school divided the biblical and apostolical Christianity into the Jewish Christianity of the primitive apostles, and the Gentile Christianity of Paul, which difference, in its view, terminated in the old Catholic Church. Justin, according to the Tübingen theologians, represented the transition from Jewish Christianity to Catholicism. This view of the Tübingen school was chiefly controverted by Albrecht Ritchl, in his celebrated work on the Origin of the Old Catholic Church, (Entstehung der alt Katholischen Kirche, 1850, second edition, 1857,) who not only softened very considerably the supposed differences between the Jewish and Gentile types of Christianity, but made Justin a somewhat degenerate representative of the Gentile Christianity of Paul. Justin thus appeared as a chief witness for the incompetency of the Gentile Christianity of the postapostolic age to obtain control of the Old Testament presuppositions of the fundamental ideas of the apostolic, especially Pauline, theology. Justin's Dialogue, according to Ritchl, substantially opposes Christianity as a new law to the old law, Christ as the new lawgiver to the old lawgiver, viewing Christianity one-sidedly as teaching, and Christ as a teacher. Ritchl's view has met with much approval on the part of the orthodox theologians. The new work by Professor Engelhard accepts the views of Ritschl, and tries to carry it through by showing in which particular points Justin's opinions do not come up to the full standard of biblical orthodoxy. The reviewer of Engelhard's work, Professor Hilgenfeld, contents himself with declaring, for the present, his dissent from the views of Ritschl and Engelhard. They have failed, he thinks, to prove that Justin could not be the representative of some Jewish type of Christianity. We may expect that Justin's orthodoxy will now for some time be thoroughly ventilated from every possible stand-point in the theological journals of Germany. At the close of his articles, Professor Hilgenfeld refers to a new work by a Jewish scholar, Dr. M. Friedländer, in Vienna, entitled Patristische und Talmudische Schriften, (1878,) which sheds some light on Justin's dialogue with the Jew Tryphon from Jewish writings. Dr. Friedländer says of Justin: "As long as Justin defends himself against the Jewish charge of not observing the law, as long as he disputes the literal conception of certain petrified, long-abandoned doctrines, and tries to spiritualize them, so long he speaks sensibly, and even in an elevated and convincing manner." Dr. Friedländer calls Justin one of the best among the Church fathers, though to some extent a sophist. It may be of interest for our readers to compare the foregoing extracts from Professor Hilgenfeld's article with the remarks of Professor Schaff, (Church History, vol. i, p. 484:) "Justin was a man of very extensive reading, enormous memory, inquiring spirit, and many profound ideas, but wanting in critical discernment. His mode of reasoning is often ingenions and convincing, but sometimes loose and rambling, fanciful and puerile. His style is easy and vivacious, but diffuse and careless." STUDIEN UND KRITIKEN. (Essays and Reviews.) Edited by Dr. J. KÖSTLIN and Dr. RIEHM. Fourth Number, 1879.-Essays: 1. KÖSTLIN, The Task of Christian Ethics. 2. GRÖBLER, The Views of the Jewish Literature of the Last Two Centuries before Christ on Immortality and Resurrection. Thoughts and Re marks: 1. KÖSTLIN, Luther's Last Intercourse with Staupitz. 2. EIBACH, John Milton as a Theologian. 3. Another Greek Translator of the Bible besides Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodɔtius. Reviews: 1. SCHRADER'S Keilinschriften und Geschicht forschung, reviewed by RÖSCH. 2. WIESELER'S Zur Geschichte der Kleinasiatischen Galater und des deutschen Volkes in der Urzeit, reviewed by HERZBERG. Until a few years ago it was not known how Luther's relation to Staupitz, whom, at the beginning of his career, he esteemed like a spiritual father, and to whom he was attached in intimate friendship, had finally terminated. Three years ago considerable light was shed upon this obscure subject by a letter of Staupitz, published for the first time in C. and W. Krafft's Briefe und Documente aus der Zeit der Reformation, and referred to last year in the Methodist Quarterly Review. The revised text of this letter has been reprinted in a very able work by Kolde on the German Augustinians and Staupitz, (Die deutsche Augustiner-Congregation und J. von Staupitz, Gotha, 1879.) Luther in a preceding letter had given utterance to his fear that the long continued silence of Stanpitz indicated an estrangement from his friends at Wittenberg, and that under the influence of the Archbishop of Salzburg he had become wavering in his evangelical sentiments. It is, therefore, highly interesting to see from Staupitz's last letter that he assures Luther of his unwavering love for him, and, while he reminds Luther of the fact that in former years he (Staupitz) was a forerunner of the holy evangelical doctrine, he now calls himself a disciple of Luther, though, he says, Luther goes further than 4 he can follow him. We have as yet no information whether Luther ever answered this letter, but Professor Köstlin in this number of the Studien publishes for the first time some extracts from the archives of the philosophical faculty of the former University of Wittenberg, which show how Staupitz's letter was received in Wittenberg. Under the year 1524 the archives of the philosophical faculty contain the following words relating to the bearer of Staupitz's letter: "Eodem anno MDXXIV ultima Aprilis (id quod antea nunquam factum est Uuittembergae) urgentibus hoc D. Joh. Staupicio, cui haec schola suum debebat principium, and D. Martino Luthero, non tam literarum quam Evangelii, (cujus fulgure Deus Opt. Max. sub hoc tempus Germaniam illustraverat,) adsertore, Georgius Führer Salzburgensis Magisterii рóσwоv adsequutus est.' Evidently George Führer was the bearer of Staupitz's letter. The promotions of Masters took place at Wittenberg on certain fixed days, to which the 30th of April did not belong. According to the annals of the university, promotion on that day was rare exception. The next after the promotion of Führer took place in 1528. Another hand has added to the entry under April 30, 1524: "Non bene de collegio meriti quicunque ista induxerunt." Thus Luther, who was not himself a member of the philosophical faculty, had used his influence to fulfill as soon as possible the wish of his old friend. The words of Staupitz, that Luther might make Führer his pupil, do not exclude that Führer was already acquainted with and attached to Luther's views. It even seems that he was in Wittenberg before, for among the baccalaurei who in 1521 came to Wittenberg is mentioned Georgius Fyerer, Saltzburgenses Bacc. Whether Führer ever returned to Staupitz is not known; the latter died on December 28. French Reviews. REVUE CHRETIENNE, (Christian Review.) June, 1879.-1. LELIEVRE, Marot, a "The Bible in the Sixteenth Century" (La Bible au XVI Siècle) is the title of a new work by Samuel Berger, a young Professor of the Protestant Theological Faculty of Paris, of which the "Christian Review" in its July number gives a full abstract. The subject is one of the highest interest for every one who appreciates the importance of this great reformatory age of the Christian Church, and the author seems to have fully mastered the subject. The main work is preceded by an introduction, in which the author sets forth what the Bible was to the ruling Church at the end of the Middle Ages. He shows that but few copies of the Bible were found among the lower clergy and monks of the fiftteenth century. Indeed, before the invention of the art of printing but few priests were rich enough to buy a copy of the Bible, for even toward the close of the Middle Age, when the price began to be reduced, it still amounted to 1,000 francs. Still, all the students of universities in the convents were required to read or hear the reading of the Bible. It was easy to borrow a copy and to make extracts. Therefore, if the majority of the secular clergy and monks showed but little acquaintance with the Bible, the chief reason was not the scarcity of books in general, but want of interest. This proceeded partly from the shocking condition of medieval exegesis. The Church had gradually developed the theory of the quadruple interpretation, literal, allegorical, topological, and anagogical. According to this exegesis, Jerusalem was historically the suffering capital of Palestine; topologically, the type of the faithful soul, the conscience of which is in peace; allegorically, the figure of the Church militant when peace reigns through charity and benevolence; anagogically, the triumphant Church, which is above all assaults. So general was that theory of construing the Bible that the University of Paris imposed it upon the bibliarii to the exclusion of any other. A few distinguished theologians raised their voice against these fanciful interpresentations, which read in the Bible many things that were not there, and did not read what was there. Among those who opposed the quadruple interpretation was Nicholas de Lyra, of whom a proverb said, "Si Lyra non lyrasset, totus mundus delirasset ;" and later the Lutherans said, "Si Lyra non lyrasset, Martinus non saltasset." The success of men like Lyra was, however, of short duration, and the quadruple interpretation remained in the ascendency until the sixteenth century, until the Reformation. ART. VIII.-FOREIGN RELIGIOUS INTELLIGENCE. THE OLD CATHOLIC CHURCH. THE Old Catholic Church of Germany held its sixth annual Synod at Bonn, on June 4. It has, of course, attracted attention that the statistics which in former years accompanied the annual report of the Bishop were this year not given. Bishop Reinkens, in his opening address, alluded to the present condition of the Church as follows: "In numbers the movement has not increased, but neither has it decreased, and our reformed ideas have penetrated into even wider circles. Though our work is not so apparent outwardly, it is not, therefore, insufficient. The manifold hinderances that opposed us have inwardly strengthened us, and tended more to consolidate us. The eager demand to see great results has ceased to be apparent with us, but our hopes are not weakened, but increased, thereby. I open the present Synod with the exhortation to hope with patience for the assured fruits of our labor." Thus it appears from the words of the Bishop that the movement during the past year has made no progress. The number of priests who have pastoral charges is about fifty. The Synod was attended by only sixteen priests and fortytwo laymen. With the consent of the synodal representation the Bishop appointed his Vicar-general, Professor Knoodt, as Deputy President of the Synod. It was resolved to establish a pension fund for invalided priests. No Synod is to be held next year, but, instead of it, a congress either at Mannheim or Heidelberg. The Synod also adopted a course of religious instruction for common and higher schools, which had been prepared by a special committee for the schools of the Grand Duchy of Baden, and was recommended by the synodal representation. In consequence of the election of several new members, the synodal representation for this time until the next Synod will be composed as follows: Bishop Reinkens, President; Professor Schulte, Vice-President; Professor Knoodt, Rev. Mr. Weidinger, Privy Councilor Meurer, and Councilor Wrede, as ordinary members; and Professor Michelis, Professor Weber, of Breslau, Ex-Mayor Malsch, of Carlsruhe, and Councilor Reuthner, as extraordinary members. It was stated that many offers from excellent priests were received during the past year, but had to be declined on account of lack of means. Two students were reported as preparing at Bonn for the Old Catholic ministry, while another was preparing for orders in the Russo-Greek Church. The Old Catholics of Austria held this year their first Synod at Vienna. The great legal difficulties against which they have had to contend have been referred to in a former number of the Methodist Quarterly Review. (See Jan., 1879, p. 153.) Having been frowned upon for seven years by the State, and then, when legally permitted to organize themselves, having been hindered for another year by the persecution of minor officials, it was only in 1878 that they were able to close their ranks and present FOURTH SERIES, VOL. XXXI.—50 |