conference was organized, and in the
division of the Church in that year the Indian Con
ference remained with the Methodist Episcopal
Church South. By 1846 the Indian work of the
latter branch of the Church included missions among
the Pottawattomis, Chippewa, Peoria., Wes, Kansas
Wyandotte, Shawnee, Kickapoo, Quapaw, Seneca,
and other fragments of tribes located on reserva
tions in the Indian Territory. Later, missions to
the Comanches, Apaches, and Kiowas were added.
The Methodist Episcopal Church, in 1906, had
about thirty‑five missions to Indians, of which five
were in New York, six on the Pacific coast, one in
Montana, and twenty three ' in the States of the
Mississippi Valley.
	In 1847 the Lutherans began work among the
Chippewa Indians in lower Michigan. The first
			mission school was opened at Franken
		io. Lu‑	muth, on Cass River, under the aus
	therans. pices of the Evangelical Lutheran
			Missionary Society of Dresden, Ger
many, and in the same year a second station
was opened at Bethany, on Pine River. Later,
missions were opened among the Apaches on the
San Carlos reservation in Arizona, and among the
Stockbridges and Munsee Indians in Wisconsin.
In 1880 the Mennonites began work among the
Arapahoes at Darlington, Indian Territory, and
about three years later among the Cheyennes at
Cantonment, Oklahoma. The work at Darlington
was abandoned and another station opened at Can
tonment among the Arapahoes. Subsequently,
stations were opened at Clinton and at Harmon,
Oklahoma, among the Cheyennes. In 1893 a mis
sion to the Hopis at Oraibi, Arizona, and in 1905
another among the same tribe at Moen Copi,
Arizona, were taken over from the National Indian
Association.	In the latter year a mission was
started upon the Lame Deer Agency in Montana
among the so‑called Northern Cheyennes.
	In 1884 the National Indian Association, which
for some years previously had devoted its efforts
			to secure legal recognition and proteo
		ii. The	tion for Indians, began missionary
	National work among them. The policy of this
	Indian As‑ association is to do pioneer work,
	sociation. going only to tribes, or separated parts
			of tribes, where Christian instruction is
not given by other agencies. After opening the
stations and meeting the heavier expense of build
ing missionary cottages and chapels, such stations,
with all the property accumulated, are given to
denominational boards asking for them and promis‑
ing the continuance of the work. The first stations of this association were among the Poncas, Otoes, and Pawnees of Indian Territory. In 1886 a mission was opened among the Sioux of South Dakota, and two stations among six tribal‑ remnants in northwestern California. In 1887 work for the Bannocks and Shoshones of Idaho was begun; two stations were established among the Omahas of Nebraska; and five centers of work were opened at Sitka, Alaska, the latter resulting in the famous Indian " model settlement " there. In 1889 work was undertaken among some of the Mission Indians of southern California, where eight preaching‑stations, and three missions were established, and in the same year work was begun among the Hiowas of Indian Territory. In 1890 a mission and day school among the Plumas County Indians of northern California were established, and hospital work among the Crow Indians of South Dakota. In 1891 a school was opened for the Apache prisoners at Mount Vernon Barracks, Alabama, and work among the absentee Shawnees and Kickapoos of Oklahoma and the Florida Seminoles was undertaken the same year. In 1892 a mission to the Moki of Arizona, and the following year one to the Piegans of Montana were opened. The same year missions were begun among the Walapai of Arizona, and a school established among the Spokanes of Washington. During the years from 1892 to 1905 work was undertaken among the Uncompahgre Utes; at four . stations among the Hopis; among the Hoopas and Desert Indians of California; at five stations among the Navajos; among the Yumas of California and the ApacheMojaves of Arizona. Since 1884 this association has done pioneer mission work among fifty tribes, or separated parts of tribes, and erected more than fifty buildings. These missions and buildings have been given, one at a time, to the permanent care of Presbyterians, Baptists, Moravians, the Episcopal Church, to Methodists, Mennonites, and to the Society of Friends.
Among missions begun in recent years are those of the Reformed Church in America, which began work among the Arapahoes and Cheyennes at Colony, Oklahoma, in 1895, under the care of the Women's Executive Committee of the Church. Four years later work was begun among the Apache prisoners at Fort Sill, and in 1903 the Church opened a mission to the Comanches.
JOHN W. CLARK.
BIBLlodaAP$y: A work of value is Handbook of American Indians, part 1, Washington, 1907 (a descriptive list of the stocks, tribes and settlements of Indians north of Mexico, of their manners, arts, customs and institutions, and of mission work among them, published by the Smithsonian Institution). Not to be neglected is the great body of sources now available for the history of Catholic missions in Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents: Travels and Explorations of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France, 1810‑1791, 73 vole. and index, 2 vole., Cleveland, 18961902. Books which deal either with the history of missions or with the state of civilization among the Indians are: J. Heckewelder, A Narrative of the Missions of the United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohepan Indians, Philadelphia, 1820 republished 1882 (charmingly quaint); P. Everhard, Hist. of Indian Baptist Missions in North America, Boston, 1831; I. McCoy. Hilt. of Baptist Indian Missions, Washington. 1840; C. Campbell, Riatoricat Sketch of Early Missions among the Indians of Maryland, Baltimore, 1846; J. G. She&, Hist. of Catholic Missions

485
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
among the Indian Tribes of the United States, 168,8‑1864, New York. 1857; F. Parkman, France and England in North America. Boston, 1887 (part ii. deals with the work of the Jesuits); J. W. DeForest, Hist. of fhe Indiana of Contttebicut, Albany, 1871 (many events given in detail); S. Jackson, Alaska and Misaicns on as North Pacific Coast, New York, 1880; M. Eells, Hist. of Indian Missions on the paciflc Coast, Philadelphia, 1882; H. S. Wellcome, The Story of Metlakahtla, New York, 1887; R. Fletcher, Indian Education and Civilization, Washington, 1888 (report to the United States Bureau of Education); Mrs. H. S. Caswell, Our Life among the Iroquois Indiana, Chicago, 1892; H. B. Whipple, Lights and Shadows of a Long Episcopate, New York, 1899 (deals with Protestant Episcopal missions); J. T. Hamilton, Hint. of Moravian Missions, Bethlehem, 1905; and literature cited under EL:oT, Joan; ZRISBESGER, DAvm.
Reports and pamphlets dealing with the subject are: J. B. A. Brouillet, The Work of the Decade ending Dec. 31, 1883, Washington, 1884 (report of the Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions); M. T Richards, Indian Missions of the Churches, New York, 1886 (leaflet of the National Indian Association, gives brief survey of denominational work up to 1885); F. M. Ellis' The Nation's Wards, Baltimore, 1890 (sketch of Indian origins, relation of the Indians to the government, and early mission work); the Reports of the yearly meetings of the Friends for 1866 and 1891 give data of Friends' missions, as do the Minutes of the Associated Executive Committee of Friends on Indian Affairs for 1905‑06; T. G. John, Indian Missions, Nashville, 1891 (on missions of the Methodist Episcopal Church South); H. L. Morehouse, in Baptist Home Mission Monthly, Nov., 1900; G. F. McAfee, Missions among the North American Indians, New York, 1903 (on the work of the Presbyte ' n Church); J. W. Johnston, The Home Missions of the ethodist Episcopal Church, ib.,1906 (deals with John ,te mission to the Wyandottes); Report of the Dome ic Section of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary S sty of the Protestant Episcopal Church, 1906; the Reports of the Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions, 190Statistics of Work for Indians of the American Missionary Association, 1905‑06; A. S. Quinton, A Glimpse of our Missions, New York, 1907 (issued by the National Indian Association, gives details of its work and of transfer to denominational boards).
INDUCTION: In the Church of England, the formal installation of a clergyman, already nominated by the patron and approved by the bishop, in the possession of a benefice. The act is usually performed by the archdeacon, who accompanies the new incumbent to the church, places his hand upon the key or handle of the door, and says to him " By virtue of this mandate I do induct you into the real, actual; and corporal possessions of this church of Christ, with all the rights, profits, and appurtenances thereto belonging." The incumbent then opens the door, enters the church, and rings the bell to make the fact of his induction known to his parishioners. In the American Episcopal Church, the analogous function is known as institution, for which a special service is provided in the prayer‑book.

INDULGENCES.
Definition ($ 1). As Remission of Ecclesiastical Penance (¢ 2). Crusading Indulgences (¢ 3) As Remission of Temporal Penalties (§ 4). As the Remission of Guilt and Penalty (§ 5). Applicable to the Departed (§ 6).
	[An indulgence is defined by modern Roman
Catholic authorities as " ° the remission of the tem
poral punishment due to God for sins already for
given as to guilt; a remission granted by ecclesias
tical authority to the faithful, from the treasury of
the superabundant satisfactory merits of our Lord
Indians of North America Indulgences
Jesus Christ, of Mary most holy, and of the saints." Indulgences are divided into partial, such as are
granted for a certain number of days, :. Defi‑ or periods of forty days (called quar‑
nition. antines), or for a year, or for several
years; and plenary, by which the whole of the temporal punishment due to God for sins which have been forgiven is supposed to be remitted. In connection with plenary indulgences granted " in the form of Jubilee," confessors have power conferred upon them to absolve from reserved cases (see CAsus RESERVATI), to dispense from or commute certain simple vows, etc. In order to gain indulgences in general, it is necessary to be in a state of grace, i.e., free from mortal sin; to have at least a general intention of gaining the indulgence; and to perform whatever good works (generally the recitation of some prayer) are prescribed as a condition. To gain a plenary indulgence, confession, communion, a visit to some church or public oratory, and pious prayers are usually prescribed. It is also taught by theologians that it is an important condition for gaining a plenary indulgence to have a true hatred for all sins, even though venial, and to be wholly free from any attachment to them.] The history of the growth of the doctrine of indulgence has never been fully investigated.
Indulgences in the modern sense can not be shown to extend further back than the eleventh century.
Here they are met with as a partial s. As Re‑ relaxation of penitential requirements, mission of or even, before the end of that century,
Ecclesias‑ as a total remission of them, granted by tical a bishop in a general way on condition
Penance. of the performance of a definite pious
act (the visiting of a church with an offering, contribution to the building of a monastery, and the like). In this form they are the last ram. neat of the penitential discipline of the earlyChurch (see PENANCE). In primitive times the bishops possessed the right to shorten the prescribed period of penance in the individual case, and with due regard to the circumstances and especially the penitent's zeal and fervor. It became customary to grant such a relaxation in return for a considerable benefit done to the Church, such as the giving of lands. As soon as these relaxation, became applicable to penitents in general, they constituted indulgences in the modern sense. The new general relaxations presupposed, as the older partial ones had done, the practise of ecclesiastical penance, the severity and extent of which made some mitigation desirable. The so‑called redemptions and commutations, which originated in the Irish and AngloSaxon churches, and by the beginning of the tenth century began to spread on the Continent, are rather analogies than early stages of the indulgence proper. It is to these, which continued for a time after as well as before the latter, that the charges of Abelard apply against the priests who " for an offering in money condone or relax the penalties of the prescribed satisfaction,, (MPL, clxxviii. 672‑873). The first demonstrable indulgence of a general nature occurs in southern France, granted in 1016, or shortly after, by Archbishop Pontius of

Indulgences
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
Arles to the monastery of Montmajour. It applies to two classes of penitents: those who, on account of grievous offenses, are excluded from public worship and obliged to wear external marks of their condition; and those who have confessed minor sins and received a penance. To the former loss one‑third, to the latter half, of their penance may thus be remitted. At the end of the century those who are under public and private penance are treated alike.
Indulgences, however, were still rarely granted. The number of demonstrable ones granted by bishops in the eleventh century, all belonging to southern France, is small; and those granted by the popes do not apparently go back further than the last decade of the century. The first wholly genuine document of this kind extant is one of Urban II., dated Oct. 12, 1091 (Jafft, Regesta, 5452), in which he remits to the benefactors of the monasterium Paviliacense in the diocese of Rouen " one quarter of the penance imposed upon them by their bishop or priest." The fact of its being granted by a French pope renders more probable the theory that indulgences were of French origin; and the next similar case, more than twenty years later, is also by a Frenchman, Calixtus II. During the remainder of the century the popes continue to grant them, though sparingly. Of this class there are less than ten in the extant papal archives before the middle of the century, and in its latter half hardly more than twenty. The remission of fractional parts of the time of penance fell into desuetude, except, in those granted to the Knights of St. John and the Templara, and with it the last traces of individual treatment of the penitents. Instead, the remission covered a certain number of days, usually twenty or forty; Alexander III. extended it a few times to a year, or, for pilgrims to Rome from the far north, two or three years. Thus it is evident that at this period the popes had not learned to look on indulgences as a source of income. It was otherwise with the bishops, whom Abelard accuses about 1140 of being so inflamed with greed " that when they have a crowd of people assembled for the dedication of a church, the consecration of an altar, the benediction of a cemetery, or any other solemnity, they are prodigal with relaxations of penanoea, remitting to all alike either a third or a fourth of their penanees " (Ethics, xxv.). With justice Innocent III., when, in the famous Lateran decree of 1215, he attempted to set bounds to the practise, asserts that " the Roman pontiff, who has the fulness of power, has in such matters been accustomed to observe such moderation " as he there imposes upon the bishops (Mansi, Concilia, xxii. 1050).
On the other hand, the popes had long before this made use of the institution with a freedom that no bishop could equal, in behalf of the
	3. Cruse‑	liberation of the Holy Land from
	ding In‑	infidel domination. As early as 1095
	dulgences.	the remission of all penance was
		promised to the crusaders. Even be
fore this Alexander II. had offered a total remission
of penance to those who bore arms against the
Saracens in Spain (c. 1063); but Urban II. estab‑
liehed the regular crusading indulgence, which nearly all his successors for two centuries continued. Paschal II. placed resistance to the Saracens in Spain on the same footing, followed by Gelasius IL, Calixtus IL, Celestine III., and Innocent III. In 1147 Eugeniue III. offered the same reward for a campaign against the Slave, and Alexander III. in 1171‑72 for the subjection of the Esthonians. It was but a short step to considering a campaign against heretics equally meritorious; in 1135 Innocent IL, at the Council of Pisa, offered the remissio of Urban II. to those who served against Roger of Sicily and the antipope Anacletua IL, and Innocent III., in 1199, designated the war against the imperial governor Markwald a crusade, while the same pope originated the crusade against the Cathari in 1207 and the following years. While the crusading indulgence of Urban II. was granted only to those who undertook in person the perils and fatigues of the journey to Palestine, it was later extended to all who supported the undertaking, until Innocent III., in 1198, declared that those who sent a number of soldiers proportioned to their wealth might share in the indulgence, while those who contributed of their goods might participate in it " in proportion to the amount of their aid, and especially to their devotion." The explanation of application of the phrase which became the usual one, peccatorum venia, remissio, indulgentis, to these indulgences is to be found in a reminiscence of that stage of the penitential discipline in which the remission of sins was pronounced only ‑ after the performance of the prescribed penance or satin. faction.
In the thirteenth century the institution takes on a new content, under the influence, not of the originators, but of the interpreters.
	;. As Re‑	The theory is an outgrowth of the
	mission of	great change in the penitential system
	Temporal	which was completed about the begin
	Penalties.	ning of that century. Penance has
		developed into a sacrament, whose
parts are designated as contrition, confession (made
a positive law in 1215), and satisfaction. Mean
while, through the gradual shortening of the period
between confession and absolution, until the latter
followed the former immediately, satisfaction had
lost the meaning which it had in the primitive
Church, and needed to be put on a new basis if it
was not to drop out altogether. The theory was
discovered by such men as Abelard and his follow
ers, Robert Pullua and Richard of Saint Victor,
that there was a difference between the forgiveness
effected by baptism and that which followed upon
absolution. The former, they said, frees man from
all guilt and penalty; in the latter, the sinner is
indeed released from his sin and its eternal punish
ment, but not (or not usually) from the temporal
penalties, of which the fires of purgatory were the
most considerable. The divine justice was held to
require that the sinner moat discharge this debt
still remaining by a pcena astisfadoria. Thus the
traditional satisfactions, especially prayer, fasting,
and almsgiving, acquired s new importance, as
delivering the soul from the necessity of remaining
in purgatory so much longer. It is easy to see what

487	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Indulgences
effect this belief had upon the doctrine of indulgences, the meaning of which had from the beginning been the remission of satisfaction. By the theory consequently developed, an indulgence is henceforth the remission, not of ecclesiastical penance, but of the temporal penalties imposed by God upon sin, to be paid either here or hereafter. Nothing was changed in the relation of indulgences to repentance. As previously the remission of penance had implied its acceptance by the penitent, after genuine repentance and confession, so now contrition, confession, and sacramental absolution are held to be prerequisites. Attention must be called to an innovation which had come into the doctrine of penance in the Merovingian period, allowing substitution instead of payment by the sinner himself. Following out the line thus suggested, Alexander of Hales, Bonaventura, and Thomas Aquinas discussed the question " whether one may make satisfaction for another," and answered it in the affirmative. The thing comes down to a simple reckoning of debit and credit, and it suffices that the indebtedness be discharged, it matters not by whom. Here a useful connection was made with the early doctrine of merit, and the indulgence became a relaxation of penalties on the ground of payment by another. That other is the Church‑raerata eccleaice satisfaeiunl; and the Church takes these merits from its storehouse, filled by the superabundant acquisitions of Christ and of the saints. The first formal adoption of this theory of an inexhaustible treasury of merits, with the pope for its guardian, is found in the bull Unigenitus issued by Clement VI. in 1343; but the popes had long before this found what a useful source of revenue it might be. The ordinary indulgence had been overshadowed by the crusading indulgence; but now, where Innocent III, had only granted five or six in a pontificate of sixteen years, Nicholas IV. issued nearly 400 in his first two years (1288‑90) to churches, monasteries, and hospitals.
After the decay of the crusading enthusiasm, the indulgence granted for that purpose had thrust out a new shoot in the jubilee indulgence
5. As the (see JUBILEE, YEAR OF), which, in‑
Remission vented by Boniface VIII. in 1300,
of Guilt became increasingly remunerative to and the popes, especially after it could be
	Penalty.	gained (beginning with Boniface IX.
		in the last decade of the fourteenth
century) outside of Rome itself, and not only in a
jubilee year, but as often as the pope pleased. It
has only recently been realized that the indulgences
of the 18:=: medieval centuries show rather an essen
tially new form than a mere abuse of the theory.
By the middle of the thirteenth century the in
dulgence granted to the crusaders must have been
widely understood as a "liberation or absolution
from penalty and fault‑" It is not, then, surprising
that, a few decades later, the famous Portiuncula
indulgence was designated as "liberation from all
fault and penalty." This unique character won
high esteem among the " Spiritual " Franciscans
not long after the middle of the thirteenth century;
and this accounts for the fact that the first pope
to use the above‑cited designation in a plenary
indulgence was Celestine V., whose relations to the
°' Spirituals " are well known. The neat pope
Boniface VIIL, disapproved and revoked it, prob
ably, however, not on the ground of general opposi
tion to indulgences a culpa et pane, but as objecting
to the concession of such an indulgence to a par
ticular church in perpetuity. In any case, his
objection to it was not long maintained at Rome.
Innocent VI. extended the Aquila indulgence to a
Benedictine monastery at Naples, and Urban VI.
renewed it in 1384; while Bonifaoe IX. made free
use of it, of the Portiuncula indulgence, and of the
" ° great " indulgence of St. Mark's at Venice.
Similar indulgences a pww et a culjoa were granted
viva voce by Alexander V. in 1409 at the Council
of Pisa, and by Nicholas V. in 1452 on the occasion
of the coronation of Frederick III. The free use of
this kind of indulgence by recent popes, especially
John XXIII., led to attempts in the Council of
Constance to abate the practise; but nothing further
was attained than the revocation, by Martin V. in
his reforming decree of 1418, of such indulgences
granted to special localities.
Both the terminology of the' Curia and the popular mind now accepted a pcena et culpa as implied in a plenary indulgence, at least of the jubilee class. The dogmatic difficulty involved in the conception of an indulgence both from the penalty and from the guilt of sin struck many theologians, who found various ways of dealing with it. Some have positively denied that such indulgences were ever granted, though Bellarmine and Suarez definitely admit the historical fact. Others limit the remission of guilt to venial sins, while still others understand the formula as equivalent to a parns culpce debits. A greater number attempt to make a distinction between the real meaning of the indulgence and the things which may in a loose sense be attributed to it (thus Antoninus of Florence, John Gerson, and Juan de Torquemada). Not a few of this latter class make use of the fact that in connection with the plenary indulgence large powers were granted to confessors to absolve from sins falling in the class of reserved cases, which actually amounted to a somewhat close union in the pope's hands of the grace of the sacrament of penance with the power of indulgence as originally understood, whether the individual penitent needed only the ordinary absolution or that from reserved sins, and whether he received it from special papal representatives or from confessors endowed for the occasion with special faculties. It is, in fact, this fusion, so to speak, of the older indulgence extending only to the remission of temporal penalties with the sin. destroying sacrament of penance which is the distinguishing note of this third stage in the develop. ment of indulgences. The doctrine then current finds nowhere a clearer expression than in the instructions issued to govern the distribution of indulgences in Germany shortly before Luther took up the question, by the papal legate Arcimboldi and Archbishop Albert of Magdeburg and Mainz. The latter explicitly names " the four principal graces conceded by the apostolic bull." They include not only the opening of 11 a confessional

Indulgences
Infall1bility of the Pope
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
488
endowed with the greatest and moat important and hitherto unheard‑of faculties," " the sharing of all the treasures of the Church universal " in the way of merit, the plenary indulgence for the departed (" the liberation of the dead from the pains of purgatory "), but, even before these, " the first grace is the plenary remission of all sins, than which no greater grace could be bestowed, seeing that by it man, a sinner and deprived of divine grace, obtains perfect remission and the grace of God once more, and by this remission of sins the pains which would have to be suffered in purgatory on account of offenses against the divine majesty are most fully remitted and absolutely done away." Observing the practical effect of such proclamations, " that unhappy souls believe, if they have purchased letters of indulgence, that they are sure of their salvation, and also . : . that by these indulgences a man is freed from all penalty and guilt " (letter to Archbishop Albert, Oct. 31, 1517), Luther set himself to restore indulgences to their primitive form, that of the remission of canonical penance; and in so doing he struck at another outgrowth of the medieval indulgence, which the popes had legalized shortly before his time.
The possibility of extending the application of indulgences from the Church militant to the souls
in purgatory seemed to follow logically 6. Appli‑ from the conception of their effect as
cable to the the removal of the divine penalties of Departed. sin. The effort to help these suffering
souls in any conceivable way brought both the scholarly and the popular mind to the idea that this might be done by indulgences as early as the first half of the thirteenth century. But the theologians found difficulties in the way which greatly delayed an affirmative answer to the problem. Discussion of this point appears as early as Alexander of Hales. He decides, indeed, that the pope may, in virtue of the power of the keys, grant indulgences to those who have died in a state of grace; but since an element of the exercise of that power, judicial absolution, is here lacking, it can only be accomplished through prayer. He was followed by Bonaventura; and with the two Franciscans agreed the Dominicans Albertua Magnus and Thomas Aquinas, though the former limited himself to the statement that indulgences " are of much avail to those in purgatory," without attempting to define the manner of their operation. Thomas based his agreement on the assumption that the souls in purgatory are still `f within the jurisdiction of the Church," but this was expressly denied by a prominent contemporary of his; Cardinal Henry of Ostia, in Summa super titulis decretalium, and at the beginning of the fourteenth century he was supported by Franciqcua Maronis. Their position influenced principally the canonists, but theologians were not lacking who took the same view, so that half, or even three‑quarters, of the fifteenth century had passed before the difference of opinion gave way to the increasing feeling in favor of these indulgences. The popes were singularly slow to act upon it. It is true that both Albertus Magnus and Aquinas assume the existence of papal bulls granting such indulgences, but
no trace remains in authentic documents of anything more than an unscrupulous promise of such effects by certain eleemotrynarum qucestorea until well into the second half of the fifteenth century. Calixtua III. is said to have granted them; but the first extant bull of the kind is that of Sixtus IV. in favor of St. Peter's Church at Saintes in 1476, which still asserts its application to the departed to be by prayer. The novel proceeding excited much attention and not a little protest, especially on the part of the friends of other churches. The papal commissary, Raymond Peraudi, had a defense drawn up by two French theologians, the wide circulation of which in France and Germany shows the general interest in the subject; but Sixtus himself was impelled to act in the matter. In his bull of Nov. 27, 1477, he authoritatively defines the phrase by prayer in quite a different sense from its original use, as meaning practically that the faithful on earth represent the departed and do for them what they are unable to do for themselves. The principal point is that the operation of the indulgence for the departed was held to be no less certain than of that for the living. This is shown by Raymond Peraudi'a official exposition of the Saintes bull, as well as by the manner in which Gabriel Biel, having in his tqanonis mieate expos4io declined to decide the question, when before, the printing was ended in 1488 he became acquainted with the declaration of Sixtus, added an appendix in which he stated this interpretation as now authoritative, and opposed the view that anything was taken away from the efficacy of indulgences by the modus sufragii.
	Tetzel has been said by some modern Ultra
montaniats to have followed " an uncertain school.
doctrine " in asserting the infallible operation of
indulgences for the departed; but this view was
strongly set forth in the instructions by which he
was bound, and the papal bulls from Sixtus IV. to
Leo X. betray no doubt of the efficacy of such in
dulgences. Moreover, nothing except the payment
of the prescribed sum was required from the person
who acquired such an indulgence. This is expressly
stated in the instructions, e.g., of Albert of Mainz:
" Nor is it necessary that those who pay into the
treasury on behalf of the souls [in purgatory] shall
be contrite in heart and make oral confession "
(J. E. Kapp, Sammlung einager zum pabstliehen
Ablaw . . . gehdrigen Schriften, p. 154, Leipaie,
1721). 	(T. BBIE(1ER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are: E. Amort, De origins, progressu, roalore et frudu indu4antiatum, Venice, 1738; J. E. Kapp. 3chauplats dss tdadisdten Ablase‑Krams, Leipsic, 1720; J. H. Hottinger, Hiat. ecd. Nova Tedamenti, vol. vii., Zurich, 1855; Deada autdentica sacra eongregationis indulgsntiia, Regensburg, 1883; Reacripta aufluntiea sacra congregationia indulgenhis, ed J. Schneider, ib. 1885. The chief modern work is H. C. Lea, Hiat. of Auricular Confession and lndulpehaa in the Latin Church, 3 vols., Philadelphia, 1896; L. Thomassin, Vetus et nova ecclesis! dieciplina, ll., iii. 24‑25, Paris, 1728; Bingham, Originea XVIII., iii. 8, XX., v. 8; N. Marshall, Penitential Discipline of the Primitive Church . . . downward to its Present State, in Library of Anglo‑Catholic Theology, Oxford. 1844; E. Wiese, in Jahrbacluer der deutachan Theologie, xxii (1877), 599‑800; P. Woker, Dos kirwiche Finanxrsasen der Papete, N6rdlingen, 1878; Documents Illustrating the Hist. of St. Paul's Cathedral, ed. W. 8. Simpson for Camden Society, London, 188o; A. W. Dieckhoff, Der Ablusstreit,

489
RELIGIOUS
Gotha, 1880; F. Beringer, Die Abldsee, ihr WeSen and Gebrauch, Paderborn, 1895; T. Brieger, Dos Wesen des Ablaseer am Ausganpe do* Mittelatters, Leipeia, 1897; A. Kurs, Die katholiwAs Lehre roofs Ablase vor and nach dem Auftreten Luthers, Paderborn, 1900; F. Bdrlnger, Les Indulgences. Leur nature et leur usage, Paris, 1906; Neander, Christian Church, vols. iii.‑v. passim; Schaff Christian Church, iv. 381 eqq., vi. 146 sqq., v. 1, pp. 729 aqq.; Thatcher and McNeal, Source Book, pp. 338‑340; Robinson, European History, i. 337‑340, 477 ii. 41‑42, 53 sqq.; %L, i. 94‑112; DCA, i. 834‑835, if. 1586‑1608; and literature under Ecs, JOHANN MET=; LDTHER, MARTIN; REroRMATION; and TETzEL, JOHANN.
INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE: The doctrine that the bishop of Rome in his official character, i.e., whenever he speaks ex cathedra on
	History	a question of doctrine or morals, is
	of the	free from error, and that his decisions
	Doctrine.	must be accepted as final, not needing
		confirmation by an ecumenical council
and not subject to modification or revision by such
a council. The Fathers and the ancient creeds and
councils know nothing of this doctrine; and the
Eastern Church rejects it as a blasphemous assump
tion. It arose in the Middle Ages in connection
with the pseudo‑Isidorian decretals (q.v.), and was
defended even by Thomas Aquinas, who was the
first theologian to discuss the theory of papal in
fallibility as an integral part of systematic theology
(cf. J. J. I. Do11inger, Das Papatthum, p. 133,
Munich, 1891; Leitner, pp. 10‑14, denies this).
The reformatory councils of Pisa, Constance, and
Basel asserted the superiority of an ecumenical
council over the pope. It is disputed among Roman
Catholic scholars whether Martin V., in approving
the acts of the Council of Constance, included its
distinct assertion of the supremacy of a council
(cf. F. X. Funk, Abhandlungen and Unterauehungen,
i. 489‑498, Paderbom, 1897). After the Council of
Trent the doctrine became a bone of contention
between the Gailicans and the Jesuits. The latter
triumphed in the Vatican Council, which formulated
the new article of faith, July 18, 1870, in these
words:
" we teach and define that it is a dogma divinely revealed, that the Roman pontiff when he speaks ex cathedra‑that is, when, in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter (Luke ztii. 32)‑is possessed of that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed for defining doctrine regarding faith or morale; and that therefore such definitions of the Roman pontiff are irreformable of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church."
Papal infallibility was the chief topic of the Vatican Council. When the vote was first taken in secret session, July 13, 601 mem‑
bers being present, 451 bishops voted in the affirmative, 88 in the negative, 62 with a qualification (Placed juxta modum), and over 80, though present in Rome, abstained from voting. On the evening of the same day the
minority, which included such able and influential prelates as Darboy of Paris, Schwarzenberg of Prague, Rauscher of Vienna, Dupanloup of Orldans, FBreter of Breslau, Ketteler of Mainz, Stroesmayer of Bosnia, Hefele of Rottenburg, and Kenrick of St. Louis, sent a deputation to the pope, and
its Pmmul
gatioa by
the
Vatican
Council.
ENCYCLOPEDIA
Indnlgenoea
Inferlubility of the Pope
begged him to modify the proposed decree, and make some concession for the peace and unity of the Church. But Pius IX. surprised the deputation with the assurance that the Church had always believed in the unconditional infallibility of the pope. On July 17 fifty‑six bishops opposed to the dogma sent a written protest to the pope, and, with sixty additional members of the opposition, left Rome to avoid voting. The next day, of the 535 members present all voted for the dogma except Bishops Riccio of Sicily and Fitzgerald of Little Rock, Ark., who changed their votes before the close of the session. After the vote the. pope read the decree of his own infallibility in St. Peter's.
The Vatican dogma can not stand the test of history, and is a mere pretension. The sixth ecumenical council (Constantinople,
	Criticism. 680) condemned and excommunicated
		Pope Honorius I. (62538) " as a
heretic [Monothelite], who, with the help of the old
serpent, had scattered deadly error." This anath
ema was solemnly repeated by the seventh and
by the eighth ecumenical councils (787 and 869),
and even by the popes themselves, who, down to the
eleventh century, in a solemn oath at their accession,
indoraed the sixth ecumenical council, and pro
nounced " an eternal anathema " on the authors of
the Monothelite heresy, together with Pope Hono
rius, " because he had given aid and comfort to the
perverse doctrines of the heretics." History knows
of other heretical popes. Zephyrinus (201‑219) and
Calixtus I. (217‑222) were Patripassians [this
charge rests upon the manifestly prejudiced testi
mony of Hippolytus, who insisted that Patripas
sianiam was logically involved in their protest
against ditheism. e. n. N.] ; Liberius signed an
Arias creed in 358; Felix II. (355‑358) was a
decided Arias; Zosimus (417) at first indorsed
the heresy of Pelagiua and Celeatius, whom his
predecessor, Innocent L, had condemned; Vigilius
(538‑555) vacillated between two opposite deci
sions during the Three Chapter Controversy (q. v.),
and thereby produced a long schism in the West;
John XXII. (d. 1334) denounced a certain opinion
of Nicholas III. and Clement V. as heretical. Six
tua V. issued an edition of the Latin Bible with
innumerable blunders; Bellarmine, the great Roman
controversialist and infallibilist, could not deny
the facts, and advised the printing of a new edition
with the bold statement in the preface, charging
the errors of the infallible pope upon the fallible
printer, though the pope had himself corrected the
proofs. 		P. AND D. S. SCHAFF.
The arguments adduced by Roman Catholic theologians in support of this newly defined doctrine are in part a priori, based on the assumed necessity of a central supreme authority in matters of faith and morals whose decisions shall be final, and to which, moreover, recourse may be had
easily and conveniently when doctrinal differences and disputes arise. The infallible authority of the Church in her teaching‑capacity is, of course, assumed as a postulate, for among other
reasons, it seems to be clearly implied in the promise of Christ to remain with the organization founded
The
Roman
Catholic
Statement.

Iafa111b1Uty of tile Pops Ingo
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
490
by him (" the pillar and ground of truth," I Tim. iii. 15) " always even unto the end of the world." Furthermore, the recognition of the principle of infallibility teems absolutely necessary for the maintenance of the unity of faith in the Church, a contention which is amply borne out by the history and doctrinal disintegration of Protestantism. The infallibility of the Church being thus assumed, the farther question arises as to the subject of this prerogative. If it be considered to ride indiscriminately in the Church as a whole, it can clearly be of little practical benefit. Nor is it sufficient for the required end that it reside simply in the Ecclesia docena, vie., in the hierarchical body of the bishops I~, with the pope at their head, who are considered as j the legitimate successors of the Apostles to whom the promises of Christ were made. For it is obviously difficult to ascertain just what the teaching of all the bishops scattered over the world may be on a given point and at a given moment; and ecumenical eounculs from their very nature can be convened only for more solemn and momentous occasions. Hence the affirmed need of a central authority to which appeal can be readily made, whose ex cadedla decisions will enjoy the same immunity from error as those vouched for by the Eoamia dooem. This authority Roman Catholics recognize in the bishop of Rome, the traditional successor of St. Peter, and inheritor of his prerogatives; and in the various teats which are adduced to prove the primacy of Peter it is claimed that the gift of infallibility is implied. In this connection stns is laid on the passage of Matthew (xvi. 18)
" Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Here the lasting security of the edifice (including doubtless doctrinal inerrancy) is derived from Peter the foundation‑atone, and similar deductions are made from other passages, e.g., Luke xxii. 31 sqq. and John xxi. 15 sqq. Texts are also brought forward from a number of the Church Fathers, e.g., Irenseus, showing that at an early date the see of Rome was widely recognized to be the center of doctrinal as well as disciplinary unity for the whole Church, and that her decisions in that regard should be taken as final.
BmwoaaArer: In favor of the doctrine may be cited: G. Cardoni, Elucubratio de dopmatica Romani pontiflcis infawbwtats, Rome, 1870 (semi‑official); H. E. Manning, Petri privilegium, Lopdon, 1871; idem, The Vatican Drams in their Bearing on Civil Allegiance, ib. 1875, and of. E. $. Purcell, Life of Cardinal Manning, ib. 1896; V. Deehamps, L'InfaillibiliU et is coneila pinfral, Paris, 1869; F. %. Leitner, Thomas von Aquino fiber das unfehlbare Lekmmt des Papstes, Frankfort, 1872 (important, opposes D811inger); J. H. Newman, Letkr to the Duke of Norfolk, London, 1874 (a qualified defense in reply to Gladstone's Vatican Decrees); T. Granderath, Oeschiehte des vatikaniachen Konxils, 8 vols., Freiburg, 1903‑08 (the authoritative Ultramontsne hiet. of the council); cf. J. Gibbons, Faith of Our Fathers, chap. id., New York, 1874.
Against the doctrine (1) by members of the council: H. L. C. Maret, Du eoneile pbnfrol st do la pain relipisuee, 2 vole., Paris, 1869; J. Friedrich, Doeumenta ad dlu!Irandum concilium Vaticanum, N5rdlingen, 1871 (contains a number of important documents, among them Darboy'e La LiberU du concite st 1'infaillibilitE, and Kenrick's Concio in ooncilio Vaticano habsnda et non habits); C. J. Hefele, Caua Honorii papa, Naples, 1870; idem, Honorius and das sockets allganeine Coned, TVbingen, 1870, Eng. travel. in Prsbyterim Quarterly Review, April, 1872. (2) by Catholics not members of the council: J. J. I. von D&1‑
linger, Der Papst and das Concil, Leipsic, 1869, Env
London, new ed. by J. Friedrich, Doe Papenum, Munich. 1892; ides, Ueber die Unfaklbarketts‑Adreae, ib. 1870; J. Langen, Doe vatikanischs Dogma won den Universakpiskopat and der Unfdlbarkeit des Papates, 4 vole., Bonn, 1871‑76; J. Friedrich, Daa vatikanische Concil, 3 vole., ib. 1877‑87; idem, Ipnas von DBllinger, 3 vole., Munich, 1898‑1901. (3) by Protestants: W. E. Gladatone, The Vatican Decrees in their Bowing on Civil Allegiance, London. 1774, ed., with a hist. of the council and the teat of the decrees, by P. Schaff, New York, 1875; idem, Vatiuanism, an Answer to Reproofs and Replies, London. 1875; Schaff, Creeds, i. 147‑189. ii. 234‑271.
INFANCY, ARABIC GOSPEL OF THE. See ArocaxraA; B, I., 6.
INFANT BAPTISM. See BArrlsNr.
INFANT COllI11IUNION. Sea Lonu's Surr$a, V., f 1.
	INFANT	SALVATION: The doctrines of infant
damnationand of non‑elect infants were unknown to
		the early Church. That the baptism of
Primitive infants was often postponed to Easter and week (see BAPTIsM, III., 5) proves that
	Roman	it was not considered a loss to the
	Catholic child to die unbaptised. But as sacer
	DoctrIne. dotal and ecclesiastical ideas spread in
		the Church, baptism was more and
more emphasized, until in the fourth century
Gregory Nasianzen and Ambrose could say that
unbaptized children could not be saved. It was
Augustine who first taught the damnation of infants
(see BAmsM, II., 1, 1 3); but their sufferings,
though eternal, are of the mildest character (De
peccatoru m merilis, i. 16); indeed, it seemed to him
doubtful whether they were punished at all. The
Roman Church, accepting Augustine's conceptions
of the necessity of baptism to salvation and of the
mildness of the punishment of those infants who
died unbaptized, agreed with him that they were
sent to bell and assigned to them a distinct place
in it, the limbua infantium or puerorum (see LImBus;
cf. Thomas Aquinas, Summa, III., queest. lxviii. 2,
Sup. qua:st. bud. 7). The Council of Trent refused
to commit itself to a decision, though affirming the
necessity of baptism (Session v. 4); and, since then,
some theologians have followed Peter Lombard in
the supposition that infants suffer some sort of
misery in punishment of original sin (Bellarmine,
De amissione gralice, vi. 6); others, like Cardinal
Celestino Sfondrati (Nodes prcedestimtionis disso
lute, Rome, 1697, I., i. 23), have maintained that
they enjoy as much happiness as they are capable of.
Perrone reprents, probably, the prevalent view
when he says (v. 275) that they suffer only the lack
of the beatific vision; they are in " a condition of
pure nature." And, further, Roman Catholic theo
logians teach that the desire for baptism, even on
the part of unborn children, is accepted for the
baptism itself; therefore, there need be no fears
for children of Christians who die in infancy.
The first to enter the lists against the theory of the necessity of baptism to infant salvation was Zwmgli. He taught that all elect
Protestant children who die in infancy are saved, Confessional whether they are baptized or not,
Statements. whether pagan or Christian; and, further, that all who die in infancy are elect, since their early death is a token of God's peculiar mercy, and therefore of their salvation.

Luther, on the other hand, taught the necessity of baptism to salvation; and this doctrine is part of the Lutheran creed, involving baptismal regeneration. Calvin held to election in regard to infants, and speaks thus:
.. As to infants, they seem to perish, not by their own fault, but by the fault of another. But there is a double solution. Though sin does not yet appear in them, yet it is latent; for they bear corruption shut up in the soul, so that before God they am damnable." •' That infants who are to be saved (as, certainly, out of that age some am saved) must be previously regenerated by the Lord is clear."Instifdee, iv., :vi. 17.
This doctrine of infant salvation through election is expressed in the Calvinistic symbols. The Canons of the Synod of,Dort (1619) declare:

" Since we am to judge of the will of God from his word (which test that the children of believers are holy. not by nature, but in virtue of the covenant of grace, in which they, together with the parents, are comprehended), godly parents have no reason to doubt of the election and salvation of their children whom it pleseeth God to call out of thin life in their infancy."‑Final Head of Doctrine. art. :vii.
And the Westminster Confession (1648):
	" • The grace promised ['m baptism] is not only offered, but
really exhibited and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such
(whether of age or infants) as that grace belongeth unto,
according to the counsel of God's own will, in his appointed
time."‑maviii. 8. " Elect infants dying in infancy am
regenerated and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who
worketh when and where and how he pleaseth."‑a. 3.
But the Second Scotch Confession (1580) says:
•' We abhor and detest . . . his [the pope's] cruel judgment against infants dying without baptism."‑Cf. Schaff, Creeds, vol. iii., p. 482.
Since Calvinists distinguish between elect and non‑elect infants, it is not strange that some of their theologians have spoken of elect and reprobate infants. Thus Musculus says:
Since, therefore, this discrimination of elect and reprobate in new‑born infants in hidden from our judgment, it is not fitting that we should inquire into it, lest by ignorance we reject vessels of grace."‑Loci oommuses, 336.
And the Swiss theologians at the Synod of Dort mid:
" That there is an election and reprobation of infants, no less than of adults, we can not deny in the face of God, who loves and bates unborn. children."‑Acts synod. Dort, iudie. 40.
In the seventeenth century, the Arminians resumed Zwingli's position, and, consistently with their theory that original sin was not punishable apart from actual transgression, taught the general salvation of infants; so do the Methodists and Baptists to‑day. On the other hand, the Lutherans, and all others who teach baptismal regeneration, am logically shut up to the view that all who die unbaptised are lost. Also the Rev. John Henry Blunt, speaking, doubtless, for High‑churchmen generally, says:
'. It can hardly, I think, be doubted that they do sustain s lose, of whatever kind. In the Inatifution of a Christian Man, the Church of England declares, ' Insomuch as infants and children dying in their infancy shall undoubtedly be saved thereby (i.e., by baptism), else not' In the last revision of the Prayer~Book is read, ' It is certain by God's word that children which are baptized, dying before they commit actual sin, are undoubtedly savd': in other words, we are certain of the future happiness of the baptized, but have no assurance of the salvation of the unbaptiaed ifant.
RELIGIOUS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
Infallibility of the Dope Inge
no quern must thus be left in obscurity, ae we have no sufficient warrant to go beyond the cautious statement of our Church."‑(Dictionary/ of Doctrinal and Historical 77rr olopy, p. 348, note i. London, 1870.)
But the tendency is toward milder views. It may well be questioned if there be a single living Lutheran theologian of high stal%ding who
	modern	confines the grace of salvation to bap
Tendencies. tined infants. So too with the Calvin
		ists the heart is stronger than logic. Dr.
Charles Hodge teaches emphatically the salvation
of ail infants who die in infancy, and asserts that
this is the " common doctrine of Evangelical Prot
estants " (Systematic Theology, i. 26). The West
minster Confession a. 3 (ut sup.) was supplemented
in 1903 for their own use by American Presbyte
rians by the following " declaratory statement":

"It in not to be regarded as teaching that any who die in infancy are lost. We believe that all dying in infancy are included in the election of , and are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who works when and where and how heyleeees."
BxiiwoaaAPBy: Besides the pertinent sections in the works on theology and on' history of dogma, eg., Harasok, Dopna, ii. 142‑143, v. 175 aqq., consult: C. P. Krauth, Infant Salvation in the Calvinistic Systen, Philadelphia, 1874; G. W: Bethune, Early Lost, Barly Saved, London, 1888; W. E. Sobsaek, Children in Heaven, Philadelphia, 1888; h. M. Ayer, Infant Salvation according to the Bible, New York, 1879; E. N. White, Wdsy Infants ors Baptised, ib.,1900.
INFRALANARL41IMM: The doctrine that God for his own glory determined: (1) to create the world; (2) to permit the fall of man; (3) to elect from the mass of fallen men an innumerable multitude as " vessels of mercy" ; (4) to send his Son for their redemption; (5) to leave the residue of mankind to suffer the just punishment of their sins. This is the common doctrine of Augustinians, and is taught in the Calvinistic symbolical books. It is to be distinguished from Supralapsarianism (q.v.), the theory of some Calvinists, and is the same as sublapsarianism; am CALvurism; PREDESTINATION.
INFULA. See VEBTMENTB,AND INSIGNIA, EccLmmaIARTICAL.
INGE, WILLIAM RALPH: Church of England; b. at Crayke, a village of Yorkshire; June 6, 1860. He was educated at Eton and at King's College, Cambridge (B.A., 1883), where he was fellow (188688). He was ordered deacon in 1888 and ordained priest in 1892, and was incorporated M.A. at Oxford in 1889, being fellow and tutor of Hertford College, Oxford, from that year until 1904. He was also assistant master at Eton College in 1884,88, and since 1905 has been vicar of All Saints', Knightsbridge, London. He was examining chaplain to the bishop of Lichfield in 1902, select preacher at Oxford in 1893‑95 and 1903‑05, and at Cambridge in 1901, moderator at Oxford in 1895‑96 and 1903‑04, Bampton lecturer in 1899, and Paddock lecturer at the General Theological Seminary, New York, 1906. He has written Society in Rome under the Casaars (London, 1886); Christian My8tieiam (1899); Faith arid Knowledge (Edinburgh, 1904); Light, Life, and Love; Selections from the German Mystics (London, 1904); Studies of English Mystics (1906); Truth and Falsehood in Religion (1906); Personal Idealism arid Mysticism (1907);

Ingersoll Lectures	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	492
Inner Austria
and All Saints' Sermons (1907), bides contributing two essays to Contentio Veritatis (London, 1902).
INGERSOLL LECTURES OR IMMORTALITY. See IMMORTALITY, VIII.

INGHAM, BENJAMIN: The " Yorkshire Evangelist "; b. at Ossett (8 m. s.s.w. of Leeds); Yorkshire, June 11, 1712; d. at Aberford (9 m. e.n.e. of Leeds), Yorkshire, 1772. He studied at the grammar school, Batley, and at Queen's College, Oxford (B.A., 1734), where he became one of the most active members of the little band of Methodists led by John and Charles Wesley. He received epiccopal ordination in 1735, but the following October he sailed with the Wesleys for America, where he spent thirteen months in missionary work. While in America he had been attracted by the Moravians. After a visit to their headquarters at Hermhut, and to Count Zinzendorf at Marienborn, he joined the brotherhood in England and practically became the head of the Moravians in Yorkshire. He preached extensively in Yorkshire and Lancashire, and formed there numerous societies, which he formally transferred to the Moravians in July, 1742. After his marriage in 1741 to Lady Margaret Hastings, sister‑in‑law of the Countess of Huntingdon, he removed to Aberford, but continued his work as evangelist at large. In 1753 he withdrew from the Moravians, taking with him eighty of the societies founded by him. Thus came into existence the Inghamites. This sect had its conferences, and at one of them Ingham was elected general overseer, or bishop. In 1755 Ingham attended Wesley's conference at Leeds and suggested an amalgamation of his societies with the Methodists. Charles Wesley favored the idea, but John declined Ingham's overtures, and the plan fell through. In 1760 Ingham adopted the views of John Glas and Robert Sandema,n, the founder of the Sandemanians. The bitter controversy which ensued upon this change of doctrine completely disrupted his Church. Out of the eighty‑odd societies ruled over by him, only thirteen remained loyal. Most of them joined the Methodists. Ingham published an exposition of his Sandemanian views in A Discourse on the Faith and Hope of the Gospel (Leeds, 1763).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Tyerman, The Oxford Methodists, Memories of . . . Ingham, New York, 1873; D.VB, axviii. 434.
IIYGMAN, ANDERS VILHELM: Finnish Bible translator; b. 1819; d. at Helsingfors Sept. 5, 1877. He was ordained in 1845, and in 1864 was appointed professor of exegetical theology in the University of Helsingfors. As a youth he joined the movement of Finnish pietism which for three decades had animated the Church of Finland, and stood in intimate connection with a national revival which awakened a keen interest in the Finnish language. Ingman was seized by the inspiration of the new movement, and his first literary work was an attempt to translate the first chapters of Thuoydides into Finnish (1841). With F.0. Durahmanhe published a translation of Luther's Hauapostille (2 vols., Helsingfors, 1848‑50). As the last Finnish translation of the Bible, dating from 1776, had become antiquated, he published, in 1859, a new translation which has
not yet. been surpassed. In 1868 he began to publish a series of scientific expositions of the Bible, Raamatun eelitykei8 A. W. Ingmanilta (6 vols., 1868‑73), which was to serve students of theology and clergymen as a guide for a deeper penetration of the Scripture. He also published in Swedish Uppaattser i bibliskt teologiska dmnen (4 vols., 1865‑67); J. T. Becks Theologiska karakter (1866), and Bibliska betraktelser (2 vols., 1868‑72).
(J. A. CEDERBERG.)
INGRAM, ARTHUR FOLEY WINNINGGTOft:
Church of England bishop of London; b. at Stanford (11 m. n.w. of Worcester), Worcestershire, Jan. 26, 1858. He was educated at Keble College, Oxford (B.A., 1881), and was ordered deacon and ordained priest in 18$4. After being a private tutor in 188184, he was curate of St. Mary's, Shrewsbury (1884‑85), and private chaplain to the bishop of Lichfield (1885‑88). He was head of Oxford House, Bethnal Green, London (1888‑97), chaplain to the bishop of St. Albans (1890‑97), and to the archbishop of York (1891‑97), rector of Bethnal Green (1895‑97), and rural dean of Spitalfields (1896‑97); canon of St. Paul's Cathedral (1897‑1901), and treasurer of the same (1898‑1901). In 1897 he was consecrated bishop of Stepney (suffragan to the bishop of London), and four years later (1901) was translated to 'his present diocese of London. He has written Old Testament Difficulties (London, 1890); New Testament Difficulties (1890; Church Dzfwulties (1893); Work in Great Cit* (1895); The Men who Crucify Christ (1896); Chris( and His Friends (1897); Banners of the Chrlsti~n Faith (1899); Popular Objections to Christianity (1899); Reasons for Faith (1900); The Afterglow of a Great Reign (1901); Under the Done (1902); Addresses in Holy Week (1902); The Faith of Church and iration (1904); and The Call of the Father (sermons, 1907).

IRGULF (IHGULPHUS) : Abbot of Crowland (Croyland); b. in London c. 1030; d. at Crowland (14 m. e.n.e. of Stamford), Lincolnshire, Nov. 16, 1109. He became secretary to William, duke of Normandy, in 1051, and, after having made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, entered the monastery of St. Wandrille in Normandy, where he became prior. In 1086 he was appointed by his former patron, now king of England, to the abbatial stall of Crowland, being one of the few Englishmen appointed to high office during the Conqueror's reign. He is known for the Historia seu descriptio abbatace Croylandenais, which was long attributed to him. This work, which is preserved in the Arundel manuscript, no. 178, in the British Museum, is now known to be a forgery dating from the thirteenth or fourteenth century, though H. S. English and Birch claim that it is a mutilation, or a reconstruction, of a genuine original by Ingulf. It was printed by Sir Henry Savile in his Rerun anglicarum scriptores post Bedam (pp. 484‑520, London, 1596; reprinted, Frankfort, 1600, pp. 850‑916); also by W. Fulman, with a continuation falsely attributed to Peter of Blois and other continuations, in the Rerun anglicarum veteres (pp. 1‑107, Oxford, 1684); and more recently by Walter de Gray Birch in the Chronicle of Croyland Abbey (Wisbech, 1883). There is a translation

493	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	I'°"r°°u I'°°t"r°°
		Inner A0U
of it by H. T. Riley in Bohn's Antiquarian Library
(vol. xxix., London, 1854); also one by J. Steven
son in Church Historians of England (vol. iii., Lon
don, 1854).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The only early source is Ordericue Vitalis,
	Eccl. Hist. of England and Normandy, in Bohn's Anti
	quarian Library, 4 vole., London, 1853‑b4. Consult: F.
	Liebermann, in NA, xviii. 225‑287, (" masterly "); T.
	Wright, Biopraphia Britannica literaria, ii. 28‑33, ib. 1848;
	T. D. Hardy, Descriptive Catalogue of Materiade, ii, b8‑84,
	128‑129, in Rolls Series, no. 28, ib. 1885; H. S. English,
	Croyland and Burgh, ib. 1871 (holds to genuineness of the
	History); E. A. Freeman, Norman Conquest, iv. 800‑802,
	890, Oxford, 1879; O. Delare, in Revue das questions
	historiquta, xli (1887), 337‑381; W. G. Bowie, Inpulf and
	the Historia Croylandensia, Cambridge. 1894; Gross,
	Sources, p. 187; DNB, xxix. 18‑17.
	INHERITANCE, HEBREW. See FAMmy AND
MARRIAGE RELATIONS, HEBREW.
	INNER AUSTRIA, THE REFORMATION IN.
	I. The Reformation: Since the fifteenth century
the name " Inner Austria " has been given to the
lands of Styria, Carinthia, and Carniola. As early
as 1411 they formed an independent administrative
group, with Graz as the seat of government.
Ecclesiastically they belonged to the archbishopric
of Salzburg and the patriarchate of Aquileja.
Medieval opposition to the papacy manifested itself
here at an early time, and humanistic studies were
pursued with especial zeal. The great religious
movement of the sixteenth century had a still
greater effect, a result due to the gross abuses of
the clergy. The monasteries became empty, there
was a general lack of priests, and the Protestant
nobility acquired a considerable part of the eccle
siastical possessions. The Salzburg synod of 1549
furnished proof that Styria, Carinthia, and possibly
also Carniola had been thoroughly penetrated by
Protestantism. While Ferdinand I. used his ut
most powers to preserve the old doctrine, he found
himself compelled to make concessions after the
heavy defeat of Charles V. by Maurice of Saxony.
Ferdinand rrfused to recognize the terms of the
religious peace on the ground that his estates were
not imperial, but he permitted administration of
the Lord's Supper in both kinds. The leader of the
Protestants was Hans Ungnad, governor‑general of
Styria. On account of his interest in the Protestant
cause he fell into disgrace and went into exile, first
to Saxony, then to Wtirttemburg, where he carried
on an active propaganda among the southern Slavs.
	The best hopes were awakened on the accession of
Maximilian II. (1564), the only representative of
the Hapsburg dynasty who had inclinations toward
the Augsburg Confession, but he subordinated his
religious convictions to his political ambitions,
especially when, after the tragic end of Don Carlos,
the prospect of the possession of Spain opened
itself to the Hapsburg dynasty. His brother,
Charles II., the proper ruler of Inner Austria, ful
filled still less the expectations of the Protestants,
but he was powerless against the growth of the new
religious spirit. The clergy had given up celibacy,
the cup was administered to the laity, and mass
was read in German. The administration of the
country and almost all municipal offices were in
the hands of Protestants, and even the personnel
of the court belonged to the Augsburg Confession.
In the political assemblies the Protestants had a large majority. In the beginning of the seventies Charles II. adopted a course more in accord with the policy of the Jesuits, but his financial difficulties compelled him, in the treaties of Graz (1572) and Bruck‑on‑the‑Mur (1578), to make concessions to the adherents of the Augsburg Confession. He promised not to use violence, and allowed the Protestants in Graz and Judenburg, Laibach and Klagenfurt to build their own churches and schools. In the capitals, Graz, Klagenfurt, and Laibach, there was now instituted a special administrative department of churches and schools. A church order binding for all Protestants of Inner Austria was drawn up and, with the concessions of the archduke, was regarded by the Protestants as a charter which would protect them against all future persecutions. The cathedral school in Graz became a sort of Protestant university, and the number of Protestant clergymen was increased.
II. The Counterreformation: With the great concessions of Bruck, Protestantism in Inner Austria had reached its culminating‑point. There was consternation at the papal court when it received the news of the concessions of the archduke, and it was feared that the movement would spread into Venetian territory. A nuncio appeared in Graz, the archduke was put under the ban, and every means was tried to withdraw the concessions made to the Protestants. The archduke was not disinclined to retract, and the courts of Munich, Innsbruck, Salzburg and Prague supported the cause of Romanism. In Munich there took place in Oct., 1579, a discussion in which the principles for carrying on the Counterreformation in Inner Austria were laid down. The reactionary movement proceeded slowly, but surely. Protestant church‑service was at first abolished in cities and market‑towns, an3 Evangelical preachers and teachers were expelled. Bavarians were sent to the court of Graz, and the best positions in the ecclesiastical hierarchy were occupied by Bavarians. After a few years, Styria presented an entirely changed view. Citizens emigrated to live according to their faith in Evangelical localities, and a strictly Catholic university was erected in Graz and delivered to the Jesuits to suppress the Protestant school. To restrain the increase of Protestant citizens, the " Catholic citizens' oath " was required of every candidate for citizenship. The Protestant citizens in Graz were prohibited from visiting the Protestant cathedral church, and whoever allowed his children to be baptized or married in it was punished. It was in vain that the entire nobility of all three countries and the Protestant princes of the empire asked for the intervention of Emperor Rudolf II. in behalf of the oppressed citizens.
In 1595 Ferdinand II. (q.v.) succeeded Archduke Charles in the rule of Inner Austria, and dealt the final and decisive blow to the Protestants. First the Pfotestant administrative departments in Graz, Judenburg, and Laibaeh were abolished, and the Protestant clergymen were expelled from the country. Then there was started a campaign against Protestant citizens and peasants, against Protestant church, cemeteries, and schools, and

Inner Austria
Innere Mission
tions.
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
494
after the cause had succeeded in Styria and Carniola, it was carried through in Carinthia. If any Protestant citizen or peasant was not willing to become Catholic, he was expelled, but not before he had paid the tenth part of his fortune as a fine. Protestant Bibles, prayer‑books, hymn‑books, and other books of devotion were burned in great heaps. The Roman Catholics were successful because no one in all three countries thought of resistance after the legal means of petitions and complaints had been exhausted. The nobility remained faithful to the old dynasty, and their entreaties for the persecuted were of no avail. The old concessions were at first left intact for the nobility, but in 1598 their clergymen were expelled from the castles, and they themselves were punished if by any chance they permitted their children to be baptized abroad. Thus the emigration of peasants and citizens was augmented by that of lords and knights. It is impossible to calculate the number of the exiled, but it would have been still larger if there had not been left, especially among the peasants, the hope of better times; " conversion " in most cases was merely external. The harmful effect upon the spiritual development of the country was soon noticeable; there ensued a general spiritual stagnation. The Protestant nobility was tolerated for a time, but when Ferdinand II. stood upon the height of his triumphs in the Thirty Years' War, he ordered their expulsion in 1628.
In this way Inner Austria was purified of heretics. After a few decades everything was apparently quiet, but in Upper Carinthia and Upper Styria it often became evident that Protestantism secretly continued to live; the commissions which were sent out from time to time learned to their consternation that the peasants were not yet converted. In many a home there was found an old Bible, a Protestant hymn‑book or book of devotion to which people in unobserved moments looked for guidance and consolation. When Emperor Joseph, in 1781, issued the edict of toleration, hundreds and thousands of Protestants arose to form new congrega‑
(J. LOBERTH.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are: B. Raupach, Evanpeliafked Oesterreick 6 vole., Hamburg, 1732‑44; G. E. Walden, Geach%clde der Proteatanten in oeeterreich . . 161•0 us auf die neueste Zeit, 2 vole., Anepaeh, 1784; J. Loaerth, Die steierische Reltgionapacifikation 1572‑78, Gras, 1898; idem, in Wiener Archdven, ib. 1898; idem, Briefs and Akten our stsiermdrkiachen Geschichte, Graz, 1899 (the last three deal especially with the Reformation). Sources for the Counter‑Reformation are: D. Rungius, Ber%cht and Erinnerunp von der . . . Mptiachen Verfoigung, Wittenberg, 1601; J. Rosolena, Grandlider Gepenberieht auf den Jadsden Bericht . . . Davidie Runpii, Graz, 1607; G. Stobaei de Palmaburga, Epietolos ad diversoa, Vienna, 1758; Akten and Korreapondsnsen our Geachichte der Gepenreformat%on in Inneraaterreech; ed. J. Loserth, 3 vols., ib. 1898‑1907; Wittelabacher Briefs, ed. F. Stieve, Munich, 1885‑1892.
Consult especially the careful and authoritative studies of J. Loeerth: Geschichte der Reformation and Gepenreformation in den inner6aterreichiachen LBndern, Stuttgart, 1898; idem, Der Ifuldipunpeetreitnaeh demTode . . Karla 11., Gras, 1898; idem, in Archiv fur 6aterreichiache Geachichte, vols. lxxxiv., Ixxxv., Ixxxviii. Also consult: F. von Hurter, Gesohiehte des Kaisers Ferdinand 11., 11 vole., Schaffhausen, 1850‑84; M. Robitseh, Geschichte des Proteatantiamus in Steiermark, Graz, 1859; B. Caerwenka, Die Kheaenhauer, ib. 1887; M. Pbilippeon, La Contra‑Rkvoladion relipieuae au xoi. aiac2e, Brussels, 1884; L. Schuster,
FflratbiadwJ Martin Brenner, Graz, 1898: A. R. Pennington. The Counter‑Rejoruwtiuh %n Europe, London, 1899: F. Ilwof, Dar Proteatan.tismue in Steiermark, Gras, 1900; G. Lomche, GeachicNa dm Proteatantiamua in Osaterreich, Leipsic, 1902.
IHNERE MISSION.
Biblical and Historical Basis (§ 1). Earlier History of the Society (§ 2). Its Objects and Agencies (§ 3). History to 1870 (§ 4). History since 1870 (§ 5).
The phrase inhere Mission is applied in Germany to organized effort to promote the spiritual and
bodily welfare of the destitute and ini. Biblical different who are, at least nominally, and within the Church; it is also the name
Historical of a society which has devoted itself Basis. to this work with much success. The
need for such " inner " mission work and the actual existence of it is illustrated in OldTestament history, which shows a service of witnesses ordered by God outside of the law within Israel in the continuous struggle against paganism. The mission of Christ himself was primarily to the people of Israel (Matt. xv. 24, x. 5‑6); i.e., it was an inner mission. The apostles were compelled to guard against Judaiatic and pagan corruption in the Christian congregations (I Cor. v. 1 sqq., vi. 18; etc.). The acceptance of Christianity as the State religion by Constantine, the development of the Occidental Church into a legal institution and with it the corruption of divine truth by human doctrine and superstition, and the ignorance and demoralization of clergy and laity led, in the medieval Church, to a reaction which culminated in the Reformationdescribed by Wichern as a great act of the inner mission. After the barren controversies of the dogmaticians in the post‑Reformation period, Spener and Francke gave the first impulse to the renovation of the inner life of Christianity in the return to its sources and to a practical realization of Christian love; but it was not until the French Revolution that, with the revelation of corrupt conditions in Church, State, and society, the need of the specific activity of the inner mission was really felt. Johann Hinrich Wichern (q.v.), the founder of the Rauhes Haus in Hamburg (1833), determined, systematized, and secured the success of its work. His stirring appeal to the Protestant Church at the Church Diet held in Wittenberg in 1848 inaugurated a new era. Since then the conviction of the inseparable connection between the inner mission and the Church has spread and influenced both the Church and the social life in various directions.
The first result of Wichern's effort was the organization of the " Central Committee of the Inner
Mission of the German Evangelical z. Earlier Church," which advanced the work of History the inner mission in all church terriof the tories of Evangelical Germany as well
Society. as among the Germans in foreign coun‑
tries. Its design was not to control the work, but to give suggestions and impulses for organized effort in different parts of the land. It instituted and superintended congresses for the inner mission (the thirty‑first held in 1901) in various parts of Germany, which became the centers

495
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
and starting‑points for all efforts relating to this sphere. Independently not a little was contributed to the development of the inner mission by new interest in the circulation of Christian literature early in the nineteenth century; by the zeal for the erection of asylums for children awakened by Johann Daniel Falk and Christian Heinrich Zeller (qq.v.); by the efforts of Pastor Theodor Fliedner (q.v.); by the organization of the Gustav‑Adolf‑Verein (q.v.) in 1832; and by the impulse given to Christian womanhood by Amalie Wilhelmine Sieveking (q.v.). The growth of the inner mission was favored also by the peculiar development of history: the rising forces of anarchism and social democracy called forth the energies of a countermovement to rechristianize the masses; and phenomena like the portentous increase of crime, the growing demoralization of youth, and the spread of suicide confirmed the conviction of its need, even in circles which, in their zeal for orthodoxy, in the beginning had opposed the new movement. The name was due to Wichern. He refused to turn the Rauhm Haua at Hamburg into an institution for training missionaries for the heathen, realizing that there was a large field at home, and that the home and foreign agencies were of sufficient importance to be kept separate. The " inner mission " naturally occurred to him as the designation for this peculiar domestic work. The phrase had also been used by Dr. Friedrich Lacke in a publication entitled Die zwwfoche, innere and duasere. Mission der evangelischen Kirche (Hamburg, 1843), but with him it referred principally to the service which the Evangelical Church owes to its members in the Diaspora (q.v‑).
The inner mission is essentially the continuation or resumption o'f the original missionary activity of the Church within the Christian world
3. Its in order to conquer the remaining nonObjects and Christian or anti‑Christian elements.
	Agencies.	Its basis is faith in Jesus Christ, and
		the love of one's neighbor as the out
growth of that faith. Its aim is to reclaim those
who have gone astray and fallen from Christ, to
strengthen the weak, to nurse the sick, to conquer
the powers which in the midst of Christianity
obstruct the building up of Christ's kingdom in
individual souls as well as in the family, congrega
tion, Church, State, and society. The means
through which the inner mission works is attesta
tion of the seeking, admonishing, punishing, and
pitying love of God through the testimony of Christ
in law and Gospel, by preaching, circulating litera
ture, and charitable work. In so far as spiritual
distress is connected with disease or similar evils,
the cure of bodily defects belongs to the work of
the inner mission. But it is a wide‑spread error
to identify the inner mission with the great com
plex of associations and institutions which occupy
themselves with works of Christian charity. Such
associations and institutions are indispensable for
the economy of the inner mission, but they in no
way exhaust its content. All purely philanthropic
and humane efforts are different from the activity
of the inner mission in so far as they are not deter
mined by the motives of Christian salvation and
Inner Austria
tnnere Xission
the aims of the kingdom of God. The institution of Deacons and Deaconesses (q.v.) is also to be distinguished from the inner mission in so far as their charitable work is necessary and justified under all circumstances and at all times, as long as there are individual members in need of bodily and spiritual nurture, and in so far as it belongs to the church organization, while the inner mission aims at the life of the people and its temporary defects which can not be reached by the church organization.
As soon as professional workers especially trained for the duties of the inner mission came forth under
Wichern's influence, the demand in4. History creased for house‑fathers of asylums
to 1870. and educational institutions, and new
spheres of activity opened, such as city missions (1848); the Herbergen zur Heimat (1854); the service of overseers in Prussian prisons (1856); the care of the sick, mentally defective, and epileptics (1860); and the service of field deacons in the Danish and later wars (see CITY MISBIDNs; HEB~ BERGEN ZUR HEIMAT; PRIBoN REFORM; WAR). Beside the institution for missionaries in Hamburg, others arose in Duisburg (1845), Ziillcher and Neinatedt (1850), Berlin (1858), and elsewhere. Other agencies which received attention were young men's societies (1838), the church care of the poor, and Sunday‑schools (at Hamburg as early as 1825, further expansion especially since 1862). Of special efforts of the central committee before the death of Wichern (1872) may be mentioned: the provision of pastoral care for the laborers who built the great railroads in the fifties; care of emigrants and Evangelical Germans in foreign countries; efforts to promote Sunday observance; the organization of prison associations and asylums for dismissed prisoners; the attack on gambling‑houses (1854‑87); the sifting of Christian literature and the attack on secular literature hostile to Christianity in the beginning of the sixties; and the organization of numerous provincial and state societies for the inner mission (Rhenish Westphalian Society 1849; others like the Southwest German Conference between 1864 and 1868).
Since 1870 it has been especially the moral and social conditions caused by the development of
industry and the extraordinary growth g. History of cities that have called forth the
since :870. efforts of the inner mission. A memo‑
rial address of the central committee in 1869 opened the battle against public immorality. The cooperation of the Evangelical Church and its inner mission in the solution of the labor question was discussed at the Stuttgart conference in 1869, and at other conferences. The social question was debated at Dresden in 1875, at Danzig in 1876, and in other cities. The efforts of the inner mission have been directed against the allurements of social democracy and its theoretical and practical materialism, which began to flourish toward the end of the seventies. Among the Christian friends of the people Adolf Stllcker, the court preacher of Berlin, especially, by the effective reorganization of the Berlin city mission and his energetic measures beginning in 1878, rendered great services to the

Innere Mission	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	496
Innocent I‑II
penetration of public life with the spirit of the
Gospel, and his example was followed by others.
In 1884 the central committee published a memorial
address, Die Aufgabe der Kirehe and ihrer inneren
Mission gegeniiber den wirtschaftlichen and gesell
schaftlichen Kampfen der Gegenwart, which had an
influence second only to that of Wichern in 1849.
At the same time the struggle against prostitution
(memorial address of 1885) and the work of saving
fallen girls (congress at Bremen 1881) were resumed
with new vigor. The general celebration of the
Luther anniversary in 1883 stimulated church life
and originated a movement for Evangelical labor
unions. Friedrich von Bodelschwingh (q.v.) began
his great work at Bielefeld, and his example stim
ulated others. In 1886 there were fifteen " working
men's colonies," aiming to provide work for the
unemployed and mitigate the tramp nuisance.
Under Bodelschwingh's impulse, at the congress
at Carlsruhe in 1884, the work for the homeless and
unemployed had received a new impetus; between
1885 and 1888 the Herbergen zur Heimat increased
from 207 to 327. At the same time colonies for
working women were instituted. With the help of
German friends in England and Scotland reading
rooms for seamen, with arrangements for lodging,
were opened indifferent seaports of the world. In
1884 the " German Association against the Abuse of
Alcoholic Beverages " was organized. A great
literary activity in behalf of the inner mission was
developed by Pastor T. SchAfer in Altona and by the
conference of theological professional workers under
the guidance of General Superintendent Dr. J. Hese
kiel which has met every second year since 1881.
Annual courses of instruction have been instituted
since 1886 in order to spread the knowledge of the
work. Since 1878 the Church and the inner mission
have been brought into closer connection by the elec
tion of synodal representatives' for the inner mission.
New suggestions have come from foreign countries,
especially from England and America, in the form
of Young Men's Christian Associations (Berlin, 1883)
and of the " German Union for Evangelization and
Practise of Fellowship" (1886), to stimulate activ
ity of laymen for laymen. Between 1880~and 1890
many new organizations came into existence. With
the nullification of the socialist law in 1890 an
opportunity was opened for a more effective so
tivity of the friends of Christianity in the sphere of
social politics, the result of which was the formation
of the Evangelical‑social Congress (see CONGRESS,
EVANGELICAI‑SOCIAL).
	The zeal for the work of the inner mission shows
no abatement. The old love for asylums has been
newly awakened since 1895. The heads of asylums,
of educational institutions, and the inner‑mission
officers have been consolidated into a regular con
ference to secure a more efficient direction of the
different institutions. In 1893 the Evangelical
associations for young women were consolidated.
Since 1891 women have been trained as overseers
for female prisoners, while the trained men have
given way to military officers. The material welfare
of deserving workers in the field of the inner mission
is	cared for by pension funds and aid societies
(1885 and 1902).	(H. RAHLENBECx.)
BIBLAOGRAPHT: J. H. Wiehern, Die inhere Mission, Hamburg, 1889; idem, Principielles zur inneren Mission, in Gesatllmelte Sehriften, vol. iii., Hamburg, 1902; C. A. G. von Zesschwitz, Innere Mission, Volkserziehunp and Prophetentum, Frankfort, 1864; T. SchAfer, Die wsibliche Diakonie in ihrem gansen Umfange, Hamburg, 1879; idem, Leitfaden der inneren Mission, Hamburg, 1903; W. Martins, Die inhere Mission, Gatersloh, 1882; F. Oldenberg, J. H. Wieharn, 2 vols., Hamburg, 1884‑87; J. B. Paton, The Incur Mission, London, 1888; G. Uhlhorn, Die chriseliche Liebeathatigkeit, vol. iii., Stuttgart, 1890; P. Wurster, Die Lehre von der inneren Mission, Berlin, 1895; C. R. Henderson, in American Journal of Sociology, March, May, July, 1896• Funfzig Jahre Innere Mission, Berlin, 1898; M. Siebold, Geachichte and Beschreibung der Anstalten Bethel, Sarepta, etc., Bethel, 1898; Statistik der inneren Mission der deutachen evangelischen Kirche, Berlin, 1899; Kirchliches Jahrbuch for 1908, ed. J. Schneider, Giitersloh, 1908; Monateachrift fur innere Mission, published at Gtitereloh since 1881; and the annual and other reports published by the central and branch organizations. INNOCENT: The name of thirteen popes and one antipope.
Innocent I.: Pope 402 (or 401)‑417. According to the apparent meaning of Jerome (Epist. cams.), he was the son of his predecessor Anastasius I., and not, as the LAer pontificalis states, from Albano. He was unanimously elected Dec. 21, 401, according to most of the lists, or early in 402, accord.. ing to Prosper (Chron., MGH, Auct. ant. ix., 1892, p. 465). The spirit in which he took up his office is indicated in his letter announcing his election to Anysius of Thessalonica, in which he calls the Roman bishop " the ruler of the Church of God." This Was not, indeed, a new claim; but Innocent enforced it for fifteen years with new boldness and skill, and to a certain extent in a new form. The theory is now first met with that the rank of a bishop is to be determined by the part played by Peter in the foundation of his see, thus giving Rome the suzerainty over the entire We§t, and a precedence over the patriarchates of the East. Still more important are the consequences which Innocent deduces from his theory. Siricius had already claimed the supreme right of legislation and supervision over the whole Church; Innocent enforced this claim upon Italian, Gallic, Spanish, and Macedonian bishops. He was the first who formally claimed the functions of a supreme judge, the right to create new ecclesiastical offices, and the power of ultimate decision as to doctrine. The first‑named he assumes in the well‑known letter to Victricius of Rouen (Feb. 15, 404, Epist. ii.), insisting that the judicial decisions of synods are to be referred to the apostolic see, and asserting the right to receive appeals against the decisions of episcopal synods. The second of these claims he put forth when he erected the vicariate of Thessalonica, between which place and Rome there had been a close connection in the pontificates of Damasus and Siricius, but Innocent first gave it the form of strict dependence in his decretal of June 17, 412, naming the metropolitan of eastern Illyria vicar of the pope, practically a new office, though the title tricarautt was introduced into official phraseology by Boniface I. The third claim, that of the supreme teaching‑office, he formally put forth in the Pelagian controversy. on the pretext of the letters addressed to him by the synods of Carthage and Mileve, as well as by five African bishops, in 416. In his replies (Epist.

497	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Innore Xiseioa
Innocent I‑II
xxix.‑xxxii.) he makes use of the opportunity to assert the " supreme official authority." Of relatively less importance was the position assumed by him in the contest between Theophilus of Alexandria and John Chrysostom, on the side of the latter, which led to a breach of the old friendly relations between Rome and Alexandria. Innocent attempted to act as mediator in the political troubles of the West, going to Ravenna with a deputation from the senate to induce the court there to modify its policy of hostility to the Goths. During his absence, however, Alaric captured Rome (Aug. 24, 410), but he exhorted his troops to spare life and to respect the churches of St. Peter and St. Paul and their treasures‑‑a fact which exalted the authority of the pope. In consonance with his general attitude, Innocent proceeded with great energy against heretics and schismatics, taking several churches from the Novatianists in Rome, banishing from the city the Photinian Marcus, and pressing for the persecution of his followers. It is further supposed that he was at the bottom of the severe edict issued by Honorius (Feb. 22, 407) against Manicheans, Montanists, and Priscillianists. He took a strong stand in favor of clerical celibacy, which seems to have been only second in interest for him to the elevation of the papal power. He died Mar. 12, 417, having accomplished more than any other fifth century pope in the way of preparation for Leo the
Great. 	(H. B6HMER.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: His Epiafolm e6 decreta are in MPL, xx. Sources for a life are: Leber pontifcalia, ed. L. Duchesne, i. 220‑224, Paris, 1886, ed. T. Mommsen in MGH, Gest. pont. Rom. i (898), 88‑90; P. Coustant, Ponhficum Romanorum . . . episto1w, ed. C. T. G. Schoenemann, f. 495‑661, G6ttingen, 1796; Jaffd, Regeeta, i. 44‑49; and the Hist• ecd. of Socrates, VIL, ix, and of Sozomen, VIII., xxvi., IX., vu. Consult: B. Jungmann, Diaeertationes eelectw, ii. 207‑212, Regensburg, 1881; H. Grisar, Ge8ehiehte Rome and der Papate im Mittelaltsr, i. 59‑7', 248‑288, Freiburg, 1898; Bower, Popes, i. 131‑149; Mihnan, Latin Christianity, 134‑139, 176‑179; Neander, Christian Church, ii. 645‑647 et passim; DCB, iii. 243‑249; Ceiuier, Auteura saar6e, vii. 506‑528, cf. iv. 655‑666.
Innocent II. (Gregorio de' Papareschi): Pope 1130‑43. He was made cardinal deacon of St. Angelus by Paschal II., went to France with Gelasins II. when the latter was obliged to seek protection in that country, was employed in difficult missions under Calixtus II., and was one of the papal delegates who formulated the Concordat of Worms. In 1123 he was legate in France. Owing to his knowledge of affairs, hi‑;a friendly relation to the imperial court, and his morally clean life, he was elected by a minority of the cardinals to succeed Honorius II. on Feb. 14. 1130, and took the name of Innocent II.; on the same day Cardinal Pietro Pierleoni was elected by the majority of the qualified voters (see ANACLETLJS II.).
Being unable to maintain his position at Rome, in June, 1130, Innocent went to France, where Bernard of Clairvaux had already done everything to dispose court and clergy in his favor. Moreover, both popes, immediately after their elevation, turned to the German king, Lothair. The influence of Archbishops Norbert of Magdeburg and Conrad of Salzburg with Lothair and the higher clergy induced a synod at Wiirzburg in Oct., 1130, to V.‑32
decide for Innocent, and send an embassy to him. On Mar. 22, of the same year, Lothair prepared for him a brilliant reception at Li6ge, and Innocent suggested to the German king that he should march on Rome, expel Anacletus, and win the imperial crown. Lothair consented, but requested that the pope reciprocate by renouncing all the privileges won by the Church in the Concordat of Worms.
In Aug., 1132, Lothair began his expedition to Italy. As Anacletus was strong enough to restrain the king from seizing St. Peter's Church, Lothair was obliged to receive the imperial crown at the hands of his pope in the Lateran, June 4, 1133. In vain did Lothair again demand the concession of episcopal investiture, but he gained the surrender of the possessions of Matilda of Tuscany (see PAPAL STATES) in return for an annuity. On this Innocent and the curial party later based the contention that the emperor was a vassal of the Roman see. When I Ahair returned to Germany, Innocent was obliged to seek protection from the Frangipani, and, in Sept., 1133, to betake himself to Pisa, where, from May 30 to June 6, 1135, he held a council which renewed the sentence of excommunication against Anacletus and his following. At the request of Innocent and the Abbot of Clairvaux, Lothair started from Wfirzburg, in Aug., 1136, on a second expedition. over the Alps. He led his army to southern Italy, which, the island of Sicily excepted, he wrested from King Roger, but failed to terminate the rule of Anacletus. The latter died Jan. 25, 1138.
By this event peace was restored, and a Lateran council, in 1139, excommunicated Roger of Sicily, who bad been the pope's most persistent enemy. But when Innocent undertook to lead an army in person against Roger, he fell into an ambush, and had to reckon himself fortunate in purchasing his freedom from captivity by recognizing the latter as king of Sicily. He alienated the Romans by a tedious war with Tivoli, the utter annihilation of which they demanded; when this was not attained they disclaimed obedience to the pope, and elected their own chief magistrate after the example of the Lombard cities. Even the good understanding with Louis VII. of France was changed into open enmity at the close of Innocent's reign, when the king would not accept the candidate proposed by the pope for the vacated archbishopric of Bourges. While the Romans were yet in arms, and peace with Louis as yet unachieved, Innocent died, Sept. 23, 1143.
Among the dogmatic decisions of this pope, the most noteworthy are the sentences of condemnation against Abelard and Arnold of Brescia.
CARL MIRBT.

BIBLIOaaAPHY: Sources and important documents are to
be found in MPL, clxxix. 27‑36, 53‑674; Bouquet, Re‑
cueil, x. 368‑408• NA, iv (1879), 199‑201, xiv (1889),
6113‑617; MGH, Leg., section iv., Conatitutiones, i (1893),
168‑170; P. Jaffd, Bibliotheca rer. Germ., v. 419 eqq.,
Berlin, 1869; idem, Regeeta, i. 840‑911, ii. 715‑716;
J. von Plug‑Harttung, Acta pontilicum inedita, i. 138 sqq.,
1265 eqq., iii. 32 eqq., T66ingen and Stuttgart, 1880‑86;
J. M. Watterich, Pontifcum Romanorurn vita!, ii. 174‑179,
Leipaic, 1862 (the Life by Cardinal Bono); Thatcher and
McNeal, Documents, p. 168. Consult: R. ZSpffel, Die
Papstwahlen, pp. 269 sqq., Gottingen, 1871; E. MOhl‑

Innocent II‑III	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	498
bacher Die streitige Papstwahl des Jahres 1130, Innsbruck, 1876; W. Bernhardi, Lothar von Supplinburg, pp. 262 eqq., Leipsie, 1879• idem Konrad Ill., 2 vols., ib. 1883; J. Langen, Geschichie der r6mischen Kirche, iv. 315 sqq., Bonn, 1893; F. Gregorovius, Hist. of the City of Rome, iv. 40‑452, 695 London, 1896; J. Jastrow and G. Winter, Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Hohenataufen, i. 330 sqq., Stuttgart, 1897; Hauck KD, vol. iv.; Ceillier, Auteurs sacrA, xiv. 256‑262, 420122, 1111‑1115; Schaff, Christian Church, v. 1, pp. 94 eqq.; Neander, Christian Church, iv. 144‑151; Milman, Latin Christianity, iv. 152157 et passim; Bower, Popes, ii. 464‑475.
	Innocent Ill. (Lando of Sezza, Landua Siti
nus) : Antipope to Alexander III. 1179‑80. He
belonged to an ancient Lombard family in Latium,
and was one of the higher clergy when he was pro
claimed pope by tile Roman nobles, Sept. 29, 1179.
The relatives of Octavian (Victor IV.), the first
antipope to Alexander III., supported him, and
Octavian's brother received him into a stronghold
between Palombara and Rome.	By means of
bribery, however, he fell into the hands of Alex
ander, who shut him up in the cloister of La Cava.
See ALEXANDER III. 	CARL MIRBT.
BIBLIoan&PHY: Besides the literature under ALEXANDER III., consult: JaV, Regesta, ii. 431; H. Reuter, Geschichts Alexanders 111., iii. 497 eqq., Leipsie, 1864; F. Gregorovius, Hiat. of the City of Rome, iv. 605, London. 1896.
Innocent III. (Lotario de' Conti): Pope 11981216. He was born at Anagni c. 1160, son of Count
Trasimund of Segni. He received his Life Before early education in Rome, and then
	Elevation	studied in Paris and in Bologna. On
	to Papacy.	his return to Rome, and after receiving
		minor orders, he became canon of St.
Peter's. As three distinguished cardinals were
among his relatives, his advance was rapid. Under
Gregory VIII. he obtained the post of subdeacon,
and as early as 1190, by favor of Pope Clement III.,
his uncle, the dignity of a cardinal diaconate of
Sts. Sergius and Bacchus. Under Celestine III. he
was little engaged in the curia's affairs, and em
ployed this involuntary leisure in literary composi
tion; three books, De contemlu mundi live de miseria
humante conditioniR; six books, Mysteriorum evan
gelictv legis ac sacramerdi Eucharistim; and the
treatise De quadnipartita specie nuptiarum, which
reveal his culture and his profound earnestness.
On Jan. 8, 1198, the very day of the death of
Celestine III., Lotario, then in his thirty‑seventh
year, was unanimously elected Celestine's successor.
At first he declined to assume the leadership of the
Church; but on Feb. 21 he was ordained priest,
and on the day following received episcopal con
secration, and as Innocent III. occupied the see of
Peter. .
Innocent's first task was to restore the prestige of the papacy in Rome and in Italy. He induced
Peter, who had been installed by Success Henry VI. prefect of Rome, to recogas Pope nize the pope's supreme authority;
	in Rome	and he prevailed upon the senator,
	and Italy.	Scottus Paparoni, who, being elected
		by the people, had till that time been
independent of St. Peter's see, to resign. Then he
came forward as liberator of Italy from the for
eign German rule. He conquered Spoleto, subdued
Perugia, assumed a commanding position in Tu&
cany, settled his rectors in the patrimonium. and
soon passed in all Italy as protector of the national independence. Moreover, good fortune delivered the kingdom of Sicily into his hands. Here, after the death of Emperor Henry VI., his widow, Constance, was reigning in behalf of her minor son, Frederick. Hard pressed by the two rival and conflicting parties of Italians and Germans, she now recognized the right of the Roman see to attack Sicily as its appanage, declaring herself ready to render the oath of fealty; and even to renounce all ancient prerogatives of the Norman rulers in Church affairs. When, soon after this, she died, Nov. 27, 1198, she left a will naming Innocent regent of the empire and guardian of the minor Frederick.
At the outset of Innocent's pontificate conditions for the extension of the papal sovereign power were most favorable in Germany. In this
Affairs in country, two pretenders were striving
	Germany.	after the German royal and Roman
		imperial crown, Philip of Swabia,
brother to Henry VI., and Otto IV. of the House of
Guelph. The latter at once endeavored to draw
the pope to his side by renouncing the most essen
tial rights of the empire in Italy and conveying to
the Roman see the exarchate of Ravenna, the
Pentapolis, and the duchy of Spoleto. But, while
the adherents of Otto were submissively entreating
the pope to acknowledge Otto's election, the princes
belonging to Philip's party exhibited a determined
independence. Innocent naturally sympathized
rather with the Guelph's candidacy than with that
of a Hohenstaufen, although he appeared to be
considering the rights of both aspirants. The
pope's temporizing course was grounded in the hope
that both pretenders would acquiesce in a court of
arbitration composed of German print, and that
Otto would emerge from the same as victor. The
court of arbitration, however, did not come about.
Innocent's memorial, Deliberatio papte Innocentii
super facto imperii, justified his espousal of Otto's
cause. In the same spirit his legate, Cardinal Bishop
Guido of Praeneste, proceeded on a mission to Ger
many, and in Mar., 1201, the Guelph was acknowl
edged by Innocent as German king and future
Roman emperor. On July 3, at a convention of
the party of Otto IV., all his adversaries were ex
communicated by the papal legate, but not until
Guido held in his hands a docunient issued at
Neuss on June 8, 1201, which embodied an express
renewal of the promise that all recoveries accruing
to the Roman see should be left thenceforth intact
for the same. This document became the basis of
the subsequent papal claims to the Papal States
(q.v.). The fortune of arms turning more and
more toward Otto, Philip, in 1203, sought to enter
into negotiations with Innocent; but they came
to nothing because he pledged himself to concede
to the Curia merely what. had been taken from it
by the emperors unlawfully, and refused to relin
quish Central Italy, upon which the pope laid
special emphasis.
Howbeit, in 1204 and 1205 a powerful reaction came about in favor of the Hohenstaufen. A number of the eminent partizans of Otto IV. went over to Philip of Swabia, who was victorious on the battlefield; Philip's confederate, the king of

499	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Innocent II‑II1
France, defeated Otto's confederate, the king of England. Accordingly, Philip, now risen to the height of his power, again (June,
Innocent 1208) addressed a conciliatory mes‑
as Arbiter sage to Innocent, wherein be set forth
		in	with noteworthy frankness the condi
	Germany. tions that led to the double election, and
			boldly defended his right to the crown.
To secure the acknowledgment of this right from
the pope, he was willing to refer the points at issue
between the empire and the see of Rome for final
decision to a court of arbitration composed of
cardinals and princes of the realm. Eventually, in
1207, Innocent was obliged to make allowance for
the altered situation and to drop Otto, but the
legates were unable to induce him to abdicate.
After prolonged negotiations, Philip now consented
to papal arbitration proposed by Innocent, having
been assured that the certain result of the examina
tion. into the double election would be big own
recognition. In view of the existing situation Otto
could not decline to submit to the Curia's verdict.
This turn of affairs implied a great triumph for the
policy of Innocent III., since he had succeeded in
	transferring to Rome the decision of the strife for
the throne. The difficult question of the disposition
of the empire's estates in central Italy now found
a happy solution by Innocent's formally renouncing
these domains, with the proviso that the Hohen
staufen's daughter should be granted in marriage
to the pope's nephew; while the latter, as the king's
son‑in‑law, was to be invested with the duchy of
	Tuscany. At this critical moment, when the way
to the royal and imperial crown lay open to Philip
of Swabia, he was murdered, on June 21, 1208, by
	Palagrave Otto of Wittelsbach.
Otto IV. now submitted to a new election, and on Nov. ill 1208, this made him the universally recognized king of Germany. In a state
He Crowns paper dated at Speyer Mar. 20, 1209,
Otto. he conceded more than he had promFrederick ised; that is, he recognized the boundof Sicily. aries of the States of the Church as drawn by Innocent III., promised to render service in the extirpation of heresy, and disavowed all manner of influence in Church elections. Thereby he obtained, on the. pope's behalf, assurance of his coronation as emperor. He started on his expedition across the Alps in the summer of 1209, and the pope placed the imperial crown on his head Oct. 4, 1209. But Otto forgot all his promises almost before he had reached his goal. He declared war against a protdgd of Innocent, King Frederick of Sicily, and the forcible seizure of a portion of Peter's patrimonium caused the pope to threaten the emperor with the anathema. On Nov. 18, 1210, this threat was carried out, when the Curia. received intelligence of Otto's incursion within the king of Sicily's dominion. The pope now summoned against Otto the magnates of Italy and the German imperial princes, and concluded an alliance with Philip Augustus of France with a view to dethroning the emperor. The latter had won ®o many advantages in his conflict with Frederick of Sicily that the latter was actually meditating flight, when Innocent succeeded in detaching Cremona,
Mantua, Verona, Ferrara, and other cities of, northern Italy from the emperor; while in Germany, with the cooperation of France, he brought it about that the imperial princes assembled at Nuremberg in Sept., 1211, resolved to offer the German royal crown to Frederick of Sicily, as the son of Henry VI. Innocent did not forbid the king of Sicily to acquiesce in this proposal of the German princes after the king had devised a state paper to the import that in the future he intended to constitute his Sicilian kingdom a papal appanage. By a convention of princes at Frankfort, Dec. 5, 1212, Frederick was elected king of the Romans in all due form, and soon afterward he was crowned at Mainz. When Frederick kept gaining larger and larger support in central and south Germany, and when even members of the house of Guelph were turning to the Hohenstaufen, the pope deemed the time at hand for asking and receiving of Frederick some toll of gratitude. On June 12, 1213, the elected emperor, in a state paper drawn up at Eger (Mirbt, Quedlen, pp. 131‑133), guaranteed anew to " his protector and benefactor, Innocent " all the domains rights, and concessions which Otto IV., on Mar. 22, 1209, had granted the see of Peter. The battle of Bouvines, June 27, 1214, in which Otto IV. and his ally, the king of England, were utterly defeated by Philip Augustus of France, decided the strife for the German throne in favor of Frederick II. The illustrious council, which convened at Rome in 1215 again passed sentence of excommunication upon Otto, whereupon Innocent proclaimed, before the council, Frederick II. as the elected emperor. The pope was spared by death from the bitter experience which was to be the lot of his successors, that, from the Church standpoint, the elevation of Frederick II. was a still greater blunder than the favor shown previously to Otto IV.
Innocent could boast of still greater success in relation to Philip Augustus of France. The latter, by the act of an assembly of French Innocent's bishops at Compi~gne, had separated
	Relations	from his lawful wife, Ingeborg, a
withFrance Danish princess, ostensibly because of
	and Spain.	too close a degree of relationship be
		tween them; subsequently he had
married Agnes, the daughter of Duke Berthaud III.
of Meran. Pope Celestine III. had already pro
tested, in the name of the Church, against this
dissolution of marriage, as also against the later
wedlock. Innocent took up the cause of the repu
diated wife at the very beginning of his papacy.
Philip Augustus turning a deaf ear to all remon
strances, the pope's cardinal legate, in a council
at Dijon, declared the interdict upon all France,
and when the clergy generally suspended public
worship, the people revolted and the nobility took
to arms. Philip Augustus was at last constrained,
on Sept. 7, 1200, to promise the papal legate,
Cardinal Bishop Octaviano of Ostia, and Cardinal
Giovanni Colonna, to take Ingeborg back a, queen
and consort. He then sought in vain, at a synod
at Soissons, to induce the papal legates to dissolve
his marriage, and neat attempted to compel his
wife to a " voluntary;' renunciation. In 1213
Innocent had the satisfaction of seeing the queen

=nnooent III	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	500
again accepted with honor by her penitent husband. The pope celebrated a similar triumph in 1206 when he succeeded in dissolving a marriage within forbidden degrees of kinship of King "onso IX, of Leon with Dome, Berengaria, daughter of the king of Castile. Likewise he opposed the betrothal of King Peter of Aragon to Blanch of Navarre on account of too close relationship. Peter, being an obedient son of the Church, acceded to the papal command, and married Maria, the daughter of Guillaume de Montpellier. His inconstancy, however, which caused him to feel the marriage bond as an oppressive chain, soon awoke in him the desire to separate from his wife; and, to palliate his base design, he appealed to the consanguinity between them. But Innocent pronounced the alleged grounds for separation to be insufficient.
When King Sancho of Portugal declined to pay the tribute promised by his father to the see of Peter,
Innocent demanded the same with Innocent energy. Moreover, he exacted obedi‑
	in the	ence to the papal regulations from
	North.	Duke Ladislaus of Poland, who was
		robbing the Church and the bishops
of their estates and rights. How strenuously Inno
cent insisted that the pope alone had the right to
excommunicate kings or to release them from the
ban appeared when Archbishop Eric of Trondhjem
absolved Hakon, king of Sweden, after he had
restored to the Church what his father had taken
from it by violence, without consulting the pope.
Innocent wrote to the archbishop that he had
imitated himself as an ape might a man, and only
absolution by the representative of Peter had
validity. The renown of this powerful pope im
pelled Prince John of the Bulgarians to hope that
by submitting to the see of Rome he might secure
his sovereignty against foes at home, as well as
against the claims of the Byzantine emperors. On
Nov. 8, 1204, he received from the pope's legate
the royal crown, the scepter, and a banner which
Innocent had sent him, adomed with the cross of
Christ and Peter's keys.
The fearlessness of Innocent, his firm perseverance in a path once taken, and his proud disdain of all
temporal supremacy, born of the conInnocent viction that he was not simply the and John of representative of St. Peter, but also
England. the vicar of Christ and of God, was
most brilliantly verified in his behavior toward the English king John. The monks of Canterbury cathedral, upon the death of their archbishop, Hubert, elected their superior, Reginald, as successor to the deceased prelate; when he proved unworthy of such confidence, they elected, at the king's wish, Bishop John of Norwich. Innocent did not confirm the latter's election, but induced certain members of the Canterbury convention, who were sojourning in Rome, to elevate the cardinal priest, Stephen Langton (q.v.), to the archiepiscopal throne, and a vehement conflict between State and Church was then inevitable, for the king was not disposed to yield in favor of a man imposed forcibly upon him by the pope. The papal threat of the interdict taking practical effect on Mar. 24, 1208, the king retaliated by giving orders to banish all clerics from
England, and to confiscate their estates. Hereupon the pope excommunicated him. All devices to keep news of the pope's action from England were fruitless; the sentence became known, and the king felt its operation in a revolt of the nobility. When Innocent furthermore released all subjects from the fealty and obedience they had sworn to the king, and threatened ‑the penalty of excommunication against every one who had any dealings with him, the uprising grew stronger and stronger. At this pass the pope had recourse to the extreme step of pronouncing the crown forfeit, also summoning Philip Augustus to drive the unworthy fellow from the throne, and himself to take permanent possession thereof; whoever should take part in the war against John was to count as a crusader, and become participant in all the indulgences of a crusader. John now yielded and resolved to ac. acquiesce in the proposals once more set before him by the Curia through the legates Pandolfo and Durando. At Dover, on May 13, 1213, the king concluded an agreement with the Roman plenipotentiaries, to the effect that he would recognize Stephen as archbishop of Canterbury; restore all Church properties that he had appropriated to himself; authorize the return of the emigrated and expelled clergy and monks; accord liberty to the captive; and more to the same effect. But this Dover scene had even a still graver sequel. Really to secure himself against the impending invasion by the French pretender to the crown, though nominally in expiation of his sins, on May 18, 1213, John surrendered his kingdoms of England and Ireland to God and the pope, but then recovered them qs papal feudatory, on condition of discharging an annual feudal rentage to the see of Peter700 marks for England, and 300 marks for Ireland. He was not absolved from the ban, however, until he had humbled himself before Archbishop Stephen. Beside all this, the land still remained under the interdict until July 2, 1214; that is to say, till the king had made restitution to the clergy, by a heavy sum of money, for the damages he had inflicted upon them during his grievous persecutions. Peace was now restored; but the king's oppressed and overtaxed barons could not endure the humiliation put upon them by John when he conveyed the realm to the pope. Their grievances not being removed, they had recourse to arms, in 1215, when they took possession of London and forced from the king the Magna Charta. No sooner had its contents become known to Innocent than he roundly denounced the compact, inasmuch as it encroached too seriously upon the royal prerogatives, and indirectly upon the see of Peter, now that the pope was John's liege lord. He declared the charter void and worthless, outrageous, without binding force. But neither this pronouncement nor repeated excommunications of all the king's adversaries had the least result. By nothing else did the papacy so sorely injure itself in England as by this opposition to the Magna Charta.
As vicar of Christ, Innocent appealed to kings and peoples for a crusade to the Holy Land. The preaching of Fulco of Neuilly (q.v.) won a portion of the French nobility, under the leadership

501
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
of Margrave Bonifaee of Montferrat, and the Cistercian Martin, abbot at Colmar, sued for the cause
in southern Germany. However, the The crusading army, camping at Venice,
Fourth was employed by the Doge Dandalo to
Crusade. recover the city of Zara, which had
been wrested from the Venetians by the king of Hungary. Then, and likewise contrary to the will of the pope, the crusading knights offered their help to the Byzantine pretender, Alexios Angelos, the son of the deposed and blinded emperor Isaac Angelos, to recover his ancestral inheritance, withheld from him by the usurper Alexios III., and conquer Constantinople. After Constantinople had been duly won by the crusaders and Isaac Angelos and his son had resumed possession of the throne, the situation between Greeks and Latins became so intolerable that during an insurrection of the former, Alexios Angelos, who was supposed to be all too partial to the Latins, was, thrown into prison, and ultimately strangled. There now remained no other course open to the Latin knights than to possess themselves of the city by force of arms, and organize a Latin empire there; whereupon, May 16, 1204, Count Baldwin of Flanders was crowned as emperor. Through the founding of the Latin empire, a much desired prospect toward eventual union of the Greek and the Latin Churches was disclosed to the see of Peter, and Innocent, who at first had bitterly censured the delay which the crusade had suffered by the expedition to Constantinople, now gave written expression to his joy over the great success of arms, and voiced the hope that there might soon be one shepherd and one fold, and the appointment of a Roman patriarch of Constantinople soon followed. Innocent supplied a new goal for the ardor of crusading by the terms of a bull dated Oct. 12, 1204, wherein he guaranteed the same gracious dispensations for an expedition to Livonia as for participation in a march to Jerusalem; he even authorized all those who had declared themselves ready for the latter to exchange this obligation in favor of the march to Livonia. By the continual importation of new troops Bishop Albert of Riga (q.v.) succeeded in baptizing the Livonians in 1206; and the Letts in 1208.
Moreover, Innocent III. was the first to impart to the crusades the direction of heretical wars. As early as 1207 he summoned the French king to extirpate the heretics in the district about Toulouse, and allowed every one who should unite in the crusade against these the same indulgence as to the crusaders proper. The cruelties against the Albigenses do not fall so much to the charge of In‑
nocent in person as to that of the Innocent "system" which, under him and
and the through him, attained its full developFourth ment and execution. The regulations Lateran devised by the pope against heretics Council. were approved at the Fourth Lateran
Council in 1215, and were codified as canon Is‑, All who hold stations of power shall promise to endure no heretics in their jurisdiction. Should a prince fail to heed the injunction to cleanse his land‑of heretics, he is subject to the ban; in the
Innocent III
event of protracted resistance, he is to be deposed from his sovereignty. Whoever takes part in such a crusade is to be guaranteed the benefits accorded to the proper crusaders. Exceedingly severe, again, was the policy inaugurated and ordained by this council against the Jews. Not merely were the authorities forbidden to intrust the Jew with a public office, but the Jews were commanded to dress differently from the Christians to the end that they might at once be recognizable as Jews; they were forbidden to go abroad in the streets during Holy Week, lest in this time of mourning the Christians take offense at their gay apparel. Among the other decisions passed by this council may be noted as important the rejection of the erroneous doctrine of Amalric of Bena (q.v.); the condemnation of the tract aimed against Peter Lombard by Joachim of Fiore, De unitate seu ementia trdnita&; and the prohibition to found new orders. The final deliverance by the council was its assent to the papal bull inviting peoples and princes to a new crusade into the Holy Land for 1207. This ecumenical council, held at the close of Innocent's pontificate, shows that powerful pope as the unlimited ruler over the world and the Church. Emperors, kings, and princes had sent him their plenipotentiaries; 1,500 archbishops, bishops, abbots, etc., took part in the council's proceedings; or, more properly expressed, they attended the official reading of the decrees of Innocent III., since nothing was attempted in the way of actual deliberations.
The absolutism of Innocent III. in the internal administration of the Church exceeds that of all his predecessors. No one else encroached The Admin‑ to a like degree upon the prerogatives istration of of the bishops and metropolitans, or so the Church. highly arrogated to himself the right of appointment vested in the local church dignitaries. He was the first to claim for the popes a right to bestow benefices; and he issued innumerable provisional orders to the end of securing, at the expense of the locally resident clergy and with the abated prestige of the native bishops, a productive living to the papal servants, the Roman ecclesiastics, even to his blood relatives and confidants. The centralization of ecclesiastical power in the hands of the pope was also furthered by Innocent by his reserving to himself the right of episcopal appointment in case the qualified electors overstepped their canonical prerogatives. He likewise reserved to the Roman see the right of removing bishops, declaring that it devolved on the pope alone, as vicar of Christ, to dissolve the marriage between a bishop and his congregation.
The unbounded prestige enjoyed by Innocent III. in questions of canon law rested alike upon his variously demonstrated legal acumen
Decretals and upon his thorough and minute and knowledge of the material. The de‑
	3ermons.	cretals of the first three years of his
		pontificate were collected by Rainer
of Pomposi, and subsequently Bernardue Com
postellanus undertook to compile in a single colleo
tion (Compilatio Romans) the ordinances deriving
from the first nine years of his Papacy. Again, the

Innocent III‑IP	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	502
pope himself, by the hand of his notary, Petrus Callivacinus, ordered a collection of all the decretals promulgated down to the twelfth year of his rule, and addressed this so‑called Compilatio tertia (1210) to the University of Bologna. Shortly after Innocent's death the briefs and bulls of the last six years of his pontificate were also published as the Comptaatio quarda. Occupied as he was with ecclesiastical disputations and law matters, Innocent found leisure to pursue his literary activity. He expounded the seven penitential Psalms. To neutralize the distracting influence of legal affairs, he preached frequently, not only in Rome, but also on his journeys. His sermons were collected in part by himself, and a goodly array of them has been preserved. They are pompous and florid, but witness the depth of his religious feeling and a true humility before God. He died at Perugia July 16, 1216. His convictions and acts are not to be ascribed to a proud and selfish heart or to the unscrupulousness of a politic, self‑seeking priest. When he threatened, banned, and absolved, he sought not his own honor, but the honor of him whose representative on earth he believed himself to be. If there is to be a pope at all, he was the
model and ideal. 	CARL MIRBT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are to be found in the Letters, Writings and Sermons of Innocent, printed in MPL. cesiv.‑ecavii.; L. Delisle, Ldbes in6ditea d'Innocent III., in Bibliothpque de 1'Ecole des chartres, acv (1873), 397‑419; idem, Les Repiatres d'Innocent 11(., ib. alvi (1885), 84‑94; E. Berger, Lea Regittrea d'Innocent III., Paris, 1884, Documents in the original or in trans]. are in Reich, Documents, pp. 178‑187; Thatcher and McNeal, Documents, pp. 208‑226; Henderson, Documents, pp. 337‑344, 430‑432; Gee and Hardy, Documents, pp. 73‑78; of. Robinson, European History, i. 338 eqq. Innocent's bull of Mar. 3, 1216, is in Eng. tranal., Warrington, 1886, Consult: F. Hurter, Oeschichte Innocent Ill., 4 vols., Hamburg, 1836‑42 (the best life); C. H. C. Pirie‑Gordon, Innocent the Great, Ass Life and Times, London and New York, 1907; L. Delisle, Mlmaire our lea actea d'Innocent III.. Paris, 1857; F. von Raumer, Oeachichte der Hohenataufen, vole. ii.‑iii., Ixipsie, 1871; W. Molitor, Die Dekretak " Per venerabilem " von Innocens III., Munich, 1876; F. Deutsch, Papal Innocens Ill. and rein Einflusa auf die Kirche, Breslau, 1877; C. BShler, Due Verhaltnis Kaiser Friedrichs Il. su den Papaten seiner Zeit, Breslau, 1888; E. Winkelmann, Philipp von Schwaben and Otto IV. von Braunschweig, i, 93 eqq, and vol. ii.: Leipaic, 1873‑78, idem, Kaiser Friedrich II., ib. 1889; F. Roequain, La Papautt! au moyen 4gs, Paris, 1881, R. Schwemer, Innocent III. and die deutsche Kirche . . . 11981808, Strasburg, 1882; J. N. Brischar, Papal Innocent Ill. and seine Zeit, Freiburg, 1883; J. Lange., Oeschichte der rthnisohen Kirche, iv. 600‑713, Bonn, 1893; F. Gregorovius, Hist. of the City q/ Rome, v. 5‑113, 609, 631 London, 1897; R. RBhricht, Geechichte den KBnipreichs Jerusalem (1100‑1891), pp. 682 eqq.,Innsbruck,1898; C. Mirbt, Quelten zur Gesrhicdts des Papattuma, pp. 125‑136. Tubingen. 1901; J. Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire, pp. 206‑207 et passim, New York, 1904; A. Luehaire, Innocent 111., 6 vols., Paris, 1902‑07; W. S. McKechnie, Magna Charta, New York, 1905; Bower, Popes, ii. 535‑549; Schaff, Christian Church, v. 1. chap. v.; Milman, Latin Christianity, vole iv.‑v.; Neander, Christian Church, iv., 173178 et passim; Ceillier, Auteurs sacrla, uv. 946‑1018 et passim; Hefele, Concilienpeschidte, v. 771 aqq.: Bar. Rack, Dogma, vol. vi. passim; Hauck, KD, iv. 683 eqq., and much of the literature given under Caoesnsa will be found pertinent, especially E. Pears, The Fall of Constantinopls, New York, 1886.
Innocent IV. (Sinibaldo de' Fieschi): Pope 12431254. Descended from the counts of Lavagna, and born at Genoa, he was brought up at Parma under
the care of his uncle Obizzo, bishop of that see,
was ordained there, and became a canon of the
		cathedral. He studied law at Bologna,
	Earlier laying the foundation of the reputa
	Life and tion which he afterward won as pope
	Writings. in that branch of learning. His first
		entrance into political life was ap
parently in 1218‑19, when, together with Cardinal
Ugolino, the later Pope Gregory IX., he made peace
between Genoa and Pisa. In 1223 he received a
benefit at Parma from Honorius III. and in 1226
an official position at Rome, in 1227 was made a
cardinal, and from 1235 to 1240 he was papal gover
nor of the March of Ancona. On June 25, 1243,
after an interregnum of a year and a half, he was
elected pope at Anagni, and consecrated on June 28.
Amidst all the political storms of his pontificate he
found time for literary work. His small treatise,
De exceptionibus, was probably written earlier;
but he wrote at Lyons, immediately after the coun
cil (1245), the Apparatus ire quinque lZros decre
talium, marked by remarkable precision, perfect
command of his materials, and strong; practical in
sight. His Apologeticus has unfortunately been lost;
it was a defense of the rights of the papacy against
the empire. In other ways Innocent promoted
learning; he induced Alexander of Hales to write
his Summa ummiversm theologise, and encouraged the
universities, especially the Sorbonne, besides erecting
new schools of jurisprudence at Rome and Piacenza.
	Innocent's relations with Frederick II. and Con
rad IV. need more detailed description. Frederick
		wrote to the prints three slays after
	Innocent his election, expressing the fullest con
and Fred‑ fidence in the result of the election,
	erick II. and a month later sent the leading
	The First magnates of the empire to Anagni to
	Council open negotiations for peat. But in
	of Lyons. spite of Innocent's professed .willing
		ness to submit the whole controversy
with the emperor to a general council and to remove
the excommunication (see GREGORY IX.) in case
it was found unjust, Frederick could not agree to
unconditional restitution of all Church property and
the restoration to favor of the Lombards, whom he
regarded,as rebels. Even while the negotiations
were in progress, Innocent made Cardinal Capotio,
Frederick's bitterest opponent, bishop of Viterbo,
and through him vron over this town to the papal
side, supporting it against Frederick's attacks with
large sums of money. Through the mediation of
Count Raymond of Toulouse and Baldwin, emperor
of Constantinople, terms of peat were arranged on
Mar. 31, 1244, by which Frederick, submitting to the
pope's demands, was to be relieved of his excommu.
nication. But before the end of April the strife had
broken out again on the Lombard question. Fred
erick sought a personal interview, but Innocent
withdrew secretly to Civita Vecchia, where a
Genoese fleet was waiting for him, and arrived in
Genoa July 7. He was looking for a safe place in
which to assemble a council and pronounce judg
ment on the emperor. Such a place was Lyons,
no longer under the empire, and not yet a part of
the French kingdom, on the boundary line between
the Latin and Teutonic rats. Hither Innocent

508	RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA	Innocent III‑IV
went on Oct. 5, arriving on Dec. 2, and on Dec. 27
issued the, summons for a council to meet on June 24
of the neat year. Only 150 bishops attended, mostly
French and Spanish, with scarcely any Germans.
The pope went swiftly to work, with two compre
hensive briefs of bitter accusation against Frederick.
Thaddeus of Sueesa, the imperial representative,
made a skilful defense of his master, denied all
legality to the assembly, and appealed to a future
pope and a really ecumenical council; the repre
sentatives of the kings of France and England urged
delay; but Innocent condemned Frederick on the
counts of perjury, sacrilege, heresy, and felony
the last‑for his oppression of the kingdom of Sicily
and refusal to pay the feudal dues from it. The
German princes were exhorted to elect a new em
peror, while Innocent himself would make pro
vision for Sicily, after consultation with the cardinals.
	The emperor was not slow in making answer. He
addressed an appeal to all Christian princes to
		remedy the condition of the secularized
	Progress Church by bringing back the clergy,
	of the especially the higher prelates, to the
	Contest state of apostolic poverty and imita
	between tion of the humility of their Lord.
	Pope and The poge also appealed to the sover
	Emperor. eigns, and went beyond personal ac
		cusations to develop still further the
theories of the subordination of the secular power
to the spiritual, as they had been held from Gregory
VII. to Innocent III. On both sides the excitement
reached its height. The Dominicans and Francis
cans went out as zealous preachers of a crusade
against a heretical emperor, for which the same
privileges would be granted as for the perilous jour
ney to the Holy Land. Twice (Nov., 1245, and May,
1246) Innocent, stubbornly rejected the mediation
of Louis IX. of France, and in Sicily supported an
aristocratic conspiracy which threatened Freder
ick's life, and in Germany the efforts of the three
Rhenish archbishops to bring about a new election.
On Apr. 21, 1246, he summoned the electors to
proceed to the choice of Henry Raspe, landgrave
of Thuringia, who, on May 22, was elected by the
three archbishops, four bishops, and a number of
counts and knights. The majority of these, with
the imperial cities, adhered to the Hohenstaufen,
and on Feb. 17, 1247, the " priests' king " came to
an ignominious end. Innocent sought in various
quarters for a successor, but without suocess until,
in Oct., Count William of Holland, a youth of
twenty, was elected by secular and ecclesiastical
magnates of the Rhine provinces, though it was not
until Nov. 1, 1248, that he was able to be crowned
at Aachen, and his power was then scarcely felt
beyond Mainz. Frederick seemed at first to have
the upper hand in, Italy. He occupied a large part
of the States of te Church, the duchy of Spoleto,
and the March of Ancona, while King Enzio and the
mighty Eizelino da Romano upheld his cause in
Lombardy; and at the very moment of his deposi
tion he was joined by Venice and the count of Savoy,
whose adhesion gave him command of the Alpine
passes, ao that he planned to march on Lyons and
force the pope to make terms. The situation was
soon altered, however, by the success of Innocent's
	partizan. in gaining possession of Parma, a place of
great strategic importance (June 16, 1247). This
town became the central point of the struggle; and
Frederick's fortunes began to decline when his
	besieging force was defeated with great loss by the
	garrison (Feb. 18, 1248). Innocent now redoubled
his efforts to gain the command of Sicily, but with
out notable success. Cardinal Octavian succeeded
better in Romagna; and Frederick suffered a severe
	blow in the capture of his favorite son, Enzio, by
	the Bolognese on May 26, 1249. Undaunted to the
	last, he was making new plans for strengthening his
	party in central and northern Italy and setting fresh
	hordes of Saraoens in motion toward the north, when
	death put an end to his projects (Dec. 13, 1250).
	Innocent now set to work to crash his old enemy's
	heir, Conrad. After laying out a plan of campaign
	in consultation with William of Hol
	Conrad IV. land, who then returned to take com
	mand in Germany, the pope finally left
	Lyons.(Apr. 19, 1251) and came down through
	Lombardy to Perugia. Naples and Capua came
	over to his side, but the eighteen‑year‑old Manfred
	succeeded in checking the movement in the south,
	and at the beginning of 1252 Conrad won back the
	cities which had deserted him. Innocent sought
	new allies; but Richard of Cornwall, to whom he
	offered the crown of Sicily, declined it, and the
	French cardinals opposed the project. Charles of
	Anjou was considered, but without definite result.
	Finally Henry III. of England accepted the crown
for his minor son, Edmund.	Even Rome was
	threatened by Conrad's victory at Naples; yet
	Innocent undauntedly refused for the second time
	to receive his envoys and began proceedings against
	him on charges of oppressing the clergy, favoring
	heretics, and murder. Death again came to the
	pope's aid; in the winter of 1253‑54 Conrad lost
	his father‑in‑law Otto of Bavaria, his nephew
	Frederick, and his half‑brother Henry of Sicily,
	and on May 20, 1254, Conrad himself died, com
	mending his two‑year‑old son Conradin to the
pope's guardianship.	Innocent now felt sure of
	the possession of Sicily; and Manfred, weakened
	by treachery among his own supporters, saw
	nothing for it but nominal submission. On Oct. 20,
	1254, Innocent took formal possession of Sicily and
	Calabria. But Manfred suddenly escaped to Luceria
	and put himself at the head of his faithful Saracens.
	The pope's life‑work, apparently so near comple
	tion, was once more threatened. On Dec. 2 Manfred
	captured Foggia; tfie papal legate and his army fled
	without striking a blow. The news of this disaster
	found Innocent stretched on a sick‑bed in Naples
	and embittered his last hours. He died Dec. 7.
	Innocent's relations with France were governed
	by his desire to preserve a counterpoise against the
	emperor, and by the eager wish of
	Innocent's Louis IX. to deliver the Holy Land.
	Relations This latter explains Louis' efforts to
with	make peace in 1244 and the neutral
	France and attitude he assumed in the subsequent
England. conflict.	But the Curia forced the
	French nobles into a hostile position
	by interference in national affairs and by cupidity,
	so that Frederick found some support among them

Innocent IV‑VTI
after his deposition by the council, and his ideas are plainly visible in the league formed by them in November, 1246. Innocent's blind hatred of Frederick brought about the failure of the crusade undertaken by Louis in 1248, and he was openly named as the cause of it by the king's brothers, the counts of Anjou and Poitou, who threatened to expel him from Lyons if he did not make terms with Frederick. The relations between France and the Curia became, however, more friendly when Charles of Anjou was spoken of for the Sicilian crown. England was also considered by Innocent as an abundant source of supplies for his war with the empire, and his legate, Martin, appeared therewith unprecedentedly ample powers, to collect ten thousand marks. When Frederick counseled the
	England.	king to free himself from the illegal
		tribute the legate was told to go, and
the king established the fact that the Curia had
been taking annually sixty thousand' marks out of
England‑more than his own revenue. Supported
by the Synod of Winchester (Dec., 1245), Henry
refused payment; but under the threat of an inter
dict the prelates weakened.
Innocent's conduct in regard to the affairs of Portugal resembles more the high moral tone taken by the third of his name. King Sancho 11. refusing to abandon his dissolute life, the pope absolved his subjects from their allegiance, and transferred the crown to his brother, Alfonso.
(HANS SCHULZ.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY:	The sources are exceedingly scattered;
perhaps the best index to them is found in Hauck‑Herzog: RE, ix. 122‑124. Among the sources may be named: Die Regesten Innocenz IV., published by the Literarischer Verein, Stuttgart, 1843 sqq.; S. Berger, Lea Repistree d'Innocent IV., Paris, 1881 sqq.; w. H. Bliss, Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers, i. 198‑308, London, 18°3; Thatcher and McNeal, Source Book, p. 508; and the early Vitie, one by Nioolao de Curbio, in Muratori, Scriptures, ii. 1, pp. 589 eqq., cf. vi. 504‑521, viii. 494‑495, 680‑681, 786‑787, 964‑965, etc. For later discussions consult: A. von Reumont, Geschichte tier Stadt Rom, u. 530‑531, Berlin, 1868; F. Schirrmacher, Die letzten Hohenstaufen, G6ttingen, 1871; B. Jungmann, Dissertationes eeleeto, v. 418 sqq., Regensburg, 1885; C. KShler, Dos Verhdltnia Kaiser Friedrich 11. zu den Pdpaten seiner Zeit, Breslau, 1888; P. Fournier, Le Royaume d'Arka de Vienne, Paris, 1891; C. Rodenberg, Innocenz IV. and das KBnigreich Sicilien, Halle, 1892; E. Berger, S. Louie et Innocent IV., Paris, 1893; F. Gregorovius, Hist. of the City of Rome, v. 229‑307, 612, London, 1897; St. Pathos, Vie de S. Louis, ed. F. Delaborde, Paris, 1899; H. Weber, Der Kampf zwschen Innoeenz IV. and Kaiser Friedrich II., Berlin, 1900; W. R. W. Stephens, The English Church (1068‑1272'), pp. 238‑240, London, 1901; J. Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire, pp. 209‑210, 268, 424, New York, 1904; A. Folz, Kaiser Friedrich 11. and Papst Innocenz IV.. Strasburg, 1905; Neander, Christian Church, iv. 49‑51. et passim; Moeller, Christian Church, ii. 279, 283 sqq., 302; Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, v. 1089, 1105‑1156, vi. 1‑10; ADB, vii. 445, xvi. 562; KL, vi. 736‑737; Bower, Popes, ii. 560567; Milman, Latin Christianity, v. 459 sqq.

Innocent V. (Pierre de Champagni, or de Tarentaise) : Pope 1276. He was born about 1225 of a noble family in the ecclesiastical province of Tarentaise, on the upper Is6re, entered the Dominican order at sixteen, and won the fame of a scholar. He taught theology in the University of Paris, and assisted Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas to draw up the rule of studies for their order. In 1262 lie became provincial for France, but when Thomas
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
504
Aquinas was called to Italy, resumed his lectures at the Sorbonne (1267‑69). By Gregory X. he was made grand penitentiary, in 1272 archbishop of Lyons, and in 1273 cardinal‑bishop of Ostia and Velletri, though he retained the see of Lyons until Apr., 1274. He was a prominent figure at the Council of Lyons in the latter year. In Apr., 1275, he left Lyons with the pope to take part in the negotiations with Rudolf of Hapsburg at Lausanne. On the death of Gregory X., he was elected pope at Arezzo, Jan. 21, 1276, and continued his predecessor's policy, directed toward the unattainable ideal of a general peace in Europe, as a prerequisite for a great crusade which was to draw upon the entire forces of Christendom. He attempted to mediate between the quarrelsome Italian states and between Charles of Anjou and Rudolf of Hapsburg. He approved Charles' appointment as a senator of Rome and imperial vicar for Tuscany, and advised Rudolf to postpone the journey to Rome, which Gregory had urged, until he should have completely regularized his relations with both the Curia and Charles, and especially recalled his officials from Romagna. In order to enlist the forces of the Eastern Empire in his crusade, he continued Gregory's attempts at bringing about a union with the Greek Church. Charles of Anjou and Venice had designs on Constantinople which were by no means in harmony with Innocent's pacific policy, and the Emperor Michael Paheologus sought a close alliance with him. He required that Michael should swear to the terms of union agreed upon at Lyons; but he died in Rome before his envoys had left Italy, June 22, 1276. His writings embraced theology, philosophy, and canon law. The most famous of them were his commentaries on the Pauline epistles, often published (editio princeps Cologne, 1478) under the name of Nicolaus Gorranus, and on the " Sentences " of Peter Lombard. A complete edition of hiss works was published at Toulouse from a manuscript in the Dominican house thepre in 1651. (HANS SCHULZ.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liber pontifkalie, ed. L. Ducheene, ii. 457, Paris, 1892; A. Potthast, Regesta ponliftcum Romanorum, ii. 1703‑1708, Berlin, 1875. Other minute and scattered sources are indicated in Hauck‑Herzog, RE, ix. 130‑131. Consult: F. J. Bethaz, Le Pape Innocent V., eat‑il PraWaia ou Italien., Paris, 1883; idem, Pierre ties Coura de la Salle, Aoste, . . Innocent V., ib. 1892; J. E. Borrel, Patrie du Page, Innocent V„ 3 parts, ib. 1890‑94; L. Carbani, Diasertatio hiatorica de Innocentio V., Rome, 1894; Vie du bienluureux Innocent V., Rome, 1896 (contains many original documents); Ppre Bourgeois, Le bienheureux Innocent V., Paris, 1899; Bower, Popes, iii. 23‑24; Milman, Latin Christianity, vi. 134; KL, vi. 743‑744.
Innocent VI. (Ptienne Aubert): Pope 1352‑62. He was born in the village of Mons, in the diocese of Limoges, and began his public career as professor of civil law at Toulouse, where he rose to hold the highest judicial functions. Later he took holy orders, and became bishop of Noyon, which see he exchanged in 1340 for that of Clermont. In 1342 Clement VI. made him a cardinal‑priest,‑ and ten years later cardinal‑bishop of Ostia and grand penitentiary. After Clement's death the cardinals entered into an agreement, the observance of which was to be binding upon the new pope when chosen. Its most important provisions were that the pope

605
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
was not to alienate or, grant feudal investiture of any Church lands without the consent of two‑thirds of the cardinals; he was not to depose, imprison, suspend, or excommunicate any cardinal without the approval of the college; he was to divide the revenues of the Church equally between himself and the college, which had previously received only half of such reN enues as came under the technical designation of census. This agreement all the cardinals subscribed, some of them with the reservation " in so far as it was lawful." Among these was the bishop of Ostia, who was selected pope on Dec. 18, 1352, and not long after his coronation he declared the instrument null and void, as limiting the divinely granted powers of the papacy.
Deeply versed in canon law, and severe in morals, Innocent at once set about correcting abuses, revoking many of his predecessor's grants of benefices, reservations, commendams, and expectations, declaring himself against pluralities, and enforcing the obligation of residence on the higher clergy. He diminished the pomp of the papal court, and assigned a fixed and sufficient income to the judges of the Rota in order to ensure a better administration of justice. Another of his principal aims was the recovery of the domains of the Church. In 1353 he sent Cardinal Albornoz to Italy, who soon brought Rome into subjection, and carried on the reduction of the Papal States with great skill, until his return to Avignon in 1357; two years later the incompetence of his successor, Abbot Adroin of Cluny, caused him to be sent back, and in the next few years he had a hard struggle with Bernabd Visconti of Milan for the possession of Bologna.
Innocent's relations with the empire were peaceable. He opposed no hindrances to the visit of Charles IV. to Rome, where he was crowned on Apr. 5, 1355, by the bishop of Ostia, after taking an oath never to interfere in Rome or any other papal domains, to leave the city on the day of his coronation, and not to return without the pope's leave. In his succeeding years, Charles adopted a more independent position, but open conflict was avoided. In 1359, in order especially to provide funds for the Italian campaigns of Albornoz, the Curia imposed a tax of a tenth for Germany. When the papal legate attempted to enforce this demand at the diet in Mainz, Charles insisted that the pope reform the German clergy before he exact money from the country; and measures to this end were soon after adopted by Innocent. He refused, indeed, to revoke the bulls which Clement V. had issued against Charles's grandfather, Henry VII., but he gratified Charles by appointing his trusted counselor, Dietrich of Minden, to the archbishopric of Magdeburg and thus assisting the ambitions of the house of Luxemburg in the direction of the acquisition of Brandenburg.
His relations with France were friendly, and he sought to mediate between that country and England, especially just before the battle of Maupertuis in 1356, when King John, confident of success, rejected his intervention, and was carried captive to London by the Black Prince. The peace of Bretigny in 1360 was, however, due to his efforts. He put forth all his powers with unsatisfactory
innocent IV‑VII
results against Peter I., the Cruel, of Castile, to
force him to put away his mistress and take back
his lawful wife, Blanche of Bourbon. Equally un
successful were Innocent's efforts to bring about
peace between this king and Peter IV. of Aragon.
In his last years he was occupied with plans for a
crusade and for a reunion with the Eastern Church,
	but died in the midst of his negotiations with the
Emperor John Paheologus, Sept. 12, 1362.
	(MAX NAUMANN.)
	BIBLIOGRAPHY: For a list of sources consult Hauck‑Herzog,
	RE, ix. 132‑133. The most important sources are: Liber
	ponti,/tcalia, ed. L. Duchesne, ii. 492, Paris, 1892; Bul
	larium Romanorum, iv. 502‑519, Turin, 1859; A. Theiner,
	Codex diplomaticus, ii. 241‑293, Rome, 1862; It. Martpne
	and U. Durand, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, ii. 843‑1072,
	Paris, 1717; L. Wadding, Annales Minorum, viii. 431‑486,
	Rome, 1773; Lettres du pope Innocent VI. et Blanche de
	Bourbon, Paris, 1901. Early Vito; are collected in E.
	Baluze, Vita paparum Avenionensium, i. 321‑362, 918‑974;
	1433‑1435, Paris, 1693. Consult: J. B. Christophe, Hist,
	de la Papaute pendant Is ‑iv. sikle, ii. 222‑352, Paris, 1853;
	D. Cerri, Innocenzo papa. VI„ Turin, 1873; E. Werunsky,
	Italienische Politik Papst Innocenz V1. and KPnip Karl IV.,
t	Vienna, 1878; idem, (3eschichte Kaiser Karls IV., vols.
	ii.‑iii., Innsbruck, 1886‑92; G. Daumet, in Melanges
	d'areheologie et d'histoire, xvu (1897), 153 eqq.; idem,
	Innocent IV. et Blanche de Bourbon: Wires du pope, Paris,
	1899; J. Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire, p. 299, New York,
	1904; Pastor, Popes, i. 93‑95; Creighton, Papacy, i. 54
	55; KL, vi. 744; Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, vi. 697‑708,
	Bower, Popes, iii. 104‑109; Milman, Latin Christianity,
vii. 200‑207.
	Innocent VII. (Cosimo de' Migliorati) : Pope
	1404‑06. He was born at Sulmona in the Abruzzi,
	and came to the Curia under Urban V1., who made
	him archbishop of Ravenna and bishop of Bologna,
	and employed him on delicate missions. Bonifaee
	IX. appointed him cardinal in 1389. His upright
	and ascetic life, his deep knowledge of canon law,
	and his general ability for affairs led to his choice
as Boniface's successor on Oct. 17, 1404.	In his
	election compact he had subscribed the obligation
	to do all in his power to heal the great Western
	schism (see ScHisM),. and in furtherance of this he
	called a general council to meet in Rome in 1405.
	That the gathering did not take place was not the
	pope's fault; the Romans rose in rebellion and
	forced Innocent and his cardinals to flee to Viterbo.
	Ladislaus, king of Naples, who encouraged the anti
	papal party in Rome, was put under the ban.
	When the University of Paris and the French king
	proposed that both Innocent and his rival at
	Avignon, Benedict XIII., should abdicate, the
	former resisted and declined to send envoys for
	preliminary conferences with delegates of Benedict.
	Meantime he had succeeded in returning to Rome
	in 1406; but in the same year he died (Nov. 6),
	without having accomplished anything toward the
restoration of unity.	K. BENRATH.
	BIBLIOGRAPHY: Early Vike are in Muratori, Scriptores, iii.
	2, pp. 832‑835, and further pertinent matter is found in
	the same work, ii. 2, pp. 1116‑1117, xix. 909‑910, xxiv.
	968‑969. Consult: J. B. Christophe, Hist. de la papauth
	pendant le xiv. sacle vol. iii., Paris, 1853; A. von Reumont,
	Geechichte der Stadt Rom, ii. 1110 sqq., Berlin, 1867; L.
	Gayet, Le Grand Schisms d'occident 2 vols., Parie, 1889‑90;
	C. Valois, La France et Is grand schisms d'occident, 4 vole.,
	ib. 1896‑1902 Creighton, Papacy, 1. 184‑197; Pastor,
	Popes, i. 165‑166; Hefele, Coneiliengeschichte, vi. 748 sqq.;
	Bower, Popes, iii. 153‑156; Milman, Latin Christianity,
vii. 29‑296; KL, vi. 747‑748.

Innocent VII‑$I	THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG	508
Innocent VIII. (Giovanni Battista Cibo): Pope 1484‑92. He was born in Genoa in 1432, and was brought up at the court of Naples: He studied in Padua and Rome, where he won the favor of Cardinal Calandrini, and by 'his help was named bishop of Savona by Paul II. Sixtus IV. transferred him to Molfetta and made him cardinal in 1473. His elevation to the papacy (Aug. 24, 1484) as the successor of Sixtus was owing to Cardinal Giuliano della Rovere, the subsequent Pope Julius II., who dominated the first years of his reign, Innocent himself being a weak, characterless personality, and of notoriously immoral life. Quarrels with Naples induced the pope to seek intimate relations with the Medici at Florence, already risen to high power; his son, Franceschetto, married the daughter of Lorenzo the Magnificent, and, to seal the union of the two houses, Innocent paved the way to the college of cardinals for the second son of Lorenzo. He summoned Christendom to a crusade against the infidels; but at the same time he entered into agreement with Sultan Bajazet II. to keep his brother, Jem, safely in Rome for the sum of 40,000 ducats yearly, and in 1490 received the pay for three years.
	In three bulls of 1486 Innocent declared Henry VII.
Tudor the lawful and rightful king of England, and
threatened the severest ecclesiastical penalties against
all who did not recognize his claims. He also con
firmed the election of Maximilian of Austria. as king
of the Romans, disregarding the protest of Charles
VIII. of France. By the bull Summis desiderantes of
Dec. 5, 1484, he gave the sanction of the Church to
the prevalent trials for witchcraft (see WiTCHCRAPT).
He strengthened the Inquisition in Spain by ap
pointing Thomas of Torquemada inquisitor‑general
(see INQBisImioN), , and he issued a bull directing
all rulers outside of Spain to deliver up heretics
to this zealous persecutor. He preached a crusade
against the Waldenses in Piedmont; and he sup
plied fresh food for superstition in Rome and else
where by solemnly importing, in 1492, the " holy
lance " with which Christ's side was said to have
been pierced, sent to him by the Sultan Bajazet.
Innocent died July 25, 1492. He neglected the
government of the Papal States and punished rob
bers and rebels only when they were unable to pay.
Everything at the Curia was for sale, and hundreds
of new positions were created expressly to fill the
papal coffers. Such is the dark background upon
which the shining figure of Savonarola (q.v.) is
projected. 	K. BENEATH.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources for a history are in muratori, Bcriptores, iii. 2, pp. 1070‑1071, 1189‑1190, xx~ii. 87‑88. The bull on witches, ed. W. Itrimer, appeared Schaffhausen, 1889, and is in Reich, Documents, 199‑202, and that on the marriage of Henry VII. in the Camden Miscellany, vol. i., London, 1847. Consult: A. von Reumont, Gaechichte der Stadt Rom, iii. 1, pp. 187 eqq., Berlin, 1868; iden4 Lorenzo de Medici, $ 272 sqq., Leipsie, 1874; F. Gregoroviue, Geschichte der Stadt Rom, vii. 268 sqq., Stuttgart, 1880; Hagen, Die Papstwahlen 1484‑1492, Brixen, 1886; Creighton, Papacy, iv. 135‑180; Pastor, Popes, iv. 288, 410, 458, v. 227‑372; Ranks, Popes, i. 33, 308; Bower, pop##, iiL 254‑258; Mirbt, Qu@ien, n. 220.
Innocent IX. (Giovanni Antonio Fachinetto): Pope 1591. He was born at Bologna July 22, 1519, and won the degree of doctor in law at his native
city in 1544. He then entered the service of Cardinal Farnese at Rome and was made bishop of Nicastro in Calabria by Pope Pius IV. In 1561 he was at the Council of Trent, in 1566 was sent as nuncio to Venice by Pius V. After the accession of Gregory XIII. (1572) he retired to his bishopric and governed it as a true shepherd‑ of the fold. Gregory honored and trusted him, making him member of the Council and of the Inquisition, patriarch of Jerusalem, and (Dec. 12, 1583) cardinal priest. The Spanish party of the cardinals chose him, Oct. 29, 1591, to succeed Gregory, XIV., and he at once arrayed himself on the side of Philip II. of Spain against Henry IV. of France. He was personally devout, took a zealous stand in favor of reform in the Church, and projected important and beneficial measures for improvement, but could do no more than outline his plans, since he died, Dec. 30, 1591, after a rule of only two months.
K. BENRATH.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: ~ GSgarella, yifa InnoanS8 IX., in appendix to B. Sacehi de Platina, Hiatoria .•de roiSa pontificum Romanorum, pp. 600‑501, Cologne, 1626; Philippeon, in Hiatwisdw Zeitachrift, xxxix (1878), 447; M. Broach, Ouediclda des %ircAsnetaatea, vol. i., Gotha, 1880; Ranks, Popes, ii. 38; Bower. Popes, p. 326.
Innocent X. (Giovanni Battista Pamfili): Pope 1644‑85. He was born at Rome 1574, and received preferment from Clement VIII., Gregory XV., and Urban VIII., the latter making him cardinal in 1629. He was chosen pope to succeed Urban, and occupied the see of Peter on Sept. 15, 1644. Pamfili had never concealed his sympathies for Spain, but was accepted by the French party as the most acceptable choice they were likely to get. The Barberinirelatives of the preceding pope‑were deceived if they expected favor from Innocent. He started suits against them to recover moneys which they had misapplied and, when they fled from Rome, seized their property and palaces. At the same time he sought to advance his own family, and was completely under the influence of his brother's widow, Donna Olimpia (n6e Maidalchina), who was allowed so free a band with the public funds that nothing remained for public needs. The relations with the Barberini became more friendly when the French minister, Mazarin, espoused their cause and even sent French troops to Italy; their property and positions were then returned to them.
In the course of a dispute with the duke of Parma, Innocent captured the city of Castro, razed its fortifications, and took possession of the country. He also made a treaty with Venice by which he gained substantial concessions and himself merely promised‑and later only half kept the promiseto contribute money for the war against the Turks. He showed himself ungrateful to Spain by encouraging a revolt in Naples; but his policy toward the newly founded kingdom of Portugal was dictated entirely by the Spanish ambassador in Rome. As a consequence the bishoprics in Portugal long remained vacant. The Peace of Westphalia was concluded in 1648 regardless of the protests of Innocent's nuncio, Chigi, and of the bull Zero domua dei, which he issued against it Nov. 26, 1648 (of. Mirbt, Quellen, pp. 294‑295; see WESTPHALIA, PEACE op). The most important and momentous decision

507
which he made was the condemnation of the five propositions from Jansen's Ateguatinua (May 30, 1653; cf. Mirbt, Quellen, pp. 295‑296; see JANSEN, CORNELIUS, JANSENISM).
	Decision and firmness in carrying through what
he undertook can not be denied to Innocent; he
was also energetic, and strove earnestly for order
and quiet in Rome. But the chronic deficit in the
treasury after Donna Olimpia's needs were supplied
frustrated his efforts. The, same needs led, at least
in part, to the preaching of jubilee indulgences in
1650, and to the suppression of a number of monas
teries, though the latter step was justified, as the
monks no longer observed their rules and failed to
perform their spiritual duties. In his last years
Innocent suffered deeper and deeper humiliation
from the constantly growing arrogance and avarice
of Donna Olimpia, still displayed after his death, on
Jan. 7, 1655, when she refused to provide for his
funeral on the ground that, as a poor widow, she
had not the means. 	K. BENRATH.

BIBLI‑BAPHY: Roaatauseher, Hist. Innocentie X., Wittenberg, 1674; T. Giampi, Innoceneo X. Pa»Ai a la sua torte, Rome, 1878; A. von Reumont, Geschic" der Stadt Rom, iii. 2, Pp. 623, Berlin, 1870; M. Broach, Gesehichte des Kirdenetaates, i. 409 sqq., Goths, 1880; J. Bryce, Tha Holy Roman EmPire, pp. 236, 392,' New York, 1904; Cambridge Modern History, iv. 402, 415, 529, 600, 687‑885, New York, 1906; Mirbt, Quallen, pp. 202‑‑2os; Raake, Popes, ii. 322 et passim; Bower. Popes, iii. 330; and the literature under JANSENIBM.
Innocent %I. (Benedetto Odescalchi): Pope 1676‑‑89. He was born at Como May 16, 1611, was educated by the Jesuits in his native city, and then studied law in Rome and Naples. He entered the Curia under Urban VIII. and was made cardinal by Innocent X. He won general respect at Rome by his simplicity of life, his uprightness, and his benevolence. As bishop of Novara in 1650 he applied the entire income of the see to the care of the sick and needy. Compelled to return to Rome by ill health, he distinguished himself among his colleagues of the college of cardinals by his fidelity to duty and his incorruptibility. After a vacancy of two months he succeeded Clement X. on Sept. 21, 1676, being chosen in accordance with the clearly expressed wish of the people of Rome and in spite of the opposition of Louis XIV. of France. Seldom has a pope taken in hand the work of reform with greater decision or more fruitful results. His first task was to regulate the finances, and in a short time he changed a deficit in the treasury into a surplus by strict economy, by cutting off sinecures, and by refraining from nepotism. He exacted similar frugality from the higher clergy and required bishops to reside in their dioceses. A congregation of cardinals was charged with the duty of inquiring into the moral and scholastic qualifications of prospeotive bishops. He admonished the lower clergy to adapt their preaching to the needs of the people, and not to neglect the training of the young.
In 1679 Innocent condemned as `° propositions of lax moralists" certain theses questionable on religious and moral grounds mostly taken from the writings of Escobar, Suarez, Busenbaum, and other Jesuits, and later he protected Tyrso Gonzalez in his attack upon Probabilism (q.v.), and even
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Innocent VIa‑X1
secured his election as general of the Jesuits. The powerful order never forgave him for his judgments, and in the quietistic controversy he was compelled to make some concessions. His sympathies at first were on the side of Molinos (q.v.) , but in the end he condemned quietism because of danger to the ecclesiastical organization. He was less complaisant in controversies with Louis XIV. of France (see REGALE). After the promulgation of the four articles of Gallicanism, Innocent refused all episcopal consecrations for France; and he was only transiently appeased by the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1686. A new source of controversy was soon added. The pope wished the ambassadors of the powers in Rome to relinquish the right of giving shelter to those condemned by Roman justice; the emperor, Spain, Poland, and Sweden complied, but Venice recalled its representative from Rome, and Louis XIV. provided a wellarmed force of 800 men to maintain the right of franchise of his ambassador. Innocent put the ambassador under the ban and a rupture of diplomatic relations ensued. The king took Avignon from the pope, and when, in 1688, a French envoy came to Rome to treat concerning the appointment of an archbishop for Cologne, Innocent would not even grant an audience. Louis even contemplated putting a patriarch independent of the pope at the head of the French Church. Innocent acquiesced in an attempt at mediation by James II. of England, but there is ground for the suspicion that he did so only because he foresaw that it would be fruitless. He strongly disapproved of the efforts of James to restore Roman Catholicism in England by ill‑advised and too precipitate measures, and when the Earl of Castlemaine appeared in Rome as envoy of James to treat in the matter, the pope received him politely, but brought the interview .to an end by severe fits of coughing, and intimated to the‑envoy that the early morning was the beat time to travel in the climate of Rome. The fall of James was not unwelcome in Rome. To no land did Innocent render greater services than to Austria. At his entreaties the German princes and John Sobieski of Poland hurried to the relief of Vienna when besieged by the Turks in 1683, and his zeal brought about later the alliance of the emperor, Venice, and Poland against the crescent. He lived to see Hungary freed from the Turkish yoke, and the capture of Belgrade.
Innocent asserted the rights of the Church with energy, moderation, and dignity. He is to be accorded the praise of an enlightened mind, of one who strove to execute large plans and attain lofty aims by honorable means. Ranks says of him: " The papacy appears in him in its most estimable
character, mediating, and laying the foundations
of peace." 	K. BizNaeTa.
Bnaioaessaz: Innocent's decrees concerning the suppression of an office of the Immaculate Conception sppesred in English, Oxford, 1679; and his Epiatoha ad prineiPas, ad‑ L I. Berthier, 2 vole.. Rome. 1891‑95. Co.. sult: Vita d'Innounw %1., Venice, 1690; A. von R.eumoat, GesehichEe der Stadt xom., iii. 2. PP. 636 nqq., Berlin, 1870; C. Gdrin in Rssus dea questions hiatoriquee, Oct., 1874; idem, Oct., 1878 (on the pope and the English Revolution); idem. Le Papa InnoeanE %1. et la rEaocation do 1'ldit de Nantes, ib.. Oct., 1878; M. Broach, Gearhialte des Kirc)tett‑

Innocent aII‑BIII
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
ataatea i. 439 sqq, Goths, 1880; E. Michaud, Louis XIV. et Innocent XI., 4 vole., Paris, 1882 eqq ; H. M. Baird, The Huguenots and the Revocation of the Edid of Names. ii. 82‑88, New York, 1896; Ranks, Popes, ii. 418‑424, , iii. 418‑417, 422; Bower, Popse, ili. 33‑334,
Innocent XII. (Antonio Pignatelli): Pope A6911700. He was born at Naples of an old and distinguished family Mar. 13, 1615. His education was received from the Jesuits in Rome, and Urban VIII. attached him to the Curia when a youth of twenty. Succeeding popes honored and advanced him, Innocent XI. most of all, who made him cardinal in 1681 and elevated him to the archbishopric Of Naples. Pignatelli was elected as a compromise between the Spanish‑imperial and French parties of the cardinals on July 12, 1691. In all‑,things he took Innocent XI. (q.v.) as model, declared against nepotism, and by the bull Romanum decet po‑nttficent sought to make it unlawful for any future pope to invest his relatives with the revenues, property, or offices of the Church. His largess to the poor was proverbial, he established a hospital in the Lateran and founded schools for the people. He suppressed simony and bribery, abolished sinecures, and meted out justice impartially to high and low and with
in'lem severity: the present spacious house of
erci deputies in Rome was originally the Curia Ianocentiana, provided by Innocent XII. for the administration of justice and public affairs. The religious orders received the pope's attention, and the monasteries were admonished to observe discipline.
Not the least of Innocent's achievements was the settlement, in 1693, of the long strife with France concerning the status of the Gallican Church (see GALLICANISM; INNOCENT XI.) in a manner wholly favorable to the Curia. The vacant French bishoprics (see INNOCENT XI.) were now filled. The strife between Bossuet and Fdnelon Innocent decided in 1699 by condemning, at the instigation of the former, twenty‑three propositions from F16nelon's Explication de‑8 maxmm den saints Bur la vie inr t&ieure (see FLNELON). In 1694 Innocent took the part of the clergy in the Netherlands who had been suspended because of suspicion of Jansenistic leanings; but in 1696 he declared explicitly that he had no intention of retracting or changing the judgment of Alexander VII. concerning the teachings of dansen. By his counsel to Charles II. of Spain to
END OF YOb. V.
608
make the duke of Anjou, grandson of Louie XIV., his heir, Innocent helped to start the War of the Spanish Succession, which for so many years involved Europe in bloodshed. He reversed the policy of all popes since Urban VIII. of favoring the Hapsburgs and opposing France after the conceseions of Louis XIV. The rupture between Austria and the Curia was not fully repaired when Innocent died, Sept. 27, 1700. K. BENaATa.
Brsrrooawrav: Colledio Zrollatura . Innocentii %11., Rome, 1897; A, van Reumont (#eachichte der 6tadt Ram, iii. 2, PP. 840 eqq, Berlin, 1870: C. Grin, Reeharchea historiqusa ear Z'aasertblEe du clergl de France de 1B8$, PP. 4ab‑438. Paris, 1889; O. KIopP. Den Fall des Nausea Stuart, vole v.‑viii.. Passim. Vienna, 1877‑79; M. Broeah, C3eachidUe den Kirchenataatea i, 450 eqq.. Goths, 1880; Ranks. Popes, ii. 425‑428, 481, iii. 389392; Bower, Popes, iii. 335.
Innocent XIII. (Michele Angela Conti): Pope 1721‑24. He was born in Rome May 13, 1655, of a family from which had sprung the great Innocent III. Alexander VIII. received him in the Curia, and Innocent XII. sent him as nuncio to Switzerland in 1695, and in 1897 to Portugal, where he remained till 1710 and conceived a dislike for the Jesuits. Clement XI. made him cardinal, and he was chosen to succeed Clement at a stormy conclave May 8, 1721. His distrust of the Jesuits, increased by news of their conduct in China, led him to consider the suppression of the order; but he contented himself with forbidding them to carry on the mission in China and prohibiting temporarily the acceptance of new members. It was hoped that he might modify the constitution Unigenitua (see JANSEN, CORNELIUS, JANSENISM) of Clement XI.; but he condemned a proposal to that effect from seven French bishops in 1721, and required unconditional acceptance of the constitution. Like his predecessor Innocent espoused the cause of the pretender to the English throne under the title of James III. He died Mar. 7, 1724. His contemporaries represent him as pesos‑loving and energetic.
K. BENEATH.
131BLIOGRAPHY: M. Guarnacci, Vito el rea pasta. pont4Jicum Aomanorum ii. 381‑382, Rome, 1781; J. M. SohrSokh, Chrietliche K4rchenpesch%cAk sail den Reformation, vi. 395 eqq., Leipeic, 1807; A. Sahill, Die Konatitutioa Unipm%tua, pp. 200 eqq.. Freiburg, 1878; E. Michaud, in Internationale theolopieehe Zeitec>ari,/t, v. 42‑60, 304‑331; Ranks, Popes, iii. 408‑407; Bower. Popes, iii. aa8.