discover" more. McClintock and Strong merely compile Kitto's matter, but follow it with a paper contradicting it, and with sketches of modern Mohammedan usage that throw no light on Roman ones. The writer in Smith ventures the general remark that "to illustrate the position of the Christianized Jew or Gentile, Paul aptly transfers well-known feelings and customs." Schaff-Herzog (1891) looks for "the opening of new treasures of theological science" from that quarter. So exhaustive a work as Conybeare and Howson on "The Life and Epistles of St. Paul"-issued in the sixties, and needing now annotation from Gaius and the learning his Institutes have begotten-has but this sentence (i. 12): "The idea of law had grown up with the growth of the Romans, and wherever they went they carried it with them." Before Niebuhr's rare "find," all that was known of Gaius, the second in rank of the great Roman five who embalmed for posterity the products of the peculiar genius of their nation, was five hundred and thirty extracts in the Digest of Justinian. Yet history tells us that "for three hundred and fifty years the élite of the youth of Rome were initiated in the mysteries of jurisprudence by the manual of Gaius"-as Justinian called him-“Gaius noster." He probably published his treatise before the death of Marcus Aurelius,2 A. D. 180. 1 "The era of those who may be called the classical jurists cannot be sharply defined, except by saying that it began-so far as any monuments of it remain—with Gaius and ended with Modestinus. (A. D. 245. Justinian died A. D. 563.) Gaius must have been born after the accession of Hadrian, A. D. 117, and probably wrote up to the times of Marcus Aurelius." (Amos, Hist. and Prin. of the Civil Law of Rome.) The rescript of Theodosius II. and Valentinian III., A. D. 436, directed "the same authority to be accorded to the writings of Gaius as to the writings of Papinian, Paulus, Ulpian, and Modestinus." (Amos.) 2 Cicero, who often disclaimed legal learning, had less advantages as a law student than those of after centuries, but he must have been impressed with its importance by each Scævola whose pupil he was, one of whom was "the first juris-consult who applied a scientific method to the treatment of the law." (Hadley, Lect.) His sense of the value of the It may soften our sense of the shortcomings of Christian expositors, if we notice those of Gibbon and his great editor, Milman. The latter praised "the profound knowledge of the laws" of the Empire shown by the historian in his "Decline and Fall," while he placed at the head of his "most temperate and skillful guides on civil law," Heineccius, who died at Halle, 1741, seventy-five years before Gaius was recovered. by Niebuhr. But Phillemore (54 note) says of Milman, this admiring editor, he "knows little of Roman law, and nothing of jurisprudence." The year before Gaius reappeared, however, Savigny (Middle Ages, 1815) supplied the churchman with some corrections of the historian, while Warnkonig (1821), Gaius (Berlin ed., 1824), Hugo (Hist. Rom. Lan. 1825), and Walker (1834) furnished many more. Gibbon's forty-fourth chapter now bristles with editorial footnotes. that quite transform the statements of the text. Heineccius comes in for a liberal share of contradiction by Milman's new authorities. Those who love both secular and sacred learning may then well rejoice in the statement of Poste, the accomplished translator and editor of Gaius, that now "knowledge of the laws under which Horace and Cicero lived, is almost as accessible as is the knowledge of the laws of England of the present day to the English layman." law in his day to the orator and the statesman is vigorously given in De Oratore. St. Augustine, A. D. 372, resorted to Rome to study it, where Gaius was the first author used. (Amos.) 1 Starting, however, with Gibbon's account of the status of a son and a daughter under the patria potestas (Bost. ed., Vol. iv. 341, 346) and taking in the qualifications that are authorized, we can see how Galatian Christians, knowing all this better than we moderns do, would be struck with Paul's words (Gal. iv. 1-9) and realize the wondrous change from bondage under the rudiments of the world, and natural birth under law to the liberty of children and heirs of God through regeneration. ARTICLE V. WHAT IS SOCIOLOGY. BY MR. Z. SWIFT HOLBROOK. I. THE following letter, which explains itself, was sent to a large number of the leading thinkers in the United States. The replies which have been received speak for themselves:OBERLIN, OHIO, Jan. 15, 1895. Dear Sir:-Owing to the wide diversity of opinions upon the propriety of using the word "Christian" as applied to "Sociology" in the phrase "Christian Sociology," we desire a concise statement of your views upon the question on the enclosed postal card with permission to publish the same in the BIBLIOTHECA SACRA. Thanking you in advance, we are, Rev. Lyman Abbott, D.D., Pastor of the Plymouth Church, Brooklyn, N. Y.-While the phrase Christian Sociology is not strictly accurate, it seems to me to be on the whole not inapt to define a school of thought, namely, that of those who hold that Jesus Christ taught not merely principles of individual character, but also those of social order, and that on his teachings a true and scientific order of society can be based. E. Benjamin Andrews, D. D., LL. D., President of Brown University, Providence, R. I.:—If we mean sociology objectively considered, as the science of society, Respectfully yours, THE EDITORS. the adjective "Christian " is clearly not in place. The use of this adjective indicates that we mean social science according to Christian ideas or as urged by Christian writers, in distinction from the science of society as held by those who deny the possibility of improving the race. This last distinction is very real, vital even, and I see no better brief way to signalize it than to use the word "Christian Sociology," adding some title for the other sort of thinking (as "Devil's Sociology"), a good deal of which gets itself aired. James B. Angell, LL. D., President of Michigan University, Ann Arbor, Mich. :-In a strictly scientific use of language I should question the use of the phrase "Christian Sociology." One may say it as one may say Christian Political Economy, Christian Politics, etc. But it is in that popular and general use of terms that it would seem to me to be allowable. W. J. Ashley, Professor in Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.-I have grave objectionsscientific and literary-to the current use of "Sociology"; and still graver to the adjective "Christian" as applied to it. But these objections can scarcely be stated on a postal card. Rev. James Atkins, D. D., President of Asheville College, Asheville, N. C. :- The word "Christian" as applied to Sociology is eminently proper. The sociological principles of Christianity are distinct, unique. No other adjective is so scientifically accurate and yet so broad in its place here. Dr. Gregory in naming his work on Ethics used it, and Dr. Albert Taylor Bledsoe, one of the greatest of American review editors, especially commended the author for his discernment and discretion in styling his work "Christian Ethics." The distinguishing adjective applied to the included sciences, cannot be rejected from the including science without confusion and error. Hon.Simeon E. Baldwin, LL.D., Judge of the Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut, New Haven, Conn.:-It is to be regretted that we have no better term than Sociology, a word barbarously compounded out of two languages, to denote the science treating of human society: but it has acquired as definite a meaning as Geology has, and I see no propriety in assuming that it can be divided into a Christian branch and a nonChristian branch. Sociology can be treated from the standpoint of Christianity; but it cannot be identified with it or differentiated by it. Religion exists for man, not man for religion. Rev. W. G. Ballantine, D. D., LL. D., President of Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio:- We say Christian Ethics" and by analogy should say Christian Sociology in acknowledgment that the clearest light in each science comes from Christ. If Christ came to regenerate society, and if he is the sole source of the vital forces that are regenerating it, and if he is to be eternally the Head of the human race, and if the evils of society arise mainly, not from ignorance nor from poverty, but from sin, and if Jesus alone can save his people from their sins,-then the principles of Christianity are the fundamentals of Sociology. This does not mean that sociology does not derive its facts from a wide range of inductive sciences. Rev. John Henry Barrows, D. D., Pastor of the First Presbyterian Church, Chicago, Ill. :—I do not perceive any good reasons for criticizing the use of "Christian" as applied to "Sociology." Rev. S.C. Bartlett, D.D., LL.D., Lecturer in Dartmouth College, Hanover, N. H.:-Sociology, socalled, may be Christian, or it may not. A true Christian sociology lies imbedded in the "second great commandment," especially as expounded by our Saviour, and is involved in the whole spirit and maxims of Christ's religion, and true Christians have always been engaged in efforts, organized or unorganized, for the benefit of the oppressed and depressed. The benign influence of Christianity through every stratum of society has been in proportion to its power over its followers. Whether it is best for the church to endeavor to absorb all these efforts directly into its own hands as an "institutional church" or to continue its co-operation largely as a leavening force with other legitimate, established agencies and channels of influence, is another question. Ex-President John Bascom, D. D., LL. D., Williamstown, Mass.-I do not like the phrase Christian Sociology. It implies that there is more than one kind of Sociology, and that one kind at least is not Christian. Christian principles correctly applied to society and a correct Sociology are identical. Edward W. Bemis, Ph. D., Professor in Chicago University, Chicago, Ill.-I see no sufficient reason for prefixing the term Christian to Sociology any more than to Biology or Political Economy, though I believe the soundest Sociology is in harmony with Christ's life and teaching. Rev. W. F. Blackman, Ph. D., Professor in Yale University, New Haven, Conn.:-There can be no objection to the term "Christian Sociology" that does not apply equally to the terms "Christian Ethics" and "Christian Theology." I believe all three are legitimate. "The Sociology of Christ" is as correct a phrase as is "the Philosophy of Plato," or "the Politics of Aristotle," or "the Ethics of Kant," or "the Sociology of Comte." But I must add that much that passes for "Christian Sociology" appears to me to be a mischievous misinterpretation of a certain fraction of our Lord's teachings. Charles A. Blanchard, President of Wheaton College, Wheaton, Ill.-I suppose "Sociology" to be a designation of science, actual and embryonic. All science is of God in the sense that all truth is from Him; that all facts and relations are in His plan. Strictly speaking, I suppose that there is no more reason for saying "Christian Sociology" than "Christian Biology," yet because we find so many unchristian arrangements in society there may be an advantage in using the expression, illogical though it be, for a time. Rev. George Dana Boardman, D.D., Professorial Lecturer in the University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. I cannot understand why there should be any "diversity of opinion upon the propriety of the phrase 'Christian Sociology.'" While Sociology is largely a matter of observation, statistics, induction, etc., yet the altogether su |