History of the Christian church (Volume 5) online

and work are impossible without an historic develop-



Evangelical Church in Germany. 491

ment, to which Kuenen seems blind. He had Httle
faith in the records of Israel's greatness, but believed
in the early fetichism and long-continued idolatry ex-
tending nearly, or quite, to the times of the prophets.
He held that, because they were ignorant of writing,
the Israelites could not have transmitted a written
law from Moses' time. The discovery of the clay
tablets at Tel-el-Amarna, showing an active corre-
spondence in Canaan with both Egypt and Babylonia
from Abraham's time, shows the untenableness of
such an objection. The negative criticism, which de-
clared the polytheistic ignorance of the Israelites,
with Kuenen, now swings to the opposite extreme to
claim, with Frederick Delitzsch, that their great and
unique doctrine of God was brought from Babylon by
Abraham to Caanan. So soon are famous theories of
men of great learning disproved and forgotten.

The most celebrated follower of Kuenen was Julius
Wellshausen, born in 1844, and a student of Ewald at
Gottingen, 1 862-1 865. After teaching at Griefswald,
Halle, and Marburg, he has been for the last ten years
at Gottingen. He published his anal3'sis of the Hex-
ateuch in 1876-1877, and his "Prologomena to the
History of Israel" in 1878. Some years before this
he had said that he no longer stood on the ground of
the Evangelical Church or of Protestantism. He de-
nies the supernatural element and the historical char-
acter of the Hexateuch.

A turn in the whole subject came with the discov-
ery by George Smith, in 1872, of the Chaldean ac-
counts of the Creation and the Flood.

The traditional view that the Pentateuch was writ-
ten by Moses, though it never expressly says so, was



492 History of the Christian Church,

strenuously defended by Hengstenberg, and more
ably by Havernick; later by Kiel, and recently by

^^g Adolph Zahn, O. Nauman, and Hodemaker.

Traditional In Britain, Stanley Leathes and James

^^' Robertson ; in America, William H. Green,

Howard Osgood, Henry M. Harman, B. Cone Bissell,

and many others, maintained the same view.

There was no more thorough student in Germany
than Christian Frederick Dillman (i 823-1 894). He
The New Studied at Tiibingen, 1 840-1 845, and after-
Evangeiicai ward at Paris, London, and Oxford. He
was easily the first Ethiopic scholar in
Europe. After teaching in Tiibingen, Kiel, and Gies-
sen, he was called to Berlin, where he remained until
his death. He published the "Book of Enoch" in
Ethiopic in 1851-1853; "Ethiopic Grammar" in
1857 ; " Ethiopic Lexicon," 1865 ; " Book of Jubilees,"
1859; the "Ascension of Isaiah," 1877. His com-
mentaries are well known — Job, 1869; Genesis, 1875;
Exodus and Leviticus, 1880; Numbers, Deuteronomy,
and Joshua, 1886. He resisted the teachings of Graf
and Kuenen. He and his school, to which belong
Baudissin and Delitzsch,with Strack and Kettel, Ryssel
and Riehm, hold, in opposition to the development
theory, that the Elohist is the oldest document, fol-
lowed by J, and both older than Deuteronomy. They
think that the main part of the legislation of P is
before the Exile, and much of it very ancient. Bau-
dissin holds that P was written before Deuteronomy.
Canon Driver represents this school in England in
his "Introduction to the Old Testament."

The latest results of Old Testament criticism at
the end of the century mainly agree in calling Exodus



Evangelical Church in Germany. 493

XX, 1-17, and Exodus xxxiv, 11-27, the earliest Pen-
tateuchal legislation. This is followed by Exodus
XX, and xxiii-xxxiii, forming the Book of the Cov-
enant. Then in order comes Deuteronomy, found
B. C. 621, and the Priests' Code, including the latter
part of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, dating from
the Exile, and edited by Ezra. Ezekiel knew the
Priests' Code, as Jeremiah knew Deuteronomy. Isaiah
xl-lxv, Job, Ecclesiastes, and Daniel, as well as a
large part of the Psalms, are from the Exile.

In the Old Testament criticism are three schools—
the Left and Right Wings, and the Center. The left
wing forms the school of critics who do not believe
in a supernatural revelation of God to Israel. At
that head stands Wellshausen, and with him Stade,
Smend, Keyser, Siegfried, and Friedrich Delitzsch.
This school has no representative among British and
American scholars. The right wing would be led by
Dillman, Baudissin, and Strack, with Hommel, Kettel,
Orelli, Konig, and Otelli. With these would be found
archseologists like Sayce, Hilprecht, and Rogers.

In the center between these schools would be
ranged Kautsch, Budde, Cornill, Gunkel, and George
Adam Smith, with Driver, Briggs, Mitchell and Francis
Brown, of New York; Ives Curtiss, of Chicago, and
Willis J. Beecher, of Auburn. Toward the left-center
are Thomas K. Cheyne, C. G. Montefiore, George F.
Moore, and Charles H. Toy.

German Theology.
At the opening of this period, and through its first
decade, the school of Baur had the controlling influ-
ence The young men and progressive thinkers who



-194 History of the Christian Church,

were not content with the meditative theology of the

school of Schleiermacher made their way to Tiibingen.

Against this tendency stood Thoiuck,

heoiogy. -j^^^j^^^j.^ Rothe, and especially Heng-

stenberg and the Confessional lyUtherans. The
century closed with the complete eclipse of the
theories and influence of Baur and his school. That
of Ritschl has very largely taken its place as the
theology of the leaders of German theological think-
ing. The change is great, and marks a noteworthy
advance in the ruling tendency in the theological
world.

To this change and what preceded it a few pages
must be given.

The chief of the successors of Schleiermacher in
these years was Isaac August Dorner (i 809-1 884).
Dorner's father was an Evangelical pastor,
and Dorner studied at Tubingen. Com-
pleting his university studies, he visited England.
After teaching for twenty-eight years at Tiibingen,
Kiel, Konigsberg, Bonn, and Gottingen, he was called
to Berlin, where he taught until his death. In 1873
he visited the United States.

He acquired enduring fame through his early work,
" The History of the Development of the Doctrine of
the Person of Christ," in three volumes, 1 834-1 839.
In 1867 appeared his ** History of Protestant Theology"
in two volumes. In 1885 his "System of Christian
Doctrine." These works have all appeared in Eng-
lish, and have exerted no slight influence in English-
speaking lands. In 1885 appeared his "System of
Morals."

Dorner was more learned than original ; in a most



Evangelical Church in Germany. 495

circumlocutory style he often set forth great thoughts.
He had both comprehensiveness and depth in his
thinking. Great in learning as a theologian, he was
yet greater as a Christian man, and the warmth of a
Christian believer's heart is in his works.

The orthodox reaction against the school of Baur
found a center in the strictly Lutheran university of
Erlangen. They sought to ''teach old truths by new

methods."

The systematic theologian of this school was Franz
Hermann Reinhold Frank (1827-1894). Frank
studied at Leipzig, 1845-1850, where he was ^^^^
won to strict Lutheranism by Harless.
After teaching at Altenburg and Ratzeburg, he was
called to Erlangen in 1857, and taught there until his
death in 1 894. Frank, though strict in his orthodoxy,
was a child of his century and a modern man. His
"Theology of the Formula of Concord," 1858-1864,
gave him reputation among the Confessional Luther-
ans. His chief work was his *' System of Christian
Certainty," two volumes, 1870-1873; second edition,
1 881-1882. The work is divided into three parts:
The first treats of the nature of certainty, of specific
Christian certainty, and its principal opposition. The
second part treats of the relations of Christian cer-
tainty to the object of faith, to the immanent, the
transcendent, and the trans-euent, thus treating of
rationalism, pantheism, and criticism. In the third
part he treats of the relations of Christian certainty to
objects of the natural life, the establishment of cer-
tainty and the opposition to materialism. In this
work Frank has performed a lasting service to
Christianity. English readers can discern its nature



496 History of the Christian Church.

from the work of the late Professor Stearns, entitled
"The Evidence of Christian Experience," which is
avowedly founded upon it. It has also been trans-
lated. Frank also published his " System of Christian
Truth," in two volumes, 1878-1880; the third volume
1 893-1 894; and in 1 884-1 887, his '' System of Christian
Morality."

Of the same school and a prolific and effective

writer, many of whose publications have appeared in

English, is Christoph Ernest Luthardt,

Luthardt. , ^ . ^ , , ,. , . ^ ,

born in 1823. Luthardt studied m Erlangen
and Berlin, 1 841-1845. After teaching in Munich,
Erlangen, and Marburg, he was called to I^eipzig in
1856.

At Leipzig he has taught New Testament exegesis
and theology. He is renowned as a pulpit orator, and
since 1868 he has edited the Kirchen Zeitung, the
organ of Confessional Lutheranism. In 1865 he was
chosen Consistorial Councilor to the Church in
Saxony. His "Gospel of John" appeared in 1852-
1853; "The Fundamental Truths of Christianity,"
1864; "The Dogmatic Truths of Christianity," 1866;
"The Saving Truths of Christianity," 1867; "The
Moral Truths of Christianity," 1872 ; " Luther's Eth-
ics," 1867; and "The Origin of the Fourth Gospel,"
1874. Luthardt is a master of clear expression, and
most of the above have appeared in an English dress.

A man of an altogether different quality and tend-
ency was Richard Adelbert Lipsius (1830-1892). His
work was largely influenced by his early

Lipsius. 11,

and thorough study of Fichte, Hegel,
Schleiermacher, Rothe, and Kant. The latter became
his master, and Lipsius was the leader of the New



Evangelical Church in Germany. 497

Kantian school of theology. He also felt the influence
of the Moravians, where his mother had been trained.
Through the influence of Baur he went over from the
meditating to the critical school of theology. After
teaching in Vienna, 1861-1865, then at Kiel and Jena,
he came to I,eipzig, and there remained until his
death. At first he was very radical, but in later
years, and through practical participation in Church
affairs, he became more conservative. Like Ritschl,
he left the school of Baur, but his fundamental theo-
logical conception was different. Ritschl would shut
out all scientific knowledge in his conception of Chris-
tian truth. lyipsius believed that scientific and re-
ligious knowledge working together could form a
common conception which should be without contra-
diction.

Lipsius published in 1883- 1890 the "Apocryphal
Acts and Legends of the Apostles," in three volumes;
in 1869, " The Chronology of the Bishops of Rome;"
1876-1893, his "Dogmatics" in three volumes, his
most important work. In 1885 appeared his "Phi-
losophy and Religion."

Lipsius was an able man, and his work remains of
value to scholars.

A man different from all these, and more original
than any of them, though not more learned, was
Albrecht Ritschl (1822-1889), the founder ^. ^.

^ Ritschl.

of the Ritschliau school of theology, now
predominant in professors' chairs, at least in Ger-
many. Ritschl's father was a son of a gymnasial
teacher in Erfurth, and he became first a pastor, and
in 1827 a bishop, in the Evangelical Church. His
diocese was Pommerania, and his residence was Stet-
32



498 History of the Christian Church,

tin. Ritschl's mother was a woman from Berlin, of
unusual musical gifts. This talent for music, both
vocal and as a pianist, her son inherited.

Albrecht was born in Berlin, March 25, 1822. He
studied at Bonn and Halle, 1839-1843; and then he
took three years of further preparation at Berlin and
Heidelberg, where he met Rothe; and Tiibingen,
where he came fully under the influence of Baur. In
1846 he published a book entitled "The Gospel of
Marcion and the Canonical Gospel of I^uke : A Crit-
ical Investigation." This work claimed that Luke was
the first writer of our Gospels, and was later than Mar-
cion's Gospel; hence all the Canonical Gospels were
from the last of the second century. This, of course,
won the praise of Baur, but certainly did not further
his promotion in his academic career. In 185 1, as the
result of further critical investigations, he fully gave
up this view, and came to the conclusion that Mark's
Gospel was the first written. Later he held that John
was the author of the Gospel that bears his name, and
that all the Gospels were written in the first century.
Already, in 1850, he had published ** The Origin of the
Old Catholic Church;" in which he largely followed
the lines of Baur's teaching, though showing marked
talent for historical investigation. In 1857 appeared
a new edition, which took altogether different ground
as the result of his researches. A year later came a
complete breach with Baur, and the man who was to
do the most to destroy the influence of the Tiibingen
school had entered upon his independent career.

Ritschl taught at Bonn without salary, with only
the fees of private docent, 1 846-1 852, reading lectures
to from six to ten hearers. In December, 1852, he be-



Evangelical Church in Germany. 499

came professor extraordinary at Bonn on a salary of
$300 per year. On this he taught until August 5,
1859, when he became ordinary professor at Bonn
with a salary of $600 per year ; in 1863 this was raised
to $750, and in 1864 he removed to Gottingen at a
salary of $1,000, where he remained during his life.
This was, of course, increased from fees; but these
must have been small, as in the first twelve years of
his teaching he rarely lectured to a dozen hearers.
At Gottingen, from the first, he had thirty or more in
attendance on his lectures. In these circumstances,
Ritschl wrote a good deal for the press, mostly review
articles, and taught the Introduction and a detailed
exposition of the books of the New Testament, as well
as lecturing upon the ''Apostolic Fathers," the ''His-
tory of Dogma," and " Theological Ethics."

In prospect of the rise in his salary to $600, he
married in April, 1859, at the age of thirty-seven.
His wife was thirty-one, and every way worthy of him.
The succeeding ten years were the happiest of Ritschl's
life. His wife bore him three children, and died in
January, 1869. Henceforth the greatly-reserved and
deeply-grieved man found solace chiefly in work, to
which he had never been a stranger.

Thus simply went on his life. His holiday vaca-
tions had, in younger days, brought him to Stettin,
his father's home, and later he would see Marburg
and Erlangen, Tiibingen and Heidelberg, and, leav-
ing Frankfort, would sometimes stop at Halle or even
Jena. For Berlin, the city of his birth, he had no love ;
it was too large for him even in the days before the
Empire. Never once did he go beyond the bounds of
the Fatherland, though he did make a daring trip to



500 History of the Christian Church.

Tengersee in 1881, where he had a most interesting
conversation with Dollinger.

Thus the chief events of his life were the issue of
his books. The work upon which rests his fame,
" The Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation,"
was issued in three volumes : Vol. I, 1870: 2d edition,
1882; 3d edition, 1889. Vol. II, 1874: 2d edition,
1882; 3d edition, 1889. Vol. Ill, 1874: 2d edition,
1883; 3d edition, 1888; 4th edition, 1895. The first
volume contained the history of the doctrine; the
second, the foundation of the doctrine in Biblical the-
ology ; the third, the development of the doctrine.

Ritschl also published a work in three volumes en-
titled ''History of Pietism," 1 880-1 886. The first
volume treated of Pietism in the Reformed Church;
the two following, of Pietism in the Lutheran Church,
from 1600 to 1800. As a criticism of Pietism it has
value ; a history it is not. For the latter task Ritschl
lacked the first essential ; he could not appreciate his
subject. In 1874 he published a lecture on "Chris-
tian Perfection," which went to a second edition. In
1875 appeared a small work on " Instruction in the
Christian Religion," which reached a fifth edition.

Ritschl was a peculiarly self-centered man. Only
one friend seems to have been at all intimate, his
colleague, Diestel. After he became known as the
founder of a school, he gladly received the visits of
his adherents. He was not only independent, but
self-confident as well, and though not a gentle critic
himself, he resented it when his own work came under
the knife.

Tholuck and Luthardt were noted as preachers;
not so Ritschl. Perhaps he preached a dozen times.



Evangelical Church in Germany. 501

but that was in his earlier career. Though his father
was a bishop, he had neither tact nor talent for preach-
ing or practical Church affairs. In real Church life in
Germany and in the world at large he seems to have
had little knowledge or interest. Self-centered as he
was, his horizon was small, and comprehended but
few intellectual interests, and these almost exclusively
academical and theological.

On the other hand, Albrecht Ritschl was a thinker
and a critic. As such, his and succeeding generations
will do him honor. As a thinker, he was analytic in
his method, and original in, after having distinguished
differences, seeking always the comprehensive whole
in which the elements of his analysis should reach
their true union. His thinking was not speculative,
but practical. Hence he was naturally a critic, and
his criticism never failed in learning or thoroughness,
while it was clear and definite in method and results.

Ritschl was no genius like Origen or Schleier-
macher, nor is the comparison with Athanasius in
place. But his service to the educated world of his
time was like that of Schleiermacher, though his
method was just the opposite. Schleiermacher ac-
centuated the comprehensiveness of the principles of
the Gospel and of Christian life as including all great
truths, and harmonizing them and all acquisitions of
the human spirit. Ritschl, on the other hand, exclud-
ing all extraneous influences, developed from itself
the unique power and scope of Christian truth.

The thinking of few men has so met the needs of
their age as this most retired and self-contained rea-
soner and critic. The notes of Ritschl's theology
which were in accord with his time, were reality,



502 History of the Christian Church.

aversion to speculation, so limitation to the known,
and the accentuation of the value of the Christian
Church. This sense of reality dominated his method
and the contents of his thought.

The New Testament Scriptures were realities ; these
he sought to have reveal their real significance.
Biblical theology was the foundation and material of
all his thinking. The experience of forgiveness of
sin through faith in Jesus Christ is a reality, a unique
fact, distinctive of Christian teaching and fundamental
to Christian life. This fact became the center of his
theological system. The Christian Church is a reality,
and the history of its origin always had a great attrac-
tion for him. These three facts dominated and gave
reality to his thinking. Then the age revolted from
the philosophical speculation which had ruled Ger-
many for fifty years, and which controlled in the do-
main of both history and theology.

Ritschl cut loose from all connection with the
Greek philosophy and the speculations of his country-
men. The Church, in I^utheran theology, had been
but little more than a department of the State, practi-
cally ; and, theoretically, a means of education, train-
ing, and common worship. Ritschl emphasized the
Church almost in the language of Augustine. In
addition to this, he placed stress upon the ethical
bearings of Christianity and the reality of Christian
faith as shown by its fruits in Christian life.

We can here only give a brief outline of the distinc-

RJtschi's ^^^^ teachings of Ritschl's theology. In

Distinctive his teaching concerning God, Ritschl re-

ngs. jg^^^g^j ^j^g qJ^j conception of his Being as

absolute, and then possessing certain attributes. His



Evangelical Church in Germany. 503

pyschological principle was, that everything is com-
plete in itself, and is known by its activities. This
he applied to God. He taught that God is in his
attributes, not surrounded by them; that, in the
highest sense, God is personality, and, hence, that
God is love. The chief relation in which he stands
to man is as Father; he is, first, the Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ; then, the Creator of the world.
The analogy of our relations to him is not to the
State, but the family. Not so much stress is laid
upon God as cause of all that is, as that his pur-
pose is working to assured fulfillment in the realiz-
ation of the kingdom of God. He differs also, in
his definition of the righteousness of God, which
he held to be the perpetual and effective faith-
fulness of God toward the people of his covenant and
toward the Christian Church. It is not in opposition
with the grace of God, but is only a modification of it^
and in full accord with his love. Hence, he rejected
every juristic significance in the relations between God
and man.

Sin is guilt and contradiction against God. Sin is
the opposite of the Christian ideal. That ideal is not
Adam, but Christ; and its social realization ^^^
is the kingdom of God. Sin has two sides —
a defect of reverence and trust in God, and a direc-
tion of the will against God. The latter results in a
kingdom of sin over against the kingdom of God, in
which men are active, and their transgressions have
their individual differences.

Guilt is the especial punishment of sin. It is an
expression of separation and mistrust. It is a living
contradiction of God and of his appointed destiny for



504 History of the Christian Church.

men. Hence, from the dej&nition of sin, that which
falls under the first aspect is forgivable, as the wills

of his children are directed toward the
* realization of the kingdom of God. These
sins he classes as sins of ignorance, and that God is
pleased with men notwithstanding the commissions
of such sins, if they are in his Church. All the pun-
ishments of God toward his children are exclusively
punishments for education, whose aim is their better-
ment. On the other hand, those who permanently
harden themselves against the Christian salvation
offered to them, are guilty of sin against the Holy
Ghost. They belong to the kingdom of sin ; they
are no more capable of salvation, and their punish-
ment \9 a definite destruction or annihilation.

Forgiveness is to restore the fore-appointed com-
munion of men with God. It is equivalent to pardon

among men, and restores to communion

Forgiveness. .,^,t-i./- • • - c

With God. In this forgiveness, justification
takes away conscious guilt, and reconciliation takes
away active contradiction against God. Both remove
the contradictions of the will ; and this justification
and reconciliation is a creative act of God. Forgive-
ness is to the whole of sinful men; hence, a syn-
thetic, not an individual, act; and is appropriate as
trust in God and sense of the Divine childhood. This
appropriation gives a new direction of the will toward
God.

Faith is the direct correlate of justification ; in
this, the full dependence of man upon God is relig-
iously recognized and actually attained. In
this connection, comes in what Ritschl calls
the master question of theology, and whose solution



Evangelical Church in Germany. 505

determined his whole theological method. That ques-
tion is, *' How the dependence upon God is reconcil-
able with human freedom, in which it is even as
necessary to think of this action as the same is wit-
nessed through our immediate self-consciousness."

Mere logical theory can not overcome this contra-
diction between freedom and dependence. The solu-
tion must come from empirical psychological obser-
vation. This is shown, because, in the domain of
Christianity, every one who endeavors to do the good
willed of God has the actual experience that he
possesses real freedom only in an especial kind of
dependence upon God. Freedom, in the full sense,
is the power of self-command over selfish impulses.
This freedom is only ours when the will is directed
to the final aim ot the most universal good; i. e.,