UR eet rec ge seco Rzinreners 
 
 tase FH Wed . 
 
 aeons eee einai 
 renee 
 
 * 
 
 =o 
 
 ashen 
 
 at 
 
 anes 
 
 aoe 
 
 oe r - ei 
 Se “ f : : 
 iy ee, - ? 
 
 ee 
 
 tM, : ; ‘ ’ 7 Pa ey Pr =) 
 RAY : Safe Ue . : : : : BoA : é : : poets 
 
 "al 
 
 € spas 
 Smee 
 
 ASO 
 
 8 
 
 Tatar bY oe 
 * 
 
 Each paiee 
 
 Rapowel 
 ba 
 
 2054 
 ae 
 
 § 
 
 Ste a toes 
 
 et 
 
LiBRAK SY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Theological Seminary, 
 PRINCETON, N.J. 
 
elle 
 
 eS 
 * 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 ° 
 ~ . 
 
 Hg > 
 Yat ae 
 
 _ aly 
 Es - 
 
 ‘ 4 = 
 ‘ 
 ‘ 
 
 ‘ 
 
 Pr 
 pre he 
 >, ts 
 i," 
 
 * 
 
 ee F 
 + 
 — - 
 
APOLOGETIC LECTURES 
 
 ON THE 
 
 MORAL TRUTHS OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
EDINBURGH : PRINTED BY MUIR AND PATERSON 
 
 FOR 
 
 T, AND T. CLARK. 
 
 LONDON, . ° ° HAMILTON, ADAMS AND CO. 
 DUBLIN, . A . JOHN ROBERTSON AND CO. 
 
 NEW YORK, . . -,  SCRIBNER, WELFORD AND ARMSTRONG. 
 
APOLOGETIC LECTURES 
 
 ON THE 
 
 MORAL TRUTHS OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 DELIVERED IN LEIPSIC IN THE WINTER OF 1872 
 
 ; 
 CHR. ERNST LUTHARDT, 
 
 DOCTOR AND PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY. 
 
 Cranslated from the German bo 
 
 SOPHIA TAYLOR. 
 
 EDINBURGH: 
 T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET. 
 1873. 
 
tit 
 
 c 
 
 he 
 ? 
 z 
 
 “i 
 
 ~, 
 arf ¥ 
 
 pes 
 om 
 
 si 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 In now sending forth to the public my Lectures on the 
 “ Morality of Christianity,” I can but accompany them 
 with the wish, that they may share like favour with 
 that bestowed, from the very first, upon my “ Apologetic 
 Lectures on the Fundamental, and upon the Saving 
 Truths of Christianity.” The present course is indeed 
 no transient effort, but the fruit of the occupation of 
 years with the subjects and questions therein discussed. 
 I am, however, but too well aware, that success and 
 results are not dependent upon our labour, or upon the 
 time we may devote to a matter. It is indeed a duty 
 to do all we can; but that which is best is a oift from 
 on high. May it have been given to me to have spoken 
 of the moral truths of Christianity in a manner con- 
 sistent with the importance and magnitude of the sub- 
 
 ject, and conducive to the benefit of my readers. 
 
vi fc Preface. 
 
 It has been my long-cherished purpose to deliver and 
 publish public lectures on Christian morals. The exe- 
 cution of my design has been delayed by circumstances, 
 and particularly by the warlike events of the last few 
 years. But the discussion of such questions can never 
 be too late. If ever there was an age when this was 
 needed, it is our own. Looking coldly—to use a mild 
 term—on the dogmas .of Christianity, it requires the 
 moral evidence furnished by life and deed. And this 
 is in all cases the evidence which will carry all before 
 it. Unless Christianity can prove itself to be the 
 moral power of public and private life, all other proofs 
 will be in vain. Besides, this kind of evidence gives 
 fresh weight to, and completes every other. If, however, 
 anything is certain, it is this, and if any evidence in 
 favour of Christianity can be brought forward it is this, 
 that it has been, both historically and actually, the 
 
 power and the blessing of our entire national existence, 
 
 and that it is an inexhaustible source of moral renova- 
 
 tion for all nations. Such has hitherto been its mis- 
 
 sion, and that mission is not yet ended. If this is 
 
 sometimes forgotten, still it cannot be denied, for it 
 
 is fulfilled in our sight. May these Lectures help to 
 
 bring it to remembrance: 
 
Preface. . Vil 
 
 In thus speaking, I am also justifying the title I 
 have given to these Lectures in calling them the Third 
 _ Part of the “ Apology for Christianity.” For if their 
 form is not apologetic their matter is itself so. 
 
 The notes to this series occupy more space than 
 those of the two former volumes. The greater the 
 number and importance of the questions and subjects 
 to be discussed, and the narrower the limits to which 
 the form of lectures obiged me to restrict myself, 
 the more was it incumbent on me to furnish in the 
 notes, not merely matter corroborative of the text, 
 but also opinions on kindred topics, which might carry 
 out what is said in other aspects, and so contribute 
 to its further consideration. I trust this may not be 
 unacceptable to my readers, and the more so, because 
 I have not been satisfied with mere references, but 
 have quoted verbally the more important passages. 
 
 With these remarks, I send forth this book to effect 
 what God has appointed it. 
 
 C. E. LUTHARDT. 
 
 Leresic, July 25, 1872: 
 
CONTENTS, 
 
 LECTURE I. 
 
 THE NATURE OF CHRISTIAN MORALITY. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 The Subject of these Lectures—The Evidence of Life and Deed 
 —The importance of Christianity to our National Life—The 
 World of the Moral, its Certainty and Importance—The 
 Physical and Moral Way of Viewing Things—Moral Statistics 
 —The Connection of Morality and Religion—The Religionless 
 Morality of the Ancient World—The Intrinsic Impossibility 
 of separating Morality and Religion—The Religious Character 
 of Morality in Christianity—The Progress of Morality by means 
 of Christianity, . ? 7 : . ‘ eek 
 
 LECTURE II. 
 MAN. 
 
 The Connection of Man with the World and with God—Man 
 Bound as a Natural Being—Man Free as a Personality—Com- 
 bination of the two Aspects in Man—Natural Distinctions— 
 The Distinction of the Sexes—Of the Temperaments—Of the 
 Ages of Life—Of the Nations—Personality—The True Morality 
 of Man—Conscience—The Law, . : : , wag 
 
x 7 Contents. 
 
 LECTURE III. 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN AND THE CHRISTIAN VIRTUES. 
 PAGE 
 The Moral End—The Way to the End—The Answers of Philo- 
 sophers—The Realization of the Ideal in Jesus Christ—Stages 
 in the Way of Conversion—The Christian—Ancient and Chris- 
 tian Morality—The Nature of Sin—The Nature of Virtue—The 
 Nature of Love—The Virtues of Love—Love in the Life—Sin in 
 the Christian—Self-Denial—Conflict, . : : <pS 
 
 LECTURE IV. 
 
 THE DEVOTIONAL LIFE OF THE CHRISTIAN, AND HIS 
 ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE CHURCH. 
 
 Life in God—Prayer—The Lord’s Prayer-—The Subjects of Prayer 
 —The Hearing of Prayer—Religion and the Chursh—Holy 
 Scripture—Preaching and Public Worship—Sunday—Church- 
 Government—The Universal Priesthood of Christians—'The 
 Office of Preaching—The Churches and their Confessions, - 85 
 
 LECTURE V. 
 CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE. 
 
 Christianity and the Ordinances of Natural Life—The Funda- 
 mental Importance of Marriage—Christianity and Marriage— 
 Marriage a Duty—Marriage and Celibacy—The Love of Man 
 and Woman—Sensuality—Shame —Chastity—Inclination—Con- 
 ditions of a Proper Marriage—Union in Moral and Religious 
 Sentiments—God’s Providence—Consent of Parents—The Bless- 
 ing of the Church—Relation of Husband and Wife in Married 
 Life—Married Life— Marriage and Labour—Married Faith- 
 fulness—Dissolution of Marriage, ‘ ' ° -abL0 
 
Contents. xl 
 
 LECTURE. VI. 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN HOME. 
 PAGE 
 The Family Feeling—Piety and Custom—Children— Duty of 
 Maintaining them—Infant Baptism—Duty of Education— 
 Parental Love—Obedience—Punishment—Christian Education 
 —HEducation for Independence—Church and State—School— 
 Duties of Grown Persons—Of Children—Of Brothers and Sisters 
 —Masters and Servants— Relationship—Social Intercourse— 
 
 - Property, ; : : ; : : . 185 
 
 LECTURE VIL. 
 
 THE STATE AND CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 The Interest in Politics— Origin of the State—Justice—The Nations 
 and their History—Legislative Enactments—The State and 
 Actual Life—The Rights of Man—The Family—The Church— 
 The Christian State—Legislative Enactments and the Gospel 
 —Legislative Enactments and the Spirit of Christian Love, . 161 
 
 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 THE LIFE OF THE CHRISTIAN IN THE STATE. 
 
 The Administration of Justice—Punishment—Capital Punishment 
 —Rulers and Subjects—Obedience—Opposition—Revolution— 
 Legitimacy—Patriotism—Religious and Moral Duties of Patriot- 
 ism-—International Rights—Commerce—War and Christianity 
 —Diplomacy—The Kingdom of God, . : : . 184 
 
 LECTURE IX. 
 CULTURE AND CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 Culture the Duty of Mankind—The Classes—Agriculture—Handi- 
 craft —Trade—Manufactures—The .Labour Question —Science 
 
xu Contents. 
 
 : PAGE 
 and Art—Science and Christianity—Art—aArt and Christianity 
 —Art and Artists—Culture and Christianity, . : . 207 
 
 LECTURE X. 
 
 HUMANITY AND CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 Culture and Education—Nature of Education—Humanity and 
 General Philanthropy — History of Mercy in the Christian 
 Church — Friendship — Friendship in the Ancient World — 
 Friendship and Christianity—Social Intercourse—Recreation— 
 Progress of Society—The Idea of Humanity—The Double Pro- 
 gress ; without or with God—The Kingdom of God the Aim of 
 
 our Moral Efforts—The Moral Duty of the Christian, . . 284 
 NOTES. 
 
 Notes To LEctTureE I., . | hs 4 ; A 259 
 Nortss to Lecture II., ‘ E 5 ; 4 274 
 Nores To Lecture III., : , : ; ; 287 
 Nores To Lecture I[V., ; ‘ ; : m 296 
 Norrs to Lecture V., , ; : : 2 BT 
 Norrs To LEcTuRE VI., ; ; i ; . 325 
 Notes to Lecrure VII., 3 ; , 4 336 
 Notes To Lecture VIIL, A : : A ; 355 
 Nores To Lecture IX,, ; * 4 - : 370 
 
 ‘Nores To LECTURE X., ; * : : : 397 
 
APOLOGETIC LECTURES 
 
 ON THE 
 
 MORALITY OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 LECTURE I. 
 
 THE NATURE OF CHRISTIAN MORALITY. 
 
 a Et OL the third time, my respected hearers, am I 
 | about to deliver a connected course of lectures 
 in this place. When, eight years since, I 
 ventured for the first time to appear before 
 
 you, our attention was occupied with the general Fun- 
 damental Truths of Christianity. The interest excited by 
 these lectures, and, I may perhaps add, the blessing 
 with which God accompanied them,emboldened me to dis- 
 cuss, in a second series of lectures, those special Saving 
 Truths of Christianity which might be said to lead us 
 
 into the inner sanctuary of the Christian faith, And. 
 
 this attempt too you received with kind indulgence 
 In now venturing to make the Morality of Christianity 
 the subject of a third course, I am but carrying out, 
 
 /s 
 
 though at a later period than I could have wished, \”) 
 
 A 
 
2 Lecture I. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 a long cherished purpose. Without this, the former 
 lectures bear a fragmentary character; for the moral 
 truths of Christianity are most intimately connected 
 with those which are the matter of its faith, and the 
 union between religion and morality is an indissoluble 
 one. (*) 
 
 My two former courses were apologetic lectures, and 
 the present one is of a similar character. For the 
 evidence of the life and practice is an evidence that 
 carries all before it. The age has a feeling for facts, it 
 demands realities, and not merely fair words or plausible 
 theories. And the demand which it makes of Christians 
 is that they should prove their faith to be a reality. (?) 
 Christian faith has been reproached as being a matter of 
 mere feeling, and not of actual practice, or thought to be 
 honoured when designated as a noble feeling of noble 
 minds. . Certainly feeling has its claims, and we all need 
 to intermit that tension of mind and will which life and 
 work demand, by moments or hours devoted to senti- 
 ment. But Christianity is not designed for such single 
 hours of mental repose alone, but for life and life’s work ; 
 and its office is a higher one than that which may be 
 filled by music or poetry. It is not, so to speak, a 
 charming romance whose home lies in the far distance 
 beyond the bounds of reality, but it is a matter of the 
 will, a fact, and, indeed, a moral fact. As truly as sin 
 and guilt, and the troubles, wants, and duties of life are 
 facts, and not mere fictions of the imagination, so truly 
 is Christianity also a fact, for it is deliverance from 
 life’s troubles, and strength for life’s duties. 
 
Importance of Christianity to the Life. 3 
 
 But perhaps it is replied, Well, granting that 
 Christianity is more than sentiment, and more than 
 poetry, it is, after all, only theory, a summary of views 
 and notions, concerning which we may hold different 
 opinions, without such opinion being decisive of a man’s 
 real value, or affecting the essence of his moral nature, 
 The most opposite religious views may be held, and yet 
 the very same moral principles and dispositions em- 
 braced and possessed. If this were indeed the case, 
 Christianity would have to be reckoned among the 
 systems of philosophy, and to share their lot. History 
 teaches us that one system of philosophy has abolished 
 another, and that none can lay claim to lasting authority. 
 The office of philosophy is to enlighten the world if it 
 can, but not to renovate it. Christianity, on the con- 
 trary, lays claim to imperishableness, and has shown 
 itself to be the power of renovation to the world. 
 
 Thirty or forty years ago, in the days when philosophy 
 had the upper hand, Christianity was regarded as a 
 preliminary stage thereto. It was said that pro- 
 found thoughts were here enclosed in the ghell of a 
 popular faith, and that it was the mission of philosophy 
 to burst the shell, and free the true ideas from their 
 covering. To give an example, the central point of 
 3 Christianity was said to be the doctrine of the God-man. 
 But to regard Jesus of Nazareth as alone the God-man 
 was the popular conception, which ever delights to clothe 
 ideas in individual and palpable forms. The general 
 idea underlying this conception was the truth that God 
 and man are in reality one, that God does not exist 
 
4 Lecture 1. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 independently, but has His reality and comes to con- 
 sciousness in man. This profoundest of philosophical 
 thoughts was expressed by Christianity in the conception 
 of the God-man Jesus Christ. Thus Christianity was, 
 in the garb of religious faith, a preliminary stage to 
 philosophy. Such was the opinion held of Christianity 
 in the period of philosophy ; but the age of philosophical 
 systems has been succeeded by that of realities, and 
 Christianity is now still regarded as a theory, but as 
 an extravagant or unmeaning one. Life, it is said, has 
 nothing to do with it, and takes its own paths inde- 
 pendently thereof. The practical consequence is, that 
 the attempt is made to thrust Christianity out of con- 
 nection with general and public life, and to make it the 
 private matter of those who happen to feel the singular 
 craving for such a religious belief. We meet with this 
 effort in the most opposite spheres, and this fact makes 
 it the Christian’s duty to prove that Christianity fills 
 the central position in all life, and that hence it is in its 
 proper place when in connection with general and 
 public life. Christianity is no mere private affair, it is 
 a public, a national affair. The future of our nation 
 depends upon the position it takes up with respect to 
 Christianity. Many as are the differences that prevail 
 among Christians, this is a conviction in which we all 
 unite. 
 
 It is an unmistakable fact that God is leading our 
 nation to a new era. After the supremacy of Spain in 
 the sixteenth century, and that of France in the succeed- 
 ing centuries, the German era seems to be dawning upon 
 
Importance of Christianity to the Life. 5 
 
 the European world. But great as may be the political 
 greatness and importance of the nation, its future will 
 only be happy and blessed if it makes Christianity the 
 firm foundation-stone of its new imperial edifice. We 
 rejoice, and we have a right to rejoice, that the German 
 name has so speedily become honourable among all 
 nations. Hitherto we had been esteemed only as dili- 
 gent labourers, as good material for the life-culture of 
 other nations, when one morning the world awoke, 
 and found to its surprisé that Germany was the first 
 among the nations. There is a national pride which is 
 justifiable, and for this we have ample reason. There is, 
 moreover, a national Pharisaism, and we are not without 
 temptation thereto. When we look back we cannot but 
 acknowledge that it was God’s mercy and not our own 
 wisdom and soldiership which so led our armies from 
 victory to victory, that we were like unto them that 
 dream ; that it was God’s mercy which gave us that 
 German empire which we Had so long vainly dreamt of 
 and longed for. Let us then, as we look forwards, 
 acknowledge also, that nothing but faith in God and in 
 His revelation in Christ can lay a firm foundation for 
 the edifice of our national future. The wisest policy, 
 the truest patriotism, is to prepare a place for Chris- 
 tianity in our nation, and in our national life. The 
 natural sources of a nation’s life, even of the most 
 highly-gifted nation, dry up at last, as we are taught by 
 the history of the ancient world. Christianity, how- 
 ever, 1s the perennial fountain of a moral life, in which 
 even the most debased of nations may ever be refreshed 
 
6 Lecture I. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 and renovated. This is a fact which our nation has 
 repeatedly experienced, and the experience of the past 
 is the best instruction for the future. (*) 
 
 It is then with a desire to render a service to my 
 fellow-countrymen, and at the same time to fulfil a 
 national duty, that I would endeavour in these lectures 
 to explain the morality of Christianity. 
 
 The subject of the present lecture is the nature of 
 Christian morality. In its execution you will perhaps 
 miss the concrete features and lively colouring which 
 you are justified in expecting in lectures on morality, 
 but will kindly excuse this when you remember the 
 generality of the question which must occupy us at the 
 ‘commencement of this course. 
 
 Our subject naturally divides itself into three heads : 
 (1) There is a moral world in general ; (2) There is 
 an internal connection between morality and religion ; 
 (3) Lhe progress made, in Chrostianity, by religion 
 denotes a similar progress by morality. 
 
 In all cases the moral view is the highest and most 
 advanced that can be taken, and to occupy, with respect 
 both to things and men,a moral position, is most in 
 accordance with the moral dignity of man. In the 
 intercourse of man with man, in the influence of one 
 upon another, we do our best and our utmost when we 
 address ourselves to his moral nature. I appeal to the 
 experience of all instructors. What is the highest duty 
 of a teacher, and what his best reward? ‘To teach 
 certain branches of knowledge, ‘to impart a certain 
 amount of skill, is well, but this is not his highest aim. 
 
The Moral World. 7 
 
 What is known may be forgotten, skill once acquired 
 may be lost, but the moral effect produced by instruc- 
 tion, the development of moral character attained by the 
 pupil, is a far more deeply rooted and enduring posses- 
 sion. To affect and to lay hold on the man in the pupil 
 is the highest duty of the teacher. And when we 
 succeed in kindling and fanning the moral spark in a 
 boy or a young man, the joy is unequalled by any of the 
 other joys of our vocation, and one which, so long as 
 there are teachers possessed of moral enthusiasm, and 
 pupils possessed of moral susceptibility, will form its 
 imperishable charm. Moral influence is the highest of 
 all influences. 
 
 Again, when we have exhausted all other means, it is 
 ‘to a man’s conscience that we make the last appeal. In 
 so doing, we try to get a hold upon him by his highest 
 dignity, and remind him of the inmost sanctuary of his 
 being. It is true that they are to be blamed who are 
 at once ready to leave anything to another’s conscience, 
 for this may certainly be abused, whether from conveni- 
 ence, or from rigorous legality, or from fanaticism. But 
 this is only blamable because it is not right to use as 
 an ordinary thing that which is the highest and the 
 utmost. And in saying this, we acknowledge that no 
 higher judgment can be passed on things and men than 
 a moral one, and no holier obligation imposed than that 
 of conscience. 
 
 The worst we can say of a man is that he has no 
 conscience. We may pardon, or at least excuse many 
 weaknesses and faults, and even grave offences; but 
 
8 Lecture Il. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 lack of conscience will never meet with excuse. On the 
 other hand, when we would express the highest confi- 
 dence in the moral character of another, we say that he 
 is conscientious. This quality is of more value in our 
 eyes than the highest endowments, or the most winning 
 amiability. And what else do these definitions say but 
 that there is a moral world, and that its decision con- 
 cerning the worth or worthlessness of a man is final ? 
 Is this mere phraseology, or the expression of a truth ? 
 We live in a world of sensible facts and experiences, 
 and are furnished with organs of sense for the percep- 
 tion of the facts of this sensible world by which we are 
 surrounded, And we all know from experience that in 
 proportion as we use and exercise these organs their 
 powers are heightened and developed. How then? Is 
 this world of sensible manifestations all, or is there not 
 besides this the world of moral facts and truths? And 
 does not the latter concern us quite as much as the 
 former? If this is the case, we shall be furnished 
 with an organ for its perception also, And in proportion 
 as we use and exercise it, shall we develop its power 
 and enhance its vigour and susceptibility. This organ 
 for the facts and truths of the moral world is conscience. 
 We all bow before its claims, and acknowledge its 
 decisions as supreme. We speak of a good conscience, 
 and when we do so, we name the highest good and the 
 surest pledge of happiness. We speak of an evil con- 
 
 science, and regard it as the greatest torture existing. 
 
 The imagination of poets has painted the most moving 
 pictures of its agony. The colours they used were poetry, 
 
The Moral World and its Importance. 9 
 
 but the portraits were faithful. When they speak of 
 the Furies they use figurative language, but what they 
 represent by such a figure is a fact. We may perhaps 
 doubt whether the characters of Shakespeare are histori- 
 cal personages, but we cannot doubt the moral events 
 of which these characters are the vehicles. When we 
 would sum up in one word the greatness and signifi- 
 cance of Shakespeare, we call him the dramatist of 
 conscience. (*) 
 
 Certain as are the truths of mathematics, indubitable 
 as are the propositions of logic, so certain and indubi- 
 table are the facts of the moral consciousness. And 
 if we will doubt, we can more easily resolve to doubt the 
 former than the latter. The scepticism of Kant stopped 
 short at the fact of conscience, and the idealism of 
 Fichte admitted this reality. The categorical impera- 
 tive “thou shalt,” was to Kant the most certain fact he 
 knew of, and the moral system of the world was exalted 
 by Fichte to the dignity of Deity. 
 
 The facts of the moral world determine the character 
 of the man. Whether I acknowledge the maxims of 
 physics or the facts of history may perhaps influence the 
 Judgment formed of my understanding, but is a thing 
 indifferent with respect to the estimate formed of my 
 character. Whether I embrace or reject the atomistic 
 theory may be of consequence to my scientific opinions, 
 but does not affect my individual nature. For to this 
 I do not occupy a moral position, as I do to the former 
 class of facts. Hence, too, the certainty which I have of 
 mathematical proofs and logical propositions is of quite 
 
10 Lecture I. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 a different kind from that which I have of moral truths. 
 I am obliged, whether I will or not, to admit the truth of 
 the Pythagorean theory of the squares of a right-angled 
 triangle, or the logical proposition that if two quantities 
 are equal to a third, they are also equal to each other. 
 But I cannot thus be constrained to admit moral truths. 
 In this case, if I will not I need not, for these truths 
 appeal not merely to the understanding but to the will, 
 and the will is free and cannot be constrained. It is 
 this very fact that constitutes the superior dignity of 
 these truths ; for in proportion as truths and facts belong 
 to the sphere of necessity are they of a lower, and in 
 proportion as they belong to the sphere of liberty are 
 they of a higher order. (°) 
 
 There is a view—and it seems to be gaining ground 
 _—which strives to. raise the method applied to the 
 world of sensible phenomena to a universal one. This 
 may be called the physical view. Nature is governed 
 by the law of necessity, and the connection between 
 cause and effect is compulsory. Here laws and forces 
 which can be expressed by mathematical formula, and 
 whose effects may be made subjects of calculation, 
 prevail. It is proposed to transfer this view to the 
 sphere of morals. But is it, we ask, possible to calcu- 
 late the emotions of the heart, and the determinations 
 of the will, with that mathematical certainty with which 
 we reduce to numbers the effects of gravitation, or the 
 electric currents? Do we not know that all the known 
 factors which co-operate in an action must be added to 
 the unknown and incalculable factor of free-determina- 
 
The Physical View of Things. EE 
 
 tion? Here we cannot get beyond a computation of 
 probability. | 
 
 This view has been applied to history, and the right 
 of a moral judgment concerning historical phenomena 
 denied. - We are told that we are not justified in judg- 
 ing, but only in explaining. Children, it is said, are 
 accustomed thus to divide men into good and bad, and 
 when they happen to hear of some past celebrity, their 
 first question is: Was he a good or a bad man?" 
 According to the answer they forthwith hate or love. 
 I must confess that this fact has ever appeared to me 
 exceedingly touching and significant. It is an in- 
 voluntary testimony to the moral nature of human 
 existence. It is said, This is a childish method. Well! 
 we know that not only are we told in the 8th Psalm, 
 that ‘‘out of the mouths of babes and sucklings God has 
 perfected praise ;” but it is a common saying among us 
 that children speak the truth, and Ruckert sings, “ O du 
 Kindermund, 0 du Kindermund, unbewusster Weishett 
 Jroh” (QO mouth of childhood, happy in unconscious 
 wisdom). But it is objected: Our business is only to 
 ascertain the circumstances and efficient causes whence 
 an action proceeded or a character was formed. We have 
 to understand, not to judge. It is no concern of ours 
 whether Nero the matricide or the Christians whom he 
 caused to be burned at Rome were morally the greater ; 
 we have to understand both the one and the other 
 according to their age and surroundings, and that is 
 sufficient. In other words, we are to contemplate 
 history without moral interest, without heart or, con- 
 
12 Lecture I. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 science; we are to examine characters much in the 
 same way as a botanist examines a plant. Its conforma- 
 tion may interest his mind, but it would be ludicrous to 
 attempt to pass a moral judgment upon it, for it belongs 
 to the sphere of necessity, not to that of freedom and will. 
 Man, however, is more than a plant, and the character 
 of man is not a mere growth of the soil from which he 
 sprang, but his own free determinations co-operate in 
 its production, and invite a moral judgment. If we are 
 not utterly blasés, we do violence to ourselves, and deny 
 our own moral nature, when we cease to regard his- 
 torical facts and historical men according to the dictates 
 of the moral sense. If enthusiasm and indignation are 
 —as I think they are—anywhere justifiable, it is in the 
 sphere of moral facts and judgments. We may be cool 
 when we study geometry, and enthusiasm may be quite 
 out of place when we compute the surfaces and angles 
 of a crystal; but they who can thus deal with history 
 have never perceived its inmost pulsations, but are 
 standing soulless themselves before the soulless corpse 
 of humanity. (°) 
 
 This view, which we may call the physical, is opposed. 
 by the ethical, which is based upon the recognition of 
 freedom. This does not deny that moral, like physical, 
 life has its laws and is subject to the connection be- 
 tween cause and effect; but it asserts that the self- 
 determination of man, with its free resolve, must be 
 taken into account as an essential factor. It admits 
 that every action demands its motive and must be re- 
 ferred to causes; but it maintains that these causes are 
 
The. Ethical View. 13 
 
 not compulsory. It knows right well how to estimate 
 the great power which natural temperament or external 
 circumstances exercises upon every one. But. it denies 
 that this power is absolute. For the ultimate decision 
 is still in a man’s own hands. In proof whereof it 
 appeals to the undeniable facts of inward accountability, 
 the feeling of responsibility, consciousness of guilt, and 
 repentance. Spinoza, the pantheist, indeed says that re- 
 pentance is folly, for what is done is done, and moreover 
 could not but have been done. (”) But repentance has at 
 all times been regarded—and that by the best of men 
 —as the beginning of good, and conscience as the char- 
 acteristic and special dignity of man. Christianity be- 
 gan, as 1s well known, with the preaching of repent 
 ance, and the Reformation began with those theses of 
 Luther which treat of repentance. 
 
 The attempt has been made to refute the doctrine of 
 moral freedom by the figures of statistics. It has been 
 shown that in apparently voluntary actions, especially 
 in suicide and other crimes, a certain self-consistent and 
 recurring regularity prevails, and it has been thence 
 inferred, that those actions which we call free only 
 appear so, and are really the necessary results of natural 
 laws, conditioned by time and space, by natural organi- 
 zation and external circumstances. It is true that 
 tables of statistics have been drawn up concerning a 
 series of actions whose apparent regularity and con- 
 formity to law cannot but be regarded with surprise. 
 But even if this conformity and regularity were still 
 greater than they are, they are no proofs of necessity, 
 
14 Lecture I. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 To infer this is to make a logical leap. Besides, though 
 external actions may be made matters of statistic enu- 
 meration, can the disposition be statistically vouched 
 for? Perhaps it is replied: It can, so far as it is mani- 
 fested. But who does not know what bad security the 
 external ‘manifestation and the internal disposition are — 
 for each other, and that similar actions may spring from 
 the most opposite dispositions? But is not the dis- 
 position the real sphere of morality? And how comes 
 it that moral statistics have been drawn up of sins and 
 crimes,and of actions morally indifferent, while no account 
 has been taken of virtues and good works ?(°) 
 
 Such statistics at all events prove one thing, namely, 
 the truth of the scriptural saying, that “whosoever 
 committeth sin is the slave of sin.” For he engages 
 himself in the service of powers who get the mastery 
 over him.(®) But it was his will which engaged in this 
 service, and which thus proves its freedom in the midst 
 of its bondage. It is true that there are limits and 
 restraints to both our will and our power, but within 
 these necessary restraints our motions are free. Cer- 
 tainly freedom is not arbitrariness, for to be free is not 
 to act without reason, but to have the power of choosing 
 and of taking the initiative. We are not mere ciphers, 
 but quantities having independent value in the world’s 
 great sum, and if such value is really determined by the 
 harmony of our will with the moral law, this harmony 
 is itself an act of our will, of our freedom. ‘There is, 
 besides the sphere of nature and its necessity, a sphere of 
 morality. And great as may be the interest we feel in 
 
Connection between Religion and Morality. 15 
 
 the problems of nature, the questions of morality have 
 far higher claims upon us, and demand our supreme 
 interest, for they are decisive concerning ourselves and 
 our whole life. 7 
 
 There is an intrinsic connection between morality and 
 religion.—The tendency of the age sets itself against 
 this maxim, and raises objections to it. Manifold are 
 the efforts of the present day; but their common object is 
 secular culture and its promotion, their common aim to 
 release secular life from the influence of religion, and to 
 place it upon its own foundations. Secular life is so 
 enriched that it seems to need nothing beyond itself, and 
 the desire is felt to comprise its fulness within itself, to 
 the exclusion of all extraneous elements. Religion is 
 regarded as that which is, properly speaking, the most 
 extraneous, because its matter is supermundane, and 
 because it gives to life a reference to a life be- 
 yond the world, and thus disturbs the finished self; 
 contained harmony of the world. So far indeed as 
 religion consists only in feeling and sentiment, and 
 forms a kind of poetry of life, breathing over it a mild 
 and gentle atmosphere, so far it may be put up with. 
 For in this form it is itself but a product of natural life, 
 it satisfies one of its wants, and well becomes those softer 
 and milder characters to whom it lends a special charm. 
 Hence this religion of sentiment is allowed to pass, and 
 is even admired, especially in women. But as for those 
 whose life is passed among the stern realities of arduous 
 labour or public duties, they have neither room nor 
 leisure for it. In other words, it is useless in the fulfil- 
 
16 Lecture I. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 ment of the moral duties of life, and if it will insist upon 
 being religion properly so called, ze. upon maintaining 
 its supermundane element, and its conformity with 
 revelation, it is actually obstructive to them, for it is 
 then a foreign element introduced into secular life. The 
 reason why the present age often takes up a position 
 adverse to religion, and seeks to exclude it from connec- 
 tion with its life, is that it may place the latter alto- 
 gether upon its own foundation. What then does the 
 age regard as the foundation of natural life? All its 
 nobler spirits admit that all life rests upon moral founda- 
 tions. To know of nothing beyond material hfe is 
 esteemed as vulgar, and as casting an objectionable shade 
 over the disposition, by the better minded, who seek 
 to base modern life and its world upon moral founda- 
 tions. Morality is declared to be the fundamental 
 principle of all life; but this morality is to be based 
 upon itself and not upon religion. Morality independent 
 of religion is the latest maxim of the age, the maxim 
 by which it seeks to justify its rejection of Chris- 
 tianity. Tis is the question which really involves 
 the decision of the various questions which agitate our 
 times. (7°) 
 
 But this maxim of an irreligious morality is by no 
 means new. It is, on the contrary, an old maxim, on 
 which history has already given its verdict, which 
 history has already condemned. It was the maxim of 
 that philosophic morality of antiquity, which has proved 
 its own impotence. Originally, indeed, morality was_ 
 combined with religion even in the opinion of the ancient 
 
Lrreligious Morality of the Ancients. 17 
 
 world. Little as Greek imagination shunned to attribute 
 human passions and human crimes to the gods, it yet 
 regarded them as the patrons and guardians of the moral 
 duties and tasks of earthly life. For the gods were 
 worldly powers, and therefore also the guardians of 
 worldly life. Domestic life, civil life, cannot exist 
 unless by keeping within the bounds prescribed by 
 nature or circumstdnces. To observe these bounds is 
 morality, arrogantly to despise them is sin, and the 
 gods are the avengers of this sin of arrogance. It was 
 the Doric mind especially which represented the feel. 
 ing for order, restraint, and law, and perceived the symbol 
 of these qualities in Apollo, the god of harmony. This 
 characteristic was also exhibited by that practical 
 wisdom of which the seven wise men of Greece, the 
 moral instructors and lawgiyers of their race, were 
 esteemed the representatives. From this practical 
 morality of the better kind of popular opinion, arose the 
 moral philosophy of the philosophers, All morality 
 was comprised in the so-called four cardinal virtues— 
 wisdom, justice, valour, and prudence. ‘These virtues, 
 however, refer only to the relations of one man to 
 another in civil life. They do not necessarily involve 
 a deeper religious element, but are merely placed under 
 the patronage of the gods. Their connection with ye- 
 ligion is this: morality is not made to erow out of 
 religion ; it does not thence derive its origin, but only its 
 external support. The two occupied entirely different 
 spheres. Morality did not necessarily involve religion, 
 
 and whatever amount of morality religion might have 
 B : 
 
18 Lecture I. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 this was no essential element of her composition, but 
 held in fief of morality. But even this bond was next 
 dissolved, It was Aristotle, that great master of ancient 
 philosophy, who completed its dissolution. With Plato 
 morality still had a religious character. Life on earth 
 was to be fashioned after the heavenly model of the 
 Divine ideas, Aristotle denied the reality of these 
 ideas. Hence our conduct has no relation to the super- 
 mundane, but only to this world in which we live. Our 
 conduct is not determined by the ideas of another world, 
 but arises from the reasonable nature of man himself. 
 Conduct towards Deity is out of the question; for the 
 Deity has no relation to us, but exists in continual 
 self-contemplation beyond the world of action, and is of 
 no importance with respect to the moral life. Thus 
 morality is demanded not by religion, but by the 
 reasonable nature of man. Hence this is also the sphere 
 of morality. Beyond these limits it does not extend. 
 Now the nature of man finds its most appropriate mani- 
 festation in the State, and accordingly morality is in 
 very truth merged in the relation to the State. It 
 necessarily exhibits a political character. All morality, 
 all sin, is of a political nature; virtue is civil justice. 
 This fundamental thought of the Aristotelian morality 
 was the prevailing view of the then Greek world in 
 general. Aristotle does but give distinct expression 
 to general opinion, and carry it out to its ultimate 
 consequences. Thus religion and morality parted 
 company. Religion was severed from morality, and 
 morality from religion, and the outcome of the ancient 
 
Separation of Religion and Morality. 19 
 
 world was an immoral religion and an irreligious 
 morality. (#1) 
 
 The consequences, however, of this separation actually 
 lie before us. History shows that such religion is doomed, 
 that such morality is impotent. This result of history 
 proves that the two, religion and morality, are assigned 
 to each other, that their truth is only found in their 
 union. That alone is true religion which produces a 
 vigorous morality, and that alone is a vigorous morality 
 which arises from true religion. 
 
 The nobler spirits of the closing era of the ancient 
 world felt that these two vital forces were intrinsically 
 united. It was the later Stoical philosophy that sought 
 to found its morality on religion. The strong point of 
 the Stoics is morality. In this serious school did all the 
 better-minded of the latter ages of the ancient world 
 take refuge. Stoicism had a wider range of vision than 
 the earlier philosophies. It surpassed the idea of the 
 State, which had formed the highest ideal of its pre- 
 decessors, and even of a Plato, and enlarged this notion 
 to the idea of human society in general. Its merit was 
 to have struck out a path to the idea—so pregnant with 
 the future—of universal manhood. The development 
 of the Roman Empire furthered and supported this idea. 
 For the Roman Empire was not merely a state, but 
 apparently a union of the human race in general— 
 apparently, for there was no real union, but only an 
 extension of the restraints of the original state upon the 
 ruins of the independence of other states and nations. 
 Thus the Stoic idea of human society had no reality and 
 
20 Leetwre I. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 - no truth. It was a shadow of the future, but not as 
 yet a present reality, and consequently no vital force. 
 A universal love of mankind was indeed spoken of, but 
 this was mere phraseology, for it was not only un- 
 realized but meaningless. How void of meaning this 
 notion was may be seen even in Cicero, who transplanted 
 the Stoic morality into Roman soil. Deeper sources 
 were needed for the new ethic acquisitions, and these 
 were sought in religion; the later Stoicism of Seneca, 
 the contemporary of St. Paul, is characterized by its reli- 
 gious tinge, and tries to base morality upon religion. The 
 severed streams now tend toward each other; and mor- 
 ality having proved its own impotence, seeks to derive 
 new strength from the spirit of religion. But for its 
 attempt to succeed, Stoicism-must have been in posses- 
 sion of true religion; and this it was without, for it was 
 without the knowledge of the true, the Personal God. 
 Its opinions were Pantheistic. Nature and its laws were 
 supreme. The absorption of God in the world and 
 the deification of the world are fundamental ideas with 
 heathenism ; and it was this false view of religion which 
 prevailed in Stoicism that frustrated its attempts in 
 morality. They were but prophecies—yet still pro- 
 phecies—whose fulfilment was as yet future. ("”) 
 
 I have dwelt upon this matter because I wished to 
 show from history that this modern notion of irreligious 
 morality is not new but old; and that this supposed 
 
 progress of modern culture is a retrogression to a stand-. 
 
 point upon which history has passed sentence of con- 
 demnation. For the moral ruin of the ancient world, 
 
 é A v= 
 
Lhe Connection of Religion and Morality. 21 
 
 which was succeeded by its political ruin, is the verdict 
 of the God who rules in history. | 
 
 And this was but natural. For the separation in 
 question is one at variance with the nature of man. If 
 we ask what it is that makes a man really such, the 
 utmost that we could mention in reply would be: his 
 consciousness of God and his conscience, We dis- 
 tinguish these qualities, but we all know that they are 
 most intimately connected, nay, that they form part each 
 of the other. The expression of consciousness of God is 
 religion, the expression of conscience is morality. To 
 sever religion and morality is to destroy the unity of 
 human nature. Besides, what kind of religion would 
 that be which was of no moral importance? And how 
 should morality be permanent, unless its roots are found 
 in the eternal world? For so soon as God ceases to 
 be the supreme moral tribunal, we have no supreme 
 tribunal of morality at all, none that is universal, before 
 which all must bow, from which none can escape. And 
 then there is an end of the idea of justice. And if 
 Justice is no longer absolute, the foundations of human 
 society in general are destroyed. For all human affairs 
 are based upon justice, and the idea of justice upon God. 
 It is indeed possible to be inconsistent, and to embrace 
 ‘the idea of justice and morality while denying the idea 
 of God, but the inconsistencies of individuals will not 
 hinder the necessary consequences of their actions. 
 “There are men,” says Naville, “whose beliefs have 
 all been destroyed, while their conscience, like a solitary 
 pillar, stands upright among the ruins. The pheno- 
 
292 Lecture I. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 menon presented by these virtuous persons fills us with 
 reverence and wonder. ‘They are, properly speaking, 
 the miracles of that Divine Goodness whose name 1s 
 never on their lips. If there is a man on earth who 
 ought to fall on his knees and shed warm tears of 
 eratitude, it is one of those who, while he means to deny 
 God, has yet been endowed by Providence with so lively 
 a feeling for the noble and the pure, with so strong an 
 aversion for evil, that his sense of duty stands firm and 
 upright without any other supports. An exception, 
 however, is not the rule, and what falls to the lot of 
 some does so to them but for a time, and never falls to 
 the lot of others at all.” “You know,” continues he, 
 “the crusts of snow over the fissures in the glaciers of 
 our mountains. The hanging bridge bears one tra- 
 veller safely over the abyss, but the thin crust breaks 
 beneath the steps of many, and the rash throng are 
 hurled into the depths. So does it fare with those 
 schools of philosophy from which the idea of God is 
 banished, and with that culture in which a lively feel- 
 ing of the existence of God is lost; they sink into those 
 sunless regions which the light of the feeling for the 
 good no longer penetrates.”(’*) 
 
 What history proves, and the nature of man requires, 
 Christianity teaches. The connection of religion and 
 morality is a fundamental thought of Christianity. 
 The Old Testament had already combined morality 
 with religion in the Ten Commandments. There is not 
 in the literature of any nation such a summary of 
 morality as we possess in the Decalogue, that briefest, 
 
The Connection of Religion and Morality. 23 
 
 yet most comprehensive compendium of morals. But 
 morality, as here required, is reduced to love to God 
 and love to man; these are designated by our Lord as 
 the two chief commandments, and we accordingly 
 divide the law into two tables. In so doing we express 
 the connection of religion and morality. But that 
 which has its beginnings in the Old Testament is com- 
 plete in Christ. Who doubts that Jesus was the per- 
 fect manifestation of morality? If ever love to man 
 became impersonate, it was soin Him. But His life in 
 the service of man was a life in God. His life in God 
 was the sacred source of His life in the world. He 
 exhibited in His own person the union of religion and 
 morality ; and this union was reflected in His word. 
 When we consider the Sermon on the Mount, we find 
 this thought in all those sayings in which moral per- 
 fection and love are traced back to God, who is holy 
 and perfect, that we also may be holy, and who maketh 
 His sun to rise upon the evil and the good. God, who 
 is the object of religious faith, is also the source of 
 moral practice. Morality is based upon religion, and 
 ethics upon dogma. Dogma treats of communion with 
 God, ethics of likeness to God. Communion with God 
 is the prerequisite of likeness to Him. Such is the 
 moral standpoint of Christianity. We find it in all 
 parts of holy Scripture, but perhaps it is nowhere so 
 definitely expressed, or so consistently carried out, as 
 in the first Epistle of St. John. If you read through 
 this epistle from this point of view, it will immedi- 
 ately bring before you the fact that the fellowship with 
 
24 Lecture Ll. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 us into which God has entered in Christ, and into 
 which faith in the Father and the Son has trans- 
 lated us, is the power of likeness to God in love and 
 holiness. | 
 
 Christianity, by thus founding morality on religion, 
 confirmed and maintained it for future ages, and in- 
 augurated a new era. For if any fact is certain it 
 is this, that the ancient world had, in a moral point 
 of view, collapsed, and could find in itself no power to 
 effect a moral renovation, and that it was Christianity 
 that breathed into the fallen ancient world that new 
 moral spirit which is still its life. What then, we ask, 
 was it that made ancient morality at last powerless, 
 and: Christian morality vigorous? What but that the 
 former depended upon itself, while the latter derived 
 its vitality from its connection with religion. To sever 
 morality from religion is to annihilate the advantages 
 introduced into the world by Christianity, and to cast 
 a doubt upon the moral future of mankind. Certainly 
 it 1s now easier to suppose that we could get on with 
 morality alone, because our notions of morality are in 
 these days far truer and deeper than those of the pre- 
 Christian world. This, however, is the case, only 
 because they have been replenished with the vital 
 elements of Christianity. Even its opponents owe their 
 morality to the gospel, as Rousseau and Kant—two 
 most unexceptionable witnesses in this case—have ac- 
 knowledged. (4) The very greatest minds of the 
 ancient world had less knowledge of morals than a 
 child attending a Christian school has now. But every- 
 
The Religious Morality of Christianity. 25 
 
 thing wastes away which is not constantly receiving 
 fresh life into itself, and the moral notions of the day 
 will not escape this universal lot, if they cut themselves 
 from those roots whence they are ever deriving acces- 
 sions of new life, and by which the advantages they 
 owe to Christianity are continued. 
 
 In what, then, do these advantages consist, and what 
 is it that distinguishes Christian morality from the 
 morality of the ancient world? You will all immedi- 
 ately answer, It is the principle of love—a love, that is, 
 a motive of conduct, and not a mere amiable, natural 
 weakness,—a serious and a sacred thing, which the 
 world was first taught to know as a union of holy 
 anger against sin, and tender compassion towards 
 sinners, by the revelations of God in Christ Jesus. This 
 moral principle of love was unknown to the ancient 
 world, for the revelations of God’s love was also un- 
 known. With Aristotle, justice is the supreme virtue ; 
 and though Cicero tries to infuse into it some warmth, 
 with the idea of moderation and philanthropy, it is but 
 a cold and frosty thing, and very far removed from that 
 
 “enthusiastic philanthropy,” as it has well been called, . 
 
 which was kindled by Christ, and which conquered the 
 world. (5) The ancient world could lay down laws, in- 
 stitute rules, and set up requirements. But while law 
 may restrain the outer life, it can neither conquer the 
 heart nor change the inclination. Christianity entered 
 into human society with a great fact, and conquered 
 the world, because it conquered the heart. This fact is 
 
 [ 
 
—_—, 
 
 26 Lecture I. The Nature of Christian Morality. 
 
 Jesus Christ, and the revelation of the love of God in 
 Him. We learn what it is to love by the love where- 
 with God has loved us. “ We love Him because He 
 first loved us.” This one saying of St. John expresses 
 the whole mystery of Christian morality. God first 
 loved us is the summary of Christian doctrine. We 
 love Him is the summary of Christian morality. To 
 speak to the pre-Christian world of the love of God to 
 us, or of our love to Him, was to speak in an unknown 
 tongue, and Aristotle called it absurd (drorov). To 
 speak thus now is to name the essence of all Christian 
 teaching, and the secret of its power. The ancient 
 world received man only in his relation to the world. 
 Christianity views him in his relation to God. It 
 shows us the sin which separates us from God, and the 
 grace which unites us to Him; it inculcates the love of 
 gratitude with which we should requite the love of 
 grace. Christianity acknowledges the world; it con- 
 firms all its natural laws, possessions, and arrangements, 
 and acquiesces in man’s position therein. But it gives 
 him a new heart; and this new heart, this changed dis- 
 position, we are to take into the various relations of 
 our life in the world. Christianity did not propose to 
 alter the arrangements of natural and national life; but 
 yet it transformed them all, for it changed men them- 
 selves. The sphere of its operations and its starting- 
 point is the inner life of the individual. It was in the 
 soul of man that Christ deposited the sacred sparks of 
 love to God and man, and thus kindled the fire of love 
 
Christian Morality. 27 
 
 in the heart. From the heart, its warmth and light 
 have penetrated the whole man, and renovated his life 
 in the world. This is Christian morality. (’°) 
 
 Christian morality, however, presupposes the Chris- 
 tian, and the Christian presupposes the man. Hence 
 man must form the subject of our next lecture. 
 
LECTURE II. 
 MAN. 
 
 ia esol theme of the present lecture is Man, his 
 
 natural and his moral nature. For if Chris- 
 tian morality deals with the morality of the 
 Christian, the Christian presupposes the man, 
 who is called and designed to become a Christian. We 
 shall not rightly understand the Christian till we have 
 learnt to understand the man. 
 
 We are accustomed to say man consists of two 
 parts, body and soul. But in thus’ speaking we do 
 not designate his special nature. For have not the 
 brutes a soul also! and is not the body of man organ- 
 ized for a wholly different kind of mental life from 
 theirs? The peculiarity of man does not then consist 
 in this fact. On the contrary, that which distinguishes 
 us from all other beings on earth is, that we stand in 
 a relation, not only to the world, but to God, and that 
 we are quite as much designed and organized for this 
 relation as for that which we hold to the world. The 
 speciality of our nature consists in our occupation of 
 this twofold position. 
 
Man. 29 
 
 We are integrally connected with the world and with 
 God. The world is comprised in man as its aim and 
 close. God isreflected in man as His image. These are 
 the two aspects combined in man as such. Let us 
 pause a while to consider them. 
 
 Let. us make man.—With these words of God does 
 Scripture introduce the creation of man. The whole 
 gradational series of earthly creatures preceded man ; 
 creation thus takes its last step in him; with him it 
 closes. The creatures who preceded him, the whole 
 terrestrial world before him, is, so to speak, man develop- 
 ing; and man himself is the summary of the world- 
 preceding him. The idea of man runs through the 
 previous stages, which are mere approaches towards 
 man; in man himself this idea is subsequently realized. 
 We may say: The earthly creation is man analysed 
 and man is creation synthetized. Such is the view 
 of Scripture as laid down in those words which precede 
 the creation of man and succeed that of all the other 
 creatures: Let us make man. But the word of God 
 continues: in our image. God designs to be imaged 
 inman. The whole world is a mirror of God, of His 
 power and wisdom; but His most special nature will 
 give itself a creature image in man. In him will God 
 Himself be reflected, and man’s soul is to be His mirror, 
 He is to bear His image and ‘likeness: to Him shall 
 man’s countenance be uplifted; towards Hini shall his 
 soul be disclosed; with Him shall his heart be filled. 
 
 This, then, is the view of holy Scripture, that we 
 occupy a double position. _ We are integrally connected 
 
30 Lecture II. Man. 
 
 with the world as its conclusion, and we are integrally 
 connected with God as His image. 
 
 Nature around us is the sphere of necessity ; God, 
 however, is freedom. In man both spheres, that of 
 freedom and that of necessity, meet together. (*) 
 
 We behold in history the joint operation of freedom 
 and necessity, and we designate this co-operation as 
 a mystery. But freedom and necessity are both present 
 in history, because they are united in man; for history 
 is nothing but the development of man. 
 
 In ourselves—in our constitution—there is an ele- 
 ment of necessity. 
 
 Nature around us is repeated in us, in our human 
 nature, and in each of us in a special manner. In no 
 single individual is human nature completely exhibited ; 
 we have each only our share. One has a nobler, one a 
 meaner nature; intellectual gifts and powers are dif- 
 ferently distributed; the material of human nature is 
 mixed in varying proportions. very one is a more or 
 less partial manifestation of human nature. No one 
 thoroughly represents it, not even the most gifted. Each 
 has his limits. The very reason of the interest we feel 
 in each other is that the rich abundance of human 
 nature has its special manifestation in each; that we 
 all have a different kind of individuality. This indivi- 
 duality is our special possession, a gift which we have 
 received, and which it is our duty to preserve and 
 cultivate. 
 
 We did not bestow this our peculiarity upon our- 
 selves; it was given to us. We may develop and 
 
Man as a Creature of Necessity. ol 
 
 cultivate it, or leave it uncultivated; we may supply 
 it with or deprive it of material; we can assimilate all 
 that we learn, all that we endure, all that we experience, 
 and enrich our nature by making all this its mental 
 possession ;, but we cannot fundamentally change the 
 nature which was given to us. He who is unimagina- 
 tive will remain so all his life, and he who is not 
 poetically gifted will never with all his efforts and practice 
 be a poet, whatever number of verses he may compose. 
 We may develop a talent, but no diligence can take 
 the place of genius. Limits are prescribed to each, 
 beyond which he cannot pass. We are not free, but 
 bound. 
 
 And so we ought to be. For we are instruments 
 in the hand of a Higher Power. “Has not a potter 
 power,” says St. Paul (Rom. ix. 21), “of the same clay 
 to make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour 2” 
 We are the clay and God is the potter; He forms and 
 uses us after His good pleasure, according as He needs 
 us in the great household of the world and its history. 
 Each of us has his place assigned him by God in the 
 great whole of mankind; and He fashions and leads 
 us in conformity therewith. 
 
 For not only is our natural peculiarity independent 
 of ourselves, but our lot in life is also for the most part 
 taken out of our own hands. There is, indeed, a saying 
 that every man is the architect of his own fortune; but 
 we all too well know in how limited a sense this is true. 
 Who is able to determine the external circumstances 
 amidst which he is born and bred? And how infinitely 
 
32 Lecture IT. Man. 
 
 does our whole earthly lot depend on these? The 
 influence of the individual himself upon it is confined 
 within the very narrowest limits. And as for what we 
 call chance or luck, we all know how great a part this 
 plays in the matter. JI need only appeal to those 
 among you who are merchants. You know that how- 
 ever cautiously you may speculate, the issue is not 
 in the hands of even the most cautious. How many 
 accidents may baffle all calculations! And this is 
 repeated in all classes and conditions of life. 
 
 In short, whether we regard our natural dispositions, 
 or the circumstances in which we are placed, or our lot 
 in life, we everywhere find ourselves restrained within 
 certain limits, which we can neither pass nor extend; 
 we everywhere see ourselves subjected to a law of 
 necessity which we are unable to shake off. We are 
 figures in the great sum of the world’s history ; instru- 
 ments in the hand of One higher than ourselves, and 
 must let ourselves be used for more general purposes ; 
 and it is on this very circumstance that the connection 
 of history depends. | 
 
 I believe I rightly understand your feelings when 
 I say, that so far you follow me, but that you do so 
 with a certain inward repugnance. You cannot but 
 admit the truth of all I have advanced, and yet you 
 feel that this is not the whole truth; and you are right. 
 This is not the whole man. Whether our natural 
 endowments are great or small, whether we rank with 
 the poetical or the commonplace; whether we are 
 favourably or unfavourably circumstanced—does not 
 
Man as Free Personality. 33 
 
 after all decide upon what we really are, is not in truth 
 our very self. All this constitutes, it may be, the goods 
 we have, the new material:we are to fashion, the matter 
 out of which we build up the edifice of our life— 
 one house is composed of better, another of meaner 
 _ materials ; but it is we that use this material in our life- 
 building. How we use it, whether ill or well, is entirely 
 our own affair, and depends not on the material alone, 
 but upon ourselves, upon the tendency of our own will, 
 upon the moral constitution of our own nature. In 
 the sphere of the will, in the province of moral re- 
 solves and self-determinations, we feel ourselves /ree. 
 We are not obliged to act as we do, we are not absolutely 
 constrained by the natural disposition which is imparted 
 tous. It is true that limits are drawn around us, but 
 within these limits we move freely. We are not mere 
 natural beings, subject like the brutes to the force of 
 instinct or impulse, or to the necessity of an unchange- 
 able fate; we are also personal, i.e. free beings, for we 
 were created in the lkeness of God, the supreme and 
 absolutely free Spirit. 
 
 If, indeed, there were no God, and we were conse- 
 quently in no relation to God—if there were only nature, 
 if this were God—then we too should be subject to the 
 law of necessity ; then liberty would be out of question, 
 and we should not be personal beings properly so called, 
 but only parts dependent upon, and not free of, the 
 great whole of nature. This is the theory of Pantheism, 
 and of its result, Materialism. We know, however, that 
 
 there is a God, a free, personal God, and that we are 
 : | 
 
34 Lecture II, Man. 
 
 not made merely for the world—this world of necessity, 
 but for God, the free Sovereign of all things, and made 
 to fill a free relation to Him. For we are called to love 
 and to obey Him. Love, however, cannot be commanded 
 or forced, and the obedience of love is a free act. Herein 
 lies the essence of morality. It is because we are 
 personal beings that the higher sphere of morality is 
 disclosed to us. We belong not only to the physical 
 but to the ethical world; for we are personal, and not 
 merely natural beings, called to freedom, and not sub- 
 ject merely to necessity.(?) 
 
 We bear, then, within us two aspects, we belong to 
 two worlds called nature and personality, necessity and 
 freedom. Both aspects are most intimately connected, 
 and are inextricably interwoven into the unity of our 
 life. We all know from experience how various and 
 how powerful are the influences exercised upon us by 
 the circumstances in which we are placed, by the 
 atmosphere in which we exist, and by the natural 
 peculiarities with which we were born, and how all 
 these set our wills in motion. But the decision which 
 we come to lies not with these, but with ourselves. 
 The temptation may be strong, the excited. passion 
 powerful, but the act itself is our own. And according 
 to our decision, according to the direction taken by our 
 will, are our moral worth, our true position towards 
 God, and our eternal lot determined. | 
 
 In the sphere of nature there is no morality, and 
 consequently no immorality. For here, not freedom but 
 necessity prevails, here it is not will or ought, but must. 
 
Man as Free Personality. 39 
 
 The different amount of endowment, and the conse- 
 quent difference of importance or value of individuals 
 with respect to the external life and history of society, 
 may be infinitely great. A great architect of the edifice 
 of humanity is of very different importance to the 
 humble carter in our streets. But when they are 
 viewed with respect to their moral nature, the one 
 stands neither higher nor lower than the other. Whether 
 one is more or less gifted, called to great or humble 
 duties, is a matter of-indifference here. In a moral 
 point of view the sentence passed must be determined 
 by one circumstance only, the relation in which we 
 inwardly stand to God. It is this which determines 
 the moral worth or worthlessness of men, and of all 
 men equally. There is not one kind of morality for 
 the man of genius and another for the man of weak 
 intellect. For the disposition of the heart, and not the 
 endowments of the mind, is decisive. (*) 
 
 For this knowledge we are indebted to Christianity. 
 But our instinct for truth bears testimony thereto. 
 When the Lord says in the Gospel, that God looks at 
 the heart, and beholds that which is secret, and that the 
 alms of the poor widow are of more value than the gifts 
 of the rich; or when St. Paul says, that there is no 
 respect of persons with God, that with Him there is 
 neither male nor female, bond nor free, we involuntarily 
 acquiesce therein. The error of the moral view of the 
 ancient world consisted in regarding man not first of all 
 in his relation to God, but in his position with regard to 
 the external circumstances of life, and especially to the 
 
36a Lecture II. Man. 
 
 civil commonwealth. In the external circumstances of 
 life and in our civil position we are all unequal. Of 
 these differences in natural life, the ancient world made 
 differences of moral worth and endowment. The man, 
 it was thought, was gifted with a better moral disposition 
 than the woman, the free than the slave. He whose 
 civil position was higher was regarded as morally higher. 
 And to be prosperous and independent was in the eyes 
 of an Aristotle an essential condition of a whole series 
 of virtues. (*) 
 
 ‘Christianity has taught us to appreciate more truly 
 and estimate more highly the dignity of morality; for 
 it has taught us that the sphere of the moral is higher 
 than that of the natural and its external distinctions. 
 
 In the sphere of nature we are indeed all unequal, 
 for our parts in natural life are dissimilar. In ‘the 
 world, regarded in a moral point of view, however, we 
 are all equal, for we have all the same moral duties, and 
 our different natural gifts and circumstances only furnish 
 us with the material for performing them. 
 
 Let us now consider these two aspects more closely. 
 
 When men are viewed as natural beings we all differ 
 in many ways one from another. A great gradation 
 of inequalities is presented to our view by human 
 society, and these very differences and inequalities con- 
 stitute the abundance and variety manifested in the 
 complex organism of human nature. 
 
 The first and most fundamental inequality in human 
 nature is that of the sexes. Human, like all other ter- 
 restrial animated beings, are divided into the two sexes, 
 
Man as a Natural Being. 37 
 
 This difference forms, the foundation of all others. It 
 is the most ancient; it stands at the beginning of human 
 history, and has given rise to every class of difference in 
 human life. Nor is it historically only at the -com- 
 mencement, it also forms the actual basis of the whole 
 structure of society, and on it too is based both its 
 moral condition and our moral appreciation thereof. 
 For when we inquire into the moral condition of an 
 age or nation, we involuntarily direct our attention to 
 the relation of the sexes, and make this the standard of 
 our moral judgment concerning its whole life. 
 
 In Plato’s Symposium there is a humorous speech 
 of the comedian Aristophanes: At the beginning man 
 was undivided, and not separated into the distinction of 
 the two sexes. When however he became too arrogant 
 and dangerous to Zeus the god, the more easily to 
 manage him, Zeus divided him into two halves—into 
 man and woman. Since then these two halves seek 
 one another, because they are parts one of another. (°) 
 This * humorous speech expresses a truth, the same 
 truth which Scripture contains in what it tells us of 
 the relation of man and woman. The two together form 
 the complete human being. Each of the two halves is 
 but a one-sided, a partial exhibition of human nature. 
 In what then does the difference consist ? 
 
 This function is among the most interesting of sub- 
 jects, for nothing more interests man than human 
 nature. We all have indeed, in our instinctive feelings, 
 an answer to this question, but how are we to make the 
 matter clear to our thoughts ? 
 
38 Lecture IT, Man. 
 
 We know that man is the summary of nature. The 
 preceding stages of organic life, the vegetable and 
 animal, are repeated in him, and raised to the higher 
 stage of human existence. And we may further say 
 that the stage of vegetable life is the prevailing one in 
 the peculiar nature of the woman, and that of animal 
 life in the peculiar nature of the man. 
 
 The plant has its roots in the soil; it is restricted to 
 its native place. The life of the woman is more restricted 
 than that of the man. Home is her place; the roots of 
 her being are implanted here. Home, with its protect- 
 ing restrictions, is her native place. Her office is to be 
 the fosterer of domestic life, the guardian of morality, 
 which is, first of all, the morality of home, and restricts 
 life to certain appointed forms. Freed from these bonds, 
 the woman ceases to be womanly, and degenerates; for 
 there is nothing more contradictory and revolting than 
 an immoral woman. The man, on the contrary, is more 
 independent of the soil which has produced and nourished 
 him; his nature speedily shows a repugnance to all re- 
 straint; it is with difficulty that he accommodates himself 
 to custom and form; his instinct is liberty, and his call- 
 ing leads him abroad. 
 
 If the quiet existence of retirement is the part of the 
 woman, the restless activity of public life, with its ex- 
 citements and impulses, are the lot of the man. A 
 restless, impetuous woman is an unpleasing pheno- 
 menon; we can much more easily put up with passionate — 
 excitement—nay, sometimes we even require it—in a 
 man. 
 
The Distinction of the Two Sexes. 39 
 
 It is not the woman’s vocation to enter the arena of 
 public life, nor to mingle in the bustle of party strife. 
 When she does so, she does it at the cost of her woman- 
 liness. To fight the battle of life is the privilege of the 
 man. The woman’s fairer privilege is to heal, by silent 
 efforts, the wounds which men have inflicted. They are 
 themselves, however, heroines of endurance, and surpass 
 in this respect the very strongest of men. 
 
 The result of the restricted and retired life of the 
 woman is, that her world is more that of the inner life 
 of the soul and its individual condition; while we call 
 the more general life of the mind, our world. We have 
 the stronger mind, they the better-disposed soul. Our 
 mental constitution exhibits greater-—I will even say 
 coarser—features: the spiritual life of woman is more 
 finely worked out. We employ ourselves with the 
 things of the outer world, and enrich our minds with 
 objects; woman lives and moves more within herself, 
 in the inner world of her own spirit and its manifold 
 and gentle sentiments. For this reason, the inmost 
 nature of woman is far more difficult to penetrate, and 
 new aspects and recesses of her hidden life disclose 
 themselves one after another to a man; while we men 
 are soon seen through by a woman, and lie open, from 
 the very first, to her observation. 
 
 The soul is the soil of direct feeling. The impartial 
 ratiocinative consideration of a subject is the business of 
 the mind, ze. of men. Women are generally weak in 
 logic. To compensate for this, they are superior to us 
 in that direct feeling which lights with a true instinct 
 
40 Lecture IT. Man. 
 
 upon the right conclusion, and sometimes looks to us 
 like a faculty of prescience. The ancient Germans 
 already attributed to woman something of a prescient 
 power. Our mind, on the contrary, is reflective; and, 
 if we are to admit anything, we must make it clear by 
 reason and consequence, cause and effect; in other words, 
 
 we are made for scientific reasoning. When women seek | 
 to compete with us on this ground, they are hardly ever 
 successful ; for this is a province which is alien to them. 
 
 To compensate for this, however, they have a direct power 
 
 of apprehension and a tact that often put us to shame; 
 
 while we, advancing step by step, with laborious mental 
 efforts, are but half-way—they are already at the goal. 
 
 You have certainly all found how much quicker the 
 female mind is than our slow and heavy mind. When, 
 
 indeed, we reach the goal, we are the more richly fur- 
 nished, for we have acquired much more by the way. 
 But it only too often happens that we lose our way and 
 miss our end, and cannot see the forest because of the 
 trees. 
 
 Hence, too, it happens that, in our contemplation of 
 the world and its common sequences, we men so often 
 stop at second causes, and do not arrive at the first and 
 supreme cause—at God; while it is natural to women 
 to hasten onwards to this first and highest, without 
 pausing much at second causes. The religious way ot 
 viewing things is natural to women, while we often lose 
 religion in science, because we forget the first cause in 
 our consideration of second causes, and so lose ourselves 
 in nature, that we fail to find God. But while we are 
 
The Distinction of the Two Sexes. 4] 
 
 inclined to excuse, though we cannot justify, this in the 
 case of the man, it is doubly unnatural in the woman to 
 be irreligious. An irreligious woman is a man spoilt, 
 and doubly corrupting to those men over whom she 
 acquires influence. (°) 
 
 The same human nature, then, is manifested in the 
 two sexes, but in each in a special and partial manner 
 only. The difference which separates the one from the 
 other, but which, therefore, refers the one to the other 
 for its completion, is not a merely corporeal one, but a 
 difference in the whole mental and spiritual constitution. 
 This is the cause of the inexhaustible delight which a 
 man feels in diving into the nature of a woman, and 
 which a woman, again, feels in surrendering her mind 
 to a man, each finding that a new world dawns upon 
 him in the other. For the entirely different man- 
 ner of viewing and of apprehending things which is 
 peculiar to each, is ever new to, and excites and en- 
 chains the interest of, the other. 
 
 It is in this twofold manner, in the manner of the 
 man or of the woman, that man is to fulfil his vocation 
 in the world. Our life in the world, however, is to 
 subserve our life in God, and our natural qualities and 
 gifts are but a means for the fulfilment of this higher 
 moral duty. Hence, then, the man and woman are called 
 upon, by that difference which makes them mutually 
 need each other, to help’ one another in their highest 
 concern, and to contribute to each other’s supreme and 
 eternal interest. When, however, we view them as 
 they actually are, we are constrained to say that they 
 
492, Lecture IT, Man. 
 
 contribute far more to mutual seduction and trans- 
 gression than to sanctification and salvation. 
 
 We know that the ruin of the old world was caused 
 by nothing more than by the corrupt state into which 
 the relation of the two sexes had fallen. The women 
 misled the men, the men misused the women, and that 
 which should have been the noblest and the tenderest, 
 became the basest and most destructive. It was the 
 Gospel which asserted the equality of both the man 
 and woman before God, and at the same time taught the 
 difference of the position assigned them in the world. 
 To this very day, as we all know, no greater danger 
 threatens human society than that which menaces it 
 from this quarter. Nor is there at the present time any 
 power which maintains the dignity of nature except the 
 Gospel. (”) 
 
 The next diversity in human nature is that which we 
 designate by the name of Temperament. For a long 
 time the whole question of temperament was declared 
 useless and unprofitable, and it was said to be but labour 
 lost. to endeavour to lay down such distinctions. 
 Recently, however, it has been again brought up, and 
 made the subject of fresh investigation. You know the 
 names of the four temperaments—the melancholy, the 
 phlegmatic, the sanguine, the choleric. These names are 
 either of Greek or Latin origin, and derived from the 
 word which means either the blood, or the bile, or a 
 mucilaginous humour. It was thought that the differ- 
 ence of temperament was to be explained by a pre- 
 ponderance of one or other of these substances, (8) 
 
The Temperaments. 43 
 
 Though this explanation does not indeed stand the test of 
 experience, it yet contains a true element, inasmuch as it 
 makes temperament, though the expression of a mental 
 disposition, depend. upon the constitution of the bodily 
 organism. For the mental life is far more closely inter- 
 woven with the bodily, than we are wont to imagine. 
 Thus temperament is indeed a mental disposition, but 
 it is conditioned by the body, and might be called the 
 constitutional mental nature. This disposition, how- 
 ever, has reference to the relation in which we stand to 
 the external world. And it.is according to this that 
 the temperaments are distinguished, for our relation to 
 the external world may be fourfold. 
 
 - Perhaps we withdraw from contact with the outer 
 world, and retire within ourselves. Here is our 
 world, which we perhaps depict with the colouring 
 of fancy. It seldom, indeed, corresponds with the ex- 
 ternal world. Hence, when we encounter this, it seems 
 a thing so foreign to our feelings, that we are soon 
 powerfully affected. An individual of this kind, ordi- 
 narily peaceful and self-contained, may be violently 
 excited either to grief, fear, or dejection, or even to 
 excessive joy. You will perceive that I am describing 
 the man of melancholy temperament. If I go for 
 examples to the well-known characters of the New 
 Testament, I would name St. Thomas, who was now 
 plunged into the night of dejection, and now soaring to 
 the height of rejoicing faith; and St. John, in whose 
 silent and contemplative character smouldered a flame 
 which at times burst forth in passionate expressions. 
 
AAI Lecture IT, Man. 
 
 If we belong to the second kind of mental nature, we 
 take up a relation to the world, but it is rather one of 
 quiet observation. We do not seek things out; we 
 rather let them come to us; we let much pass, because 
 we can wait; we maintain our tranquillity and modera- 
 tion, and do not easily lose the command of our sober 
 reason. A man of this temperament will however reach 
 shis aim, and perhaps reap what others have sown. The 
 phlegmatic, it is said, belong to the world. Among 
 New Testament characters, I should thus characterize 
 Nicodemus, whose inward development advanced slowly, 
 step by step, but who, when Jesus was dead, was found 
 among the faithful friends who took charge of His body. 
 
 We belong to the third kind, when we place our- 
 selves in an active relation to the world, but in such 
 wise that we let it influence us, and produce in us lively 
 emotions. We feel a need for this continual mutual 
 intercourse with the world; we live upon it; we yield 
 ourselves to whatever the present moment offers; and 
 we do not try to escape its demands. These men of 
 the moment aré the sanguine. Among the apostles, 
 St. Peter was thus constituted, for he was a man of the 
 moment beyond others, courageous and dispirited in 
 rapid change of feeling, and possessing that gift of say- 
 ing the right word at the right time, which made him 
 the mouthpiece of the apostles. 
 
 Finally, we rank with the fourth kind, when we fill 
 an active relation of influence upon the world, when we 
 are not so much formed by the world as it is formed 
 and fashioned by us, and our mark impressed upon it by 
 
The Temperaments. 45 
 
 the power of our will. Such are the choleric, the men 
 of will and deed, the men of history. In the apostolic 
 circle you will directly think of St. Paul, that man of 
 energetic mind and decided action. (9) 
 In past times, the melancholy temperament was ex- 
 tolled, as by Aristotle, as that of the poet and philo- 
 sopher, and the phlegmatic despised as the Beotian or 
 boorish temperament, as it was called by the romantic 
 authors. But Kant, the philosopher, was of the phleg- 
 matic, and it may well be doubted whether Gothe was 
 of the melancholy temperament. We have no right to 
 exalt one temperament to the prejudice of another, 
 Each has its own advantages, and each its own faults 
 and dangers. The differences existing between them 
 are of a natural, not of a moral kind. Temperamental 
 virtues have indeed been spoken of, but these are in 
 themselves no real virtues, though they are capable of 
 becoming such. If the virtue of liberality is ascribed 
 to the sanguine, and the vice of avarice to the phleg- 
 matic, neither the nature of the sanguine, nor that of 
 the phlegmatic, is in itself moral or immoral, but it 
 ‘becomes so by the position which the will takes up 
 thereto. Least of all does one temperament bring a 
 man nearer than another to the kingdom of God. The 
 four kinds of ground in the parable (Matt. Xlil.) are by 
 no means emblematical of the four temperaments. 
 Each, on the contrary, is radically as near to, and 
 as far from, the kingdom of God as the others; and 
 each needs to be disciplined as being seductible and 
 corrupted by sin. (#9) Each, too, is a partiality which 
 
46 Lecture II. Man. 
 
 needs its complement. But our nature is thus variously 
 constituted, that the general harmony of human society 
 may result from the combination of its varieties. 
 
 The different ages of life have always been compared 
 with the temperaments. Childhood is the stage of the 
 sanguine temperament. The child lives for the moment, 
 and sorrow and joy rapidly succeed each other in his 
 case. This absorption in the present forms the charm 
 of childhood. The sanguine always exhibit something 
 of this childlike disposition; and it is this that makes 
 them such general favourites. At the same time, they, 
 like children, are, by this very feature, in danger of 
 petulance, caprice, and instability. Oetinger, the Wur- 
 temburgian theosophist, himself of the sanguine tem- 
 perament, says, “the mercurial (he means the sanguine) 
 temperament would be the noblest, if only it had 
 fixity.” When I compare the season of youth to the 
 melancholy temperament, you will perhaps be aston- 
 ished, and ask, whether youth is ‘not the time of 
 pleasure. But it is, above all other ages, the age of 
 the ideal; and this is the feature which places the 
 young among the melancholy. They mentally build up 
 a world of their own,—an ideal world, of which their 
 fervid imagination is enamoured,—and deem themselves 
 to be raised far above the commonplace world around: 
 There is something lovable in this youthful disposition, 
 and we ought all to keep young in this sense, in which, 
 it has been well said that they who grow old never were 
 young. But the danger of this stage is the pride which 
 despises others, and that revelling in fancy and sentiment, 
 
The Ages of Life. 47 
 
 which, shunning real earnest work, seeks its ideal in 
 enjoyment, and at last in very un-ideal enjoyment. 
 Manhood is the time of work. Now we seek to set our 
 mark upon the world. Our will contends against the 
 resistance offered by actual life, and strives to master it. 
 And such, too, is the nature of the choleric. St. Paul, 
 a man of choleric temperament, could say, I laboured 
 more abundantly than they all. We are all called to 
 labour; but the danger to which the choleric are ex- 
 posed is the love of power. The season of work is 
 followed by the season of repose, by old age. The 
 storm of life is calmed, and gives way to reflection, and 
 combativeness is exchanged for the patience which 
 knows how to wait. God Himself is called in Serip- 
 ture the Ancient of Days, and that which is most wonder- 
 ful in His government is the patience with which He 
 can wait. The obverse side of the phlegmatic tem- 
 perament is however indifference and obduracy. (14) 
 
 The whole world of nature ig a hieroglyphic of the 
 eternal thoughts of God. The temperamental qualities 
 are no virtues, but they are natural images of virtues, 
 and it is our part to elevate and transfigure them into 
 real virtues. We ought to be always children in our 
 lively, yet unassuming receptivity for the blessings of 
 the kingdom of God. We ought to be always young in 
 our love for the good and the beautiful. We ought to 
 be men in Christ, matured and strong for battle. And 
 we ought to maintain that tranquillity of mind which is 
 the ornament of the aged, and the type of the eternal 
 rest for which we hope. 
 
48 Lecture II. Me an. 
 
 Not only, however, are different characteristics ex- 
 hibited by individuals, but nations, too, are individuals 
 on a larger scale. Each nation has a common type of 
 mind, resulting from its natural disposition, its history, 
 climate, occupation, etc. This common national quality 
 is shared by the individual. In him is reflected the 
 peculiarity of his nation; and this feature of mental 
 affinity connects him with the whole, and calls upon him 
 for devotion to, and sacrifices for, his nation and native 
 land. The different historical vocations of the several 
 nations in the world are determined by their different 
 natures and gifts. The vocation of one nation may be 
 more important, the vocation of another more humble ; 
 there are highly and less highly gifted nations. But 
 one nation is not morally above another by reason of its 
 natural endowments, nor has any a right to look upon 
 another with contempt. National hatred is however 
 the special sin of nations. However richly or poorly a 
 nation may be endowed, all are equally called to the 
 highest moral duty of mankind, at whose service they 
 are to place their natural qualities. Each is destined 
 and enabled to fulfil, in a moral spirit, that task of 
 civilisation which is committed to it, and thus to fur- 
 nish stones for the building up the kingdom of God. 
 This is the destination of the nations, and this should 
 pe the aim of their ambition, and the prize for which 
 they should contend. (*) 
 
 The several depositories of special dispositions form 
 the many members of the one organism of humanity. 
 Each peculiarity involves the duty of maintaining it, for 
 
Personality. 49 
 
 each has its special destination in the general and 
 world-wide vocation of man; but also the duty of com- 
 bining with others; for only in combination do indivi- 
 duals form the harmonious whole of the joint organism 
 - of humanity, and fulfil their joint vocation. The natural 
 endowments of individuals and nations differ in value 
 and importance, but personality is the same in all. For 
 while the world is manifold, God is one. Our relations 
 to the world and our duties in the world vary, but with 
 respect to God we are all equal. The deficiency in the 
 view of man held by the ancient world was, that he was 
 regarded only in- his relation to the world, only as a 
 natural being. The consequence was that there was a- 
 sense of the differences, but no feeling of the equality of 
 allmen. The superiority of the man to the woman, of 
 the free citizen to the slave, of the Greek to the barbarian, 
 was exclusively dwelt upon. That one man, whether 
 high born or low born, bond or free, educated or unedu- 
 cated, was on a level with another, was a truth hidden 
 from their philosophers. Individual anticipations of this 
 truth are indeed met with ; but they are isolated, and 
 uttered without consciousness of their importance, (3) 
 . It was Christianity which first made the knowledge that 
 all men are equal the common possession of the nations, 
 and the foundation-stone of the new edifice of human so- 
 ciety. For it was Christianity which first comprehended 
 man not merely in his connection with the world, and 
 as a natural being, but in his relation to God, and as a 
 free moral personality. With respect to God we are all 
 
 equal, in other respects we all differ, but here there is 
 s : 
 
50 Lecture II. Man. 
 
 neither male nor female, Jew nor Greek, but all are 
 one in Christ. In what then consists the nature of 
 personality, by means of which we are raised above 
 the bounds of nature? You will all say, In our free 
 will. For however bound we may be to our nature we 
 are yet free in our bonds. We float down the stream 
 of life, as nature and fate impel us; we cannot pass the 
 bounds within which the ship of our life restrains us, 
 but upon this ship our movements are free. We ex- 
 perience influences and impressions of various kinds, but 
 we possess freedom of choice. Weare placed in manifold 
 connections, but we have the power of the initiative ; 
 we are able to begin what is new, though in connection 
 with what is old. Our actions are occasioned by external 
 or internal causes, but in every action we are conscious 
 that we could have acted differently. This ability to 
 act. differently, this power of the initiative, of decid- 
 ing for ourselves, is freedom. But, you will say, this. 
 ability to will is not yet true and perfect freedom. 
 Power to will is not the highest power; to will rightly 
 is higher. The faculty of willing is indeed the first 
 thing, but the tenor of the will is the main point. Our 
 will has true freedom when it has a tenor in true con- 
 formity therewith. And what is this? We are based 
 upon a Divine idea, which is our own truth. When 
 this also forms our reality, when we act from it, when 
 in conformity with God’s will we put this our true 
 nature into the resolve, and act of our own will, and 
 make it the tenor of our actions, then, but not till then, 
 are we truly free. Conformity with the will of God is 
 
The True Morality. 51 
 
 true freedom of will, opposition to the will of God 
 destroys our liberty, and “ he that committeth sin is the 
 slave of sin.” (#4) 
 
 Such is the trwe morality of man. 
 
 There is, it is true, a natural morality. I am far from 
 denying it. I know that there is a series of natural 
 virtues, that it is possible to live, and to make sacrifices 
 for one’s family, one’s country, the public good, the good 
 of mankind, without being a Christian. When we 
 meet with so noble a disposition our heart rejoices over 
 it, and yet this falls short of true morality. The aims 
 to which such an one dedicates his life are not the true, 
 the highest. They are but earthly and subordinate, 
 and he who lives exclusively for these makes them his 
 supreme good, makes a god of them, and this is erron- 
 eous, wrong, and sinful; for we ought to love God 
 supremely. The decisive question is, whether our life 
 has its source from this fountain, whether our soul 
 places itself in this centre of all being, or stands at the 
 circumference. The morality of a life does not depend 
 upon the greatness of its sacrifices, but upon the inward 
 tendency of the heart, its hidden motive, and its ulti- 
 mate aim; for God beholds our secret thoughts. 
 
 The young man who asked the Lord what he must 
 do to inherit eternal life, was adorned with many excel- 
 lent qualities and virtues; and Jesus, we are told, 
 beholding him, loved him. But when the Lord required 
 him to take the decisive step of giving up all that he 
 had for the one pearl of great price, he could not resolve 
 to do so; he went away with a conflict in his heart, and 
 
52 Lecture IT. Man. 
 
 beyond this internal discord the moral aristocrats of 
 nature are unable to advance. (°) We are all ac- 
 quainted with this discord in the inward man. The 
 eternal purpose of God, that we should find in Himself 
 and in communion with Him the object of our life, 1s 
 implanted in each of us, and is the law of our being. 
 But our actual state contradicts, nor only contradicts, 
 but resists this law. The sad paradox of our existence is 
 that while there is within us an attraction towards God, 
 we yet resist it ; while we long for freedom, we yet love 
 the chains of sin; while the higher ideal of the good and 
 the true is present to our soul, we yet struggle against 
 it; while we feel within us aspirations towards loftier | 
 regions, we yet love the dust and mire. 
 
 ‘¢ Hin edler Sklave in dir ist 
 Den du Freiheit schuldig bist.” * 
 
 You all know the touching lament uttered by St. Paul: 
 “ T am carnal, sold under sin; for what I would, that do I 
 not; but what I bate, that I do.” “I know that in me, 
 that is in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing ; for to will 
 is present with me, but how to perform that which is 
 good I find not. For the good that I would I do not; 
 but the evil which I would not, that I do.” “I delight 
 in the law of God after the inward man; but I see 
 another law in my members, warring against the law of 
 my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of 
 sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I 
 
 * There is a noble slave within thee, to whom 
 Thou owest his freedom. 
 
The True Morality. — 53 
 
 am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death 2” 
 If even St. Paul was constrained to speak thus from his 
 own experience, after God had already begun His work 
 in his soul, how much more true is it of us, how much 
 more true of the natural man, that a deep moral discord 
 runs through his inmost soul! We are in bondage ;(1°) 
 what shall make us free, truly free ? 
 
 Conscience cannot do it, the law cannot do it; only 
 the Gospel and the Spirit of Jesus Christ, the Spirit of 
 inward renovation, can effect this. 
 
 Conscience is the last thing left to man after he has 
 squandered and lost all else that God has given him. It 
 is the last tie by which God still retains a hold upon 
 the man who has erred and strayed from Him, and by 
 which He reminds him of the home he has forsaken. 
 Even in the most degraded ages of heathenism it was 
 still a power, and the times of deepest decay have been 
 just those which have yielded the most touching evi- 
 dence of the secret torments of an evil conscience. (!”) 
 It is true that conscience itself has not remained un- 
 affected by the universal corruption wherewith sin has 
 overspread our whole being. Both its truth and its power 
 have been weakened. If we contemplate the heathen 
 nations, we everywhere find conscience made of matters 
 indifferent, and matters which should be made con- 
 science of, regarded as indifferent. Conscience has gone 
 astray, and does not rightly understand its office. And 
 how often does the power of sin get the upper hand, and 
 so paralyze the operation of conscience that its authority 
 is slighted. Yet in the midst of all this corruption and 
 
54 Lecture af I. Man. 
 
 perversion of conscience, the fact is not abolished. 
 It is a universal fact, which holds good among all 
 nations—a fact which cannot be avoided—an inward 
 authority before which all are constrained to bow, and 
 which all acknowledge, even by their struggles to escape 
 its authority. And truly it is not merely the authority 
 of a human moral law which conscience brings to bear 
 upon man, but it accredits itself to him as an expression 
 of the Divine will against which there is no appeal. 
 For though it is saying too much to call conscience the 
 voice of God Himself, it yet bears testimony in the soul 
 to that will of God which we bear within us as the law of 
 our being,and summons both ourwills and deeds before its 
 judgment-seat, to receive therefrom the moral law which 
 is to guide, or the moral sentence which is to condemn 
 them. For as God is both the lawgiver and judge of 
 the world, so, too, is the agency of the conscience both 
 legislative and judicial. But though it requires indeed 
 what is good, and condemns what is evil, it is not able 
 to deliver us from the power of sin, nor from the moral 
 contradiction of our nature. It holds up before us the 
 moral ideal, but does not give us the moral power to 
 realize it; it discovers to us our sin, but does not 
 free us from it; it shows us the internal discord to 
 which we are subjected, but does not raise us above it; 
 it can awaken within us a desire for freedom, for true 
 moral freedom, but it cannot satisfy this desire, nor 
 bring us to the aim of our existence. It is the remnant 
 of creation, but it is not the instrument of redemp- 
 tion. (1°) 
 
The Law. 55 
 
 And neither is the law. The conscience of the heathen 
 world was deposited in its legislation. Divine authority 
 was on all hands sought and invented for these laws. 
 This circumstance expresses man’s consciousness that 
 law must have its ultimate basis and support in the 
 will of God,.and be independent of the caprice of the 
 human will. What the heathen world desired and 
 feigned was realized in Israel. The law of Israel was 
 the revelation of the Divine will. It thus became the 
 objective conscience of the nation, the former and 
 purifier of its moral knowledge and notions. When we 
 find in Israel a moral consciousness so far purer and 
 truer than even in Greece and Rome, it is to its law 
 that this nation is indebted for this superiority. In its 
 form, indeed, this law was a national ordinance for 
 Israel and for its national life, and consequently only for 
 this people, and not for all; only of transitory and not 
 of abiding importance. In its substance however—even 
 as forming the basis of various civil and ceremonial 
 external observances—it is of eternal and universal 
 importance; for it is the expression of that moral will 
 of God, which we all bear in our own moral conscious- 
 ness, but its expression apart from the obscurations and 
 corruptions to which the moral consciousness of man is 
 continually exposed. Its office, therefore, is as the great 
 objective conscience of mankind, to assist our conscience 
 and to uphold its work within us. Simple as the Ten 
 Commandments may sound, there is nothing in the 
 whole literature of the nations that can be compared 
 with them for the purity, earnestness, and universality 
 
a] ihe ge Lecture lI. Man. 
 
 of the moral consciousness therein deposited. They are 
 the simplest, and at the same the grandest, compendium 
 of morality. It is a wondrous line which this com- 
 pendium draws from the heart of God down to the 
 heart of man—the one the source of all fulfilment, the 
 other the source of all transgression of the law. For 
 it begins with God and with the demand that we 
 should love Him whose love has redeemed us, and it 
 concludes with the evil desire of the heart, and with 
 the demand that this should not be suffered to prevail. 
 And in doing this it declares that all fulfihment of the 
 law springs from the love of God which is based on faith 
 in Him, and all transgression of the law from the 
 evil desire of the heart, the desire that forgets God. 
 External as may be the letter of the commandments, 
 their meaning is an inward one. And if we were still 
 uncertain of their meaning, Christ has explained it to 
 us clearly enough in His Sermon on the Mount. Not 
 the outward act alone is the fulfilment of the will of 
 God, and not with the outward act does the trans- 
 gression of that will begin, but both fulfilment and 
 transgression have their commencement and place in the 
 heart, and all the several requirements of the law are 
 comprised in this one of love to God. ’ 
 
 But requirement is not fulfilment, and the ideal is 
 not reality. The law contains the requirement and the 
 ideal. But how are we to attain to the reality? The 
 law tells us what we must do, and rebukes us when 
 we transgress it,—the law disciplines us, and urges us to 
 control ourselves. But even the strictest self-control 
 
The Law. Lyi 
 
 does not change the disposition, nor lead us to surmount 
 the opposition between law and inclination. Can that 
 be called true morality which does not get beyond the 
 constraint we impose upon ourselves, and knows no 
 higher motive than the commands of duty? There 
 is true morality only where there is freedom, and true 
 freedom is love to God, This, however, not the law, 
 but only the spirit of renovation proceeding from Jesus 
 Christ and making the man a Christian, can effect. 
 To this point our next lecture will be directed. 
 
LECTURE IIL 
 THE CHRISTIAN AND THE CHRISTIAN VIRTUES. 
 
 Tes DLE theme of our last lecture was the man, 
 that of our present is the Christian. For 
 the Christian is the man truly such. 
 
 We all have an ideal within us; the ideas 
 of a perfect condition of human existence—each may per- 
 haps depict it to himself in different colours—but all seri- 
 ous minds are agreed that the highest ideal is to be found 
 in moral perfection. We all place moral perfection above 
 the greatest earthly prosperity, or the highest mental en- 
 dowments. The true ideal of our mind is the moral ideal. 
 
 This ideal is not a mere notion, but the law of our 
 being. This law is within us, we feel that its fulfilment 
 is the end for which we are destined, and our conscience 
 tells us we are not our true selves until we bear the 
 image of God impressed on our inmost will, “Be ye 
 holy, for Iam holy.” Such is the Divine demand re- 
 echoed by our conscience, and which is in truth the aim 
 also of our desires. We may not perhaps confess this 
 to ourselves. But in the depths of every soul there 
 exists the desire to be free from the empty vanities 
 
The Inquiry after the Way to Morality. 59 
 
 which occupy so large a space of human life, and of its 
 own life also. | 
 
 This longing desire of the heart is a testimony that 
 our reality 1s in opposition to the ideal whose image we 
 have within us. Opposition between the ideal and the 
 real is the lot of every human life. And yet we 
 were created for harmony, not for discord. At those 
 times when the Spirit of God touches our hearts, this 
 feeling lays hold of us with a force which we cannot 
 resist, and we long to escape from,the moral discord of 
 our life, and to enter upon a life of moral harmony. 
 Which then is the way by which we may attain the 
 goal of moral perfection ? 
 
 This question has at all times been agitated by the 
 nobler spirits. Socrates, who was the first among the 
 Greeks to enter more deeply into questions of morality, 
 thought that the way of wisdom and knowledge led to 
 virtue. He was of opinion that sin originated in 
 ignorance and error, and that he who had attained a 
 clear conception of virtue could not be otherwise than 
 virtuous. (1) I need not tell you that this opinion of the 
 noble Greek moralist was an error—a noble error per- 
 _ haps—one that did honour to the heart of the man who 
 could not understand how any one could be acquainted 
 with virtue without loving it. But experience has 
 shown us, times without number, that there is a great 
 distance—nay, often a great gulf—between knowing and 
 willing. Even Aristotle perceived this, and controverted 
 this opinion of Socrates. 
 
 The error of Socrates is repeated in the notion so 
 
60 Lecture ITI. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 kindred to modern thought, that we possess in education 
 the means and guarantee of moral perfection. This is, 
 however, to expect from education what it is not able to 
 perform, what moreover it is not called to perform. In 
 saying this let us not be so misunderstood as to be 
 supposed to declare that we desire to have nothing at 
 all to do. with education. To say that it cannot do 
 everything, is not to say that it can do nothing. Is it 
 not evident to all that the province of education is 
 diverse from that of morality? Sin may appear under 
 coarser aspects among the uneducated, but it is not 
 diminished or weakened by the refinement it acquires 
 from education. “When the rose is brought to per- 
 fection,’ says Auerbach’s Irma, “it brings forth thorns 
 of another kind, but still thorns.” The human heart is 
 agitated by the same passions and temptations, whether 
 it be the heart of a man of high intellectual endowments 
 or of an ignorant labourer. Education changes the 
 form but not the nature of that which proceedeth out 
 of the heart of man. Progress in culture moreover is 
 not progress in morality. The periods of highest culture, 
 the age of Augustus in Rome, of Leo X. in Italy, of 
 Louis XIV. in France, were also the ages in which a 
 declension of morals set in. It was the perception of 
 this fact which misled Rousseau to place the source of 
 all evil in culture. It is superfluous to say that this 
 was an exaggeration. But it is true, that when the 
 eye lights with pleasure upon some single sunny spots 
 in the dark picture of human passions, these are found 
 to be more especially periods of moral elevation. 
 
The Answers of Philosophers. 61 
 
 What, then, is to improve us in a moral point of 
 view? Not knowledge, says Aristotle, but custom and 
 the discipline of law. Man must be early accustomed 
 to good, and by being thus accustomed to do good, he 
 will become good. The means thereto are law and con- 
 straint. But do law and constraint reach the heart ? 
 The external actions may indeed be thus controlled, 
 aud customs perhaps may be produced, but not morality, 
 manners influenced, but not the disposition. How, too, 
 are sinful inclinations to be mastered? Aristotle thinks 
 that as the young tree, when it is growing crooked, may 
 be straightened by being bent towards the other side, 
 so must the young be accustomed to that which is 
 opposed to their evil inclinations. But this is not to 
 alter the inclination itself. And even if this could 
 avail in youth, of what use would it be when the 
 character is settled ? Then, according to Aristotle, it 
 is no longer capable of being changed. To the ancient 
 world it appeared a folly to attempt to change a formed 
 character, for what we call conversion was esteemed 
 impossible, was a thing unknown. (7) 
 
 And certainly it is impossible in the way of custom, 
 and equally so by the means upon which Kant erected 
 his system of morality, namely, the dictates of duty. 
 For how when duty and inclination are opposed? <A 
 morality based upon the supremacy of duty over the 
 resisting inclination is, as Schiller says, a morality for 
 slaves. “ But what had the children of the family done 
 that he (Kant) should care only for slaves?” Schiller 
 pronounces free inclination the highest acquirement, 
 
62 Lecture III. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 and regards it as that which gives Christian morality 
 the pre-eminence over the legal morality of Kant. (°) 
 How, then, is free inclination to be attained ? 
 
 Kant’s penetration showed him that a change of our 
 inmost thoughts, a “revolution” in which the hitherto 
 evil man turns round by a single unalterable resolve, 
 ze. anew birth, must precede all moral development, if 
 that which is really good is to be attained. But the 
 question is: By what power is such a change to: be 
 effected? To this he could give no answer.(*) The 
 ideal of the good must be presented to us in the form of 
 beauty, so as to captivate our hearts, and kindle in 
 them an enthusiastic love of the good. Such was the 
 answer of Plato, and it has been the opinion of the 
 nobler spirits of all ages that the soaring of the soul 
 towards the fair world of the eternal ideal loosens the 
 ties which bind us to the commonplace, and calls forth 
 in us a new and higher life. Certainly this is the first 
 step. What would become of the world if the power of 
 the ideal were lost? and how would the soul be im- 
 poverished if the fire of enthusiasm were extinguished ! 
 This is the youth which we must preserve even in old 
 age, and keep in our hearts even when our heads are 
 erey. But we all know that such moments of mental 
 exaltation are isolated, that such a condition is not 
 permanent, that still less is it a power of moral renova- 
 tion. Behind the moment of exaltation the sinful 
 background of nature remains unchanged. The power 
 of sin is a reality. Such a reality can only be overcome 
 by another and more powerful reality; and only per- 
 
The Answers of Philosophers. 63 
 
 sonal powers can operate upon the personal life. Why 
 did antiquity so zealously cherish the worship of friend- 
 ship, and its philosophers so assiduously elaborate the 
 theory of friendship?. Why does Aristotle, usually so cool 
 and calm in his words, warm up when he speaks of 
 friendship, and a breath of poetry linger upon his words? 
 Why, but because those philosophers felt certain that 
 the idea of the good can exercise no influence upon us, 
 unless it is presented to us in corporeal personal reality. 
 It is said, a friend is his friend’s ideal. But our friend 
 cannot be the realization of the highest ideal. He may 
 be a help by the way, but he is not the end of that 
 way. (°) 
 
 Christians have at all times honoured the realization 
 of the ideal in Jesus Christ; for He is the personal 
 manifestation of the Divine holiness and love. When 
 Plato depicts the image of the righteous man, who 
 maintains his rectitude even in the extremity of suffer- 
 ing; when the Stoics sketch the portrait of the wise 
 man whom they make the possessor of every virtue, 
 these are predictions of a moral perfection, which was 
 indeed sought for, but not found, and which we see 
 fulfilled in Divine Love incarnate in Jesus Christ. 
 There is something overwhelming in the image pre- 
 sented in the Gospels—something which involuntarily 
 brings us on our knees—in that marvellous union of 
 humility and majesty. Even if it were not reality, 
 were but an image, the world at least would be the 
 richer by a moral ideal such as it never knew before. 
 But it is no fair romance; it is reality. It was not the 
 
64 Lecture III. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 invention of the disciples, otherwise the disciples would 
 have been greater than their Master. (°) If it were not 
 historical reality, it would be of little avail to us, for the 
 power of sin, which is a fact, can only be overcome by 
 a power, which is also a fact. The first step to moral 
 renovation is to let ourselves be influenced by the moral 
 ideal in its historical realization. But this is only 
 the first step, and we proceed to inquire what is the 
 second. 
 
 Let me answer by reminding you of a significant 
 narrative from the life of Christ, given in the Gospel of 
 St. John (chap. iv.). Jesus, on His journey through 
 Samaria, was sitting wearied by a well, when a woman 
 approached from the neighbouring town to draw water. 
 His request for a draught gave rise to a conversation, In 
 which the different stages of moral renovation are ex- 
 hibited. “If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it 
 is that saith unto thee, Give me to drink, thou wouldest 
 have asked of Him, and He would have given thee 
 living water. Whoso drinketh of the water that I shall 
 give him shall never thirst.” This is the first stage, the 
 stage of the ideal, as Jesus awakens it within us. We 
 then long after a higher good—a better state of exist- 
 ence—and anticipate its realization in Jesus. This is 
 the first step. But it must be followed by a second; 
 and what is this? The Lord suddenly adds: “Call 
 thy husband.” And when the woman answered, “I 
 have no husband,’ Jesus replied, “ Thou hast rightly 
 said I have no husband, for thou hast had five husbands, 
 and he whom thou now hast is not thine husband, in 
 
The Way of Conversion. 65 
 
 that saidst thou truly.” What then is His purpose in 
 these words? They contain the history of her life, and 
 it is a history of sin. Sin assumes one form in this 
 case, another in that. The form is of no moment; it 
 may differ widely at different times, and under differ- 
 ent circumstances, but the thing itself is always and 
 everywhere the same. The second step is to perceive 
 the sinful principle of our being; and to get free from 
 it, 7.e. to be converted. But why is conversion neces- 
 sary, and what is meant by it? Certainly the uncon- 
 verted may possess many virtues, for there is a natural 
 morality ; and that deeds of self-sacrifice for our family, 
 for our friends, for the commonwealth, for our native 
 land, for mankind, are performed by the natural man, 
 no lover of truth would dispute. Besides, it would be 
 folly to deny that great moral distinctions exist among 
 those whom we call unconverted. If some do not rise 
 above the common level, we cannot withhold our respect 
 from the moral nobility of soul displayed by others. 
 Why, then, is conversion necessary, and what does it 
 mean? Great as may be the moral distinction between 
 individuals, this one thing is common to all: our life’s 
 centre of gravity is not in God, but in ourselves, or in the 
 good things of this life. To be converted is to transfer 
 our life’s centre of gravity from ourselves to God, to free 
 ourselves from ourselves, to break with our self-suffi- 
 cient and selfish nature, and to seek our supreme satisfac- 
 tion, not in ourselves, nor in the possessions of this life, 
 but in Him who is the first cause and ultimate aim of 
 
 our being. When we become conscious how far we are 
 E 
 
 \ 
 
66 Lecture III. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 from doing this, though it was for this that we were 
 created, the perception causes us a grief and terror 
 which no remembrance of the slight amount of good 
 which we may perchance have to show, serves to allay. 
 On the contrary, it all vanishes like chaff, as we sit in 
 judgment upon ourselves. In this judgment our heart 
 gets free from the sinful principle of our nature, and 
 turns to God. = This is the second step. What is the 
 power which produces this change in us? The third 
 step to which the Lord leads this Samaritan woman at 
 Jacob’s well, is to refer her to the history of the Divine 
 revelation of salvation in Israel—“ Salvation is of the 
 Jews;” and finally, to reveal Himself to her as the 
 Messiah, for He is the end of the ways of God, and the 
 ‘complete revelation of His love. This revelation of 
 Divine love in Jesus Christ, in which the heart of God is 
 disclosed to us, this it is which conquers our hearts, 
 and uncloses them towards Him. This love of God in 
 Christ it is, which converts us, and makes us Christians. 
 
 The Apostle calls the Christian a new creation, and 
 yet he is the end of all precéding history. As Christ 
 Himself is the Son of Man, z.e. the end of the history of 
 man, the end in whom all his seeking is to be satisfied, 
 all his questions to be solved, and yet at the same 
 time a new beginning, from which a new development 
 is to proceed, so, too, is it with the Christian. He is 
 the end of the man in whom all the seeking of the 
 natural man is satisfied, all his questions solved, and 
 his higher truth found; and he is at the same time 
 a new beginning planted by God, in which is deposited 
 
Christian Morality. 67 
 
 the germ of anew moral life. For from the renewed 
 heart is developed the new Christian morality in all 
 the multiplicity of its virtues. 
 
 we good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and a corrupt 
 tree corrupt fruit. If, as Schiller says, in opposing the 
 | Kantian morality, “it is greater to conquer by means 
 of the heart, than to conquer the heart,” (7) the heart 
 itself must first be good, ze. renewed. First the heart, 
 then the deed. According to Aristotle, we become 
 good by doing good actions; but the gospel and the 
 very nature of the case teach us that we must first 
 become good before we can do good. 
 
 What then are the Christian virtues ? 
 
 The old world reckoned four cardinal virtues : wisdom, 
 justice, fortitude, and prudence. These were, so to 
 speak, the stems upon which all the other virtues orew. 
 You will easily perceive that these virtues refer not to 
 man’s relation to God, but to his external life in the 
 world. To be just in the relations of human life, to be 
 moderate in all things, especially in the indulgence of 
 our sensuous appetites, such was the essence of this 
 morality. Itis evident at a glance, that such a morality 
 is that of the external conduct alone, and not of the 
 internal disposition. Yet the sphere of morality is, 
 properly speaking, that of the disposition. For it is this 
 which imparts moral worth to the actions. In this 
 morality the outer world of civil society takes the place 
 of the inner world of the disposition. Morality becomes 
 civil justice ; and what is the standard of this morality ? 
 The moral philosophers of the ancient world name a 
 
68 Lecture ITI. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 twofold one: the law of the State and public opinion.(*) 
 But we all know that the law cannot govern the heart, 
 and that there is hardly a more uncertain tribunal than 
 public opinion. If this is to give the final decision in 
 moral questions, morality has lost its proper dignity. 
 Is public opinion never mistaken? Is it not, moreover, 
 subject to change? And is the standard of morality to 
 change with it, to be one thing to-day and another to- 
 morrow? The dignity and supremacy of morality can 
 only be preserved by the conviction that in all our 
 thoughts and words we stand before Him to whom all 
 secrets are known. 
 
 Nor can its wnity be maintained unless it is referred to 
 God. If morality begins and ends in our relation to the 
 world and to human society, its idea is necessarily shat- 
 tered into a multitude of single virtues. For the world 
 is manifold ; God alone is one. Hence the morality of a 
 life in the world is compounded of a mass of separate 
 virtues and duties, while only life in God can be simple, 
 and grow from a single root. The moral teachers of the 
 old world discuss a great number of separate virtues, 
 but are unacquainted with the fundamental virtue, 
 which is the higher truth of all the rest;(°) and the 
 actual results correspond with this state of the case. 
 The moral magnates of the old world are strong in this 
 or that particular virtue, but they fail to give us the 
 impression, that the central point of their being is pene- 
 trated and renovated by the spirit of morality, and that 
 we have in this a guarantee that the moral spirit by which 
 they are animated would manifest itself in all aspects as 
 
Ancient and Christian Morality. 69 
 
 occasion offered. They represent only single virtues: 
 Aristides, justice ; Epaminondas, truthfulness ; Cimon, 
 liberality ; Leonidas, patriotism, &c.; but they do not 
 represent morality itself. Socrates is the model of a 
 noble Greek ; but in his last hours he was unfeeling to 
 his wife and children. Plato and Aristotle were teachers 
 of wisdom, but their verdict on the sensual errors of 
 their fellow-countrymen was more than lenient. Cato 
 was proverbial for his integrity in public life, but was 
 cruel to his slaves; and we might adduce many more 
 such instances. Everywhere we see single virtues; 
 nowhere do we find the spirit of morality filling the 
 whole man. 
 
 This reflection presses upon us in other provinces 
 also. Let us take a glance, eg. at the ancient drama ! 
 In the drama a moral conflict is carried on. Of what 
 kind then are the moral conflicts in the ancient drama ? 
 They are only such as arise from the opposition between 
 different single virtues and duties. Nowhere do we 
 meet with the idea of the moral law itself in conflict 
 with sin, and becoming that Divine justice which pre- 
 sides over human history, and visits sin upon the sinner. 
 Even that very drama which is most consonant with our 
 sentiments, the Antigone of Sophocles, is based upon a 
 collision of separate duties—duty towards a deceased 
 brother, and the duty towards the law of the State. 
 Into such a collision I may be betrayed by fate without 
 any fault of my own. But I cannot come into collision 
 with the moral law itself except by my own fault. The 
 feature which makes Shakespeare a Christian dramatist 
 
70 Lecture ITI. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 is, that he refers all conflicts to such voluntary offences, 
 though the transgression .may be but slight, and have 
 taken place in the inner world of the thoughts. Hence 
 it is not the power of fate, but the law of righteousness, 
 which he brings into prominence in the intricate fabric 
 of human affairs. (2°) — 
 
 We see, then, that ancient morality was not acquainted 
 with virtue, but only with the virtues, because it made 
 virtue consist in the external action, and not in the 
 disposition of the heart. The Christian notion of virtue 
 is to make it consist in the disposition, and indeed in the 
 disposition towards God. This was the morality taught 
 by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount. It is in the 
 inner world of the heart that the will of God is either 
 fulfilled or transgressed. Whether the eye of man 
 discerns it or not 1s a matter of indifference ; God seeth 
 in secret. And equally indifferent is it against whom 
 our transgression is directly committed, for all sin is sin 
 against God. | 
 
 For this reason virtue is the same inall. The outward 
 appearance of morality may differ in the man and in the 
 woman, in the child and the adult. But to make from 
 this a different morality, as the ancients did, is to mis- 
 conceive its essential nature. God demands of all, high 
 and low, educated and uneducated, the same love of the 
 heart. For this knowledge we are indebted to Chris- 
 tianity, which introduced into the world the wnity of 
 morality. Where Christianity is unknown, distinctions 
 prevail. Even the judgment as to right and wrong is 
 different in different countries and nations. The unity 
 
 a 
 
The Nature of Sin. (fe 
 
 of morality.is the supreme means of mutual understand- 
 ing and association. The main bond of society is severed 
 when the unity of morality is denied. Christianity, by 
 placing morality in the disposition, and pronouncing 
 the relation towards God to be that by which all the 
 other relations are determined, brought into the world 
 the unity of morality. We proceed then to inquire: 
 What is this moral disposition which is equally required 
 in all ? 
 
 Morality is the opposite of sin; let us then first 
 endeavour clearly to perceive wherein the essence of sin 
 consists. } 
 
 Sin is not merely sensuality. For ambition and pride, 
 or self-righteousness, are as much sins as fleshly lust, 
 and it is quite indifferent with respect to the dominion 
 of sin, whether the body is alive to sensible impressions 
 or not. For the seat of sin is not in the body but in 
 the heart. 
 
 Sin is not merely the weakness of human nature 
 stopping on the way to its goal, but it is opposition to 
 good ; and couscience does not merely find what excuses 
 it can for our sins, but condemns them. 
 
 Sin is not merely the law of our finiteness. For then 
 it would be a thing necessary, and God Himself, who is 
 holy, its ultimate cause. We shall be finite beings to 
 all eternity, but we hope to be free from sin. The 
 perfection set before us is not to escape the limits of our 
 finite nature, but to love God with all our heart, with 
 . all our mind, and with all our powers. 
 
 Sin is not the triumph of our freedom, but its misuse. 
 
72 Lecture IIT. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 For to love God is true freedom, and obedience is the 
 way to freedom. The misuse of freedom does not 
 set us at liberty, but enslaves us. He that committeth 
 sin is the slave of sin, as we may see every day in the 
 tyranny exercised by certain sins and passions over those 
 who are addicted to them. And this apples not to 
 particular sins only, but to sin in general. 
 
 We theologians are often reproached with exaggerating 
 sin, that the gospel which we proclaim may shine the 
 more brightly upon this dark background of the picture. 
 I think, however, that it is superfluous to paint sin in 
 dark colours; for the deep shadows it casts on human 
 life are dark enough. Let us then speak justly of it. 
 And how can we speak of it in milder terms than to call 
 it an error of the heart? Man, instead of giving his 
 heart to God, has chosen to bestow his affections on the 
 world, this world of perishable possessions and pleasures. 
 But it is a fatal error; for it thrusts us out from our 
 true centre, and destroys the harmony of our existence. 
 We are made for God, and are to find in Him the centre 
 of our life and the end for which we are destined. To 
 this appointment sin is the contradiction. 
 
 Every matter is to be understood by its origin. Ac- 
 cording to Scripture, sin had its beginning in this world, 
 in the fall of the first created human beings. Whatever 
 opinion may be held as to the historical character of 
 this narrative, the profound psychological penetration 
 therein contained is unmistakable. There are in this 
 account three sayings to which significant prominence 
 is given. “Yea, hath God said?” is the first. Faith in 
 
 ee 
 
The Nature of Sin. ths) 
 
 God is shaken. The beginning of sin is that unbelief 
 by which a man inwardly severs himself from God. 
 “ Ye shall be as God,” is the second saying, and it is one 
 of proud self-deification. For when God ceases to be 
 man’s God, man becomes his owngod. He then knows 
 nothing higher than himself. “ And the woman beheld 
 that the tree was good for food, ... and took of the 
 fruit and did eat.” This is the third saying. Sin is 
 now become sensual lust, to which such enjoyment is 
 the end of existence. Unbelief, pride, and lust—these 
 are the three stages and aspects of sin; and these have 
 obtained historical status in three mental tendencies. 
 “Yea, hath God said ?” such is the motto of Rationalism. 
 “Ye shall be as God :” such is the motto of Pantheism. 
 “ And the woman saw. . . and ate:” such is the motto of 
 Materialism. Rationalism, with its unbelief, led the 
 way; Pantheism followed with its proud selt-deifica- 
 tion; we are now in the era of Materialism. This 
 Materialism manifests its earthly and sensual nature 
 under a threefold form. It appears either as the pursuit 
 of gain, the pursuit of power, or the pursuit of enjoy- 
 ment. But after all it is never these things themselves 
 that man seeks; they are but his means, not his end. 
 What he seeks in all is his own gratification, his own 
 self. Man seeks himself in all. Even in the passionate 
 love which he entertains for another human being, he 
 seeks himself. His passion is egotism. For when he 
 ceased to have in God the centre and aim of his life, he 
 transposed that centre and aim to himself. The essence 
 of sin is selfishness. In these three stages of unbelief, 
 
74. Lecture III. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 pride, and worldly lust, in all their various forms, it is 
 always his own self that fills the thoughts and purposes 
 of man, his own self that he places on that throne from 
 which he has banished God. : 
 
 ‘The essence of sin is selfishness, but the essence of 
 virtue is love. For this is the opposite to selfishness. 
 Sin is the transgression of the law; but love is the 
 fulfilling of the law. This is the ideal of Christian 
 morality. 
 
 The ideal of the ancients was pride. When Aristotle 
 depicts the magnanimous man who is his moral ideal, 
 he is one who being complete in himself, neither has 
 need of, nor renders service to others, who proudly and 
 tranquilly goes his own way, self-sufficient and self- 
 conscious. And when the Stoic philosophy portrays 
 the wise man, it presents an image of one whose heart 
 has died out and been replaced by a frigid resignation, 
 of one unsusceptible of joy or sorrow, inaccessible to 
 indignation or compassion, and raised in proud tran- 
 quillity above what agitates the minds of other men. It 
 might almost -be said that the saying of Cain, “ Am I 
 my brother’s keeper ?” was hovering on his lips. (1) 
 
 How different is the ideal placed before us! We have 
 learnt from Jesus Christ to esteem ministering love as 
 of all things the greatest, and sacrifice as the most 
 exalted of deeds. The virtue of the Christian is love. 
 We love Him because He first loved us, is a summary 
 of Christianity. The love of God to us is the subject of 
 Christian doctrine; our love to God the principle of 
 Christian morality. 
 
The Essence of Virtwe—Love. 75 
 
 The virtue of the Christian is love, what then is meant 
 by love ? 
 
 What we call love in the conduct of men to each other 
 in this world, is an image of true love to God. We 
 must understand the one by the other. 
 
 Love is not a matter, merely of the feeling, nor cer- 
 tainly merely of the imagination. True love dwells in 
 the deepest roots of the will. Here it has its secret 
 dwelling-place when feeling is silent, and imagination 
 has forsaken us. As we are to believe without seeing, 
 so, too, are we to be strong enough to love God with- 
 out feeling. 
 
 It is a tremendous thing to talk of love to God. For 
 in all love there is something that is levelling If I 
 love any one, I put myself on a level with him, and 
 place him on a level with me. Great as may be the 
 differences separating me amd one whom I love, love 
 reconciles them. It is a tremendous thing to talk of 
 love to God. Aristotle called it absurd. For truly we 
 must have experienced the love of God to ourselves, 
 before we can love Him in return. Only becanse He 
 chose to love us, can we choose to love Him. What 
 then is it to love ? 
 
 To love is, first of all, not to seek self. Love is self- 
 denial, and is in virtue thereof the opposite of selfish- 
 ness. It is the nature of one who loves to desire to 
 possess nothing for himself alone, nay, not to be his 
 own, but another’s. Love says: It is more blessed to 
 give than to receive. The most blessed giving, however, 
 is to give ourself. Love means: to seek not one’s-self but 
 
76 Lecture ITI. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 another, his will, his profit, his pleasure. The words of 
 selfishness.are: I, my, my will be done. The words of 
 love: Thou, Thy, Thy will be done. When we love, our 
 chief concern is not that we, but that another should be 
 appreciated and esteemed. Even the erief which one — 
 who loves experiences at the hands of the loved one, 
 does not destroy his love, but only makes him more 
 sensible, even though painfully so, of it. Such too is 
 the nature of love to God. Our interest is in God, in 
 God Himself. It seeks not His gifts but Himself: “I 
 desire not Thine”—says Luther, speaking for the true 
 children of God—* but Thee. Thou art not dearer to 
 me when things go well, nor less dear when things go 
 ill with me.” And even if they knew that there were no 
 heaven, no hell, and no reward, they would still love 
 God for His own sake. To love God without reward 
 is the maxim not of the mystics merely, but of all true 
 Christians. 
 
 To love God is to seek not ourselves but Him, and 
 again it is to seek ourselves and all others only in God. 
 For we do, in any case, love ourselves, and it would be 
 unnatural not to do so. “No one ever hated his own 
 flesh,” says the Apostle; and the things of this world 
 involuntarily awaken within us this feature of love, which 
 it would be vain to try to obliterate. But all this love 
 for self and the world is sanctified by being included in 
 ~ love to God. For God must so wholly fill our heart, 
 and rule our will, as to leave room for no other love 
 except as part of this love. The way rightly to possess, 
 rightly to love the world and the things of the world, is 
 
Love and its Virtues. 77 
 
 first to have released ourselves from love to them, and 
 to have heartily forsaken and renounced everything 
 that we may gain Him, and then to find and regain all 
 in God. Our regards are to be so exclusively directed 
 to Him, that we lose sight of all besides, until we learn 
 to see and rejoice in it, looking at it as it were through 
 Him. ) 
 
 Such is love to God. There is nothing more free and 
 at the same time nothing more necessary than love. 
 All else can be commanded, love cannot be commanded, 
 it must ever remain uncompelled. And yet when once 
 we love, it is so natural to us, that we cannot under- 
 stand how it could be otherwise. It is the most 
 necessary thing there is—it is’ an intrinsic necessity 
 which is one with freedom. That is true freedom in 
 which inclination and duty are no longer opposed to 
 each other. Therefore love to God is true morality. 
 In it we find our truth. For to love God is the end to 
 which we are destined. The other creatures were made 
 to be the ministers of His will. Man was made to love 
 Him. Hence love to God is our happiness. Never is 
 man happier than when he loves, when through love he 
 surrenders himself to live in another. Everything 
 earthly is a parable, and finds its higher truth in God. 
 It is man’s highest happiness to love God, because this 
 is the end for which he was destined. 
 
 Love then is the virtue of the Christian. And to 
 love means to love God. (22) 
 
 Out of this love to God grows all the other virtues. 
 They are nothing else than the development of love. 
 
78 Lecture ITI, The Christian Virtues. 
 
 They form, not a mass without order or connection, but 
 as springing from one common root, a unity, or, if I may 
 use the word, a system of virtues. “Virtue,” says 
 Augustine, “is the order of love.” (8) God is the cause 
 of love, in which he who loves Him sinks himself, the 
 ever-present One in whom he lives, the future to 
 which he is tending. From this threefold position the 
 Christian virtues result. 
 
 Allow me a few words on these virtues. 
 
 Of all the Christian virtues, the first both in order 
 and rank, is humility. According to its measure do we 
 estimate the Christian,.and the Lord demands this 
 child-like spirit of humility above all else from His 
 disciples if they would be members of His kingdom. 
 This was the very virtue which was unknown to the 
 ancients, and a contemptuous meaning lingers in the 
 word by which they defined humility. Their chief 
 virtue was pride. But since the Lord spoke in this 
 proud world the words, “Iam meek and lowly of heart,” 
 humility has been promoted to the first rank in the 
 circle of Christian virtues, has become the condition of 
 the highest privileges. She who was chief in suffering, 
 and he who was in labours most abundant, the Virgin 
 Mary and St. Paul, were also humble beyond all others. 
 For only so far as we are and desire to be esteemed as 
 nothing in ourselves, do we leave God room to carry 
 on His work within us, and to pour out His grace 
 upon us. (1) 
 
 With humility is combined gratitude. Humility 
 abases us before God as creatures before the Creator, 
 
Love and its Virtues. 79 
 
 as sinners before the holy God, as recipients of mercy 
 before Him who is abundant in mersy. Love is 
 humble when it looks to God, thankful when it looks to 
 itself; all love is thankful. For when we think the love 
 of another is deserved there is no true love. True love 
 exists only in connection with the feeling of undeserved 
 favour. And what is more undeserved than God and 
 His love ? 
 
 Love to God is humble and thankful when it sinks 
 itself in the contemplation of God, its eternal cause. 
 Obedience to God and delight in Him are its qualities 
 when it lives and moves in Him. For love makes the 
 will of the beloved one its own in obedience. Without 
 obedience love would not be moral conduct, and without 
 love obedience would not be free. Without delight, 
 moreover, love and the obedience it renders would not 
 be lively. No one loves another without delighting in 
 him ; because he knows what a treasure he possesses in 
 him. God is the supreme treasure, the treasure of 
 treasures, the soul’s highest joy. When God created 
 man He rejoiced in him and rested in him, He created 
 and purposed nothing beyond him. And when man 
 finds his God and possesses Him in love, he rejoices in 
 Him, and rests in Him, for he desires nothing beside 
 Him. 
 
 But he desires to possess Him more and more. The 
 present is to the Christian only a pledge of the future, 
 and inasmuch as love finds the future which it hopes 
 for in God, is it desire after God and rest in Him. All 
 love exhibits this characteristic feature of desire, and is 
 
80 Lecture III. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 ever striving to reach a higher stage than it has yet 
 attained; nor does the amount of intercourse enjoyed 
 ever fully satisfy it. As the eyes of one who loves are 
 ever seeking the beloved, because his heart and mind 
 are ever with him, so does the soul of one who loves 
 God ever follow after Him, and say with the Psalmist, 
 “My soul thirsteth for God.” But the Christian is 
 assured of attaining that which he thus longs after. 
 This gives him true repose: “My soul is silent to God, 
 of whom cometh my salvation.” His longing desire is 
 not restlessness, but patient, waiting rest in God. He 
 who is not sure of attaining his end is uneasy, because 
 uncertain, by the way. But the fact that this is assured 
 to us makes us tranquil and calm even in the storms of 
 life, and enables us to keep an eternal Sabbath even in 
 the midst of this restless life in time. 
 
 These are the virtues involved in the virtue of love, 
 which diffuse their gentle rays over the Christian’s life. 
 For a Christian’s whole demeanour in this world is but 
 the reflection of his inward disposition towards God. 
 As God maketh His sun to rise upon the evil and the 
 good, and sendeth rain upon the just and the unjust, so 
 too is the love of the Christian all-comprehending, and 
 not conditioned by the merits or amiability of others. 
 Tt has indeed—as is natural—its narrower and wider 
 circles, and its degrees of greater or less intensity. But 
 as the love of God is bestowed on all, and is not to be 
 turned aside by the ingratitude of man, so too does the 
 Christian’s love embrace, in intercession at least, all 
 mankind, and include in its prayers even the hostile 
 
The Christian Conflict. ‘(eh 
 
 and unthankful. Our Lord designates this love as the 
 token of His followers, “ By this shall all men know that 
 ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” 
 And it was by this quality that the ancient heathen 
 world recognised Christians. “See how they love one 
 another!” “They love before they know each other!” 
 they exclaimed with astonishment, for it was a thing 
 wholly incomprehensible. Such a saying as the well- 
 known words of Christ: “Love your enemies, bless 
 them that curse you, and pray for them that despite- 
 fully use you and persecute you,” had hitherto been 
 unheard in the world, or even if perchance uttered—as 
 an involuntary testimony to the truth which exists in 
 the depths of the soul—it had been but a saying, and 
 never realized. Now it became however, as we all 
 know, reality in Christ; and in Christians also, for it 
 was the power by which they overcame the world. (1°) 
 You will say, perhaps, that I am drawing an ideal 
 picture, that this may apply to the early days of the 
 first love of Christendom, and to certain elect souls, but 
 will question whether it holds good of Christians in 
 general. I reply that it is not an ideal, but reality, 
 though not indeed the whole reality. For though the 
 new spirit proceeding from Jesus Christ attains the 
 supremacy, yet the power of the former opposition is 
 never entirely subdued, so long as we are within the 
 bounds of this earthly existence. As Luther expresses 
 it, we still carry the old Adam round our necks, That 
 we shall not be wholly free from this discord so long as 
 
 we live on earth, is the fact which casts a tinge of sad- 
 F 
 
82 Lecture IIT. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 ness on the Christian’s countenance. But the power of 
 sin is to the Christian not a source of sorrow merely, 
 but also a challenge addressed to his will Scripture 
 not seldom portrays the Christian as a cross-bearer and 
 a warrior; and in so doing, it describes the double duty 
 of self-denial and conflict imposed upon the Christian 
 by sin. 
 
 Self-Denial—for the seductive power exercised upon 
 the Christian by sin, makes it incumbent upon him to 
 debar himself of all that might minister thereto, that 
 he may be faithful to the moral task imposed upon him. 
 The Romish Church requires abstinence, and various 
 ascetic exercises as proofs of piety. Our Church rejects 
 this doctrine; for such exercises are not proofs of 
 piety, but only means of attaining it. In this latter 
 aspect, however, they are both lawful and necessary. 
 We have no right to misuse the body; but it is our 
 duty to keep it in subjection, that it may be our obedi- 
 ent instrument in the fulfilment of our moral duty. 
 We have no right to suppress our intellectual gifts ; but 
 it is our duty to deny ourselves anything which might 
 excite our imagination, in such a manner as to interfere 
 with our life in God, or with the performance of our 
 moral duty in the world. The twofold standard of 
 life in God, and the fulfilment of our moral task in the 
 world, is that by which all self-denial must be estimated. 
 To remind us of this is the office of the sorrow which 
 we have to experience ; for all sorrow has the property 
 of loosening the ties that bind us, of withdrawing us 
 from the ordinary turmoil of the world, of attracting us 
 
The Christian Conflict. 83 
 
 to God. Such is the great and blessed office of sorrow. 
 And in proportion as we allow it to exercise this, does 
 it become the cross which we carry after Christ. For 
 as Christ prepared salvation for us on the cross, so are 
 we to be prepared for salvation by the cross. (16) 
 
 One duty, then, imposed upon us by sin, is that of 
 renunciation and self-denial. The other is that of con- 
 fact, by which we defend ourselves against it, and 
 against its seductive influence. The whole life of the 
 Christian bears this form of conflict ; for the new man 
 in Christ has constantly to defend himself against the 
 old man. The power of sin is indeed broken in the 
 central point of the personal life, and restricted to the 
 circumference of our mental and bodily nature. But 
 the secret force of its temptations, amounting even to 
 the demoniac form of evil thoughts, which expose the 
 soul to the power of doubt, and plunge it into profound 
 melancholy, or cast about it the dark net, which drags 
 it to the very brink of the precipice, is sometimes only 
 the more keenly felt. In such hours of temptation, we 
 feel but too well that we wrestle not with flesh and 
 blood, but that other powers lurk in the background of 
 this life. And the higher the vocation of the Christian 
 in the kingdom of God, the more, we cannot but think, 
 will he have to pass through of such experiences. 
 When Luther says that he was well acquainted with 
 the depths of hell, we will not call this a figure of 
 speech, or an exaggeration. I know well that flesh and 
 blood rule over a vast realm of temptations, that such 
 strange forms may be taken by disturbance of the 
 
84. Lecture ITI. The Christian Virtues. 
 
 nervous system, as may seem to us temptations from 
 another world, and that we must not deal in a simply 
 spiritual manner with a state which is the result of physi- 
 cal affections. But even these physical bodily disturb- 
 ances and dangers involve moral duties, and demand 
 moral effort. Besides, we know that the limits of the 
 bodily organism are not the limits of reality, but that, 
 beyond it, other powers of a spiritual nature are ever 
 active, who make use of the disorder of the bodily 
 functions to endanger our souls, and who must be 
 opposed with mental and spiritual weapons. 
 
 According as we carry on this warfare, negligently or 
 vigorously, do we advance or recede. But one who is 
 far advanced may fall, so as not to rise again; and one 
 in whom the work of renovation is begun, so completely 
 forfeit salvation that deliverance is no longer possible. 
 The will of God, however, when He suffers us to be 
 in conflict and temptation, is our safety and promotion. 
 Every victory over sin is a step in advance. The goal 
 of perfection will not be attained on earth. Saints are 
 not made perfect here. The Christian, says Luther, is 
 becoming, not become; what we shall be is not yet pre- 
 sent, but it is in process. | 
 
 We are, however, helped onwards by prayer and 
 the word of God. To these is the Christian with his 
 moral duties directed. The life of the Christian in these 
 ordinances and means of divine grace must form the 
 subject of our next lecture. 
 
Sh 
 
 LECTURE IV. 
 
 THE DEVOTIONAL LIFE OF THE CHRISTIAN, AND HIS 
 ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE CHURCH. 
 
 vara: were made for work in the world. What our 
 s f Lord said of Himself: “I must work while 
 
 \ ut it is day ; the night cometh when no man can 
 ~~ work,” applies to each of us.. Now the value 
 of our work is to be computed according to the moral 
 force of will with which we work, and the moral dis- 
 position which we bring to it. Our life and work in this 
 world, moreover, have true value and lasting worth 
 only when animated and impregnated by the powers of 
 the world to come, for it is by these that our souls live. 
 Our life is passed on earth, and our work is part of our 
 temporal vocation, but the roots of our being must pene- 
 trate to those depths where flow the perennial sources 
 whence strength and refreshment, even for our work on 
 
 earth, are derived. These sources are prayer and the 
 
 word of God, and of the Divine word the Church is 
 the steward. Permit me then, before directing your 
 attention in my next lecture to our manifold earthly 
 duties, to speak to you to-day of the devotional life of 
 
 the Christian, and his relation to the Church. 
 
 The soul of the devotional life is prayer. 
 
86 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 We all know that Jesus is more to us than a mere 
 example. But if He were only this we could not for a 
 moment doubt of the importance of prayer with regard ~ 
 to our whole life. For if we consider the life of Jesus, 
 the impression universally made upon us will be, that it 
 was a life of constant prayer. It was indeed a life of 
 labour, of consuming labour, but all its labour was 
 based on prayer, on the secret intercourse of His soul 
 with His Father. Before every word which He uttered, 
 before every miracle which He wrought, He ever se- 
 cretly applied, as we may plainly perceive, to His Father. 
 And when the hours of day were all engrossed by the 
 work of His calling, He dedicated the solitary hours of 
 evening or morning, or the silence of night, to prayer. 
 Every feeling which stirred His soul He transformed into 
 prayer,and when at last the anguish of His soul threatened 
 to overcome Him, His remedy and refuge was prayer. 
 
 In all ages, since we have known anything of man’s 
 life on earth he has prayed. The time when prayer 
 first came into vogue has not yet been discovered, for it 
 is natural to man to pray. The child learns to do it 
 almost before it learns to speak, and the old man prac- 
 tises it when he is capable of doing nothing else. It is 
 the first thing in the history of mankind, and it will be 
 the last in those times of the end of which Scripture 
 prophesies. There is no nation ignorant of prayer, for 
 no nation has been discovered without religion, and the 
 central point of religion is prayer. Among the heathen 
 prayer has indeed lost its truth and inwardness, and be- 
 come a merely external work; but still it exists, and is, 
 
Prayer. 87 
 
 in the midst of its disfigurement, a testimony to the 
 inmost need of the human soul. The nation of revela- 
 tion has been the soil on which it has borne its fairest 
 and most abundant blossoms. The supplicatory passages 
 of the Psalms, after so many centuries, still stir our souls. 
 But the supreme example of prayer is the life of our 
 Lord. (*) 
 
 From Him we learn the position prayer ought to 
 occupy in the life of the Christian. We are accustomed 
 to set apart times in which to practise prayer. It must 
 not, however, be limited to such seasons. Prayer is the 
 abiding background in the life of the Christian. Prayer 
 must give support to his whole life, his every action ; in 
 it must all originate, init must all terminate. The stan- 
 dard by which to estimate our true condition is the 
 degree in which we are conversant with prayer. The 
 life of the Christian must be a living in prayer. It is | 
 upon this background that all the special exercises of 
 prayer must be practised, and thus enter into con- 
 nection with the rest of our life. The day’s routine, with 
 its recurrence of morning, noon, and evening, times and 
 seasons of sacred remembrance, the special occurrences 
 which agitate our souls, the cares and wants by which 
 we are so sorely burdened, the experiences of Divine 
 coodness which are bestowed on us, the various frames 
 and emotions of our mind—all these should be occa- 
 sions and incentives to prayer, that thus our whole life 
 in time may be pervaded with an atmosphere of eternity. 
 
 What is it to pray? What is prayer ? 
 
 In daily life, with its labour and unrest, the external 
 
88 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 world makes claims upon us, and withdraws us from 
 ourselves, In prayer we retire within ourselves, we betake 
 ourselves to the silence of the inner sanctuary, in which 
 we have the presence of God. To pray is inwardly to draw 
 near to God,to leave awhile this transitory world and enter 
 the eternal world, that we may breathe its pure and in- 
 vigorating atmosphere. Our bodies cannot live without 
 inhaling the air of this world, nor can our souls live with- 
 out inhaling the air of the eternal world. Prayer is the 
 soul’s respiration. The mind of man is stunted if it has 
 no intercourse with other minds, No being is nearer to 
 us than God. Our inward man is stunted if it has no spiri- 
 tual intercourse with God. Prayer is the secret intercourse 
 of the soul with God. Love cannot exist where there is no 
 opening, no pouring out of the heart to the beloved. Fora 
 love shut up in itself would be no true love. And so too 
 does the love of a child of God impel him to pour out 
 his heart in prayer to his Father in heaven. It would 
 be unnatural to him not to do so. Nothing is more 
 natural to the Christian than prayer. 
 
 What we ought to pray for has been shown us by 
 Christ, in the prayer which He taught His disciples. 
 The Lord’s Prayer is the prayer of prayers. Brief and 
 simple, and yet so copious that it includes everything, 
 and that every one can connect with it whatever else 
 may specially concern his soul. In the address we 
 express our glad belief that God our Father is willing to 
 help us His children, and that as the Almighty One who 
 from Heaven rules over all earthly things He is also 
 able. Upon this persuasion we base the petitions we 
 
The Lord’s Prayer. 89 
 
 _ bring before Him. And these do not in the first place 
 concern our own, but His interests. For love seeketh 
 not her own, but first of all: that which is another’s. 
 “ Hallowed be Thy name, Thy Kingdom come, Thy will 
 be done.” That God, as He has revealed Himself, may 
 be acknowledged by man in word and deed is the first 
 thing desired. This is the way in which the Kingdom 
 of God is realized, that happy sway in which His will 
 alone prevails and is performed. To this future is the 
 _ third petition directed with ardent longing. But how 
 many wants and sorrows of this earthly life still lie in the 
 way between now and then! to these wants the thoughts 
 of the suppliant now descend. The bodily need is the 
 first thing which he lays before the Helper in all need, 
 For bodily life is the foundation of spiritual life. It 
 only occupies, however, the space of one petition. The 
 others are all devoted to the wants of the soul. That 
 God should pardon the guilt of sins already committed 
 is the first and most pressing need of the soul; then 
 follows the request that He would preserve us from 
 further guilt; and finally, that He would deliver us from 
 all the seductions and troubles of this life. This closes 
 the petitions. The Church has added an ascription of 
 praise, “For Thine is the kingdom, the power, and the 
 glory, for ever and ever,” thus making all the emotions 
 of the heart resound, as it were, in one full chord in 
 these words. (7) 
 
 One petition follows another in harmonious connection, 
 and the seven form a whole so simple that a child may 
 ‘pray it, so wide and copious that the most advanced 
 
90 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 Christian can never exhaust it. Whatever else may 
 affect us, we can and must include it in the words 
 of this prayer, or add it to this prayer in words of our 
 own. 
 
 What then is to be the sudject of prayer? All that 
 affects us. Nothing is so small that we may not, 
 and ought not to bring it before God in prayer. As 
 God in His government of the world cares not only for 
 that which is great, but also cherishes in His fatherly love 
 that which is least, so should nothing seem to us too small 
 to bring t6 Him in prayer. It is true that the concerns 
 of the soul should occupy the first place, that our chief and 
 first interest should be our salvation. But the concerns 
 of our earthly existence, the little interests of everyday 
 life, must not be regarded as too trifling to be brought 
 before God. A child will pour out even the lesser cares 
 of its heart into a mother’s ear, and God’s love is ten- 
 derer than that of a mother. We must not indeed 
 think to extort temporal relief by prayer, but must com- 
 mit our circumstances to God and His wisdom, for there 
 is but one thing absolutely needful, and for which 
 we may unreservedly pray, and that is our soul’s salva- 
 tion; for all else we may and must ask only condi- 
 tionally. 
 
 Our Lord has, however, promised us that these peti- 
 tions too shall be heard ; but how they shall be heard 
 must be left to Him. When Augustine desired to leave 
 Africa and to go to Italy, his mother Monica, fearing 
 the effect which the seductions of Rome might have 
 upon his impulsive mind, earnestly entreated God not 
 
The Hearing of Prayer. 91 
 
 to suffer this to take place. God however permitted 
 him to go to Italy, that he might find at Milan his 
 soul’s salvation. “Thou didst deny her,” says Augustine 
 in his Confessions, “ Thou didst deny her what she prayed 
 for then, that Thou mightest grant her what she prayed 
 for always.” The history of the Church down to our 
 own days is full of experiences of the power of prayer. (*) 
 Why then should such an experience not be ours ? 
 Whatever arguments may be used against the possibility 
 of prayer being answered, we know that God, the living 
 God, is Love, and that even a wordless sigh does not go 
 up to Heaven unheard. “God will call the sigh prayer,” 
 says Vinet in a passage of unsurpassable beauty, “ and 
 the prayer power; and the power of God will, if I may 
 venture to say so, bow before the Ey er of the sigh 
 which is from Himself.” 
 
 The Christian’s attitude towards the Church is closely 
 connected with his devotional life. 
 
 Prayer is the most inward thing there is, and religion 
 is a concern of the inner life. But we are made for 
 society, and even religion is a matter of association. It 
 is true that Christ desired to kindle in the secret 
 sanctuary of the soul that fire of love and faith whose 
 warmth and light have since pervaded the whole life of 
 Christian mankind. But He also united His disciples 
 in a society, and purposed to found a church. When 
 religion had become legal and external, the preaching of 
 the Reformation reopened the secret sources of reli- 
 gious life, and the living streams have flowed forth from 
 that time to the present, even during that period which 
 
92 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 has been designated the age of stiff orthodoxy ; for this 
 was also the age of those Church hymns which are the 
 boast of our Church, and whose heart-reviving power we 
 are all acquaintedwith. But the Reformation also founded 
 an evangelical church; for religion, though it is first of 
 all an internal matter, becomes stunted and morbid if it 
 continues to be only an individual interest. All mental 
 life is healthy, in proportion as the life of the individual 
 is in harmony with the life of the community. What 
 then? if the great general ideas which govern human 
 life become associative forces, by whose operation 
 human society obtains points of contact, about which 
 individual life congregates—must not that supreme truth 
 which nourishes the inner life of our soul, and ministers 
 to the highest and most important interests of public 
 life, be designed to become first of all the central point 
 of an association, fitted to serve as a support to all 
 others, and to be to them a source of higher vital powers ? 
 
 They indeed who are conscious of no religious wants, 
 will also desire to know nothing of a church. That 
 alienation from the Church which is now so widespread, 
 is for the most part rooted in indifference to religion 
 itself. But though an individual may perhaps think, 
 that as far as he is himself concerned he can do without 
 religion, human society cannot do without it, for every 
 intelligent observer perceives what a chaos we should 
 be involved in if life were to be deprived of religion. 
 It is not, however, merely in the interest of order that 
 religion is required, but by the inmost craving of human 
 nature itself, However large may be the number of 
 
Religion and the Church. Me 
 
 individuals who deceive themselves into esteeming 
 religion either superfluous or pernicious, they will 
 never succeed in uprooting it from the minds of 
 men, because they will never succeed in separating God 
 from our spirits. But he who says Religion, says the 
 Church; for as religious men also we are made for 
 society, and the Church is the religious corporation. (*) 
 
 There is, however, a difference between church and 
 church. The Romish Church regards the Church as 
 a great world-embracing political organism, claiming 
 supreme power even in temporal and mundane affairs. 
 Nothing besides has any powcr but in so far as it sub- 
 serves the interests of the Church. Hence the Church 
 is, in fact, a declaration of war against all independence 
 in the various departments of natural life, and peace 
 with these is only possible because the Romish Church 
 meanwhile refrains from fully asserting her claims. 
 We understand the Church differently. It is in our 
 eyes the association of the new and spiritual life, ap- 
 pointed to guide souls, by the spiritual means at its 
 disposal, to their eternal home. It is indeed also an ex- 
 ternal association, for its members are men who are still 
 in the body, and whose locality is here upon earth, 
 But the soul of the external association is the inward 
 and spiritual society of the kingdom of God; the aim 
 of all its efforts is the building up of this kingdom of 
 God ; and its means of operation are chiefly the word 
 of God and the sacraments. (°) 
 
 The Church question is now the order of the day, and 
 the interest felt in Church matters is widely diffused, 
 
94 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 I will not now stop to inquire into the motives of 
 this interest, and its consequent value; I speak only of 
 the fact. But when by reason of this interest. taken in 
 Church matters, the question is to arrive at a decision— 
 by what standard must Church matters be judged and 
 decided? The Protestant principle is that in such 
 questions the last appeal must be to holy Scripture. 
 To it are we above all referred; it is to be the Divine 
 mirror for ourselves and for the Church. For this pur- 
 pose does our Church put the Scriptures into our hand, 
 that we may dive into them, read them, live in them. 
 And it is the glory of the Protestant that he has free 
 access to them, and that no authority may block up his 
 way to them. And they deserve this. We read much. 
 But holy Scripture deserves beyond all other books to 
 be read. What a marvellous book it is! How stu- 
 pendous and wondrous an edifice, from its foundations 
 laid with the huge and solid blocks, so to speak, of the 
 account of the beginning of all things’and of the origin 
 of the people of God, up to its lofty spire, towering 
 above the limits of earth, and reaching into that eternal 
 world of which the Revelation of St. John gives us a 
 distant glimpse! 
 
 We tread on holy ground when we enter this wondrous 
 structure of holy Scripture. And the voices which resound 
 through its courts are sacred voices from another world, 
 nay, the voice of God Himself addresses us not merely 
 as the Lawgiver and Judge, but as the Father seeking 
 for His children. When we enter here we must first 
 of all silence whatever opinions and prejudices we may 
 
Holy Scripture. 95 
 
 entertain or bring with us, surrender ourselves unreserv- 
 edly to the impression which God’s word makes upon 
 us, and let it do its work upon our souls. This is the 
 main point. Human scholarship may be needful to 
 give us access to the full understanding of holy Scrip- 
 ture; but then, having entered, we must leave all 
 human knowledge without, and simply hearken. Scrip- 
 ture was given to us by God not to be an object of 
 learned investigation, not to enlarge our historical or 
 philological knowledge—it does indeed do us service in 
 these matters, but its ultimate aim is a religious one, 
 and our proper attitude towards it must also be a 
 religious one. The first essential in the Christian life 
 is prayer, and the second is love to holy Scripture and 
 _ living in it. 
 
 It may be truly said, that there never was a time in 
 which Scripture was so widely diffused as in our own. 
 Care is taken that it shall be in the hands of all. But 
 it may also be said, that since the press’ made Scripture 
 the common property of Christians, there never was a 
 time in which it was, on the whole, so little read and 
 known, and so foreign to the masses of Christendom, as 
 the present. To be well grounded in Scripture was 
 formerly the boast and the acquirement of many. How 
 few can be called so now! Much time and pains are 
 devoted to religious questions; much interest taken, it 
 may be, in matters of Church government; much con- 
 flict perhaps waged for the advancement of the Church ; 
 but that which should have the first place is passed by, 
 and very littlé attention is paid to the Bible. And yet it 
 
96 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 is the Protestant principle that in all matters, religious 
 and ecclesiastical, the decision rests with holy Scrip- 
 ture. And apart from this, is there a work in the 
 German language of which we have more reason to be 
 proud than Luther’s translation of the Bible? What 
 have we not as a nation possessed in our Bible? It 
 has ever furnished the best and purest nutriment of our 
 intellectual life. Hence have we derived our poetry and 
 our practical wisdom, here have we found gladness in 
 labour, even solace in suffering. Nor let it be forgotten 
 that there is nothing so calculated to form a bond of 
 union between the different classes and grades of our 
 population, nothing which can make our national spirit 
 so healthy, and in the best sense so popular, as holy 
 Scripture. A French scholar, Rosseuw St. Hilaire, pub- 
 lished, in the French language, some few years since, a 
 collection of Alsatian proverbs and tales. In the midst 
 of his learned labours he met with these productions of 
 the German mind in Alsace, and was so struck with 
 their simplicity and poetical beauty that he left off for 
 a season his History of Spain, upon which he was then 
 engaged, to translate these little tales, and thus to intro- 
 duce them among’ his own people. He preceded these 
 Tractates d Alsace by a preface, in which he speaks of the 
 difference between the French and German mind, and 
 of the influence of the Bible upon the national spirit 
 and literature of a people. “There is in the German 
 mind a strangely charming mixture of the naive and 
 the sublime, of the childlike and the profound, resulting 
 from the honest nature of this primitive people, who 
 
 ee 
 
Holy Scripture. 97, 
 
 have kept closer to nature than we have done, and are 
 endowed with an indestructible youth which defies the 
 lapse of ages. If there are in the world two types of 
 mind so oppositely constituted that they can never under- 
 stand each other, they are the French and German. 
 One always ironical, ready to jest at itself and others; 
 the other sincere even to childishness (enfantillage), 
 indignant at jesting which is contrary to its nature, and 
 ready to take offence when it feels itself misunderstood. 
 I have travelled much, both in north and south, and 
 there is one fact which I have everywhere met with. 
 Wherever the Bible is not made the foundation stone 
 of education, of society, and of every form of life, there 
 is no literature for children or for the people. Look at 
 Spain, Italy, and even France, in a word at every 
 country in which the Bible is not read: nowhere is 
 there any reading for the child or the labourer. In 
 Germany and England, on the contrary, there exists a 
 Christian children’s and popular literature, in which, as 
 in a mirror, the national spirit is clearly reflected.” In 
 these words does a Frenchman tell us the secret of our 
 strength and of the soundness of our national life. The 
 Bible in the family, the Bible in the school, the Bible 
 in the Church, is the good old German and Protestant 
 custom. From Holy Scripture our thoughts involun- 
 tarily pass to preaching. ; 
 
 You are aware that it was the Reformation which 
 made Scripture and preaching upon Scripture the cen- 
 tral point of Divine worship. This fact teaches us 
 
 what we ought to seek in preaching,—not the human 
 G 
 
98 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 art of eloquence, nor brilliant and ingenious ideas. 
 They whom God has endowed with an acute intellect 
 and an eloquent tongue may thankfully use them, but 
 they must place them at the disposal of that eternal 
 truth which is proclaimed to us in Scripture. The say- 
 ing of John the Baptist, “ He must increase, but I must 
 decrease,” is the best motto for preachers. And as the 
 preacher should recede in comparison with Him whom 
 he proclaims, so too should the concern of his hearers 
 be not intellectual or esthetic enjoyment, but the preach- 
 ing of the word whose matter is Jesus Christ and our 
 salvation, When we come to hear preaching in this 
 frame of mind, we shall both have more patience with 
 the manifold deficiencies inseparable from every human 
 performance, and find something that-may be of use to 
 us under the unpromising covering. We are but too 
 much inclined to require of preaching a_ perfection 
 which calmer and wiser reflection must declare to be 
 impossible. If even a Paul felt himself justified in 
 writing again the same things to the Philippians, how 
 should we require that our preachers, who are certainly 
 no Pauls, and whose days and weeks are often passed 
 amidst the distractions of external and time consuming 
 employments, should always present us with what is 
 new and striking, or provide us with displays of oratori- 
 cal art ? (7) 
 
 ‘The Reformation did the right thing when it placed 
 the reading of Scripture and the sermon in the middle 
 of the service. Subsequently, however, especially during 
 the era of Rationalism, the other parts of Divine worship 
 
Preaching and Worship. er 
 
 were but too much cast into the background; and it is still 
 our habit to undervalue them, and to give in our service 
 undue prominence to the human word of the preacher. 
 And yet the sermon can never produce its full effect 
 unless it is properly supported by the other acts of 
 worship, nor can the edification resulting from Divine 
 service be really attained, unless not only our under- 
 standing and will, but all the other aspects and powers 
 of our inner life be claimed, and the numberless religious 
 wants of the heart satisfied thereby. (8) 
 
 The false and exaggerated demands made upon preach- 
 ing are chiefly to blame for the habitual absence of so 
 many from public worship. They think, it may be, 
 that they do not need the instruction there to be ob- 
 tained, or that they are capable of giving it to them- 
 selves. And we all know from experience how readily 
 a certain natural distaste and love of ease may combine 
 with and be concealed under all kind of excuses, But 
 this secret pride and this concealed idleness are both 
 mistaken, for in our religious as well as in our natural 
 life, we are made for association, and in this as in other 
 respects are only healthy and vigorous thereby. We 
 all find again and again what a power there is in associa- 
 tion to elevate and animate. It is by heaping log on 
 log that we feed the flame, in which each single log 
 then burns brightly and cheerfully. 
 
 It was_to make room for public worship that the 
 Church followed up the Old Testament celebration of 
 the Sabbath by the appointment of Sunday. Even in 
 Apostolic times we find traces of the observance of the 
 
100 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 Sunday. There are both natural and religious reasons 
 for this institution. When the Old Testament law set 
 apart a day to be devoted to rest, it acted in accordance 
 with a law of our nature. That nature is ruined phy- 
 sically as well as mentally, unless the time of labour 
 is repeatedly interrupted by a day of rest. This is a 
 necessity both of individual and social life. The phy- 
 sical and mental powers are prematurely worn out, and 
 family and social life also suffer loss, if this Divine law 
 of nature is disregarded. And the more so in these days 
 when labour has so increased, when it makes such far 
 larger demands than formerly on our powers, and with- 
 draws so many members of the family from their home. 
 Body and soul need breathing-time, both to rest and to 
 rejoice in God's works in flower and field; parents and 
 children need quiet time in which they may belong to 
 each other and live together again, after their work has 
 so much separated them; and the heart needs the 
 opportunity of calmly surrendering itself to the associ- 
 ations of love and friendship, without feeling the goad of 
 the driver behind it. The mind dies out, the heart 
 grows empty and desolate, selfishness and the love of 
 material enjoyment reign supreme, where the day of rest 
 is not observed. England and America well know what 
 they are about when they insist so strictly upon the 
 rest of Sunday. They know that their progress and 
 prosperity depend upon it. For their populations would 
 have been long ere this used up, if the whirling machine 
 of modern industry had not been brought to a compul- 
 sory pause at intervals. The celebration of Sunday by 
 
The Sunday. 101 
 
 these nations may seem to us too legal, and their Puritan- 
 ism will always be repulsive to our feelings and opinions, 
 but we have certainly something to learn from them. 
 The future of our nation depends in a great degree upon 
 the observance of the Sunday. Hitherto this day, which 
 ought to be a blessing, has been, in Rie aie circles, a 
 curse to our people. 
 
 It can, however, only be a blessing when, besides 
 being a day of rest, it is also made a day of religious 
 observance ; for we do not live for this world only, we 
 live also ie the eternal world. Our body and soul must 
 both rejoice in the living God. .The creation of the 
 world closed with the Sabbath ; the new creation, by the 
 resurrection of Jesus Christ, on with the Sunday. 
 It is by virtue of the powers proceeding from that new 
 creation that we live, and it must be our part to im- 
 merse our souls in this world of vital powers, that we 
 may thence derive refreshment after toil and new 
 vigour for the labours of life. Sunday is the sun of days, 
 whence light and warmth are diffused over the week 
 days, and which sheds even over our saddest seasons a 
 glow of relief and enjoyment. For this purpose was the 
 day given us, and for this set apart for common prayer 
 and hearing of the word by the Church. (°) . 
 
 The Church, like every other corporation, requires its 
 appointed ordinances and its government. The era of 
 the Reformation was, at least in our Church, little solici- 
 tous as to the carrying out of a system of Church 
 government, for it was an era of creative ideas, and 
 concerned itself more with the internal hfe, and with 
 
102 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 great and new thoughts, than with external ordinances. 
 Our age is, in respect of the Church, one poorer in new 
 thoughts, and has therefore the more zealously thrown 
 itself into questions of government and external order. 
 If such matters were somewhat neglected by our prede- 
 cessors, it is perhaps our office to repair this deficiency. 
 The main thing, indeed, is that this should be set about 
 in the right manner. Christ gave us no precepts con- 
 cerning any definite form of Church government. He 
 proclaimed the word, He instituted Baptism and the 
 Lord’s Supper, He commanded that the Gospel should 
 be preached, He appointed apostles. He left the rest to 
 the free development of the future. We learn from 
 this that government occupies a subordinate position, 
 and must be looked upon not as an end but a means, a 
 means to help the Church to fulfil her proper duty. 
 This duty is to save souls by preaching Christ and 
 administering the sacraments. Hence our supreme aim 
 in all questions of government must be, not to pursue. 
 ideals, or satisfy self-seeking thoughts and ambitions, 
 but to procure for the Church such an order as may be 
 most conducive to the fulfilment of her essential office. 
 You know that the effort to procure for the laity a 
 participation in Church affairs, has made this question, 
 which has been the source of so much contention, its 
 own. This effort is founded upon a certain amount 
 both of truth and justice. For there is latent in every 
 commonwealth a mass of gifts and powers ever striving 
 after their proper application ; and the Church, too, is a 
 commonwealth endowed with various gifts and powers 
 
Church Government. 103 
 
 which God has bestowed upon her, that they may find 
 their appropriate and appointed application. It is a 
 hierarchical disposition which prevails in the Church 
 when this free co-operation of different powers is rejected 
 or disallowed. I willingly admit that too much appre- 
 hension is perhaps entertained in many circles con- 
 cerning this concession, and I do not deny that our 
 Church has in this respect large omissions to repair. 
 But this question is regarded from a false point of view 
 when it is made a question of supremacy, of whether 
 the clergy or the laity are to be the leaders in the 
 Church ; for the matter in discussion is by no means 
 Supremacy or sway, but service—the service to be 
 rendered to the Church, to enable her the better to 
 fulfil her office of saving souls by preaching Christ. 
 And equally so when notions native to the foreign 
 province of politics are imported into it, and the 
 Church laid out according to a pattern of political 
 constitutionalism ; for every department of life must be 
 Judged of and treated according to its own nature and 
 laws. And, finally, when the Church is regarded as the 
 exercising ground for all kinds of freethinkers, to carry 
 on the pranks which they are perhaps forbidden to 
 play elsewhere; for every sphere of life has, together 
 with its proper nature, its proper restrictions, which are 
 the standard and law of all action within it. (1°) 
 
 In support of the demand in question, the universal ° 
 priesthood 1s generally appealed to. The universal 
 priesthood of Christians is a great truth, for whose 
 re-discovery and recognition we are indebted to the 
 
104 Lecture LV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 Reformation, and from whose admission no misuse that 
 may be made of it must be allowed to deter us. It is 
 based upon the Reformation perception, that though the 
 individual is brought to faith in Jesus Christ by the mini- 
 strations of the Church, his faith is not to stop at the stage 
 of dependent non-age, but to advance to independent 
 certainty of the salvation, the knowledge of which he 
 owes to the Church. Every believer is a priest, ze. he 
 has through Christ direct access. to God in Christ ; and it 
 is at once his privilege and his duty to offer to God the 
 gifts and sacrifices of his prayers and life. This is the. 
 first and also the chief meaning of the universal priest- 
 hood. It is however true that this does not exhaust it. 
 For as the Old Testament priest returned from the 
 sanctuary, where he had been offering prayer, to bless 
 the people, so, too, is it the privilege and duty of the 
 New Testament priest, ze. of the Christian, to be a 
 blessing to others, by those works of love which prove 
 the reality of his faith. All the care we take for the 
 spiritual and temporal good of others, whether by word 
 or deed, the entire field of action which we comprise 
 under the name of, the Inner Mission, what is it but a 
 performance of the functions of the universal priesthood ? 
 For this priesthood may be exercised either by organized 
 associations or individual effort. And when, as at the 
 present time, a demand is made in the interest of the 
 Church and of congregations for Church representa- 
 tion, in the form of deputies and synods, this demand 
 is equally based upon the universal priesthood. 
 
 Let us not however forget that there is one very 
 
The Universal Priesthood. 105 
 
 essential. prerequisite to this universal priesthood, viz. 
 to be a Christian. I do not mean a Christian in name 
 and in Church registers only, but in reality. For a man 
 is not morally entitled to Church privileges, because he 
 is five-and-twenty or thirty years of age, and has, it may 
 be, never incurred any disgraceful penalty from the civil 
 power, For this, it is of the first necessity that he should 
 know himself to be in unison with the faith of the 
 Church, and should be living in the fulfilment of all 
 Church duties. For it is in the very nature of the 
 matter that he who has inwardly fallen away from, or 
 is utterly indifferent to, the Christian faith and his 
 Church, cannot possibly claim any right of government 
 therein. Otherwise the Church and its faithful mem- 
 bers would be subjected to the most insufferable of all 
 tyrannies, because a tyranny affecting the most sacred 
 and secret interests of the heart and conscience. This 
 must not be forgotten when the universal priesthood is 
 appealed to. And those Church provinces which are 
 esteemed models of synodal action—the Rhine Pro- 
 vinces and Westphalia—express themselves very de- 
 cidedly on this prerequisite, and have in more than one 
 case very decidedly insisted upon it. (1) 
 
 But besides the universal priesthood of the Christian, 
 there is also the regular ministry of the word. It is self- 
 evident that the former is not opposed to the latter, but 
 to be exercised in accordance therewith. It may well 
 be, indeed, that a member of the congregation may 
 stand far above his pastor in intellect, in knowledge, 
 and even in piety; but such a fact no more annuls the 
 
106 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 ministerial office than it could annul an analogous 
 relation in secular affairs. We Protestants reject the 
 Romish doctrine, that the office itself, or ordination to 
 the office, bestows on its possessor certain personal 
 qualities, by virtue of which he is elevated above his 
 fellow Christians. Such a distinction between clergy 
 and laity we do not admit. That which distinguishes 
 the minister from others is his office of proclaiming the 
 word of. God; and this gives him the right, or rather 
 imposes upon him the duty, of speaking to others in the 
 name of God, and of saying with the apostle, “ We are 
 ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you 
 by us, we pray you in Christ’s stead be ye reconciled to 
 God.” 
 
 Whatever we may be, however, whether private 
 Christians or ministers of the word, we still belong to 
 a definite church, and have to be faithful thereto in faith 
 and practice. We may lament the separations of the 
 Church, but it is a fact, and certainly did not come to 
 pass without Divine appointment, that thus the whole 
 fulness of the Christian spirit might in this multi- 
 plicity be developed. For each church has _ its 
 special gifts and its special office. But this acknow- 
 ledgment, which we owe to all churches, does not re- 
 lieve us of the duty of testing the several churches, and 
 comparing them with each other. The standard by 
 which this testing is to be effected is, according to Pro- 
 testant principles, holy Scripture. In proportion as a 
 particular church has maintained with more or less 
 purity, the saving truth which is deposited in holy 
 
The Churches and their Confession. 107 
 
 Scripture, is it a more or less true manifestation of the 
 Church of Jesus Christ, and should stand proportion- 
 ately higher in our estimation than other churches. 
 Now, the several churches have laid down their views 
 of Scripture truth in their several confessions. No 
 church can be without a confession; for none can be 
 without some definite characteristic by which it is 
 specially distinguished from the rest; and the expres- 
 sion of this speciality is its confession. Hence its con- 
 fession is the internal standard of each particular 
 church. We require that the church ordinances, the 
 doctrinal teaching, and the preaching of the ministers of 
 a church should be in conformity with its confession ; 
 for in every utterance of a particular church its special 
 character should be manifested and expressed. (PyerAs 
 it is the duty of a German to be German in thought 
 and act, so is it also the duty of a Lutheran Christian 
 to prove himself a Lutheran in word and deed, where 
 religious or church matters are concerned. But as it is 
 not merely the duty of us Germans to be German, but 
 rather our pleasure, and an expression of our love for 
 the German nature, because we know what a gift God 
 has bestowed upon us in it, so should it be to us, as 
 Lutherans, not merely a duty, but a pleasure and an 
 expression of grateful love, to show ourselves such in 
 word and deed ; for they who know what they possess 
 in their Lutheran Church, and in the Lutheran form of 
 Christianity, will naturally show their thankfulness by 
 their fidelity to their church and its confession. In 
 many circles faithfulness to the confession is still a 
 
108 Lecture IV. Devotional Life of the Christian. 
 
 somewhat doubtful merit; and to have emancipated 
 one’s-self therefrom is esteemed a mark of intellectual 
 freedom, and an act of progress. And yet, no one 
 would regard it as an act of intellectual freedom or 
 mental progress to renounce his Germanism, and ex- 
 change it for a cosmopolitanism, which would, more- 
 over, be impossible. And is not the testimony of 
 Luther the flower of the German mind, and of its 
 espousals with the spirit of the gospel, and, we boldly 
 add, as yet at least the truest form of saving truth ? (°) 
 When I call love and fidelity to our Church a moral 
 duty, 1 do not say that we are to idolize it. I know 
 very well, perhaps better than most of you, what are its 
 deficiencies ; and I know, too, that the work of improve- 
 ment must never cease in the Church; but the treasure 
 of truth which is within her pale, and which is the 
 noblest jewel our nation possesses, far surpasses her 
 deficiencies. Our Church would cast away her best 
 blessing if she renounced her confession of truth, and 
 our nation would despoil itself of its best treasure, if it: 
 should suffer the Lutheran Church to be spoiled and 
 disturbed. I do not speak thus, as thinking that our 
 Church has an exclusive tenure of truth; I*know that 
 all churches have their shares, some larger, some smaller. 
 According to the measure of that truth which they hold 
 in common with us are they nearer or more remote; 
 but one bond of fellowship connects us with all, and 
 our ultimate aim is the same. War is not the normal 
 state of affairs, but a crisis; and to live on polemics is 
 immoral. But so long as error opposes truth, the con- 
 
The Church and its Confession. 109 
 
 flict with error must not and cannot cease. The strife 
 is inevitable; the only question is as to the spirit in 
 which it shall be conducted. There is a strife which is 
 according to God’s will, and which subserves His holy 
 purposes. In the midst of strife, too, we must be build- 
 ing up the kingdom of God, which is the kingdom of 
 peace! This it is which is the ultimate and supreme 
 aim of all church action. 
 
LECTURE V. 
 CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE, 
 Marriage. 
 
 We belong to two worlds. We have a 
 heavenly and we have an earthly calling. 
 
 Each has its independent province, and is distinct from 
 the other, yet they must not exist in severance, but in 
 alliance, and each must furnish assistance to the other. 
 _ The Gospel does not teach us how to perform our worldly 
 business, but how to obtain the. salvation which it 
 announces. It is not, however, indifferent, much less 
 hostile, to our earthly employments. Christianity does 
 not command its professors to go out of the world; for 
 it was God who placed them in the world, and in it are 
 the tasks which He has assigned them. On the con- 
 trary, it helps them to accomplish these very tasks 
 aright, by the new mind and spirit it bestows, and by 
 which even our earthly calling must be animated, We 
 must not think that we may be bad artizans or men of 
 business if only we are good Christians. Our Chris- 
 tianity must not be used for the purpose of excusing or 
 
Lhe Fundamental Importance of Marriage. 111 
 
 covering our unskilfulness in our calling. The Chris- 
 tian ought, on the contrary, to be the best workman, the 
 best merchant, the best artist and scholar. Christianity 
 and the interests of natural life are mutually referred to 
 each other. Christianity exercises a sanctifying power 
 upon the employments of life, and these again are of 
 educational importance to Christianity. Redemption 
 was effected upon the soil of creation, and God has 
 placed the ordinances of natural life at the service of ” 
 His kingdom. It is one and the same God who rules 
 in both provinces, and they should both co-operate in 
 promoting the fulfilment of His purposes. The means 
 for attaining this end is to let the earthly life be per- 
 vaded by the spirit of Christianity. Now, the funda- 
 mental and most important ordinance of life is marriage. 
 I will therefore begin my discussion of the natural 
 relations of life with marriage and Christian life 
 therein. 
 
 When we inquire into the moral condition of a nation 
 or an age, we first of all direct our attention to the 
 state of married life therein, and by this do we judge 
 of all else. If the married life of a people is disorderly, 
 we know that their moral condition in general is in evil 
 case. And if the tone of morality is to be raised among 
 them, we should all say that marriage must first of all 
 be placed upon a better footing. It isa kind of instinct 
 which leads us to take this as our standard, and to 
 judge of all social relations accordingly. We need not 
 make any special study of social science to perceive the 
 importance of marriage, in deciding as to the entire 
 
Vda Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 conditions of national life. It is a direct feeling which 
 tells us that it does so. (*) 
 
 Holy Scripture says in its ‘own natural yet profound 
 manner, “ God created man in His own image, in the 
 image of God created He him, male and female created 
 He them.” In these words, which place marriage at 
 the head of the history of mankind, Holy Scripture 
 teaches us that marriage is the foundation of all human 
 society. In our current language we talk of Holy 
 Matrimony, and we apply this designation to no other 
 state of natural life, thus expressing our moral estima- 
 tion of this condition. And justly so, for marriage is 
 the oldest and most important of all human institutions. 
 Long before there were nations and states there were 
 marriages and families. Before the nation of Israel, the 
 depositary of God’s revelation, existed, we meet with mar- 
 riage in the family of Abraham. When our Lord became 
 a member of this nation, He became a member of a 
 family ; and before He entered upon His ministry, He 
 blessed a marriage and the family in which it was made. 
 When the apostles called the nations into the Church of 
 Jesus Christ, they first brought the word into families, 
 and made them the nurseries of Christianity. And 
 Christianity, whether in civil society, or in the state, 1S 
 still based upon the Christian family. If it disappears 
 from the family, the laws of the state will not avail it. 
 The last hour of Christianity will have struck among us 
 when we have no more Christian wives and mothers. 
 But not of Christianity alone. With respect then, 
 both to time and importance, marriage, the family, the 
 
The Fundamental Importance of Marriage. 113 
 
 home, come before all the other institutions of natural 
 life. 
 
 It is in this particular that our Christian views differ 
 from those of the old heathen world. The ancient 
 world accorded the first place to the state, and subor- 
 dinated marriage and the home thereto. Children 
 belonged to the state, and respect to the interest of the 
 country decided, e.g. in Sparta, whether they should be 
 reared or exposed in the Valley of Taygetus. When the 
 position due to marriage is misconceived, its due moral 
 dignity will also be misconceived. It may be rightly 
 said that the history of religions is also a history of 
 marriage, and of the moral notions entertained of mar- 
 riage; for it is the history of women and of their moral 
 estimation. If Christianity reckons among women its 
 most numerous and faithful friends, this is but just and 
 fair. For women owe their best possession, their moral 
 elevation and its recognition, to Christianity. The 
 darkest shadow in the pre-Christian world is the history 
 and position of its women. From of old has the saying 
 of Mary, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord,” been 
 regarded as the turning-point in the history of women, 
 and the contrary to the transeression of our first mother, 
 related in the opening pages of Scripture. The Gospels 
 tell us of the loving fidelity with which women mini- 
 stered to our Lord, and stood beneath His cross, when 
 the disciples had timidly withdrawn; they teach us 
 how He received the “woman which was a sinner,” and 
 how Mary Magdalene was the first to behold the risen 
 
 Saviour. It teaches us that women were, equally with 
 . ; 
 
 . 
 
114 Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 men, reckoned members of the Church of Christ, Chris- 
 tianity having bestowed a new moral dignity upon them, 
 raised them out of the dust, and placed them on a level 
 with men. When, however, we speak of women, we 
 speak of marriage, for the history of marriage is the 
 history of women. (’) 
 
 We perceive, then, how closely rolion and natural 
 life are intertwined, for marriage is the most natural of 
 the relations of life, and the most universal of all earthly 
 vocations. 
 
 Marriage is a vocation. 
 
 When God created mankind in the distinction of male 
 and female, He thereby announced, and, as it were, im- 
 pressed upon our nature the fact, that 1t was His will 
 that we should marry. Hence we are justified in saying 
 that marriage is a duty, and the most universal duty 
 incumbent on us. 
 
 It is a duty we owe to the human race, to the king- 
 dom of God, and to ourselves. | 
 
 We owe it to the human race. For God has ordained 
 that the continuity of the race should be combined with 
 the relation of marriage, and we have no right to obstruct 
 the fulfilment of His purpose by declining marriage. 
 
 We owe it to the kingdom of God, for which we 
 ought to prepare a place in the home and in the family 
 with which God may bless our marriage. Nothing 1s 
 more lovely than a home in which the Spirit of God 
 rules. Both angels and men delight in it, and God's 
 approbation rests upon it. 
 
 But we owe it also to ourselves. All the natural 
 
Marriage a Duty. 115 
 
 ordinances of life have an educational purpose. They 
 are means and institutions to educate us for the king- 
 dom of God. The Christian also needs this education 
 for his inner man. The means of education may not, 
 perhaps, be pleasant—it is not in the nature of educa- 
 tion that they should be—but they are always salutary. 
 We need not, however, direct our attention to the 
 ultimate and supreme purpose of our existence to per- 
 ceive the importance of marriage to individuals. Even 
 when we stop at our more immediate interests, its creat 
 influence upon our whole mind and character is directly 
 evident. However highly gifted some individuals among 
 us may be, we are still all of us but one-sided beings, 
 even by the very fact that we are all either men or 
 women. For we have already seen how this distinction 
 extends even to the inmost recesses of mental life, and 
 ever presents human nature to us on one side only. 
 Hence these two halves of human nature are directed 
 each to the other for mutual completion, even with 
 respect to mind and character. Each side contributes 
 to the enrichment of the other; the woman helps the 
 man, and the man the woman, to make a nearer ap- 
 _ proach to the ideal of a complete human being. And 
 to what a multiplicity of tasks and moral duties does 
 marriage introduce us, and what a value, which nothing 
 else can replace, does it bestow on life! This value is 
 forfeited by those who wilfully deprive themselves of 
 marriage. (°) 
 
 There is a view held by some which places celibacy 
 above marriage. This view appeals to certain misun- 
 
116 Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 derstood passages of Scripture——such, perhaps, as those 
 in which our Lord declares that His disciples must have 
 the moral strength to be able to renounce marriage for 
 the kingdom of heaven’s sake, or those in which St. Paul 
 pronounces celibacy, under certain circumstances, the 
 more advisable, as being the freer condition. In saying 
 this, he does not pronounce celibacy more moral, but 
 only more easy than marriage, because the latter involves 
 a series of duties and tasks which the single are spared. 
 These, however, we ought not to seek to spare ourselves 
 for the purpose of leading an easier life, but should 
 decline them only when we plainly perceive this to be 
 in accordance with the will and providence of God. (*) 
 An individual may certainly be so led by Providence, that 
 marriage is made impossible to him, either by external or 
 internal causes. But these are exceptional cases, which 
 are justified by the circumstances under which they occur. 
 And we may be certain that they whom God so leads, 
 and who humbly submit to such guidance, will receive 
 compensation from Him in the inner man, for those 
 educational means and tasks of marriage which he for- 
 feits. There is an’order of services in the kingdom of 
 God which require celibacy, and which are indeed cap- 
 able of affording to heart and mind that inward satisfac- 
 tion which sheds over the whole character, and even 
 over the external appearance of such servants and hand- 
 maids of Jesus Christ, a spirit of peace and joy which 
 makes them worthy of all love and reverence. This is 
 a just and sacred celibacy. (°) But to remain unmarried 
 for the sake of convenience, or other selfish reasons, is 
 
Marriage and Celibacy. 117 
 
 morally blamable and also morally pernicious. Celi- 
 bacy, even when not immoral, nay, even when it is real 
 celibacy, and a victory over nature, is still a fosterer of 
 an immoral selfishness; while a celibacy which re- 
 nounces all strugele for such a victory, places itself 
 beyond the pale of all moral consideration. (°) 
 
 It is the common vocation of mankind that we fulfil 
 when we marry, and in fulfilling it we subserve the will 
 of God. Testimony to this will of God is inwardly experi- 
 enced byusall. To everyhealthily or ganized man, to every 
 right-feeling woman, the time of love will come in due 
 season. As the flowers unfold spontaneously, when the 
 sun shines upon them in spring, and open to the genial 
 warmth and refreshing dew, so does that feeling of desire 
 which we call love, involuntarily arise in the soul of the 
 youth becoming a man, of the girl who has reached 
 womanhood. It may be that the desire is in vain and 
 does not attain its end, or that it must be resisted and 
 overcome ; but it will arise in every one, and we should 
 regard its absence as something abnormal. It apper- 
 tains to a healthy development of the natural life of 
 both mind and body. And we may boldly say that it 
 is a work of God Himself in our nature, which we are 
 not to be ashamed of but thankfully respect. (7) 
 
 This love of man and woman is not merely a mental 
 interest taken by one in another. It differs in kind 
 from the love of friendship ; for there is included in it 
 from the very beginning a sensuous element. Its aim, 
 though at first its unconscious aim, is marriage, and 
 marriage is an intercourse not merely of mind, but also 
 
118 Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 of body. It would, however, be a low view of this love, 
 to regard it as produced by that which merely pleases the 
 senses. A complacence evoked only by the external 
 appearance, and not also by the heart and mind of 
 another, does but affect us externally, and does not touch 
 our heart and mind. (*) 
 
 It is not single features of external appearance or 
 snternal character which captivate us in another, it is 
 the whole man to which the whole man is attracted. 
 We are wont to speak of the inclinations of the heart. 
 But the heart is the whole man, for it is the immost 
 fountain of life. It is in this inner nature of man that 
 love dwells, and thence pervades both soul and body 
 when it is of the right kind. 
 
 There is nothing of which poets have sung and said 
 so much as of love. It is not, however, always true 
 love which they depict; but the consuming flame of 
 sensuous passion, which plunges a man into utter ruin. 
 We all know, indeed, that there is not upon earth a 
 mightier power than love. But true love is not the 
 storm of passion and the intoxication of the senses, but 
 the calm determination of the soul. It is quite as 
 powerful in prosaic as in poetic natures, and as true and 
 deep among the uneducated as among the cultivated. 
 It is the same wherever it is truly found ; it differs only 
 in form. It is no privilege of a select few distinguished 
 beyond others. If certain shining examples of betrothed 
 and married Iove are'so deeply engraven by history 
 upon the memory of man that they can never more be 
 effaced, we still know that love blessed or plunged into 
 
The Love of Man and Woman. 119 
 
 deepest misery not only these elect ones, but that it 
 finds a home wherever two hearts are sincerely given to 
 each other. It is not the office of holy Scripture to 
 extol this love, but to tell us of the holy love of God 
 to fallen man ; yet throughout its sacred pages married 
 love serves as a type of that supreme love of the eternal 
 God for us men. The thoughts and poetry of the philo- 
 sophers and poets of Greece never ventured to raise love 
 to such a height, nor to bestow such honour upon it. 
 True love is tranquil and simple; but it is the true 
 poetry of life, the tender exhalation which after it is set 
 free covers like a veil the mystery of marriage. (°) 
 
 This love has ever in it an element of restlessness and 
 seeking, until it finds its aim in the one being in whom 
 alone it can repose. It is by this fact that God shows 
 us that monogamous marriage is in accordance with His 
 will. To the discipline of this appointment has God 
 subjected the intercourse of the sexes, and thus rescued 
 it from licentiousness; hence this is alone compatible 
 with piety and communion with God, and every other 
 kind of cohabitation is displeasing to Him. (1) 
 
 The aim of love is marriage, and marriage is a fellow- 
 ship of body and soul. It has not only a mental, but 
 also a sensual side. Permit me to speak of the sphere 
 of sensuality as far as it is needful and possible. As 
 far, I say, as it is possible, for you know the saying of 
 the Apostle, “That it is a shame even to speak of those 
 things that are done of them in secret ;’ and when we 
 look at life as it actually is, and perceive the world of 
 sin, shame, and coarseness which meets us, we may well 
 
120 Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 be seized with a horror which may make us avert our 
 faces with fear and shame, and depart in deep conster- 
 nation at the corruption of mankind, well understanding 
 the wish that the whole world of sense were annihilated, 
 and that we were, as Plato desired, mere spirits ; and 
 yet our sensuous nature also is a work of God, in which 
 we ought to rejoice. (") 
 
 It is, however, but too true that by reason of sin our 
 body has ceased to be to us a subject of pure and irre- 
 proachable delight. For sin involves the corruption not 
 of the soul only, but also of the body. And we all have 
 the feeling that the invisible robe of innocence and 
 purity which covered our body, as it came from God's 
 hands, and caused us to behold in it an admirable work 
 of God, is lost. ‘This feeling we call shame. It is the 
 conscience of the body, and was given us by God, 
 when we were forced to leave the paradise of innocence, 
 to dwell within as a faithful guardian, and to give us 
 inward warning of the slightest contact, even in thought, 
 with the coarse and rude. This fine instinct for what is 
 proper and of good report, produces that timid reserve 
 which diffuses, especially over the young, that atmos- 
 phere of coyness which is their greatest charm, and 
 which involuntarily provokes our admiration in propor- 
 tion as such admiration is less sought after. — 
 
 This instinct becomes a power which consciously 
 sways the will and conduct in chastity. . Our body was 
 not given us to be the instrument of our own pleasure. 
 It is a noble gift of God, and must fulfil its office, 
 according to the appointment of the Divine will. No 
 
Shame, Chastity, Inclination. ma eit 
 
 one has a right selfishly to misuse and corrupt before- 
 hand what is not his own, but is to be another’s. It is 
 true that marriage itself is, as our ancestors loved to call 
 it, a remedy and preventative. But we ought not to 
 enter upon marriage merely to preserve our purity ; we 
 ought also to maintain our purity that we may marry 
 with a good conscience. Our body is not a matter that 
 we may deal with at our own discretion ; it is the instru- 
 ment of our personality, and not our absolute property. 
 It is the image of our Creator; it is the temple in which 
 the Holy Ghost carries on His work; it is destined for 
 immortality. Our treatment of our body is not a matter 
 of indifference. The Grecian world placed the matter 
 of which I am speaking on a level with eating and 
 drinking. Even men of elevated minds, as Aristotle, 
 so regarded it.("*) We know, however, that there was 
 nothing which so ruined the ancient world as the 
 dominion of the fleshly lusts; and nothing would be so 
 sure a sign of our own approaching destruction as their 
 unrestrained indulgence. History teaches us that a 
 nation is in either a healthy or a decaying state in pro- 
 portion to its judgment and conduct with respect to 
 these sins. It was for their chastity before all else that 
 Tacitus extolled the ancient Germans, and held them up 
 as patterns to his Roman fellow-countrymen. (1%) It is 
 an act of patriotism to bring the sins of the flesh to the 
 strictest standard, and to pass the severest judgment 
 upon them. 
 
 But marriage is not merely the association of the 
 sexes, it 1s also the association of personal life, and 
 
122 Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 it is the former only that it may be the latter. It is this 
 which gives it its moral consecration. As a personal 
 association it has two requirements: personal inclina- 
 tion, and harmony of moral opinion. 
 
 A distinction is sometimes made between a marriage 
 of inclination and a marriage of prudence. But that is 
 no true inclination which is not confirmed by prudence. 
 Inclination is not the intoxication of the senses, for 
 intoxication passes away and gives place to temperance. 
 Inclination is not a mere frame of mind, for frames 
 change and depend on circumstances. Inclination is 
 the attraction of heart to heart, resulting from the 
 harmony of two different kinds of mind, which find in 
 one another the completion which each requires. ‘Two 
 married people may be excellent persons, and even 
 earnest Christians, and yet their natural dispositions 
 may not agree. They were not made for each other. 
 Such a marriage was a mistake, and the mistake makes 
 itself felt in the difficulties which married life entails, and 
 which only earnest moral effort can conquer or at least 
 alleviate. 
 
 Harmony of moral opinions must go hand in hand 
 with inclination. For marriage without this would be 
 a merely natural and not a personal association. Now 
 the highest of moral relations is the relation to God. If 
 then marriage is to be a fellowship in every relation of 
 life, it must be a fellowship in the highest of all, in life 
 in God. The most important prerequisite of marriage 
 is religious fellowship. 
 
 If there is one step in life which ought to be under- 
 
The Conditions of a Proper Marriage. 125 
 
 taken under the guidance of God it is this. For as 
 there is no greater happiness on earth than a happy 
 marriage, so also is there no greater torment, no heavier 
 burden, than an unhappy one. In all matters a Chris- 
 tian’s first concern will be to know what is the will of 
 God. And nowhere is this more necessary than here. 
 There are indeed in every marriage more or fewer 
 periods and hours of uncertainty, doubt, and vacillation. 
 For it is the sinful custom of our nature never to be 
 satisfied with what we have, but always to wish it 
 different from what it is.(!4) In such seasons of doubt, 
 we need to be able to fall back upon the certainty, that 
 we acted according to the will of God, and to use this 
 certainty as a shield against such temptation. The 
 question then is, that we should be certain of having 
 acted according to the will of God. But how are we to 
 arrive at this certainty? First by the secret inclination 
 of our heart, for by this God speaks to us. We must 
 indeed be careful to understand it aright, and correctly 
 to interpret the voice of God therein. To this must 
 be added the providential guidance of our life. Our 
 decision must be no capricious fancy, but one to 
 which we are naturally led by our condition of life 
 and external events, and finally, we have to consider 
 whether certain external conditions are in accordance 
 with our desire. 
 
 The first among these is the advice and approbation 
 of parents. To them, first of all, should the young apply. 
 For they have the knowledge furnished by experience. 
 Previous to marriage, none conceives of married life as 
 
 > 
 
124 Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 it really is, none realize either its quiet pleasures or its 
 burdens. And the blessing of parents builds the houses 
 of their children. - When the young scion separates 
 from the old family, if it is to flourish and prosper it 
 must take with it the blessing of the old home, as in 
 ancient times colonists were accustomed to bear fire from 
 the domestic hearth in their ships to the distant land 
 to which they were bound. 
 
 But much besides must be considered if the family 
 is to be built up at unity with itself, The wife has to 
 enter into the husband’s sphere of life. She ought then 
 to be able to take her part in it, and to enter into the 
 interests in which he is concerned. When the woman 
 is mentally far the man’s inferior, the true fellowship 
 which marriage ought to be cannot exist, and this will 
 tempt the man to be unfaithful, at least in mind. The 
 education of a woman does not however consist in her 
 learning and being as far as possible acquainted with 
 those special branches of knowledge which are not 
 perhaps in union with her own nature, but on the con- 
 trary tend to obliterate it. An education whose aim it 
 is to teach a girl all kinds of knowledge in every depart- 
 ment of culture, that she may perchance be able thereby 
 to shine in society, does more harm than good, if only 
 by destroying through its multiplicity of acquirement 
 that singleness of character which is the distinctive 
 excellence of woman. The best female education is the 
 head and heart in the right place, true sensibility with- 
 out affectation, and a genuine sense for the noble and 
 beautiful. (*°) Such a woman will soon be at home in — 
 
Lhe Conditions of a Proper Marriage. T25 
 
 any sphere of life, and amidst the circumstances of any 
 calling, much sooner than we. This special elasticity 
 of the female above the male mind also reconciles dis- 
 crepancy of social position. 
 
 Social position being an external matter, the inclina- 
 tion of the heart is independent of it. Nor indeed 
 ought position to settle into caste, and it is the very 
 office of martiage to combine the heterogeneous, and 
 thus ever to keep in action the amalgamation of human 
 society. But, as laying the foundations of a family, mar- 
 riage enters into the intricate web of political and social re- 
 lations, and experiences their reaction. Hence the matters 
 of rank, family, and society should also be considered, 
 and should coincide with inclination, unless marriage is 
 from the very first to involve the future in difficulties 
 and dangers. But even in this case it will be much 
 easier to the woman both to descend and ascend in the 
 social scale; while the man, if marriage should impose 
 upon him a renunciation of his former social position, 
 would have greater difficulty in forgetting it; and if it 
 should raise him to a higher grade, he would not go 
 easily as a woman obliterate the traces of his former 
 modes of life and action, 
 
 If those who love were alone in the world there would 
 be no need for them to take counsel of any but of God 
 and their own hearts, as to whether they ought to marry. 
 But the family which they found forms part of the civil 
 community. Hence the State brings its laws to bear upon 
 the conclusion of a marriage, and the Church also seeks 
 to make her voice heard. 
 
126 Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 It is true that marriage is marriage even without the 
 blessing of the Church, and the State may decline to 
 require it, and to deem the fulfilment of certain civil 
 conditions sufficient. But when the Church requires of 
 her members that if they conclude a marriage they 
 should come to the house of God, this is no arbitrary 
 act on her part. For she has to bring before them the 
 words of God concerning marriage, and to impart the 
 Divine blessing upon marriage for the consecration of 
 their new path in life. When then they who are con- 
 tracting marriage contemn, in this most important act 
 of their life, the Church and the Church’s blessing, and 
 thus deny their Church membership, it is but consistent 
 that they should be regarded and treated as having 
 by this act renounced and forfeited their Church 
 privileges. 
 
 For it cannot be a right state of mind which despises 
 the blessing of the Church, nor can it be said of such a 
 marriage, that it has been entered upon in the name of 
 God, which is in every marriage the main point. (1°) 
 
 But it must also be carried on in His name. 
 
 The strongest bond of union in married life is union 
 in religious life. This it is which sanctifies its joys, helps 
 to bear its cares and wants, and changes life’s heavy 
 sorrows, which are not wont to leave any family unvisited, 
 into blessings. Every department of life needs its regula- 
 tions, and so also does religious married life, It is 
 natural, it is moreover right and just, that the religious 
 life of married people should find its common expres- 
 sion in the religious regulations of domestic life. In 
 
Marriage a Union of Religious Life. 127 
 
 former times family worship was the general custom. 
 At present it is the constant habit only in comparatively 
 small circles. I know well that under many circum- 
 stances it has its difficulties, especially where the 
 husband or both parents must be at work very early, 
 But generally the obstacles allowed to prevail are the 
 mere excuses which are contentedly made to stand for 
 real difficulties. The chief reason of its omission is 
 convenience, or the fear of being called Jromm, or 
 pietistic. I have, indeed, seen married couples begin 
 the introduction of religious forms into domestic life 
 after heavy afflictions. But why should we wait for 
 these? Can any family exist without appointed rules 
 and regulations? And if we make rules in every other 
 department of life, why not in religious life, which is the 
 soul of all the rest? Can it be fear which restrains us 2 
 Such timidity is far less known in England and 
 America. Why will we not have the courage to act 
 upon our convictions? Or do we really think it is a 
 thing improper, or even preposterous, to remember in 
 our family circle that God, upon whose blessing the suc- 
 cess of all our undertakings depends? A man cannot 
 be invested with a higher dignity than that of being the 
 priest of his own household, and none more fitly raises 
 his position in the family, (17) 
 
 Husband and wife must both occupy their proper 
 positions in the family, the positions which correspond 
 with their respective characters and duties. From the 
 man proceeds the proposal of marriage, the woman con- 
 sents to the proposal. Hence, too, it is the husband’s 
 
128 | Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 part to decide on the course to be taken, even in matters 
 pertaining to daily life and the management of the 
 family ; the initiative and the final decision are equally 
 his. But his, too, is the responsibility. He may 
 surrender much in detail, but responsibility for the 
 family he cannot surrender. If the husband however is 
 the determining will of the home, the wife is its animat- 
 ing soul. As the soul is present in the whole body, so 
 are the thoughts and eyes of the wife to be everywhere 
 present in the home. Not that she is to do all herself. 
 She is not to be used up in external work, and to be 
 merely a housekeeper to her husband. She must main- 
 tain her freshness of mind and gladness of disposition, 
 that she may minister refreshment to bim after his 
 labours. It may be that. the wife is superior to the 
 husband, but this does not release her from the duty of 
 taking the second place, and of acknowledging the 
 position of her husband. The decision lies not; in her 
 hands, but in his. But it is just because she does 
 not decide and command, but obey, that she exer- 
 cises a secret power, which we all perceive, and from 
 which no man can'nor should seek to escape. Neither 
 does this secret power fail her even with respect to the 
 despotism of a tyrannical husband, but is the greater in 
 proportion as it is the quieter. An entreaty is mightier 
 than a command, and nothing subdues the heart so soon 
 as the silent sadness of a woman who is able to main- 
 tain her amiability even when she is enduring. (1*) 
 
 The positions of husband and wife in the family are 
 different ; but married love is common to both, and has 
 
Married Life. (129 
 
 a levelling power. Love is a communion of gwing and 
 recewing. It pertains to the perfection of married life 
 that each should disclose himself or herself to the other, 
 and give and take a share in all that affects oris possessed 
 by the other. For they who enter upon the married 
 state are no longer their own, but give themselves to be 
 the property of another. This applies also, and indeed 
 apples pre-eminently, to the inner life. In saying this, 
 it is not meant that we should burden each other with 
 every trifling vexation or every passing annoyance ; but 
 that which is an essential part of the inner hfe, viz. the 
 manner in which it is influenced by God and the world, 
 ought to be the common property of both. Love how- 
 ever is not merely a mutual giving, it is also a mutual 
 receiving. At first, perhaps, all that is done by the one 
 interests the other, and each takes pleasure in drawing 
 out the other, that the whole character may be mani- 
 fested and developed under every aspect. This delight 
 in another, and in another’s peculiarity, is moreover 
 inseparable from love, and never disappears till love too 
 departs. We ought ever to see in each other a eft 
 bestowed upon us by God, which we ought neither to 
 leave uncherished and undeveloped, nor to endeavour to 
 transform according to our own perhaps vain notions and 
 hikings, and when we cannot succeed, to recoil from 
 with inward disappointment. We ought, on the con- 
 trary, with a loving acquiescence and delight in the 
 disposition of each other, to take pains to mature and 
 cultivate its native qualities. It is this which gives 
 
 a life and charm to the intercourse of married life, and 
 ; : 
 
130 Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 preserves to it that atmosphere of poetry which should 
 no more vanish in the course of years than should that 
 tenderness of treatment which neither destroys with 
 rude hand nor contemns by indifference, but thankfully 
 receives what God has bestowed upon us in each 
 other. 
 
 But marriage is not merely the enjoyment of a good, 
 it is still more a work—a work to be wrought first of all 
 upon ourselves. We have in marriage first of alla work 
 with ourselves. For it is against our sin, which en- 
 dangers the happiness of married life, that we must 
 unceasingly strive. The greater events of life, and espe- 
 cially its greater sorrows, have a uniting power; but 
 everyday life, with its many little annoyances, soon 
 exercises a chilling or even an alienating agency, unless 
 we are constantly upon our guard. Or perhaps certain - 
 qualities or customs in each other so unpleasantly 
 affect as to make us inwardly recoil. Every moral 
 relation of life demands fidelity. Now marriage is the 
 most intimate and comprehensive of all relations, and 
 none requires fidelity in an equal degree with this. 
 Every secret coldness, every inward recoil, is an in- 
 fraction of faithfulness, and by all ill-humour and re- 
 pugnance we incur the danger of unfaithfulness. This 
 is a danger which we must overcome, not by mere 
 feeling, which it may be we endeavour to revive, but by 
 a regard to the will of God, who has placed us in this 
 state of life, and bound us together by His word, that 
 we may learn in this school of life to fulfil the moral 
 duties to which we are called. 
 
Marriage Faithfulness. 131 
 
 This is the work we have to do in ourselves. But we 
 have also a task to perform with respect to each other. 
 For we must be fellow-helpers in the work of salvation, 
 and allies in the war with sin. It would be no true love 
 which would not dare, but from false tenderness or love 
 of ease decline, to rebuke sin in the loved, and that 
 would be no true love which would not endure, but reply 
 with irritation to such rebuke. We must however take 
 care to reprove from love, and not from self-exaltation or 
 a conceited notion of our own superior merit. Love 
 will reprove kindly, and know how to stop, and will speak 
 more of the matter with God than with the offender. 
 
 We must oppose the sins, but we should bear the 
 weaknesses of each other; for each gives the other 
 enough to bear. At first, indeed, each appears to the 
 other, as it were, in Sunday attire ; but marriage soon 
 puts on its work-day garments. Then many an ideal 
 vanishes, and much that is unlovely makes its appear- 
 ance. Spring ever bears more blossoms and hopes than 
 the season which succeeds it matures, But let us not 
 be unjust. One fruit on the tree is worth more than a 
 whole branch of blossoms. And the best of any human 
 being is never known till after long acquaintance; the 
 whole treasure of love, faithfulness, self-sacrifice, and 
 patience which a human heart may contain can be but 
 gradually disclosed. Much with which our fancy once 
 invested it may indeed vanish, but we shall find other 
 and better riches; for a faithful heart is the most pre- 
 cious of all treasures, and married life is ever deepening 
 and increasing this experience. The kind of intercourse 
 
132 Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 may and must vary, but the tie itself must not decrease 
 but increase in strength. 
 
 Hence, where marriage is rightly ordered, the thought 
 
 of a dissolution of the marriage tie cannot, and, by the 
 
 Christian, ought not to be entertained. 
 
 Marriage is in its nature indissoluble. If it might be 
 dissolved, that complete and unreserved surrender which 
 takes place in marriage would be morally impossible. 
 To enter upon marriage with the idea of possible separ- 
 ation is to deny one’s personal dignity, degrade one’s- 
 self to a means for any end, and show signs of moral 
 depravity. Where marriage 1s tightly regarded, the 
 longer it lasts the more indissoluble does it become. 
 Marriage may indeed become a heavy burden, either 
 because some mistake or sin committed when it was 
 entered upon is thus avenging itself, or through the 
 fault of either husband or wife, or through some grievous 
 providence. In such cases, the Christian must either 
 bear with humility the punishment of his own fault, or 
 endure with patience what God lays upon him. Where 
 there is a right state of mind, the burden may perhaps 
 be inexpressibly heavy; but it cannot be impossible to 
 bear it. If the moral power to do this is wanting, it 
 must be prayed for, and God will not let Himself be 
 entreated in vain. 
 
 In one case only can separation be a moral duty, or 
 at least morally allowable, namely, when either hus- 
 band or wife has through unfaithfulness so transgressed 
 in that which makes marriage marriage, as to deserve to 
 be deprived of marriage as of a possession forfeited by 
 
Lhe Dissolution of Marriage. 133 
 
 unworthiness. This is the self-evident exception laid 
 down by our Lord, and confirmed by His apostle. For 
 the wilful departure of one partner, of which St. Paul 
 speaks, as setting free the other and Christian partner, 
 because he is thus defrauded of marriage, belongs to the 
 same kind of transgression against the nature of mar- 
 riage. (7°) We have no right to set up another point of 
 view for divorce than that stated by the Lord, for no 
 other is justified by the very nature of the case. 
 
 You know that this question forms one of the points 
 of dispute, in which Church opinion is at variance with 
 the law of the State, and one which has ever furnished 
 matter for repeatedly accusing the representatives of the 
 Church of excessive rigour. And yet they ought rather 
 to be thanked for risking the favour of public opinion, 
 for the sake of keeping up in the popular consciousness 
 the higher moral view of marriage ; for no. greater 
 injury can be done to a people than to shake their 
 moral view of marriage, and degrade it into a contract 
 which may be dissolved as well as entered into. It isa 
 boon to the general morality, and to the entire life of a 
 nation, when the spirit of laxity is decidedly opposed ; 
 for it is powerful and seductive enough already, and by 
 no means needs any further support. And if the State 
 is prepared on grounds of expediency to make conces- 
 sions, and to legalize relations, which ought to be called 
 not marriages, but decent concubinages, it is still the 
 office of the Church, as guardian of the highest moral 
 possessions of mankind, to enforce those stricter moral 
 principles which may prevent the moral ideal, without 
 
134 Lecture V. Christian Marriage. 
 
 which life threatens to sink to its lowest level, from 
 vanishing out of the world. Its indissoluble nature 18 
 implied and required by the very idea of marriage. 
 Without this it ceases to be really marriage. 
 
 Marriage is then by its very nature indissoluble, and 
 becomes, when rightly entered upon, only the more so 
 the longer it lasts; and when God blesses it with chil- » 
 dren, these form a fresh bond of union between their 
 parents. It is of the children and the home that I in- 
 tend to speak in my next lecture. 
 
LECTURE VI. 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN HOME. 
 
 upon our former one—marriage. 
 
 Marriage and home are intimately con- 
 nected, for the family results from marriage ; 
 and even when a marriage is childless, it still forms a 
 home-life complete in itself. Not till he is the master of a 
 household is a man truly free; while to be the mistress 
 of the house is the chief dignity and pride of a woman. 
 Love for home and pride in home are deeply imprinted 
 in the German character; and when the Englishman 
 proudly says that his house is his castle, it is the 
 German spirit which speaks by his mouth—the same 
 spirit which, among ourselves, calls domestic authority 
 an unquestionable one, and looks upon home as an in- 
 violable sanctuary. 
 
 The State is a result of history, the home a produc- 
 tion of nature; for it is marriage and its association— 
 an association not mental only, but also corporeal, 
 which forms the foundations of the home, and gives rise, 
 too, to that common feeling which binds its members to 
 
136 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 each other. The family feeling which unites them is no 
 resolve of the will, no result of reflection, but a natural 
 feeling owing its existence to a common source, which 
 arises spontaneously, and combines individuals into a 
 whole. For it is not law and order, or even a com- 
 munity of interests, that keeps the members of a family 
 together, but it is this natural feeling of a common 
 origin that forms the soul of domestic life. We may 
 truly say, It is God the Creator Himself, present by His 
 Spirit in the natural ordinances which He has instituted, 
 who produces this sense of mutual connection. This 
 family feeling we call natural piety, ze. that spirit of 
 reverent love which holds sacred the common origin and 
 soil which has produced and bears us. This feeling of 
 piety is the natural morality of domestic life. We all 
 know how greatly we are concerned to maintain and 
 cherish this feeling of natural piety. Upon it depends 
 the temporal wellbeing of families. The members of a 
 family can be guilty of no greater transgression than 
 impiety, which all regard as contrary to nature, and as a 
 token of an utterly corrupt disposition. (*) 
 
 Wherever natural piety exists, there too we find the 
 feeling for tradition ; for we rest upon the past, and it 
 is of the nature of piety to reverence it. To despise his- 
 tory, to know only a to-day and no yesterday, is 1m- 
 piety ; for life must be pervaded by the breath of history 
 if it is to attain its full development, to be kindled to a 
 noble ardour, to be animated by a soul. 
 
 The feeling for the past obtains a firm footing and 
 definite shape in custom. Custom is the deposit of the | 
 
Piety and Custom. 137 
 
 past in the life of the present. It is no mere matter of 
 agreement resulting from a felt need, that all life must 
 move according to certain definite forms, if it is not to 
 be scattered to fragments by caprice. Custom has a 
 deeper, even a moral importancé, By it we maintain 
 the connection of history. It is the experience of 
 former generations, their views, their practical wisdom, 
 which are deposited in custom, and which we preserve 
 for future ages, when we hand down custom to them. 
 Customs change; for we correct, and ought to correct, 
 the thoughts and opinions of past ages. But custom 
 itself remains as the bond which connects the ages with 
 each other. It is a revolutionary spirit, which breaks 
 with history and does away with custom ; and its effect 
 is the restlessness that it introduces into the life of a 
 nation, which, having lost the connection of its history, 
 is seeking to reunite the broken threads. The healthi- 
 ness of national life is intimately connected with the 
 preservation of its continuity. Now. the feeling for 
 tradition manifests itself in custom. Hence the healthi- 
 ness of family life also is intimately connected with the 
 power which custom exercises in it. A family must not 
 be regulated by inclination or fancy, which is one thing 
 to-day, another to-morrow. The active flow, indeed, of 
 individual life must be allowed free course, and must 
 not stagnate in forms and customs; for the family 
 belongs not merely to the past, but chiefly to the pre- 
 sent. But when the gates are open to admit the current 
 of the present, care must also be taken to maintain the 
 protecting dams which restrain the stream within due 
 
138 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 limits, and direct it into that appointed course by which 
 its blessings may be most abundantly diffused. The 
 spirit of a family is expressed in its customs, and so, too, 
 should be its religious spirit. Every home worthy the 
 name requires also its religious, its Christian customs ; 
 for these alone give sacredness and truth to the family 
 spirit, and raise the feeling of natural piety to higher 
 moral dignity, by incorporating it into our life in God. () 
 
 The family feeling forms the internal, the family 
 custom the external, bond which combines the several 
 members into the unity of the family. From marriage 
 as the trunk the several members of the family branch 
 off in their various gradations. The relations of parents 
 and children, brothers and sisters, masters and servants, 
 are included in the one home. These are then followed 
 by that relation of kinship in which the home stands to 
 the offshoots which have been formed from the parent 
 stock. It is these various circles of the home life which 
 are to employ our thoughts to-day. 
 
 Children are an heritage and gift which cometh of 
 the Lord, says the Psalmist. Our language speaks of 
 the blessing of children, and the proverb says, Viel 
 Kinder viel Vaterunser (many children many Lord’s 
 prayers). Modern opinion, however, has undergone 
 some alteration in this respect. You all know that 
 when in any nation marriages are but scant of children 
 such a fact is a symptom of a deep moral corrup- 
 tion. The prevailing fewness of children in French 
 marriages is one of the darkest points in the married 
 and moral life of France; and the same phenomenon 
 
Duties of Parents to Children. 139 
 
 in certain circles of North America has been deemed 
 sufficiently important to evoke a discussion of this 
 suspicious circumstance even from the pulpit. Mar- 
 riages abundant in children evince not only the physi- 
 cal, but also the moral healthiness of a nation. Children 
 are a gift of the Lord, but a gift which entails serious 
 duties, as any one possessed of children knows full well. 
 
 The first and most self-evident of parental duties is 
 the maintenance of children. Every privilege is depen- 
 dent upon the fulfilment of duties. To bea parent is 
 the highest privilege to which a human being can lay 
 claim ; for there is nothing greater in this world than to 
 have given life to a human being. Hence, this privi- 
 lege involves its corresponding duties. The first of 
 these is the preservation of the child’s life. N eglect of 
 this duty is a crime. Heathen antiquity looked upon a 
 child as a thing of which its parent had an absolute 
 right to dispose. In other instances; the State claimed 
 the right of déciding the fate of the young life, accord- 
 Ing as it gave promise or not of doing service to the 
 commonwealth ; (*) and similar notions still exercise a 
 devastating power among heathen nations. It is Chris- 
 tianity that has taught us to recognise in a child that 
 personality which belongs not only to men, but to God, 
 and on which He has the first claim. 
 
 This constitutes the great significance of Infant Bap- 
 tism. It is not merely a happy family solemnity, at 
 which we welcome, as it were, and dedicate the new life 
 to human society, but the delivery of the child to its 
 Lord and Saviour as His property, and the admission 
 
140 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 thereby that it has an equal claim with ourselves to 
 eternal treasures, and stands, with respect to God and 
 Christ, on the same level as we who are grown up. It° 
 is by means of Infant Baptism that Christianity has 
 preserved the recognition of the moral personality of 
 children by the general consciousness of Christendom. 
 When; then, Infant Baptism is rejected or treated with 
 indifference, it is not merely the stability of the Church 
 but the interests of mankind in general that are en- 
 dangered. (*) 
 
 It is the greatest comfort to parents to know that 
 their children are not merely theirs, but that they are 
 more especially the children of their God and Saviour ; 
 and if at other times we have not as vivid a conscious- 
 ness of this comfort as we ought to have, we at least 
 find how much we possess in it when we stand beside 
 the sick or dying bed of a beloved child. There is 
 nothing which so helps us to bear the sorrow of so 
 ereat a loss as the certainty that we are resigning our 
 child into the same faithful Hand to which we com- 
 mitted it at its baptism. In that Hand we know it to 
 be well covered and better protected than it could have 
 been by us in this world of temptation. It is true that 
 this certainty, though it comforts us in our sorrow, does 
 not, and ought not, to do away with our grief; for we re- 
 ceived our children from the hand of God chiefly that 
 we might have them, not that we might lose them. This 
 is one of the most painful among the painful contradic- 
 tions of our existence. 
 
 Infant Baptism is a comfort beyond any other; but it 
 
The Education of Children. 141 
 
 is also a responsibility beyond any other. The muain- 
 tenance of our child is our first duty, its education our 
 ‘second. The more we feel that our child belongs not 
 merely to ourselves, not merely to society, but, above 
 all, to its God and Lord, the more shall we feel ourselves 
 bound to Him also, for the preservation of the gift which 
 He has bestowed upon us. The duty of maintenance . 
 extends to the time of the child’s Independence. Cer- 
 tainly the growing child may be required to contribute 
 to its maintenance, but only in such wise that the other 
 essential duty which parents owe to their children may 
 not be infringed on. All use made of the child in co- 
 operating towards its support ought at the same time to 
 subsegve the purpose of its education. Al] work which 
 has not also an educational purpose is a misuse of the 
 child. May children, then, be employed in factories for 
 the sake of their earnings? Those terrible conditions 
 under which it was related that even the youngest 
 children were employed in factories in certain districts 
 in England, and which resulted in a mentally and physi- 
 - cally distorted generation, seeming to have sprung from 
 a totally different race—these conditions, indeed, have 
 been alleviated by the enactments of the last twenty 
 years. Still we cannot but designate it as an injustice 
 to the age of childhood that children of eight years of 
 age may legally be employed in factories for five hours 
 a day. It is to the interest of the general welfare and 
 of the future that their youth should be preserved to 
 the young, and the factory is surely the most inappro- 
 priate of places for such a purpose. (°) 
 
142 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 There is certainly an educational value in work ab- 
 stractedly considered, and a child ought early to be 
 accustomed to it. But its natural place being home, 
 this is also the place of its education. (°) 
 
 It is the general spirit of home, the whole atmosphere 
 which a child breathes, the domestic arrangements by 
 which it is surrounded, which will educate it. And it 
 is this circumstance which gives such educational im- 
 portance to custom. Education is now much more talked 
 about than formerly. I do not know that the result cor- 
 responds with the greater pains applied to the discussion 
 of this subject. And how is this phenomenon to be 
 accounted for? In proportion as custom loses its sway 
 must its loss be replaced by special exertions. Nothing 
 has greater educational power, nothing is of greater 
 assistance in the work of education, than custom. And 
 no age is more susceptible of the power of custom than 
 youth, which is still, or at least ought to be, ruled by 
 direct influence, and not by reflection. (”) 
 
 It is the husband who appoints the arrangements and 
 customs of the home, the wife who maintains them ; 
 and thus do both concur in the work of. education. 
 Education is a matter which necessarily pertains to 
 parents. They can give up the work of instruction, but 
 not that of education. They may procure assistance in 
 this work, but the final decision, and consequently the 
 final responsibility, is theirs. or the child has been 
 committed to them by God, and in that relation of natural 
 piety which exists between parents and children, an 
 educational power is bestowed on them which none other 
 
The Education of Children. 143 
 
 can possess. The child belongs to both parents: hence 
 its education is the affair of both, and not of the mother 
 only. However much the father may be engaged else- 
 where, and absent from the home, it is nevertheless his 
 to determine the principles by which it shall be ruled, 
 to give the final decision, and to take upon himself the 
 final responsibility. The task which husband and wife 
 have severally to perform in the work of education is 
 differently apportioned to each, according to the different 
 nature and constitution bestowed by God upon the man 
 and woman. And it is just the union of these differences 
 which render education efficient, each of the two supply- 
 ing what is lacking in the other. There must, indeéd, 
 be harmony between them ; for nothing can have a more 
 evil influence upon education than discord between 
 parents. Nothing can be worse than when each has 
 a different relation to the children behind the back of 
 the other. And even though the discord may not prevail 
 in the matter of education, the very fact is sufficient to 
 render any salutary education impossible; for the con- 
 jugal love of the parents is the common hearth whence 
 the warm atmosphere of love, which fills the home and 
 unites children and parents, must be diffused. (8) | 
 Parental love, which has its roots in conjugal love, is 
 an educational power. It must not, indeed, be a carnal 
 and selfish, but a holy love ; for parents must see in their 
 children not only their own flesh and blood, but a eift 
 of God. Hence they must look upon their duty to their 
 children as an office with which they have been invested 
 by God, and the duties of which they must perform in 
 
144 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 His name. This will produce both that self-sacrifice 
 which cares nothing for its own ease if 1t may but live 
 for and serve the children—a self-sacrifice which calls 
 forth, especially in mothers, those deeds of devotion 
 - to which the strength of the man will willingly yield 
 the palm; and, on the other hand, that moral earnest- 
 ness which deals with the child with the authority 
 of a Divine vocation, and demands unconditional obe- 
 dience. 3 
 
 For the road on which we have to lead the young is 
 the road of obedience. Whether children understand why 
 they are to obey or not is all one ; it is enough that the 
 parents have commanded. For it is their parents’ word, 
 and not their own understanding, which they are to obey. 
 They neither need, nor ought at first, to understand it; 
 for it must be an absolute confidence which they place 
 in a parent’s word—a confidence which must not be 
 subjected to the criticism of a precocious reflection. A 
 child’s duties are all summed up in the duty of obedience, 
 and the special sin of youth is disobedience. Learning 
 itself is, in the first place, a matter of obedience, and 
 not of understanding ; and hence the first form of learn- 
 ing is an exercise of memory, and not of reason. For 
 memory is the obedience of the intellect, in respect of 
 matters which present themselves as much in the form 
 of a law to the child’s intellect as the commands of a 
 parent do to its will @) To submit to this law, whether 
 it addresses the will or the intellect, is the first step. 
 To understand this law is the second. The essence of 
 education consists, first of all, in the practice of obedi- 
 
The Education of Children. 145 
 
 ence ; for obedience is the road to liberty, and self-control 
 is education for independence. 
 
 Hence, where this obedience is refused, it must be 
 compelled. This brings us to the duty of punishment. 
 It may well go hard with parents to punish, it may well 
 be that a mother would far rather suffer punishment 
 herself than inflict it on her child; yet it is love for the 
 child which makes the punishment of disobedience a 
 duty. It must, indeed, be love, and not temper and 
 irritability or mere severity, which punishes. Love will 
 know how to inflict the right amount of punishment and 
 to exercise due forbearance. In such a case, it need not 
 be feared that punishment will alienate a child’s heart. 
 On the contrary, it will bind the heart of the child more — 
 closely to the parents, for it will feel through the punish- 
 ment the pain it causes to its parents. In the case of a 
 child, punishment has the value of asserting the autho- 
 rity of the moral law in a manner suitable to the stage 
 of childhood, and of bringing the child to a conscious- 
 ness that the guilt of transgression lies not with its 
 power, but with its will. In proportion, however, as 
 the stage of consciousness is developed from the pre- 
 ceding stage of sense, punishment must give place to 
 moral motives. (1°) 
 
 Love and firmness, in due proportion, constitute the 
 educational powers. What, then, is their task? We have 
 not to make something out of our children, but to receive 
 them, and be thankful for them, as God gives them. 
 Whether they answer to our notions and desires or not, 
 
 they are not bestowed to be the toys of our vanity or the 
 K 
 
146 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 objects of our pride or caprice, but are a sift entrusted 
 to us, and which we have to preserve. To educate is to 
 preserve and to develop. God has bestowed its pecu- 
 liarity on the child, and this pecuharity He would have us 
 first to recognise, and then, in such recognition, to develop. 
 Gifts and characters differ. To one is given much, to 
 another little. It is folly to set before all children the 
 same goal in respect of culture, for they have not equal 
 capacities, nor are they equally favoured by outward 
 circumstances. We ought not to try to make equality 
 where God has made inequality, nor to correct what His 
 wisdom has ordained.(“) To bring to their full and 
 harmonious development those capabilities which God 
 has deposited in the child is the true task of education. 
 
 And also of Christian education. As Christians, we 
 know that God has bestowed upon our children not only 
 natural but spiritual gifts. For our children have been 
 baptized, and received by baptism into the covenant of 
 grace. To preserve them in this baptismal grace, to 
 develop in them the life of God’s Spirit, this is one side 
 of Christian education; to contend against sin in the 
 child is the other. For though we are accustomed to 
 call children innocent, we still know that they are not 
 so. And though in them sin rather assumes the form 
 of naughtiness, it is still sin itself which lurks behind 
 the mere naughtiness. And we must have been but 
 very superficial observers of children if we have not 
 perceived, even in their childish impulses, the secret 
 germs of passions which, if developed, may be the ruin 
 of the whole life. 
 
The Religious Education of Children. 147 
 
 But the Christian. knows also that the conflict with 
 sin cannot be successfully waged by human strength, 
 but only by the grace of God. This knowledge will 
 restrain him in the work of education from the use of 
 any kind of force, the ultimate motive of which is com- 
 pounded of unbelief and pride, the unbelief which does 
 not trust in God, the pride which makes us feel that 
 we must do all ourselves. We certainly ought to 
 exercise an unceasing watchfulness over our children, 
 and to lead and guide them to the best of our ability ; 
 but they are confessedly the best teachers who make 
 themselves least conspicuous, and the best that we can 
 do for our children is after all to commend them to God 
 in prayer, and to train them betimes in the way of 
 godliness. 
 
 How, then, is a child to be religionsly educated? Re- 
 ligion is first of all a thing to be lived, and not till 
 afterwards a matter to be instructed in. Religion must 
 first approach a child in the form of life, and afterwards 
 in the form of instruction. Let religion be the atmos- 
 phere by which the child is surrounded, the air he 
 breathes. The whole spirit of his home, its order, its 
 practice—that world in which the child finds himself as 
 soon as he knows himself—this it is which must make 
 religion appear to him a thing natural and self-evident. 
 And let it be ours to lead him go to regard it! 
 
 We cannot begin too early with prayer. When the 
 child cannot pray himself, let his mother pray with and 
 for him. As soon as the child can speak, as soon as he 
 can prattle, let him be accustomed to saya few words 
 
148 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 of prayer himself. Let it not be objected that the child 
 cannot understand them. The way of education is by 
 practice to understanding, not by understanding to 
 practice. And a child will have a feeling and a pre- 
 sentiment of what it cannot understand. The world of 
 heavenly things is not an incomprehensible and foreign 
 region to a child, but the home of his spirit. He will 
 speak to His Father in heaven without our needing to — 
 give him much instruction as to who that Father is. 
 It seems as though God were the well-known friend of 
 his heart. And when a child is accustomed to speak to 
 Him, he will observe this custom more strictly than his 
 mother will, and, if she forgets it, will remind her of it, _ 
 even with tears. 
 
 The first nourishment for a child’s mind is not in- 
 struction, but poetry and history. For there is an 
 element of poetry and romance in the mind of a child, 
 and we must all of us have frequently contemplated 
 with delight the play of its imagination. It is in this 
 form that religion also will approach a child. Poetry 
 and: history will be unconsciously the means of instruc- 
 tion. A child will willingly learn little verses, and likes 
 nothing better than listening to stories. With what en- 
 thusiasm have we each in our day heard the stories of 
 the Old Testament, of David and Goliath, of Samson and 
 the Philistines, of Joseph and his brethren, and of 
 Abraham’s sacrifice; and with what silent devoutness 
 have we listened to the history of the Saviour! And 
 when these narratives are accompanied by the sight of 
 an illustrated Bible, what a source of pleasure is opened 
 
The Religious Education of Children. 149 
 
 to a child! They utterly misconceive the nature of a 
 child who would deprive him of the Bible and of Scrip- 
 ture history. How poor and barren they make child- 
 hood! And why? Because the history is miraculous ? 
 A child is at home in the world of marvels. Criticism 
 and doubt are sure to come soon enough; and the spirit 
 of reflection should not be prematurely evoked. It 
 is equally pernicious to bind a child, as pietists too 
 often do, to religious confessions, which have as yet no 
 truth for him, and to feed him, as rationalists advise, on 
 morality, thus leading him away from the flowery fields 
 of Scripture narrative to the arid wastes of moral com- 
 monplaces. Let us suffer a child to continue a child, 
 and allow him his world of poetry and history, and let 
 us afterwards, when he has reached the time of rational 
 reflection, initiate him in the earnest teaching of the 
 Catechism, and lead him to make it his manual. (12) 
 Many objections have been recently raised against the 
 Catechism. They, however, who find fault with it, do 
 not understand it. Its diction has been blamed; yet it 
 was written by the greatest master of the German 
 tongue, and contains—it might perhaps be said—in its 
 second article, the most famous paragraph extant, 
 Offence has been taken at its matter.» But, after the 
 Bible, there is no book that can be placed on a level 
 with it. Its pages are few, but they are golden pages, 
 Next to his translation of the Bible, it is the best gift 
 bestowed by Luther on our nation, and that which has 
 been most abundantly blessed. Former ages were in- 
 clined to ascribe to it a kind of inspiration. Leopold 
 
150" Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 Ranke, the great historian of the Reformation, speaking 
 of it, says: “The Catechism published by Luther in 
 1529, and of which he himself said, that, learned 
 doctor as he was, he made a prayer of it, is as child-like 
 as it is profound, as comprehensible as it is unfathom- 
 able, simple and elevated. Happy he whose soul 1s fed 
 by it, who cleaves to it. He possesses at all times an 
 imperishable consolation, and under its easy form the 
 essence of truth which is sufficient for the wisest of the 
 wise.” (1°) 
 
 Let us not fear that the religious character of their 
 education will enslave the minds of our children. On 
 the contrary, they who have learnt to bow to God will 
 be able to stand erect before men ; while they who know 
 nothing higher than earthly human power, will bend 
 before it. As Tocqueville rightly says: “A people that 
 does not believe must be servile, for none but a religious 
 people can bear liberty.” We require of youth that 
 ideality which despises all that is coarse and common, 
 and is acquainted with something higher and better 
 than the petty cares and gains of every day, an ideality 
 which may refresh and refine ordinary life. It is one 
 of the duties of education to cherish this spirit of ideality 
 in youth. And though it sometimes becomes excessive, 
 or is combined with a deficiency of practical skill, yet 
 it far more becomes the young to live in the ideal, than 
 prematurely to cherish the practical tendency at the 
 cost of the ideal. All true ideality, however, presup- 
 poses religion. For it is religion which raises the mind 
 to the world of everlasting good, while ideality without 
 
 i 
 
Education for Independence. 151 
 
 religion is but a phantasm, which dissolves with ad- 
 vancing years as the morning dew, and gives place to 
 the ordinary doings of everyday life. If we desire that 
 our youth should be fresh, glad, and free (/frisch, froh- 
 lich, frer), and cannot imagine them otherwise, let us 
 remember that in the old German gymnastic motto 
 prous (fromm) precedes these three qualities. 
 
 Custom and habit are the beginning of education, 
 undependence its end. Education has the twofold task 
 of fitting the child for both its heavenly and earthly 
 vocation. In both its aim is to render him independent, 
 and in order to attain this we must separate him from 
 ourselves. In every education, that most critical period 
 of all, the time of separation, comes. It is not without 
 care and anxiety that the child is suffered to leave the 
 shelter of home and removed from parental cuardian- 
 ship. Then is the time for faith and hope, and casting 
 our care on God. And this apples both to the heavenly 
 and the earthly calling. At first it is the home atmos- 
 phere and the home customs that keep the child in the 
 realm of religious thoughts and feelings. But what was 
 inherited custom must become a matter of independent 
 conviction and individual possession. And this is 
 brought about amidst both internal and external crises. 
 When the world’s many voices reach the ear of our son, 
 can we be surprised to see him perplexed about what is 
 as yet a matter of tradition? The young love freedom, 
 and feel a repugnance to constraint. They are much 
 more inclined to break with tradition than to maintain 
 it. And this is a fact we must understand, and to 
 
152 uecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 which we must accommodate our conduct. The young 
 desire not to be ordered, but to be allowed reasonable 
 liberty. And least of all will the inmost convictions of 
 the heart suffer the law of obedience to be applied to 
 them. Here liberty must be granted. But if the piety 
 of the home was sound and not affected; if our son’s 
 innermost feeling is a sincere love of truth, we may 
 confidently commit all to Him, who takes His different 
 ways with each, and who demands our confidence, while 
 He will not suffer us to prescribe His time. It is ‘the 
 school of life which makes us independent, whether 
 in secular or religious matters. 
 
 But we belong also to the world. Education must 
 fit us for our earthly calling, and in this respect 1t 
 ought to have some. definite end in view. This 18 
 needed to give it unity, and hinder it from being de- 
 sultory. It is not, however, left to our arbitrary choice 
 to bring up our children for whatever calling we please. 
 On the contrary, we should seek to ascertain God’s will 
 concerning them, as expressed in their nature and dis- 
 positions, their talents and inclinations; and according 
 to these must we first guide and then advise them. 
 What this calling may be isin itself a matter of indiffer- 
 ence. Every calling is good and noble which contri- 
 butes to the fulfilment of the general tasks imposed on 
 man, whether it is nearly or more distantly connected 
 with the kingdom of God. For it is this which we 
 serve in every calling which is according to His will. 
 
 If children belonged only to their parents, their 
 instruction and education would be a matter in which 
 
School. Mais: 
 
 their parents alone were concerned. ‘They belong, how- 
 ever, also to the church and to the commonwealth ; and 
 home education has therefore an ecclesiastical and a 
 political aspect. It is the interest of the Church that 
 children should be brought up and instructed in the faith 
 into which they were baptized ; it is the interest of the 
 State that children should be qualified for the perform- 
 ance of those duties which the civil and political com- 
 munity to which they belong imposes on them. Hence 
 both Church and State have ever cared for the edu- 
 cation of children. The Church has set the example, 
 the State has followed it. And it betokens a healthy 
 condition of affairs when neither of these powers seeks 
 to supplant the other, but both act and work in unison. (!*) 
 With us in Germany education is compulsory. Other 
 nations are gradually imitating us in this respect, and 
 it must be confessed that this is a needful and bene- 
 ficial institution ; for many parents would neglect their 
 duty to their children if they were not compelled to 
 perform it. When this is the case, however, the school 
 must be so constituted that parents may entrust their 
 children to it with a good conscience. The various . 
 interests of the home and of the Church must be con- 
 sulted in the school, as well as those of the State. The 
 tone and spirit of the school must be of a genuinely 
 moral and Christian character. Compulsory education 
 in non-Christian and non-Church schools, is to Christians 
 and members of the Church, tyranny, and their relega- 
 tion to private schools, robbery. The manner in which 
 certain teachers may view this matter cannot be 
 
154 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 regarded as decisive, for children belong not to teachers, 
 but to parents. The calling of a teacher is honourable 
 and important, but his highest duty is to assist and 
 strengthen parents in their office of bringing up pious 
 Christians and worthy members of society, and thus 
 serving both Church and State. But it is not parents and 
 teachers only that have duties to fulfil with regard to chil- 
 dren, but all grown persons. We all know how sharp- 
 sighted children are. Every weak point which grown 
 people expose to children, and which leads them astray 
 to sin, or becomes to them an occasion of irreligion, 1s a 
 transgression against them. You all know what stern 
 words they were which our Lord spoke concerning those 
 who offend His little ones, Especially have the aged 
 members of their home a serious duty to perform to 
 the young, and the more so in proportion as it is chiefly 
 to the old that the young are more strongly attracted. 
 The aged are hoth the bearers of the tradition of the 
 past and the witnesses of the eternity to come. Both 
 these circumstances invest the old with a mysterious 
 charm, compounded of respect and attachment, in the 
 eyes of the young. 
 
 The duties of children correspond with those of 
 parents. They look up to them with reverence and 
 confidence, and their authority is glorified in their eyes 
 with a reflection of Divine authority. This reverent 
 confidence finds its exercise in obedience and gratitude. 
 These are the virtues of a child. And gratitude remains 
 even after the time of obedience has been succeeded by 
 that of independence, and when there is no longer a 
 
Brothers and Sisters. 155 
 
 possibility of showing gratitude, the grateful remem- 
 brance still endures. ; 
 
 Home is a place of various relations and their appro- 
 priate duties. With the relation of parents and children 
 is connected the mutual relation of brotherhood. The 
 more numerous the family, and the more diversified by 
 sex, age, and nature, the more is the home life enriched, 
 but the greater also is the responsibility of each separate 
 member. or each member of a family helps to pro- 
 mote or to disturb the peace and harmony of the whole. 
 And it is here that the sisters especially find a field of 
 operation. It is in every one’s nature to assert himself 
 and his own peculiarities, without much regard to the 
 likings of others. Hence arise frictions, wounded feel- 
 ings, and interruptions of harmony. It is the happy 
 part of the sisters in the family circle, to exercise by 
 their patient and quiet manner an appeasing and recon- 
 ciling influence. It is that of the brothers to contribute, 
 by promoting and exciting it, to the general cheerfulness. 
 The world of history and of intellectual life is far earlier 
 and far otherwise disclosed to their view than to that of 
 their sisters. From these flights of mind into the broad 
 and varied world it should be their part to bring back 
 with them into their home, gifts and treasures which 
 may serve to increase its resources and enlarge its 
 views. It is true that the circle will afterwards be 
 broken up, and new connections formed, which will 
 then fully claim both the external and internal life. 
 But if the home life was healthy and happy, the 
 memory of their youthful days will, even in these later 
 
156 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 seasons, bind the brothers and sisters together in love » 
 and gratitude. 
 
 There are few families which do not require assist- 
 ance from other quarters. And, on the other hand, 
 there are so many families possessed of superfluous 
 energies which they desire to impart to others. Hence 
 arise the new connections occasioned by various kinds 
 of service and assistance. The most important tie thus 
 formed is the relation of masters and servants.(°) We 
 all know how much the welfare of the home depends 
 upon this. For servants enter into the circle of the home 
 life, and can therefore promote or disturb its comfort 
 according to the position they occupy thereto. It is 
 true that this relation is based upon a legal agreement. 
 But this does not embrace the whole of its conditions. 
 It becomes a personal relation, involving personal obli- 
 gations, and thus differs widely from the relation of 
 workmen and employers. Domestic servants have not 
 merely to do their work, and to do it well, like day- 
 labourers, but, entering as they do our household, they 
 have to be restricted by its rules, to share in its habits, 
 and to show by their actions that they belong thereto. 
 It is indeed this very confinement to the house, this 
 submission to its rules and ways, that repels so many of 
 our poorer female youth from domestic service, and 
 makes them prefer the freedom which the factory seems 
 to offer. And yet the house is the fittest place for a 
 young woman, the best external protection for her 
 youth, the best preparation for her future. The moral 
 duties, moreover, of masters correspond with the moral 
 
Masters and Servants. 157 
 
 obligations of servants. If the servant enters into the 
 life, and submits to the rules of the home, the master 
 has to look upon the servant as belonging to the home, 
 and sharing its life and arrangements. Domestic ser- 
 vants are not mere labourers, but members, though 
 transitory ones, of the household. Hence they must be. 
 maintained, and not selfishly misused. They must have 
 their share in the joys of the family, that they may 
 also be able to sympathize with its sorrows; they must 
 take part in the religious exercises of the family, and 
 not be excluded therefrom, that they too may be able 
 to fulfil in a right spirit the duties of their calling ; and 
 they must be regarded and treated as free personalities, 
 who have not sold all their time and all their powers to 
 their masters, but have also a right to belong to themselves, 
 and to have some time to themselves, some time for the 
 care of their intellectual and spiritual interests. For 
 both parties are responsible for each other; servants are 
 responsible for the moral order, the propérty, and the 
 good name of the family, which all so greatly depend 
 upon them; masters are responsible for the physical 
 and mental well-being of their servants, and, if it so 
 happens, for their future. For, if the possibility of a 
 home of their own is offered to servants, the relation of 
 master and servant must not be dissolved without 
 counsel and assistance on the part of the master, or 
 opposition to an unconsidered step. 
 
 Every home has, or at least ought to have, its indi- 
 vidual character, and to form a circle complete in itself. 
 But each again is also related to the outer world around 
 
158 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 it, and bound to intercourse therewith. If it wilfully 
 isolates and confines itself to its own members, its inner 
 life will become as morbid and distorted as would be that 
 of an individual under like circumstances. But as it is 
 our duty to maintain and not to lose our peculiarity in the 
 intercourse of giving and taking, so too is it the duty of 
 a family not to lose itself in the society with which it has 
 intercourse. The nearest circle is that of relationship. 
 We have no right to ignore this, for it is by the ties of 
 nature and the providence of God that we are directed 
 to it. The feeling of kinship must be maintained and . 
 intercourse with relations cherished, but still so that 
 this is not done at the cost of the peculiarity and defi- 
 nite character of our own home. It is upon such a 
 mutual recognition both of the ties of kindred and of 
 the definite character of the home, that the right keep- 
 ing up of intercourse with relations depends. 
 
 Next follows social intercourse. From this we have 
 no right to withdraw our family. Our duty both to our 
 own household, and to those with whom our course of 
 life brings us in contact, binds us to engage in it. For 
 the cheerfulness of our home requires that fresh air 
 should be allowed to pass through it by the open doors 
 and windows. But we are not called upon to sacrifice 
 the sanctuary of our home, and our object should be to 
 promote, and not to endanger, its peculiar character by 
 society. (1°) 
 
 No family is without property. For, be it ever so 
 poor, it has still the natural mental powers and gifts 
 bestowed by God upon its members. Intellectual no 
 
Property. 159 
 
 less than material possessions form the property of a 
 family; and poverty in the latter aspect may be coun- 
 terbalanced by affluence in the former. Whatever is 
 possessed by its individual members should be regarded 
 as the property of the family, and applied to its service. 
 For the duty of the head and of the members of a family 
 is not fulfilled by merely acquiring, whether in a ma- 
 terial or intellectual respect, they have also to place 
 their acquisitions at the service of the home and its 
 members. Nor are such acquisitions rightly applied by 
 being merely made use of. Our whole earthly life and 
 its sensible existence subserves higher moral purposes. 
 Whatever we possess must contribute to enable us the 
 more completely and comprehensively to fulfil the 
 moral duties of life. And among these is not only care 
 for ourselves and ours, but for others also. It would be 
 folly to insist upon equality of goods. If equality were 
 instituted to-day, it would disappear to-morrow. Com- 
 munism is a delusion; but it. is nevertheless a duty to 
 seek by sympathy and love to compensate for, and miti- 
 gate, glaring discrepancies, and thus to effect a recon- 
 ciliation between different social classes. Christianity 
 is the religion of reconciliation, not only with God, but 
 also of man with man; and one of its fairest fruits is 
 the history of mercy which it has produced, and in 
 which every Christian household should participate. 
 Even if it is poor in goods it can still be rich in | 
 love. (17) 
 
 No family has a right to shut itself against external 
 interests, for each is a component part of the whole of 
 
160 Lecture VI. The Christian Home. 
 
 human society. And as each receives so much and in 
 so various ways from society at large, so too must it 
 contribute to the general welfare. The circle next in 
 order to the family, in which it is immediately placed, 
 and to which a relation of active intercourse and mutual 
 service, of giving and taking, is to be occupied—is the 
 State; and this is to form the subject of our next 
 lecture. 
 
LECTURE VII. 
 
 THE STATE AND CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 limits of the family into the wider circle 
 of the State. 
 
 We all grow up as members of a family. 
 The protecting walls of his home shelter the son of the 
 house till the lapse of time brings his youthful years to a 
 close, leads him towards his future independence, and 
 loosens the tie which had hitherto bound him to his 
 family. At least his thoughts reach beyond the narrow 
 space of home, and aspire after public life and his own 
 future position therein. And though when he ‘has 
 reached manhood he may again settle in a home of his 
 own, he does not then belong to his family alone, but 
 also to that civil community of which he is a member, 
 to the national and political life of his country. Both 
 these spheres now claim his services; he is himself the 
 living bond between them, and a necessity is laid upon 
 him to place them in active intercourse with each other. 
 He brings into his family the spirit and the interests of 
 general life, and thereby raises the tone of domestic life; 
 
 he makes the position and possessions of his family ser- 
 L 
 
162 Lecture VIL. The State and Christianity. 
 
 viceable to the community; he is concerned to instil 
 into the youthful members of his family a national 
 spirit ; he strives to evoke in his sons the genius of the 
 commonwealth which they are one day to serve. In | 
 this respect it is a matter of indifference whether he 
 occupies a definite official position in the State or not. 
 For we demand of every one that he should take an in- 
 terest in the public concerns of his State and nation, 
 that its fate, its greatness or decay, should affect and 
 move his inmost soul. We blame the man who con- 
 fines himself to the narrow limits of home life, and 
 regard such conduct as selfish or unmanly. Even when 
 care for his daily bread, or the bounded horizon within 
 which his thoughts move, prevents his taking a part in 
 public affairs, we still demand from the man of the most 
 limited intellect, from the most scantily paid artizan, 
 an affection for his country, an inward interest in its 
 fate, which affects even him in his narrow sphere. For 
 we are all born not only members of a family, but also 
 members of a particular nation ; and what we are by the 
 disposition of natural circumstances we ought also to be 
 consciously and willingly. We have no right to with- 
 draw from those connections in which we have been 
 placed by God Himself. 
 
 It is from this relation which he holds to the State 
 that Aristotle defines man as “a political animal” (a (ov 
 woXwrexov). This is certainly an exaggeration, and rests 
 upon that ancient view which knew of nothing higher 
 than the State. We know of higher than political aims 
 of life, of a higher than a national community. When 
 
Origin of the State. 163 
 
 we would name this highest and ultimate object of 
 man’s life, we name not the State but the kingdom of 
 God. And yet we conceive and speak of it after the 
 . analogy of the State, for we call it a kingdom. In so 
 doing we express a feeling that, in the stage of earthly 
 existence, the State represents a certain finality attained 
 in the institutions of life. 
 
 We regard it as a higher grade of national life 
 when the idea of the State governs the individual. 
 A nation in which the idea of the State is a power 
 influencing the hearts and minds of its members, 
 possesses in this circumstance a moral preponderance 
 over. others. But it would be an error to require that 
 the entire life should be absorbed thereby. For the 
 State as such does not furnish life with its matter, it is 
 but a form which life assumes. Its matter it receives 
 from the different departments of real life. The State 
 is the means, not the end, but it is a necessary means 
 and a God-designed institution. How then did the State 
 originate? and in what does its nature consist ? 
 
 We have all a feeling that the existence of the State 
 is a thing not accidental but necessary. We cannot 
 conceive that this form of human society might just as 
 well be non-existent. And yet it did not exist at the 
 first, and will not continue to exist always. We all 
 bear about with us a hope of the future. Revelation 
 announces this future to us, and calls its consummation 
 the kingdom of God. This is the higher glorification 
 of the relation of the State, but yet it is the State no 
 longer. In that future age of the world for which we 
 
164 Lecture VIL. The State and Christianity. 
 
 hope there will be no more states. The State will not 
 last for ever, nor did it exist at the first. It belongs 
 to this interim of the world in which we are living. It 
 had a beginning, and it will have an end; it is a product 
 of history. (1) How then did this form of human society 
 originate @ 
 
 There are various views on the subject. Some make 
 it to proceed from the family, others found it upon com- 
 pact, while a third party regard it as originating in force, 
 
 The first of these views has in it an element of native 
 simplicity and kindliness, and is most akin to our 
 natural notions. The family preceded the State. It 
 was by the extension of families that states were formed, 
 and the authority of the head of the family transferred 
 to the supreme head of the State. Do we not call rulers 
 fathers of their country, and invest them in a certain 
 fashion with parental authority? And yet, when we 
 set this plainly before us, do we not all directly feel 
 what a deep-reaching difference prevails between the 
 “province of the family and domestic life and that of the 
 State? They are two utterly different spheres. The 
 family is the sphere of affection and custom, the State 
 that of justice. In the former prevail free confidence, 
 loving submission, willing obedience. In the latter, the 
 strict severe spirit of right, which compels obedience to 
 its behests by law and force. The family knows no- 
 thing of the unbending behests of justice which prevail 
 in the State, and the State is unacquainted with the 
 warm breath of kindness which forms the soul of family 
 life. Both must exist in this world. There must be 
 
Origin of the State. 165 
 
 Justice and order and law, but none of us would wish 
 that there should be nothing else. There must also be 
 heart and love and affection, or the world would become 
 one great prison. The family and the State are both 
 necessary, but they are totally distinct from each other. 
 The State cannot be the natural product of the family, 
 for it is animated by another kind of spirit. The family 
 is a product of nature, the State not a product of nature, 
 but brought to pass in history. (?) 
 
 Yes, say those who hold the second view, by the free 
 will of its several members, the State is the result of 
 compact. Men exchanged the lawlessness which at first 
 prevailed, by mutually agreeing to enact ordinances, and 
 to constitute legal authorities for their enforcement. 
 And thus states arose. This doctrine of a social compact, 
 advocated especially by Rousseau, was for a long time 
 
 the prevailing one, and though it is now for the most 
 | part given up in principle, its consequences are still at 
 work. For, when far-reaching political ordinances are 
 made to-day after this fashion, to-morrow after its opposite, 
 according to the decision of the majority, what else is 
 this than carrying out the notion that the State is a 
 mere formation of the will or an invention of the intel- 
 lect? But the State is not this. No state was ever 
 produced by the mere resolve of the will and by com- 
 pact. And we may thank God that compact is not the 
 foundation of the State, for we well know what compacts 
 are worth. The State rests on a firmer basis. It was 
 not created by the free resolves of the will, for a people 
 living in a lawless and irregular manner has no inclina- 
 
166 Lecture VIL. The State and Christianity. 
 
 tion for order. And sayage nations are just those which 
 are not wont to make compacts. (*) 
 
 Certainly, say the advocates of the third view, states 
 are neither the result of compacts, nor the invention of 
 the intellect and will of the parties concerned, but an 
 act of violence, and they who employ force usurp them. 
 From the days of Nimrod onwards, men of violence 
 have from time to time arisen, who have subjected 
 others, imposed upon them laws, and thus founded 
 states. All states originated in despotism, and it has 
 been but gradually that subjects have extorted from 
 their rulers a greater or less amount of liberty. This is 
 especially the doctrine of papistical authors, who then 
 proceed to place in broad light upon this dark back- 
 ground, the need of the papal power to protect the 
 freedom of nations from the despotism of their rulers, 
 Nor can it be denied that most of the states of primi- 
 tive times exhibited the form of despotism, and that 
 men of violence have in all ages usurped power over - 
 others. We all know too of what importance men of 
 energy are to the development of the states which they 
 govern. But pure force is that which is in most direct 
 opposition to the nature of the State. For the very 
 reason why states exist is, that human affairs may not 
 be arranged by force but by justice. «This is true even 
 with respect to the weaker states. And whether we 
 appeal to their actual condition or past history, we find 
 that states are founded on justice. (4) 
 
 Justice existed before states. Scripture informs us 
 that the fundamental elements of justice are based upon 
 
Justice and Nations. 167 
 
 a Divine ordinance. After the deluge, when men again 
 began to spread and to settle upon earth, God, for the 
 purpose of securing the preservation of human life, estab- 
 lished the foundations of justice by the words, “ Whoso 
 sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed, 
 for in the image of God made He man.” Such is the 
 oldest definition of justice existing, and this is referred 
 by holy Scripture to the immediate ordinance of God. 
 By it the stability of human affairs is placed under the 
 protection of justice, and this justice under the protection 
 of punishment. To live is the fundamental right of man; 
 hence to deprive another of his life is the fundamental 
 transgression against human society, for it violates its 
 fundamental condition, and endangers existence and its 
 future. Hence this right must be maintained and this sin 
 prevented by opposing to this sin an act most emphatically 
 answering it. Thus God Himself places human affairs on 
 the basis of justice, and places this justice under the 
 protection of punishment. Because men are sinful; and 
 will not, if left to themselves, do what is needful and 
 right, there must be justice and punishment on earth, 
 and those also who administer them, 2.c. magisterial 
 authorities. Such is the divine basis of that institution 
 which we call the State. Justice and its development 
 devolve upon history, and so too does the formation of 
 states. All states bear within them an historical element 
 which is subject to change. But beneath this changeable 
 and accidental element there is a permanent one, viz. 
 the Divine foundation of justice, and of the administra- 
 tion of justice by its authorized organs for the protection 
 of the manifold interests of men. (°) 
 
168 Lecture VII. The State and Christianity. 
 
 But that which is thus comprised by justice is 
 national life. States are the judicial arrangements and 
 forms of national life. And the latter is the second and 
 natural foundation of the State. (°) 
 
 The same holy Scripture informs us, some chapters 
 farther on, that when men began to multiply, and to 
 feel the power of the differences which were beginning 
 to appear among them, they attempted, for the sake of 
 obviating them, to maintain their unity by force, and 
 that they endeavoured to effect this by creating, accord- 
 ing to their own choice, one great centre of union, but 
 that God separated them into different nations and lan- 
 guages. What then are we taught by this information ? 
 
 The effort to combine different nations into the unity 
 of a great empire, and thus to satisfy by human means 
 the craving of the heart after the union of the whole 
 human family, runs through the whole course of history. 
 This end however God has reserved to Himself, and He 
 is the enemy of all combination brought about by force. 
 We see again and again how His judgments have been 
 poured out upon those empires whose unity has been 
 founded on force. It was such an attempt at centrali- 
 zation that God punished by the dispersion. Scripture 
 tells us that a confusion of tongues took place. What 
 it tells us of the separation of languages applies to that 
 of nations, for language is the most direct expression of 
 the national spirit. The law of multiplicity, on which 
 the difference between one nation and another is based, 
 is no doubt a Divine law, whose purpose is that the rich 
 fulness of human nature should be developed in the 
 
Justice and Nations. 169 
 
 abundant diversity of national distinction. Through sin 
 however this multiplicity has grown into a separating 
 and hostile opposition, and history is not merely the 
 history of the maintenance of national distinctions, but 
 of uninterrupted national strife. 
 
 The causes of national diversity are partly moral, 
 partly geographical, partly historical. 
 
 We meet not merely with natural, but with moral dif- 
 ferences between nation and nation. We recognise in the 
 national genius of the several peoples, not merely different 
 degrees of endowment, which in themselves are indeed 
 morally indifferent, but we also judge them according to 
 a moral standard, and speak of national virtues and vices; 
 and these point back to former moral decisions, which 
 we are no longer able to point out in past history, but 
 which we perceive in their effects. For, as in the case 
 of an individual, the after effects of an early moral 
 determination continue through the whole of his subse- 
 quent years, and produce a decided effect on the for- 
 mation of his character; so too is. it with nations. 
 And the greater number of the national peculiarities of 
 temperament are to be accounted for on this ground. 
 
 With this moral factor is combined a geographical 
 one. You all know how emphatically and how success- 
 fully modern geographical science, as established by 
 Carl Ritter, has pointed out the historical and intellectual 
 influence of the soil upon which the different nations 
 have settled. Not only plants, but ourselves also—who 
 seem so separate from it—assimilate the nature of the 
 soil, especially in times when the bond of association 
 
170 Lecture VIL. The State and Christianity. - 
 
 therewith was a far more intimate and active one than 
 it is at present. But even in these days we all ac- 
 knowledge what an influence the soil has upon the 
 temperament of its inhabitants, nor is it difficult to 
 prove this in individual cases. We all bear in our 
 mental constitution the character of our native land, 
 and even when we seek out anew home, we take with us, 
 in our whole mental nature, the character of our original 
 home into our new world. 
 
 To these influences exercised upon the mental con- 
 stitution of a people by original moral decisions and 
 by its geographical position, must be added the history 
 which it goes through. For, after mankind separated 
 into the multiplicity of nations, God appointed to each 
 the separate road upon which it should go, and in which 
 it should gain its experience. The aim indeed of each 
 national history is the same. In his great speech on 
 Mars Hill, St. Paul expresses it in ‘the words (Acts 
 xvu. 26, 27): “God hath made of one blood all nations 
 of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath 
 determined the times before appointed, and the bounds 
 of their habitation, that they should seek the Lord, if 
 haply they might feel after Him and find Him, though 
 He be not far from every one of us.” History is the 
 development of the possibilities latent in human nature, 
 It lasts so long as these possibilities are not utterly 
 exhausted. As long as anything new can happen it 
 does happen. The history of any nation is the develop- 
 ment of the possibilities existing in its special nature. 
 It must develop the whole wealth of its nature. One 
 
The Nations and their History. | aly 
 
 nation is more, another less highly gifted. So too 1s 
 the history of one nation more rich and varied than that 
 of another. But the nature of each people has its limits, 
 and its history is to serve the purpose of making it 
 conscious both of its limits and its powers ; and it is just 
 this experience which is to lead it to God. The more 
 thoroughly a nation deals with its history, the more 
 decidedly will it acknowledge God to be its Lord and 
 helper, and the more religious a nation will it become ; 
 and the more superficially it deals with its history, the 
 more irreligious will it be. To seek and to find God is 
 the purpose of all nations and of their history. But the 
 ways to this end are different, each nation being led by 
 God upon its appointed path. Now the experiences 
 which each gains upon this path settle down into the 
 legal ordinances which it enacts. As the experiences 
 made in the social life of individuals settle into, and 
 are, so to speak, deposited in custom, so too is law the 
 deposit of the history of the nations. In so far as this 
 history is a common one, it obtains a common expression 
 in the legal enactments of nations. In so far as it is a 
 different one, so too are their legal enactments different. 
 Law is not invented, not made according to notions and 
 theories ; it is a product of history, an expression of the 
 actual circumstances of a nation as brought about by 
 history. Laws and ordinances may indeed be made, 
 which are merely inventions and devoid of historical 
 foundations, but these have no roots, and are not the 
 expression of the common consciousness. (7) Thus is it 
 that a people becomes a legally constituted, legally 
 
172 Lecture VIL. §=The State and Christianity. 
 
 ordered commonwealth, zc. a state. According, then, 
 to what has been said, every state requires a national 
 basis. But a state is not necessarily ,co-extensive 
 with nationality, for it is the product of a common 
 _ history, and this may have variously modified the 
 national status and composition. Hence the exclusive 
 and absolute enforcement of the principle of nationality ~ 
 upon states is a revolutionary theory, for it ignores 
 the rights of history, and this is the essence of re- 
 volution. (°) 
 
 To sum up what has been said, we have seen that 
 upon the foundation of that fundamental enactment by 
 which God protected the life of sinful man from arbitrary 
 violence, have arisen the manifold historical enactments 
 in which the different nations have deposited their 
 common history, and comprised their national life. And 
 thus the State is the legal organization of national 
 life brought about by history. (°) 
 
 What, then, is the relation of the State to actual life ? 
 
 There are various spheres of life which the State finds 
 already in existence, which it does not create, but finds, 
 and has to recognise; on which it has only to impress 
 the form of its legislation for the purpose of securing 
 them from arbitrariness, and thus promoting their healthy 
 activity. These varied spheres of life which the State 
 presupposes, which are not indebted to the State for 
 existence, but are merely under its protection that’ they 
 may the more comprehensively and perfectly fulfil their 
 different tasks, are those of personal, of family, and of 
 religious life. The State does not first create the reli- 
 
The Nations and their History. 173 
 
 gious association ; it existed prior to the State, and is not 
 its product. The State does not institute the family, but 
 finds it long pre-existent; the State does not bestow 
 upon personality the right of free self-determination, 
 but only recognises it. All these departments of life 
 are embraced by the State, and placed under the pro- 
 tection of its laws, but do not owe to it their origin. 
 The State cannot ignore them, but must minister to their 
 activity, and help them in the discharge of their special 
 duties. Each of these spheres of life has in itself its 
 own nature and character, its special justification and 
 its peculiar rights. The State does not create but merely 
 formulates, as it were, and guarantees them. (10) 
 
 Let us briefly consider this subject. 
 
 There are certain imprescriptible human rights in- 
 volved in the very nature of human personality. These 
 are the inalienable right of free self-determination, and 
 the inviolability by any earthly power of the sanctuary 
 of human personality. The State did not create these 
 rights of man, but has merely to recognise and protect 
 them. (14) 
 
 There is also a family sanctuary, before whose thres- 
 hold even the power of the State must pause. It has no 
 right arbitrarily to deprive the husband of the wife, the 
 wife of her husband, the children of their parents, the 
 parents of their children, and to dispose .of them at its 
 own discretion. The State is neither one great family 
 nor is it the negation of the family. Political order 
 is not an extension of family order, nor are the political 
 rights of magistrates and rulers individual rights. We 
 
174 Lecture VII. The State and Christianity. 
 
 do not belong to the ruler as children belong to us who 
 are parents, and his country and people are not his pro- 
 perty in the same manner that an estate is the property 
 of its owner. The State is not a kind of family order 
 and au individual relation, but it includes within itself 
 the family and individual relations, and protects them 
 in their condition and in the fulfilment of their special 
 duties. But as little is it the negation of the family. 
 The order of things of which Socialists dream, is not 
 a state, but a monster which swallows up the indepen- 
 dence of the family in its general dissolution of all 
 special and independent life. (7) 
 
 Finally, the religious community, while it is placed 
 under the all-ordering authority of the State, is no fief 
 thereof. Its peculiar nature distinctly separates it from 
 the sphere of the State. It is no product of the State; 
 its existence has roots independent thereof. It is as 
 much an absolute independent quantity, as the sphere 
 of religious life is an independent quantity with 
 respect to legal life. In the pre-Christian world 
 religion, and its exercise, was the affair of the State. 
 The Christian order of things rests upon a severance of 
 these two spheres. It is the characteristic of the Chris- 
 tian view and the foundation of the Christian order of 
 society, to regard Church and State as two essentially 
 different, and yet equally authorized quantities. (1%) 
 Neither of these two powers is the servant, neither the 
 ruler of the other. They have different duties, by which 
 they are distinguished from each other, to fulfil. The 
 Church does not owe its office to the State, nor the 
 
The Nations and their History. ERs 
 
 State its office to the Church, but each is independent of 
 the other, and yet there is a connection between them. 
 Their absolute separation is an abstraction, not a reality, 
 a mere theory which is nowhere and will never be 
 a fact; for it is an impossibility. The various spheres 
 of actual life are so intimately interwoven, that while 
 it is possible to subject one to another it is impossible 
 to tear them asunder. All such attempts lead to greater 
 conflicts than those which they are made to escape, for 
 they contend against reality. It is easy to put such 
 a separation on paper; a moderate amount of legal 
 schooling. will enable a man to draw up in a day, a con- 
 stitution in which the absolute separation of Church 
 and State is consistently carried out. But a legislative 
 scheme on paper is one thing, its actual realization 
 
 another. 
 ‘* Leicht bei einander wohnen die Gedanken 
 
 Doch hart im Raume stossen sich die Sache.” * 
 
 Besides, what is called separation would only be an 
 injury to one of these spheres. Even in those states 
 in which such a separation is apparently carried out, 
 there is in reality only another kind of relation between 
 Church and State; their relation may perhaps be a 
 more spontaneous one, and allow each to take a freer 
 and more independent course of action, but they are 
 not entirely unconnected. Neither of these institutions 
 should interfere in the province of the other. The State, 
 for instance, must not prescribe to the Church what it 
 
 * Thoughts easily dwell together, while things—things which take 
 up room-——bruise each other sorely. 
 
176 Lecture VIL. The State and Christianity. 
 
 is to preach, and how it is to conduct the guidance of 
 souls; the Church must not lay down rules as to 
 how the State is to legislate in civil affairs; but each 
 must do service to the other, that both may contribute 
 to the common welfare of the nation. The State does 
 service to the Church, by placing it under the protec- 
 tion of its laws, and thus rendering the safe and peace- 
 able fulfilment of its office possible; the Church does 
 service to the State by improving and elevating the 
 minds of its members, and thus giving them moral 
 power and alacrity rightly to fulfil their political duties. 
 Thus should each be independent of, yet at the same 
 time in friendly alliance with, the other. It is not 
 enough to speak—as the fashion is—of the free Church 
 in the free State; for the one must not be unconnected 
 with and indifferent towards the other, but both must 
 occupy a position of mutual co-operation and fellow- 
 ship. (14) | | 
 Every legal enactment should be an expression of 
 actual relations. So too should the legal enactment of 
 the relation between Church and State. When the 
 people of a State is a Christian people, the State 
 naturally does. not ignore, but takes account of this fact 
 in its enactments. It would be unnatural for such a 
 State to legislate, as though the people comprised by its 
 laws was not a Christian people, or out of regard toa 
 vanishing minority to lose sight of the consideration 
 which it owes to the Christian character of the mass of 
 its population. Such mistaken justice towards some 
 would be injustice towards others. Hence it is the duty of 
 
The Nations and their History. 177 
 
 such a State to adapt its legal enactments to the Chris- 
 tian character of its people, and to endeavour to bring 
 them into harmony with the principles of Christianity. 
 Herein consists the nature of what we call the Christian 
 State. This term may certainly be misunderstood, and 
 so misunderstood may give rise to just opposition. But 
 rightly understood the Christian State is a truth, for it 
 corresponds with reality. In politics we all require 
 that actual circumstances should be taken into account. 
 Now there is no greater reality than the religious creed 
 of a people. Hence it is a lawful requirement, and 
 moreover a true policy, that the religious creed should 
 not be ignared, but taken into account even in the legal 
 enactments of the State. Those only who deal in ab- 
 stract reasonings apart from the active current of real 
 life, could think of constructing ordinances to suit all 
 nations, whatever their religious creed, or whether they 
 had any religious creed at all. When we demand on 
 the ground of the fact, that the German nation is a 
 Christian nation, and that Christianity and the Church 
 is an historical power in German national and _ political 
 life—when on this ground we demand a Christian 
 state, we do not mean that the State should derive its 
 legislation directly from Scripture, or borrow its pre- 
 scriptions from the Gospel. For it is not the office of 
 the State to practise theology, and there is an essential 
 distinction between the Gospel of the kingdom of Jesus 
 Christ and the laws of states. What we mean, how- 
 ever, and what alone should be understood by the term 
 
 ‘the Christian state, is that the legislation and constitu- 
 M 
 
178 Lecture VIL. The State and Christianity. 
 
 tion of a state should be in such harmony with the 
 Christian convictions of its people as to make it pos- 
 sible to the Christians within its jurisdiction to ac- 
 quiesce with a good conscience and hearty alacrity in its 
 enactments. For though Christianity is in our days 
 much attacked and opposed, it is not yet abolished, 
 and it still exercises a far greater influence upon our 
 customs and convictions than is generally known or 
 admitted. And however coldly many of us may look 
 upon its truths, even these would not desire that it 
 should cease to exist. We may hold different views con- 
 cerning this or that question of doctrine, but our common 
 Christianity is yet broad enough to furnish the State 
 with a basis of agreement, sufficient for the purpose of 
 legislation. (?°) 
 
 But it may be asked: Can Christianity on the whole 
 be reconciled with the exigencies of the State, and the 
 Gospel with the administration of justice? 'The Gospel 
 requires us to suffer. injustice, the State to assert and 
 seek our rights; the Gospel bids us forgive, justice 
 bids us punish; the Gospel forbids oaths and homicide, 
 the State demands oaths and military service. These 
 seem irreconcilable opposites, and if they are really 
 such, the Christian cannot live in a state of this nature. 
 It was but slowly that the Primitive Church accommo- 
 dated itself thereto. It is true that it was chiefly the 
 heathen element in the then existing governments which 
 eave offence to Christians. But it was not this alone, 
 for many scruples were felt concerning institutions with- 
 out which no State could exist, and it was but gradually 
 
The Nations and their History. 179 
 
 that this hesitation was exchanged for intelligent cer- 
 tainty. Down indeed to our own days certain sects 
 have been unable to attain to any settled relation to the 
 enactments and demands of the State, refusing, ¢.g., oaths 
 and military service. And yet it is impossible to insti- 
 tute any external order on earth according to the Gospel, 
 in which, for instance, evil-doers are to be forgiven in- 
 stead of punished. What would this be but a proclama- 
 tion of universal disorder? So long as sin is a power 
 in social life, justice, law, coercion and punishment must 
 exist, and war continue to be an inevitable evil. Now 
 with respect to this external order, as conditioned by 
 sin, Jesus gave and intended to give no laws; in fact, 
 none of His laws relate to the external national polity. 
 When appealed to, He declined to decide a dispute con- 
 cerning an inheritance, for this was the office of the secu- 
 lar judge, and not a matter pertaining to His ministry. 
 He proclaimed the Gospel of the kingdom of God, and 
 required the dispositions of love and purity of heart. 
 These dispositions, which He demands in all who would 
 be members of His spiritual kingdom, we must and we 
 can inwardly maintain,-even when, as subjects of the 
 State, we govern our external civil life according to its 
 maxims. To illustrate our meaning by an example: it 
 makes all the difference whether I move for the punish- 
 ment of an evil-doer with a feeling of a malicious plea- 
 sure or with heartfelt sorrow, and only because order 
 must be maintained and justice done upon earth. Ex- 
 ternally indeed the act is the same, but the inward 
 motive is different. And as in this, so in all similar 
 
180 Lecture VIL. The State and Christianity. 
 
 cases. The external act is neither Christian nor un- 
 christian, but merely the judicial act which the exist- 
 ence of the State involves. But the temper in which 
 I perform it is either Christian or unchristian. It is 
 just because the words of Christ refer, in those utter- 
 ances which sometinies sound so strange, to the disposi- 
 tion and to the individual state of the heart, and not to 
 the external official act performed in compliance with 
 the laws of the State, that Christianity can be recon- 
 ciled with this institution, (1°) 
 
 If Christianity were a code of external precepts, it 
 might indeed come into collision with the State; and 
 they who so regard it are perpetually exciting such 
 collisions. But it is a misconception of Christianity to 
 make an external and legal act of that which is a ques- 
 tion of internal disposition. Christianity at first altered 
 nothing, as far as legal enactments were concerned. In 
 this respect it let everything be as it was. It did not 
 feel called upon to give new laws to states, nor to change 
 the ordinances of civil life. It did not enter the world 
 as a social revolution, but as a spiritual reformation. It 
 gave to the world, and to life in the world, a new soul. (2”) 
 But it is not indifferent whether or not the life led within 
 civil society and its legal forms is animated with this 
 soul of love or not, and whether or not this disposition is 
 combined with the administration of justice; for it weaves 
 bonds of fellowship in this world of variance. Law and 
 justice can maintain order and compel obedience, but 
 
 cannot unite hearts; in fact, law has nothing whatever 
 
 ? 
 
 to do with the state of the heart. The judge may be 
 
The Nations and their History. 181 
 
 inwardly persuaded that punishment will have a morally 
 pernicious effect upon the heart and mind of, perhaps, a 
 youthful criminal; but justice must be done, and the 
 order of civil society maintained, though individuals 
 should be ruined thereby. The law must take its stern, 
 unyielding course, unmindful whether or not hearts are 
 broken, and whether or not hatred and variance are the 
 result. But the Gospel unites men in bonds of fellow- 
 ship, and effects a reconciliation of hearts. When the 
 law makes, and must make, wounds, the Gospel applies 
 a balm; and when the law condemns, the Gospel seeks 
 to save. It is not, however, a matter of indifference 
 whether justice alone prevails in human life, or whether 
 it be accompanied by this gentle and conciliatory power. 
 It has been said: the State hasno need of religion and 
 the Church; in the State of the future the penal code 
 will take the place of religion.('*) We should none of 
 us, however, like to live in such a future,-in which only 
 law and punishment should reign. The world would 
 have reached its saddest form when it should have been 
 converted into one great penal institution. The spirit 
 of justice must be combined with the spirit of love, 
 
 human life depends upon their alliance. Love must not 
 prevail to the exclusion of justice, for we are sinners, 
 and our evil-doing demands punishment; nor must 
 justice prevail to the exclusion of love, for we are im- 
 mortal souls, which are to be saved. 
 
 Nor does the spirit of Christian love exist merely 
 together with justice; it has also entered into the sphere 
 of justice itself, so far as this is compatible with the 
 
182 =Leecture VIL. = The State and Christianity. 
 
 nature of the latter, and: mitigated it by that spirit of 
 gentleness for which it has made room. This‘is true 
 even of the heathen world at the period of transition 
 from the old to the new era, when it became the task of 
 legislation to reconcile justice and leniency. For Chris- 
 tianity met this effort, and brought about a transformation 
 of the former rigid justice into a clemency which did 
 away with those marks of cruelty which the admini- 
 stration of justice still widely exhibits even among our- 
 selves.(!®) It is the triumph of law to be the expression 
 of justice, and yet, at the same time, to leave room for 
 clemency. In our days it is universally demanded that, 
 even in penal legislation, humanity should not be for- 
 gotten; and that even in the criminal, the man must not 
 be ignored. This humanity is not Christianity, and it 
 has many friends who are no. friends of Christianity ; 
 but it is nevertheless a fruit of that Christianity which 
 first taught us to recognise the human in every man. 
 
 In contrast with the severity of former times, the . 
 danger of the humanity of the day is an amount of 
 tenderness prejudicial to strict and full justice; and 
 in proportion as regard is had to this temporal life 
 alone, and it is forgotten that there is besides a life of 
 the soul—a life not absolutely dependent upon the out- 
 ward lot of this earthly life, nay, that earthly life must 
 frequently be ruined that the life of the soul may be 
 saved,—in proportion, I say, as this is forgotten, will the 
 danger of this false tenderness be incurred.(?°) A merely 
 earthly view of life will ever oscillate between the cruel 
 severity which offends against love, and the false tender- 
 
The Nations and their History. 183 
 
 ness which violates justice. It is Christianity alone 
 which teaches us both the full seriousness of sin and of 
 justice, as revealed to us by God’s pardoning grace; and 
 though it does not thus create right, it yet bases human 
 rights upon those everlasting foundations of God’s moral 
 order and God’s kingdom, upon which, as upon two 
 massive columns, the whole edifice of national and poli- 
 tical life now rests. 
 
 We see, then, that the sphere of justice and the sphere 
 of the Gospel are two different spheres, which, externally 
 considered, seem at variance with each other. But each 
 promotes and does service to the other, and by their 
 combination they form the unity of moral life in a world 
 -ofsin. Our next lecture must treat of the various man- 
 ners in which a Christian’s life is affected by this sphere 
 of justice, which we call the State. 
 
LECTURE VIII 
 
 THE LIFE OF THE CHRISTIAN IN THE STATE. 
 
 ey Wd 
 
 ‘ot UR last lecture dwelt upon the nature of the 
 i eo | State and its relation to Christianity; the 
 present will treat of the life of the Chris- 
 tian in the State. 
 
 We saw that as the Church is the commonwealth of 
 erace, the family the association of piety, so, too, is the 
 State the commonwealth of justice. With the State, 
 justice enters human life as a new factor; and in saying 
 this, its office is declared. 
 
 The State is founded upon justice, and to maintain 
 and administer justice is its first duty; for it is only 
 under the protection of justice that the various circles 
 of society comprised in the State, can find free and 
 undisturbed opportunity to fulfil their several duties. 
 Hence the court of justice is the sanctuary of the State, 
 
 and judges its priests. Hence it is in the judge, more 
 than in any other servant of the State, that we require 
 calmness and dignity, and that no act of public life 
 appears to us so weighty and important as judicial 
 transactions and decisions. (*) 
 
Justice and Punishment. 185 
 
 Justice is the supreme power of the State, and justice 
 must be done even to the most refractory. Now, since 
 justice must be maintained and enforced, punishment 1s 
 necessary. What, then, we proceed to inquire, is the 
 meaning and aim of punishment ? 
 
 Punishment is not a means of improvement. Im- 
 provement may be combined with punishment ; but it 
 is not justice, but human and Christian love which has 
 combined efforts for the improvement of the criminal 
 with the administration of justice. Neither is deterrence 
 from crime the proper import of punishment. There is 
 of necessity a deterring element in punishment, inasmuch 
 as it is an exhibition of the full strictness of justice; and 
 thus deterrence from crime is, and must be, combined 
 with punishment, though it is not its proper nature and 
 special end. Punishment, on the contrary, is simply 
 the infliction of penalty; it is the upholding of justice 
 against disobedience; it is the necessary reaction of 
 justice against its violation. Justice must exist, either 
 in the guise of performance or in that of retribution. 
 In punishment, justice carries out its authority and glory 
 against that self-glorification of man which opposes it. (*) 
 
 Herein lies the duty of punishment. If God in- 
 tended that justice should prevail, He also intended 
 that punishment should not only be justified, but that it 
 should be a duty. Not according to human caprice, but 
 in the name of God, must punishment be decreed and 
 inflicted on the criminal. If punishment originated 
 merely in the will of man, it might well be asked 
 whence man derives the right to deprive his fellow- 
 
186 Lecture VIIL. Life of the Christian in the State. 
 
 man of his liberty, his property, or even of his life. But 
 since it is not a man’s, but God righteous will which is 
 carried out in the punishment of His adversaries, we 
 may with a good conscience, and in God’s name, decree 
 the punishment of others. 
 
 Herein, too, lies the justification of capital punishment. 
 This question has recently excited so much, and often 
 such irritable discussion, that any one who advocates 
 the lawfulness of capital punishment runs the risk of 
 being regarded as still plunged in medizval darkness. 
 The attacks made upon it proceed, however, from a 
 mistaken humanity, and really rest upon a misconcep- 
 tion of the double truth, that punishment and penal 
 justice are not of human, but of Divine origin, and that 
 punishment must be commensurate with the violation 
 of justice committed. Violations of justice differing in 
 kind and degree, penalties must thus differ also. These 
 differences are infinite in number, but there is an 
 extremity of crime against mankind which cannot be 
 exceeded. Hence, there must also be an extremity of 
 penalty which cannot be exceeded. The extreme viola- 
 tion of justice is murder, and the corresponding extreme 
 in the administration of justice is capital punishment. 
 For to live is the fundamental right of man, and the pre- 
 requisite of all the other possessions of life. Hence, 
 wilfully to deprive another of life is the fundamental 
 transgression against the stability of mankind,—the 
 special outrage against human society. With this ex- 
 tremity of crime, then, the extreme penalty must be 
 commensurate; and this is capital punishment. It is, 
 
Rulers and Subjects. 187 
 
 indeed, the most grievous thing possible to deny a fellow- 
 man the right of living, but it is also the most heinous 
 thing possible to have forfeited this right; and He, in 
 whose name we act in passing such a sentence, is the 
 supreme protector of justice on earth. Such is the holy 
 severity of justice. (*) 
 
 To administer this justice, or to secure its administra- 
 tion, is the affair of rulers. When we speak of the 
 State, we include in this term the distinction of rulers 
 and subjects ; for there is no State without rulers. If it 
 be the will of God that mankind should live in the 
 form of civil society, and that there should be therein 
 appointed organs for the administration of justice, it is 
 also His will that there should be rulers; and thus, as 
 the apostle says, there is no power but of God. Not 
 only is it the will of God that there should be rulers, 
 but they who are actually such, are such by that provi- 
 dence of God which works in history. -What may be 
 ‘the form of government, whether hereditary or elective 
 monarchy, or aught else, is in this respect a matter of 
 indifference; the government, and whoever may be at 
 its head, exists by reason of God’s will, and acts in His 
 name, not in virtue of personal excellence, but of official 
 authority. Our rulers were wont to express this fact by 
 the designation “ by the grace of God.” This expression 
 is one of humility, and not of presumption, and is meant 
 to say that it is not a personal right, but an office com- 
 mitted to him by God, which is exercised by the pos- 
 sessor of the supreme power. And on this ground it 
 indicates the Divine authority of His office, and not, 
 
188 Lecture VIL. Life of the Christian in the State. 
 
 as has been supposed, the absoluteness of his sway ; for 
 it deals not with its extent and matter, but with its 
 foundation. In this sense it is a sound and correct 
 expression, and a wholesome reminder both to the 
 bearers of magisterial authority and to their subjects. (*) 
 The State cannot exist without this distinction of 
 rulers and subjects, which is involved in its very nature. 
 It follows that neither the ruler nor the people consti- 
 tute the State, neither has the former a right to say [état 
 cest mot, nor the latter to regard itself as “ sovereign,” 
 instead of being subject to the law, and to the magis- 
 tracy to which its execution is intrusted.(°) The two 
 together constitute the State, and are consequently re- 
 ferred to each other. It is characteristic of what has 
 been called bureaucracy, for the possessors of magisterial 
 power to isolate themselves from the people, as though 
 the latter were not an essential and lawful factor in the 
 State, instead of feeling it the duty of rulers to quicken 
 the idea of the State in the whole people, and to call 
 forth its active expression. But however lively may be 
 the idea of the State among the people, and however 
 mature their understanding of political matters, subjects 
 are still devoid of one thing which the holders of magis- 
 terial power possess, and the recognition of which it is 
 not merely their right but their duty to demand; and 
 that is official authority, and the recognition they 
 must demand is obedience. ; 
 You are all acquainted with that famous passage in 
 Romans xiii.: “Let every soul be subject unto the 
 higher powers. For there is no power but of God; the 
 
Rulers and Subjects. 189); 
 
 powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever, there- 
 fore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God, 
 and they that resist shall receive to themselves con- 
 demnation.” When the apostle in these words so 
 strictly and earnestly exhorted Christians to obedience, 
 he had regard both to the revolutionary tendencies of 
 existing Judaism, which might exercise a seductive 
 effect even upon Christians, and also to the danger 
 which Christians incurred of so misconceiving their 
 Christian liberty as to suppose that, because they 
 were now the subjects of Christ and members of His 
 heavenly kingdom, they were no longer bound to obey 
 their earthly superiors. Upon the Christians of the 
 first century this warning of the apostle, combined with 
 their memory of their Lord’s saying, “Render unto 
 Cesar the things that are Cesar’s,” had its effect. 
 Never were there more cruel persecutions, never was 
 there more unlawful cruelty, than that which the Chris- 
 tians of the first century suffered from their Roman 
 rulers. None could have been more sorely tempted than 
 they to opposition and resistance. But they conquered 
 the temptation, and persevered in silent and patient 
 obedience; and God gave their cause the victory, while 
 the Jews of those days who raised up one rebellion after 
 another, were only the more completely crushed on that 
 account. These facts of the early Christian centuries are 
 typical for all times. Christianity inculeates obedience 
 to the civil rulers, even if they are unjust and tyran- 
 nical. No one preached such obedience more decidedly 
 than Luther ; no one had a more lively feeling for liberty 
 
190 Lecture VILL. Life of the Christian in the State. 
 
 than he. He uses a freedom with respect to the per- 
 sons of rulers the strong language of which may sometimes 
 almost startle us. But with respect to their office he 
 recognises and inculcates only the obedience which 
 submits even to injustice, and absolutely forbids all 
 right to active and armed resistance.(°) It is this 
 which distinguishes Lutheran Protestantism from many 
 Reformed circles in non-German nations. To this very 
 day these are far more ready to embrace the notion of 
 armed resistance to an unjust and tyrannical govern- 
 ment, which our Church decidedly rejects, by requiring 
 for all action that right which is conferred by the call- 
 ing. But we have no calling to offer arbitrary opposition 
 to the civil government. It may be a duty to refuse 
 obedience, if it commands what God has forbidden, or 
 forbids what God has commanded. We should then 
 indeed, like the apostles in Jerusalem, obey God rather 
 than men, and also patiently bear the consequences 
 of such disobedience as an evil of God’s ordaining. 
 They whose office it is may indeed be bound to offer 
 opposition within the sphere of their official calling to 
 the unjust ordinances or demands of the organs of 
 authority. There is an opposition which is lawful; but 
 it is the business of those only who, by their official 
 position, may be regarded as the chosen and appointed 
 representatives of the nation, or may have, in some 
 other official capacity, a regular calling thereto. Where 
 such a calling is wanting, opposition to the enactments 
 of government wears the guise of rebellion. But re- 
 bellion is always blameworthy, and revolution is sin ; for 
 
Opposition, Revolution, Legitimacy. 19] 
 
 it is the assumption of a power which is not possessed. 
 To this must be added, that it imperils the existence 
 of the body politic itself. For though the beginning 
 of a revolution may be under control, its results are 
 entirely beyond the power of its authors, How the 
 State will come forth from it no one can know; and 
 we have no right to imperil the existence of states. 
 Revolutions may sometimes, perhaps, have resulted 
 in salutary political progress, yet this advantage is 
 fully counterbalanced by the evils with which they are 
 combined. Revolutions are always misfortunes, and 
 greater evils than the abuses against which they are 
 directed. But if a revolution proceeding from beneath 
 is blamable, the coup d’état proceeding from above is 
 equally so, for both are infractions of law ; and in every 
 commonwealth law is supreme, and rulers exist for 
 the sake of law and its administration,—not for its 
 arbitrary overthrow. (7) : 
 
 In this question of obedience to rulers, the Christian 
 conscience will feel little difficulty in deciding. Far 
 less easy will a decision be, when the question is not 
 between ruler and subjects, but between ruler and ruler, 
 a.€. when it is a question of legitimacy. How far does 
 duty to a former ruler extend? When does duty 
 towards the new one begin? These are questions which 
 may bring a Christian conscience into a state of griev- 
 ous internal conflict. A revolutionary movement within 
 the conimonwealth, or force from without, may over- 
 throw the old government, and set up a new order of 
 things. How, then, is the Christian to regulate his 
 
192 Lecture VIII. Life of the Christian in the State. 
 
 conduct? I speak not of his heart, but of his civil 
 duty. His heart may be bound by gratitude and affec- 
 tion long after his conscience is bound to new duties. 
 Our question is simply one of conscience. As long as 
 the old government is attacked, it is the duty of every 
 man to stand up for it with heart, word, and deed, 
 according to his office and position. But when it no 
 longer exists; when another has come into its place, 
 and—which is the decisive: point—undertaken the ad- 
 ministration of justice, and thus become the embodiment 
 of law, then we are bound by duty and conscience, 
 though not perhaps by inclination, to the new. It 
 may be a heavy sorrow to him, but even in his sorrow 
 the Christian will -recognhise God’s purpose and pro- 
 vidence, and submit himself thereto. It would not be 
 the fulfilment, but the violation of his duty to the 
 State, and an act of caprice, were he, for instance, to 
 regard the dethroned dynasty as his rulers, while it 
 really was such no longer. Such changes are not, 
 indeed, generally made after so clear and decided a 
 fashion, long periods of perplexing transition usually 
 intervening. At such times, when a lawful claim to 
 his obedience is wanting, or when it is no longer obvious 
 with whom it may lie, perhaps nothing is left to a 
 Christian but to withdraw for a season from public 
 affairs, in which he could not participate without sin. (°) 
 
 Such withdrawal however must be only exceptional, 
 participation in public affairs, according to his station 
 and calling, being no less the civil duty of the Christian 
 than of other citizens. 
 
Patriotism. . 193 
 
 The disposition of mind which induces a lively con- 
 sciousness of this duty is the love of one’s country, or 
 patriotism. This is the most essential of political virtues, 
 and that from which all the political activity of the 
 Christian citizen should spring. 
 
 Let us see, then, wherein it consists. 
 
 Its first form is the love of home. The ties of nature 
 connect every one of us with the soil on which we 
 originated. For we havé received it into ourselves, and 
 have, as it were, transmitted it into our natural tempera- 
 ment. With our native soil we live as with a friend, 
 and we are bound to it by ties of affection. Even in the 
 mature and much tossed about man there is found a 
 certain longing for the home of his youth, which 
 impels him to see it once more before he dies, (°) 
 
 But this is not patriotism properly so called, but only 
 the natural feeling on which it is founded. Patriotism 
 is a moral, and therefore a freely chosen course of action, 
 which may consequently be separated from this natural 
 _ basis. A nation may leave its home and seek out a new 
 one, but its members transport their patriotism. with 
 themselves to their new home. For it is an affection 
 for the nation to which we belong, to its manners and 
 customs, that we bear about within us, in our own mental 
 constitution; and we love it, with all its weaknesses and 
 harrownesses, Just as we love a friend in spite of his 
 faults. 
 
 But all these natural characteristics of a people still 
 form only the natural foundation of its political consti- 
 
 tution. Hence patriotism in its highest sense is love to 
 N 
 
194 Lecture VIII. Life of the Christian in the State. 
 
 the political constitution of the nation to which we 
 belong. (1°) Love of country does not always coincide 
 with affection for the hereditary dynasty. It will not, 
 indeed, be unaccompanied thereby, especially where a 
 dynasty has acquired an historical importance for a state 
 and nation, or where the sovereign holds up to his 
 people an illustrious example of moral excellence and 
 faithful performance of duty. Happy are the people 
 that can boast of such a ruler! But attachment to him 
 is not equivalent to patriotism, for the latter must exist 
 even where the dynasty is unworthy of affection, or 
 where it changes. Neither has patriotism aught in 
 common with that flattery of the multitude practised by 
 demagogues, which is quite as immoral and more re- 
 pulsive than flattery of princes. It is an attachment to 
 the political institutions of our native land, and is rooted 
 in our nature. The love of country is innate in every 
 breast, and is not the result of our own reflection that 
 our state and nation is a thing necessary, or admirable, 
 or famous. It is not produced by us, but effected by 
 God, who is present in all our natural tendencies. It is 
 not force, nor fear, nor reflection, but this natural feeling 
 wrought in us by God that keeps states and peoples 
 together, and unites to each other with firmest bonds the 
 different members of a nation. - But it is ours to make 
 that which God works in us our conscious inward act, 
 to raise a natural inclination into a voluntary and 
 conscious attachment to the political institutions of our 
 country, and to make it the source of all our political 
 conduct. 
 
Patriotism. 195 
 
 This source must however be kept free from all that 
 might obscure or corrupt it. 
 
 The first transgression against patriotism is committed 
 when an individual makes political institutions subservi- 
 ent to his own interests or those of his class, instead of 
 placing himself and hisclass at the disposal of the country. 
 The.fundamental sin is selfishness, and this is also the 
 fundamental sin of political life. The State is not merely 
 a means to be used for money-making, or an institution to 
 provide appointments and maintenance for individuals. 
 This is indeed one source, but a selfish one, of interest 
 in the State. Nor is the duty of patriotism less trans- 
 gressed when homage is done to that vulgar cosmo- 
 politanism which is indifferent how the national and 
 political affairs of its own country are arranged, if it can 
 only carry on its business; or that sentimental cosmo- 
 politanism which is in love with the whole world, and 
 neglects or depreciates its own home, its. people and 
 state in comparison with others, admiring and esteeming 
 all that is foreign merely because it is foreign. 
 
 This is the old fault of which we Germans ought by 
 this time to have been cured. But, if I see aright, the 
 cure is as yet but partial. For German patriotism is not 
 merely a rejoicing in German industry, or a pride in 
 German greatness, but above all an appreciation and 
 administration of those special gifts and possessions with 
 _ which God has endowed us, and of the special office He 
 has committed to us. 
 
 And what, we ask, is this office? It is twofold, and 
 while it constitutes our pre-eminence above other nations, 
 
196 Lecture VILL. Life of the Christian in the State. | 
 
 it also imposes upon us duties above all others. It was 
 not by accident that the Reformation was effected on 
 German soil. We all rejoice in and boast of this act of 
 the German mind, and regard it as the date at which a 
 new era begins. And what kind of act was it? An act 
 which liberated the mind from unjustifiable and untrue 
 restrictions, an act which thereby introduced a new era 
 in whose blessings we participate—certainly it was all 
 this. But above and beyond this, it was a religious act, 
 an act of the religious conscience, and of the religious 
 craving, an act of piety. The mere feeling for liberty, 
 or the scientific conscience alone, would never have 
 given Luther power and courage to cope with all the 
 world, nor led his cause to victory. In such a spirit 
 have many others made the attempt, and have been 
 either brought to confusion, or betaken themselves to 
 repose. No, it was his religious conscience, it was the 
 question of his own soul's salvation, it was the 
 inward craving for assurance which gave him that godly 
 disregard, which cared neither for Pope, nor Emperor, 
 nor any human authority, because his conscience was 
 bound by God and His word as the supreme authority. 
 It was from the spirit of true piety that the Reforma- 
 tion proceeded, and hence modern German life is rooted 
 in the religious conscience and the pious heart. 
 Religion is the source of our life. From of old we have 
 been wont to speak of pious German ways, and thus to 
 comprise piety and Germanism in one notion, nay, 
 almost in one word. A pious and believing mind is the 
 heritage of our nation, and he who denies piety and 
 
Patriotism. | 197 
 
 despises faith denies and despises his best possession. 
 This trait of piety reaches back to the earliest beginnings 
 of our literature. The oldest monument of the German 
 language is the Gothic translation of the Bible by 
 Ulfilas, and the Epic which stands on the threshold of 
 our national history is a religious epic—an old Saxon 
 harmony of the Gospels called the Heiland, the most 
 characteristic saying of which is the saying concerning 
 the disciples, They knew not doubt. (!1) Our nation was 
 ever a pious nation, and unbelief has been imported 
 from Italy and France. To be an unbeliever is to be- 
 come an alien, and he who can ridicule faith and piety 
 is a degenerate son of Germany. Not till we remember 
 and turn to our good old German ways, and do away 
 with foreign ones, shall we do away with unbelief. 
 The vocation of our nation in the world is a religious 
 one, that of being the protectress of piety and faith. (}”) 
 It has also a second and secular vocation, that of 
 being the guardian of good faith and right dealing 
 between nation and nation. The memory of old German 
 honesty is indissolubly intertwined with the old German 
 ways and customs, and German faith is a well-known 
 word. But no other nation has ever done such justice 
 to the ways and customs of other nations as ours has. 
 We have the gift of entering into the mental pecu- 
 liarities of foreign nations as no other people has—it is 
 our sense of justice, our power of recognising the 
 qualities of others, which makes us capable of this, and 
 this very capacity points to our vocation. We are not 
 indeed ignorant of the weaknesses which are the result 
 
198 Lecture VIII. Life of the Christian im the State. 
 
 of this capacity ; but these weaknesses are the shadows 
 of virtues. Our nation is called upon to keep faith and 
 maintain justice in its intercourse with other nations. 
 It is an Italian principle to make interest instead of 
 truth and justice the law of action. But Italian ways 
 have ever been a temptation to our people. Their 
 apparent brillancy and their seeming success have 
 always exercised a seductive effect upon this nation. 
 It would be a denial of our vocation to be seduced 
 into setting up a policy of interest in the place 
 of a policy of faith and justice, for the sake of 
 the brilliant results which it promises. It has been a 
 frequently repeated phenomenon that victorious nations 
 have been morally conquered by those they have sub- 
 dued, and have adopted their customs. This might 
 almost be said to be a law of retribution prevailing in 
 history. Hence a moral duty is in this respect imposed 
 upon the victors. It is in such a position that we now 
 find ourselves. May our nation perceive and overcome 
 the danger! When Alexander the Great had conquered 
 Asia, the Asiatic spirit obtained the mastery over him, 
 and when Rome became the mistress of Greece it 
 succumbed to Greek customs, and its best and honour- 
 able days were over. And will Germany, after its 
 brilliant victories over France, find French gold a 
 temptation, and let the French spirit prevail? Shall 
 the time of our greatness be also the era from which we 
 must date our decay? God forbid! 
 
 Every nation has its limitations and its weaknesses. 
 With these we must have patience, and strive by patient 
 
The Religious and Moral Duties of Patriotism. 199 
 
 effort to overcome them. But with sin we should 
 have no patience, but earnestly oppose it. It would be 
 but a poor kind of love which would not permit us to 
 rebuke the sins of our own nation. Those who love 
 their nation most have ever been the most strenuous 
 opponents of its sins. The history of Israel offers us 
 abundant examples of this fact. No man ever loved his 
 people more than Moses did, who was ready to purchase 
 its prosperity even at the price of his own salvation, 
 and yet never was any more strict or uncompromising 
 with respect to the transgressions of his people. He did 
 not hesitate to sacrifice hundreds and thousands in 
 strict justice, for the moral preservation and deliverance 
 of the nation. And in this path he was followed by all 
 the great characters of Israelite history. The sharp re- 
 bukes and threatened judgments of the prophets are the 
 expressions of a love which earnestly fears and hopes for 
 the future of their nation. And such hag ever been the 
 case. The best friends of their country have always 
 been its strictest and severest judges. 
 
 But our love will not be shown in rebukes only, but 
 above and beyond all in earnest moral work with our- 
 selves. All moral work with ourselves, all moral pro- 
 eress in the fashioning of our own lives, is a contribution 
 towards the edifice of our nation’s future. God has 
 given us the German Empire, and we ought all to be 
 workers in building it up, and the best work we can 
 contribute thereto is the moral earnestness of our own 
 lives. With this it is that we can serve our country 
 and its future. Not power and territory, not armies nor 
 
200 Lecture VIII. Life of the Christian in the State. 
 
 talents nor riches, but earnest morality is the true 
 foundation of a nation’s present and future greatness. 
 To contribute to this is within the power, as it is the. 
 duty, of all. And it is thus that we may best testify 
 our patriotism. (1%) 
 
 Every state occupies its special position among other 
 states, and this its position in the world depends upon 
 both its actual relative power and the history it has 
 passed through. For the position assigned to a state by 
 reason of its history may be a more important one than 
 its actual proportion of power might in and by itself 
 involve. Such a state imposes on its members the 
 necessity of great exertions of moral power, that the 
 lack of an actual basis of power may thus be com- 
 pensated for, and the temptation escaped of endeavour- 
 ing to remedy such a disadvantage in the way of con- 
 quest. A state may need indeed to extend or rectify its 
 boundaries. But such extension of boundaries depends 
 not only on necessity, whether real or supposed, but must 
 be regarded from the point of view of a judicial act. 
 There are however moral conquests, which give a state 
 a wider basis with respect to the estimation in which 
 it is held by other states, and to these all patriotic 
 conduct on the part of individuals may contribute. 
 The several states stand in relation and intercourse 
 with each other, and this is regulated not by their 
 greatness or their smallness, but by justice. For the 
 relation of one state to another, as well as the state 
 itself, is based not on force but on justice. Even the 
 most powerful state has no right to issue commands to 
 
International Rights. 201 
 
 a weaker, as to a subordinate, but each has equal rights 
 in respect of another. And this is true not only of 
 civilized, but also of uncivilized states. Uncivilized 
 nations are not, according to the ancient view, and indeed 
 to that of many at the present day, without rights; nor 
 are heathen nations, according to the medizeval papistical 
 notion, without their rights in respect of Christian 
 nations. Christianity has taught us to recognise the 
 equal rights of all men and all nations, for it has placed 
 them all under the rule of God. God has appointed to 
 them all the bounds and times of their habitation, as St. 
 Paul preached at Athens (Acts xvii. 26), and has thus. 
 removed them from arbitrary treatment. 
 
 Thus has the Christian religion become the foundress 
 of international rights. What the pre-Christian era 
 knew of the rights of nations was limited chiefly to the 
 maintenance of certain forms and limits in the conduct 
 of war. But the recognition of the independent rights 
 of others, which forms the foundation of all international 
 justice, was wholly wanting, and was first brought into 
 the world by Christianity. As it teaches one man to 
 love and to serve another, so also does it preach the 
 peace, the fellowship, and the mutual assistance of the 
 different nations. (‘4) National hatred is the funda- 
 mental sin in international life. Joint labour in the 
 common duties of mankind is the calling of all nations, 
 and peaceful intercourse the means thereto. From this 
 fact it is that commerce derives its higher moral im- 
 portance. It is not merely a means of gain, or a medium 
 for the supply of the most urgent external wants, but it 
 
202 Lecture VITL. Life of the Christian in the State. 
 
 forms a bond of association and intercourse between the 
 nations of the earth, and thus opens up ways of mutual 
 influence which are subsequently used by the intel- 
 lectual and moral powers of national life.() Thus 
 also does missionary enterprise advance on the paths 
 opened by commerce, and bear the gospel to the dis- 
 tant heathen lands, as the best gift we have to offer in 
 return for the productions of the soil or the results of 
 labour brought thence by commerce. Thus does com- 
 merce help to promote and maintain a feeling of kindred 
 among the different nations of earth. 
 
 The nations’ are not, however, always treading these 
 peaceful paths, and their history is a history of wars. 
 The strongest testimony against the moral excellence of 
 human nature is furnished by the fact that nations 
 cannot dwell together in peace, nor exist without war. 
 For war, as being murder on a large scale and the 
 destruction of the works of peace, is at’ once the greatest 
 crime and the greatest scourge of mankind. It is true 
 that it also evokes salutary forces, and that, like a 
 violent storm, it may clear the atmosphere and result in 
 actual progress. But this is because God employs in 
 His service even the passions and sins of man. Sin does 
 not cease to be sin because it may result in good as well 
 as evil, nor war to be an unchaining of the passions 
 because it is also a school of virtue, nor its work to be 
 ‘a work of destruction because it destroys also what is 
 bad and obsolete. All the scourges of human nature 
 unite in war and march in its paths, and all the woes 
 of human life have here a meeting-place. Let a war be 
 
War and Christianity. 203 
 
 ever so prosperous and victorious it is a heavy judgment 
 even upon the victors. It is not without the greatest 
 moral earnestness, and not without supplication to the 
 Almighty, who holds the fate of battles in His hand, 
 and who alone can heal all wounds, that a nation may 
 enter upon a war which is forced upon it. We have 
 but to bring before our minds what that word war 
 means, and what sorrow and misery it involves, to make 
 all frivolous talk about a quick and lively war die 
 upon our lips. Every war which is voluntary, and not 
 forced upon us by necessity, is a crime. Only when 
 thus inevitable is it moral, because conformable with 
 duty. Hence every war of ambition and conquest, or 
 of vengeance, is blamable, and nothing but a war of 
 self-defence justifiable. For it is certainly the duty of 
 every people to defend its independence and national 
 possessions against flagitious attacks, and to punish such 
 criminal action on the part of a foreign nation by force 
 of arms. The belligerent nation then becomes the 
 executioner of divine judgments; but it must also know 
 and confess, that it is used by God for this purpose, and 
 that it only carries on war aright when it does so. with 
 this conviction. Then only can we, though with bloody 
 hands, come before God with confidence and a good con- 
 science, because it is His will that we have performed ; 
 while every wilfully undertaken war forbids our having 
 free and happy access to God. (1°) 
 
 Christianity entered the world with the angel’s pro- 
 clamation: “On earth peace.” And Jesus parted from 
 his disciples with the words: “My peace I give unto 
 
204 Lecture VILL. Life of the Christian in the State. 
 
 you.” And yet wars have not since been of less frequent 
 occurrence upon earth. This is no testimony against 
 Christianity, but it is a testimony against the nations. 
 For every one that knows anything of Christianity will 
 confess, that if the nations were governed by the spirit 
 of the Gospel, peace would reien and wars cease among 
 them. An era of peace has often been dreamed of, and 
 it has been hoped for from the prevalence of humanity. 
 The theory of the friends of peace is a pleasant dream, 
 but only adream. Humanity is indeed itself an effect of 
 Christianity, but it is not the power that can ensure 
 peace, because it is not a victory over the passions. 
 As long as the passions are a power upon earth, whether 
 in the breast of the individual or in the life of the 
 nations—and that will be till the end of the world—so 
 long will the era of wars last, in spite of Christianity. 
 Christianity meantime celebrates its triumphs even in 
 the midst of wars, and especially in those abundant 
 works of mercy which follow in the sanguinary paths of 
 war, and heal the wounds thereby inflicted. (?”) 
 
 But there are other difficulties in the mutual inter- 
 course of nations and states, arising either from opposing 
 interests, or from the intricacy of the general situation; 
 and these require to be obviated by the patient labours 
 of diplomacy. For the natural virtue of diplomats is the 
 patience which employs itself in solving difficulties, 
 And their object is the peace of nations and their emu- 
 lation in the labours of peace. We are wont to com- 
 bine a sinister meaning with the word diplomacy, and 
 it is difficult to us to imagine that a diplomat can be a 
 
The Kingdom of God. 205 
 
 true Christian, or that Christianity is compatible with 
 his calling, and yet this must be possible. For if this 
 calling is a necessary one, it is according to the will of 
 God, and must be compatible with, and subserve the 
 interests of His kingdom. If lies and deceit are often 
 regarded as inseparable from diplomacy, we still may 
 confidently apply the proverb: “ Honesty lasts longest,” 
 and designate it as the best policy, even in the depart- 
 ment of international intercourse. And this is con- 
 firmed by a not inconsiderable number of truly Christian 
 statesmen. (18) 
 
 The highest problem in politics is national prosperity. 
 True prosperity, however, is not merely: the elevation of 
 the natural life of our race, but the attainment of its 
 highest moral aims. And the ultimate aim of the nations 
 and of mankind is the kingdom of God. All political 
 science must, and true political science will, subserve it. 
 It is Christianity however that has placed this object 
 before mankind, and promised its attainment. Chris- 
 tianity is the redemption even of international life. The 
 ancient world placed the different nations in sharp con- 
 tradistinction. This principle of exclusive nationality 
 is however a permanent declaration of war, for it 
 raises this into the normal form of national inter- 
 course. Christianity cast among mankind the new 
 great thought of the kingdom of God, and thereby 
 set before the nations enduring peace as the aim of 
 their history. Since then this thought has never been 
 lost. And though the subsequent history of the nations 
 has been one continuous transgression against it, 
 
206 Lecture VIII. Life of the Christian in the State. 
 
 it still lives unextinguished and unextinguishable in 
 the hearts of men, and does its quiet but mighty 
 work, spreading its blessings even among those who sin 
 against it, and exercising its influence even over those 
 who desire to know nothing of Christianity.(°) Jesus 
 Christ is not in an earthly sense the Ruler of the nations, 
 and His kingdom is not of this world; but from Him 
 goes forth a blessing upon the kingdoms and. nations of 
 the earth also, and Christianity helps them even in the 
 attainment of their earthly aims. The ideal of our 
 hopes and desires is, a people willingly and piously sub- 
 missive to their God and Saviour, and fulfilling the 
 works of their calling in vigorous, happy Christian faith, 
 and a state which so orders secular matters as to leave 
 Christianity room to pour out its blessings in the mani- 
 fold manifestations of national and civil life. 
 
 Into the manifold manifestations of the social life of 
 mankind I would ask you to accompany me in our 
 next lecture. 
 
LECTURE IX. 
 CULTURE AND CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 eee U kt observations to-day will lead us beyénd the 
 | borders of national and political life into the 
 
 wider circle of human society. We belong 
 
 to the Church, to our family and household, 
 to our nation and its political institutions; but we are 
 also members of the human race, and have a calling com- 
 mon to us as human beings. To this common human call- 
 ing we give the name of culture. And it is of this and its 
 relation to Christianity, that our present lecture is to treat. 
 
 If the ancient view, which was acquainted only with 
 separate nations living in each other's neighbourhood, 
 but not with one universal manhood, were correct, a 
 common human duty would be out of question. Chris- 
 tianity introduced into the world the notion of humanity, 
 and in so doing it introduced also the notion of culture. 
 Our era insists, with a certain amount of pride, upon the 
 human duty of culture. But let us not forget that this 
 presupposes the knowledge expressed by holy Serip- 
 ture in the words: “God hath made of one blood all 
 nations of men to dwell upon the whole earth” (Acts 
 © xvii. 26). 
 
tee cen 
 
 208 Lecture [X. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 What then is this common human duty of culture? 
 When we read in the simple account given in holy 
 Scripture of the first beginnings of our race, that God 
 commanded men to fill the earth, to subdue it, and rule 
 over it, these words express the nature of culture. To 
 appropriate and subject his world to himself is the 
 task of culture committed to man. God in this respect 
 assigns to man the whole world, and we have no right 
 to prescribe to him boundaries. The entire earthly 
 creation is to be the possession of man, his material and 
 his intellectual property; such is the will of God and 
 our calling. History is the progressive accomplishment 
 of this task. We accomplish it by the means of ex- 
 ternal dominion, and by the means of intellect. For to 
 be acquainted with, is also to have dominion over matter, 
 and knowledge is power. The shares which individuals 
 have in this calling are diverse—according as God hath 
 
 ' diversely endowed them, and assigned to them their 
 
 different positions. When we contemplate human hfe, 
 we behold a wondrous concatenation of agencies at 
 work one within another, all subserving the same object, 
 but each contributing thereto in its proper place. 
 
 From of old a distinction into three classes has existed. 
 These may be called respectively the labouring, the 
 
 educated, and the administrative classes. The first con-— 
 
 tributes to the external, the second to the intellectual 
 subjugation and appropriation of the earth; while the 
 third takes the various activities comprised in the two 
 former classes under its protection. Of this protection, 
 as afforded by the legal enactments of the State, our two Pa 
 
‘ 
 
 Culture a Duty. 209 
 
 last lectures treated. For the administrative class in- 
 cludes both the rulers and the armed defenders of a 
 country. The two other classes will therefore form the 
 subject of our present observations. For to them is 
 committed the task of culture properly so called. 
 
 The foundation of all culture is agriculture. You all 
 know in what brilliant colours Schiller carries out this 
 thought in his Hleusischen Feste :— 
 
 ** Dass der Mensch zum Menschen werde 
 
 Stift er einen ewigen Bund, 
 
 Glaiibig mit der frommen Erde 
 
 Seinem miitterlichen Grund.’ * 
 From this covenant between man and the earth has 
 arisen all civilisation, and all the salutary order of 
 human society, and upon it are based even the adorn- 
 ments of art and the attainments of science. 
 
 The same fact here brought before us in poetic 
 imagery is also taught us by historical research. The 
 science of comparative philology, that youthful con- 
 queror in the world of mind and history, has attempted, 
 by means of its linguistic researches, to produce a sketch 
 of the primitive condition of our Aryan ancestors in 
 Central Asia, whence proceeded those nations that were 
 the bearers of culture. The picture thus sketched ex- 
 hibits tribes practising agriculture and cattle-keeping. 
 In such employments we are made to perceive that the 
 
 * **Let—that man to man may soar— 
 Man and earth with one another 
 Make a compact evermore— 
 Man the son, and earth the mother.” 
 —Lord Lytton’s translation. 
 6) 
 
210 Lecture IX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 firm foundation of our existence is that patient perse- 
 verance, without which the ever-shifting vicissitudes of 
 life would lead to the dissolution of all relations. Life 
 here runs on in the quiet uniformity of the seasons; it 
 requires settled order, it requires patience. That the 
 quality of perseverance should, in such a state of life, be 
 advocated above all others, is but just and natural. For 
 the spirit of restlessness, and the inclination for rapid 
 changes to intrude upon this condition, would be un- 
 natural and pernicious. Conservatism is the natural 
 virtue of the peasant and the landholder. Nor are any 
 more inclined to religion than they who, day by day, 
 morning and evening, are led to have regard to a 
 blessing from above. When they sow their seed in 
 the furrow, they place it at the same time in the hands 
 of God. For, after the utmost has been done, and after 
 all the certainty which the advance of science may offer, 
 the chief dependence must be in Him who gives rain 
 and sunshine in due time, and sends both fruitful and 
 unfruitful seasons. (3) 
 
 While the ancient world, especially the Romans, 
 always respected this class, and the latter did not 
 scruple to call their dictators from the plough, handi- 
 craft was regarded in Greece and Rome as the business 
 of the half-free and the servile. Its practice was left 
 for the most part to the slaves, the Athenian citizen 
 roaming idly about the market in quest of their produce, 
 the Roman citizen being supported by the State. Such 
 a state of things was one cause of the ruin of these 
 states. A different view prevailed in Israel. Here 
 
Culture a Duty. 211 
 
 handicraft was honoured, and it was customary for even 
 scholars to learn a trade. St. Paul combined with his 
 learned studies the trade of a tent-maker, and the Lord 
 Jesus Himself assisted His foster-father in his trade of a 
 carpenter until His ministry claimed His time. Chris- 
 tianity has ennobled trade, and how greatly the ancient 
 guilds contributed in former times, in their respective 
 spheres, to maintain among us a spirit of ability, 
 honour, and piety is known to all. Forms change, 
 and when they are obsolete it is neither desirable nor 
 possible to retain them by force. But it is possible to 
 maintain the sense of honour in this class under what- 
 ever forms it may adopt. And the name master is the 
 most honourable one that can be given, for in the highest 
 departments the most gifted cannot get beyond master- 
 ship. (4) 
 
 The opinion entertained by the ancient world con- 
 cerning trade was fluctuating. Cicero allows wholesale 
 dealing to the free citizen, but thinks retail dealing 
 beneath him, though the former cannot exist without 
 the latter. The early Christians, too, were doubtful 
 about trade, for they thought it scarcely possible that 
 the pursuit of gain should not debase the soul, or that 
 competition should not ensnare it into lies and deceit. 
 And who can deny that this employment has dangers 
 above many others? Experience, however, shows that its 
 temptations are not insuperable, as may be seen in the 
 most opposite ages of the world by many examples of 
 honourable conduct in this class. . The whole benefits of 
 trade are not exhausted in the profits it returns. It is ser- 
 
212 Lecture IX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 viceable to human society. Ifit only furnished the neces- 
 sary material foundations for our intellectual existence, it 
 would even then subserve the higher tasks of mankind. 
 But it contributes to them in a still more direct manner. 
 The nations are called upon, not to live side by side m 
 mutual indifference, but to carry on active intercourse 
 with each other, that by this mutual exchange of both 
 their material and intellectual productions the associa- 
 tion of mankind may be promoted. Trade subserves 
 this duty of international intercourse. It forms ties 
 between lands and nations, and unites the different 
 quarters of the world with each other. And when 
 national jealousy and aversion are so enhanced that 
 outbreaks of violence ensue, and the blessings of peace 
 are annihilated in the horrors of war, it is the interests 
 of trade, which assert themselves by obstructing enmity, 
 and exhorting to moderation and peace, and thus becom- 
 ing the messengers of culture. There is something great 
 and significant in the manner in which the thoughts of the 
 ereat merchant will mentally balance and compare the 
 conditions of nations, and unite the nearest with the 
 most distant lands. And in proportion as we have 
 learned to view commerce on this large scale, and to treat 
 it accordingly, has it become itself great and morally 
 important. Not only, moreover, has wholesale trade its 
 honour and its intellectual satisfaction, but retail trade 
 also has its moral value and importance. It is a service 
 rendered to one’s neighbour, and when rightly carried 
 on promotes no less than the former a right moral 
 feeling. When the fear of God, however, no longer exists, 
 
The Manufacturing Classes. 213 
 
 rectitude also will soon disappear, and where there is no 
 trust in God the heart will ever oscillate between 
 arrogance in prosperity and anxious despondency in 
 adversity or distress. For, however well considered may 
 be the plans of the long-sighted merchant, there is in 
 all his calculations a something that is incalculable, and 
 which ever directs the mind to Him who holds in His 
 hands the fortunes of commercial houses as well as the 
 fate of nations. (°) 
 
 No branch of human activity has attained such im- | 
 portance in our days as manufactures. The factory is 
 the symbol of the age, and steam the ruler of the day. 
 This it is which so sharply distinguishes our times from 
 those which precede. them, this which gives its special 
 form to the age. The Reformation era, and that im- 
 mediately succeeding it, began to recognise the laws of 
 nature ; ours has enlisted the powers of nature in its 
 service; and we cannot but say that in so doing it has 
 made a great advance towards the object which God has 
 set before man—to subdue the earth. Machinery is a 
 triumph of mind over the blind powers of nature. It is 
 not indeed without sacrifices that man fights for his 
 victory. The captive powers of nature do him but 
 unwilling service, and break their bonds when they can 
 with destructive violence. Nevertheless, they are com- 
 pelled to serve. Man has bound them to the triumphant 
 chariot on which he rides over the whole earth to sub- 
 due it.(°) This supremacy of the human mind has its 
 temptations—especially the temptation to forget God, 
 and to ascribe all progress to the intellect of man. If we 
 
214 Lecture LX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 are unwilling to admit that the progress of the indus- 
 trial arts in our day involves this danger, we have only 
 to look around us to perceive and comprehend it. The 
 temptation however lies not in the industrial arts, but in 
 ourselves. The great minds of a former age, the ‘dis- 
 coverers of the great laws of nature, a Copernicus, a 
 Kepler, a Newton, and others, gave God the glory and 
 acknowledged Him in His works ; and why should they 
 who have learned to use the forces of nature find them- 
 selves less ready to rise in mind and heart to the First 
 Cause of all force and of all their knowledge of it? We 
 know, too, that there are very many pious Christian 
 manufacturers, and I never heard that they are less 
 esteemed in their calling or less successful in their 
 undertakings because they are Christians. 
 
 There is, moreover, another aspect of their calling, 
 which directs them to that Supreme spiritual Power 
 in whom is our last resource in all the dangers and diffi- 
 culties of life—I mean their relation to their workmen, 
 
 In this relation entirely new conditions have super- 
 vened, involving new duties and new dangers, and these 
 are the greater and the more momentous because this 
 new order of things is still only in a state of develop- 
 ment. The old forms of carrying on business are de- 
 stroyed, and their restoration is out of the question, 
 while safe and settled forms for the new conditions have 
 not yet been attained. There is consequently and 
 necessarily on all sides a feeling of uneasiness and 
 insecurity, and none can tell what the future may bring 
 forth. The conviction, however, is universal, that in this 
 
The Labour Question. 215 
 
 question—the social question as it is called—the decision 
 of our future is involved. 
 
 Let us bring before us the existing state of things. A 
 manufacturer employs a hundred, perhaps a thousand 
 work-people, who are more or less dependent upon him 
 and the state of his business, and therefore exposed to 
 ereater or less uncertainty with respect to their whole 
 means of subsistence. We all feel that such uncertainty 
 cannot exist without a dangerous reaction upon the moral 
 quality of the life they lead. Near to this factory are 
 others, each employing a like number of workmen. Thus 
 is formed a numerous class who, in opposition to the 
 agricultural population, have no solid ground under their 
 feet, and are uncertain of the morrow. The relation in 
 which these workmen stand to their employers is, in 
 the first place, not a personal one; they have not, like 
 domestic servants, entered into the atmosphere of the 
 family, and are not enclosed in that bond of piety which 
 unites all the members of a household. They have only | 
 temporarily sold their skilled labour; in other respects | 
 they are free. Hence they apparently form a complete 3 
 contrast to bondmen or slaves, and yet—extremes meet. 
 Aristotle defines a slave as an animated instrument. And 
 what else are these workmen but animated tools with 
 which so much work is done? As such they are neces- 
 sary; but if they are nothing more, this is not in ac- 
 cordance with the personal character of man. And, free 
 as they appear, who are more dependent on the will or the 
 fortunes of an individual than they? If the manufac- 
 turer should choose, or be compelled, to close his factory 
 
216 Lecture LX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 to-day, the work-people are dismissed to-morrow. They 
 can look after other work, but if they find it, the same 
 event may be repeated—and what if they cannot find it ? 
 The moral remedy of the agriculturist is found in the 
 circumstance that he is obliged to live for the future. 
 What he does is done not merely for to-day or to-morrow, 
 but with an eye toa more distant future. In autumn 
 he has to care for summer, and in spring for autumn. 
 This involves a salutary waiting to which he is con- 
 strained. The danger, on the other hand, of the working 
 classes is the absence of this salutary constraint. No 
 man can bear such absence of constraint without detri- 
 ment. The lack of this enforced waiting in external life 
 results in want of moral firmness and restraint. If, then, 
 a remedy is to be applied, and the dangers by which our 
 future is threatened averted, waiting and restriction must 
 be introduced into the external life of this class. I know 
 well that natural inclination is opposed thereto; but we 
 none of us naturally like what is salutary, and this very 
 opposition is a proof of its necessity. Willingly to wait 
 and to submit to restriction is a moral resolve. <A cer- 
 tain amount of moral spirit must exist if evils are to be 
 remedied; to consent to restriction is a moral remedy. 
 We all need such external supports and remedies. None 
 are strong enough to bear entire freedom, and to dispense 
 with such remedies and helps. 
 - The ties which restrict us are of many kinds. The 
 best is home and home-life. Let us take care lest 
 this should be broken up and made impossible by 
 female and juvenile labour, and lest we be defrauded of 
 
The Labour Question. 217 
 
 the leisure indispensable thereto by Sunday labour. This 
 tie is fundamental. If this is absent all else is in vain. 
 It is well when the consciousness of possessing some- 
 thing, be it ever so little, is combined with the feeling 
 of domesticity. The efforts of certain noble-minded and 
 intelligent manufacturers to assist their workmen in 
 obtaining small possessions of land are worthy of all 
 assistance. Besides, there are interruptions to earning 
 by times of sickness or want of work. To provide 
 beforehand, and to know one’s-self to be provided before- 
 hand against such times, is not merely an ease to the 
 mind, but is also for the present, a waiting. It is the 
 affair of manufacturers to direct their attention to or- 
 ganizing and assuring such care for the future, whether 
 the provident fund is in their hands or in those of the 
 workmen. But in this, as in all other respects, visita- 
 tions will occur for which no human foresight or remedy 
 will avail. If there were nothing beyond this earthly 
 life and its resources, we might well abandon ourselves 
 to despair or to that kind of resignation which is of 
 no moral worth. But we know that there are deeper 
 resources than those which deal with outward circum- 
 stances, and consist in earthly means—resources which 
 are developed in the heart of man and in his connection 
 with a world beyond this. It is religion which opens 
 up to us these sources. The labouring classes, like all 
 other classes, can never properly fulfil their earthly 
 duties without morality and religion. This was the 
 sentiment of Franklin, and is the advice of their best 
 friends. 
 
218 - Lecture LX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 There are times when certain indefinite notions and 
 misty expectations exercise upon certain generations or 
 classes an almost intoxicating effect, difficult to account 
 for on psychological grounds. We need only call to 
 mind certain cases of an excitement, now scarcely com- 
 prebensible, of which the history of the French revolution 
 brings before us so many examples. They now appear 
 to us like cases of intoxication, which are ever followed 
 by terrible-prostration. Deceptive hopes, arising from 
 ill-reasoned out general ideas, so captivated the minds 
 of men, that they imagined themselves to be in pursuit 
 of a state of happiness, while really treading the path of 
 destruction. The temper now prevailing in large circles 
 of the working classes seems somewhat similar. <A state 
 of prosperity is being pursued by paths which lead over 
 the ruins of the moral and religious foundations of both 
 social and individual life. Preachers of certain indefi- 
 nite ideas and deceptive hopes have obtained a power 
 over the thoughts and feelings of these classes of society 
 which threatens serious danger to the future of our nation, 
 and is the more dangerous, inasmuch as the prophets of 
 these new doctrines are surrounded by that atmosphere 
 of enthusiasm and voluntary self-sacrifice which are 
 wont to accompany the announcement of a new religious 
 faith. And, in fact, their doctrine has, in their own eyes, 
 the importance of religion—of an earthly, which they 
 put in the place of the heavenly religion. With Chris- 
 tianity and the Church they have, for the most part, 
 broken, regarding these as the source of all evil, and 
 believing that while heaven is preached to them they are 
 
The Labour Question. 219 
 
 being defrauded of earth. And yet can this earthly life 
 dispense with religion? As the field needs the rain 
 and sunshine from above, that the seed committed to 
 the dark bosom of the earth may germinate and bear 
 fruit, so does the human heart need the animating light 
 and warmth of that heavenly sun, which in Christ Jesus 
 rose upon this dark, cold world, that the good seed in 
 the heart may be developed. What is the whole of this 
 earthly life but a seed-time, to be followed by the har- 
 vest which God has reserved to Himself? Unless I am 
 deceived, the future depends upon our subduing the 
 mistrust of the doctrines and preachers of Christianity, 
 so widely and so firmly entertained among these classes—- 
 a mistrust almost greater than that felt towards the pos- 
 sessors of capital, to whom they are so hostile. External 
 remedies are inadequate. Much has been talked and 
 written and read concerning this question, which has 
 not been less, but perhaps more, discussed by Liberals 
 than by Conservatives. But needful and salutary as 
 external arrangements and enactments may be, its final 
 decision lies not in the province of external measures, 
 and, least of all, in the military power of the Govern- 
 ment—for only avenging spirits rise from the blood of 
 the vanquished—but in the realm of morals. 
 
 The relation between workman and employer is based, 
 in the first place, upon the mere realization of the physi- 
 cal working powers of an individual. But this external 
 relation, which treats a man as an animated machine, 
 and degrades him to a thing, must be raised to a moral 
 relation by the bond of personal interest. When, indeed, 
 
220 Lecture IX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 gain and the enjoyment of his gain are the manufac- 
 turer’s sole aim; when he squanders in immoral luxury 
 what has been obtained by the sweat of his workmen, 
 and. shows no personal interest in them and their life- 
 battle, can it be wondered if envy and bitterness should 
 poison the minds and tempers of the workmen, and they 
 should lend an ear to the deceitful words of seducers or 
 enthusiasts? The selfish disposition of our men of pro- 
 perty is, for the most:part, the cause of the dangers which 
 threaten us; and if we condemn the greediness and irre- 
 ligion of the working classes, we certainly ought not to 
 keep silence concerning the sins so conspicuous on the 
 other side. The first thing needful is, that the mere 
 material and legal relation between employers and em- 
 
 V ployed should be raised by personal interest to a moral 
 
 one. In proportion, indeed, as industrial enterprises are 
 transformed into the enterprises of companies, will this 
 personal interest become more difficult, or even impos- 
 sible. Hence it cannot be without anxiety that we 
 contemplate this most recent form of our industrial 
 relations; nor can we cease all the more emphatically 
 to insist upon this first prerequisite to a better state of 
 affairs. When this personal interest exists, the next 
 thing to be considered is the manner in which it may 
 find expression in external arrangements. But the 
 first is, the personal interest itself; for if once a mutual 
 concern in each other’s welfare is entertained, the way 
 will soon be found in which the respective material 
 interests may be combined. (’) 
 
 The world in which we live is a world of inequality. 
 
Science and Art. 221 
 
 To institute equality here is impossible. If we take the 
 utmost care for the education of the working classes— 
 and it is right to do so—we shall still be unable to 
 abolish the distinction between them and those more 
 
 highly educated. Circumstances make this impossible. 
 In one respect only is the lowest on an equality with 
 the highest: he, too, is an immortal soul, and has the 
 same lofty destiny. Of this consciousness, which we 
 owe to Christianity, is begotten that sympathizing love 
 in which alone is found the possibility of morally com- 
 pensating for those differences in external life which are 
 otherwise irremediable, and inducing that reconciliation 
 to our earthly lot which is the foundation of a peaceable 
 life. ‘In the Christian spirit will be found the solution 
 of the problems now presented by the labour question, 
 and our ultimate resource against the dangers by which 
 society is threatened when it renounces Christianity. (°): 
 
 Upon the material, are based those intellectual 
 activities which we are accustomed to comprise when 
 we speak of the educated class. Two nearly related 
 but distinct provinces, the provinces of art and science, 
 are occupied by this class. Both have their foundations 
 in the nature of man. For the mind is impelled by a 
 twofold instinct with respect to the world of being which 
 surrounds it; to know this whole being, its nature and 
 its laws, and thus inwardly to appropriate it in the idea 
 which we mentally form of that which is external to 
 us, is one impulse of the mind; and then to give to 
 this mental image a visible and palpable form by such 
 means of sensible representation as we are gifted with 
 
222 Lecture IX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 is the other. In one mind the former, in another the 
 latter preponderates; one man is more gifted in know- 
 ing and perceiving ; another in forming and portraying ; 
 one in science, another in art. The nation of the 
 ancient world which surpassed all others in mental 
 endowments—the Greeks, were addicted both to scien- 
 tific investigation and to the cultivation of art. If our 
 artists still resort to Grecian works of art for the pro- 
 portions of beauty, the science of to-day is still based 
 upon Aristotle, and the mind still loves to dwell in 
 Plato’s world of ideas. But highly as we may esteem 
 the Greeks, and willingly as we may confess ourselves 
 their pupils, they only who are wilfully blind to what 
 is evident, will deny that both science and art are 
 indebted to Christianity for a progress of which the 
 ancient world had no conception. 
 
 Science is older than Christianity, for its roots are 
 found in the human mind itself. Man’s mind is 
 destined for knowledge, and science is well worthy the 
 devotion of the life. But as our mind first finds its own 
 truth in Christianity,.so too does Christianity first raise 
 science to higher truth. It is true that Christianity is 
 religion and not science, yet it has opened a new and 
 extensive world, and given a powerful impulse to the 
 latter, and the point to be aimed at is not the antagonism 
 but the union of the two. When the apostle says that 
 in Christ are hid all the treasures of knowledge (Col. 
 ii. 3), he means that when we find in Him our soul’s 
 salvation, an entirely new perception of the connection 
 and course of the world at the same time dawns upon 
 
Science and Christianity. 223 
 
 us. Not till we start from salvation in Christ do we 
 learn truly to understand our own life, the destiny of 
 man, and the ways.of God in history. Even those who 
 made the nearest approaches to truth, the disciples of 
 Plato, are compared by Augustine to men wandering in 
 a dark forest, and seeking the way out into the broad, 
 sunny plain, but seeking it in vain. The Fathers of the 
 Church were themselves too conversant with Hellenic 
 learning not to admit that it was acquainted with 
 certain isolated truths ; but these truths were like the 
 stars scattered over the heavens by night—the sun did 
 not rise till Christ appeared ; He is the Truth, and His 
 teaching the true philosophy. What, in fact, is the 
 knowledge of individual truths worth unless connected 
 with the knowledge of the whole? This, however, is 
 not possible until we know the answer to the highest 
 and deepest questions of human life and of all existence. 
 This answer is given by Christianity. For it teaches 
 us to know God and the destiny of man, and the ulti- 
 mate aim of history. A whole new world of ideas 
 entered the human mind with Christianity—broad and 
 lofty prospects, great and elevating views, comprehen- 
 sive associations of ideas, affording infinitely copious 
 matter for scientific thought and suggestion. And best 
 of all, not merely for individuals, not merely for a select 
 circle of the initiated. Ancient philosophy was never 
 the affair of the people, it always kept at an aristocratic 
 distance from the multitude. Christianity is a popular 
 matter, and has made the greatest ideas the common 
 possession of all. Wherever it spreads, it evokes within 
 
994 Lecture IX. Oulture and Christianity. 
 
 its adherents an impulse to strive after higher knowledge, 
 and a tendency towards the ideal. Hence, since its 
 introduction, science has been cultivated to an. all- 
 embracing extent, and with an untiring perseverance, 
 quite unknown to the ancient world. (3) 
 
 And the connection between the two, between science 
 and Christianity, is not merely a historical one; they 
 are also referred the one to the other by an inward 
 necessity. It is true that an individual may be a man 
 of science, nay, a scientific magnate, without being a 
 Christian. The fact is unquestionable. And yet, be- 
 sides personal morality, there is such a thing as scientific 
 morality. In Christian circles we sometimes find an 
 anxious dread of the danger of knowledge; knowledge 
 puffs up it is said, and to love Christ is better than all 
 knowledge. Certainly it is better, but it does not 
 follow that knowledge is not good. It is more needful 
 that I should be a good Christian, than that I should be 
 able to make good shoes. But this, too, is needful for 
 one who is a shoemaker, and his Christianity is to show 
 itself in his earthly,calling, and not to be an excuse for 
 unskilfulness therein. And here, too, the case is similar. 
 It is true that knowledge puffs up, that. is, superficial 
 knowledge, the appearance of knowledge, where its 
 reality and solidity are wanting; while true knowledge, 
 and earnest genuine research, makes a man humble and 
 modest. For the more we learn, the more we perceive 
 what we owe to others, and the more we know, the | 
 more we perceive how little we know. Leal research, 
 moreover, is impossible without self-denial, devotion, 
 
Scrence and Christianity. 225 
 
 and a feeling for truth which will not be ashamed to 
 confess its errors to itself and others. To investigate is 
 a moral labour, and not a mere exercise of the mind. 
 True science cannot be separated from morality, and 
 true morality has always a religious root, even when this 
 is unconfessed. When we investigate, too, we owe our 
 best discoveries to God; our best possessions are a oft 
 from above. When Pythagoras had discovered his 
 famous geometrical theorem concerning the squares of a 
 right-angled triangle, he sacrificed a hecatomb to the gods. 
 And Kepler concluded his famous work on the motion 
 of the planets with hearty thanks sgiving to God. The 
 true disciples of science have ever been the pupils 
 of that heavenly wisdom of which St. James says that 
 it is “peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, without 
 partiality, and without hypocrisy.” And does not all 
 knowledge, when we go deeply into it, lead us to God? 
 What Bacon said of philosophy, that “a little inclineth 
 men’s minds to atheism, but a depth in it brings them 
 about to religion,” is true of knowledge in general, If 
 we range through heaven and earth, the highest and 
 ultimate object is God, the top-stone of the edifice of . 
 being. True knowledge of God, however, is united with 
 His revelation in Christ. Science requires Christianity, 
 and Christianity requires science. For it is nota ee 
 gion merely of customs and ceremonies, but of word ; 
 
 is not a code of law, but a proclamation of truths ; a 
 merely a matter of frames and feelings, but a Aield of 
 ideas and knowledge. Thus by its very nature it is 
 
 referred to science. Scarcely had it made any way in 
 ‘ | 
 
226 Lecture LX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 the world than the germs of its scientific treatment 
 were already generated. The history of the Christian 
 Church is at the same time a history of theology, and 
 our own Church especially, has ever regarded the culti- 
 vation of theology as its vocation. Theology, however, is 
 directed to the other sciences, to philology, history, and 
 philosophy. For it is from these that it obtains the 
 tools from which it works. Thus, Christianity with its 
 theological science on the one hand, and the secular 
 sciences on the other, are directed to and in alliance 
 with each other. Our universities, in which theology 
 ‘makes one in the series of faculties, exemplify this 
 alliance, and in them we possess a pre-eminence over 
 other nations of which we are justly proud. Their 
 essential characteristic consists in the union of the 
 different sciences. It would be disastrous both to theo- 
 logy and the other sciences if the bond which unites 
 them were to be broken. (1°) 
 
 Still closer, it might almost be said, is the tie which 
 unites art and Christianity. I speak of the fine arts, 
 properly: so called, of architecture, sculpture, painting, 
 music, and poetry, which make the -earthly material, 
 whether stone, colour, tone, or word manifest the 
 thoughts and feelings of the mind, in forms of beauty, 
 that by the external manifestation of harmony our 
 minds may also be tuned to harmony, and our souls 
 may, by the pleasure thus awakened, become susceptible 
 of that language of mind incorporated in sensible beauty. 
 
 We call these the fine arts to distinguish them from 
 those which are merely useful, and not to imply that 
 
Art. O27 
 
 they minister only to luxury. Artistic delineation is 
 an intrinsic necessity to the mind. The intellectual 
 involuntarily becomes incorporate. They who desire to 
 remain without sensible representations in the higher 
 provinces of life, in religion, for instance, misconceive 
 the nature of man. We are not pure spirits, and our 
 spirit itself seeks after that which is sensible. Art sets 
 the stamp of beauty on the sensible. The beautiful, it 
 may be said, is not necessary, it were better to direct 
 attention to the useful; but we do not live upon the 
 useful only, we live also on the beautiful. The very 
 harmony of the universe, and of its several parts, which 
 resounds in and affects our souls, conduces also to our 
 mental nourishment. Every one is called upon to take 
 an interest in art, if not in the way of production, at 
 least in that of enjoyment. ("") 
 
 But here, as everywhere, labour is the prerequisite of 
 enjoyment. Art-work itself should not indeed be looked 
 on in the light of labour—the breath of beauty must wipe 
 off the dust of toil. It is the perfection of a work to 
 give us the impression of being a matter of course— 
 everything so exactly suitable that it seems to have 
 been thrown off at one effort. But if we here see a 
 triumph of mind over matter, the way to this triumph 
 was a conflict with the resisting material element. And 
 this laborious way must be trodden by the poet no less 
 than by the sculptor and the painter. The enjoyment, 
 too, of the lover of art is the result of labour—unless it 
 is a mere passing taste of emotions, which vanish as 
 quickly as they come. We must learn to enjoy a work 
 
228 Lecture LX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 of art, we must learn to devote ourselves to the work 
 before us, to immerse ourselves in it, and thus inwardly 
 to appropriate it. Premature attempts at criticism will 
 never teach us to do this, for they only will attain to it 
 who have sufficient self-control to preserve a mental 
 tranquillity which will silence their own thoughts, and 
 suffer the work of art to speak and to touch their souls” 
 with that spirit of harmony which awakens within us 
 the notion of an eternal harmony. ('”) 
 
 The origin of art is man’s natural mental constitution, 
 and its native home is religion. To this it at first 
 devotes its services, until by degrees secular art is 
 developed as well as religious art. It is a natural 
 attraction which binds religion and art to each other. 
 Every religion has an inward need externally to repre- 
 sent under a symbolical form those truths and notions 
 which it proclaims, a form in which the mind finds that 
 sensible manifestation which man’s nature demands. 
 
 For we are ourselves mind clothed in sense, and all our 
 ‘actions have in them a symbolical element. The 
 dignity of religion requires that the sensible garment in 
 which truth is clothed should exhibit the form of beauty. 
 Religion has taken all the arts into her service, and it is 
 in combination with her that they celebrate their highest 
 triumph, and exercise their mightiest influence. When 
 under the venerable roof of a cathedral, from whose 
 towering columns sacred forms speak to us of the days 
 that are past, and remind us of the cloud of witnesses 
 by whom we are surrounded, while the mellow light 
 which streams through the richly-painted windows of the 
 
Art and Christianity. 229 
 
 choir raises our souls above the disquiet of day, and 
 bathes them as it were in the mysteries of heaven 
 itself; when under such roofs the tones of the organ 
 resound, and the holy words of Scripture or of sacred 
 psalmody are borne to us upon the rolling waves of the 
 music—Bach’s Passion music perhaps—and penetrate 
 our souls with irresistible power, we should all declare 
 such a result to be the highest that art could possibly 
 produce or attain. For in such a combination of all its 
 parts art celebrates its highest triumph. 
 
 It needs but a thought to convince us of the ptfogress 
 which Christianity has enabled art to achieve. Chris- 
 tianity has bestowed upon art a higher ideal. There is 
 something incomparably beautiful about Grecian art, 
 with its splendour and finish. But it is not the highest 
 art. What it represents is the finite in its ideality. 
 But Christianity has revealed the sphere of the infinite, 
 and Christian art is the conception of that infinity which 
 constitutes the mystery involved in the finite and its 
 representation. The idea on which the former is based 
 is: the finite is itself the manifestation and realization 
 of the infinite. The idea which lies at the foundation 
 of the latter is: the finite is but the transparent image 
 of the infinite—all that is transitory is a parable. (1%) 
 In the former also art does service to religion, but 
 Christianity has invested it with a higher importance. 
 The former were religions of external representation, of 
 ceremonies; Christianity is the religion of the word. On 
 this account, the arts they most esteemed were the 
 plastic, by which the Divine was directly represented ; 
 
230 Lecture IX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 now poetry, combined with music, occupies the first 
 place, and the plastic arts only the second place. 3, 
 In Christianity, pictorial or sculptured representations 
 are language made visible, symbolized thought. In pro- 
 portion as the word was cast into the background in the 
 Church of Rome did a one-sided esthetic interest become 
 prominent in religious art. Hence Zwingle, for the 
 sake of saving the word, rejected all plastic art ; Luther, 
 however, assigned to the word the foremost position—it 
 was to bear rule, while the arts were to be the servants 
 of the Gospel. He loved the arts, and specially delighted 
 in music and song, which he diligently cultivated. (°) 
 
 And what a world of great facts has the word pro- 
 claimed by Christianity opened up to art! There are 
 no subjects which, for nobleness, and, at the same time, 
 general comprehensibility, can be even remotely com- 
 pared with those offered to art by Christianity. 
 Opinions may perhaps differ as to the propriety of so 
 dramatically carrying out the most sacred of histories as 
 is done in the Oberammergauer Passion play, but every 
 one, whatever may be his religious feeling on the 
 matter, must confess that this is the drama of dramas ; 
 that the great moral contrasts which stir the world 
 could not come into more direct or more violent 
 collision than they do as here visibly embodied before 
 - us; that nothing could be conceived which would more 
 powerfully possess, affect, and elevate the mind, than 
 the history here produced before us. Christianity has 
 afforded to art the noblest matter she possesses. (1°) 
 
 But it is not merely by the external material it has 
 
Art and Christianity. 231 
 
 afforded that Christianity has promoted art, it has also 
 developed to a far greater extent than the religions of 
 the ancient world the inner life of the soul, and has 
 thus opened to art a world of feeling with which it was 
 previously unacquainted., We stand astonished before 
 the plastic representation of a Laocoon, in which human 
 strength is vainly contending with the power of fate, 
 and our minds are deeply moved by the fate of Niobe, 
 and the incessant grief which turned her to stone; but 
 how different, how infinitely deeper, are the feelings 
 developed by the contemplation of a picture of the 
 Mater Dolorosa, and her sorrow, over which is shed at 
 the same time the gentle light of the Atonement. And 
 what contrasts are combined in the image of the 
 Crucified: triumphant majesty in lowhest humiliation ! 
 To have regarded a representation of a crucified man as 
 the highest of artistic tasks, would have been an incom- 
 prehensible notion to ancient art. For that most 
 sublime of all objects—majesty in humiliation—here 
 manifested, was unknown to her. The ancient world 
 knew the Divine only as the majesty of power, not as 
 the grace of condescension to the depths of human woe. 
 Christianity not only disclosed a new world to art, but 
 bestowed upon her a new soul. (77) 
 
 But the vocation of art is not merely to be the hand- 
 maid of religion, it has, besides this, by reason of its 
 independent origin in the natural mental constitution 
 of man, its independent office. As God adorns the 
 dusky earth with the flowers of the field, so should the 
 arts contribute, as Luther says, to adorn this sad life of 
 
232 Lecture TX. Culture and Christianity. 
 
 ours. It is true, that as the flowers turn towards the 
 sun which allured them into being, so do the arts love 
 to turn their countenance towards the more genial sun 
 of Christianity which has raised them to a more ele- 
 vated condition. But even when they are not proclaim- 
 ing the praises of the Redeemer, but confining them- 
 selves to the sphere of natural life, they are still 
 bearing testimony to the Creator whose gift they are. 
 The soil on which they flourish may indeed be polluted, 
 but they are still gifts of God, and conferred upon 
 us that we may enjoy them. Why should we not enjoy 
 a rose even if it grew upon a soil rank with weeds ? 
 What does it matter to us what sort of man Heine 
 was, if only the pure atmosphere of poetry breathes 
 from his compositions? Plants are however affected by . 
 the nature and odour of the soil they grow in, and the 
 immorality of the artist can mar the noble gift which 
 God hasimplanted inhim. Art, abstractedly considered, 
 is not dependent upon the morality of the artist; and the 
 spirit of art, the spirit of poetry, which chooses a man 
 as its instrument, and speaks to us through him, is 
 higher than the spirit of the artist, and often puts more 
 into his work than he is himself aware of.. Nevertheless 
 the immorality of the man sets itself in opposition to 
 the spirit of the art, whose servant he is. For all true 
 art is moral; it comes from God, and it is the spirit of 
 moral truth which clothes itself in the beautiful. Im- 
 moral art ceases to be ‘true art, and the more pleasure it 
 finds and excites in mere sensuousness, the more does it 
 deny its proper origin. Hence he only will be a genuine 
 
Art and the Artist. 233 
 
 artist who so purifies and tunes his own soul, that those 
 tones, which come from the world of the ideal, and seek 
 to remind us that there is a harmony of existence 
 beyond the discords of this world, may reverberate 
 from its strings. (18) 
 
 Science and art are in themselves productions, not of 
 morality, but of the natural powers of the human mind. 
 But only moral nobility can make a man a genuine 
 disciple of science or art, The natural cannot find its 
 truth without the moral. And the source of morality is 
 religion. 
 
 To conclude: Religion and Christianity are not the 
 origin of culture, whose roots, on the contrary, are to be 
 found in the natural intellect of man. Religion, how- 
 ever, has ever been to culture that heavenly sun in 
 whose warming and quickening rays it has flourished. 
 Its future, too, depends upon its alliance with religion. 
 It can assume a hostile position towards religion, but it 
 then enters into alliance with the immoral powers, and 
 becomes a potent means of corruption to the moral 
 future of the human race. Only when it preserves its 
 internal association with religion does it become a 
 blessing. In this respect, as in others, we perceive that 
 it is Christianity which raises natural life to its truth, by 
 imparting to it a new and sanctifying spirit. 
 
 Our next and last lecture will be devoted to con- 
 sidering how human life finds its ultimate object, and 
 the idea of humanity its realization, in Christianity. 
 
LECTURE X. 
 HUMANITY AND CHRISTIANITY. 
 Ewe U LTURE and education are the ruling powers 
 
 of the age. But the end towards which all 
 its efforts tend is humanity, ze. the perfec- 
 
 tion of human nature in its every aspect. Of 
 this end, and its relations to Christianity, I now pro- 
 pose to speak to you. 
 
 Culture is the development and appropriation of 
 external nature; education is the development and 
 appropriation of our own human nature. By the former 
 term we designate our task with respect to the world, 
 by the latter our task with respect to ourselves. (7) 
 
 Every man bears within him a wealth of natural 
 endowments and susceptibilities. That which is within 
 him needs, however, to be developed. Education is the 
 development of what we bear within us. An unedu- 
 cated, may be as highly gifted as an’ educated man, but 
 he does not know it, and has not made what he possesses 
 his own. All as yet slumbers undeveloped within. 
 The treasures latent within him must be brought forth 
 by labour and made his own. | 
 
 diducation is not scholar- 
 ship. A man may be a scholarand yet not, properly 
 
Nature of Education. . 235 
 
 speaking, educated. It is not the mass of information 
 I may possess, but the development of my nature in its 
 every aspect that constitutes education. My vocation 
 may perhaps make various kinds of knowledge necessary. 
 But this knowledge only becomes an element or means 
 of education, when it serves to develop and enrich my 
 own nature. Learning and knowledge, when not re- 
 quired by my calling, may, if they do not subserve this 
 end, be rather a hindrance than an assistance to education, 
 for they then form a foreign element which is not in 
 unison with myself, but, on the contrary, disturbs the 
 harmony and peculiarity of my proper nature. This 
 applies more particularly to the education of women, 
 whose vocation does not, like that of men, require a mass 
 of learned acquirements, but all whose knowledge should 
 be an element of education, in other words, should sub- 
 serve the purpose of developing their proper nature. 
 
 As culture develops the various forces of the natural 
 world to give them into the possession of man, and 
 make them his own, so is it the part of education to 
 develop the various gifts and aspects of our nature, for 
 the purpose of making them our own and _ placing 
 them at our disposal. That which is in us by nature 
 must become our conscious possession ; we are to get our- 
 selves into our own hands, and become our own masters. 
 Wherever there is education, there is also self-control. 
 Nations in a state of nature are under the ascendency 
 of their natural feelings and dispositions. Civilized 
 nations have more dominion over the outward mani- 
 festations of their inner life. Education has been 
 
236 = Lecture X. Humanity and Christianity. 
 
 divided into different stages, and a social, an intellectual, 
 and a moral education spoken of. But in all its stages 
 the form under which education manifests its presence 
 is that of self-control. My social education consists in 
 my not allowing my external behaviour, my gait and 
 deportment, my tones and voice, my language and 
 laughter, to take their own course, but having them in 
 hand and ordering them according to the established form 
 required by custom and regard for others. My intel- 
 lectual education consists in my so having the capa- 
 bilities of my mind and the material of my knowledge 
 at my disposal, as to be able to use them as the exi- 
 gencies of the moment or a regard for others may 
 require. But the essence of man is his moral nature. 
 Social and intellectual education are not worth much 
 if the ornament of moral culture is absent. A true 
 development of the moral worth of our nature will, 
 however, only be attained when the feeling for the 
 highest moral ideal, for moral beauty, is a lively one. 
 And genuine self-control can only be said to exist where 
 not merely outbursts of ill-feeling are repressed, but 
 where the inward emotions are stibject to the will of the 
 moral agent. When there is no feeling for the moral 
 ideal, and when it is thought sufficient to keep up an 
 appearance of external propriety, education in its proper 
 sense cannot be spoken of.. However brilliant the talents, 
 and however charming the demeanour, they do but 
 conceal a really common mind. Religion is not, indeed, 
 identical with education, but it is the prerequisite of 
 true education. An irreligious man will never be an 
 
Nature of Education. 237 
 
 educated ene in the highest sense, while religion will 
 shed an atmosphere of refinement even over the unedu- 
 cated. Among peasants who are true Christians a tact 
 of behaviour and a tenderness of feeling will often be 
 found which might shame even the most highly edu- 
 cated. } 
 
 Education is the development and appropriation of 
 our own nature. Now our nature is the tie which. 
 unites us with the external universe, it is the sounding- 
 board in which all its various tones are echoed. Hence 
 education is a universal receptiveness for the manifold 
 wealth of that life of nature and of mind with which 
 our. souls are in contact. The indifferent and non- 
 receptive we call uneducated. Of the educated we 
 require an expanded feeling for all that is of importance 
 to human life. But the more the feeling expands to an 
 inward perception of the voices of nature around, the 
 more sensible will it also be of the terrible discords which 
 so harshly disturb the harmony of the world, and the 
 more conscious will it be of the internal struggles and 
 conflicts, of the yearning and hoping, in short, of the tragic 
 nature of reality. For life is indeed a tragedy. The 
 more profound the education the more serious will it 
 be. An atmosphere of melancholy broods over the 
 highest degrees of education. The most cultivated 
 people of the ancient world were the Greeks, and cheerful 
 as is the picture of their life, all deep investigations 
 have shown that a feature of profound melancholy is 
 impressed upon this picture. Thus education directs us 
 above and beyond this actual existence to that in which 
 
938 Lecture X. Humanity and Christianity. 
 
 the resolution of the discords of this world is to be found. 
 Genuine education, far from opposing religion or making 
 it superfluous, on the contrary demands it.(?) 
 
 Education, then, is an expansion towards the wealth 
 of life around us. But in nothing have men a greater 
 interest than in man. The end of education is humanity. 
 And the fairest manifestation of humanity is wniversal 
 love to man. 
 
 The ruling principle of the ancient world was not the 
 love of one’s neighbour, but selfishness. As the different 
 nations secluded themselves from each other, so that 
 national boundaries became the boundaries of human 
 interest and benevolence, except where hospitality 
 between individuals might here and _ there “break 
 through such limits, so too were the lives of their 
 members governed not by a spirit of mutual interest, 
 but of selfish exclusiveness. The ideal set up by 
 Aristotle in his description of the “ great-souled man”. 
 is the future of self-contained pride, which makes its 
 need of no one, its ideal. And the maxim of the Stoic 
 philosophers was neither to give nor retaliate, ze. to 
 maintain absolute indifference towards others. The 
 characteristic of the ancient world was selfishness, both 
 national and individual. Selfishness is, however, con- 
 trary to nature. The sympathy felt by man for his 
 
 fellow is deeply implanted in the human breast, and here 
 ~ and there we see it bursting through the limits drawn 
 round it by selfishness.(*) It was never, however, recog- 
 nised as the ruling law of life; for nothing was known 
 of the love of God. Aristotle defines it as madness to 
 
Love to all Men. 239 
 
 talk of love between God and man, because love can 
 only exist between beings of a like kind (*) Where, 
 however, nothing is known of the love of God, love to 
 man lacks the deepest source of its vitality. The love 
 of God and love to man stand or fall together. Chris- 
 tianity inculcated the latter because it revealed and pro- 
 claimed the former. “ We desire a republic of the whole 
 human race,” says Tertullian. It was Christianity which 
 first introduced an association of men which did away 
 with the limits set by selfishness, and made the love of 
 one’s neighbour the law of life. It is true that the Stoic 
 philosophy also inculcates the association of the whole 
 human race, and that this is a frequently repeated saying 
 in Cicero’s treatise on duties. It is, however, a mere 
 thought, without vitality and without real meaning. It 
 was Christianity which first filled it with the new spirit 
 of love, and thereby imparted to. it a vital power. We 
 are told indeed of certain Roman emperors, that they 
 founded benevolent institutions. But the new spirit of 
 Christianity was then already asserting itself, and so 
 far as the Roman world remained closed towards Chris- 
 tianity so far did it remain subject to the ancient law 
 of selfishness. The attempts of Julian the Apostate, as 
 he is called, in the fourth century, to transplant Chris- 
 tian benevolence into the soil of the heathen religion, 
 were futile: it was an exotic which could not strike 
 root in such a soil. (°) 
 
 The history of the Christian Church is a history of 
 mercy.{*) The heathen beheld Christians, not only united 
 to each other by a bond of love at which they could not 
 
240 Lecture X. Humanity and Christianity. 
 
 but marvel, but also exercising toward their non-Chris- 
 tian neighbours an active benevolence, which was some- 
 thing new and strange in the cold and selfish world. 
 When, in the terrible pestilences with which Carthage 
 and Alexandria were visited in. the third and fourth 
 centuries of the Christian era, the sick and dying were 
 abandoned by their heathen relatives, it was by Christians 
 that they were received and cared for. The poor had 
 hitherto been objects of contempt, they now became 
 objects of attention. The history of the Church is a 
 history of charitable institutions. The feeling of charity 
 may sometimes have erred; its results may not always 
 have answered the purpose they were designed to serve; 
 but even in its errors, Christian compassion is a witness 
 to that new spirit which entered the world with Chris- 
 tianity. Great and powerful as may still be the sway 
 of selfishness, it is at least rejected in principle, and 
 love to one’s neighbour acknowledged to be the supreme 
 law of life. Ifthe perfection and cultivation of humanity 
 is designated as the highest object of the age, the exercise 
 of universal philanthropy is regarded as the most 
 essential feature of this humanity. But let us not forget 
 that it was Christianity that first mtroduced this spirit 
 of philanthropy into the world, and awoke it in the 
 hearts of men.. And if this love to man may be compared 
 to a beneficent stream, adorning and fertilizing the cold 
 and barren steppes of this earthly life, this stream 
 cannot, even at the present day, dispense with the 
 source whence it arose. This source is the love of God 
 announced to us by Christianity, the love which created 
 
Lriendship. 241 
 
 man in God’s image, the love which redeemed him, 
 When we see in another nothing more than mere present 
 reality, it shows us when we stop at this our love 
 soon grows cold. As all experience shows us, our love 
 can only continue ardent when we penetrate through 
 the coverings with which the man’s reality, his faults 
 and unloveliness envelop him, to that hidden germ 
 which God has implanted in every man; when we 
 descry in every one; even in the most degraded and 
 abandoned, the image of God in which he was created, 
 and that immortal soul which is, equally with our own, 
 redeemed by Christ, and intended to bear His image. 
 You see that it is Christianity which adorns humanity 
 with its fairest crown—the exercise of universal love to 
 man. 
 
 Within this wide circle of human fellowship,are formed 
 the narrower circles of closer intercourse. It igs not 
 merely the pursuit of a similar calling which brings men 
 nearer together, there is also the inner relation of 
 natural peculiarity and feeling, which draws individuals 
 together within the closer bond of Jreendship. 
 
 Friendship played a great part in ‘the ancient world, 
 and was of great importance in both a political and 
 scientific sense.(7) Spartan legislation made the friend- 
 ship of the man with the growing youth the foundation 
 of political virtue; the man was to inspire the youth 
 with the spirit of the political constitution. In battle 
 _ friends stood by and protected each other, as Socrates 
 and Alcibiades in the battle of Potidea; the friends 
 
 Epaminondas and Pelopidas were associated in the work 
 Q 
 
942 Lecture X. Humanity and Christianty. 
 
 of aggrandizing their country ; and the sacred band of 
 Thebans was an association of friends. Art, moreover, 
 whether plastic or poetic, delighted to do honour to the 
 alliances of friends, from the friendships of Achilles and 
 Patroclus, of Orestes and Pylades, down to that of the 
 tyrannicides Harmodius and Aristogiton. It was, too, 
 with the purpose of being a thorough Greek that 
 Alexander entered into the bonds of friendship with 
 Hephestion. If friendships were generally commenced 
 upon the arena of the gymnasia, their importance 
 extended not merely to personal and political life, but 
 formed also the basis of scientific studies and schools of 
 philosophy. It was a tie of friendship which united the 
 Pythagoreans to each other, and attracted the disciples 
 of Socrates to their beloved master. Hence it is no 
 marvel, that not only poets and artists did honour to 
 friendship, but that philosophers made it the subject of 
 their investigations. Aristotle devotes to it no less than 
 two of his ten books on Ethics, and he who is elsewhere 
 so calm, cold, and sparse in words, rises almost to poetic 
 flights and warmth of feeling when he speaks of friend- 
 ship. 
 
 What, then, let us ask, was it that gave such import- 
 ance to friendship in the ancient world. It was as- 
 suredly perceived that morality must be the basis even 
 of political action. But what force was to impart 
 strength to morality? Nothing for such a purpose was 
 known but law. Even Aristotle knew no other means 
 of moral education than the law of the State. But it is 
 obvious that, while law can determine and regulate the 
 
Christianity and Friendship. 243 
 
 external conduct, it is powerless to impart the inward 
 spirit of morality. The letter killeth; the spirit alone 
 giveth life. Antiquity had, however, no other and 
 higher moral power. Its religion was a summary of 
 external precepts, and knew nothing of personal self- 
 surrender to God. To us the family is the sphere of 
 the highest and dearest of human associations. In the 
 ancient world, marriage was too much regarded from the 
 point of view furnished by the interest of the State; and 
 in Athens it was rather a sensuous than a moral fellow- 
 ship. It did not then offer the personal satisfaction 
 and moral elevation which we seek in it, Hence, 
 friendship took the place of the wanting moral power. 
 One friend was to be in the eyes of another the realiza- 
 tion of the moral ideal, and to furnish him with that 
 inward spiritual impulse which the law was powerless 
 to produce. 
 
 This view of friendship, however, exacted more of it 
 than it was able to afford. It was a pleasant delusion 
 indeed, but only a delusion. 
 
 Reproach has often been cast upon Christianity for 
 lacking that high appreciation of friendship which pre- 
 existed in the ancient world. With the revival] of 
 humanism at the time of Petrarch was revived also the 
 eulogy of ancient friendship; and during the decadence 
 of Christianity in the last, and the subsequent romantic 
 period in the present, century, the worship of friendship 
 was renewed. Christianity and holy Scripture are, 
 however, quite as well acquainted with friendship as 
 the non-Christian world. The friendship of David and 
 
244 «Lecture X. Humanity and Chrisiianity. 
 
 Jonathan is equal in poetic tenderness and fervour to 
 any mentioned among the ancients; and what was it 
 but a tie of friendship that subsisted between the earliest 
 disciples of Christ? It was by friends that the new 
 epoch of the Christian era was introduced; and the 
 history of the Church presents us with many examples 
 of friends, whose affection became a mutual incentive in 
 the service of the Master to whom they had devoted 
 their lives. It is, however, true that friendship does 
 not occupy in the Christian, the exclusive position it 
 possessed in the ancient world. It is no longer all in 
 all; it is but one member in the organism of moral life 
 —one ray of the moral sun. That sun itself which rose 
 with Christ is love—Christian love to the brethren, and 
 general love to man, with its whole circle of Christian 
 virtues. To this highest of all virtues, friendship is 
 subordinate. But what it seems to lose in importance 
 it gains in inward worth by the consecration it receives 
 from the Christian spirit. (°) 
 
 Friendship in the abstract is independent of Chris- 
 tianity; for it is a relation natural to man. Internal 
 affinity of natural qualities and feelings brings together 
 the like-minded and like-disposed. It is at the time of 
 life when the properties of heart and mind develop, 
 that we seek in another the supply of that which is 
 lacking in themselves by combining with kindred 
 souls. Youth is the time for forming friendships. 
 Later years, when peculiarities become settled and 
 confirmed, make us more conscious of difference than 
 of affinity in others. It’is but rarely that the man 
 
Christianity and Friendship. 245 
 
 of mature age enjoys the happiness of obtaining a 
 friend in the true sense of the word. The period of 
 youthful development is the time for friendship. For 
 even though in later life, not only their outward lot, 
 but their inward opinions, whether political or religious, 
 may more or less sever youthful friends, the ties of 
 memory and of former connection will still remain, 
 even between those now parted. 
 
 Friendship seeks in another merely himself. It is 
 not the profit which may accrue to our own nature, to 
 our mental development or wealth, which we must seek 
 in friendship. Such a friendship, in which one man 
 regards another merely as a means for the attainment of 
 his own ends, be they ever so intellectual, is but selfish- 
 ness. It is inward communion of heart that we seek, 
 and this it is that friends cherish by that personal inter- 
 course in which each devotes himself to the other, and 
 finds mutual pleasure in the other’s affection. 
 
 Friendship is based indeed upon natural properties, 
 but it is itself a moral relation, and cannot therefore 
 exist without exercising a moral agency. That is no 
 true friendship which would not venture upon or 
 endure moral exhortation and reproof. It is on this 
 account that no friendship can be durable which does 
 _ not rest upon an agreement of moral sentiments. The 
 latter decades of the former, and the first decades of the 
 present, century, exhibit a series of friendships, espe- 
 cially in the various literary circles of the period, which 
 were of a merely esthetic nature. 
 
 The terms in which these friends speak of and to 
 
246 = Lecture X. Humanity and Christianity. 
 
 each other are often of a very excessive kind; but a 
 perusal of their respective correspondences forces upon 
 us the conviction, that there is a lack of heartfelt 
 earnestness in this superabundant worship of friendship. 
 And this is borne out by facts; for in many instances it 
 has happened that these friends have become indifferent, 
 or even hostile. Friendship is durable only when it is 
 based upon common moral and religious sentiments. I 
 
 } cannot be the friend of him who rejects or despises my 
 (Lord and Saviour. (°) Christianity does not, indeed, 
 make friends, but it is the spiritual force which binds 
 their inmost hearts together. And it is true of friend- 
 ship, as of every other human relation, that it finds 
 its highest truth in Christianity. 
 
 Friendship exists only between the few, but we have 
 intercourse with the many; and even those who are far 
 removed from ourselves in intellectual respects must 
 not be objects of indifference. Man must show a kindly 
 feeling to, and find pleasure in his fellow-man; for 
 from all flows forth that varied wealth of human nature 
 which God has displayed before us, that we should 
 rejoice in and enjoy it. Thus are formed those various 
 relations of a slighter kind which must be cherished. 
 The form of this manifold and freer intercourse is socia- 
 bility. ‘This purely human relation of social intercourse 
 extends beyond the limits of business, association, and 
 friendship. 
 
 It is true that business and friendship will ever form 
 the central points round which this wider circle of 
 society will gather; for we must not seek acquaintances 
 
Sociability. 247 
 
 arbitrarily, but take them as they arise from the mani- 
 fold contact into which we come with our fellows. But 
 what we seek in another with whom we enter into social 
 relations is not the business associate nor the friend, 
 but the man himself; for his fellow-man is to be re- 
 garded with indifference by none, but to be to him an 
 object of affection and delight. God has implanted 
 certain natural gifts in every man, and these each must 
 offer to, and rejoice over in another. It is this unre- 
 served and mutual interchange of giving and receiving 
 that forms the charm of social intercourse. We do not 
 frequent society to learn, or in some way to profit by it; 
 we frequent it for its own sake. And it is just this that 
 forms its value and importance. It brings men together, 
 arouses their mutual interest and good-will, and obliges 
 ‘ them to exercise that self-control which opposes their 
 natural faults, and thus removes all that might interrupt 
 or destroy social intercourse. By thus disposing every 
 one to show his better side to others, it generates 
 that healthy atmosphere of social life which reacts 
 with salutary and moralizing effect upon each indivi- 
 dual. It is this that imparts to society that refreshing 
 influence which sheds itself over the dusty hours of 
 labour, like the refreshing dew that falls upon the 
 thirsty flowers. (2°) 
 
 Christianity, you will however say, has not much to 
 do with such sociability; and it must be admitted that 
 companionship is a human want even in a Christian. 
 Not religious subjects and spiritual songs alone should 
 constitute the matter of intercourse, even of Christians. 
 
248 «Lecture X. Humanity and Christianity. 
 
 The abundant variety of natural life, and the sphere of 
 intellectual interests, as well as the hidden depths of 
 the soul, must furnish such matter. But for this very 
 reason, social intercourse, like all else, is placed under 
 moral law, and must receive therefrom its measure, and 
 its precepts of modesty, truth, and love.(1!) Social 
 intercourse is not work, but enjoyment; and enjoyment 
 is recreation from work. It is this which must deter- 
 mine its measure, and that of the various pleasures and 
 enjoyments that may be connected with it. These are 
 all lawful, so far as they furnish the recreation needed 
 by work, and thus subserve, instead of hinder, the busi- 
 ness of our calling. 
 
 Every enjoyment has its sensuous side, and sensuous- 
 ness of every kind has its dangers. You all know how 
 great are these dangers, and how numerous are the 
 offences of ordinary society; for there is a refined 
 as well as a coarse sensuality, and the former is often 
 more infectious than the latter. 
 
 In social intercourse each should show his best side 
 to others. This involves the danger of untruthfulness. 
 We try to appear better or more amiable than we 
 really are. There are untruths of external appearance, 
 as well as of word. The temptation to untruthfulness 
 dodges our every step in daily intercourse. I know well 
 that there is in our language, a multitude of expressions 
 which are worth far less than they seem; it is a de- 
 preciated currency. We cannot dispense with these ex- 
 pressions of courtesy, if we mean to have any intercourse 
 at all with others. We are obliged to speak of esteem 
 
Social Intercourse. 249 
 
 and devotion when perhaps little or none exists. But: 
 there is a tacit understanding with respect to such 
 phrases. Every one knows what they mean, and no 
 one attributes to them a higher meaning, though even 
 in such matters there is a certain moral tact which will 
 know how to preserve moderation and avoid extremes. 
 Our words, however, become really untrue, when we give 
 others occasion to attribute more meaning to them than 
 is really intended. Our social intercourse is full of 
 courtesies and flatteries, which are purposely designed 
 to be taken in a fuller sense than the heart of the 
 speaker feels, and therefore to deceive those to whom 
 they are addressed. This is contrary to the moral 
 law of truth, and a Christian must not be misled 
 into treading the path of such conventional false- 
 hood. (7*) 7 
 
 Sociability is the expression of that general good-will 
 which man should show to his fellow; and_grievously as 
 others are sinned against by unloving words even in social _ 
 intercourse, it still conduces, or at least should conduce, 
 to arouse and cherish mutual interest and good-will. 
 Such good-will, however, as is shown by sociability, is 
 not worth much, unless it is more deeply rooted in that 
 love which beholds in another not the natural amiability 
 or interesting mental qualities he may possess, but an 
 immortal soul created by God and redeemed by Christ. 
 We soon feel the difference between a merely external 
 and transitory interest, and that deeper heart-interest 
 which desires our real good; and we experience but too 
 often how acquaintanceships of many years’ standing 
 
250 = Lecture X. Humanity and Christianity. 
 
 are exchanged for complete indifference, when they 
 have no deeper foundation than merely sensible or in- 
 tellectual enjoyment. Here, too, it is the religious and 
 moral basis of the inner life, which bestows its higher 
 truth upon even this outmost circumference of natural 
 life. 
 
 A life of action requires its pauses of recreation. 
 Play of one kind or other is the most usual form of 
 recreation, whether our minds find pleasant exercise in 
 the various forms of playful conversation, in wit or 
 humour, or we employ the intervals of labour in the 
 many forms of gymnastic exercises; whether the young 
 amuse themselves with the easy and harmonious move- 
 ments of the body in the dance, or the old seek repose for 
 their weary minds in easy and alluring games of 
 chance. (18) All this seems of a nature so indifferent, as 
 to withdraw altogether from moral estimation. And 
 yet it may be a widely different moral substance with 
 which these varying forms are filled. I may betake 
 myself to a certain recreation in a moral spirit, and seek 
 therein invigoration, for renewed exertion, or I may seek 
 and find in it food for my immoral inclinations. In 
 fact, nothing a man does is morally indifferent, but 
 every act, down to the most seemingly indifferent, 
 down to eating and drinking, and to the very fashion of 
 our garments, has a moral importance and value be- 
 stowed upon it by the spirit and intention which we 
 put into it. And not unfrequently will the practised 
 eye detect the inward character manifested in these 
 most external of matters. 
 
Progress. 251 
 
 The forms of life change, but amidst all their fluctua- 
 tions progress is still being accomplished. In every 
 sphere of action there is a struggle to attain to a mode 
 of life more befitting the dignity of human nature. 
 And who can deny that the diversity prevailing in their 
 respective ways of living, between a rude and bar- 
 barous and a refined and civilized nation, besides being 
 the result of a different degree of cultivation, is also 
 of moral importance? The stage which we have reached 
 is more conformable with the idea of human nature 
 than that occupied by the inhabitants of Terra del Fuego 
 or the aborigines of New Holland, or even the Chinese. 
 The history of nations marks not merely a progress of 
 particular nations, but a progress of human nature. 
 What we call universal history is in truth the history 
 of man himself, whose God-created nature is ever 
 struggling to attain its more adequate manifestation. 
 The progress of the ages has been ever. increasingly 
 abolishing slavery and serfdom, raising the position of 
 woman, subjecting the power of rulers to definite limits, 
 making the authority of law universal, obtaining re- 
 cognition for the rights of conscience, taking measures 
 for the extension of education, seeking to alleviate 
 the condition of the poor, and promoting all similar 
 measures. And the thought which has furnished an 
 impulse to these improvements and advances is that 
 they are consistent with the dignity of man and required 
 by his nature. It is the idea of humanity which takes 
 effect in the course of history, and works even in the 
 most isolated and exterior forms of life, that thus 
 
252 Lecture X. Humanity and Christianity. 
 
 the life of man may exhibit in its every aspect the 
 beauty and nobility of his nature. | 
 
 There is no thought which has for the last hundred 
 years so ruled the age as this cdea of humanity, The 
 idea of pure humanity may be called the ultimate object 
 of all recent movements. It is in the paths of culture 
 and education that the attainment of this object is 
 sought. The treasures of the world are continually 
 accumulating, and man’s dominion over the world ex- 
 tending, while his mental acquirements increase and his 
 skill is enhanced. Thus are we struggling onwards 
 towards the goal of perfection, which goal is beheld 
 in the full and complete manifestation of human 
 nature, the realization of the idea of humanity. Indeed, 
 if we are to express the most recent notion of our age, 
 we should say, that this realization of the idea of 
 humanity is esteemed by it as the religion of the 
 future... 4 | 
 
 Certainly no higher worldly task than that which 
 ‘is comprised in the tasks of culture and education 
 can be set before man, no sublimer earthly idea than 
 the idea of man and the perfect manifestation of human 
 nature, and no fairer ideal than the ideal of humanity. 
 The realization of this ideal would be peace on earth. 
 But it must be a realization of genuine humanity. 
 
 For there is a difference between humanity and 
 humanity. The full nature of man cannot be said to be 
 grasped when he is viewed only in his relation to this 
 world. Does he stand in no other relation? Is it only 
 this world which is reflected in his mind? Do not the 
 
The Idea of Humanity. 253 
 
 tones of another world reverberate in his soul, and are 
 not the profoundest depths of his being stirred thereby ? 
 Do we possess only the notion of transitoriness, and not 
 also the notion of eternity ? And do we not bear within 
 us the consciousness of an immortal existence? Do we 
 belong only to the world, and not also to God? Are we 
 simply men of culture, and not also men of religion ? 
 It is right to strive for the realization of the idea of 
 humanity. It is an object well worthy the toil of the 
 noblest spirits. But human nature must not be maimed 
 and stunted, but conceived in its whole full truth. 
 Whether we interrogate history, or listen to the deeper\ 
 utterances of our inmost soul, both testify that the re- | 
 ligious propensity, the religious craving, is an element 
 of man’s nature. No age, no nation, which has dis- 
 solved the connection between religion and _ politics 
 has fulfilled its mission. Those ages only have been 
 great, and those nations alone have flourished, who 
 have made religion the foundation ef their entire 
 life. A breach between politics and religion is a 
 shattering of the moral foundations of all, even of 
 national life. But when we speak of religion we mean 
 Christianity, for every unprejudiced observer must admit 
 that every other religion is eclipsed by this. And all 
 candid investigation of history will teach us that this 
 has been a blessing to nations and the fruitful source 
 of their civilisation. (*) 
 
 Harmony alone is peace. If we obliterate religion 
 from the inner, if we remove it from the organism of 
 the external life, we destroy the harmony of life, and 
 
254 Lecture X. Humanity and Christianity. 
 
 make discord the prevailing law of existence. Culture 
 cannot take the place of religion, nor education make 
 up for its absence. Happier—if in such a case we could 
 use the word—may we call the people whose minds — 
 have not yet been aroused from their state of slumber, 
 aud among whom the questions and cravings which 
 torture man until he accepts the answer and the satisfac- 
 tion given to them by heaven, have not yet been stirred. 
 Not unpunished does man eat of the fruit of the tree of 
 knowledge, unless that Divine grace is at hand which 
 heals not only the wounds and sorrows of life, but also 
 the tortures of knowledge. Culture and knowledge 
 without God are the Prometheus of Grecian fable. (}°) 
 You are acquainted with this fable. Prometheus, in 
 contemptuous defiance of the King of heaven, stole fire, 
 the foundation of culture or civilisation, from heaven, 
 for which he was chained to a rock, while a vulture, toe 
 his endless torture, devoured his constantly regrowing 
 entrails, until a god—so runs the legend—at last de- 
 livered him. Schelling rightly says of this fable, “that 
 it is one of those outward forms given to divine truths, 
 not by the fancy of a single individual, but by the pre- 
 sentiments and perceptions of the spirit of human nature 
 itself.” What the legend intends to express by its 
 figurative language is the fate of mankind. Its earthly 
 progress, when obtained by a rejection of the Deity, tends 
 not to happiness but to suffering. And the desires thus 
 aroused prepare ever new torments. Not culture, but 
 the help of Deity alone, can deliver man from such 
 torment. It is the union of culture with religion which 
 
The Twofold Progress. 255 
 
 constitutes the earthly happiness of individuals and 
 nations. There are two paths in which the progress of 
 the human race is accomplished. In the times of un- 
 consciousness these two paths are still often inseparably 
 blended. In proportion as the historical consciousness 
 is developed, and men know what it is they desire, these 
 two paths diverge. Not their union, but their separation, 
 is the future of history; and a separation of minds is 
 already taking place before the eyes of all who choose 
 to see. Culture, education, humanity—we all desire 
 these. But the question is: with God or without Him? 
 
 The one mode of thought and feeling confines itself 
 exclusively to secular life, and seeks to make it com- 
 plete in itself. Nothing extraneous is to intrude. The 
 world is a harmony. There is nothing which did not 
 originate therefrom. This is the thought of Pantheism. 
 And the prevailing characteristic of the age is the trans- 
 lation of this thought into practice. Labour, research, 
 activity, are, it is true, going on on all sides. And just 
 in proportion as life is, in a religious sense, im- 
 poverished, are efforts made to adorn and make it happy 
 in a worldly one. This thought, however, accomplishes 
 its inexorable results. Life is not being knit to heaven 
 above ; its way leads downwards to the deep. Out of 
 the deep arise those spirits which soon usurp authority. 
 And the nobler-minded advocates of this notion of a 
 merely secular culture will soon be dispossessed and 
 supplanted by others who understand that heaven on 
 earth which they all desire in their own coarser fashion, 
 In speaking thus, and reminding you in these terms of 
 
256 Lecture X. Humanity and Christianity. 
 
 the acknowledged phenomena and dangers of the times, 
 I am neither taking gloomy views nor using the lan- 
 ouage of calumny; 1 am but pointing to the consequence 
 of the inexorable logic of the case. This is the sole end 
 of the matter: a kingdom of this world is desired—a 
 kingdom of this world only—this way terminates in 
 the deep. 
 
 The other scales the height. The end for which it 1s 
 striving is the kingdom of God. This is the sublimest 
 thought of man, the supreme aim of all earthly effort. 
 Of effort, I repeat it. For it is to be not merely the 
 work and gift of God, but also the result of our choice 
 and of our labour. For God has called us all to be His 
 fellow-labourers in this work. In the Divine factory of 
 history, man takes his place at the loom, and works at 
 the garments of the future, at that new fashioning of all 
 things for which we hope. Our task is not religion only, 
 and the kingdom of God is not merely the Church. For 
 we have been placed in this world, and have callings to ~ 
 fulfil in it. But religion is the soul of action, and the 
 Church the helper of our earthly tasks. In inexhaus- 
 tible fulness does God spread before us the gifts of 
 creation, whether in external nature or in the human 
 mind. This whole rich world is given to us to rejoice 
 in and appropriate. We are destined to subdue and 
 enjoy it by knowledge, and by that dominion over it 
 which God has given us as our destination, But it is 
 His grace which bestows upon us a good conscience in 
 this matter, and it is religion which teaches us the 
 supreme end of this destination. 
 
The Twofold Progress, 257. 
 
 To know the world as a prophet, to rule it as a king, 
 such is man’s earthly vocation, and there cannot be a 
 prouder one. But what we know as prophets, and rule 
 over as kings, we must, as priests, consecrate, together 
 with our own selves, to God. This is man’s highest 
 dignity. To serve God means to be lord and master on 
 earth. And to combine these—the lordship of the 
 world and the service of God—is the fulfilment of our 
 moral duty. And this harmony of our earthly and our 
 heavenly calling is the fundamental tdea of Christian, 
 and the truth of all other morality. 
 
 This it is, my respected hearers, which I have desired 
 to point out to you. I have come to the end of my task. 
 We started from the nature of man, and saw how this 
 finds its truth in its renovation by Christianity. We 
 next accompanied him through the various spheres of 
 earthly life, and saw that in all these it is’ the spirit of 
 Christianity which leads the earthly life towards its 
 destiny and perfection. You will have been convinced, 
 I hope, that Christianity is not the denial of that 
 natural life which God has created, but its genuine 
 affirmation; not the curse, but the blessing and the 
 healing of the world. Christianity is, in the first place, 
 the message and the doctrine of the soul’s salvation. 
 But by gladdening us with the assurance of this divine 
 salvation, it makes us inwardly free to enter into all 
 that life offers us or requires of us; free and joyful in 
 the world, because inwardly united to God. Thus we 
 pursue our tasks in the world, and carry the kingdom 
 
 of God into earthly life, rescuing for the future kingdom 
 R 
 
258 Lecture X. Humanity and Christianity. 
 
 of God all who will allow themselves to be rescued 
 from the judgment with which all the ungodly will be 
 visited. Such is the moral task of the Christian. 
 
 I have done. May my words have contributed to 
 make you more fully acquainted with this duty of the 
 Christian life, and to impress it more deeply on your 
 hearts! May God so bless them that they may not be 
 fruitless! May they remind us all that the best evidence 
 of Christianity is the evidence of our lives and actions, 
 the fulfilment of our duty in the world! 
 
INE OE TERS: 
 
 NOTES TO LECTURE I. 
 
 (*) “The Apologetic Lectures on the Fundamental 
 Truths of Christianity” were delivered at Leipsic in the 
 beginning of 1864, and appeared in print during the 
 spring of the same year. The seventh edition came out 
 in 1870. Of the various translations I have seen—as 
 yet seven in. number—I have been especially pleased 
 with that into modern Greek by Dr. Myrianthus, teacher 
 of theology at the theological school in Jerusalem, 
 printed at the press of the Holy Sepulchre. The list of 
 subscribers attached to it contains pretty nearly the 
 whole hierarchy of the Greek Church. The second 
 series of lectures on “ The Saving Truths of Christianity” 
 was delivered in the beginning of 1867, and the third 
 edition appeared in 1870. The present course is for the 
 most part based upon, the prelections on theological 
 morality which I have been for a long series of years 
 accustomed to deliver in the University of this place. 
 
 Theintrinsic connection of divinity and morality is gene- 
 rally admitted in theology; while not a few theologians, 
 as, €.g., Schleiermacher, Nitzsch, Sartorius, Von Hofmann 
 (of Erlangen), have required, and the three last named 
 carried out, their treatment as mutually dependent por- 
 tions in the single system of Christian doctrine, Theo- 
 logy has during the few last decades taken a very lively 
 interest in morals. Almost every year has witnessed 
 the appearance of some new work on the subject. 
 Among the most recent may be specially mentioned 
 
260 Notes to Lecture I. 
 
 Martensen’s Christliche Ethik,* a work adapted also for 
 non-theologians. The interest taken in the subject is 
 connected with the importance which practical, and 
 especially social, questions have, with respect both to our 
 present and our future—an importance which makes it 
 incumbent upon Christianity and its advocates to show 
 how Christianity proves itself to be the final solution of 
 all such questions. This perception has also been 
 occasioned by the turn which ethical science is upon 
 the point of taking. For, while it has hitherto been 
 chiefly confined to the individual and personal aspect, 
 its social character is now more strongly insisted on, 
 upon the ground of the connection in which the indi- 
 vidual stands to society. In France, a mode of viewing 
 this subject which chiefly keeps in view the social 
 importance and office of religion, and consequently the | 
 influence of Christianity upon the state of society, has, 
 in connection with the interest there felt in social 
 problems, been already for a long time usual. This is 
 made evident, not only by the works of Franck, Edgar 
 Quinet, and Benjamin Constant, mentioned by Naville 
 in his admirable section on “Society,” in Le Pere 
 Oéleste, to which may be added those of Villemain, Trop- 
 long, and others, but also by the tendency and contents 
 of some of Guizot’s writings. These views are also 
 predominant in the sermons of the most celebrated 
 preachers; and the French Academy has done us a ser- 
 vice which we shall never forget, by offering in 1849 a 
 prize for an essay upon the subject of “The influence of 
 the new spirit of Christian love upon Civil Society in 
 the Ancient World,” and thus calling forth the excellent 
 works of CG. Schmid of Strasburg and Chastel of Ghent. 
 Among ourselves, it was chiefly the cultivation of moral 
 statistics which induced the notion of raising morality 
 from an individual, to a social position. This notion is 
 chiefly advocated by D. von Oettingen of Dorpat in his 
 comprehensive work on Social Ethics, of which only 
 
 * A translation of this work into English is preparing from the 
 Danish original. 
 
Notes to Lecture J. : 261 
 
 the first part has as yet appeared (Die Moralstatistik, 
 Erlangen, 1808). 
 
 (*) Our Lord, in the Sermon on the Mount, already 
 exhorts His followers to let their light so shine before 
 men, that they may see their good works, and glorify 
 their Father which is in heaven (Matt. v. 16); and in 
 His farewell discourse in St. John xiii. 35, declares love 
 to be the token whereby His disciples are to be known; 
 on which Bengel remarks: Gnorisma Christianorum amor. 
 In like manner do the apostles repeatedly add to their 
 exhortations to a walk worthy the Christian name, the 
 motive of the effect it is calculated to produce. The 
 first epistle of St. Peter in particular advances on this 
 train of thought. The adversaries of Christian truth 
 and of the Christian Church are to be put to shame 
 by the holy walk of Christians (ii. 12, 15, iii.16), and 
 unbelieving husbands to be won over without the word 
 to the Christian cause by the meek and quiet spirit 
 of their Christian wives (iii 1). In an exactly similar 
 spirit does Origen (+ 254), in his work against Celsus, 
 thus appeal to the silence of Christ before Pilate’s tribunal, 
 as being both then and always the best answer to 
 false-witness. “But the irreproachable and holy walk 
 of His true disciples speaks in His stead. This is more 
 eloquent and emphatic than aught else, and casts down 
 all blasphemiés and slanders” (comp. Stirm, Apologie 
 des Christenthums, 2nd edit., 1856, DieloMeLa! this 
 evidence of the life do the early Christian apologists 
 repeatedly appeal: I adduce but one passage from the 
 beautiful early Christian “Epistle to Diocnetus,” on 
 which the well-known hymn, “Es glinzet des Christen 
 inwendiges Leben” (the inner life of the Christian shines 
 resplendently), is founded. They are in the flesh, but 
 they do not live after the flesh. They tarry on earth, 
 but they walk in heaven. They obey appointed laws, 
 but by their own conduct they triumph over all law. 
 They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They do 
 
262 Notes to Lecture I. 
 
 good, and are punished as evil-doers. To speak briefly : 
 what the soul is to the body, Christians are to the world, 
 &e. (chaps. v. and vi). And a like tone runs through 
 the writings of Justin and other apologists. 
 
 (3) On the power of moral renovation possessed by 
 Christianity, comp. “ Lectures on Fundamental Truths,’ 
 Lect. IX. pp. 275-278, and notes 18-22 ; Stirm, Apologie, 
 Qnd edit., Letter 8. Gédthe (Westast. Divan) says: 
 “The greatest praise is due to the Christian religion, 
 which has at all times proved the purity of its origin, 
 ‘nasmuch as it has ever re-emerged in its pristine and 
 admirable peculiarity as a mission,.a brotherhood, a 
 family friend for the supply of man’s wants, from those 
 ereat errors in which man had in his blindness involved 
 “t unawares.” On the influence of the Gospel upon the 
 history and intellectual life. of the German nation, 
 comp. Gustav Baur’s lecture, The German Nation and 
 the Gospel (Leips. 1871), and “ Lectures on Fundamen- 
 tal Truths,” Lect. VI. p. 169, etc. On the need of a 
 renovation of our national life by the spirit of reli- 
 ion, comp. Constantin Franz, Die Wiederherstellung 
 Deutschlands, 1865, p. 443): a religious renovation is 
 “ unquestionably the most pressing need of all nations 
 at the present day. his 1s as certain as it is that the 
 deepest reasons of all political and social questions refer to 
 religion. What association in fact could be more im- 
 portant and more fruitful in results to all men, than one 
 whose bond is faith and the worship of God? What 
 tie is there which could so closely bind together nations, 
 and in nations ranks and individuals, as religion, 7.¢. the 
 alliance of the human soul with God. Herein have all 
 human compacts received their final consecration, and 
 sought their final confirmation, and will do so as long as 
 the world endures. Hence no unprejudiced observer 
 can doubt that religion is the best source of all human 
 development.” 
 
Notes to Lecture I. 263 
 
 _() Aristotle already regarded conscience as that char- 
 acteristic of man by which he is distinguished from 
 the brutes. “For that which specially distinguishes 
 man trom the other animals is that he alone has within 
 him a feeling of good and evil, of right and wrong, and 
 the lke” (Polit.i. 1,11; Lotze, Microcosmus, ii. 240). 
 “The self-condemning power of conscience has even here 
 separated the human being, as a member of a spiritual 
 world, from that dominion of the natural passions which 
 prevails in the animal world.” “The capacity of 
 becoming conscious of the Infinite is the distinctive 
 gift of the human mind.” “In conscience, the specially 
 spiritual world of moral truths and facts, as distinct not 
 only from the world of scientific facts but from that of 
 logical truths, is implied and certain. Hence conscience 
 is not an element in the logical progress of the mind, to 
 be solved in the way of the dialectic process, as the 
 Hegelian philosophy supposes. For no dialectic can get 
 over an evil conscience. No arguing delivered Macbeth 
 and his wife from an evil conscience, or lightened the 
 heart of a Richard III.” On the ethical spirit of the 
 Shakespearian drama, comp. eg. Phil. Fischer, Grund- 
 ztige des Systems der spekul, Hthik, Erlangen, 1851, p. 366, 
 where he points out that Shakespeare’s poetry “ brings 
 before us the union of freedom and necessity and (God's 
 moral government of the world, with such reality and 
 truth, as to justify the great maxim that ‘the world’s 
 history is the world’s judgment ;’” or p. 368, where he 
 says, “The retribution of moral good or evil by their 
 external consequences, is presided over by Divine jus- 
 tice, as the characters of Shakespeare’s tragedies learn 
 either through the inward purification or the moral 
 determination of their nature and life, or from the 
 judgment of their conscience,” &c. “The world’s centre 
 of gravity is transferred to man, to his heart and con- 
 science, and his lot is but the result of character” (Broek- 
 haus’s Die Convers,-Lex. 11th edit. 15,629; compare also 
 Ulrici, Shakespeare's Dramat. Kunst. 3rd edit. pt. i, 1868, 
 
 ‘ 
 ‘ {i, 
 ~ Vi ad 
 o OMAK 
 
264 | Notes to Lecture L. 
 
 p. 410, etc. We may also refer to the words he himself 
 puts into the mouth of Hamlet: “The end of playing, 
 both at the first and now, was and is, to hold as it were 
 the mirror up to nature, to shew virtue her own feature, 
 scorn her own image,’ etc. 
 
 (°) Compare the kindred notion carried out by Grau 
 in his “ Lecture on Faith as the Highest Reason,” 1865, 
 p.4. “Things of a lower, are more easily understood than 
 things of a higher nature, and it is easier to avoid 
 mistakes in the former than in the latter.” We need 
 only think of the science of mathematics. This science 
 ranks so high only because its results and propositions 
 are so certain, and not because its subjects are elevated 
 or its propositions make deep disclosures concerning the 
 nature of things. Hence I consider Schopenhauer in 
 the right when he says: “ You never cease to boast of . 
 the reliability and certainty of mathematics. But of 
 what use is it to me to have this very certain and 
 reliable knowledge of that about which I care nothing ?” 
 and, “in mathematics the mind is contending with its 
 own forms of knowledge, time and space, and is thus 
 like a cat playing with its own tail.” 
 
 (°) The opinions here referred to are those of so- 
 called Positivism, as advocated especially by Auguste 
 Comte, who has found numerous disciples in France and 
 England, and has not lacked followers in Germany, 
 especially in those circles in which natural science is 
 looked to to account for everything. Guizot, in his 
 Méditations sur la religion chrétienne, vol. ., Médit. sur 
 Pétat actuel de la rel. chré., Paris, 1866, p. 249, &c., gives 
 interesting information concerning Comte, the founder 
 of this school, and his system as laid down. by himself 
 in his Cours de philosophie positive (vol. vi. 1830-42), 
 and further developed by his disciple Littré in his 
 biography of Comte, 1864. Comte’s fundamental thought 
 —according to the passages cited by Guizot from the 
 
Notes to Lecture TI. 265 
 
 above-mentioned works—is the subjection of all destinies 
 -and facts to unalterable laws of nature, in conscious 
 opposition to every religious or metaphysical tendency, 
 and their correspouding political systems. “Le caractére 
 fondamental de la philosophie positive est de regarder 
 tous les phénoménes comme assejuttis 4 des lois na- 
 turelles invariables, en considerant comme absolument 
 inaccessible et vide de sens pour nous la recherche de ce 
 quon appelle les causes soit premiéres soit finales. Les 
 travaux que je poursuis obstinément pour élever les 
 théories sociales au rang des sciences physiques, sont 
 évidemment en opposition radicale et absolue avec toute 
 espece de tendance religieuse ou metaphysique, et par 
 _ suite avec les systémes politiques correspondants.” “La 
 religiosité,” says Littré in his biography of Comte, “lui 
 parait une faiblesse et un aven d’impuissance.” <Ab- 
 solutely, however, as he rejected theology, he still 
 treated it with more respect than metaphysics. Guizot 
 reduces these opinions to the fundamental law, that 
 matter, with its laws and forces, is the sole subject of 
 human knowledge, the sole province of the human 
 mind, This view, opposed as it is to all metaphysics, 
 has nevertheless a metaphysical foundation, viz. the 
 sensualism of Locke and others, that man’s whole 
 knowledge is produced by the outward impressions of 
 the senses. Comte then presses his mode of regarding 
 _ history into the service of his views, and seeks to make 
 it a proof of the truth of his doctrine, which in reality 
 does nothing less'than make man the highest of beings, 
 and put him in the place of God, while he is himself the 
 priest of this God. This is that purely natural religion 
 which must, in his opinion, supersede the supernatural, 
 the Christian religion, “At any other period,” says 
 Guizot, in concluding his remarks, which we have fol- 
 lowed in the above, “hig doctrine would have been 
 regarded as folly, but having been born in our times, he 
 has been more fortunate ; his fundamental principle, and 
 the coincidence of his first ideas with the method and 
 
266 Notes to Lecture I. 
 
 tendency of the physical sciences, which are the favourite 
 pursuit of the age, have given him more weight and 
 influence than he actually deserved.” | 
 
 The consequences of these opinions, as asserted by 
 Taine, are opposed with righteous indignation by Naville 
 in his Le Pere Céleste. Speaking of Macaulay, he says, 
 “The noble Englishman presumes to judge and con- 
 demn the men who make so pernicious a use of their 
 talents.” Now, this appeal to conscience is a Gothic 
 prejudice in the eyes of the French author (Taine), who 
 thus expresses himself on the matter: “In France 
 criticism assumes a freer deportment. When we attempt 
 to relate the life of an individual, or to give a sketch of 
 his peculiar character, we like to regard him simply as 
 an object of artistic or scientific study. We do not 
 judge him, we want only to represent him graphically 
 and intelligibly. Whether this man or that was a rogue 
 does not trouble us. We leave all such care to his con- 
 temporaries who had to suffer from his crimes. To-day 
 we are beyond his reach, and hatred vanishes with 
 danger. .. . I experience neither dislike nor disgust. 
 I leave these feelings behind me at the gates of History, 
 and I then enjoy the very deep and pure pleasure of see- 
 ing the soul treated according to definite laws” (Lssais de 
 critique et d'histoire, 9). “You understand, gentlemen,” 
 continues Naville, “the distinction between right and’ 
 wrong, between error and truth, is like a pair of old 
 and heavy shoes, which must be put off before the 
 sanctuary of History is entered. Holy sympathy 
 with magnanimous deeds, and righteous indignation at 
 the sight of meanness or cruelty, are childish emotions, 
 which must disappear to allow us to contemplate vice 
 and virtue with a like very deep and very pure pleasure.” 
 This teaching is not the aberration of a young and still 
 unbalanced mind, it is that of an entire school. I open 
 again the Revue des deux Mondes, and meet with the 
 theory which Taine has brought into vogue. It is here 
 said: “We are now acquainted, not with morality but 
 only with moral conditions, not with principles but only 
 
Notes to Lecture I. 267 
 
 with facts. We explain however, and, as has been 
 already said, the mind at last accustoms itself to 
 tolerate everything which it can explain. Modern 
 virtue consists entirely in toleration. Enormous in- 
 novation! whatever is, has, as far as we are concerned, 
 a right to be!” It is easy to see how akin such 
 opinions are to the Hegelian maxim of the reasonable- 
 ness of all that is actual. Naville continues his criti- 
 cism of “these monstrosities” by saying, “ All principle 
 vanishes, all morality is overthrown. There is no longer 
 any difference between might and right, between what 
 is and what ought to be. Upon what then is all this 
 founded? Ultimately upon the following proposition: 
 Mankind is the summit of the universe, there is nothing 
 higher. Mankind is God, if we allow that this sacred 
 name may be used in a new sense. How then can 
 mankind be judged? In virtue of what law, when 
 there is no law? In the name of what right, when there 
 is none? Condemnation is but personal prejudice, the 
 view of a narrow mind. God is not to be judged, He is 
 to be described; His acts are to be recognised, they are 
 all to be equally honoured. .. . The deification of the 
 human race is the justification of all its acts, and 
 involves -as its direct result the annihilation of all 
 morality.” Naville is perfectly right when he con- 
 tinues: “The glorification of success is the first’ and 
 most certain consequence of moral indifferentism, and if 
 we will let ourselves be fashioned by the world, instead 
 of bringing the world up to our own standard, the first 
 thing needful is to do homage to victory.” ... “It 
 was necessary that Louis XVI. should be beheaded, and 
 the guillotine be in action for years, to bring to light 
 the transgressions of Louis XIV., the infamy of Louis 
 XV., and the moral dissolution of French society. _ It 
 was necessary that Louis XIV. should be an adulterer, 
 and Louis XV. a debauchee, the clergy corrupt, and the 
 nobility degraded, to bring about the earthquake of the 
 Revolution. Events are linked together; I explain them 
 
268 Notes to Lecture I. 
 
 and acquiesce in them. In the eyes of the modern 
 philosopher everything is right.” 
 
 We have purposely lingered, and given such copious 
 particulars concerning this tendency, because it is in this 
 final abolition of the moral view of things, and of all 
 morality, that we behold the results of that Pantheism 
 by which modern opinion is far more governed than it 
 knows or thinks. The notions of philosophy gradually 
 descend from the heights of pure conception, and take 
 that shape and body in the denser atmosphere of actual 
 lite in which they are comprehensible even to the ordi- 
 nary understanding. The fathers would neither recognise 
 nor acknowledge the children which are yet their true 
 offspring. The end to which this road leads is the 
 dominion of brutal fact; for, says Pascal, there is 
 nothing more brutal than fact. Comp. also “ Lectures on 
 Saving Truths,” Lect. II. pp. 73, 349. 
 
 (") Spinoza, £thik, iv. 53: “Dejection is no virtue: in 
 other words, it does not arise from reason.” 54. “ Re- 
 pentance is no virtue: in other words, it does not arise 
 from reason; on the contrary, he who repents of an 
 action is either miserable or impotent.” 
 
 (*) On the question of moral statistics, comp. “ Lectures 
 on Saving Truths ” (3rd ed.), Lect. I. pp. 71, 345. To the 
 literature there adduced may be added the interesting 
 lecture of G. F. Knapp, “The recent Views of Moral 
 Statistics,” 1871. On the whole, the opposition to the 
 confirmation of Determinism, 7.e. the denial of moral] 
 freedom, seems to increase in the recent literature on 
 this subject. 
 
 (*) It is among the services rendered by Von Oettingen’s 
 above-cited work to have emphatically pointed to this 
 fact, and thus to have directed attention to the agreement 
 between the facts of statistics and the announcements 
 
 of holy Scripture. Comp. p. 973, ete. On the next 
 
Notes to Lecture. I. 269 
 
 question, the relation between freedom and necessity, 
 comp. my Lehre vom freien Willen, 1863, p. 5, ete. : 
 Martensen, Die Christliche Ethik, i. p. 153, ete. ; Riickert : 
 
 «6 Grundlage hat gelegt Nothwendigkeit, Natur, 
 Baumeisterin des Baus ist deine Freiheit nur.” * 
 
 (°) It is a fundamental thought of Wolfe. Menzel’s 
 Kritik des modernen Zcitbewusstseins, 1869—a work of 
 some exaggeration, but full of serious truths—that the 
 Renaissance or Humanism marks the commencement of 
 the heathen opinions and feelings of modern times. 
 Comp. p. 160, ete. On the heathen character of Italian 
 Humanism, comp. “ Lectures on Fundamental Truths,” 
 Lect. I. p. 11, note 6. With respect to the independence 
 of religion claimed for morality, I have discussed this 
 question in “Die religionslose Moral,” an article in the 
 Allg. Ev. Luth. Kirchenzeitg. 1869, No. 27, and have 
 there directed attention to the interesting discussions 
 of this question at the Bern Congress of 1865. The 
 judgment of enlightened moral philosophy on this ques- 
 _ tion is shown, ¢g., in the well-known work of Martensen, 
 Grundriss des Systems der Moralphilosophie ; comp. pre- 
 face, p. 12: “ A moral philosophy which ignores Chris- 
 tianity, ignores also actual morality, and thus renders 
 itself unpractical. If ethical science is, on the contrary, 
 pervaded by the principle Christianity, it cannot forbear 
 entering into the religious elements of morality.” Reli- 
 gion shows how the great moral contrast of the world is 
 reconciled by God, and morality shows how man is to 
 reconcile it in his life in the world. But this can be done 
 only on the ground of the fact thus pointed out. For 
 only the certainty that reconciliation already exists on 
 the part of God, can impart a cheerful willingness in 
 labouring at the moral work of reconciliation ; while it, 
 at the same time, involves a demand that this principle 
 
 * Nature has laid the foundation of necessity. Thy freedom is alone 
 the architect of the building. 
 
210 Notes to Lecture I. 
 
 of religion should be carried out in the world of reality 
 (comp. Martensen, Grundriss, p. 3). 
 
 (1) Compare my University programme on the Ethics 
 of Aristotle as distinguished from the Morality of Chris- 
 tianity, I. (on the festival of the Reformation, 1869), 
 where this fact is proved from history in a more circum- 
 stantial manner. 
 
 (2) On the Stoa, comp. the same, p. 23. Zeller also 
 recognises the religious character of the later Stoic 
 morality in his History of Greek Philosophy, 11. 1, 1, pp. 
 618, etc., 647 sq. and 672. 
 
 (8) The passage is from Naville’s Le Pére Céleste, 
 1865, p. 51. Comp. Martensen, Die Christl. Athik. 1. p. 
 25: “ History at all times confirms the fact, that an ab- 
 stract antinomian morality can only prevail in times 
 when a decay of religion has begun. It was when the 
 religions of Greece and Rome had fallen, that the moral 
 philosophers appeared and promulgated their new ‘doc- 
 trines on the ruins, so to speak, of the ancient temples 
 and altars. And whenever the Church and Christianity 
 have appeared to be, to a certain extent, approaching 
 their dissolution, that well-known cry has been heard 
 again: it is to morality that we must now look, and the 
 days of genuine, unselfish virtue and true freedom have 
 now dawned,” ete. ete. 
 
 It will surely be admitted, that in appealing to the 
 testimony of Jiiger the Darwinian, to the connection of 
 morality with religion, we are citing an unprejudiced 
 witness. In quoting from his work, Die darwinistische 
 Theorie und thre Stellung zur Moral und Religion, 1869, 
 we are not concerned with his attempts to show the 
 accordance of Darwinism with morality and religion— 
 attempts which cannot but fail, as proving that both are 
 endangered, because their special ethical character is 
 compromised, by the Darwinian theory—but with the 
 
Notes to Lecture I. 271 
 
 testimony, entirely independent of these attempts, which 
 he furnishes to the intrinsic connection of the two. “A 
 morality without religion may look very well as a 
 paradox, but when a weapon is needed, and you should 
 draw the sword, you will unsheath but a peacock’s 
 feather, a thing that can neither cut nor thrust. Just 
 try it if you have children. Tell them how good and 
 virtuous they ought to be, and you will soon see that 
 this will do no good. But talk to them of their Father 
 in heaven who seeth in secret, of their Saviour who 
 gives them all things, of the holy angels who guard 
 them, and you will see in their beaming eyes, that this 
 touches their hearts, and that religion is the only means 
 of educating aman to be a man indeed.” ‘And in 
 answer to the ironical reply of opponents: Then religion 
 is a good thing for women and children! he replies : 
 “ And is not this alone sufficient to rescue religion from 
 all opposition ? If you allow that women and children 
 need it, you cannot but make use of it yourselves as 
 long as you are children, and when you have wives and 
 children. In this case none can do without it who do 
 not condemn themselves to be dried up branches on the 
 thriving tree of human nature.” In another passage of 
 the same work, he continues—and we cannot here refrain 
 from citing the passage, although it is but slightly con- 
 nected with the train of thought at present engaging us: 
 —*“TIt is objected that religion is an invention. W ell, 
 _ language too is an invention, and inventions are made 
 that they may be used. Just as I would say to you: 
 Teach your children to speak, that when it is time to do 
 so, they may be able to utter words ; so would I exhort 
 you, Teach your children to pray, that when they want to 
 do so, they may beable. That there are people who talk 
 when they ought to act, and pray when they ought to 
 work, is sad enough; but this does not prove that speech 
 or that prayer is worthless, but only that the education 
 given has been a mistaken one. Let us learn in our 
 youth to do both, and let us be careful not to unlearn 
 
272 Notes to Lecture I. 
 
 either, for none can tell whether he may not find him- 
 self in such a condition as to make prayer as necessary 
 as speech.” He thinks that “ Darwinians especially 
 ought to keep some terms at the university to study 
 theology,” that they may be able to deliver an opinion 
 on religious matters. 
 
 To place a politician in juxtaposition with the Dar- 
 winian investigator of nature, I refer to the expressions 
 of Constantin Franz, in his work, Die Wiederherstellung 
 Deutschlands, 1865, p. 445. Opposing the theory of Libe- 
 ralism, which proclaims the separation of Church from 
 State, and of law and morality from religion, and regards 
 the latter as merely an individual concern, with which 
 politics have nothing to do, Franz writes: “ As if the re- 
 ligious man and the political man were two different 
 beings. If, however, it is one and the same man who 
 acts in the atmosphere of religion and in the atmosphere 
 of politics, how can religion be prevented from exercis- 
 ing a very extensive influence upon politics? This 
 theory, then, demands the impossible. It is also an 
 error to regard justice and morality as absolutely inde- 
 pendent; for the relation of man to man depends on the 
 relation of man to God, and justice and morality cannot 
 even be conceived of, much less carried into practice, 
 without the consciousness of God.” The same writer in 
 his Vorschule zur Physiologie der Staaten, Berlin, 1857, 
 p- 161, says: “ However philosophers may deceive them- 
 selves on the subject, it will not escape the unprejudiced 
 observer, that the moral consciousness of nations is 
 indeed and in truth everywhere rooted in religion. 
 Even history itself confirms the fact, that all moral ideas 
 originally entered the world by means of religion, and 
 never by means of speculation, which, under the most 
 favourable circumstances, has only elaborated, but has 
 never independently produced such ideas. Never yet 
 has there been a philosophical book of equal influence 
 even with the Koran, not to mention the Bible.” 
 
Notes to Lecture I. yes 
 
 (“*) “I do not know,” writes Rousseau in the 7yois- 
 veme Lettre de la Montagne, pp. 85-88, “ why men will in- 
 sist on ascribing the excellent morality of our books to 
 the progress of philosophy. This morality, which ig 
 derived from the gospel, was Christian before it was 
 philosophical.” Kant acknowledges the excellence of 
 Christian morality in his Kritik der prakt. Vernunft. 
 Schopenhauer, moreover, who is a decided opponent of 
 Christianity, esteems “the purely ethical portion thereof 
 as unassailable.” On the progress for which the moral 
 consciousness is indebted to Christianity, comp. Lotze, 
 Mikrokosmos, 2nd ed., ii. 338. «It may be that there is 
 in the conscience an ineradicable germ of good—and 
 undoubtedly we shall persevere in this belief—inherent 
 in the human mind. It may be also that the natural 
 goodness of man’s nature may take care that this general 
 formal feeling of justice shall not always and absolutely 
 sanction relations contrary to the true duty of mankind ; 
 but even then we cannot but persist in the conviction, 
 that the natural heart of man by no means produces 
 that clear understanding of all moral precepts which 
 seems so natural to us, because education is the source 
 whence they flow to us so easily.” On the other hand, 
 Dr. Abraham Geiger, formerly of F rankfort, but now of 
 Berlin, a leader of the Jewish reform party, dares to 
 write in the Jiidische Zeitschrift, 1869, No. oy) ps 287: 
 “Christianity has exercised a deep-reaching influence, 
 but has conduced not to the progressive development 
 but to the torpidity of human nature; not to the re- 
 cognition of the human, but to its disfigurement; not to 
 freedom, but to the suppression of all that could not be 
 restrained within its narrow circle of ideas:” Chris- 
 tianity is a frustrated revival of Judaism and Hellenism, 
 which is just kept on its legs by the power of habit! 
 More arrogant insults could not be hurled at Christians 
 on the part of Jews. 
 
 (°) Compare E. Schmidt’s Die biirgerliche Gesellschaft 
 S 
 
274 Notes to Lecture LI. 
 
 in der altrim. Welt und ‘thre Umgestaltung durch das 
 Christenthum, translated by Richter, 1857, p. 288, etc., 
 for historical confirmation of and testimony to that new 
 spirit of love which came into the world with Chris- 
 tianity, and which constrained even the heathen to 
 perceive and acknowledge it. The expression, “ Enthu- 
 siasm of love for man,’ is taken from the interesting 
 English work Hece Homo, of which a German translation 
 appeared at Erlangen, 1867, under the title Darstellung 
 von Jesu Christi Leben und Wirken. 
 
 (1°) T have discussed the difference between Chris- 
 tian and ancient morals in the above-named Programme 
 on the Ethics of Aristotle. Zcce Homo, pp. 160-187, 
 also contains an able discussion of this subject. The 
 question has been treated from the Romish standpoint 
 in Leitmeier’s Aypologie der christl. Darstellung des 
 Verhiltnisses der heidn. und christl. thik, zundchst 
 nach einer Vergleichung des Ciceronianischen Buches de 
 — Offctis und dem gleichnimigen des hel. Ambrosius, 
 
 Munich, 1866. 
 
 NOTES TO LECTURE IL 
 
 (1) On these two aspects of nature and personality in 
 man, and the necessity and freedom respectively con- 
 nected with them, compare my Lehre der freven Willen, 
 p. 4, ete. 
 
 (7) This it is which distinguishes the opposite views 
 of Determinism and Indeterminism. The former has 
 exclusive regard to the whole, of which individuals are 
 but members; the latter to individuals, the aggregation 
 of whom compose the whole. Hence the former view 
 leads to a denial of all creature liberty, the individual 
 being absolutely determined by, and dependent on, that 
 whole of which he is a member, and therefore subject 
 
 * 
 
Notes to Lecture ITI. SATA 
 
 to the law of the necessity of universal connection. It 
 is the consequence of Pantheism, which ever dwells on 
 the categories of the whole and its parts or manifes- 
 tations. The latter view teaches the absolute freedom 
 of creature will, as if this were not determined. by the 
 manifold natural and historical connections in which it 
 is placed. It is the consequence of Deism, which being 
 unacquainted with a living and active God, refers the 
 individual to himself, and thus really puts him in the 
 place of God. In the former sense it was that Augus- 
 tine regarded mankind as a massa (perditionis), in the 
 latter that Pelagius regarded each individual as a sheet 
 of white paper, which was first to fill itself with writing. 
 Luther and Melancthon at first taught Determinism 
 until they perceived its objectionable consequences, and 
 altered their former course; while Zwingle and Calvin 
 persevered in the path they had adopted. Rationalism 
 following, Pelagius embraced the perverted doctrine of 
 liberty. On the earlier doctrine of the Reformers, com- 
 pare my Lehre vom freien Willen, pp. 87, sq., 149, sq. On 
 these opposite views. in general, compare the discussions 
 in A. von Oettingen’s Moralstatistik, p. 943, sq. 
 
 (°) In the “Sturm und Drang” period, and also in 
 the circle of the romantic authors, freedom from the 
 ordinary morality of the “Philistines” was demanded 
 for genius. We need only call to mind Fried. v. Schlegel 
 and kindred spirits, or Schelling’s wife Caroline, as we 
 know her through her correspondence, and the whole 
 of the Jena era of genius, and the characteristic literary — 
 memorial of this opinion in Schlegel’s Zucinde, to the 
 defence of which even Schleiermacher devoted himself. 
 
 (*) Compare my treatise on the Ethics of Aristotle, 
 etc. u. die Tugendlehre (Univers-Programm, 1870). The 
 defect of ancient morality did not lie in the fact that it 
 erroneously identified the spiritual with the natural, as 
 Zeller shows in his Gesch. der griechischen Philosophie, 
 
D76 © Notes to Lecture IT, 
 
 vol. i. 93, sq. “The distinctive character of the Greek 
 nature lies in that unbroken union of the spiritual and 
 the natural, which constitutes both the excellence and 
 the narrowness of this classical nation” (p. 96). Chris- 
 tianity is said to oppose spirit to nature in a one-sided 
 manner, and modern Humanism to reconcile them. 
 But it is not the relation of the spiritual, but of the 
 moral, which is here in question. Ancient ethical 
 science naturalized morality, and this was its funda- 
 mental error. Christian ethics comprehend the inde- 
 pendence of morality, in which independence, moreover, 
 it is to be the animating soul of the natural. 
 
 (>) Plato, Sympos. 14: “The shape of each human being 
 was round as a ball, his back and sides forming a circle ; 
 he had four hands, and as many legs as hands, and two 
 faces, exactly like one another, upon his circular neck, 
 but there was only one head over these two faces, which 
 were placed opposite each other; there were four ears, 
 etc. He went both upright as he does now, and also 
 with a swift, circular motion upon his eight limbs, lift- 
 ing them up outstretched around, like the spokes of-a 
 wheel. . . . Men were then of great strength; they pos- 
 sessed elevated minds, and made themselves gods... . 
 Now Zeus and the rest of the gods were perplexed, and 
 took counsel what they should do. ... Zeus having 
 with some difficulty devised an expedient, said: I think 
 I have found out a contrivance by which, on the one 
 hand, men may continue to exist, and, on the other, 
 their insubordination may be restrained by their becom- 
 ing weaker. I propose now to halve them... . If, 
 however, they still continue too presumptuous, and give 
 us no peace, I will halve them again, so that they may 
 go on one leg only.... The nature of man haying 
 been thus divided into two, each half feels a longing for 
 its corresponding half. Hence mutual love, which 
 brings the original nature together again, has so long 
 been innate in mankind, and tries to heal human nature 
 
Notes to Lecture IT. yi a 
 
 by making its two parts one.” Extravagant and fanci- 
 ful as this speech of Aristophanes may be, the harmony 
 of the truth upon which it is based with Scripture is 
 obvious. Comp. also Fichte, System der Sittenlehre, p. 
 332: “The unmarried person is only half a human 
 being.” 
 
 (°) On the difference between man and woman, J. P. 
 Lange, among others, has made some interesting re- 
 marks in Gelzer’s Monatblittern, 1858, 8: “The life of 
 the woman is pre-eminently an individual and personal 
 one; and hence individual separate and personal cares are 
 committed to her ministering and ruling love. The 
 man is pre-eminently an intellectual one; hence he ap- 
 plies himself to the general ordering and regulation of 
 life. As the female nature is on the one hand inclined 
 to a constant, an almost vegetative continuance within 
 accustomed and traditional spheres of action, so, on the 
 other hand, does its power of presentiment anticipate 
 its appointed development.” Edw. Erdmann (of Halle), 
 in his ingenious Psychol. Briefe, 3rd ed. 1863, p. 82, sq, 
 gives a series of excellent remarks and observations : 
 “ Rousseau observes that there is a motion which ill be- 
 comes even the most beautiful woman, and this is swift 
 running. He might have said the same of all move- 
 ments of the arms requiring great exertion, ¢.g. those of 
 wrestling or fencing. They are not graceful in a woman, 
 because it is not fitting in her to flee from, or contend 
 against us. She is intended to let herself be overtaken, 
 and to submit. In the man, tendency outwards predomi- 
 nates. The man’s circle of sensible perceptions is wider ; 
 hence the perceptive power of the woman within her 
 narrower circle is more acute than his.” .. . See the 
 work itself for farther particulars. Lotze (Alikrokosmos, 
 2nd ed. ii. 380, sq.), besides dwelling on that feeling of 
 obligation which teaches a woman to find her calling in 
 the midst of the circumstances at hand, directs attention 
 also to her greater powers of adaptation, in virtue of 
 
278 Notes to Lecture IT. 
 
 which she accommodates herself more easily to new 
 conditions of life, change of rank, etc., than the man 
 does. With respect to the mental capacities of women, 
 he says, p. 388: “They are not inclined to scientific 
 labours, and their thoughts take a more evidently 
 artistic course.” With ‘‘a preponderance of practical 
 acquaintance above scientific classification, is connected 
 a certainty of religious faith and a repose of moral feel- 
 ing. Essentially agreeing with Lotze, Rothe (Theol. 
 Hilk, ii. 265, sg.) endeavours to point out that the indi- 
 vidual aspect (feeling, sentiment, intuition, art, etc.) pre- 
 dominates in the woman, the general (intellect, argument, 
 science, produce, business, politics) in the man. Schopen- 
 hauer (Die Welt als Wille, etc. 11. 447) remarks in a 
 kindred sense: “ Women may have considerable talent, 
 but not genius, because they are always subjective.” 
 On the mutual completion and co-operation of both, not 
 merely that they may live, but that they may live a com- 
 plete life by means of each other, Aristotle (Wikom. Ethik, 
 vill. 14; Politik, i. 13) has some good remarks, to which 
 Trendelenburg (Waturrecht, 1860, p. 247, sq.) directs atten- 
 tion. The latter says, p. 233: “On the part of the man 
 there is more of active origination, on that of the woman 
 of passive receptivity. If love, working in harmony 
 with nature, appears in woman, fills her soul as wife and 
 mother, and becomes the motive power of her life, 
 that reasoning power which is destined to rule, and’ 
 does not shrink’ from working even against nature, 
 comes forth in the man. On the part of the man, 
 thoughtful contrivance is prominent; on that of the 
 woman, sensible appreciation ; in the man, independent, 
 well-defined character ; in the woman, feeling supported 
 by confidence; in the man, singleness of purpose, as in 
 the plastic arts; in the woman, the gentle blending of 
 differences, as in the musical; in the man, the self- 
 imposed law; in the woman, the received custom.” 
 
 (") The judgment of holy Scripture on the relation of 
 
Notes to Lecture IT. 279 
 
 the sexes is contained in the passages: “It is not good 
 for the man to be alone” (Gen. 11. 18); “ Neither is the 
 man without the woman,” etc. (1 Cor. xi. 11); “ There 
 is neither Greek nor Jew,” etc. (Gal. i. 28); “ For the 
 man is the head of the woman,” etc. (Eph. v. 23, 33), 
 which recognize both the natural differences with the 
 special calling and position involved therein, and the 
 personal equality of the sexes before God and in Christ. 
 On the condition of the female sex in the heathen world, 
 and at the close of the pree-Christian era, when, as Mon- 
 tesquieu (Hsprit des Lois, vill. 9) says, “ Love had still 
 only a form which cannot be named,’ comp. the particu- 
 lars and proofs furnished by Schmidt, Die burgerliche 
 Gessellschaft in der altrom. Welt, etc. pp. 23, sq. and 33, 
 sq., and Stirm, Apologie, 2nd ed. p. 263, sg. In contrast 
 to which, the Christian women of the New Testament, 
 the female followers of Christ, the women among the 
 circle of disciples in the Acts, and such exhortations as 
 1 Pet. ui. 1, sg., may be appealed to. On Christian 
 women in: history, comp. Schmidt, p. 109, s¢., on the 
 vocation of women, my essay, Der Dienst der Frauen am 
 Reich Gottes, 1868; Wichern’s Der Dienst der Frauen in 
 der Kurche, 2nd ed. 1858; Monod’s two able lectures, La 
 femme, etc. On this subject, and on the fallacies of the 
 spurious emancipation movement, comp. the interesting 
 article upon the position and calling of a Christian 
 woman in the Allg. Ly.-Luth. Kirchenzeitung, 1872, Nos. 
 6 and 7. The frightful state of morality in Berlin 
 (where the magistrate computes the number of prosti- 
 tutes at 30,000) has been the occasion of much public 
 speaking and writing on the increase of prostitution in 
 great cities. Police regulations alone will not however 
 remedy this inveterate evil of modern society. On its 
 greatness, and on the labours of Christian love in oppos- 
 ing it, comp. Herbst, Die Magdalenensache, etc. 1867, 
 and Lehmann’s admirable work, Die Werke der Inebe, a 
 series of lectures on the present sphere of action of the 
 Inner Mission, Leips. 1870, p. 54, sq. 
 
280. Notes to Lecture IT. 
 
 (°) While most of the ancients referred the tem- 
 peraments (Kpdcers, temperamentum, mixture) as well as 
 diseases, to the supposed four fundamental principles— 
 the dry or the damp, the warm or the cold—there were, 
 according to the theory of the Hippocratians, four chief 
 humours of the body—the bile, produced in the liver, 
 the blood, in the heart, the water, in the spleen, the 
 phlegm, in the head—from the mixture of which arose 
 both diseases and the temperaments. In Galen the 
 temperaments are themselves regarded as morbid condi- 
 tions. More recently, the temperaments were deduced 
 (as by Stahl and Haller in the eighteenth century) from 
 the varying sensitiveness and strength of the nerves and 
 muscles, and therefore from the whole bodily constitution. 
 In any case they are not of a purely psychical nature, 
 but depend upon the bodily constitution. 
 
 (*) Descriptions of the temperaments are exceedingly 
 numerous. While only partially mentioning the litera- 
 ture of the different subjects in question, I take the 
 opportunity of directing attention to (Die Tempera- 
 mente des Menschen in gesunden und kranken Zustande, 
 Wiirzb. 1856) a pamphlet by the recently deceased 
 physician, Theod. v. Haupt. Fortlage of Jena has de- 
 voted the fifth of his eight Psychological Lectures to the 
 temperaments. Erdmann speaks ably as ever of them 
 in his Psychological Letters, 3rd ed. p. 34, sq. 
 
 (*°) The educational method pursued by our Lord 
 with respect to individuals of differently constituted 
 natures, 1s instructive on this point. A characteristic 
 example is found in Luke ix. 57-62. The first indi- 
 vidual there spoken of-was of the sanguine temperament, 
 and full of ardent zeal; the second of the phlegmatic, 
 wanting first to arrange everything; the third of the 
 melancholy, and desirous of once more satisfying his 
 emotional nature. To these must be added the preceding 
 narrative, in which our Lord rebuked a manifestation of 
 natural impetuosity. 
 
Notes to Lecture IT. 281 
 
 (1) Aristotle had already made a similar remark in 
 his psychology. This parallel is especially carried out 
 in Lotze’s Mrkrokosmos, ii., 2nd edit., p. 365, sg. I sub- 
 join a longer extract from this discussion. He is treating 
 of the temperaments in connection with the different ages 
 of life, and refers the sanguine to childhood, the senti- 
 mental—as he prefers calling the melancholy—to youth, 
 the choleric to manhood, the phlegmatic to old age. 
 Lotze designates an “all-sided excitability of all the 
 physical states by each other, and of the soul by all 
 external incentives,” as the characteristic of the sanguine 
 temperament. “We find it natural that childhood, 
 which is intended for the gathering up without pre- 
 judice, and even without special inclination, of the im- 
 pressions which may contribute to its education, should 
 exhibit this readiness to be excited, and to pass from one 
 frame of mind to another; in fact a child’s develop- 
 ment makes the most rapid progress where this facility 
 appears without lasting too long. KEqually natural does 
 this sanguine activity appear among uncivilized races, 
 whose life generally yields too little “ variety of interests 
 to make it desirable that their unbiassed susceptibility 
 of all kinds of impressions should be weakened by the 
 partial pursuit of definite objects.” The-melancholy 
 temperament Lotze prefers to designate as the senti- 
 mental, for the sake of obviating the notion of dejection, 
 which is no more essential to this than to the other 
 temperaments. “For the sentimental temperament 
 which we intend, is not, he says, the special predomin- 
 ance of one of the many moods which we may ex- 
 perience, but the inclination to give way to moods in 
 general, to cherish them, and to generate them with 
 more readiness, and to a greater extent than the occasion 
 justifies.” “The less well-defined objects of life, with 
 which individual experiences would certainly be com- 
 bined, are prominent in the season of youth, the more 
 will the heart’s interest be bestowed upon the emotional 
 value of impressions. Thus the natural hue of the emo- 
 
282 Notes to Lecture LT. 
 
 tional life of youth produces that sentimental tempera- 
 ment upon which, when it does not outlast the limits of 
 its rightful existence, depends the greater portion of our 
 best progress. Pre-eminently adapted to grasp the 
 harmonious or inharmonious value concealed within 
 the formal circumstances of impressions, it delights in 
 the dreamlike repetition of the rhythmical and of zsthetic 
 " impressions in general; disinclined to work properly so 
 called, but impelled by restlessness of feeling to great 
 activity of imagination, it seeks to vent itself now in 
 artistic creations, now in the formation of ideals of a 
 better reality. Sensitive however as it is to the emo- 
 tional value of perceptions, it is nevertheless inclined 
 also to theoretical indefiniteness, because it is less suc- 
 cessful in maintaining a hold of those definite points of 
 reference among which these circumstances filled with 
 value exist. It thus becomes unpractical, because while 
 it would indeed desire to reproduce in action the value 
 of its moods, it has no interest in the indifferent details 
 of those reasonable means which might conduce thereto, 
 and itis often unjust in. regarding the indifference or 
 opposition of others to its own esthetic prejudices, 
 with a bitterness which excludes all fair judgment 
 and all. tolerance of a different kind of cultivation.” 
 The sentimental temperament is said to be followed in 
 manhood by the choleric. “The duller susceptibility 
 which, together with greater power of reaction when 
 once aroused, is ascribed to this temperament, is un- 
 doubtedly very often the result either of a moral 
 stability of character, which, having decided on certain 
 definite objects, is not to be easily turned from its faith 
 by opposite attractions, or of the narrowness of imagina- 
 tion, induced by monotony of circumstances, by means 
 of which the natural interest in various kinds of attrac- 
 tions is blunted.” “I may seem to be making a very 
 strange assertion when I adduce the phlegmatic tempera- 
 ment as that which is natural to age, and which is at 
 the same time the correction of the partialities of the 
 
Notes to Lectwre ITI. 283 
 
 choleric.” “A constant equilibrium would be insuffer- 
 able and repulsive in the soul which has to advance to 
 its maturity, and to receive the form of its culture from 
 the manifold commotions of life: but this serene repose 
 is venerable in the mind which has already surmounted 
 these commotions, and learned by varied experiences 
 neither to suffer itself to be impelled by the changing im- 
 pressions of feeling, nor to prefer in a one-sided manner 
 any single form and tendency of human effort above all 
 others.” “It is not the great names of history which 
 we have now in view, but those peacefully happy beings 
 who pass through life unnoticed, like direct incorporations 
 of the ideal. They who have played important parts in 
 history have far more frequently owed the power of 
 their influence to those one-sided harshnesses by means 
 of which they were able, without any inward counter- 
 poise, to impart their own motion to the world around 
 them.” When I wrote and delivered what is found in 
 the text I was still unacquainted with Lotze’s views, 
 and am therefore the more pleased to find how fre- 
 quently they coincide with my own. 
 
 (1°) Erdmann, Psychol. Briefe, p. 32: “The inestimable 
 benefit of directing attention to the close connection 
 between the nature of a country and the historical 
 destiny of its inhabitants, has been conferred on science 
 by C. Ritter, the creator of scientific geography.” Lotze, 
 on the other hand (Mikrokosmos, ii. p. 351), thus warns 
 us agains’ too hasty conclusions: “Much as the mental 
 disposition in general depends upon external nature, still 
 it depends not upon this nature as it really is in itself, 
 but upon the effect it produces upon the yet uneducated 
 mind of the man who is constantly‘surrounded by it. 
 This influence, moreover, cannot even be divined by the 
 impression it makes upon the attention of an already 
 cultivated mind, not living in and with it, but merely 
 observing it” (iii. 40). He dwells upon the transmission 
 of work in common upon common territory, as that by 
 
284 Notes to Lecture IT. 
 
 which, above all else, the history and the historical con- 
 sciousness of a nation is determined. On the vocation 
 of the German nation, Rothe (Theol. Lthik, v. 338, sq.) 
 thus ably expresses himself: “As by its geographical 
 position it forms the heart in the body of European 
 mankind, so should it also take upon itself the functions 
 of the heart, the office of preparing the blood, in the 
 great moral community of Europe.” “It is to be the 
 quiet laboratory in which those moral ideas which’ are 
 to produce the historical development of European 
 Christendom must be perfected.” It may not be un- 
 interesting to take a glance at the comparative weight 
 of the brain among different nations. The following is 
 from the Ausland for 1872, No. 16: “The German brain 
 weighs 1425 grammes, the English 1389, the French 
 1353, the Roumanian 1303, the Bohemian 1245. The 
 female brain is unfortunately considerably lighter than 
 the male. Among most Asiatic races a great dimi- 
 nution of weight is found. The medium is 1235 
 grammes. ‘There are however races on the slopes of the 
 Himalayas with an average weight of brain amounting 
 to 1304 grammes. The Chinese too form a remarkable 
 exception, the brain here averaging 1357 grammes, 2.¢. 
 4-92 above that of the French. The brain in the N egro 
 races varies in general from 1319 to 1249 grammes, 
 while the skull of the Caffre contains 1364 grammes of 
 brain. In North America, beginning with “the Esqui- 
 maux and other inhabitants of the Polar regions, we find 
 an average weight of 1219 grammes. The brains of the 
 different Indian tribes are somewhat heavier, their 
 medium weight being 1310 grammes, while those of the 
 entirely savage, barbarous, and nomad races amount 
 to only 1214 grammes. Among the Caribs, the abori- 
 eines of the Antilles, the average is still lower, being 
 about 1189 grammes. Among the Sclaves the medium 
 weight of brain is 13 340, among the Gypsies 1327, the 
 Magyars 1319, the Roumanians 1317. Among Sclavie 
 females 1171, and German 1157. The female brain 
 
Notes to Lecture IT. 285 
 
 (whose medium weight is 1159) is 150 grammes lighter 
 than the male; the cubical contents are about 215 
 centimetres cubic, the circumference of the skull about 
 18 millimetres smaller than that of the man; it is less 
 porous, and seems also denser, for in the same space is 
 contained about 002°548 grammes more female than 
 male. brain.” 
 
 (8) Aristotle, Nikom. Hthik, viii. i. 3. Even when 
 wandering in foreign lands we may soon see how near 
 akin, and how dear each man is to man (is olkefov das 
 dvOpwros avOpurw Kat ws ptXrov), vil. 7,6. He acknowledges 
 man even in the slave, vili. 18, 8. These are isolated 
 testmonia anime naturaliter christiane, still they are 
 not, as even Zeller admits in his Gesch. der griech. Philos., 
 2nd edit., p. 539, taken into consideration in connection 
 with his system and the entire view therein expressed, 
 but: are merely happy and honourable inconsistencies. 
 Comp. my Programm on the Ethics of Aristotle, ii. Zu- 
 gendlehre, p. 15, sq. 
 
 (4) On the distinction between real and formal 
 freedom, comp. my Lehre vom freien Willen, pp. 6-11; 
 Rothe, Zheol. Lthik, 2nd edit. pp. 349-380 ; Jul. Miiller, 
 Lehre v. d. Sunde, ii. 7, sq. [translated into English by 
 Urwich.] 
 
 (7°) On the limits of natural morality, comp. my 
 Lehre vom freven Willen, 451-457 ; Frank (of Erlangen), 
 System der Christl. Gewissheit, i. 106, sg. 246. It is 
 something, and should not therefore be slightingly re- 
 garded, when a man strives with all his might and main 
 to resist, in those matters in which his natural moral 
 consciousness teaches him to regard as right and com- 
 manded to do so. But even though such an one should 
 really succeed in attaining to the righteousness for 
 which he is striving by fulfilling all the commandments 
 of which he is morally conscious, the Christian knows 
 
286 Notes to Lecture IT. 
 
 that the eye of love can only look upon him and say 
 (Mark x. 21), “Go thy way, sell all that thou hast. It is 
 true thou art seeking after goodly pearls, and hast 
 found many, but the one whose value surpasses all 
 others hast thou not yet found,—sell that thou hast.” 
 
 (©) On the internal discord in man, comp. “ Funda- 
 mental Truths,” Lecture VII. 181. 
 
 (7) Testimony to the power of conscience from 
 authors of the era of decaying antiquity, from the Greek 
 tragedians and Roman satirists, as well as from modern 
 poets, is cited in “ Lectures on Saving Truths,” p. 350, sq. 
 Single passages are also given by Schneider, Ohristl. 
 Klange aus den griech. und rom. Klassikern, 1865, p. 
 13, sq. 
 
 (’*) The saying with which Kant concludes his Cri- 
 ticism of Practical Reason is well known: “There are 
 two things which fill the mind with ever new and in- 
 creasing admiration, the oftener and the more con- 
 tinuously the mind is occupied in their contemplation,— 
 the starry heavens above me and the moral law within 
 me” (Works, edited by Hartenstein, v. 167). On the 
 nature and character of the conscience, comp. the 
 discussions in Frank’s System der christliche Gewissheit, 
 1.88: “Just as the natural ear is constructed to be 
 sensible of the wayes of sound, when the vibrations 
 which reach it from without are continued within the 
 organs which exist to receive them, so also the con- 
 ‘science of man, the organ of moral perception, is not 
 productive by itself, but becomes conscious of the moral 
 idea, in virtue of the rapport into which the moral 
 powers enter with it, and forms in a certain measure 
 the resonance by whose means moral vibrations from 
 the sphere of objective reality become audible in. the 
 subject. By means of an organ homogeneous with the 
 nature of moral realities, the subject perceives with 
 
Notes to Lecture ITT, 287 
 
 reference to the activities proceeding from himself, that 
 rule which shows him whether and how far his conduct 
 corresponds with the supreme object of his personal life, 
 and determines the absolute value of his personality 
 accordingly.” “It is not left absolutely to the arbitrary 
 choice of the subject to become conscious of this direct- 
 ing and ruling idea of his being; on the contrary, he 
 becomes conscious thereof, either with or against his 
 will: in other words, there is an objective moral power, 
 which in this case as much obtrudes itself upon the 
 organ for its perception, as sensible realities force them- 
 selves upon the organs of physical perception.” Among 
 the various discussions on the conscience, I would refer 
 to the sections on this subject in the Zthics of Harless 
 (sec. 7-12), and Vilmar, i. 65, sq.; also in Philippi’s 
 Kirchl. Glaubenslehre, iii. 7, sq.; Delitzsch’s Bibl. Psycho- 
 logie, 2nd ed. p. 133, sq., translated into English—Foreign 
 Theological Library; my Lehre vom freien Willen, p. 
 444, sq.; and finally to the separate works on this subject 
 of Kahler (Lehre vom Gewissen, 1869), Rud. Hoffmann, 
 1866, and Gass, 1869. 
 
 NOTES TO LECTURE II. 
 
 (1) How incompatible it seemed to Socrates to know 
 what was good and do what was evil, may be seen, e7., 
 in Erdmann’s Grundriss der Gresch. der Philosophie, i. 73. 
 Comp. Xenophon’s Memorabilia, iii. 8, 4: “He was 
 of opinion that he who knew what was truly good and 
 excellent, would act accordingly, and that every one 
 who knew what was disgraceful, would be on his guard 
 against it;” 5, ‘He also declared that justice, and 
 virtue in general, were wisdom—and that it was as im- 
 possible for those who had been acquainted with it to 
 prefer anything to it, as for those to whom it was not 
 known to practise it.” 
 
288 Notes to Lecture ILI. 
 
 (2) According to Aristotle, virtue is a matter of 
 practice and custom, Hh. Nicom. 1.1, 1-3. As a man 
 becomes a builder by building houses, and a lute-player 
 by playing the Inte, so do we become just by acting 
 justly, moderate by acting moderately, and brave by 
 practising bravery, etc. “To express it briefly, from 
 like activities arise like qualities and skill,’ 1. 1,6 and 7. 
 Most things, or rather all things, depend on what is the 
 habit from youth upwards, 1.1, 8. Virtue consists in 
 the medium between two extremes (76 pécov, 1) perdrys), 
 ii. 2, 1-7, 6, 9,13. How then are we to hit this happy 
 medium? By accustoming ourselves to do that which 
 is directly opposed to the fault to which we are most 
 prone, “as they do who would make crooked wood 
 straight,” i. 9,5. To this, law conduces beyond all 
 else, e.g. x. 9,8. For the law is more powerful than 
 paternal commands, x. 9, 11-12. At first we are at 
 liberty to choose to be either unjust, intemperate, etc., 
 “when once, however, they have become so, it is no 
 longer in their power not to be so,” ui. 5, 14, which is 
 as much as to say that a change of character, a con- 
 version, is impossible. 
 
 (?) Schiller to Goethe (17 Aug. 1797): “If we keep 
 to that special characteristic of Christianity which dis- 
 tinguished it from all the monotheistic religions, it is 
 no other than its abolition: of law, of the Kantian im- 
 perative; in the place of which Christianity insists on 
 placing free inclination. Hence, in its pure form, it is 
 the manifestation of moral loveliness, the incarnation of 
 the Holy, and in this sense the only (esthetic ?) religion.” 
 On Kant and Schiller, comp. my Lehre vom freien Willen, 
 p. 347, sg. The saying quoted from Schiller is from 
 Anmuth und Wiirde, Works, 1847, vol. u. p. 354. 
 Schiller, in opposition to Kant, required the union of 
 duty and inclination as in the well-known distich 
 against Kant : 
 
Notes to Lecture ITT. 289 
 
 * Ueber sein Herz zu siegen ist gross, ich ehre den Tapfern ; 
 Aber wer durch sein Herz seiget, er gilt mir noch mehr.”* 
 
 For this, however, the heart itself must be in a right 
 state. Schiller put in the place of Kant’s rigorous idea 
 of duty, the charms by which virtue wins the heatt, 
 Comp. Anmuth und Wiirde (Thalia, 1793, 2nd), and the 
 letters on the Aisthetic Education of Man (Horen, 1795). 
 Good remarks on the different attempts of moral philo- 
 sophy are found in Réssler’s System der Staatslehre, 1857 : 
 p. 445, sg. On Kant he says (p. 494), “ Virtue is only 
 negative, not the employment of the nature as a moral 
 organ.” On Schiller, with reference to his poem, Die 
 Ideale und das Leben: “Schiller relegates to the con- 
 templation of beauty, ze. to art, the task of educating 
 mankind.” “It is by the image of beauty that the 
 priests of truth are to arouse men from moral ruin” 
 (p. 496). On Schiller’s position with regard to the 
 Kantian morality, comp. Drobisch in the reports of the 
 Royal Saxon Society of Sciences, Leipzig, xi. 1859, pp. 
 177-194. 
 
 (*) Kant, Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen 
 Vernunft (1793-94, published by Rosencranz as the 
 10th part of Kant’s collected Works). The first treatise 
 is “On the indwelling of the evil, together with the 
 good principle; or, On the radical evil in human 
 nature.” He calls it “radical” because it corrupts the 
 root of all maxims, and is at the same time also a natu- 
 ral human proclivity not to be extirpated by human 
 powers (p. 41). It is this which constitutes the fell dis- 
 ease in our species which, as long as we do not get rid 
 of it, hinders the germ of good from developing as it 
 would otherwise do. That we may become morally 
 and not merely legally good, a revolution in our mind 
 and a reform in our character are necessary. “That is 
 
 * To conquer one’s heart is great, I honour the brave one. But he 
 who conquers by means of his heart is superior in my eyes. 
 T 
 
290 Notes to Lecture ILI. 
 
 to say, when he (man), by a single unchangeable resolu- 
 tion, reverses the supreme reason of his maxims, by 
 means of which he was a bad man (and thus puts on 
 a new man), he is, as far as principle and mind are con- 
 cerned, a being susceptible of good,” etc. (p. 54 sq.). But 
 how this moral miracle—for it is no less—is to take 
 place Kant cannot inform us. Comp. Frank, System, der 
 Christl. Gewissheit, i. 120. The same may be said of 
 Jacobi. He admits that things cannot be better “ un- 
 less a change, whereby the relation between his inclina- 
 tions and his powers is reversed, takes place in the 
 nature of man,” etc. (Waldemar, Works, v. 1820, p. 217). 
 “ He who trusts in his heart is a fool” (p.482). Reason 
 cannot think out a power of being virtuous (p. 431). 
 “My self is bad—I am a worthless man—I am a horror 
 to myself” (p. 427). But to the question, how this 
 change is to be effected, he has no reply to offer. 
 
 (5) On Friendship, comp. Socrates in Xenophon’s Me- 
 morabilia, ii. 4-6; Aristot.. £th. Nicom. viii. and 1x., eg. 
 viii. 1, 4: “Friendship seems to be the bond which 
 holds states together, hence lawgivers direct their at- 
 tention more to it than to justice.” (So also Plato, Resp. 
 i. p. 351d.) Aristotle often insists that true friend- 
 ship can exist only between the good, and that it 1s 
 based on kindred virtue, eg. viii. 8,5,4, 5: “A friend is 
 his friend’s second self.” So too 8, 2,1x. 9, 7: “ Hence 
 one might say with Theognis, that it is practice for 
 our own virtue to live with excellent men.” The 
 verse of Theognis, a poet of the sixth century B.C., 
 used also as a favourite maxim by Socrates (Xenophon, 
 Memorab. i. 2, 20; Sympos. 2, 5, etc.) 1s as follows: 
 «Associate only with the good. Never have inter- 
 course with bad men. For from the good thou wilt 
 learn that which is good, while if thou dost associate 
 with the bad, thou wilt lose even thine own reason.” 
 Curtius (formerly of Gottingen, now of Berlin) gave 
 an able lecture, published in Gelzer’s Monaibl., July 
 
Notes to Lecture ITT. 291 
 
 1863, “On the Importance attributed to Friendship in 
 Antiquity.” Scripture however declares, Ps, xlix. 7: 
 None can by any means redeem his brother, nor re- 
 concile him to God. And Pascal says: I am no one’s 
 object, nor is there anything in me that can satisfy 
 another (Pensées, ii. 198). 
 
 (°) Comp. my “ Lectures on Fundamental Truths,” pp. 
 294, sq. 422, especially the passage quoted from Rous 
 seau’s Hmile. 
 
 (7) Comp. above, note ea 
 
 (*) Aristotle puts in the first place the moral tact of 
 the reasonable and excellent man, Eth. Nicom, ii 63.15, 
 To the question, however, how this may be attained, 
 he answers by referring to habit and law, e.g. bk. x. 9, 8. 
 
 ‘The public judgment, as expressed by prevailing opinion, 
 together with law, occupy the second. The latter plays 
 a great part, especially with Cicero, eg. de Officiis, ii. 11, 
 39, 18, 64,75. Christian morality, on the other hand, 
 lays stress on the disposition and the Divine approba- 
 tion. 
 
 (°) Comp. my treatise on the Fthies of Aristotle, ii. 
 10, sq. 
 
 (1°) Comp. Fischer and Ulrici in note (*) to Lecture 
 I. Also Ebrard’s interesting lecture on Shakespeare’s 
 “ Relation to Christianity,’ 1870, in which he shows, 
 that while in the ancient world the idea of morality is 
 broken up (p. 5), and hence the tragic conflict is one 
 between single duties, and originating rather in fate than 
 sin, in Shakespeare, on the contrary, it is the conflict 
 with a man’s own guilt which brings about the catas- 
 trophe (p. 11). I commend this little work to my 
 readers. | 
 
292 Notes to Lectwre ITT. 
 
 (1) Compare the description of the high-souled man in 
 Aristotle, vi. 3,10, sg. I cite only a few passages. “It 
 is also characteristic of him that he does not rush to 
 places and opportunities which are highly esteemed, and 
 where others have already played the first part; that he 
 is in general but slowly roused, except where a great 
 honour or a great work is concerned, etc. He is candid, 
 because he looks upon men with contempt, hence he is 
 always inclined to speak the truth, except in cases when 
 he ironically reserves his real opinion, a part which he 
 may well play with respect to the multitude.” “ Nothing 
 can easily astonish him, because nothing is great in his 
 eyes,” etc. “ Even.in externals, it is generally admitted 
 that the gait of the high-souled man is slow, his voice 
 deep and emphatic, his words few. For aman to whom 
 few things are important, is not inclined to haste, and he 
 who regards nothing as great does not exert his voice. So 
 too the wise man, the Stoic ideal, is the representative of 
 indifference towards men, and his morality is nothing 
 more than cold resignation.” 
 
 (2) I may mention the well-known eulogy of love 
 in 1 Cor. xiii., which concludes with the words: “ Now 
 abideth faith, hope, love ; but the greatest of these is love.” 
 For faith will give place to sight, and hope to possession, 
 while love is that which is eternally present. In other 
 passages also of the New Testament, the Christian life is 
 described by this triad: comp. Col. 1. 4, sq. ; 1 Thess. 1.13, 
 v. 8; Titus i. 2, etc. Theology comprises these three 
 under the title of the theological, in contradistinction to 
 the philosophical or cardinal virtues (wisdom, justice, 
 valour, and prudence). In the morals of the scholastic 
 theologians (eg. even in Thomas Aquinas, the greatest 
 of medizeval schoolmen), love forms only the pinnacle, so 
 to speak, of the pyramid of the virtues, whose ascending 
 eradations are formed by the other chief virtues; while 
 with Luther, on the contrary, it is the “ fountain whence 
 they all spring, and to which they are all to return.” 
 
Notes to Lecture ITT, 293 
 
 How Luther thus attains to a view of Christian morality 
 which regards it as a whole is shown in my Lthik 
 Luthers, 1867, p. 48, sg. The passage of Luther on 
 “ Love without reward,” cited in the text, p. 38, is taken 
 from vol. xxu. p. 139 (Erlangen edit.); comp. Zthik 
 Luthers, p. 54. “This commandment then of love is 
 both a short commandment and a long commandment ; 
 it is a single commandment and many commandments ; 
 it is no commandment and all the commandments.” 
 (8, 58, sq.) 
 
 (°) Virtus est ordo amoris. Aug. de Civ. Dei, xv. 22. 
 The attempt has often been made to develop a system 
 of virtues, without any one of these attempts finding 
 general favour. Such an attempt is made in the text, 
 where the several virtues are developed from the three- 
 fold relation in which we stand to God (as our origin, 
 our present, and our object), and from the twofold 
 mental activity of the reasonable soul (willing and 
 knowing). 
 
 (*) Ancient ethics know nothing of humility. The 
 ideal both of Aristotle and the Stoa is pride (comp. note 
 11). Humilitas has the bad meaning of meanness, humi- 
 liation; comp. Cic. de Or. 1, 53, de Inv. 1, 56: and tarrewds; 
 means low, desponding, fearful, subservient, for the 
 most part in a bad sense. Inscriptural language, on the 
 contrary, Ta7recvos is never used in this bad sense, but only 
 employed to designate the noblest of virtues : the having a 
 lowly estimate of one’s self before God and man. The New 
 Testament substantive taewoppootvy, is a newly formed 
 word. Comp. Cremer, Bibl. Theol. Worterbuch, 2nd. edit. 
 1872, p. 543, sq. In the German word Demuth (humility) 
 is involved the idea of Dienen (service). Of this service 
 of humility Christ set us the example, Matt. xx. 28, and 
 hence requires this disposition in His disciples, “ He that 
 humbleth himself shall be exalted,” etc., Matt. xxiii. 12 ; 
 “The last shall be first,” etc., Matt. xx. 16; and many 
 
294 Notes to Lecture IT. 
 
 other passages. While Heine calls humility a hound’s 
 virtue (eg. Gesch. der schinen Inter. in Deutschl. 1833, 
 1. 8), Gothe says of it (14, 253): “ Itis undeniable that no 
 teaching can cleanse us from prejudices but that which 
 first lowers our pride, and what teaching is it which 
 builds upon humility as upon that which is from above?” 
 Luther too, expounding the Magnificat, says (Erl. edit. 
 45, 236): “True humility never knows that itis humble, 
 for if it did it would be proud of this excellent virtue, 
 but it fixes its heart, mind, and feelings on the mean 
 things which it constantly beholds. And so long as 
 these are present to it, it cannot see itself. For this 
 reason, if honour comes, it must come unawares, and find 
 it in a train of thought far removed from honour. 
 Hence we find in Luke i. 29 that the salutation of the 
 angel astonished Mary. Had such a salutation been 
 given to a daughter of Caiaphas, she would not have cast 
 in her mind what manner of salutation this should be, but 
 would soon have accepted it, and thought: Ah, this is 
 well!” (comp. Ackermann, Luther, No. 1, 1871, p. 144.) 
 
 (7°) John xii. 34. For heathen testimony, see Stirm, 
 p. 299; Schmidt. p. 289, sq. ; “ Lectures on Fundamental 
 Truths,” p. 413, sg. We are reminded of the words of 
 holy Scripture, when we read in the Buddhist morals 
 (Dhammapadam Palice ed. Latine vertit, etc., Von Faus- 
 boll, Hanniz, 1855, p. 40, proposition 223, sg.): “ Cle- 
 mentia iram vineat, malum bono, avarum liberalitate, 
 veritate falsiloquum. Verum loquatur, ne irascatur, 
 det parvulum rogatus: per has tres conditiones ibit in 
 deorum propinguitatem.” The similarity is however one 
 of sound only. The Buddhist morality—which is per- 
 haps the best and most excellent of the heathen world, 
 and has often been placed on a level with that of 
 Christianity (comp. testimony of this fact in the In- 
 trod. to the Work, p. 11),—starts from the fact of suffer- 
 ing, and seeks, in the way of reflection and denial, 
 to be free from earthliness (the chief matter is to 
 
Notes to Lecture ITT. 295 
 
 know: “ Dolorem, doloris ortum et doloris interitum ; 
 excellentem optopartitam viam ad doloris sedationem 
 ducentem,’ maxim191). Christian morality, on the con- 
 trary, is based upon the facts of sin and grace. The 
 former requires a struggle against nature, the latter its 
 healing and sanctification. The former is akin, not to 
 Christian, but to Stoic morality. Hence its demands 
 reach only to the external act, while the latter really 
 produces the disposition required. This distinction 
 must be borne in mind amidst any similarity of pre- 
 Christian, with Christian moral maxims. 
 
 (°) Our older dogmatists generally treated on the 
 “cross” (de cruce) ina single section. To this belongs 
 also the doctrine of Askesis. According to Romish 
 doctrine, ascetic practices are in themselves holy, meri- 
 torious and expiatory ; according to Protestant teaching, 
 asceticism is only a means in the warfare with the flesh, 
 and its practice only justified so far as it is required 
 therein. Comp. Lnther’s doctrine on this subject in my 
 Lihik Luthers, pp. 60-62. On the history of asceticism, 
 comp, Zockler, Krit. Gesch. der Askese, a contribution to 
 the history of Christian morals and culture, 1863. 
 
 (7) According to Calvin’s doctrine, the man who is 
 born again cannot fall. This is however in opposition 
 to unquestionable statements of Scripture, eg. Matt. 
 v. 13; Rom. xi. 20, sg. According to Romish doctrine, 
 there are perfect saints who have supererogatory works 
 and merits which may profit others. This is opposed 
 to the Lord’s Prayer, in which our Lord directs all His 
 disciples to pray for the forgiveness of sin. The Chris- 
 tian, as Luther says, “still bears the old Adam round 
 his neck;” comp. Luthers Hthik, p. 46. On the temp- 
 tations of the Christian, see the same work, p. 58; on 
 the warfare of the Christian, p. 59. 
 
296 Notes to Lecture IV. 
 
 NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 
 
 (*) With this section on prayer, comp. “ Lectures on 
 Fundamental Truths,” VI. note 6. On prayer in general, 
 as the culminating point of the inner life, comp. the 
 excellent section in Loher’s thoughtful work Das innere 
 Leben, 1867, p. 217, sq. On the devotional life of our 
 Lord, compare the passages Mark 1. 35; John vi. 15; 
 Matt. xiv. 23 ; Mark vi. 46; Luke vi. 12; Matt. xxvi. 36, 
 xi. 25; Mark vi. 24; John xii. 27; John xvii; Matt. 
 xxvil. 46. He teaches to pray, Matt. vi. 5, sq.; prayer 
 must be an inward transaction between the soul and God, 
 Luke xvii. 1; we should pray always, Luke xi. 13. 
 The Holy Spirit, the essential gift, Matt. viii. 8. The 
 promise that prayer, in the name of Jesus, ze. in and 
 through communion with Him, shall be heard, John xiv. 
 23, xv. 16, xvi. 23, sq. See also the example of the 
 Church, Acts 11.42; and the apostolical injunctions to 
 continuance in prayer, Col. iv. 2; 1 Thess. v. 17; to pray 
 in the Spirit, Rom. viii. 26; in faith, Jamesi. 6, sg. The 
 history of the Church displays a goodly roll of names 
 belonging to men who were mighty in prayer. Fore- 
 most among them are Bernard of Clairvaux, who 
 sometimes passed the day and night in prayer ; Luther, 
 of whose powerful prayers of some hours’ duration, in | 
 the fortress of Coburg, we are told by Veit Dietrich; 
 Spener, one of the'most faithful intercessors who ever 
 lived, and who daily brought separately before the Lord 
 in prayer, kingdoms, towns, princes, and nobles, the 
 children whom he had baptized, those whom he knew 
 to be in the right road, his friends, etc. For some he 
 prayed weekly, for some daily, for some three times 
 a day. 
 
 (7) Luther in particular has written often and ex- 
 cellently on the Lord’s Prayer. Among his many works, 
 there is a small one called “ A Simple way of Praying,” 
 which we commend to our readers, In concluding it he 
 
Notes to Lecture IV. 297 
 
 says: “How I am myself accustomed to pray the Lord’s 
 Prayer, may be briefly told; for to this very day I suck 
 it like a child, and eat and drink it ke an old man, I 
 can never have too much of it, and it is to me the best 
 of all prayers, surpassing even the Psalter, which I love 
 so well. One soon finds out that it was ordered and 
 taught by a true Master of the subject, and it is a thou- 
 sand pities that such a prayer, by such a Master, should 
 be indevoutly gabbled through, all over the world. Many 
 say perhaps a thousand pater nosters ina year, and if they 
 were to say them thus for a thousand years, they would 
 neither have prayed or tasted one jot or tittle of them. 
 In short, the pater noster—whether as the name or the 
 word of God—is the greatest martyr on earth, for every 
 one tortures and ill uses it, few comfort and gladden it 
 by use” (Erlang. edit. 23, 223). 
 
 (?) From the life of Luther I adduce two great in- 
 stances of prayer being answered. These relate to 
 Myconius and Melancthon. Luther found Melancthon 
 dangerously ill at Weimar; his sight and hearing had 
 both ceased, he no longer recognized any one, his jaw 
 had fallen, and the lineaments of death were already 
 visible in his sunken countenance. “God forbid, how 
 has the devil disfigured this organon” (instrument), ex- 
 claimed Luther, shocked at his appearance, and applied 
 himself to prayer, casting his burden on God, and so 
 bringing before Him all His promises contained in Scrip- 
 ture, that, as he himself expresses it in the narrative, 
 “He must hear me if I am to trust His promises 
 another time.’ Then, seizing Melancthon by the hand, 
 he exclaimed, “Be of good cheer, Philip, thou wilt not 
 die ;’ and with earnest words called him back to life. 
 Melancthon then began to breathe again, and gradually 
 recovered the power of speech. When he perceived 
 Luther, he prayed him, for God’s sake, to let him die, 
 saying that he was now on a happy journey, and desired 
 to depart. “ By no means,” exclaimed Luther, “thou must 
 serve our Lord still longer ;” and besought him to live, and 
 
298 Notes to Lecture IV. 
 
 to take nourishment. Thus he brought him back, as 
 he wrote home, from the gates of death, by the power of 
 prayer and encouragement. Less known perhaps is the 
 manner in which he recalled from death his friend 
 Myconius, the venerated superintendent of Gotha. 
 Myconius was in the last stage of consumption, and 
 already speechless. Luther wrote to him that he must 
 not die: “ May God not let me hear, so long as I live, 
 that you are dead, but cause you to survive me. I pray 
 this earnestly, and will have it granted, and my will will 
 be done herein. Amen.” “I was so horrified,” said . 
 Myconius afterwards, “when I read what the good man 
 had written, that it seemed to me as though I had heard 
 Christ say, ‘ Lazarus, come forth.’” And from that time 
 Myconius was, as it were, kept from the grave by the 
 power of Luther’s prayer, and did not die till after 
 Luther’s death. The orphanage at Halle is a standing 
 memorial of the prayers of Francke and of a pupil of the 
 orphanage being heard. And George Miiller has by prayer 
 effected the erection of large institutions at Bristol, 
 which are called in England “the wonder of the age.” 
 Comp. Delitzsch, System der Apologetik,1869,pp. 233-235. 
 
 (4) The craving for association in religion is expressed, 
 
 e.g., in the words of Schiller’s Mary Stuart :— 
 
 ‘* Ach, die Begliickten die das froh vereinte 
 
 Gebet versammelt in dem Haus des Herrn.””* 
 “The Bell” is the voice of the Church in daily hfe. Itis 
 true that the religious craving of the individual some- 
 times loosens itself from religious tradition and the 
 society it has formed, as at the close of the pre-Christian 
 period. In the case of Luther, too, the individual need 
 of salvation broke with the official church. Still the 
 religious life of the individual has always struggled 
 towards a religious society with which it could feel 
 itself in unison. Unbelief is a separating, but never an 
 associating force. Faith is this by an inward necessity. 
 
 * Oh happy ones whom glad united prayer assembles in the Lord’s 
 house. 
 
Notes to Lecture IV. 299 
 
 (°) The Romish idea of the Church absolutely iden- 
 tifies it with its external manifestation in that definite 
 hierarchical form which it assumed in the Romish com- 
 munion. The evangelical idea of the Church insists, in 
 opposition to this externalism, on its truly inward and 
 spiritual nature, but does not in doing this, make the 
 Church merely invisible, as the evangelical doc- 
 trine has been so frequently misinterpreted both by 
 friends and foes. Just as we ourselves are not merely 
 spirits, and as our bodies are constituent parts of our 
 nature, so also does a corporality adapted to its spiritual 
 nature form a constituent part of the Church, which 
 is composed and exists for the sake of men in the 
 body. This corporality consists chiefly in the means of 
 grace. By these is formed that external and- empirical 
 Church in which the Church proper is contained. If 
 then we would have the latter, we must adhere to the 
 former, and are bound to render it obedience, service, 
 gratitude, and affection. Comp. on this subject “ Saving 
 Truths,” Lect. VIL, The Church, p. 195. 
 
 (°) On holy Scripture, comp. the Lecttire (VIIT.) on 
 this subject in “Saving Truths,” p. 234, and the testimony 
 of Reville, W. Wenzel, Rosseuw, and St. Hilary, in 
 notes 10 and 25 to this Lecture. On the organism of 
 holy Scripture, note 16 to the same. 
 
 (‘) In the Greek Church especially preaching was 
 looked upon as a rhetorical art. The highest fame in 
 this respect was attained by Chrysostom, whose sermons 
 were not unfrequently applauded in Church by the 
 clapping of hands, and whose polemic even had the same 
 sign of approbation bestowed upon it. I quote a 
 passage to this effect from one of his sermons: “ When 
 I hear loud applause bestowed upon my discourse, a 
 human feeling—why should I deny it—overcomes me 
 for the moment, and I feel delighted. But when I go 
 home and reflect, that they from whom I have received 
 
300 Notes to Lecture IV. 
 
 these public signs of approbation have not profited by 
 my preaching, and that even if they might have derived 
 some profit from it, they have lost it in these marks of 
 approval, I sigh and weep, and feel as if I had spoken 
 in vain. I have often intended entirely to forbid this 
 public applause, and to entreat you to listen to me with 
 becoming silence and order. Let us then, from this 
 time forward, make it a rule that none of the hearers 
 shall thus interrupt the preacher. If he admires the 
 sermon, let him do so in silence, and devote all his 
 energies to the comprehension of what 1s being delivered. 
 Why is there a noise again? I am just laying down 
 a rule against it! But as for you, you cannot endure 
 to hear me quietly even for once. It is for this reason 
 that even the heathen reproach us for doing all things 
 for show and effect.” (Comp. Alt, Der kirchl. Gottes- 
 dienst, etc., 2nd ed. 1851, p. 613.) Many excellent pithy 
 and wholesome sayings of Luther concerning preaching, 
 are preserved in his Table-talk (by Forstemann, pt. 1. p. 
 366, sq.). I quote a few. He gave the following in- 
 struction to Erasmus Alber, when he went to Berlin as 
 Court chaplain to the Elector Joachim II. “Let all 
 your sermons be of the simplest kind, and have respect, 
 not to the prince, but to the simple, foolish, rude, and 
 unlearned people, for the prince is made of the same 
 stuff. If, in my preaching, I were to have respect to 
 Philip Melancthon and other learned doctors, I should 
 do no good. I preach in the simplest way to the un- 
 learned, and it pleases all. If I understand Greek and 
 Hebrew, I put all this aside, and when we scholars get 
 together, we get into such tangles, that God is astonished 
 at us” (p. 384). “Every preacher should accustom him- 
 self to preaching plainly and simply, and should resolve 
 and reflect, that he must preach to ignorant people, such 
 as peasants, who understand as little as children of 
 twelve, thirteen, and fourteen, whom one 1s accustomed 
 to address separately. Of such are the masses; let these 
 be able to understand his sermons, or to get something out 
 
Notes to Lecture IV. 301 
 
 of them to improve their‘lives. We must not preach 
 splendidly and artificially, and scrape fine words together 
 _ that people may see how learned we are—thus seeking 
 our own honour. No, this will never do!” (p. 401). 
 “A pious, God-fearing preacher cannot but feel that 
 nothing is dearer to him than Christ his Lord and 
 Saviour, and the eternal life to come, that even if he 
 should lose this present life and all it can bestow, Christ 
 would say to him, ‘Come hither, thou hast been My 
 dear and faithful servant’” (p. 412). “Whatever we 
 do in the way of preaching or suffering, let us do all for 
 the glory of God and the salvation of His elect, that 
 they may believe” (p. 413). 
 
 (*) On the fact that the Lutheran service offers just 
 the due combination of the objective and subjective, of 
 the divine and human, of the instructive and the emo- 
 tional, of the word and the transaction, of worship and 
 art, etc., compare among others Alt’s above-cited work, 
 p. 302, sg.; the description given in which is based 
 especially on Kliefoth’s able and touching work, Die 
 ursprungliche Grottesdienstordnung in den deutschen 
 Kirchen lutherischen Bekenntnisses, thre Destruktion und 
 Leformation, 1847. Kliefoth’s subsequent considerable 
 works on this subject are all based upon this, which 
 however, as a first and rapid sketch for an historical 
 picture of Lutheran worship, has a value and importance 
 of its own. The foundations of the order of Lutheran 
 service were laid by Luther, especially in the Formula 
 Misse, 1523, and the Deutsche Messe, 1526, a complete 
 purification and modification of the Romish Mass 
 according to evangelical principles. “ Divine worship, 
 as now everywhere carried on, is of good Christian de- 
 scent.” “It is not our intention to abolish the service, 
 but to bring it back to its true course.” “One thing is 
 needful, and that is that Mary should sit at the feet 
 of Christ, and daily hear His words.” “Where what is 
 preached is not the word of God, it is better that there 
 
302 Notes to Lecture IV. 
 
 should be neither reading, nor singing, nor assembling ” 
 (Luther). From that time a twofold custom was formed 
 in the Lutheran Church: the fuller more copious order 
 of Lutheran worship prevailing in the north, east, and 
 middle of Germany, and in the south-west a simpler 
 form, which takes up a medium position between the 
 Lutheran, and the plainer reformed type, in which 
 preaching so preponderates, that the other essential 
 elements of Divine worship are repressed and abbre- 
 viated, while scarcely any room is left for art. Pvetesm 
 had less feeling for what was objective and ecclesiastical, 
 than for what was subjective and edifying, and rather 
 cherished the vitality of smaller associations, than that 
 of the whole congregation of the church. Hence the 
 traditional, fixed liturgical element was made to give 
 way to the subjective element of extempore prayer and 
 momentary excitement. Finally; the age of Ld/wminism 
 had no feeling at all for the liturgical, sacramental, and 
 artistic element in worship, and suffered it to be 
 absorbed in moralizing songs and pulpit lectures. It 
 was not till after the first decades of the present century 
 that recourse was again had to the aricient treasures of - 
 the Church. In this respect good service was done by 
 the Prussian Agenda of Fred. Will. III, 1823. The 
 genuine Lutheran demand however for a greater elabo- 
 ration of the liturgical element in our worship, still 
 encounters, in consequence of the traditions of the 
 Illuministic period, much unjust suspicion, as being 
 “ catholicizing,” etc... ° . 
 
 (°) The first traces of the celebration of Sunday are found 
 in the New Testament, eg. in Acts xx. 7; 1 Cor. xvi. 2; 
 Rey. i. 10; also in ancient Catholic literature: Epistle of 
 Barnabas, chap. xv. Justin Martyr’s (+168) Second 
 Apology, chap. xxv.: “We hold our common assemblies 
 on the Sunday, for this is the first day, on which God 
 created the world, by transforming both darkness and 
 matter, and also the day on which Jesus Christ our 
 
Notes to Lecture IV. 303 
 
 Saviour rose from the dead.” Pliny, the imperial pro-- 
 consul of Asia Minor, in his well-known Epistle to 
 Trajan (Plin. Zpp. x. 97) in’ the second century, speaks 
 of the assemblies of the Christians on an appointed day 
 (stato die), by which we are unquestionably to under- 
 stand the Sunday. It is not uninteresting to read this 
 heathen account, based as it is upon the confessions 
 extorted by torture from Christian maidens, “ They are 
 accustomed to meet together on an appointed day 
 before sunrise, and by turns to sing a hymn to Christ as 
 God, and to bind themselves by an oath not to any 
 crime, but to commit neither theft, robbery, nor adultery, 
 to keep their word, and not to deny what has been 
 committed to them when they shall be called to 
 confess it. Then it is the custom to go forth, and after- 
 wards to reassemble at a meal, of which both sexes 
 participate, but which is nevertheless conducted in a 
 respectable manner.” We have a more accurate de- 
 scription of the worship of the primitive Church in 
 Justin Martyr, Apol. c. 65, 67. To set apart certain days 
 of rest was customary even among the heathen (comp. 
 Alt’s work, p. 28, sq.). If every seventh day was 
 appointed for this purpose in Israel, this corresponds 
 with the constitution of human nature, on which the 
 proportion of seven to one is founded, Consequently 
 _ the Sunday has a twofold importance, a natural and a 
 moral one. Its natural importance, moreover, consists 
 in the fact that it is both an individual and a social 
 necessity. A comprehensive work on the institution of 
 Sunday has been written by Irmischer, under the title of 
 Staats- und Kirchenordnungen tiber die Christliche Sonn. 
 tagsfeier, Erlangen, 1839. Many works on the Sunday, 
 specially suggested by the offer of a prize for an essay 
 on the subject in England in 1847, have recently 
 appeared, e.g. Die Christliche Sonntagsfeier, by Oschwald, 
 Leipz. 1850; Die Sonntagsfeier, by Liebetrut, Hamb., 
 1851; Ueber den Tag des Herrn, by Hengstenberg, 
 Berlin, 1852; Ueber Hetertagsheiligung, by Wilhelmi, 
 
304 Notes to Lecture IV. 
 
 Halle, 1853. Even a Proudhon has sung the praises of 
 Sunday, in a work entitled The Celebration of Sunday, 
 considered with respect to the Public Health, etc., and 
 frequently translated into German. Various treatises 
 have sought, especially by an appeal to facts, to render 
 evident the blessing of the Sunday. Lg. Due Perle der 
 Tage, a prize essay by a eardener’s daughter, translated 
 from the English by Wentz, Stettin, 1850, Hamb. 1858 ; 
 Die Fackel der Zeit, German, Marriot, Basle ; Das Lncht 
 der Woche, German, by Kayser. Compare Palmer in 
 Herzog’s Theol. Real-Encycl. xiv. 535, sq. More espe- 
 cially would I mention and recommend to general read- 
 ing and distribution the excellent lecture of Dr. 
 Uhlhorn, Ueber die Sonntagsfrage im ihrer socvalen 
 Bedentung,1870,delivered at the second General Lutheran 
 Conference, held at Leipzig, 1870. I add an interesting 
 passage from W. von Humboldt’s Briefe an eine Freun- 
 din, 5th edit. p. 282: “I am quite of your opinion, 
 that the appointment of certain days of rest, even 
 if utterly unconnected with religious celebration, 1s a 
 very delightful and really refreshing idea to every one 
 who has a philanthropic feeling towards all classes of 
 society. There is nothing so selfish and heartless, as 
 for the rich and the upper classes to look with dis- 
 pleasure, or at least with a certain amount of contemp- 
 tuous dislike, upon Sundays and holydays. Even the 
 choice of the seventh day is certainly the wisest that 
 could have been made. Arbitrary as it may seem, and 
 to a certain extent be so in reality, to lengthen or shorten 
 labour by a day, I am convinced that the six days is 
 just the right measure, and best adapted to men, with 
 respect both to their physical powers and their continu- 
 ance in uniform occupation. . There is also something 
 humane in the provision, that those animals who assist 
 man in his labour should share in his rest. _ It would be 
 as foolish as inhuman to lengthen beyond this proportion 
 the period of recurring rest. I once saw in my own 
 experience an example of this. Being for some years in 
 
Notes to Lecture IV. 305 
 
 Paris during the period of the Revolution, I was there 
 when this institution was subordinated to the dry and 
 wooden Decimal system. The tenth day was that which 
 we were to call a Sunday, and all ordinary occupations 
 were to be carried on for nine days. When it was 
 found that this was evidently far too long, several kept 
 the Sunday as well, so far as the laws would allow, and 
 then there was tdo much leisure. Thus we ever oscillate 
 between two extremes, when we leave the regular and 
 appointed medium. 
 
 “Tf then the case is as above stated with respect 
 to merely reasonable and secular considerations, how 
 differently does the matter appear in its religious aspect, 
 when both the idea and the enjoyment of the holyday 
 become a source of spiritual joy and true consolation. 
 The great holydays are moreover combined with such 
 remarkable historical events, that they receive from them 
 a special consecration. It is certainly the most appro- 
 priate way of keeping them to read in the Bible itself, 
 and in all the four evangelists, the narratives of the 
 events to which they refer,” ete. 
 
 (7°) On the relation of synods to Church doctrine, I 
 may be allowed to refer to my small work on this subject, 
 “Die Synoden und die Kirchenlehre. Den Synoden der 
 evang luth. Kirche gewidmet, Leipz. 1871, in which are 
 discussed the various subjects of synodal constitution, 
 the inevitability and danger of synods, the importance 
 of Church doctrine, its foundation in the nature of the 
 Church, the relation of Church doctrine to ecclesiastical 
 legislation, the consequences of synodal government, and 
 finally, the question of Church progress. The importance 
 which these subjects have acquired may perhaps render 
 the discussions of this brochure acceptable to many. 
 
 (1) The Rhenish-Westphalian Church ordinances re- 
 quire, as a condition of election to the presbyterate, that 
 the church members in question should be of “ blameless 
 
 U 
 
306 Notes to Lecture IV. 
 
 conversation,” should have a good report in the church, 
 and should have given proot of their affection for the 
 Evangelical Church, especially by having brought up 
 their children in the evangelical creed, and “should have 
 diligently participated in public worship and in the Holy 
 Communion, or (add. 1) have shown their disposition 
 towards the church by participation in public worship 
 and the Lord’s Supper.” Among their duties is (§ 15) 
 “that of giving information to the preacher concerning 
 any who, by absenting themselves from public worship, 
 or by any transgression, become causes of offence to 
 members of the church,” &c. The (Reformed) Confedera- 
 tion of Lower Saxony also requires (in its church orders, 
 ; 60) of the president of the congregation, that he 
 should “by diligent attendance at church and partici- 
 pation of the Sacrament of the table, prove himself a 
 true and lively member of the church.” Compare 
 Dove, Sammlung der wichtrgsten neuen Kirchenord- 
 nungen, ete., 1865. 
 
 (2) I may here be allowed to repeat explanations 
 which have been already delivered elsewhere (in a re- 
 port delivered to the Saxon Country Synod, 1871): 
 “The very fact, that every existing church is more or 
 less based upon a confession, or something simular, if not 
 a proof, is at least a token, that a confession is not 
 an incidental matter, but required by the very nature of 
 an ecclesiastical commonwealth, and a necessity induced 
 by historical circumstances. 1. In considering, first, the 
 necessity of a confession, we may designate this as a 
 threefold, ¢.c. a psychological, a historical, and an eccle- 
 siastical necessity. The Christian Church is based on 
 faith in Jesus Christ, produced by the operation of the 
 Holy Spirit. In this faith she has within herself that 
 saving truth which is deposited in holy Scripture, whose 
 subject-matter is Jesus Christ. It is a psychological 
 necessity of this faith to express itself in a correspond- 
 ing confession of faith. Christ Himself imparted to 
 
Notes to Lecture IV. 307 
 
 His disciples, in the baptismal confession of the Triune 
 God (Matt. xxviii. 18, 19), the fundamental confession 
 of the Christian Church, as the most comprehensive 
 expression of its faith, and the germ of all farther 
 development. From this has been developed. the 
 whole Church confession of the subsequent centuries ; 
 and this development has been in proportion as errors © 
 have appeared, which, obscuring the saving truth 
 that constitutes the matter of faith, needed conse- 
 quently to be repelled by their opposite truths. Thus, 
 to the psychological was added that historical necessity 
 which gives to a confession its definite historical expres- 
 sion. It was in this way that the confessions of the 
 ancient Church and the confessions of our own Church 
 arose, as those developments of the original creed of the 
 Christian Church and those statements of Christian 
 faith which events had rendered necessary. In the 
 general Christian confession, the Christian Church gathers 
 itself together, and withdraws from the non-Christian 
 world; in the special confession, each separate church 
 gathers itself together, and withdraws from the other 
 separate churches. Thus each church has in its con- 
 fession its internal bond of union and its external 
 boundary ; and both are necessary for the expression 
 and manifestation of its inward peculiarity and its dis- 
 tinction from other churches. Hence a definite confes- 
 sion, besides being a psychological and historical, is also 
 an ecclesiastical necessity to the individual churches, 
 2. Upon the necessity is based the authority of a con- 
 fession. A confession claims internal authority because, 
 and in proportion as, it is a confession of the truth pro- 
 claimed in the word of God, and as this truth forms its 
 matter. It is the conviction of our Church that her 
 confession is the most adequate expression of that 
 general Christian and evangelical truth which we are 
 indebted to Luther for having again brought to light in 
 its full purity. With this her conviction our Church 
 stands or falls. For in proportion as she should lose 
 
308 Notes to Lecture IV. 
 
 confidence in the truth which she teaches in her con- 
 fession, would she lose confidence in herself. On the 
 ground of this conviction, therefore, our Church has im- 
 parted to her confession an external authority also, as 
 far as the members of her own communion are con- 
 cerned, And this, in the first place, to the Confession 
 of Augsburg, as the fundamental confession of our 
 Church; and also to those other confessional writings 
 connected with it, in which its doctrines are repeated 
 and more precisely defined, in consequence of errors 
 which have since arisen. In these confessional writings 
 then and their doctrine, are expressed our Church’s per- 
 ception of Christian truth and her peculiar nature. It 
 is this that constitutes their ecclesiastical authority. 
 3. Upon this depends the necessity and the right of 
 requiring that an engagement to the confession should be 
 entered into. For they who would be teachers in a 
 particular church, and be invested with its ministry, 
 must be not merely in external, but also in internal 
 fellowship with the same, and must therefore agree in 
 its peculiar nature, and share that perception of truth 
 which the church expresses in its confessional writings 
 and their doctrine, and desires to have taught by those 
 who exercise within its pale the office of teachers. The 
 declaration of such agreement is an engagement, whether 
 this is made in’ the form of an oath or a promise. 
 Hence our Church, after having stated her doctrines in 
 the Confession of Augsburg, bound her teachers to this 
 Confession. It was Luther himself who, in conjunction 
 with Jonas and Bugenhagen, introduced in 1533 the 
 engagement to the Confession of Augsburg ( persevera- 
 turum esse in consensu doctrine comprehensze in Conf. 
 Aug.), and the statutes of the Theological Faculty of 
 Wittenberg of 1533, drawn up by Melancthon, also 
 contain an engagement to this Confession (puram evan- 
 gelii doctrinam consentaneam confessioni quam, 1530 ex- 
 hibuimus). 4. From what has been said, the meaning 
 of this engagement is obvious. If the confession is the 
 
Notes to Lecture IV. 309 
 
 expression of that perception of Divine truth peculiar 
 to the church in question, the engagement naturally 
 concerns this confession, and this only. The oldest 
 form of engagement in our Church, dating from the very 
 era of the Reformation, speaks of an “ agreement in doc- 
 trine as comprised in the Confession of Augsburg ” (con- 
 sensus doctrine, etc.). The engagement, then, does not 
 concern each and every particular in the confessional 
 writings, is not entered into with respect to each sepa- 
 rate argument, each theological detail, each peculiarity 
 of diction, nor to such private opinions of Luther and 
 Melancthon as may be therein expressed. No en- 
 lightened theologian of our Church has ever under- 
 stood, and none even of the strictest theologians of our 
 own days understand, the engagement in the extent here 
 denied, but regard it as applying to doctrine only, ze. 
 to that perception of Christian truth laid down, both 
 negatively and positively, for our Church above others, 
 and specially stated in the various confessional writings 
 and in the connection of its several elements. It is true 
 that the engagement is not fulfilled when applied only 
 to the “spirit” of the Confession, which each might 
 conceive according to his own pleasure, for the spirit of 
 our Church is expressed in that very doctrine laid down 
 in the Confession. Nor when restricted. only to “the 
 letter,’ but when regard is had to the matter of the Con- 
 fession. Neither must the engagement be limited to 
 “general principles” or “fundamental doctrines,’—for it 
 is always uncertain and optional what we are to under- 
 stand by these,—but to the doctrine of our Church as here 
 clearly and definitely stated. 
 
 I have discussed the demand for unity of doctrine 
 connected with this subject, and the consequences re- 
 sulting from this demand, with respect to variety and 
 arbitrary diversity of doctrine, in a lecture “On the Im- 
 portance of Unity of Doctrine to the Lutheran Church 
 at the present time,” delivered at the second General 
 Lutheran Conference (Leipz. 1870). 
 
310 Notes to Lecture IV. 
 
 (8) Even a Rothe acknowledges the affinity between 
 Lutheranism and the German mind. Comp. Stelle 
 Stunden (Wittenb. 1872), p. 258: “The Lutheran 
 Reformation, with all its weaknesses, has the great 
 strength of being specially German (Luther was a 
 thorough and genuine German). Hence the Protestant 
 world of Germany has still an instinctive leaning to 
 Lutheranism.” “There is no son of our nation of whom 
 we have more right to be proud, and no teacher of the 
 Church since the days of the apostles for whom we have 
 more reason to thank God, than Luther. The best 
 aspects of the German character were comprised in him, 
 and in him attained their fullest and richest develop- 
 ment. Depth of feeling and a childlike mind, holy 
 seriousness and playful cheerfulness, an eye which 
 penetrated to the depths of eternity, yet at the same 
 time joyfully tarried with every flower of the field, a 
 mind which could be agitated by violent indignation, 
 and yet could pour itself forth in sacred hymn and 
 joyful song, whatever of great and noble our German 
 nature has received of God’s grace, all was combined in 
 him. If any one individual is fitted to be a symbol of 
 the mental unity of our nation it is this son ofa Thurin- 
 gian miner” (Allg. Hv. Luth. Kirchenzeitung, 1869, No. 1). 
 A large number of like testimonies is to be foundin the 
 introduction to the commendable work, Martin Luther 
 als deutscher Klassiker in einer Auswahl seiner klevneren 
 Schriften, Frankfort, 1871. Thomasius, in his able theo- 
 ~ Jogical work: Das Bekenntniss der luth. Kirche in der 
 Konsequenz seines Prinzips, 1848, shows that the testi- 
 mony of Luther and the confession of the Lutheran 
 Church is the genuine scriptural form of saving truth. 
 
Notes to Lecture V. ATE 
 
 NOTES TO LECTURE V. 
 
 (1) To perceive the importance of married and family 
 life to the entire moral condition of a people, we need 
 only think of France and the decreasing fruitfulness of 
 its marriages. Comp. Roscher, System der Volkswirth- 
 schaft, vol. i. 9th edit., 1871, p. 553: indeed the whole 
 section, in which he treats of matrimonial and family 
 matters in general, is in the highest degree instructive, 
 as bringing before us the great importance of the subject. 
 Trendelenburg, Naturrecht, p. 232, sq., carries out the 
 fact, that marriage is the foundation of all the moral 
 order of natural life. I specially recommend, however, 
 Riehl’s Familie, reprinted for the sixth time in 1862, 
 and forming the 3rd vol. of his Natwrgeschichte des Volks 
 —a book worthy to be repeatedly read. Political revolu- 
 tionists are generally destroyers also of domestic life, 
 because this forms the foundation of civil society. This _ 
 applies to the socialism of a Proudhon and a Fournier 
 (comp. Roscher, i. 167). “It is because marriage 1s 
 the precious foundation and corner-stone of all society, 
 that the misanthropic spirit of our age shows itself most 
 emphatically in the laws concerning marriage. “ Fecunda 
 culpz secura nuptias primum inquinavere et genus et 
 domos; Hoc fonte derivate clades in patriam populumque 
 fluxit,” Horat. Od. iii. 6, as we are reminded by Hamann, 
 Versuch einer Sibylle tiber die Ehe, 1775 (Schr. iv. p. 
 227). It is characteristic that the determining powers 
 of lite, the virtues and vices, are usually represented as 
 women. In holy Scripture the figures by which the 
 kingdom of God is represented are for the most part 
 taken from domestic life. God is “the true Father of 
 whatever can be called a family in heaven or earth” 
 (Eph. iii. 16).. “As a father pitieth his children, so the 
 Lord pitieth them that fear Him” (Ps. ciii. 13). He will 
 comfort us “ as one whom his mother comforteth” (Isa. 
 
S12 Notes to Lecture V. 
 
 Ixvi. 12). “Can a woman forget her sucking child,” ete. 
 (Isa. xix. 15). And Paul Gerhardt says :— 
 **Mit Mutterhanden leitet Er 
 Die seinen stetig hin und her.”* 
 
 The highest relation between God and man, between 
 God and the Church, is represented under the image of © 
 marriage (e.g. Eph. v. 23). The Church is the bride (e.g. 
 Rev. xxi. 9). 
 
 (7) On women in the ancient world, comp. Dollinger, 
 Heidenthum und Judenthum, 1857, p. 680, sq. (thre Stel- 
 lung bet den Gireechen), p. 698, sq. (bec den Rimern). 
 Grecian history and literature are remarkably barren of 
 noble female characters, and we very seldom receive a 
 favourable impression of the influence of the mothers 
 and wives upon the acts and characters of their sons 
 and husbands. ‘“ Not voluntarily and naturally, but con- 
 strained by law, do we accommodate ourselves to mar- 
 riage and the begetting of children,’ says Plato, speaking 
 quite generally (Sympos. p. 192). Spartan legislature 
 regarded marriage as an institution for the production 
 of healthy and robust citizens, and laid down laws con- 
 cerning it entirely from this point of view. The law- 
 giver desired, as Plutarch says, not that citizens should 
 jealously claim the exclusive possession of their wives, 
 but that they should, on the contrary, be willing to 
 share them with others, etc. “Even in the time of 
 Socrates, the Spartan women were notorious throughout 
 all Greece for their profligacy.’ In Athens it was the 
 men. “We have,” says Demosthenes of the Athenian, 
 “prostitutes for pleasure, concubines for the daily care 
 of the body, and wives for the production of legitimate 
 children and the trustworthy guardianship of the house.” 
 If retirement, constraint, ignorance, and legal respect 
 were the position of wives; freedom, education, the ad- 
 miration of men, and, at last, contempt were the posi- 
 
 * He even leads His own hither and thither with the hands of a 
 mother. 
 
Notes to Lecture V. 313 
 
 tion of prostitutes. In Rome, where things had for- 
 merly been in a better state, the shocking disorders in 
 the relation of the sexes, and the moral degradation 
 of women, especially in the timés of the Emperors, are 
 universally known. And equally so is the degraded 
 position still filled by women in the East. Comp. also 
 EK. Schmidt (die burgerliche Gesellschaft in der altrim. 
 Welt, etc., trans. 1857), p. 20, sq., on the condition of 
 married women, where the passages on the point in 
 question are cited from the ancients; and p. 168, sq., on 
 the dignity imparted to women and marriage by Chris- 
 tianity. An interesting discussion of this subject is 
 found also in the Allg. Hv. Luth. Kirchenzeitung, 1872, 
 “Thoughts on the calling and position of the Christian 
 Woman.” Many lectures and articles on the position and 
 vocation of Christian women have recently appeared. 
 I name among others my lecture “On the Service of 
 Women in the Kingdom of God,” 1868; Wichern, der 
 Dienst der Frauen in der Kirche, 1857; Frank (of Er- 
 langen), das Christenthum und die Frauen, 1868; Ad. 
 Monod, La Femme. 
 
 (*) For what Luther says of the Divine institution of 
 marriage and the universal duty of marriage, see my thik 
 Luthers, pp. 96-100. With exceeding beauty and feeling 
 does he portray the charms of married life, and sound the 
 praise of conjugal love and fidelity. “The highest gift and 
 favour of God is a pious, kind, godly and domestic wife, 
 with whom thou mayest live peaceably, and to whom 
 thou mayest entrust all thy possessions, yea, thy body and 
 thy life,” ete. (7ischreden, Erl. edit. 61, 169). Comp. in 
 general the whole section on marriage, etc., in the 7%sch- 
 reden (61, 164-304). Trendelenburg (Naturrecht, p. 233, 
 sq.) well carries out the subject, that, by reason of the dis- 
 tinction of the sexes, the two opposites mutually need each 
 other for the formation of acommonand harmonious whole. 
 
 (*) Harless (Christliche Lthik, 6th edit. 1864, p. 512. 
 
314 Notes to Lecture V. 
 
 Christian conduct will, in conformity with nature, sanc- 
 tion a desire for marriage. Where external circum- 
 stances do not show it to be the will of God that this 
 desire should be suppressed, it is natural and God- 
 ordained, while abstinence from marriage is, on the con- 
 trary, arbitrary and wilful. 1 Cor, vil. 1s appealed to, 
 on the Romish side, in favour of the superior sanctity of 
 celibacy. But St. Paul is here speaking only of con- 
 siderations which make it advisable to abstain from 
 marriage, not of such as show this abstention to be the 
 absolute will of God to individuals. Comp. also Hof- 
 mann, Schrifibeweis, ii. 2; 2nd edit. 1860, p. 416,sq. “It 
 is certain that the apostle recommends celibacy as de- 
 cidedly as could be done without derogating from the 
 dignity of matrimony. He does not, however, recommend 
 it as a state holier in itself, but as one which makes a 
 Christian life easier, and undivided activity for the 
 kingdom of God possible.” Equally impossible is it to 
 understand what Christ says, Matt. xix. 12, concerning 
 those that have made themselves eunuchs for the king- 
 dom of God’s sake, and those who alone are capable of ~ 
 receiving the saying concerning the indissolubility of 
 marriage, as an unconditional requirement of celibacy. 
 “He who makes himself an eunuch foregoes entirely the 
 exercise of his manly powers, and when he does this for 
 the kingdom of God’s sake, he does it, because he is 
 more concerned to enter into, and to serve that kingdom 
 than to taste the joys of married life. As then the 
 Lord Jesus, in the narrative which (in Matt. and Mark) 
 immediately follows, requires of the rich young ruler 
 that he should give all that he had to the poor for the 
 kingdom of God’s sake, without saying that no one can 
 enter into the kingdom of God without first giving all 
 his property to the poor, so is it with the renunciation 
 of marriage. He who does not feel—would the Lord 
 say—that he would willingly make such a sacrifice, 
 when the kingdom of God requires it, cannot enter into 
 heaven. And such an one is also incapable of embrac- 
 
Notes to Lecture V. 31é 
 
 ing such a view of marriage, and of leading such a mar- 
 ried life, as the Lord, upon scriptural grounds, insists on. 
 For he would certainly find the indissolubility of mar- 
 riage an insufferable restraint, because the bent of 
 his life is not towards God, but towards the enjoyment 
 of this world” (Hofmann, Schriftbewets, p. 411, sq.). The 
 Romish view of the sanctity of celibacy is based upon 
 a view of marriage prevalent among the Romish clergy, 
 which regards it as a merely sensual intercourse—-a view 
 not infrequently expressed in the works of even esteemed 
 Romish theologians (comp. eg. the coarse manner in 
 which Alban Stolz expresses himself in Kalender «fir 
 Zeit und Hwigkeit, 1864, p. 38), and which is only natu- 
 ral, considering the instructions concerning the relations 
 of married life given to young priests with respect to 
 the confessional. We need only refer to the much 
 talked of Latin Compendium of morality by Gury, whose 
 German translator did not venture to translate the sec- 
 tion on the subject in question. Comp. on this Com- 
 pendium, Nos. 50 and 51 of the Allg. Hvang. Luth. Kir- 
 chenzeitung. This view is, on the other hand, connected 
 with the doctrine so long held by the Church of Rome, 
 that there is above and beyond ordinary Christian 
 morality—that fulfilling of the commandments required 
 of all Christians—an observance of the so-called “ evan- 
 gelical counsels,” which cannot be enjoined, but only 
 advised to those who follow after a higher perfection, 
 and which consists especially in the fulfilment of the 
 three monkish vows of poverty, chastity, i.e. celibacy, 
 and obedience, as opposed to the lust of the eyes (ze. 
 covetousness), the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life, 
 which form, according to 1 John ii. 16, the essence of 
 worldliness. Upon this doctrine of a twofold morality 
 is based the whole stability of the Romish system. ‘The 
 evangelical counter-doctrine is, that the highest moral 
 ideal is to be set before all who would be really Chris- 
 tians. That which is not for all cannot be the moral 
 ideal, for it is characteristic of Christianity, in opposi- 
 
316 Notes to Lecture V. 
 
 tion to the aristocratic character of ancient morality and 
 philosophy, to have made morality as well as truth the 
 common possession of all. The morality required of all 
 Christians is love to God, and even the most perfect can 
 perform nothing higher than the works of this love. On 
 what Luther taught concerning and against this Romish 
 morality, comp. Hihik Luthers, pp. 68-75. 
 
 (°) On Protestant deaconesses, comp. Lehmann, dze 
 Werke der Lrebe, etc., p. 151, s¢., and p. 226, sq. The Evan- 
 eelical Church at present possesses 42 deaconess houses, 
 about 2000 deaconesses,and almost 600 deaconess stations. 
 During the three last years the number of sisters has 
 been increased by about 500, and that of stations by 
 about 150. The need of theni is, however, still greater. 
 The community of Protestant deaconesses should ever 
 bear in mind, that it is based upon an entirely different 
 foundation from the Romish institution of Sisters of 
 Mercy, and should therefore feel no inclination to imitate 
 the Romish fashion of regarding the consecration of deacon- 
 esses to their calling, as a “betrothal” to Jesus Christ, but 
 remember that this service is simply a fulfilment of the 
 general duty of Christians in this special form of action, 
 
 (°) It is no marvel that socialists should inculcate the 
 unrestrained intercourse of the sexes, when even poetry 
 devotes itself to the glorification of sin. Comp. Count 
 Strachwitz’ “Solemn Protest,’ against conjugal love as 
 Philistinism : 
 
 ‘Ich aber sag’ euch eher fesseln, 
 Konnt ihr im Sturz das Wasserfall, 
 Eh’ ihr’s vermégt mich einzufesseln 
 In euren engen Ginsestall. 
 ‘Ich aber sag’ euch eher wandeln, 
 ’  Konnt ihr zur Gans den Falken um, 
 Eh’ ihr’s vermégt mir einzuhandeln 
 Ew’r hauslicher Elysium.’”* 
 * I tell you, you may sooner chain the waterfall in its course than 
 chain me into your narrow goose’s nest. 
 
 I tell you, you may sooner change the falcon into a goose than get me 
 to bargain for your domestic Elysium. 
 
Notes to Lecture V. ole 
 
 And how many modern poets have adored and extolled 
 an unbridled Cypria! (Comp. Disselhof in his Vor- 
 trage fir das gebildete Publikum, 3rd collection, 1864, 
 p. 112). 
 
 (‘) Luther: “Itisa Christian and a godly thing to love 
 a maiden whom you may honourably take to wife ; for it 
 is a natural inclination which men and women have for 
 each other. And God will not have us despise this 
 inclination, as though it were in itself dishonourable. It 
 is a work of God, which He has Himself wrought in the 
 nature of man, which not only must not be despised and 
 defamed, but must also be held in honour. For God is 
 to be honoured in all His works, both great and small. 
 There is no man so spiritual as not to feel such innate 
 natural inclination and love” (7%schreden, El. ed. 61, 185). 
 
 (§) Aristotle derives épay (to love), according to the 
 ' aa ; 
 Greek saying, from opay (to see) (comp. Lth. Nicom. ix. 
 5, 3, 12, 1), 2.¢., he makes the love of man and woman 
 depend, in accordance with ancient views in general, 
 upon the gratification of sense. 
 
 (?) On the spurious poetry of love, comp. note 6. It is 
 true of genuine love, as is expressed in Cant. viii. 6, that 
 “ Love is strong as death, and jealousy is cruel as the 
 grave ; the coals thereof are coals of fire, which hath a 
 most vehement flame. Many waters cannot quench love, 
 neither can the floods drown it: ifa man would give all 
 the substance of his house for love, it would utterly be 
 contemned.” Luther: “There is on earth no pleasanter 
 thing than the love of woman to him who may partake 
 of it” (Z%schreden, Erl. ed. 61, 212). 
 
 ("°) Trendelenbure, Vaturrecht, p. 234: “Marriage is 
 necessarily monogamy, because the entire personality 
 must be surrendered to it, and this very fact excludes 
 all other relations of a like kind. In polygamy the 
 
Dao Notes to Lecture V. 
 
 fidelity and confidence of man and wife do not exist. 
 The woman is a slave, and becomes a mistress. Jealousy 
 prevails among the wives, and hostility among the half- 
 brothers and sisters, the children of different women. 
 Hence, in the history of nations in a state of develop- 
 ment, monogamy is a step in advance, a triumph of the 
 spirit of order over individual, and therefore destructive 
 desire.” P. 236, sg., he furnishes valuable contributions to 
 the history of the views entertained of marriage., Plato, 
 in his Symposium, views love ideally “as the desire for 
 the production of the beautiful, in a beautiful body or a 
 beautiful soul.” “Thus does Plato grasp the sublime and 
 spiritual element in the natural instinct. This is indeed 
 one side, but it is as it were taken out of its natural soil, 
 for Plato is unable either to recognize this thought in 
 marriage, or to keep it free from a Greek unnaturalness 
 which it is impossible and immoral to idealize. Plato’s 
 law of marriage is a misconception and a misuse of 
 woman.” Aristotle, directing his attention to the 
 foundation of the actual, discovered the ethic truth, 
 concealed from the idealistic Plato, of the intrinsic 
 destination of the opposites of male and female human 
 nature to form a common, mutually sufficing life. “ Nor 
 is an element of tenderness wanting when the philoso- 
 pher regards the wife as one supplicating assistance, and 
 taken from her own home into another family,asone whom 
 no injustice must approach, and especially the injustice of 
 secondary extramarital associations. Among the Stoics, on 
 the contrary, the true feeling for marriage was again lost 
 in the superficial view entertained of it. Kant’s cautious 
 definition, that “marriage is the union of two persons of 
 opposite sex for thelife-long mutual possession ofthe quali- 
 ties of their respective sexes,” is based upon evasions, and 
 only indirectly excludes polygamy. The definition of the 
 Roman law: “ Nuptie sunt conjunctio maris et feemine 
 consortium omnis vitee, divini et humani juris communi- 
 catio,” is true and just if only omnis vite is taken in the 
 full extent of its meaning. It was Christianity “which 
 
Notes to Lecture V. 319 
 
 filled and consecrated this relation of life with its deepest 
 meaning.” “The deeper comprehension of the law of 
 marriage is established by Christianity.” “Where the 
 fidelity of monogamy is the custom, it reacts upon fidelity 
 and constancy in general, and it is therefore a charac- 
 teristic fact, that revolutionary efforts are generally ever 
 directed against this element of moral stability.” “ Bed 
 and board, commercium et connubium, have ever been 
 regarded as mutually connected notions; hence all con- 
 sistent socialists, eg. Proudhon and F ournier, insist as 
 strongly on community of wives as community of goods 
 (comp. Roscher, i. 167). In most legendary history, the 
 institutions of marriage and property are ascribed to 
 the same individual. On community of wives and its 
 evil results among races at a low stage of civilization, 
 e.g. in North America, the South Sea Islands, etc., comp. 
 Roscher, i. 541, sg. Increase of population is as incompa- 
 tible with community of wives, as increase of wealth is 
 with community of goods. They who have to do with 
 newly-born children, will not doubt how easily their feeble 
 spark of life will be extinguished without family care.” 
 “The Creator has undoubtedly prescribed monogamy, 
 hence it is only in monogamous countries, that we can 
 expect domestic life, pleasant social intercourse and free 
 citizenship” (Roscher, i. 540). “The respect for woman 
 essential to true love, seems quite incompatible with poly- 
 gamy ; the wives take the place of mistresses, and the idea 
 of fidelity is almost foreign to the latter. The husband, 
 too, naturally cannot trust in his wives, hence their seclu- 
 sion in the harem. He too who is a tyrant in his family 
 is but too generally a slave to his superiors. And what 
 is to be said of the fraternal feeling between the children 
 of different mothers 2” (p. 543). 
 
 (11) The increase of unchastity has of late been much 
 talked of. This has been specially occasioned by the 
 many public discussions which the moral condition of 
 Berlin has given rise to, and the question of prosti- 
 
320 Notes to Lecture V. 
 
 tution and the efforts made against it are the order of the 
 day. Comp. Lehmann, die Werke der Liebe, p. 53, sq. 
 
 (2) The repeated juxtaposition in Aristotle of the desire 
 for food and drink and the desire for women (iu. 11, 1), or of 
 the enjoyment of food and the enjoyment of love (vii. 4, 
 2), plainly shows his opinion on the subject. I cite the 
 latter passage: “Of the things which occasion appetite, 
 some are necessary (constraining), others such as depend 
 indeed on our choice but admit of excess. I call bodily 
 matters necessary, and understand thereby, eating, drink- 
 ing, the craving for the enjoyment of love, and such like 
 bodily things, etc. The polemic of St. Paul (1 Cor. vi. 
 13) shows, that even in Christian churches on Greek 
 soil, especially such a soil as Corinth, the view was still 
 cherished which placed eating and the intercourse of the 
 sexes on a level, and consequently regarded the latter as 
 equally indifferent with the former in a moral point of 
 view. 
 
 (3) Tacitus, Germania, 18, sq. : “Severa matrimonia— 
 singulis uxoribus contenti sunt—septe pudicitia—pau- 
 cissima adulteria—publicate pudicitize nulla venia— 
 nemo vitia videt—numerum liberorum finire flagitium 
 habetur—sua quemque mater uberibus alit—sera inve- 
 num venus eoque inexhausta pubertas—quanto plus pro- 
 pinquorum tanto gratiosior senectus.” It was quite 
 otherwise, ¢.g., with the Celts. With this chastity of the 
 Germans was connected the deep seriousness and hearti- 
 ness of their ancient niarriage ceremony (Tac. Germ. 18). 
 Such too was the state of things in England throughout 
 the Middle Ages. Comp. Roscher,i. 541. Though Tacitus 
 may perhaps have coloured his picture too highly, be- 
 cause of the aim he had in view, it is still, after this is 
 allowed for, much to the credit of our ancestors. 
 
 (4) On this discontent of the natural man, who is 
 always longing for something else than what God has 
 allotted to him, Luther repeatedly expresses himself in 
 
Notes to Lecture V. OAL 
 
 words worthy of consideration, and hence he repeatedly 
 insists that marriage should be undertaken with prayer, 
 and that prayer should be persevered in afterwards. 
 Comp. his marriage sermons, Works, vol. xviii p. 269, sq. 
 
 (°) On the education of girls, comp. Wolcken, die 
 Bestimmung und Erziehung des Weibes, 1865; Kiihn, die 
 Erziehung der Miidchen, a lecture; and especially K, 
 von Raumer, die Erziehung der Madchen, 2nd edit. 1857. 
 
 (7°) The question of evil marriage is now the order 
 of the day. It is self-evident that a marriage is legally 
 such, even without any Church rite. But the question 
 is, first: what position the Church should occupy towards 
 those who despise her blessing; and, secondly: what 
 judgment we must form on the subject in the interest of 
 the people, and of general moral opinion and practice, 
 With respect to the first point I will quote what Luther 
 says (6, 460): “It is therefore a very right and Chris- 
 tian rule, that a blessing should be bestowed upon the 
 newly-married pair in presence of the Church of God, 
 and united intercession made for them, that they may 
 enter upon the marriage: state in God’s name, and 
 prosper in it. If such a blessing were to be bought, no 
 money should be grudged to purchase it. The Church 
 however gives it without money, and yet some are go 
 boorish, that they never seek it, nay, would rather do 
 without it. Such may be let to go their own way. But 
 they who are Christians, will enter upon the state of 
 marriage the more comfortably because of this prayer 
 and blessing.” The Church in itself can have nothing 
 to object in theory, if the civil commonwealth con- 
 tents itself with the civil transaction, and leaves the 
 members of the Church to obtain the Church’s blessing 
 if they wish. In practice, however, it cannot be con. 
 cealed, that, judging from actual results, this course of 
 action furnishes no slight temptation to omit the 
 practice of the Church rite, if only on account of the 
 
 x 
 
322 Notes to Lecture V. 
 
 double: trouble and expense connected with it. And 
 this, as every judicious friend of the people will allow, 
 would not only be a grievous injury to the Christian 
 habits of life of the nation, but would react also with 
 erave effect upon its view of marriage. This is shown 
 even by Trendelenburg in his Naturrecht, though, in 
 conformity with his subject, he occupies the standpoint 
 of the State, p. 248, sg. The public declaration of inten- 
 tion when a marriage is concluded, is naturally under 
 the protection of civil law, because the results of 
 marriage belong in their wide extent to civil life. It is 
 nevertheless a true instinct which would commit 
 marriage, with its deep moral interests, to the guardian- 
 ship of the Church, .¢. the ethic community based upon 
 belief in the Divine, and that the State should leave to 
 the Church, together with the solemnization of marriage, 
 the power of legalizing the contract. Where indeed 
 contrary to what ought to be,—but in consequence of 
 what is—the actual state of affairs, the Church and State 
 are at variance as to their view of the marriage law, the 
 civil law will, as in the case of civil marriage, first make 
 its claims good, and leave the claims of the Church, as 
 affairs of their own, to the Church and its members.— 
 When civil marriage originates, in consequence of the 
 disagreement between Church and State concerning the 
 moral conditions of matrimony, it is an expedient ; but 
 even then a dignity should be maintained in its per- 
 formance which would forbid its being regarded as ‘a 
 mere piece of legal business. With respect to the 
 position of the Church towards those who content them- 
 selves with civil marriage, even Rothe, while insisting 
 upon the “ exceptional allowance of civil marriage, and 
 at the same time claiming for it the character of a 
 religious and indeed a decidedly Christian (but not a 
 Church or confessional) transaction,” confesses : “Tt is 
 only reasonable that the Church should expect from 
 those within her pale, that they should not desire to 
 take such a step as that of entering the married state, 
 
Notes to Lecture V. O20 
 
 otherwise than as members of the Church, and in active 
 communion with her, and consequently with her express 
 sanction and blessing; she can recognise none who feel 
 no need of her prayers and blessing as her genuine 
 members, and must hence require as the condition, not 
 -of her regarding such a marriage as valid and Christian, 
 but of her continuing to regard the married pair as her 
 members, that, as far as in them lies, they should con- 
 clude marriage no otherwise than by procuring its 
 solemnization by the Church.” (Theol. Ethik, 5, 61, 
 § 1088). In saying this, Rothe goes farther than is 
 necessary. It is not church-membership, but the full 
 possession of Church privileges, the full right of Church 
 citizenship, that should be denied to such. 
 
 (7) Riehl, die Familie (I quote from the 3rd reprint, 
 1855), p. 154: “Truly a father of a family should not 
 lightly cast away the last remnant left him of the priestly 
 dignity of his forefathers, viz. the office of praying before 
 and with ‘the whole household’ There -is more 
 honour, rank, and sovereign right in it, than in a whole 
 collection of titles and orders. And many a poor wretch 
 of a father has a true perception that it is so, who is yet 
 afraid of being laughed at by his more ‘refined’ neigh- 
 bours. He is not ashamed of being little or hardly ever 
 in his home, but very much so of being priest and 
 master there! ‘Die Feigheit ist’s die uns verdirbt’ (It 
 is cowardice that spoils us), as the old song says,” etc. 
 Comp. also the able section, Verleugnung und Bekennt- 
 miss des Hauses, p. 233, Sq. 
 
 (18) Eph. v. 28, 29; Col. iii, 19°51: Pet. ii '7- (On the 
 position. of man and wife in the family, as mutually 
 supplying each other’s deficiencies, comp. Riehl, die 
 Familie, p. 20. On the dignity and duty of the hus- 
 band, Thiersch, Ueber christliches Familienleben, 6th edit. 
 1872, p. 44, sg. On the position of the father of the 
 family, Trendelenburg, Naturrecht, Poi2o7. ) Slt isothe 
 
324 Notes to Lecture V. 
 
 characteristic of the father of the family that the unity 
 of the whole household should, for the sake of every 
 member of it, be involved in his intelligent will. From 
 this idea arise both his duties and his rights, his duties 
 towards the members of his household (wife, children, 
 servants), and his rights for those duties’ sake. Head 
 and members unite in the common object of the moral 
 welfare of the family, and find in it the measure of both 
 their duties and rights; the head of the household the 
 duties of protection and maintenance, the members the 
 duties of obedience and work. 
 
 (9) The best discussion of the passages of Scripture 
 which treat of divorce will be found in Harless’s Dze 
 Ehescheidung, eve erneute Untersuchung der neuesten 
 Schriftstellen, Stuttg. 1861. Besides this may be con- 
 sulted the articles (by Von Hoffmann) in the Zeitschryft 
 fir Protestantismus und Kirche, Erlangen, 1859, Nos. 1 
 and 2, “ What Holy Scripture says of Divorce.” Luther's 
 opinion on this question has been for some years the © 
 subject of repeated discussion. I refer on this matter 
 especially to the articles, Luther's Lherechtsweisheit and 
 Zugestiindniss und Erlauterung, the former in the Dee. 
 and Nov. Nos. for 1858 of the same journal, the latter 
 in No. 3 for 1861. Thiersch indeed, in his above-named 
 work, p. 21, sq., appealing to Dollinger, p. 165, sq., rejects 
 all actual divorce, and denies the right of the innocent 
 party to contract a fresh marriage. This, however, 1s 
 incompatible with the exception of our Lord, “ except 
 for the cause of fornication.” His indignation, however, 
 at lax legislation concerning marriage, especially that of 
 the Prussian common law (pp. 23 and 167), by which its 
 sanctity and indissolubility are destroyed, is perfectly 
 justifiable. It is true that national legislation may, like 
 the Mosaic law, have occasion “for hardness of heart,” 
 ie. because of the prevalence of immorality, to make 
 some concessions. To this, however, must be applied 
 what Luther says, 51, 37: “ Where, however, there are 
 
Notes to Lecture VI. 325 
 
 non-Christians or uncivilized false Christians, it might be 
 well even now to keep to this law (viz. the Mosaic pre- 
 cept of giving a writing of divorcement), and to let them 
 separate from their wives and take others like the heathen, 
 lest by their discordant lives they should have two hells, 
 one in this world, the other in the next. But let them 
 know that by reason of such separations they are no 
 longer Christians, but heathens, and in a state of condem- 
 nation.” Brenz, the Wurtemburgian reformer, designated 
 such a connection a “respectable concubinage.” The 
 main point is to keep alive the conviction of the in- 
 dissolubility of marriage. On this point, comp. Tren- 
 delenburg, p. 249: “Marriage is by its very nature 
 designed to be indissoluble. Only when this is presup- 
 posed, has it any moral force. If it could be conceived 
 of as naturally soluble, its centre of gravity would be 
 something else than the fact that it is a self-completing 
 life-association.” “Marriage is not a universally ac- 
 knowledged compact, but an ordinance to which in- 
 dividuals are subject, and whose duration is not placed 
 at their discretion. In this stability there is a moral 
 power, to which the now capricious, now inordinate 
 affections have to submit.” On adultery and its crimi- 
 nality, p. 252, sg. How much the strictest possible law 
 of divorce is in favour of the wife is brought out by 
 Riehl, die Familie, p. 67. } 
 
 NOTES TO LECTURE VI. 
 
 () On this point I refer, with reiterated emphasis, © 
 to Riehl, the panegyrist of the “united family” and of. 
 the “German household.” Comp. die Familie, p. 142, 
 sq.; das ganze Haus, p. 163, sqg.; die Familie und die 
 birgerliche Baukunst, etc., p. 260, sqg.; zum Weeder- 
 aufbau des Hauses. The consciousness that the German 
 household is our most precious national jewel, in which 
 
326 Notes to Lecture VI. 
 
 lay its strength, and in which still les its future great- 
 ness, the consciousness of our unity in domestic morals 
 must be again attained.” On what has been said con- 
 cerning piety, comp. p. 118: “ Authority and piety are 
 moral motive powers in the family. This is not the case 
 in the State, where they retire to the second rank, and 
 give place to the consciousness of law, which takes the 
 first in their stead.” He then futher carries out this 
 distinction between the family and the State, p. 122. 
 
 (7) On the importance of custom, comp. Riehl, p. 118: 
 «The rule of custom begins in the family, and extends 
 thence over civil society.” “A custom can never be 
 made by the caprice of an individual; it is born and 
 erows like a popular ballad.” It is “the historical pro- 
 duct of a whole series of human developments. It is a 
 vessel containing not the wisdom of an individual, but 
 the wisdom of ages.” On religious family customs, comp. 
 
 p. 154, sq., and Thiersch, Christl. Familienleben, p. 68, sq. 
 
 (°) On the scarcity of children in French marriages, 
 comp. Roscher, i. 550 and 553. A decrease, however, in. 
 the numbers of families has been observed also in other 
 countries, p. 551. The Christian apologists repeatedly 
 reproach the heathen with killing their children either 
 before or after birth, eg. Tertull. Apolog. c. 9, This 
 crime is to this very day indigenous in the heathen 
 world; comp. Roscher, p. 538. The patria potestas ac- 
 cording to Roman law included an absolute power over 
 the life of the child (comp. Trendelenburg, Naturrecht, 
 p. 260). The right of exposing newly-born children was, 
 with respect at least to the weakly and deformed, un- 
 questioned in the ancient world (comp. E. Schmidt, dze 
 birgerliche Gesellschaft, p. 46, sq.). Plato and Aristotle 
 too, justify not only this, but also the procuring of 
 abortion (Plato, de Rep. vol. i. p. 276 ; Arist. Polit. vi. 14; 
 Schmidt, p. 48). All this lasted till the Christian era, 
 and was only abolished by the influence of Christianity. 
 
Notes to Lecture VI. 327 
 
 The celebrated physician Dr. Lancaster, however, reckons 
 that in London alone are 12,000 mothers who regularly | 
 destroy their children! (Kaiserswerther Armen- und 
 Krankenfreund, 1869, p. 114.) 
 
 (*) The history and doctrine of infant baptism have 
 been very thoroughly treated by Hofling, das Sukrament 
 der Taufe, etc., vol. i. 1859, p. 98, sg. Luther’s sayings 
 on baptism in general, and infant baptism in particular, 
 have been collected by Léhe (Dr. M. L’s Worte v. d. heil. 
 Laufe, 2nd edit., Niirmb. 1859). On infant baptism in 
 particular, p. 103, Liihr’s die Wiedertiéufer, new edit. 
 1869, is a popular work on baptism in opposition to 
 Anabaptist error. 
 
 (°) The descriptions given in the English Blue Book 
 of 1865, and thence transferred to many journals and 
 works (comp. eg. Kaiserswerther Armen- und Kranken- 
 Jreund, 1869, p. 111), of the state of children a few years 
 since in English factories, are truly shocking. We read 
 of children of five years of age who were obliged to work 
 daily from fourteen to sixteen hours far on into the night; 
 of boys of three years old squatting at the fire holding hot 
 irons, many of them cooling their scorched fingers in 
 bowls of water; of others with their hands bound up 
 because their fingers were out of joint; nay, of mothers 
 who pinned their children when at work with them to 
 their aprons, that they might be able when they were 
 sinking from weariness to shake them up again without 
 ceasing from their own labour; and how through all 
 this the whole of the youthful labouring class were half 
 imbecile, crippled mentally as well as bodily. “As 
 soon as a child can hold a pin,” say the Commissioners, 
 “it 1s booked for misery.” The famous Ten-hours’ Act 
 of 1347 (carried out still further by the Acts of 1853 
 and 1856) had indeed already prescribed that children 
 under eight should not be employed at all in factories, - 
 that those of from eight to twelve should work no longer 
 
328 Notes to Lecture VI. 
 
 than five hours, from thirteen to eighteen no longer than 
 ten. But even this is unquestionably too long. If 
 twenty-nine per cent. of the children under thirteen 
 years of age find employment in England, we can call 
 this nothing but a sin against childhood. In Saxony the 
 employment of children under fourteen, amounts to only 
 one half per cent. There may be certain kinds of work, 
 and external regulations may be possible, which would 
 make the moderate employment of children admissible, 
 but on the whole a factory is certainly one of the worst 
 places for them. Lotze, Mikrokosmus, ui. 272, sq., 
 speaks of the darker side of factory life in general, and 
 especially of the dispiriting and joyless nature of factory 
 work, in terms which well deserve consideration. 
 
 (°) Riehl, die Familie, p. 125.  Thiersch, Ohristl. 
 Familienleben, p. 79, sq., speaks very seriously of home 
 being the right place for the education of children. On 
 the duty of parents to educate and provide school- 
 instruction for their children, see Trendelenburg, p. 259. 
 
 (*) Herbart, Umriss pidagogischer Vorlesungen, 4th 
 ed. 1841, p. 162. The firmer the rules by which a child 
 finds himself surrounded, the easier will he find it to 
 submit to them. , Comp. Thiersch, Christliches Fam- 
 lienleben, p. 109; Riehl, p. 118: “It is from the family 
 that the sway of custom proceeds.” 
 
 (8) Riehl, p. 123: “It is in the home alone that our 
 people must reacquire the spirit of authority and piety, 
 in the home that they must learn how discipline and 
 freedom go hand in hand, how the individual must 
 sacrifice himself for a higher moral collective per- 
 sonality,” ete. Thiersch, p. 107: “Obedience, and that 
 a willing obedience, proceeding from an internal cause, 
 viz. reverence, is not a virtue but dhe virtue of children, 
 the sum-total of all the goodness we can demand or 
 expect from them.” 
 
Notes to Lecture VI. 329 
 
 (°) J. C. Erdmann, in his psychologische Briefen, p. 309, 
 sy., expresses himself in a manner well worthy of con- 
 sideration, concerning the analogy between memory and 
 obedience: “To impress upon the memory is in the 
 intellectual sphere, what obedience is in the practical. 
 We learn by appropriating what has been already 
 thought out. In old age learning is difficult, because 
 age is intended for something else, viz. to think for 
 itself, If what should have been learned in youth is 
 delayed, the subsequent difticulty of acquiring it is the 
 well-deserved punishment. If the intellect of childhood 
 is, according to its very notion, memory, it is self- 
 evident that the strength of the memory is in childhood 
 the sole standard of the energy of the intellect. With a 
 child there is but one measure of talent, and that is 
 memory, but one measure of morality, and that is 
 obedience. In the days when’a false pedagogy was 
 driving obedience out of the world, by proposing always 
 to communicate to children the reason of a command, 
 it was also the fashion to attack memory. The reason, 
 it was said, must be exercised instead of ‘the memory. 
 This made children precocious, ze. stupid, because what 
 is wisdom in age is stupidity in childhood. So, too, in 
 practical matters, did this kind of education make 
 children bad and immoral, because that which is sub- 
 sequently a moral requirement is in childhood opposed 
 to the idea, ze. bad,” ete. It is obvious that these re- 
 marks of Erdmann, first written in 1856, are still in 
 season with respect to the present tendency in education, 
 especially in its attack upon the learning by heart of 
 texts and hymns. 
 
 (*°) On the matter of—corporeal—punishment, comp. 
 Prov. x. 13, xiii, 24, xxiii, 13, sq; Heb. xii. 5-11. 
 Thiersch, Christl. Familienleben, p. 112, sq.: “ Hence those 
 teachers do not deserve a hearing who will not allow of 
 punishment—at least of corporeal punishment—in 
 education. If the punishment is of a right kind, it does 
 
330 Notes to Lecture VI. 
 
 not merely act on the senses, but by sensible terror and 
 pain it arouses and sharpens the consciousness that a 
 moral power, a just judge, an inviolable law, presides 
 over us. It does not loosen but strengthens the moral 
 tie by which the child is united to the father, for ex- 
 perience shows that strict fathers are ereatly beloved,” 
 etc. The Apostle indeed warns us, Col. iii. 21, “ Fathers, 
 provoke not your children, lest they be discouraged.” — 
 “One word about after anger. Scarcely is a serious 
 punishment itself so important as the first quarter of an 
 hour after it; and the transition to forgiveness, After 
 a storm each seed finds the ground softened; fear and 
 hatred of punishment, which at first were hardened 
 against exhortation and revolted at advice, are now past, 
 and gentle instruction penetrates and heals, as honey 
 allays the sting of a bee, and oil alleviates wounds,’ ete. 
 Levana oder Erzichungslehre, by Jean Paul, i. p. 187, 
 in Thiersch, p. 177. 
 
 (1) Wolfgang Menzel, in his Kritik des modernen 
 Bewusstseins, in the chapter on educational vagaries, 
 p. 174, sq., has some excellent remarks on this subject. 
 At p. 184, he says: “Suppose it should succeed, and 
 every child should be capable of being initiated in all 
 the arts and sciences, what a dreadful fate it would be 
 to have all really talented, and through having none but 
 ereat and highly cultivated minds, to find none to till 
 the fields, make boots, clean the house! But what folly 
 is it to take such capability for granted, and to regulate 
 education accordingly, when nothing is more certain 
 than the fact, that, according to God’s wise ordainment, 
 there will always be, so long as the world exists, mental 
 capacities and inclinations proportioned to the indis- 
 pensable labour imposed on man for his own maintenance. 
 
 (2) Against pietistic pressure and forcing in religious 
 education, comp. Thiersch, p. 97, sq. 104. He speaks 
 with great beauty on the duty of accustoming a child 
 
Notes to Lecture VI. 331 
 
 to prayer, and of initiating him in holy Scripture: “As 
 a child is taught to speak so should he be taught to 
 pray by his mother, and so soon as he can utter his first 
 words to man should his mother lead him to speak to 
 God.” . . . “Convinced that a child’s words reach the 
 heart of God, she will reverently fulfil this maternal duty. 
 When she is making her child say his morning and 
 evening prayer, she is performing a no less sacred and 
 sublime office, than the minister of Christ, when stand- 
 ing at the altar, he sends up to God the prayers of the 
 Church.” . . . “When story-telling and the earliest in- 
 structions begin, the mother should not delay to tell 
 the child stories from the Bible, and especially from the 
 history of the Saviour, in that childish language which 
 none so well understand as a mother. Who can suf- 
 ficiently pity those parents who suffer themselves to be 
 deprived of so pure a joy as giving to their child the 
 first tidings of his Redeemer, and witnessing the first 
 fresh deep impression made upon a childish mind by 
 these tidings.” . . . “There is nothing in the world that 
 can compare with the wealth of moral-elements of 
 education, and of deepest truths under forms most easy 
 of apprehension, which we possess for our children in 
 the Bible history.” 
 
 (*) Ranke, Geschichte Deutschlands im Zeitalter der 
 Reformation, ii. (4th ed.) p. 313.. Palmer has collected 
 in his Hvang. Katechetik (3rd ed. 1851, p. 252) ap- 
 preciative opinions on Luther’s Catechism, in opposition 
 to the depreciating and unintelligent judgment of an 
 affected modern pedagogy. Lohe, drei Biicher von der 
 Kirche, p. 123: “Luther’s smaller Catechism is a con- 
 fession of the Church, and indeed of all confessions that 
 which is most suitable and best adapted for the people. 
 It is a fact which no one denies, that no other catechism 
 in the world can be made a prayer of but this. But it 
 is less known that it may be called a real marvel in 
 respect of the extraordinary fulness and great abundance 
 
Don Notes to Lecture VI. 
 
 of knowledge expressed in it in so few words.” Luther 
 says of himself im a subsequent preface to the larger 
 Catechism: “This however I will say for myself, I too _ 
 am a doctor and preacher, and one as learned and ex- 
 perienced as any of those who have such presumption 
 and assurance (he is speaking of those who despised the 
 catechism), yet I still act like as a child who is learn- 
 ing his catechism, and read and say every morning, and 
 whenever I have time, the Ten Commandments, the 
 Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, the Psalms, etc., word by word. 
 And I am still obliged daily to read and study, and yet 
 cannot get on as I would wish, but I still remain and 
 love to remain the child and pupil of the Catechism. 
 And these nice fastidious fellows think with one read- 
 ing to be instantly doctors above all doctors, to know 
 everything and to need nothing more My 
 
 (4) The literature of the school question has so 
 inordinately increased, that it is not possible to enter 
 into it, I shall confine myself to citing a few opinions. 
 On the introduction of the Bible and religion into schools, 
 Luther says in his address to the nobles of the German 
 nation: “Above all things holy Scripture must be the 
 chief and the most general reading, whether in the 
 higher or lower schools. The Wurtb. ev. Consist., 1a a 
 decree of the year 1856, declares that the old and sacred 
 rights of the Bible in the school may not be violated or 
 curtailed, and that it is to be regarded as the central 
 point in the religious education of the young whether 
 in doctrine or history, just as the reading book is the 
 central point of instruction in the linguistic and realistic 
 departments.” Bluntschli, too, says: “1 declare myself 
 against an education which ignores religion, or which 1s 
 even hostile to the confession! It would be no gain, no 
 progress, but a step back towards barbarism. All the 
 creat acquisitions which we owe to Christianity would 
 be abandoned.” . . . “The school must help not merely 
 to develop the intellect, but also to warm and ennoble 
 
Notes to Lecture VI. 333 
 
 the heart. The national school should not merely turn 
 out intelligent men, but also arouse the religious 
 consciousness, sow the seed of faith in the hearts of 
 children, and strengthen it to all virtuous action. Tf in 
 the former matter the ultimate decision and chief care 
 belong to the State, the Church has most to do with 
 and can best effect the latter purpose. ‘As both the 
 father and mother conduct the domestic education, so 
 should both Church and State unite in caring for the 
 public education of the people.’” (See the excellent 
 work of Ad. Stihlin, die Schulreformfrage, 1865, p. 85.) 
 Schleiermacher, on the second day of the Reformation 
 Jubilee, 1817, said: “We cannot sufficiently thank 
 God, that in the days of a pernicious sophistry con- 
 cerning Divine things, and of a destructive superiority 
 to wholesome institutions, the connection between the 
 Church and the school was not also dissolved; for only 
 thereby has a great portion of our youth attained to 
 that early acquaintance with the Word of God, of which 
 we cannot doubt the salutary influence. Where this is 
 wanting, how much more easily is the germ of good 
 repressed, how much more easily does youth rush into 
 all kinds of errors! And how few return, after the dis- 
 graceful suppression of their pious feelings, to the way 
 of life!” The votes of the preceptorial world indeed 
 are at present on the other side. Even the Protestant 
 Union is not liberal enough for the Allyem. deutscher 
 Lehrerzeitung, which thus addresses it: “What is the 
 Church, now in its decay and dissolution, to us? What 
 cultivated mind does not now think with repugnance 
 and often with disgust of the Church? Regard us as a 
 noli me tangere if you will; we can go our way without 
 you, for our ways are different” (comp. Allg, Hv. Kir- 
 chenzetung, 1871, No. 18: On the school question, p. 
 323). Finally both words and feelings, as expressed. 
 and received with the greatest approbation at the two 
 great meetings of teachers at Vienna and Hamburg, can 
 be designated as nothing else than savage in their 
 
334 Notes to Weehuire VI. 
 
 hostility to the Church and clergy. With respect to 
 the relation to the clergy, we would recall to mind a 
 saying of that great authority in the matter of education, 
 Kv. Raumer: “If teachers return from their lamentable 
 delusions, if the clergy apply themselves to a thorough 
 educational training, it is easy to foresee that the con- 
 nection between Church and school will not be dissolved, 
 but on the contrary strengthened” (Gesch. der Pidag. 
 iii. 1, p. 103). Would that these words might be ful- 
 fled! I refer once more to the observations of Tren- 
 delenburg, as an entirely unprejudiced witness. In his 
 Naturrecht, p. 476, he says: “In the education of 
 children the Church, the home, the State meet.” ... 
 “Tt ig a one-sided theory of the rights of the State 
 which favours so complete a separation of Church and 
 State as to let the State deprive itself of a spiritual 
 assistance.” . . . “He also calls to mind (p. 479) that 
 Luther in his sermon on the duty of keeping children at 
 school required school discipline, and also (p. 480) 
 that it is a matter of history, that the care for the 
 general instruction of the people in the elements of 
 education originated with the Church, and especially 
 with the Evangelical Church.” The work of Bishop 
 Dupanloup on school teaching in Prussia (translated by 
 Sickinger) regards the strength of Prussia as consisting 
 in the Christian character of its national schools, and 
 holds this up—as shown by the Prussian school-regula- 
 tions—as a model to France. Turning from Prussia to 
 England, he brings forward expressions of opinion by 
 the most renowned English statesmen. “ Sire Robert 
 Peel desires, in the name of the rights of conscience, 
 that religion should form the universal foundation of 
 every education, and that the religious instruction given 
 in schools should be of a doctrinal character.” Glad- 
 stone: “Every system which looks upon religious 
 education as an accessory is a pernicious system.” 
 Cousin, too, the French philosopher, says: “ Without 
 religion schools would perhaps do more harm than good, 
 
Notes to Lecture VI. 335 
 
 perhaps would only serve to introduce a barbarism of a 
 new kind.” To what tyranny towards Christians the 
 Separation of State schools from religion and the Church 
 leads, has been shown of late years by the example of the 
 schools in Holland (comp. on this subject Schwarz, die 
 relugionslose Schule der Niederlande und ihre Priichte, 
 Berlin, 1868). 
 
 (*) On slavery in the ancient world, comp. Lotze, 
 Mikrokosmus, iii. 257: “In the heroic ages, the miseries 
 of slavery impending on the widow and orphan—as 
 bewailed with melancholy forebodings by Hector and 
 Andromache—were regarded as the destiny which it 
 was but natural that the course of events should induce, 
 and for which human wisdom was powerless to find a 
 remedy. “In the palmy days of Greece, when social 
 institutions had long been discussed with political 
 acuteness, the calmness with which even the most 
 elevated minds regarded slavery, as a self-evident element 
 of the political edifice, really arouses indignation. . . . 
 The superabundant rhetoric and logical verbosity 
 scarcely conceal the aristocratic selfishness which in- 
 fers from the consciousness of those benefited, and 
 from the need for some to be honourably and liberally 
 educated, the self-obviousness of the slavery of others. 
 The capacities of men differ; Aristotle makes the dis- 
 tinction of king-like souls who are capable of living 
 nobly and worthily, and others who can neither propose 
 _ to themselves reasonable tasks, nor possess the power of 
 fulfilling them. But the moral duty of loving com- 
 passion and of educational care towards the weak is 
 not demanded of the strong because of this distinction. 
 The term here chosen of king-like souls imperceptibly 
 introduces the claim of power into this view, and the 
 weak become the property of the strong. This justifica- 
 tion is even worse than the thing itself.” Aristotle—ag 
 is well known—calls slaves (Polit. i. 2, 4, sq.) animated 
 instruments needful for life, instruments for the em. 
 
336 Notes to Lecture VII. 
 
 ployment of utensils, a portion of their possessor him- 
 self, and therefore absolutely belonging to and dependent 
 upon him. This distinction he justifies on philosophical 
 erounds (Polit. i. 2, 8, s9.). Trendelenburg, Vaturrecht, 
 p. 173, sq.: “ Where slavery prevails the idea of per- 
 sonality is not the moral characteristic of man, but an 
 aristocratic privilege.” . . . There history must be viewed 
 in the light of the view of slavery taken by the ancient 
 world. Waiz has recently shown, in a thorough investiga- 
 tion of the subject, that there is no specific distinction 
 between different races of men in respect of their 
 intellectual condition. Anthropologie der Naturvolker, 
 i. 368, sq., 393; Trendelenburg, p. 177. On servants, 
 comp. the earnest language of Thiersch, Chrostliches 
 Familienleben, p. 141, s9. 
 
 (6) On domestic sociability, comp. Riehl, Familie, 
 die Familie und der gesellige Kreis, p. 236, sq.; Thiersch, 
 p. 151, sg. The question of social intercourse itself will 
 find its place subsequently (Lect. X. note 10). 
 
 (17) On the history of Christian works of mercy, comp. 
 Lecture X. note 6. On the question of communism, 
 Lecture IX. note 8. 
 
 NOTES TO LECTURE VIL 
 
 () On the State as a product of history, comp. ¢.9. 
 Constantin Franz, Vorschule zur Physiologie der Staaten, | 
 Berlin, 1857—a work designated by Trendelenburg in 
 his Naturrecht, p. 363, as one of great observation— 
 pp. 61, 63: “The State is not a mere process, but the 
 result of a process, that is to say that the process by 
 which it is developed must sooner or later attain to this 
 conclusion.” P. 118, sq.: “States, with all they are or pos- 
 sess, are found within the pale of history.” States do not 
 
Notes to Lecture VIT. O37 
 
 Spring up according to general and necessary forms, like 
 natural organisms, but arise through a complication of 
 facts, which forms the basis of their individuality, ete. 
 Hence it is a mistake to Say, as ¢g. in Wagener’s Staats- 
 und Cesellschaftslexicon, under the article “ Staat” (vol. xix. 
 1865, p. 578): “Man and the State are inseparable; 
 there can be no development of mankind except in the 
 
 State.” Aristotle already shows that, “according to 
 the system of nature, states must be conceived of be- 
 fore men. . . . Man is a €aov woArTixéy.” Hence the 
 
 question concerning the origin of the State coincides 
 with that concerning the origin of mankind. “The 
 State is primordial,” says Dahlmann; “the primitive 
 family is the primitive state, and every family inde- 
 pendently viewed is a state. For even in the first few 
 men of the first family, the notions of custom, justice, 
 and order were aroused. This condition of order passed 
 from the family to those artificial political institutions 
 from which the State proceeded, Consequently, the 
 State is an expression for the moral order of the world, a 
 thing originally given, and not historically developed,” 
 etc. All this is erroneous, or is at least stated in a 
 manner open to misconstruction. It is the ancient view 
 which absolutely identified men with their national or 
 political existence, and made the commencement of the 
 State coeval with the beginning of mankind, and which 
 consequently failed to admit the independent rights 
 either of personality and its relation to God, 2.e. religion, 
 or of the family, in respect of the State. Holy Scrip- 
 ture and the view based thereon teach us to distinguish 
 between the beginning of mankind and the family, and 
 that of nations and states, and exhibit the latter as a 
 fresh stage in. the. historical development of mankind. 
 
 (*) That the State does not arise absolutely from the 
 family, as is made to appear in the passages quoted 
 from Wagener in note 1, and even by Dahlmann, is ad- 
 mitted by Constantin Franz, p. 18: “Consequently the 
 
 AN Y 
 
338 Notes to Lecture VIL. 
 
 State must not be regarded as a kind of extended family; 
 for widely as a family may spread and ramify through 
 a series of generations, it 1s yet essential to the principle 
 of a family that all its members should have sprung from 
 that one unity, the family ; the citizens of the State, on 
 the contrary, do not originate from the State, but pre- 
 cede it. Hence the application of the analogy of the 
 family principle to the State is not very suitable. Nor 
 can it be shown that ‘any state was ever developed 
 from a family, while the contrary is admitted of all 
 historical states.” So, too, p. 63. Hence it follows, 
 p. 37, that ‘supreme power never cab be possessed ‘as 
 private property.” It was, as is well known, the 
 doctrine of Haller, in his Restauration der Staatswissen- 
 schaften, 6 vols., 1845, that the sovereign power bore the 
 character of private property, in opposition to the re- 
 volutionary tenet, that it was the result of a political 
 compact. But public power, because it is public, cannot 
 have the nature of a private right, and this is not the 
 correct way of restoring the inviolability and sacredness 
 of the magistracy. Comp. Stahl’s refutation in his 
 Rechtsphilosophie (2nd ed. p. 553, 8q.). 
 
 (3) The view of a compact already rests upon the 
 doctrine of Hugo Grotius, a statement and criticism of 
 which may be compared in Stahl’s Rechtsphilosophre, 
 p. 158. It was subsequently farther modified by 
 Rousseau (comp. Contrat social ow principes du drowt 
 publique, 1762), and these attained a wide-spread accept- 
 ance. On Rousseau, comp. Stahl, p. 294, sq. Rousseau’s 
 problem was to combine man’s inalienable right to 
 liberty with his connection with the State and its obliga- 
 tions. He found its solution in the complete renuncia- 
 tion of all his rights by each member of the community 
 in favour of the whole—the general will thus origin- 
 ating is sovereign. “This theory presupposes a natural 
 condition and equality of man at variance with all ex- 
 perience. The compact, whether historically or philo- 
 
Notes to Lecture VII. 339 
 
 sophically considered, is not the ultimate origin of 
 Justice. Only possible under the protection of the State, 
 it is, both in this democratic theory and in Hobbes’ 
 absolutist theory, made to precede and to lay the 
 foundation of the State” (Trendelenburg, Naturrecht, 
 p. 14). Against the view, which makes the State origi- 
 nate in voluntary agreement, comp. Const. Franz, p. 52, 
 sq., where it is shown, that the result of such an attempt 
 to construct a commonwealth simply from the free 
 choice of men, might perhaps be a French revolution, 
 but not a state. 
 
 (*) Const. Franz, p. 55, shows that the State can no 
 more be derived from pure force than from free agree- 
 ment. “Slavery is based upon pure force, but slaves, 
 wherever they are found, form no integral portion of the 
 State; they are not subjects, but are esteemed as mere 
 property. Despotism could not have founded the earliest 
 states, for they exhibit a character of internal calmness 
 and stability” (p.62). It is now certain, that the prunitive 
 states could not have originated either in voluntary 
 agreement or the despotism of a ruler, but that they were 
 the result of an intrinsic necessity. Such an intrinsic 
 necessity did not, however, consist in the natural growth 
 of the body politic out of the family ; as this could only 
 give rise to a patriarchal combination of tribes, which 
 in themselves neither are, nor can become true states 
 without the addition of another element,” So also does 
 Trendelenburg, p. 800, oppose the two theories of usurpa- 
 tion and compact. Gregory VII. (Hildebrand) expressed 
 in very strong terms the view, that sovereign power 
 originated in force and ungodly usurpation, and at the 
 instigation of the devil: “Quis nesciat, reges et duces ab 
 iis habuisse principium, qui Deum ignorantes, superbia, 
 rapinis, perfidia, homicidiis, postremo universis peene 
 sceleribus mundi principe diabolo videlicet agitante super 
 pares, scilicet homines, dominari ceca cupiditate et 
 intolerabili preesumptione affectaverunt” (Greg. lib, viii, 
 
340 Notes to Lecture VII. 
 
 Epist. ad Herimannum episc. Metensem a 1081, in Gie- 
 seler's Church History, vol. 111., Pp. 4, Clark’s translation). 
 Jesuit professors, on the contrary, as Bellarmin and 
 Mariana, advocate the compact theory and the sove- 
 reignty of the people. From this they deduce the law- 
 fulness of tyrannicide, etc. Comp. Stahl, Rechtsphilosophie 
 (2nd edit.), p. 292. 
 
 (°) When Const. Franz reduces the divine element in 
 the foundation of the State to mere Providence (p. 31), 
 this is neither satisfactory nor in harmony with the 
 famous passage, Rom. xi. 1. Cicero well remarks, 
 Somnium Scipionis, c. 3: “ Nihil est illi principi Deo, 
 qui omnem hune mundum regit, quod quidem in terris 
 fiat, acceptius, quam concilia ccetusque hominum jure 
 sociati quee civitates appellantur.” Comp. Rothe, Theol. : 
 Ethik, ii. 2nd edit. p. 460. It is a fundamental idea 
 of Trendelenburge’s Naturrecht that justice has its roots 
 in the moral, and that the moral refers to religion 
 (p. 51). Thus the State is finally rooted in the sphere 
 of religion, and invested with the authority of the Divine 
 will. How decidedly Luther advocated the Divine foun- 
 dation of the State, and consequently of government, 18 
 well known. His whole moral view is based upon the 
 doctrine of the “three Divine institutions,’ the family, 
 the State, and the Church (Works, ¢9., 4, 394, Jen. 1 
 524, b.: “Tres enim hierarchias ordinavit Deus contra 
 diabolum, scilicet ceconomiam, politiam, ecclesiam,” etc.). 
 It is to the Reformation that we really owe this per- 
 ception, which never existed in this form before it, 
 though its germ was found among the Hussites (comp. 
 Richter, Kirchenrecht, p. 157, note 12: “Et he tres 
 partes debent esse unum corpus ecclesie”). Luther 
 made this perception the foundation of his ethics, and 
 caused it to become common property in the popular 
 view of Christianity (comp. Luthers Hthik, p. 87, sq.), and. 
 from him this doctrine was transmitted to the subsequent 
 instructors of our Church. It must indeed be admitted 
 
Notes to Lecture VIT. 341 
 
 that the historical development must be combined with 
 the Divine foundation, and that we are indebted to the 
 historical school of jurists for having insisted on the 
 historical element. Comp. on this subject, Stahl, p. 564, 
 sqg.: “Law is one aspect in the sum total of a nation’s 
 life, inseparably connected with its other aspects and 
 activities, such as language, custom, art. Hence it 
 like these originates, not from choice and reflection, but 
 in an inherent feeling and instinct, a felt necessity.” 
 The deeper truth which is at the bottom of this is 
 “the recognition of an active Divine administration in 
 history. Hence arises reverence for what exists, acqul- 
 escence when a change takes place, anda regard toa . 
 higher Power from whom what is necessary and best is 
 expected. Piety, viewed in the light of its inward 
 motives, is a solicitous attendance on history, a preser- 
 vation of every peculiar institution, a respect for all 
 that has happened without our assistance” (p. 578, Sq.). 
 “In saying this it (the historical school) is decidedly 
 opposed to revolution” (p. 580).. It differs, however, 
 from all counter-revolutionary authors—Maistre, Haller 
 —inasmuch as it by no means undertakes to make a 
 final settlement of the form and fashion of the world, 
 according to definite and past institutions. It cannot 
 be sufficiently insisted on, that a true feeling for history 
 will not regard it as including only the past; but will 
 recognise also the undisclosed development involved 
 therein, and that a true sense of religion will not 
 arbitrarily limit the Divine interposition to earlier for- 
 mations, as though these were an effort which it could not 
 surpass, but will accept with submission new and future 
 forms, as being equally attributable thereto” (p. 581). 
 
 (°) Wagener, Staats- und Gesellschaftslewicon, p. 579. 
 The possibility of a state, and indeed the natural 
 basis of any commonwealth, involves the two elements, 
 people and land. Const. Franz, p. 60: “The dispersion 
 of mankind preceded the foundation of states, and there 
 
342 Notes to Lecture VII. 
 
 can be no doubt that differently endowed, and respec- 
 tively higher and lower nations arose—a fact not only 
 testified to by the Bible, but obvious at the present day 
 in the difference existing between the various races of 
 mankind.” In his farther delineation Franz proceeds from 
 the scriptural account of the dispersion (Gen. x1.), and 
 recognises it as the true key to the understanding of that 
 primitive occurrence, of which we are without any other 
 historical knowledge. “It would be presumptuous to 
 attempt to set up any definite view of that marvellous 
 event—the dispersion, of which we have no historical 
 information, while everything testifies that 1t was not 
 effected by a gradual estrangement from a common 
 primitive type, but must have taken place by extra- 
 ordinary occurrences, and, as we have said, in the 
 form of a catastrophe.” “In consequence of its national 
 basis, the State is the constituted nationality ” (p. 77). 
 ‘So too Trendelenburg:; “The nation is the bearer of the 
 State, the State the completion of the nation (pp. 282, 
 284). On what is further said in the text on national 
 distinctions, comp. Lect. II. note 12, Also L. Diefen- 
 bach, Vorschule der Volkerkunde ans der Bildungs- 
 geschichte, 1864; Wagener, Staats- und Gesellschafislext- 
 con, vol. xxi. art. Volkerstamme. 
 
 (7) C. Franz, in his above-cited work, strikingly shows 
 that the foundation of states is not a mere product of 
 nationality, but is occasioned by definite historical 
 events, wants, etc. “It is not the State itself, but only 
 the elementary organizations which precede the for- 
 mation of states, that arise from nationality.” The tie of 
 nationality is the reason, so to speak, of only.a bringing 
 together of men, while a superiority and subordination, 
 upon which public authority is based, are essential to 
 every political association. The institution of this public 
 authority is conditioned by overruling circumstances, as 
 well as by the nature of the object in view, and is not 
 derived from nationality, which, absolutely considered, 
 
 _ 
 
Notes to Lecture VII. 343 
 
 involves no object. Hence nations may go on vegetating 
 for centuries, without advancing to the formation of a 
 state, because no common object establishes its claims 
 among them. When, however, some common object 
 comes forward, they suddenly make their appearance 
 upon the stage of history, as, ¢g., the Germans at the 
 period of their incursions upon the Roman empire, 
 with which the formation of the German state begins. 
 “ Hence nations are to be regarded as merely the sub- 
 stratum and material of the political organization, and 
 it is in this circumstance that their importance to the 
 State consists.” ‘“ When, however, a commonwealth is 
 formed, and develops itself through several centuries 
 within a nationality, the political institutions and ten- 
 dencies are at last so overgrown by the national 
 character, that the nationality henceforth appears to be 
 the producing and determining power.” The political 
 constitution being, as has been shown, conditioned by 
 the historical relations of a people and country, there 
 is no universal pattern for constitutions, nor any pos- 
 sibility of transferring them from one natidn to another. 
 Hence Franz justly ridicules those who regard the pecu- 
 har English constitution as the universal model, “ while, 
 on the contrary, every state should seek the pattern of 
 its constitution solely in its.own people.” He con- 
 sequently opposes all such mechanical legislation, p. 
 157, sq. “If then, as is evident, it is their objects 
 which. make states and nations great, and even deter- 
 mine their very existence, what folly should it appear 
 to us to attempt to heal a sickly period by mechanical 
 legislation, and to expect the revival of a state from 
 the re-modelling of its constitution.” Trendelenburg, 
 p. 276, blames the Hegelian philosophy, because it 
 would develop a perfect constitution in a purely logical 
 and philosophical manner. “The constitution which is 
 proportioned to the origin of the State, the history of 
 the people, the peculiarity of their manners, the degree 
 of their cultivation, the political circumstances of the 
 
344 Notes to Lecture VII. 
 
 neighbouring states, in short the adequate constitution, 
 is always the perfect one.” 
 
 (®) Const. Réssler, in his System der Staatslehre, i. 1857, 
 p. 538, sq., pours just contempt upon the one-sided prin- 
 ciple of nationality, and the fanaticism for nationalities 
 of all possible sorts, which is its consequence. “ Such 
 fanaticism was entertained by Humanism in 1848 for 
 Poles, Czechs, Sclaves, Danes, etc., to the prejudice of 
 Germans. It is a folly which has at all times been 
 dreamt of, that the political divisions of the world should 
 be co-extensive with the different languages. Languages 
 shift indiscriminately, and there are numerous races 
 speaking the same tongue who could not possibly form 
 one political nationality,” etc. Comp. Const. Franz’s 
 above-cited work, pp. 82, 87, sq., and 92, 96,sqg. “Since 
 the unity of a state does not arise from unity of 
 nationality, but is often quite distinct therefrom, these 
 two principles enter upon a process,” etc. “ Again, since 
 the limits of states exceed the limits of nationalities, 
 and everywhere include fragments of different nations, 
 an intertwining of nationalities takes place, whereby the 
 spirit of exclusiveness, inherent in each, is broken, inter- 
 national intercourse promoted, and the idea of a uni- 
 versal citizenship of mankind throughout the world 
 introduced.” 7 Bilh 
 
 () The definition of the State given in the text is in 
 accordance with those usually given by political science : 
 eg., Gerber, Grundziige eines Systems des deutschen 
 Staatsrechts, 2nd edit. 1869, p. 1. “In the State a 
 nation attains legal order in its joint life.” It is the 
 form of law for the joint life of a people. Kant proceeds 
 too much upon the formal notion of the rights of the 
 individual when (Metaphys. Anfangsgriinde des Rechts, 
 § 45) he defines the State as the union of a multitude 
 of men under certain legal enactments. So too is the 
 political science of modern liberalism, as represented, ¢.g., 
 
Notes to Lecture VITI. 345 
 
 by Rotteck and Welcker’s Staatslexicon, unable to assign 
 any other concrete matter to the State than the interest 
 of the individual. “That the joint life exists only for 
 the promotion of the aims of individuals, and not the 
 reverse of this proposition, is a fact, hence no one must 
 be used as the means, or indeed offered as a sacrifice for 
 the idea of the whole” (comp. Staatslexicon, new edit. 
 1845 ; Welcker, under Polizei, x. p. 694). In opposition 
 to this, Hegel (Rechtsphilosophie, 1821) sees in the State 
 the realization of the objective spirit, but then under- 
 stands it too broadly. “The State is the reality of the 
 political idea—the reality of concrete liberty.” This view 
 has also been greatly extended, governing, eg., even the 
 notions of Rothe, and involving in his case the most 
 important and objectionable results. Comp. the next 
 note. A brief historical sketch of the notion of the State 
 is given by Trendelenburg, Natwrrecht, p. 291, sq. 
 
 (1°) The erroneous extension by Hegel of the idea 
 of the State mentioned in note 9 reappears in the 
 various phases of modern opinion: ¢g., when Wagener, 
 in the Staats- und Cresellschaftslexicon, calls the State 
 _ “the form or manifestation of all earthly existence ;” 
 or ossler, as above, p. 23, declares it to be “the 
 realization of the common capital of mankind, or 
 human association in an absolute sense ;” or, p. 1, “ the 
 comprehension of all moral functions in a joint aim,” 
 as though the State were the kingdom of God. He 
 is afterwards only consistent when he says that the 
 State is not merely the bearer, but also the source of 
 all justice. This view is justly, and not “ sophisti- 
 cally,” as Rossler says, opposed by Stahl; for it leads 
 to a deification of the State, a revival of the errone- 
 ous opinion of the ancient world, which indeed knew 
 of nothing higher, while Christianity teaches us, that 
 above and beyond the State. is the Church, and above 
 both the kingdom of God. Comp. Const. Franz, Das 
 newe Deutschland, 1871, p. 353: “What, then, let me 
 
346 Notes to Lecture VII. 
 
 ask, is the deification of the State, and the subordina- 
 tion both of justice and morality to political objects ? 
 It is an ancient, and therefore also a heathen prin- 
 ciple, while the German principle is, that justice 1s 
 above political power.” Again: “ It is an especially Ger- 
 man, and at the same time a Christian principle, 
 that the Holy of Holies has its place in the conscience.” 
 360, “The worship of the idea of the State and the 
 aims of the State.” 
 
 (11) Wagener’s Staatsleatcon, vol. xlii., art. Menschen- 
 recht, p. 265, sq., points out how Christianity, by assert- 
 ing human personality, introduces the recognition of the 
 original rights involved in the very nature of man—a 
 recognition which is then vindicated and carried out in 
 the way of historical development, and in connection 
 with general culture; also that the political science of 
 natural right, and especially that of Rousseau, puts cer- 
 tain abstract theories of the supposed, equal political 
 rights of individuals in the place of the moral rights 
 involved in the personality of man. Hence arose the 
 “ Declarations of Right,” given in the French republican 
 constitutions of Sept. 3, 1791 and June 24, 1797, and 
 containing the results of all the reasoning about “ the 
 way and means in which the constant inherent and in- 
 alienable rights of men as such, and as citizens of a 
 State, are to obtain recognition.” Their contents are, 
 however, so incompatible with all political order, that 
 they were limited even by the constitution of Aug. 22, 
 1795, while that of Dec. 15, 1800, expunged these de- 
 clarations as superfluous. For the laws of the State, 
 when they are just and wise, are themselves the recogni- 
 tion of these rights of man, under the conditions. of the 
 existence of society of which the individual is a member. 
 If, however, the laws are unjust, or the government 
 tyrannical, such a declaration of rights is of no avail. 
 The first of man’s original rights is his life, and there- 
 fore protection of life and limb. With this is connected 
 
Notes to Lecture VII. 347 
 
 his right to education. The second original right is 
 equality, as based upon human personality, z.c. equality 
 in the eyes of the law, with the maintenance, however, 
 of such fundamental distinctions as are involved in the 
 organism of human society. Another right is liberty, as 
 also proved by the nature of human personality, viz. by 
 its intrinsic self-determination,—a liberty to be restricted, 
 however, by the limits supposed by human society. The 
 last primitive right of man is protection in the rights he 
 has obtained, ze. the recognition of the person in the 
 result of his acts,—a recognition to be restricted, however, 
 by the general administration of justice, ze. by an ad- 
 mission of the rights of others. Comp. on this subject 
 the above-cited treatise of Wagener. 
 
 (1?) Dahlmann, Politik, vol. i. 2nd ed. 1847, p. 6: “The 
 bad state makes use of force only, swallows up families 
 by the power of its law, attributes to itself a supreme 
 right over property, sets its seal upon investigation, and 
 insists upon all kinds of exceptions to every rule. The 
 good state, on the contrary, far from interfering with the 
 rights of the individual, takes them under the protection 
 of public justice, and imposes upon property and per- 
 sons such restrictions only as are demanded by the 
 public good. By this decided step, of allowing the 
 rights of the individual, it reconciles the independence 
 of families with the obligations of government,” ete. On 
 socialism and communism, and their attempted! organi- 
 zation of all mankind, and all their activities, comp. the 
 interesting and instructive article on Socialism in 
 Wagener’s Staatslexicon, vol. xix. pp. 297-325. 
 
 (1°) Guizot, in particular, has undertaken to show 
 that, in contrast with the ancient system of government, 
 in which the Roman emperor was also Pontifex Maxi- 
 mus, religion an affair of the State, and freedom of con- 
 science consequently absent, the separation of the spiri- 
 tual and temporal powers, by reason of Christ’s saying, 
 
348 Notes to Lecture VIZ, 
 
 “ Render unto Cesar,” etc., is now the basis upon which 
 Christian governments are founded, and the prerequisite 
 of freedom of conscience. See his work, L’Hglise et la 
 Société Chrétienne, 1861, and his Aléditations sur la Relr- 
 gion Chrétienne (Médit. 1, Le christianisme et la liberté, 
 e.g. p. 9); also his Histoire dela Civilisation en Europe, p. 
 54: “La séparation du spirituel et du temporel a done 
 été la source de la liberté de conscience la plus rigoureuse 
 et la plus étendue. Le grand principe de cette liberté 
 était deposé dans le berceau de la civilisation europienne, 
 et cest l’éelise chrétienne qui l’y a introduit et main- 
 tenue.” Comp. also the confessions of our Church in the 
 28th art. cf the Augs. Conf. ° 
 
 (4) The separation of State and Church has been re- 
 garded in liberal circles as the height of political wisdom, 
 and as the infallible remedy for all the difficulties that 
 have arisen from the relations of these two powers. In 
 the German Diet of 1872 Schulze-Delitzsch, on the 
 occasion of a debate, May 16, on the Jesuits and other 
 kindred orders, moved the following amendment to the 
 law: “Finally to prepare common measures with the 
 combined governments, to bring about the complete 
 separation of State and Church, and of Church and 
 school, and thus to enter upon the only path for abolish- 
 ing for ever all religious complications in the province 
 of the State’? This is nothing else than abstract 
 doctrinairism, which supposes that difficulties are to be 
 got rid of by declaring that it will have nothing to do 
 with them. Gneist, who brought in the report, also 
 acknowledges this by speaking of the “ignis fatuus of 
 the so-called free church in the free state.’ “That 
 most unfortunate of all phrases, the free church in 
 the free state, brought things to such a pass in the 
 model state of Belgium, that the number of male and 
 female Jesuits increased more in a few years than it did 
 during the palmy days of Spanish and Austrian rule,” 
 
 etc. And yet Belgium has always been accounted the 
 
Notes to Lecture VII. 349 
 
 model state according to the pattern laid down by 
 liberalism. “That most difficult act, the actual dissolu- 
 tion of partnership between Church and State,” con- 
 tinues Gneist, ‘‘cannot be smoothed down into the 
 simple expression, ‘separation of the Church from the 
 State.” To demand this is to take the matter too easily. 
 In the present day we, who by the experiences of the 
 last few years have surpassed this stand-point, ought to 
 be spared so perplexing and barren an expression, and I 
 must beg you to dismiss all expectations founded upon 
 it.” The more intelligent, moreover, had no need of 
 the experiences of the last few years to enable them to 
 perceive that it was impossible to carry this liberal 
 doctrine into practice. Dahlmann, in his Politik section: 
 Religion and the Church in the State, p. 341, already 
 wrote—and it is not superfluous to call to mind these 
 long since uttered words of so acknowledged an 
 authority :—“ High as the State is, power does not be- 
 long to it alone; it is pervaded by a certain constitution 
 of affairs which it must accept if it would, make it of 
 relative service. Especially is religion superior to the 
 State, and the question is, what position is the Church 
 to occupy with respect thereto? Not only Hobbes, but 
 also Spinoza, cuts the knot, and Justus Lipsius, who in 
 Jena acted the protestant, in Leyden the reformed, and 
 in Lyons the catholic, followed the example of the 
 Chinese, whose religion must always be that of the 
 emperor. The esprits forts of the French Revolution 
 were satisfied with teaching, that religion had no place 
 at all in civil enactments, but was entirely the concern 
 of the individual, and a matter wholly indifferent to the 
 State; and in the autumn of 1793, it was decreed by the 
 National Convention that God and religion were to be 
 out of question in the instruction of youth. We will 
 not here ask whether the State, which derives its sup- 
 port from public custom, can assume an indifference to 
 religion, which sanctifies custom by referring it to its 
 original source,” etc., and p. 343: “Can that of which 
 
350 Notes to Lecture VII, 
 
 Socrates was incapable, with respect to a very degenerate 
 worship, be—I will not say desirable, but—on the whole 
 possible to the State at the present day, with respect to 
 Christianity, viz. to ignore it? All higher cultivation, 
 and especially all progress in the more conscious cultiva- 
 tion of the State, has been developed in modern Europe 
 by means of, and together with, Christianity. The past 
 Christian ages have given our existence limbs which we 
 cannot renounce, even if we desire to do so. When the 
 French at the Revolution rejected, together with the — 
 computation of time common to all Christians, its 
 division into weeks, which Christianity had transmitted 
 to us from Judaism, they proclaimed such a desire; but 
 to attain this supposed elevation they must have re- 
 nounced also the necessary oneness of marriage, the 
 non-exposure of children, the deeper principle of penal 
 justice, the love of one’s neighbour beyond the State, 
 in fact the foundations of their entire civilization. Tor 
 our own part we do not at all want either to miss the 
 church-tower from the landscape, or to try to separate 
 ourselves from all that Christianity is to us through our 
 ancestors.” ... . P. 367: “Can and ought the State to 
 practise absolute toleration? They who start from 
 philosophy will, when they encounter this question, 
 answer it in the affirmative, and perhaps adduce the case 
 of the United States of North America, to prove that 
 their opinion is capable of being carried out. They, 
 however, who are observers of history and of life, will, 
 while wishing to give an affirmative, decide upon a 
 negative reply, regard the case of America as not to the 
 point, and meantime strive the more earnestly to set 
 limits to the agency of the State.” P. 349: “Oaths and 
 marriage, magistracy and property, even the observance 
 of certain days, make religion the concern of the State. 
 The State must not be governed by the Church, but neither 
 must it desire to govern, to the prejudice of religion.” 
 Const. Rossler, too, in his above-named work, though 
 starting from premises which we certainly do not. share, 
 
Notes to Lecture VII. 351 
 
 says, p. 214: “The State—as the constituted totality of 
 moral functions (?)—can never be religionless. Shallow- 
 ness alone can subscribe to the proposition, that the 
 State must be atheistic, by which is meant indifferent, 
 It is in the nature of things that the State cannot behave 
 with indifference towards religion. The State is always 
 following some religious principle, however cast in the 
 background, however unrecognized such connection may 
 be ; the State may be atheistic, at least it can try to be 
 so, but then it is not indifferent.” Trendelenburg, p. 
 348, sg., expresses. himself excellently on the intrinsi- 
 cally necessary relation of the State: to religion, and 
 therefore to the Church (“the Church as a condition of 
 the very existence of the State”); and p. 352, on the 
 _ co-operation of the two: “It is universally perceived 
 how difficult it is to attain to union, and discover the 
 limits of justice in the relation of churches to each other 
 and the State, due consideration being had to their re- 
 spective individuality. But the Church, if judicious, 
 and the State, if wise, will, before they separate, or are 
 only kept together by force, leave no means untried to 
 find a point of union in their intrinsic aim, and to agree 
 upon their mutual rights.” Const. Franz, in his Vor- 
 schule zur Physiologie der Staaten, p. 153, carries out the 
 notion, that “religion must on principle be excluded 
 from the aims of the State.” For if it is true religion 
 it will be “secularized and adulterated by the State.” 
 As a matter of history, however, all states have been 
 overgrown with religious aims; and this applies even to 
 North America. P. 161: “Though, however, the State 
 must place before itself no religious aims, yet religion 
 has nevertheless a very great influence on the attain- 
 ment of the aims of the State, and even forms their in- 
 dispensable guarantee, because the disposition whence 
 arise obedience to the law and devotion to public affairs 
 is itself maintained by religion. Philosophers may de- 
 ceive themselves in this matter, but it will not escape 
 the candid observer, that the moral consciousness of 
 
352 Notes to Lecture VII. 
 
 nations is indeed and in truth everywhere rooted in 
 religion.” P. 159: “But, however States may be inter- 
 twined with religion, the latter always has its own sanc- 
 tuary, within which the power of the State neither may 
 nor can penetrate.” “God can and will suffer none to 
 rule over the soul but Himself,’ says Luther in his 
 treatise: On the Secular Authority, and how far we are 
 bound to obey it, 1523 (Erl. edit. vol. xxii. p. 82). The 
 article “ Liberalism and Ultramontanism” in the Allg. 
 Evangel. Luth. Kirchenzeitung, 1871, No. 47, shows how 
 “the theory of the absolute indifference of the State 
 towards religion, or of the “ godless State, on the part of 
 a spurious liberalism, called forth the opposite extreme 
 of the supremacy of the Church over the State, on the 
 part of Ultramontanism.” Fabri, in his Staat und Kirche, 
 1872, p. 27, sq., addresses to modern liberals certain very 
 just and weighty remarks against the unfortunate amal- 
 gamation of the party of political progress with irreli- 
 gious tendencies. I append from Tocqueville’s work on 
 American democracy a saying which has obtained fresh 
 application: “Les incrédules de Europe poursuivent 
 les chrétiens comme des ennemies politiques plutot que 
 comme des adversaires religieux; ils haissent la fox 
 comme l’opinion d’un parti plus que comme une croyance 
 erronée, et c’est moins le représentant de Dieu quiils re- 
 poussent dans le prétre que l’ami du pouvoir. En 
 Europe le christianisme a permis, qu’on l’unit intimé- 
 ment aux puissances de la terre.” The sentence in the 
 text on the ease of putting such a separation on paper, 
 etc., is in accordance with Fabri’s Staat und Kirche, p.124. 
 
 (15) Stahl’s treatise on the Christian State, 1847 and 
 1858, asserts that “ but one objection can be made to the 
 Christian State,and that is by denying Christianityitself;” 
 and then consistently carries out this assertion by say- 
 ing, ¢g., p. 20, that the state of a Christian people stands 
 in direct relation to the Christian religion, An article 
 on the Christian State (by Von Scheurl), in the Erlanger 
 
Notes to Lecture VIT. 353 
 
 Zeitschrift fiir Protestantismus, 1858, on the other hand, 
 tends to show that the legislation of the State, even 
 in the matters of marriage and national education, 
 is not directly determined by Christianity as such, but 
 by the Christian customs of the people, z.e. the national 
 Christianity in so far as this is the common possession 
 of its different churches. Otherwise the State would 
 have to practise theology, and to ascertain independently 
 from the Bible what is the Christian doctrine concerning 
 maitiage. The treatise concludes as follows: “We are 
 no less seriously concerned than Stahl, that our German 
 State should not be unchristianized. But we can only 
 conceive of the true christianization of the State as pro- 
 duced by the Christianity of the people. We do not 
 esteem it desirable, nor even, strictly speaking, possible, 
 that the enactments of a state should be directly based 
 upon Christianity. For we have no revealed Christian 
 system of government, and find in the records of the 
 Christian revelation only precepts concerning the con- 
 duct of the individual towards the State, and in this 
 respect no new revelation at all. It is true, that the 
 Christian faith will and must inwardly renew and 
 transform the national life, and therefore, that the state 
 of a Christian nation will and must be of an essentially 
 different composition from that of a non-Christian nation, 
 The State as such, however, can by no means be 
 Christian, not, that is to say, Christian in such a sense 
 as not to be national. The State, whether of a Christian 
 or a heathen people, must ever be the expression of its 
 definite nationality in its public affairs. By nationality, 
 however, we of course by no means understand the transi. 
 tory and vacillating humour of the masses, whether at 
 the present or any other period, but the permanent 
 characteristics of a nation as an intelligent individuality, 
 in our conception of which we take account not only of its 
 Separate contemporaneous members, but also of its suc- 
 cessive generations, as together constituting a certain 
 kind of personal unity. The Christian revelation relates 
 Z 
 
354 Notes to Lecture VIZ. 
 
 directly to that kingdom only which is not of this world, 
 and which is not destined to receive into itself the king- 
 doms of this world, the states assuch. To this extent we 
 assert that the Christian state properly so called is out 
 of question; for it would coincide with the Church (and 
 with the kingdom of God). Butas for state legislation in 
 conformity with the Christian character, and with the 
 prosperity of Germany, and contributing to their perman- 
 ence, may the Lord ever bestow such upon us ; and may 
 every German Christian who has the power and oppor- 
 tunity, regard it as a sacred duty to do his utmost to 
 maintain it.” 
 
 (6) The expressions of Christ in the Sermon on the 
 Mount, especially those on oaths, on suffering wrong, 
 etc. (Matt. v. 33, etc.), have—as is well known—when 
 regarded as external precepts, been frequently exposed 
 both to the misconception of believers and the misinter- 
 pretation of unbelievers; and yet Christ’s refusal to 
 arrange a dispute about an inheritance (Luke xu. 14) 
 might suffice to show us that the Lord Jesus would 
 have nothing to do with the external secular ordinances of 
 civil life, but desired that His words should be the rule 
 in the inner world of the heart. In consequence of such 
 misconception it was, that the ancient Church often 
 hesitated as to its position with respect to oaths, judi- 
 cature, trade, military service, etc. The Romish Church 
 made the words of Christ and of the Gospel in general 
 into a law, but for the sake of rendering external, 
 secular, and political existence possible, confined this 
 law to the perfect properly so called. The Anabaptists 
 fell into the same erroneous and legal views. Luther 
 speaks ably and with triumphant lucidity, on this sub- 
 ject in his exposition of Matt. v. vi. and vii. (1532, Erl. 
 edit. vol. 43). 
 
 (17) The importance of St. Paul’s Epistle to Philemon 
 consists in its bringing before us this truth, the proving 
 
Notes to Lecture VII. 355 
 
 of which is the theme of the whole of C. Schmidt’s 
 frequently mentioned work on “Civil Society in the 
 old Roman world, and its transformation by Christi- 
 anity.” | 
 
 18) Von Schweizer, Zeitgeist wnd Christenthum, 1861, 
 g 
 p.196. Comp. “Lectures on Fundamental Truths,” p. 339. 
 
 ('°) Compare Schmidt’s above-named work, p. 246. 
 
 (7°) I would call to remembrance the serious words of 
 Bismarck in the German Diet, on the occasion of the 
 debate on capital punishment. 
 
 NOTES TO LECTURE VIII. 
 
 (1) On the dignity of the judicial office, comp. Tren- 
 delenburg, Naturrecht, pp. 387 and 397; Aristotle, Eth. 
 Nicom. v. 7, 6 yap oucacrys BovrNerae etvae otov Sikatov 
 éuvruxov : the judge is to be, as it were, animate justice. 
 
 (7?) On punishment, see Trendelenburg, p. 103; its 
 authorization in the moral community, p. 104. The 
 deterring theory is that external conception of punish- 
 ment occasioned by the separation of justice from the 
 moral principle, p. 105. The notion of punishment 
 has, under Hegel’s influence, been corrected and com- 
 pleted from the moral and objective side. According 
 to this, a transaction contrary to law is null, and in 
 punishment the State makes a manifestation of its nul- 
 lity. Hence it is the negation of a negation. P. 106: 
 “Since an act of injustice, which invades the power of 
 justice, when once done cannot be undone, it is by 
 punishment that the power of justice is, ideally at least, 
 
Basa 3 ce Notes to Lecture VIII. 
 
 reinstated, and it is by means of such violence that its 
 universal recognition is maintained.” Stahl’s expres- 
 sions in the “philosophical foundation” of his Rechts- 
 philosophie, ui. 1,3, 1854, arise from his profound view of 
 the subject. P.105: “Itis the eternal law of righteous- 
 ness, as every candid consciousness bears testimony, that 
 punishment should inevitably follow evil.” P. 167: “ By 
 the punishment of the evil-doer it is testified in a practical. 
 manner that moral order is supreme.” ‘ Punishment is 
 therefore inflicted for righteousness’ sake. Punishment 
 may have no merely future purpose (as that such trans- 
 eressions should not in future be committed), and may 
 be no merely effectual mechanical means; but the act 
 which has been perpetrated, of itself and absolutely, 
 requires punishment on moral grounds.” ' This is the 
 specific and universal meaning of the term, and when 
 the penalty which the transeressor suffers in punish- 
 ment is inflicted for any other purpose—such as pre- 
 vention, protection, etc., it ought at least to be no longer 
 called punishment. Trendelenburg, p. 120: “In the 
 corrective point of view the Church stretches out a 
 helping hand to the State.” 
 
 (3) The right of capital punishment is expressly ac- 
 knowledged in holy Scripture. On the passage in Gen. » 
 1x. 5, 6, whose literal translation is: “ Your blood will I 
 require according to your souls, at the hand of every 
 beast will I require it, and at the hand of man, at the 
 hand of every one’s brother will I require the life of 
 man. Who sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood 
 be shed, for in the image of God made He man,” comp. 
 Delitzsch’s Commentary on Genesis, 4th edit., 1872, p. 
 227: “Murder is the most extreme violation of the 
 brotherly relation of mankind, and is to.be punished 
 ‘accordingly. The penal power attributable to God 
 alone, is here committed to the hands of man.” “We 
 have here the first traces of the institution of a govern- 
 ment as the executive of the divine law and the repre- 
 
Notes to Lecture VITI. ODN 
 
 sentative of God.” And indeed it is, in the first place, 
 the human race itself which is invested with the attri- 
 butes of authority, and opposed as a Holy Vehme to the 
 act of blood. When St. Paul, Rom. xiii. 4, designates the 
 magistrate as the bearer of the sword, he unquestionably 
 uses the sword as the symbol of the “jus gladii, ie. 
 necis (Ulpian. qui universas provincias regent jus eladiu 
 habent).” He is speaking, moreover, not of heathen 
 magistrates only, but of magistrates in general, and of 
 what results from the idea of government. It is moreover 
 obvious that the sword cannot be the great insignia of 
 penal justice to the exclusion of capital punishment, but 
 that it is chosen with express reference to the latter. 
 As Luther says: “it is not in vain, that is, not sine 
 
 _ usu, not as a mere bauble, that he bears the sword.” 
 
 Comp. Tholuck’s Commentary on the Epistle to the 
 ftomans, 5th edit. 1865. On capital punishment, Stahl, 
 Fundamente einer Christliche Philosophie, p. 150, Says : 
 “There is an absolute transgression against the most 
 sacred possession, which civil order must, according to 
 God’s command, protect; and hence there is also an abso- 
 lute punishment, .viz., the execution of the transgressor.” 
 Philosophie des Rechts, p. ii. 2, p. 540: “A legislation 
 which does not inflict death, but only imprisonment, for 
 murder, would not maintain in its full sacredness the 
 law which protects life, and hence, far from being a 
 humane, would on the contrary, by its disregard of 
 human life, be an unjust legislation.” Kant also requires 
 capital punishment: “There is nohomogeneousness between 
 ever so sad a life and death” (Lechtslehre, vol. v. p. 168). 
 Hegel, Philosophie des Rechts, p. 345: “Since life ig the 
 whole compass of being, punishment for taking this away 
 cannot consist in the loss of that which is of a non- 
 equivalent value, but only in deprivation of life.” Com- 
 pare also the justification of capital punishment by 
 Marheinecke, Theol. Moral, pp. 336-345 ; Nitzsch, System 
 der Christlichen Lehre, p. 334; Rothe, Theol. Ethik, vy. 
 278, sq.; Wuttke, Handbuch der Christlichen Sittenlehre, 
 
 . 
 
358 Notes to Lecture VIII. 
 
 i. 565, etc. The question of capital punishment has 
 recently, as is well known, been made the subject of 
 repeated discussions, and the aversion to it is one very 
 widely diffused. An enlightened juristic vote in its 
 favour is given by J. E. Kuntze, Ueber die Todesstrafe, 
 1868. Comp. also die Frage v. d. Todesstrafe, Versuch 
 emer hoheren Darst. etc., 1869 ; Pfotenhauer, die Todes- 
 strafe akadem. Vorirdge, 1863; Fiirer, die Todesstrafe, 
 en Versuch zu ihrer Rechtfertigung, a lecture delivered 
 at the Gnadau Conference, 1869, with concluding re- 
 marks by President V. Gerlach, 1869; Kemmler, die 
 Lerechtigung der Todesstrafe, 1868. On the other side 
 see Mehring, Prdlat. die Frage v. d. Todesstrafe, 1868. 
 The antipathy to and attack upon capital punishment 
 have chiefly originated in a misunderstood humanity. 
 Trendelenburg, p. 124: “It is false humanity to promote 
 crime by lax punishments in the interest of the criminal.” 
 Capital punishment may be greatly restricted, indeed 
 for the most part be checked, but when it is abolished 
 by law, a right to life which he no longer possesses is 
 conceded to the criminal, and those notions of justice 
 which relate to its due proportionality become per- 
 plexed. 
 
 (°) Augs. Konf. 16: ‘“ Of magistracy and secular 
 government it is taught that all authorities, regular 
 governments and laws, are ordained and instituted of 
 God.” Rulers are in the Old Testament called Elohim 
 (Gods) as the representatives of God. The Divine in- 
 stitution is, however, designated by our Church not as 
 direct, but as indirect. “As heaven and earth, sun, 
 moon, and stars, are God’s ordinances, and upheld by 
 Him, so also are all polities.” Ayol. 8, art. 156, ed. 
 Rech. How lively a consciousness of the Divine 
 authority of even heathen governments prevailed in the 
 ancient Church is shown by several expressions of 
 Tertullian: “ Noster est magis Cesar ut a Deo nostro con- 
 stitutus quam/vester.” Aug. de Civ. D. 5, 21: “ Qui dedit 
 
Notes to Lecture VITT. 359 
 
 imperium Constantino christiano, ipse etiam apostate 
 Juliano.” (Tholuck’s Com. on Romans, ch. xui.1.) For 
 what Luther thought of the Divine institution of 
 government, comp. Luthers Hthik, p. 101: “ Let the 
 government be what it may, it 1s not of man, or it would 
 not be safe for an hour; if God did not uphold it by His 
 power, my Lord Omnes would utterly destroy it. Be- 
 cause therefore it is the power and ordinance of God, we 
 must look upon it as though we saw God. Wherever 
 He casts it, His. honour must follow” (Erl. ed. 34, 217). 
 This must be said for the comfort of governors and for 
 the fear of subjects (36, 189). “ After the Gospel or 
 spiritual office, there is on earth no better jewel, no 
 ereater treasure, no richer alms, no more excellent in- 
 stitution, no better possession, than a government which 
 does justice and upholds right” (39, 241, and elsewhere). 
 Christ, indeed, sanctioned government, but did not 
 institute it (5, 272, 39, 233); it is Divine, bet not, 
 properly speaking, Christian. “For the emperor was at 
 that time (viz. of Christ) a heathen, and knew nothing 
 of Christ, and. his government was founded on merely 
 human wisdom, and guided, conducted, and maintained 
 thereby ; yet Christ says, that because he is emperor 
 he is to be regarded and obeyed as such” (5, 272). 
 Government belongs to the kingdom of creation, not to 
 that of the Gospel, and is not therefore founded and 
 justified first of all by the latter (against the papal 
 doctrine). For such a kingdom already existed, founded 
 from the beginning of the world, and subjected to the 
 reason of man, by the Word of God, as He says, Gen. 
 i. 28, “ Have dominion over the fish of the sea,” ete. 
 This is the ancient rule with which the secular authority 
 has to do, and for which it needs not the Holy Spirit, 
 and concerning which not much is to be taught even in 
 Christendom. “The counsel and assistance of lawyers 
 is what is needed in this respect” (11, 326). Comp. 
 also Harless, Christl. Ethik, 6th ed. 1864, p. 547, sq. 
 (translated. in Clark’s Foreign Theological Library). 
 Rothe, Zheol. Ethik, 2nd ed. vol. it. 1867, p. 460, sq. 
 
360 Notes to Lecture VITT, 
 
 (°) Harless’s above cited work, p. 652, sq.: “When kings 
 and those in authority no longer rule ‘by the grace of 
 God, and subjects no longer obey ‘in the name of God, 
 then even the best form of government is eaten away by 
 a spirit of self-deception; and the ruler who says ‘I am 
 the State’ is soon followed by the other and equally 
 false extreme, ‘the will of the sovereign people’ A 
 people, on the other hand, is well advised, when rulers 
 and subjects are reminded by justice and law, that the 
 maintenance of order is designed to secure to the mem- 
 bers of the commonwealth the possibility. of together 
 fulfilling their common office in the spirit of the love of 
 Christ, and where that office, being regarded as of God’s 
 appointment, reminds all as much of God’s judgement 
 (comp. eg., Ps. 1xxxii.), as of those gifts of grace without 
 which even natural fitness for an earthly office cannot 
 enable a man to discharge its duties with a blessing,” ete. 
 The doctrine of the sovereignty of the people had been 
 promulgated previous to Rousseau and the writers of 
 the Revolution by the Jesuits. This was done, eg., in 
 the beginning of the seventeenth century by Mariana, 
 who in some respects goes even beyond the French 
 Revolution. He permits insurrection, not merely when 
 it is resolved on in an assembly of the people, but when 
 such an assembly 'is not possible (si publici conventus 
 facultas erit sublata), each individual is called upon to 
 kill tyrants; for the desire of citizens to destroy tyranny 
 and to punish the crimes of rulers does not cease with 
 their loss of the power of assembling, etc. Only this 
 may not be done by means of poison, partly because 
 execution by poisoning is not a punishment customary 
 in Christendom, partly because others than the tyrant 
 are endangered thereby. The assassination of Henry III. 
 by a monk is especially extolled (Mariana, de Rege et 
 fegis wnstitutione, 1. 6,'7). Stahl, Geschichte der Rechts- 
 philosophie, 2nd edit. p. 293. 
 
 (°) Comp. Luther, “On Secular Rulers, and how far we 
 
Notes to Lecture VIII. 361 
 
 owe them Obedience,” 1523, Zthik Luthers, p. 107, etc. 
 Luther most earnestly deprecates sedition (xxii. 261, 
 xxl. 61, liv. 139). ‘“ For sedition is worse than murder” 
 (iii, 219). “ However tyrannical rulers may be, though 
 they must themselves answer to God for their tyranny, 
 this gives their subjects no right to use force against them. 
 It is true that rulers are bound to maintain justice 
 (xxi. 265), and when they put power before justice, 
 must put up with being reproached by words (xli. 18) ; 
 but we have no right to go further, and to resist by force 
 the injustice which we should on the contrary suffer ” 
 (xxxviil. 435, and elsewhere). What is further said in 
 the text on the increased affinity with revolutionary 
 views existing in many non-German Reformed circles, 
 rests upon personal observations, and is confirmed by 
 history. 
 
 . () On how sedition is rejected by Luther, comp. 
 Note 6. On this point, Trendelenburg well says, in his 
 Naturrecht, p. 492: “In a legitimate state, revolution, 
 if we compare what takes place within a state to that 
 which happens to man in general, is a rebellion of the 
 desires against the will. In every revolution there is 
 always an error in the background, on the side of either 
 the people or the government, and sometimes of both. 
 Every revolution errs against the fundamental idea of 
 the State, for in each the part usurps authority over the 
 whole, and right yields to might. The State being the 
 condition for the realization of all justice, it is absolutely 
 inviolable; and if it is to protect right, it must itself be 
 protected by law. Every revolution involves the dis- 
 order of the State. Though it may seem at first a 
 forcible uprising only against a part, it really is an up- 
 rising against the whole. No one has it in his power 
 to hinder the war against a part from becoming a war 
 of the parts against each other, and a war against the 
 whole. evolution endangers the feeling of respect for 
 rulers, and the stability of law, and hence cuts at the 
 
362 Notes to Lecture VITT. 
 
 roots of the nation’s moral ideas. It interrupts the con- 
 tinuous development, and cuts asunder the roots of law 
 which find their strength in history,” etc. On that 
 counterpart of revolution—a morbid reaction—I quote 
 the able expressions of Stahl (die Gegenwartigen Par- 
 teen wn Staat und Kirche, 2nd ed. 1868, p. 334, sq.). 
 After showing that there is a reaction which is salutary 
 and necessary, viz. the restoration of true principles, 
 good institutions, etc., he continues: “ But there is also 
 a morbid reaction. It consists in misconceiving and 
 keeping aloof from the tasks actually incumbent upon 
 the times, which revolution had but misunderstood. ... 
 Merely to put down revolution is of itself no healthy 
 reaction. But a reaction is decidedly morbid when it 
 attacks wholesome institutions, together with revo- 
 lution; when it reacts not only against the diseased 
 matter, but against the developing healthy germ; when 
 it seeks not only to extirpate the malady, but to para- 
 lyze and destroy the members infected with it. Revo- 
 lution, besides the evil which it is in itself, involves 
 also the opposite evil of such obstructive and destruc- 
 tive reaction.” . 
 
 (*) On the question of legitimacy, comp. Stahl, die 
 Gegenwartigen Parteien, p. 302: “It is an error to sup- 
 pose that the principle of legitimacy involves slavish un- 
 conditional obedience. That subjects should themselves. 
 employ force, practise active resistance, rebel against 
 their rulers, is certainly contrary to it.” On the other 
 hand, however, on the principles of legitimacy, and by 
 the concurrence of the whole Christian Church, when 
 rulers overstep the limits of Divine or human enact- 
 ments, passive resistance—ie. the refusal of obedience 
 unless under the application of foree—is beyond all 
 doubt allowed, nay commanded. “It is an error to 
 suppose that the principle of legitimacy is an unbending 
 logical dogma, which ignores, in favour of the absolute 
 inalienability of dynastic rights, all historical events, and 
 
Notes to Lecture VIII. 363 
 
 opposes all historical necessities, and therefore sets itself 
 above history. The legitimate claims of a dynasty 
 originate in time, and may also terminate in time; they 
 attain maturity, they become superannuated ; and the 
 same Divine Providence which founded, has also the 
 right and power to destroy kingship. The idea of 
 legitimacy is just this, that man (the people) should 
 recognise God’s providence in history, as a law above 
 himself, and should therefore certainly not attempt 
 himself to lay down a law to Providence.” Similarly 
 does Harless express himself in his Christl. Ethik, p. 552, 
 when discussing the conduct of the Christian with re- 
 spect to changes in the existing order of things. I refer 
 to him more especially, because he states more decidedly 
 than I have done in the text, the conditions under which 
 the new government is to be regarded as the actual goy- 
 ernment. “That government has no right to recognition, 
 on the ground of the Christian conscience, which opposes 
 the general moral objects of human society, and their 
 special realization according to the national peculiarities 
 of a people” (p. 554). But how is such a state of affairs 
 to be recognised, and according to what principle is it to 
 be judged of ? I believe we must fall back upon the 
 point mentioned in the text as one easily perceptible, 
 viz. that the new authorities have already entered upon 
 the administration of the laws of the State. With 
 respect, however, to the resistance which may be offered 
 to lawlessness, he says, p! 554: “The position of those 
 who were appointed on the part of the community (by 
 public acts), to advocate and administer the rights of a 
 people to the maintenance of their national calling, is 
 one thing; the position of those whose business it is, 
 as simple members of a nation, to contribute to the 
 preservation of the rights of a national society, by con- 
 forming their personal actions to national enactments, is 
 another. The former must, in conformity with their 
 office, oppose every power destructive of the objects of 
 human and national society; the latter may do so, but 
 
364 Notes to Lecture VITTI. 
 
 are not officially called upon by the interests of society 
 thus to act,” etc. To escape by flight and exile from the 
 duty of protest, and refusal of an oath of allegiance, can 
 only be justified or appear innocent where there is from 
 the first a certainty that every attempt to maintain 
 justice will be rendered vain by force, before it is carried 
 into execution. 
 
 (°) Comp. Ruckert’s touching lay : 
 
 “‘ Aus der Jugendzeit, aus der Jugendzeit 
 Klingt ein Lied mir immerdar ; 
 O wie liegt so weit, o wie liegt so weit, 
 Was mein einst war ! 
 
 “* Was die Schwalbe sang, was die Schwalbe sang 
 Die den Herbst und Friihling bringt ; 
 Ob das Dorf entlang, ob das Dorf entlang, 
 Das jetzt noch klingt. 
 
 ‘*O du Heimatflur, o du Heimatflur 
 Lass zu deinem sel’gen Raum, . 
 Mich noch einmal nur, mich noch einmal nur, 
 Entfliehn im Traum !” 
 
 Rothe, Theol. Hthik, 2nd edit. 1867, ii. 432: “The soil, 
 ze. to speak generally, the sum-total of the material 
 elements which constitute the sphere of its external 
 existence, being the causal principle of a nation’s in- 
 dividuality, the chief and original object of patriotism is 
 this very soil on which the nation has grown.” Rothe 
 shows farther on, how patriotism then “takes a higher 
 flight.” Comp. Note 10. 
 
 (*°) Rothe, Theol. Ethik: “But as soon as an indivi- 
 dual, in his attachment to his nation, becomes also con- 
 scious of an attachment to its political constitution, his 
 patriotism takes a higher flight, and becomes a love to 
 the political institutions of his home” (5, 392). Schleier- 
 macher, Christl. Sitte, p. 257: “He is a bad citizen who 
 does not actively interfere, when the objects of the State 
 cannot be attained without his assistance.” Fichte, too, 
 admits in his addresses to the German nation (Works, vii. 
 
 7 
 
Notes to Lecture VIIT. 365 
 
 299, sq.), that when what is highest and most difficult in 
 politics has to be effected, morality must be completed 
 and strengthened by religion. 
 
 (") Comp. eg., the following strophes from the 
 Heliand. Mary, after receiving the message of the 
 Angel, says :— 
 
 **¢ Mein Herz zweifelt nicht 
 an Wort und Weise.’ So erfuhr ich dass das Weibempfing 
 gottesbotschaftgern und willig, 
 
 mit lichtem Sinn und mit lauterer Treue, 
 mit guttem Glauben.” * 
 
 Of Mary at the manger it is said, v. 383 :— 
 
 ‘¢ Nicht war ihr Herz in Zweifel, 
 das Gemuth der Jungfrau.” + 
 
 Of the wicked Jews, on the contrary, v. 2350 :— 
 
 ‘Und so manches grosse 
 Zeichen zeigte er ihnen dass sie nicht zweifeln sollten, 
 sondern lauterer an seine Lehre glaubten.” + 
 
 Vereen ie a 
 **So frommt die Treue 
 und ist gut fiir jeden, dass kein Goldes Hort 
 gleicht solchem Glauben.” § © 
 
 V. 2903 :— 
 
 ** An des Wassers Gestade 
 sammelten sich die Gesellen Christi die er sich selbst erkoren 
 die Zwolfe in guter Treue: sie Kannten Zweifel nicht.” || 
 
 And so in many other passages. Comp. also Vilmar, 
 deutsche Altertliimer inv altsdchs. Heliund (Gymnasialpro- 
 gramm, Marburg), p. 24, sq. 
 
 * “My heart doubts neither the word nor the means.” I. thus per- 
 ceived that the woman received God’s message willingly and heartily, 
 with sincere fidelity and true faith. 
 
 + Her heart was in no doubt, the mind of the Virgin. 
 
 + And He showed them so many signs that they ought not to have 
 doubted, but simply to have believed His doctrine. P 
 
 § This faithfulness profits, and is good for all, so that no treasure of 
 gold equals such faith. 
 
 || The companions of Christ whom He had Himself chosen, the 
 twelve, assembled on the shore in good faith ; they knew no doubt, 
 
366 Notes to Lecture VIL. 
 
 (7) On the advent of infidelity from Italy at the 
 period of the Renaissance, comp. “ Lectures on Funda- 
 mental Truths,” pp. 8 and 335, sg. The influence of 
 France, especially of Voltaire and French freethinking, 
 is well known. Nor is it less so, that the German 
 patriots of the era of liberation—especially Stein and 
 Arndt—advocated by word and deed, and insisted upon 
 not merely general, but Christian piety, as a condition of 
 the restoration of Germany. Comp. “ Lectures on Funda- 
 mental Truths,” p. 123, sq. 
 
 (18) Roscher, i. 508: “In behalf of the human feeling 
 for liberty, it may boldly be affirmed, that no religious 
 and morally good people ever perished so long as it pre- 
 served these best possessions.” Tocqueville: “A people 
 that would be free and strong must believe, and a people 
 which will not believe must be a subject people.” 
 
 (#4) Cicero’s contributions to international legislation 
 amount to legal forms to be observed at the proclama- 
 tion and during the waging of war, de Ofic. 1. 11. His 
 boastful words on the old times of Rome (at the begin- 
 ing of 11.8), in which Rome’s position towards the nations 
 “micht be more correctly called a protectorate of the 
 world than a supremacy over it,’ have a tinge of 
 panegyric and purpose. On the influence of Christi- 
 anity, and consequently on the importance of the 
 papacy, in the Middle Ages, with respect to the rights of 
 nations, comp. vol. xxi. pp. 518-521, in Wagener’s Staats- 
 und Cresellschaftslecicon ; Rothe, v. p. 341, sq. Schleier- 
 macher, Christl. Sitte, p. 491: “It is also a result of the 
 growing power of true Christian consciousness, that 
 states endeavour to institute and ensure a peaceable 
 intercourse with each other, and that indeed no longer. 
 from a selfish point of view, but purely out of love to 
 the entire body of nations. And this result, where it 
 exists, is the highest attainment of policy, and the most 
 brilliant triumph of the Christian spirit; for nothing more 
 
Notes to Lecture VITT. 367 
 
 powerful than the selfishness of nations can be opposed 
 to Christianity.” 
 
 (5) On the moral importance of trade, comp. Rothe, v. 
 247, sq.: “As on the one hand credit being the condition 
 of its vitality, moral worth, and especially that national 
 and public morality which begets confidence, is its in- 
 dispensable basis; so too on the other is it an instrument of 
 supreme importance for the diffusion and propagation of 
 those powers which carry on the moral process among 
 mankind.” Stahl, 11.2, p. 58: “Commerce, as the ruler of 
 material intercourse, carries intellectual intercourse upon 
 his back.” Trendelenburg, p. 504: “ Commerce has, from 
 the beginning of the world’s history, opened one nation to 
 another, and implanted and cherished in all the thought 
 that they need each other.” P.329: “Thus commerce 
 becomes an ethical instrument, and that not only of one 
 nation, but of mankind.” P. 333: “When commerce, in 
 its great enterprises, boldly traverses the ocean, etc., it 
 strips off its mere self-seeking, and the merchant learns 
 to entertain grand designs affecting the whole world.” 
 
 (16) The ancient Church often hesitated concerning 
 the lawfulness of waging war. On Luther’s teaching, 
 comp. Luthers Hthik, p. 109: “It forbids us to use the 
 sword, but when rulers require us to draw it in war, 
 we are bound promptly and confidently to wield it; it 
 is then no longer our hand that strikes, for we no longer 
 do it ourselves, but our rulers do it by means of our 
 arm. We then act not as Christians, but as subjects,” 
 etc. (43, 128, 137). It is this thought which Luther 
 carried out, when he found occasion to write a separate 
 treatise on the question, “ Whether soldiers can be in 
 a state of salvation,” 1526. In this he makes the dis- 
 tinction between the person and his office the foundation 
 of the entire discussion. It is quite another question, 
 whether war is itself lawful. Here it is self-evident, 
 that everything turns first on its beig not a matter of 
 
368 ; Notes to Lecture VIII. 
 
 choice but of necessity (22, 270, sq., 23, 54), and then 
 upon its being entered upon, not with arrogant self-con- — 
 fidence, but in dependence on God (22, 227). Trendelen- 
 burg, p. 420: “ War between two nations inflames their 
 mutual passions, and a bloody battle unchains in the 
 ordinary man the wild beast within him which was 
 restrained by culture, and makes him a savage, like the 
 tame lion after he has tasted blood.” P. 526: “War is 
 the self-help of nations. And as in a state, when the 
 maintenance of justice has become impossible, this main- 
 tenance 1s again left to the individual, so among the 
 different states, when the power of deciding and recon- 
 ciling is absent, self-help becomes lawful. The right- 
 fulness of a war depends upon the consciousness of a 
 moral necessity. This consciousness is indeed at first 
 only that of a party, and not a judicial sentence; but 
 if the consciousness becomes the moral faith of the. 
 nation, this.1s both a pledge of the lawfulness of the 
 cause, and a source of strength which cannot be equalled.” 
 Harless, Christl. Hihik, p. 489, sq. The characteristic of 
 a lawful war is that it is necessary in the interest of 
 justice. “Its justification is to be found in those in- 
 ternational duties which flow from the special callings 
 appointed by God to the several nations in their mutual 
 relations, and whose violation a reeularly constituted asso- 
 ciation of nations has a right to avenge. The Chris- 
 tian who recognises his earthly calling as an individual 
 member of a nation, neither can nor will draw back 
 from the duty of avenging breaches of international 
 law. Nay, knowing that in this respect he is not 
 merely in the service of an earthly master, but even as 
 a soldier is serving his God, to whom he owes life and 
 body, for the purpose of executing His justice, it is in 
 the Christian soldier that we find the full spirit of 
 sincere self-surrender to the execution of God’s justice 
 and righteousness on earth.” The glorification of war 
 as a means of exciting the varied powers of life—a 
 glorification frequently heard of late—apart from the 
 
Notes to Lecture VIII. 369 
 
 Divine calling thereto above alluded to, cannot be mor- 
 ally justified. 
 
 (7) On the agency of Christian love in war, comp. 
 Lehmann, die Werke der Liebe, 1870; on the work of 
 deaconesses, p. 144, 225, note 11, where the supple- 
 ments to the jlreg. Blatter of the rauhes Haus, 1864 and 
 1866, Nos. 8 and 9, are referred to. Allg. Ev. Luth. Kir- 
 chenzeritung, 1870 ; on the Samaritan-service in war, Nos. 
 41and43. Raundorff, Unter dem rothen Kreuz, Leipzig, 
 1867. (The dark picture here drawn of the hyenas of 
 the battle-field, in contrast to the works of Christian 
 love, is very terrible.) Henri Dunaut, die Barmherzigheit 
 auf dem Schlachtfelde, eine Erinnerung an Solferino, 
 translated by Wagner, 1864. Discussions of the Inter- 
 national Conference, Berlin, 1869. Hahn, die deutschen 
 Frauenvereine unter dem rothen Kreuz, 1870. Brink- 
 mann, dve frevwillige Krankenpflege im Kriege, 1867. 
 Uhlhorn, die Arbeit der Diakonrssen im letzten Kriege, a 
 lecture, 1867. Marie Simon, meine Erfahrungen auf dem 
 Gebrete der freiwilligen Krankenpflege, 1872. Scheper’s 
 bilder und Hindriicke aus einer achtwichentlichen Dienst- 
 ze als frevwilliger Keldprediger, 1871. Diestelkamp, 
 Freuden und Leiden eines geistl. freiwilligen Kranken- 
 pflegers, 1871. Hofmann, Lrinnerungen an den deutsch- 
 Jranzs Feldzug, 1870-71. Kadelbach, Bilder und 
 Erinnerungen, etc., 1871. Also the information given 
 in the different journals on this subject, eg. Bausteine, 
 hannov. Sonntagsblatt, Armen- und Krankenfreunde by 
 Disselhoff, ete. 
 
 ('8) On the moral task of diplomacy, comp. Trendelen- 
 burg, p. 542, sq. 
 
 (1°) Trendelenburg, p. 545: “We will not ask whether 
 men will ever be able to dispense with war. We do 
 not ask it because the time is far off. Nevertheless, 
 constant peace has from of old been the desire of the 
 
 2A 
 
370 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 wiser sort who hope for it when man becomes good. 
 The prophet Isaiah (21. 2, sq.) tells of the last days, when 
 the nations shall make their swords into ploughshares, 
 and their spears into sickles. But they are not to come 
 till the mountain, on which is the Lord’s house, is higher 
 than all mountains, and till all walk in the light of the 
 Lord. The Stoic Zeno imagines an age in which the 
 nations will live like one flock upon a common pasture, 
 and under common laws; and a Stoic poet sings hope- 
 fully even of a Roman era: “Tune genus humanum positis 
 sibi consulat armis inque vicem-gens omnis amet.” Kant 
 describes it as a condition of constant peace that politics 
 should be moral (new edit. 1796, p. 96). “Constant 
 peace is to proceed from morality, and law, in so far as 
 it is itself moral, will help us to bring it about and 
 maintain it.” But morality points back to religion, ze. 
 to Christianity. And of this, the first and last word, 
 is “the kingdom of God.” 
 
 NOTES TO LECTURE IX. 
 
 (') Comp. A. von Harless, das Verhdltniss des Chris- 
 tenthums zu Kultur und Lebensfragen, Erlangen, 1863 ; 
 Conrady, Kultur und Christenthum, a Lecture, 1868; 
 Disselhoff, Christenthum und Kultur, in the nine Apolo- 
 getic Lectures published by the Committee of the Society 
 for the Inner Mission in Bremen, 1869. Conrady lays 
 down a definition of culture which is too formal, and 
 not quite to the point. “ By culture,” he says, “we un- 
 derstand the whole range of the efforts of the human 
 mind in the actual or supposed development of the powers 
 and talents latent therein and referable thereto, together 
 with the summary of all those mental acquisitions 
 which find their expression in the literature of the age, 
 in art, and in politics.” Here culture is not suffi- 
 ciently separated from education, with which indeed 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. Olt 
 
 Conrady rather identifies it (p. 5), which is scarcely 
 correct. I have endeavoured in the text (comp. the be- 
 ginning of Lect. X.) to state briefly and exactly the re- 
 lation between the two. Harless, guided by motives 
 which he states, confines himself to the discussion of 
 poetry, literature, and politics, in their relation to Chris- 
 tianity. He likewise directs his chief attention only to 
 art and science. Disselhoff designates free spiritual 
 personality, marriage, the family, the state, and art and 
 science, within these provinces as the chief manifesta- 
 tions of culture. In discussing these matters, he dis- 
 plays extensive reading, especially in poetic literature. 
 I have endeavoured in the text to furnish a complete 
 sketch of the various departments and agencies of cul- 
 ture, upon the ground of the old and popular division 
 of the different classes. 
 
 (*) Plato in “the State,” on the ground of his psycho- 
 logical division of man into reason (vovs in the head), 
 courage (Ouuds in the breast), and sensuous desires 
 (€7eOvuia in the belly), already regarded the State as 
 compounded of three classes—of the ruling, the ficht- 
 ing, and the earning, z.e. of the educated, administrative, 
 and labouring classes. With this division the cardinal 
 virtues agree. The virtue of the first class is wisdom, 
 that of the second valour, that of the third prudence, 
 while justice keeps them all in order. The Indian castes 
 are also founded upon this division, which is in them 
 carried out to its extreme. Comp. Wuttke; Handbuch 
 der christl. Sittenlehre, vol. ii. sec. 308 (p. 520, Sq.). 
 
 (?) On the influence of settlement and agriculture 
 with regard to culture, comp. Lotze, Mikrokosmus, ii. 
 411, sg. On the condition of the ancient Aryan nations, 
 comp. J. Routsch, Ueber Indo-germanen und Semitenthum, 
 eine Volkerpsychologische Studie, 1872, p. 26, s¢. From 
 what has been said, it appears that the life of the primi- 
 tive Indo-Germanic peoples was chiefly, but not exclu- 
 
O12 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 sively, a pastoral one. We have not to think, in their 
 case, of a nomadic life like that, eg., of the predatory 
 tribes of Scythians, Turcomans, and Mongols, but of a 
 wandering with their herds, occasionally combined, when 
 a longer sojourn was made, with the cultivation of the 
 soil. Here, then, where we first meet with the nations 
 of the Indo-Germanic group, we already. find among 
 them the germs which, when developed, laid the founda- 
 tion of their subsequent greatness in the world’s history, 
 viz., a determined inclination for a settled life, combined 
 with the impulse to spread themselves,—a feeling for 
 what is called culture and civilization, combined with 
 military courage and warlike inclinations. Proof of this 
 is adduced from language, viz., from the circumstance 
 that in all the Indo-Germanic tongues there are a 
 number of words designating things, which betray at 
 least a start towards civilized life; house (dama, domus), 
 plough, barley (ێa, yava). That the rearing of cattle 
 formed the chief employment is perceived from the fact, 
 that among all the Indo-Germans the collective idea is 
 found (pacu, zw, pecu, faihu). Bullocks, cows and 
 oxen, horse, sheep, and swine were tamed by the Indo- 
 Germans. “The flock includes the dog, already become 
 the friend of man, while the cat seems not to have been 
 as yet domesticated, on which account the mouse, ‘the 
 thief, still had a'good time,” ete. 
 
 (4) Handicraft was regarded as aveNevOepov (unworthy 
 of a free man) by the ancient world. Plato, de Rep. 1. 
 347; Aristot. Polit. ii. 3, 2, viii.: “ All common labour 
 and trading in the life of a citizen” are incompatible 
 with true political virtue and prosperity. “ For such a 
 life is ignoble.” vi. 27: “None of the employments 
 carried on by the multitude of artizans, dealers, and 
 hirelings require or excite any moral power.” Lhet. i. 
 9,27: uedeutay épyaterOa Bavavooy Téxvev, EAeuOE pov 
 yap TO wy Tpos G\Aov Gy. We also find in Cicero a 
 like contempt for manual labour and labourers: “ An 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. 373 
 quidquam stultius, quam quos singulos sicut operarios 
 barbarosque contemnis, eos aliquid putare esse uni- 
 versos. —-T'use. v. 42; de Offic. i. 42: “Base and ignoble 
 is also the business of the day-labourer, of whom the 
 labour—not the skill—is remunerated, for, in their case, 
 the wage for which they bind themselves to the work of 
 a slave is ready money. We cannot also but regard as 
 low the employment of the retail dealers, who buy 
 wares from wholesale dealers to sell them directly, for 
 they can gain nothing but by duly deceiving their cus- 
 tomers; and there is nothing really more disgraceful 
 than deceit. Artizans, too, practise a mean employment, 
 for the workshop implies nothing noble.” Comp, E. 
 Schmidt, Die biirgerliche Gesellschaft, etc. p. 56, ete. 
 Lotze (Mikrokosmus, iii. 257, sq.) strongly condemns 
 Aristotle on this point. On handicraft among the Jews, 
 comp. the copious and interesting proofs in Delitzsch, 
 Handwerkerleben zur Zeit Jesu, Erlangen, 1868. The 
 relation between Christianity and labour is expressed 
 in Eph. iv. 28; 1 Thess. iv. 11; 2 Thess. iii. 10-12. 
 On the esteem in which labour was held in the primitive 
 Church, comp. Schmidt, 191. On the sound views of 
 the guilds of the Middle Ages, comp. Lotze, iii. 263, sq. 
 
 (°) Aristot. Pol. i. 3,23: “The activity of trade is ex- 
 posed to just disapprobation, because its foundations are 
 unnatural, and rest upon mutual overreaching.” Cicero 
 approves only of wholesale, and condemns retail dealing 
 (see note 4). There was also some indecision in the 
 primitive Church on the question of trade (comp. Lac- 
 tant. Institt. v. 17, 12, sq.) Comp. also Lecture VIII. 
 Note 15. 
 
 (°) Lotze, iii, 269, sq., speaks doubtfully of the results 
 of machinery, and of the great division of labour thereby 
 introduced. On the division of labour as the founda- 
 tion of all human culture, and on its uses, comp. Roscher, 
 System der Volkswirthschaft, i. 9th ed. 1871, p. 110, sq., 
 
374 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 while the dark side of a highly-developed division of 
 labour is brought forward, p. 119, sg. Some of Roscher’s 
 opinions on this question are here cited: “ Where, in- 
 deed, the one-sidedness effected by the division of labour, 
 goes so far as to deteriorate the personality of the work- 
 man, then the human loss of the nation is greater than 
 its material gain.” Schleiermacher rightly pronounces 
 all purely mechanical employment of a man, which 
 makes him an animated instrument (a slave !), immoral. 
 “The proportion in which any special calling is moral, 
 depends on the measure in which it harmonizes with 
 the general calling of mankind. The whole man is of 
 more importance than the sum of his performances and 
 enjoyments (Luke ix. 25). Hence, nothing is more per- 
 nicious than a premature addiction to some one-sided 
 employment, often resorted to from poverty, before the 
 foundations of a general education have been laid” (p. 
 121). “The best corrective for the one-sidedness re- 
 sulting from an extreme division of labour, consists in 
 the extension and the varied employment of leisure, 
 both which are indeed facilitated by that higher culture 
 which is combined with the division of labour” (p. 122). 
 
 (7) The labour question is a chief element of the social 
 question, on whose successful solution the future of our 
 civil society depends. Dr. Engel, director of the Royal 
 Statistical Office of Berlin, says in the Staddisches 
 Jahrbuch of Berlin for 1868: “The wholesale industry 
 system now prevailing, and specially advocated in large 
 towns, 1s characterized as follows bythe most enlightened 
 statesmen, and those best acquainted with actual life, 
 There is, notwithstanding all the humane endeavours on 
 the part of individual employers, and the heroic exer- 
 tions after frugal self-help on that of many workmen, a 
 consumption of men in favour of capital—a consump- 
 tion which, by wearing out the vital strength of indi- 
 viduals, by enfeebling whole generations, by breaking up 
 families, by letting men run morally wild, and by its 
 destruction of all alacrity in labour, endangers in the 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. 375 
 
 highest degree the state of civilised society.” After the 
 successful termination of an external war, which now 
 lies behind us, this internal conflict, now gathering its 
 forces, hangs menacingly over us. Modern times have 
 put powerful weapons into the hands of the so-called 
 working classes,—universal suffrage, corporate rights, and 
 liberty of coalition. To these are added, as motive 
 powers, the undeniably many causes of distress, and also 
 the increased requirements of life, and the desires and 
 passions of men. Capital has become the basis of pro- 
 duction; this is a fact which we cannot alter—from 
 which we cannot retrograde, with which we cannot dis- 
 pense. Capital may either be regarded as exclusively 
 an individual possession—as by Liberalism, whose prin- 
 ciple is one-sided individualism, or required, as a com- 
 mon possession, as by communism, whose exclusive prin- 
 ciple is community of property. The former principle 
 necessarily involves the reaction of the latter. For.mere 
 individualism leads to the oppression of the weak by 
 the strong; so that, in spite of legal liberty and equality, 
 there exists a monopoly of money power, accompanied 
 by a dangerous proletariate. A mere policy of non-in- 
 tervention, which is the principle of liberal legislation, 
 is of no avail. For a wrong state of things will not 
 make itself a right one, but must be made such in the 
 way of legislation or social enactment. The decisive 
 element, however, lies in moral remedies. In the 
 Lidinburgh Review for July 1850, Art. “Church and 
 State Education,’ we read: “The truth is, that the evils 
 under which the labouring classes suffer are essentially 
 moral evils, and that their cure is not to be effected 
 except by the operation of moral causes. If the wages 
 of labour were doubled to-morrow—other things re- 
 maining the same—these evils would not be diminished, 
 but rather increased. We do not mean that there are 
 not many labourers whose material well-being is impos- 
 sible on their present earnings; but we assert that the 
 chief source of the misery of the class of labourers is in 
 
376 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 their demoralisation; and that, so long as this remains, 
 whatever measures may be taken to better their con- 
 dition, by increasing their wages or cheapening their 
 food, they will defeat them by their vices and their 
 improvidence.” __ A } 
 Benjamin Franklin, addressing the working classes, ex- 
 claims: “ Hearken not to any one who tells you that you 
 can grow rich.in any other way than by industry and 
 economy; hearken not, he is a poisoner” (Hettinger, 
 Apologie des Christenthums, ii. 3, edit. 2nd, 1869, p. 256). 
 I spoke from this point of view, on the social office and 
 importance of the Inner Mission, at the annual meeting 
 of the Association for Inner Missions, held at Leipsic in 
 1871 (see the second report of this Association, Leips. 
 1871). Schiffle, the famous and able social economist, 
 says (Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift, 1864, p. 358): “The 
 social questions of the present day may indeed be re- 
 garded by the political economist exclusively in their 
 economical aspect, but they can never be solved in all 
 their bearings without the co-operation of all the moral 
 potencies of society.” Very interesting is the in- 
 formation given, in “The Working Classes of England in 
 their Social and Political Relations by Ludlow & Lloyd 
 Jones,” translated by J. v. Holzendorff, Berlin, 1868, 
 p. 189, concerning the conference with workmen held 
 in the London Coffee-House, Jan. 21, 1869, and the 
 opinions there expressed on the religious question 
 among the workmen. “ We may rest assured,” said the 
 mover of one resolution in concluding his speech, “that 
 the Gospel has lost nothing of its power over the masses 
 since the days when it was said of its first Teacher that 
 ‘the common people heard Him gladly.”” It is well 
 known that V. A. Huber, in particular, has taken a great 
 interest in contributing to such a solution of the labour 
 question. His observations, ideas, and counsels are to 
 be found more especially in his journal Concordia, a con- 
 tribution to the solution of the labour question, Leips. 
 1861, sg. At great Church meetings this question has 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. BH it 
 
 repeatedly been made the subject of comprehensive 
 reports and thorough discussion. At the fourteenth 
 German Evangelical Church diet, held at Kiel, 1867, 
 Prof. Nasse of Bonn treated this question in an ex- 
 haustive manner, and Commerc. R. J. Quistorp of Stettin, 
 and Sarasin of Basle, contributed valuable remarks (see 
 die Verhandlungen, etc., Berlin, 1867, p. 134, sq.). The 
 copious and important lectures delivered by Wichern 
 and Prof. Wagner at the October meeting at Berlin, 
 1871 (see die Verhandlungen, etc., Berlin, 1871, p. 91, 
 sq.), are well known. The lecture Der Kern der Arbett- 
 erfrage, given at the Johanneum in Hamburg, 1872, by 
 Comm. R. J. Quistorp (Stettin, 1872), produced a great 
 impression upon the parties in question. “There are 
 many,” it is said, p. 15, “who admit indeed that a mere 
 rise of wages, a mere increase of income, will not suflice 
 permanently to raise the condition of the working classes, 
 and to reconcile them to their condition. They think 
 that the something else that is wanting is better edu- 
 cation, more cultivation of the understanding, more 
 intelligence, more knowledge,—in short, to use the dying 
 words of Goethe, ‘more light.’ I say, on the contrary, 
 that highly as I appreciate the value of a more solid 
 education of the working classes, it is not only more light 
 that is wanted, but, above all, more Jove. Everything 
 does not depend only upon enlightening the understand- 
 ing, but also upon warming the heart. It is in the fact 
 that the love of many has waxed cold, and that a blind 
 and inordinate selfishness which alienates man from man 
 has taken its place, that I behold the main root of the ter- 
 rible discord which has attacked society and threatens its 
 dissolution!” “ More love, however, can only arise from 
 drawing more deeply from the Source of all love, from 
 a renovation and revival of the Christian consciousness.” 
 “It is not the lower classes, not those who have no - 
 property, that must make a beginning, but owrselves ; for 
 it was from us, the higher classes, that that false direction 
 of heart and mind, whose ultimate results we encounter 
 
378 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 in the religious and social doctrines of revolutionary 
 fanatics, proceeded and penetrated to the lower classes,” 
 “When we employers learn to tread this path, and to 
 tread it with right feelings, especially towards our work- 
 people, then, but not till then, will the labour question 
 be solved in the right manner” (p. 23). I earnestly 
 recommend this lecture to my readers. 
 
 (*) The widest diffusion of socialistic and communistic 
 ideas took place, according to Roscher, i. 152, among the 
 ancients in the age of the decadence of Hellenism, and in 
 that of the degeneracy of the Roman republic ; among 
 the moderns, at the era of the Reformation, and again at 
 
 the present time. That Platonic socialism (Plato, de 
 ftep. v.) was no mere individual fancy is best shown 
 by the controversy directed against it by Aristophanes 
 in his Heclesiazusen. Comp. also Arist. Polit. ii. 2. “The 
 speeches of the Gracchi, and, in a far ruder fashion, the 
 conspiracy of Catiline, remind us of the catchwords 
 of modern socialism (see Plut. 7" Gracchus, 9, and Sallust, 
 Cat. 20, 23, 3'7-39).” “A social revolution of the most 
 fearful kind, by which a great part of all private property 
 passed into the hands of those who hitherto had had no 
 possessions (the soldiers), and knew not how to ad- 
 minister it, happened twice during the Roman republi, 
 viz. under Sylla and the second Triumvirate ” (p. 153). 
 “In the two centuries whose central point is the Re- 
 formation, the transition from the husbandry of medieval 
 peasants to modern high cultivation could not in the 
 first instance but press severely on the lower classes, 
 A like effect was produced by the depreciation of the 
 precious metals. The abolition too of so many monas- 
 teries, which caused a great increase of poverty, was 
 scarcely compensated by the numerous new poor laws 
 which played so great a part in Spain, England, ete.,during 
 the sixteenth century.” In Luther’s days, it was almost as 
 usual as it was in 1848 to speak of the great corruption 
 of trade, the systematic fraud everywhere prevailing, 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. 379 
 
 etc. Miinzer’s principle was “ omnia simul communia!” 
 “The community of goods and wives, that of the Libertines 
 (Calvin, Instructio adv. Libertinos, c. 20), English com- 
 munists of the Reformation age.” The most important 
 systematic works of the period are Sir Thomas More’s 
 Utopia (1516) and Campanella’s Civitas solis (1620). 
 More expressly declares that “all the states of the time 
 were but conspiracies of the rich to promote their 
 private interests, and to plunder the poor under the 
 mask of the common good” (p. 154). “Almost all 
 socialists have succeeded better in the critical than 
 in the positive part of their work.” “On the conspiracy 
 of Babceuf (executed 1796), who desired complete 
 equality and community of labour, enjoyment, and 
 education, the doing away with great cities, etc., comp. 
 Buonarotti, la Conjuration de Babeuf, 1821. This work 
 powerfully contributed to the revival of communistic 
 ideas after the July Revolution. Among the works of 
 modern communists, which are especially distinguished 
 from the ancient by their industrial colouring, Cabet’s 
 Voyage en Icarie, 11. 1840,is prominent. He declares the 
 doing away with religion, the family, and town life open 
 questions, and desires that the prevalence of community 
 of gocds should be brought about by the peaceful means 
 of persuasion” (p. 155). Comp. the very able history of 
 the socialist system in Marle’s Weltékonomie, 1. 2, 435, 
 sq. Schaftle’s work, Kapitalismus und Socialismus, 1870, 
 is a significant attempt to acknowledge what is true and 
 to oppose what is unjust in socialism. On community 
 of goods, Roscher, p. 167, says: “ Let us disregard for the 
 present the terrible and culture-destroying revolution by 
 which community of goods must be preceded, and ask 
 what will be its results. Among either brutes or angels 
 it might exist without doing harm. And also among 
 men united by genuine love. All exemplary family 
 life is a kind of community of goods. In larger associa-. 
 tions such love is indeed only to be found combined 
 with great religious enthusiasm, which is never of long 
 
380 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 duration, and of which Acts ii. 44, sq., iv. 33, sq., V. 1-11, 
 offers the most remarkable and best example.” Besides, 
 this community of goods of the primitive Christians 
 at Jerusalem was “only a community of use, not of 
 possession (Acts iv. 32); it was moreover entirely a 
 voluntary act of love (v. 4), not a duty, and still less 
 a right which the poorer might claim” (p. 158). Where 
 these prerequisites are absent, 2.¢. in ordinary times, the 
 most prejudicial results will ensue. Where there are 
 now 1000 rich and 100,000 proletariates, there would be 
 in the next generation no rich and perhaps 200,000 
 proletariates. Poverty would be universal. For the 
 sake of a period of transition very agreeable to the 
 multitude, but very brief, all those better possessions of 
 life which surpass the eating of potatoes, the drinking of 
 brandy, and the begetting of children, would have been 
 wrecked; for equality of education, as advocated by 
 the communists, would in practice amount to an utter 
 absence of any higher scientific cultivation at all. Far 
 more envy really lurks in communism than is believed. 
 
 (?) In the ancient world there was in intellectual 
 as well as in political life an aristocratic element. As 
 only the narrow circle of citizens, properly so-called, 
 was capable of liberty and virtue, so too but a narrow 
 
 circle was capable of education. “ Odi profanum vulgus_ 
 
 et arceo.” With Christianity a wealth of new and sublime 
 ideas entered the world, and became the common pos- 
 session of all members of the Christian Church. Comp. 
 “Lectures on Fundamental Truths,’ Lect. I. p. 5, sq. 
 Hence Origen says: “The philosophers are physicians 
 who heal only the great and rich; Plato, who must how- 
 ever by no means be depreciated, is read only by men of 
 science and education. Christ and His apostles, im- 
 pelled by love to man, sought to gain Greeks and bar- 
 barians, wise and simple, learned and unlearned. And 
 because their teaching was intended for all men, it was 
 
 ot to be like the highly-seasoned food, which could be’ 
 
 njoyed only by the luxurious and dainty” (Stirm, 
 
 a 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. 381 
 
 Apologie, etc. p. 209). Guizot, appealing to Montesquieu, 
 specially shows how by this means it became the parent of 
 civilization. Compare “Lectures on Fundamental Truths,” 
 Lecture IX. Note 18. Jouffroy, Mélanges philos. p. 424 
 (quoted by Hettinger, i. 3, p. 136): “The church asks the 
 young Christian whence he came ? he knows it—whither 
 he is going ? he knows it—how he is to attain his end ? 
 he knows it. She asks this poor child, who never in all 
 his life thought about such matters, why he is here, and 
 what will become of him after death? he gives a sub- 
 lime answer. She asks how the world came into exist- 
 ence, and why God made it, and the plants and animals 
 upon it? How the earth was peopled, how diversity of 
 language, how suffering originated ? he knows all. The 
 origin of the world, the origin of our race, the destiny of 
 man in this life and the next, the relation of man to 
 God and to his fellow-men, his rights over creation, 
 —nothing is strange to him. end when he comes to 
 maturity, he knows the principles of natural rights, of 
 national rights ; for all these follow as a matter of course 
 from the instruction he has received. ‘Truly it is a great 
 religion which is thus able to give an answer to every 
 question that man asks. If Christianity is in the first 
 place a matter of faith, yet it is also true that ‘faith 
 seeks its ideas;’ it impels to knowledge as well as to 
 confession. ‘Fides preecedit intellectum,’ ‘Credo ut intelli- 
 gam, are old-established maxims of the Church and of 
 theology. None of the ancient religions had a theology, 
 1c. a religious science, but only a mythology; and 
 science—in philosophy—led to a dissolution of religion. 
 Christianity alone has a theology, and has it by an in- 
 ward necessity, as being the religion of the word, and 
 addressed to the thoughts and will of human personality. 
 Thus Christianity produced theology, and theology bears 
 the other sciences in her bosom, until they set out on their 
 independent paths. They are still however united to 
 her, both by a common moral and scientific interest in 
 truth, and by their use of the same scientific method 
 
382 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 and instruments. But apart from the special cultiva- 
 tion of the sciences, only consider the educational im- 
 portance of preaching! Christianity is the commence- 
 ment of civilization and education to the uncivilized 
 nations, even by the very fact that it is to them the 
 commencement of literature. For it brings them the 
 holy Scriptures, and with them the beginning of all 
 further education.” Comp. Stirm, Apol. p. 210; 
 Nitzsch, die Wirkung des evangelischen Christenthums 
 auf kulturlose Volker, Berlin, 1852. 
 
 (*°) On the relation of the modern ideas of liberty of 
 conscience and humanity to Christianity, comp. Hun- 
 deshagen, Betirdge zur Kirchenverfassungsgeschichte und 
 Karchenpolitik, ete. 1864, p. 474, sq. The doctrines 
 and demands laid down by the age of Illuminism “ be- 
 long, in their better and primitive form, to Christianity ; 
 in many the Christian feature may still be discerned 
 even in their degenerate state. May not indeed the 
 whole humanitarian agitation, the fanaticism for the 
 rights of man, the dignity of man, philanthropy, human 
 well-being, ete., be regarded as a reaction on the part 
 of that moral view of the world which, though funda- 
 mentally combined in Christianity with the religious 
 view, has nevertheless failed in so many points to attain 
 its just dues in actual realization, repressed as it has 
 been, and as good as stifled in several particulars, by the 
 one-sided preponderance of the religious view ? Unsup- 
 ported by the State, inadequately cherished bythe Church, 
 certain elements of the Christian world of thought, in- 
 stead of developing themselves within the Church, and 
 through its medium in Christianized mankind, have 
 strayed into the extra-Christian, nay, the anti-Christian 
 domain, have wandered about like lost and orphaned 
 children, and have, in this their neglected state, not only 
 degenerated in many respects, but have also lost the 
 knowledge of their parentage, and at last taken up a 
 hostile position towards the mother who bore them. 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. 383 
 
 The ideas of liberty of faith, mutual toleration in reli- 
 gious matters, also the ideas of liberty and rights in 
 social life, of pure manhood and human dignity, and 
 lastly, that apparatus of social notions, for whose realiza- 
 tion a struggle was beeun in 1789, which to this very 
 day stirs the passions of Christian nations in both hem}- 
 spheres—what, after all, are these but such homeless 
 descendants of Christianity, ruined and run wild in 
 their homelessness, who, never certain concerning their 
 own nature, have in their self-ignorance entered into the 
 service of the natural man, and have, in their insubor- 
 dinate state, been misused and spurred on riotously to 
 resist reasonable human enactments, to oppose sacred and 
 divine ordinances, nay, to outrage the holy God Himself.” 
 To these let us add the idea of progress, unknown to the 
 heathen world—which despaired of the future (comp. 
 “ Lectures on Fundamental Truths,” Lect. VITL p. 238)— 
 but essential to Christianity, as being involved both in 
 the idea and the fact of the history of Salvation, and in 
 the doctrine of the Trinity, and consequently ruling the 
 history of the Church and its doctrine (comp. the say- 
 ing of Vincent Lerins in his famous Commonitorium ; 
 “ profectus non permutatio”). Algo the separation of the 
 two powers, the spiritual and secular, upon. which, in 
 contrast to the ancient view that religion was of the 
 State, is based the whole stability of Christian social 
 order and liberty of conscience. Especially is an inward 
 relation to science peculiar to Protestantism. The Re- 
 formation proceeded from a university (Wittenberg), and 
 found there its home; “nor did the Swiss doctrine 
 flourish till it had found its university (Geneva),” Dahl- 
 mann, Politik, p. 311. On the universities, as exhibiting 
 and effecting the union of the various sclences, comp. 
 the able section in the above work, p. 30, sy.; also Ph, 
 Fischer, Spekul, Hthik, 1851, p. 407. — 
 
 (*") The relation of art to science may be thus ex- 
 pressed: art carries out the general to the individual, 
 
384 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 science leads back the individual to the general. Good 
 remarks on art will be found in Ph. Fischer’s Spekul. 
 Ethik (p. 263, sq.). The mind, “that born idealist,” 
 exhibits in art the idea of its entire life in the most 
 direct form. The principle of art is the imagination 
 pervaded by the idea, its aim the carrying out of the 
 ideas to reality, a carrying out which is free, and yet at 
 the same time in conformity with laws (p. 263). Its 
 esthetic development being one of the necessary stages 
 and spheres of the mind, “art is not merely the gift of 
 individuals, but a popular world-wide gift—a view which 
 Herder, and Goethe who owed it to Herder, vindicated 
 in behalf of science also” (p. 264). From my lecture 
 “On the Development of Religious Painting,” Leips. 
 1863, p. 3: “The pictorial arts proceeded from architec- 
 ture. This is the oldest of the arts, and originally in- 
 cluded the rest. It was but gradually that sculpture 
 and painting separated themselves from architecture, 
 and pursued each its independent path. Architecture 
 impresses the thoughts of the mind upon stone, but they 
 still struggle with the supremacy of matter, and there- 
 fore of technics. In sculpture matter has become entirely 
 the form which pervades it with spirit. The variously 
 affected individual life, however, of mind and heart can 
 only be represented by the art of light and colouring. 
 Sound, that direet expression of the inward emotion, 
 penetrates still more deeply into the life of the soul. 
 But the art of language, poetry, stands highest of all. 
 To architecture belong the oldest monuments of man’s 
 artistic efforts; sculpture is the art of the ancients, 
 painting of the Christian era. Music has in recent 
 times been specially cultivated and developed, while 
 poetry, the faithful companion of mankind, is of all 
 times.” On the relation of sculpture to paihting, 
 Schelling says, in his discourse of 1807, On the Relation 
 of the Plastic Arts to Nature: “The perfect plastic 
 artist will indeed, as Winckelmann says, not take more 
 matter for his work than he needs for the accomplish- 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. 385 
 
 ment of the purposes of his mind; nor, on the other 
 hand, put more power into the soul than is expressed in 
 the matter: for his art consists in expressing the spirit- 
 ual in a manner wholly corporeal. Hence sculpture can 
 attain its true climax only in those natures whose idea 
 involves, that they are at all times in reality all that they 
 are In idea or in soul, ze. in divine natures. Painting, 
 on the contrary, represents by light and colour, and 
 therefore by a non-corporeal, and to a certain extent 
 spiritual, medium. Nor does it by any means give its 
 images for the objects themselves, but expressly intends 
 that they should be regarded as pictures. Hence, even 
 for this reason, it does not lay so much stress upon the 
 material as sculpture does, and seems, on this account, 
 capable of giving a clear preponderance to the spiritual.” 
 Schelling, Philos. der Kunst, Works, 1.5, p.576: “ Archi- 
 tecture is necessarily fashioned according to arithmetical, 
 or, as being music in space, according to geometrical 
 proportions. It is music in space, music, as it were, 
 petrified” (Rothe, Theol. Ethik, ii. 314). My lecture on 
 Religious Painting, p. 4: “Art is the product of an 
 inward craving which the Creator Himself has im- 
 planted in the human mind. Hence it is primordial, 
 and we are justified in saying that poetry is older than 
 prose, painting than writing. Man has an irrepressible 
 craving to give to the thoughts of his mind, by means of 
 sensible matter, that beautiful expression which may 
 awaken noble sentiments and emotions, This impulse 
 is indigenous in his inmost soul, even in those lowest 
 depths where religion also finds its home. In this inner 
 world, art and religion are near neighbours, and hence it 
 is natural that when they come forth into the sphere of 
 the phenomenal, they should appear side by side, and 
 willingly enter into mutual alliance.” Kahnis, Kunst und 
 Kirche (three lectures, Leipsic, 1865), p. 56. Itis the 
 highest vocation of art “to bea priestess, offering to the 
 nations the mysteries of a higher world in the form of 
 the beautiful.” 
 2B 
 
386 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 (2) On the connection of the enjoyment of art with 
 labour, comp. Martensen, Grundriss des Systems der 
 Moralphilosophie, 1845, p. 92: “They who only dream 
 away life in esthetic enjoyment, who would delight in 
 the enchanting appearance of the ideal, in the image of 
 liberty, but withdraw from the serious reality of work, 
 have apprehended the meaning neither of art nor of 
 life.’ Comp. Ph. Fischer, Spekul. Ethik, p: 272, on “the 
 moral importance of art as refining and ennobling the 
 mind.” That beauty is founded in God, and in the 
 eternal harmony of the Divine power, was, as is well 
 known, a fundamental idea of Plato (comp. Hettinger, 
 die Kunst im Christenthum, Festrede, ete., 1867, p. 4, sq.), 
 and has frequently been repeated since his days. Comp. 
 also Winckelmann, Gesch. der Kunst, 1776, p. 260; Het- 
 tinger’s above-named work, p. 5. “Supreme beauty is 
 in God. The idea of beauty becomes more perfect, the 
 more certainly it can be conceived in harmony with the 
 Supreme Being.” 
 
 (3) On the difference between the Christian and 
 the ancient ideal, comp. Hegel’s Aesthetik, edited by 
 Hotho, 2nd edit. 1842, vol. i. p. 70, sq. The clas- 
 sical ideal is both as to form and subject the 
 human, with the rejection of all that is unfitting 
 and incidental. But “with all their mental subli- 
 mity an atmosphere and odour of sadness has always 
 been perceived by the intelligent in ancient works of 
 art, representing the gods, even when charmed by their 
 perfect beauty” (p. 77). “It is this very sadness which 
 decides their fate, by pointing to something higher than 
 themselves” (101). ‘The classical is the adequate and 
 beautiful manifestation of mind in its external and 
 sensible form—a union accomplished in the element of 
 the external, and therefore appropriately existing in 
 sensible reality. The true notion of mind is not how- 
 ever yet attained; on the contrary, it presses back from 
 this reconciliation with the corporeal, to its reconcilia- 
 
Notes to Lecture IX. 387 
 
 tion with itself. Thus arises the contrast of subjectivity 
 as existing in itself and the outward appearance. This 
 self-perception of the mind is the principle of romantic 
 (Christian) art. Classical beauty is therefore no longer 
 ‘the highest ideal. For mind now knows that. its 
 truth does not consist in merging itself in corporeity; on 
 the contrary, it becomes certain of its truth by bringing 
 itself back from the external to its own inwardness, and 
 assuming that external reality is not its adequate ex- 
 istence. Hence beauty becomes mental beauty (better, 
 the beauty of the soul), p. 121, sq. “By surmounting the 
 finite, the natural, the transitory, it enters the realm of 
 truth and satisfaction. This process is conflict, orief, 
 death, sorrow for the transitory,” p. 125. “Not till the 
 Middle Ages is the real necessity for the infinite pain of 
 this sacrifice of the most specific subjectivity, or suffering 
 and death, etc., perceived. It cannot be said that death 
 in its essential import was comprehended by the Greeks,” 
 p. 127. “Grecian beauty exhibits the internal qualities 
 of the mental individuality as wholly moulded into its 
 bodily form, acts, and surroundings, as wholly expressed, 
 and content to live in the external. To romantic beauty, 
 on the contrary, it is absolutely necessary that the soul, 
 though manifested in the external, should at the same 
 time show, that from this corporeity it returns to itself, 
 and lives in itself. Hence the corporeal can at this stage 
 express the inwardness of the mind only go far as 
 it manifests, that the soul has its congruent reality not 
 in this actual existence but in itself. On this account 
 beauty is no longer the idealization of the objective 
 form, but the inward condition of the soul in itself > it 
 becomes a beauty of inwardness,’ p. 138. Comp. my 
 lecture on Religious Painting, p. 6. “Our Lord’s mode 
 of instruction by parables is the starting - point of 
 Christian art. It contains the germ of the new prin- 
 ciple, that the sensible is a parable of the super-sensible, 
 The principle of ancient art is: the sensible is the mani- 
 festation of the super-sensible ; the highest perfection of 
 
388 Notes to Lecture LX, 
 
 the sensible form is also the fitting expression of the 
 super-sensible; the eternal intrinsic value comes forth in 
 the ideal earthly form. The Christian notion, on the 
 contrary, is that the eternal, the divine, has over and 
 above even the most ideal form a surpassing value, which 
 the sensible manifestation may indeed enable us to form 
 a notion of, but is incompetent fully to express. Through 
 the covering of the earthly we look into a world of 
 eternity, of which this world is not a manifestation, 
 but only a parable.” This is shown, especially with 
 respect to the representation of grief in ancient and 
 Christian art, by a comparison of the Laocoon and Niobe 
 with the crucified Saviour and the Mater dolorosa, in my 
 lecture “On the Representation of Grief in Art,” Leips. 
 1864. The article of Prof. Kriiger (Gottingen) on the 
 liturgy and Church music in Klhiefoth and Dieckhoff’s 
 Theologische Zeitschrift, 1865, p. 169, sq., also contains 
 good and apposite remarks on the difference between 
 heathen and Christian art—the esthetic root of the 
 former, the ethic root of the latter. Martensen, Grwn- 
 driss, etc., p. 92: “ In Romanism and. heathenism, art and 
 religion are confounded, and the fantastic light thus 
 produced gives rise to the forms of mythology and super- 
 stition. In Protestantism, art first keeps within its 
 proper limits, and only when thus duly distinguished 
 from religion can'it be reconciled therewith and justified 
 by theology.” 
 
 (*) The Christian principle of art, and the great ad- 
 vance which art, in all its departments, owes to Chris- 
 tianity, are treated on, in frequent accordance with Hegel, 
 by Ph. Fischer, Spekul. Hihik, in a copious and compre- 
 hensive section, pp. 274-374. I adduce a few passages ; 
 “Tf the ideal of art is the union of the finite and the 
 infinite, of the idea and reality, of the universal and the 
 individual, it is obvious that the absolute truth of the 
 Christian view is the cause of the beauty and sublimity 
 of romantic art; and that sacred art, by its union of the 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. 389 
 
 esthetic with the moral ideal, presents the truest and 
 most objective glorification of reality” (p. 278). “The 
 God-man, who exhibits by His Person and history no 
 particular relative personification of the Divine, but both 
 the absolute self-manifestation of God and the archetype 
 of mankind, is the absolute ideal of art, which, in 
 conceiving and depicting Him, devotes itself to the repre- 
 sentation of what is Highest and Holiest” (279). This 
 is then carried out with respect to the several arts, and 
 first to architecture. “The inseparableness of art from 
 worship and its sanctuaries, this blending of its agency 
 with faith, applies to the symbolism of architecture in 
 a higher sense than to ancient architecture” (p. 297). 
 While the Romance round-arched style expresses the 
 “satisfaction of the mind by the visible church which 
 represents heaven upon earth, the popular genius of the 
 German Christian nations, rising from the created to the 
 Divine Father and Redeemer of the world, expresses 
 the most ardent longing for the celestial state itself, 
 of which the church on earth is an image, and for which 
 its sacred temples and worship are a preparation” (p. 
 299). On Seulpture and Painting: “Sculpture devotes 
 itself chiefly to the representation of the sublime repose 
 and harmony of the self-contained and self-sufficing gods 
 or men of antiquity” (p.308). “Not till after the light of 
 that spiritual kingdom of faith, love, and hope had risen 
 upon mankind, by means of the Divine Logos, was paint- 
 ing capable of expressing, by the symbolism of colour, 
 that most ideal manifestation of life, the inward ideality 
 of the mind” (p. 309). On these arts, comp. the already 
 often-mentioned lectures, “ On the Development of Reli- 
 gious Painting,” Leips. 1863; “On Church Art,” 2nd 
 edit., 1864; “On the Representation of Grief in Art,” 
 1864. Music, “an essentially romantic art, which did 
 not, till the promulgation of the religion of faith, hope, 
 and love, solemnize her true spiritualization and her 
 transfiguration into a symbol of hidden mysteries, is even 
 more nearly connected than are sculpture and painting 
 
390 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 with Christianity” (Fischer, p. 329). “The high, the 
 truly moral destiny of music is to render sensible the 
 harmonious emotions and images of a mind stirred by 
 the revelation of God and of His kingdom, by a poetry 
 of sound as deeply felt as it is artistic” (p. 332). “ Music 
 is the echo of the inward harmony of a genius which 
 manifests therein its religious life and its feeling for 
 nature” (p. 335), “It follows, from its very nature, that 
 the most direct power of moving the feelings is at its 
 command.” ‘The reason why the moral, and especially 
 the religious, effect of music is to be so highly estimated 
 is, that its sacred power ennobles and spiritualizes the 
 feelings (Gemiith), and through them the whole man, 
 and devotes and disposes him, so to speak, to the most 
 ardent reverence and lively perception of God and of His 
 manifestations.” “ But for the same reason this poetry of 
 sound—abusus optim pessimus—is capable of expressing, 
 with fearful power, the most terrible passions, and the 
 most uncontrolled feelings, and of dragging its hearer 
 into the vortex of excessive sensuous excitement” (p. 
 334). On music, comp. Thibaut’s treatise, Ueber Reinheit 
 der Tonkunst, 4th enlarged edit., with preface by K. 
 Bahr, which itself marks an epoch, also Kriiger, in his 
 above-named work, and others. The very sanctuaries of 
 Christianity—those vast halls—were specially adapted 
 for music and song, while the Grecian temples merely 
 served the purpose of containing the images of the gods 
 and the sacred vessels, but offered no space for the soul- 
 stirring sounds of speech and song. Heathenism was 
 symbolical, but dumb; the Gospel opened both heart 
 and mouth. For in the former there were only dumb 
 idols, in the latter a revelation, 7.e. a God who speaks, 
 So early as the New Testament we read of Christian 
 songs (psalms, odes, hymns, 1 Cor. xiv. 26; Eph. v. 19; 
 Col. 111. 16), while the Revelation of St. John gives, in the 
 praises of heaven, an image of the praises of earth (v. 9; 
 xiv. 3). Pliny’s letter, quoted in Note 9 to Lecture IV., 
 shows that hymns were sung in the Christian assemblies 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. 391 
 
 to Jesus Christ, and the cultivation of music and song 
 in the Christian Church, from that time onwards, is well 
 known. Down to the times of Sebastian Bach sacred art 
 towers far above secular in music—Bach himself being 
 its greatest representative, and ruling in its sanctuary 
 like a priest. From his days to those of Mozart, the 
 effort was to bring secular up to the level of sacred 
 art; from Mozart onwards the secular element became 
 the ruling power, and the elder sister the vassal of the 
 younger. Of late, however, the treasures of ancient 
 music, and. especially Bach’s, have again been brought 
 to light and appreciated (comp. Kriiger, Gott. Gel. Aug. 
 1863, 11. p.°“988). Finally, with respect to Poetry,’ we 
 refer, in epic poetry, to the Heliand, Dante, and Klop- 
 stock’s Messiah; in lyric, to the wealth of religious 
 popular poetry, or poetry with at least a religious ten- 
 dency, produced in the Middle Ages, and to the trea- 
 sures of Protestant hymnody; in dramatic, above all, 
 to Shakespeare. Comp. Lect. I. Note 4. 
 
 (+) Luther praises not only the arts and languages 
 in general, but the fine arts, especially music in parti- 
 cular. Vol. iii. 280, 282, 283, 284, sq., 52, 298, 56, 297. 
 “ Also that it is not my opinion that all the arts are 
 to be destroyed and to perish by means of the Gospel, 
 as some super-spiritualists give out, but I should like 
 to see all the arts, and especially music, employed in 
 the service of Him who made and who gave them.” 
 In a like spirit, so, too (56, 295), he wrote a song of 
 “ Frau Musiker” “as a preface to all good song-books.” 
 
 ** Hie kann nicht sein ein boser Muth, 
 Wo da singen Gesellen gut : 
 Hie bleibt kein Zorn, Zank Hass noch Neid, ~ 
 Weichen muss alles Herzeleid ; 
 Geiz Sorg’ und was sonst hart anleit, 
 Fahrt hin mit aller Traurigkeit. 
 _ Auch ist ein jeder dess wahl frei 
 
392 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 Dass solcher Freud kein Siinde sel, 
 Sondern auch Gott viel biiss gefillt ; 
 Denn alle Freud der ganzen Welt 
 
 Dem Teufel sie sein Werk zerstért,” ete. * 
 
 And 60, 60: “The devil is a sad spirit, and makes folks 
 sad, hence he cannot bear cheerfulness ; and therefore gets 
 as far off from music as possible, and never stays where 
 men are singing, especially spiritual songs” (62, 111, 307, 
 311). 
 
 ("®) Ph. Fischer, p. 272, and elsewhere, lays stress 
 upon the fact that Christianity has, in the Gospel 
 history, given to art its most sublime subject. Whether 
 this Gospel history ought however to be made the 
 subject of dramatic representation is questionable, and 
 the Oberammergauer Passion-play alone cannot furnish 
 the answer. For this is intended to be less a purely 
 artistic performance than the fulfilment of a religious 
 duty in that spirit of simplicity which beholds the 
 secular and religious spheres in far more immediate 
 union, than is the case when they are viewed from the 
 stand-point of reflection occupied at other stages of 
 secular and Christian development. Emilie Ringseis, in 
 the preface to “ Sebastian,” a martyrdom tragedy in five 
 acts, Freiburg, 1868, “desires that sacred subjects should 
 be represented on the stage, just as a erucifix is placed in 
 _ the corner of the inn room (as is the case in Roman Catholic 
 districts), notwithstanding the noise and confusion of an 
 inn, etc. The existence of the theatre is a fact, and it 
 can neither be reasoned away nor preached down. 
 Some, however, will make no use of this excellent 
 weapon, from indignation at its great power in the 
 enemy's hand, or from fear lest its unskilful use should 
 
 ’ * Tll-humour cannot be here where companions sing pleasantly to- 
 gether : neither anger, contention, hatred, nor envy, stay here, and all 
 heart-sorrow must depart ; covetousness, anxiety, and whatever else 
 disposes to harshness begone, with all sadness. Every one, too, may be 
 sure that such joy is no sin, but that it pleases God far better than all 
 other joy in the whole world. It destroys the work of the devil, ete. 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. 393 
 
 bring injury to their own leader. It is the old story of 
 burying the talent because God is a hard master. 
 This is moreover the Romish stand-point, which, on the 
 one hand, requires asceticism, and exalts the saints 
 above the sphere of what is human and natural, and on 
 the other makes no real distinction between spiritual 
 and natural, sacred and profane, the church and the 
 world, divine worship and the theatre, but intermingles 
 one with the other, and offers this misty mixture of 
 devotion and sensuous enjoyment. The Reformation 
 view is based upon the decided discrimination of the 
 two provinces. The contrast between the two views is, 
 in the matter of the drama, exhibited in Calderon and 
 Shakespeare. In the former, sacred subjects are repre- 
 sented, in the latter, actual human life, but in the light 
 of Christianity, the delineation being really based upon 
 the moral spirit of Christianity. On the representation 
 of sacred subjects on the stage, comp. Hase, das geistliche 
 Schauspiel, geschichtl. und sachl. Leips. 1858, eg., p. 318. 
 “It is impossible to be edified by hearing the same song 
 in the theatre on one day which on another we sing 
 in church.” On the question of dramatic entertain- 
 ments, see Hagenbach’s Kirche und Schauspiel, Hine 
 Kulturgeschichtliche Zeitfrage, 1n Gelzer’s Monatsbl. 
 1862, 5, Rothe 5,141, sq. “ In fact the mistrust of play- 
 going, so long rooted in Christianity, has ever, where it 
 has not arisen from a dislike to art on principle, been 
 inspired by the existing state of the stage, and has, 
 when rightly understood, always applied to this, and not 
 to theatrical representations in the abstract. In this 
 limited sense it has always, from the first Christian 
 centuries to the present day, had good reason for con- 
 tinuing. Such a confession is indeed a very humbling 
 one to Christendom, the condition of the stage being a 
 true barometer of the condition of morality in general. 
 Still, humbling as the confession may be, we cannot but 
 own, when we consider the present state of our stage, 
 that it stands on a very low moral level, and that, when 
 
394 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 regarded from a Christian stand-point, it naturally 
 raises a prejudice against theatrical representations in 
 general. Such a conclusion is forced upon us whether ~ 
 we turn our attention to the dramas, with their scenic 
 apparatus, now presented upon our stages, or to the 
 actors themselves, or finally, to the theatrical public 
 properly so-called.” Karl Frenzel, Newe Studien, Berlin, 
 1868: “The public that supports the stage with its 
 money has a certain claim” that this stage should not 
 be regarded, as by Schiller, as a moral institution, but 
 as an institution devoted to amusement. | 
 
 (‘") Compare the quotations from Hegel, Note 13, and 
 my lecture on the Representation of Grief. 
 
 (’*) Harless, in his article “ Christenthum und Dicht- 
 kunst” (Lrlanger Zeitschrift, June 1860, reprinted in 
 the work, Das Verhdltniss des Christenthums zu Kultur- 
 und Lebensfragen der Gegenwart, 1863), written on the 
 occasion of the Schiller festival, enters into the superior- 
 ity of the gift and the work to the .artist. I cannot 
 refrain from quoting various passages, which will cer- 
 tainly please all my readers: “Speech in the abstract is 
 a wondrous mystery, the depth of which it would be 
 difficult for thought to exhaust. A child of paradisaic 
 birth, now cast outinto a strange land, it wears a garment 
 covered with the dust of earth, and is yet winged with 
 celestial pinions.” “They whom we call the rulers of 
 language, are themselves ruled by that same spirit which, 
 by its unconscious formative agency, created language.” 
 “ It is not the material in the abstract, not to mention 
 the rule and standard according to which we mould and 
 carve, but the unfettered genius of speech itself, trans- 
 mitted to us by its own free agency, that is the parent of 
 poetic thoughts perfect in form, for this genius of speech 
 is one with the genius of poetry, nay, speech is, by its 
 very origin, itself poetry,” (p. 10, sg.) “ What is called 
 simplicity, directness, artlessness, is the highest art, and 
 
Notes to Lecture LX. “\, Se 
 
 the chief ornament of true poetry ; and poetic language 
 gives to the soul that laver of purification in which it 
 washes off the sweat of thought about things, and learns, 
 as it were, playfully to dive znto the very essence of the 
 things” (p.11).. “ For this very cause, however, regard to 
 the individual poet will, in our judgment and apprecia- 
 tion of poetical productions, be kept very much in the 
 background. It is only in place when the question is 
 to account for the deficiencies, imperfections, and moral 
 blemishes of a poem. As for that, however, which is 
 ereat, beautiful, and sublime in a poem, the pqet himself 
 best knows that it was given him, that it arose within 
 him, he knows not how, that he could not have created 
 it by all the energy of his self-conscious will,” ete. (p. 13). 
 “Because these things are so, it is absurd and preposterous 
 to try to estimate the worth of the poetic gift and its 
 results, according to our opinion of the author’s moral 
 personality. I may in this respect think very meanly 
 of the poet, without being prevented on that account from 
 very highly estimating his gift and his work” (p. 14). 
 “We must not judge by his matter whether a poet is 
 alienated from Christianity or not” (p. 19). “Truth is 
 the highest law, whether for the poet or the Christian. 
 He who has a feeling for it desires to say no more and to 
 speak no otherwise at any moment than he really feels, 
 and has a horror of words which give out, like a pastor, 
 that here is a Christian singing, speaking, or making 
 poetry !” “ The office of poetry is misunderstood when 
 it is regarded merely as a means for the promotion 
 of Christianity” (p. 20). “What Christianity would 
 be to the world, cannot be understood without under- 
 standing the world? Wouldst thou look then into the 
 world’s heart, contemplate the monuments of art, and turn 
 over the pages of poetry. There it is that she opens her 
 heart, there that she gives vent to her most secret sorrow 
 and most silent longings: there are found the echoes of 
 the joy with which the morning stars praised God, and 
 the groaning of the creature longing for the liberty of the 
 
396 Notes to Lecture LX. 
 
 sons of God; an uncomprehended home-sickness for a 
 lost glory, and a hopeful anticipation of a fresh sun- 
 rising ; the voice of a widow bewailing her desolation, 
 and the call of the bride seeking her unknown bride- 
 groom” (p. 21). “Genuine poetry is akin to prophecy ; 
 She is the prophetess and revealer of the voices and 
 thoughts concealed and locked up in nature and history, 
 so far as this human nature can in her light conceive or 
 know them. We are all like the people of Israel while 
 wandering in the wilderness. The Christian eye sees 
 by faith the land of Promise, but body and soul are 
 still surrounded by the sand and sun-burning of the 
 desert. Before us marches One who came from heaven 
 to be the true bread of life; but the Divine mercy does 
 not leave us even now without other manna, which falls 
 like dew upon the wilderness, and strengthens both soul 
 and body with earthly food. This is the gift of art, a 
 gift bestowed by God, and in the power of none to be- 
 stow upon Himself. And to those who do not for its 
 sake neglect the rest of the Sabbath, it may also be 
 granted, that strengthened and refreshed by the power of 
 art, they may leave the plains of Moab and ascend the 
 mountain, whence their eyes may behold in the distant 
 twilight the Canaan they long for. Well for those 
 whom art leads to such heights! But let him to whom 
 it becomes a voice ‘alluring him back to the wilderness, 
 learn to renounce it, no matter whether he finds those 
 to whom it is committed averse to Christianity or not. 
 For all things are yours, but ye are Christ’s. All things 
 are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient ; all 
 things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought 
 under the power of any” (p. 20, sq.). Iwould here also 
 commend to notice Hamann’s Wsthetica in nuce (in. his 
 
 Kreuzeigen des Philologen, Hamann’s Works, edited by. 
 
 Fred. Rothe, 1821, ii. 255, sq.), In which the rays spread 
 over his other works are, as it were, collected into a 
 focus. God is the supreme author, All our authorship 
 should be an image of the Divine. Hence it begins : 
 
 ll 
 
Notes to Lecture X. | 397 
 
 “ Neither lyre, nor pencil, but a winnowing fan for my 
 muse, to purge the floor. of sacred literature!” and it 
 concludes with these words : “ Let us now hearken to the 
 summary of His most recent esthetics, which is also the 
 oldest, ‘ Fear God, and give glory to Him, for the hour of 
 His judgment is come, ” etc. Compare also Disselhoff’s 
 Wegweiser zu J. C. Hamann, 1817, p. 215, sg. Rothe, 
 v. 135, 136, sq., discusses the purity, chastity, and Chris- 
 tianity of art. Good remarks will be found in W. Arnold’s 
 Kultur und Rechtsleben, 1865, p. 39, sg., on the moral or 
 immoral spirit of a people, as reflected in the character 
 of its national art. 
 
 NOTES TO LECTURE X. 
 
 (1) On the definition of the notion of education, comp. 
 Harless, das Verhdltniss des Christenthums, ete. (3rd 
 article, Christianity and the Literature of general Educa- 
 tion 1862): “The universality of this lively interest in 
 all that pertains to human knowledge and power, is the 
 token of genuine education” (p. 32). “Genuine educa- 
 tion, as the intellectual and ethical virtue of a kindly 
 interest in whatever may stir man to or become the 
 theme of his intellectual struggles after the compre- 
 hension and dominion of the powers and forces which 
 condition his being, surpasses all single branches of 
 knowledge and all particular acquirements” (p. 33). 
 “Where this universal sensorium is cultivated and 
 maintained, there is education” (p. 37). “Kant, in 
 his Kriwk der Urtheilskraft, pt. 1. appendix, defines 
 humanity as, on the one hand, the feeling of general 
 interest, on the other, the power of cordially and 
 generally communicating this feeling.” 
 
 (*) On the feature of sadness in the Greek delinea- 
 tion of life, comp. Lect. IX. Note 13; Darstellung des 
 
398 Notes to Lecture X. 
 
 Schmerzes, p. 5; “Lectures on Fundamental Truths,” pp. 
 183 and 394 (Lect. VII. Note 9). On the discords of 
 reality as expressed in poetry, etc., and their reconcilia- 
 tion by Christianity, comp. Harless’ above-named work 
 (Ist treatise, Christianity and Poetry), p. 21, and (2nd 
 treatise, Christianity and Literature) p. 50, sq. 
 
 (3) The description of the “ great-souled man” is in 
 Aristotle’s th. Nicom. iv. 3; comp. Lect. III. Note 11. 
 On isolated opinions and movements, Lect. II. Note 13. 
 Individual manifestations of natural human benevolence 
 are enumerated by Chastel in his Histor. Studien iiber 
 den Linfluss der christl. Barmherzigkeit in den ersten 6 
 Jahrh. der Kirche, translated from the French by 
 Wichern, 1854, p. 1, sg. (note, p. 210), and acknowledged 
 also by Augustine (Ep. clv. ad Macedon. c. 14). How 
 much self-interest was mingled in the commendation of 
 benevolence by Aristotle and Cicero, is pointed out by 
 Chastel, pp. 6 and 7, and appendix, p. 211. 
 
 (4) Aristot. Hth. Nicom. vii. 7, 4,5, viii. 14, 5, ix. 1,7: 
 Magn. Mor. ii. 11. 
 
 (°) Cicero, indeed, insists that benevolence (“bene- 
 ficentia, benignitas vel liberalitas”) must prevail as well 
 as justice, de Off: 1. 7, 20; still justice even abbreviated 
 of love is the supreme virtue (comp. eg. in the above) 
 “ut ne cul quis noceat nisi lacessitus injuria”—also the 
 permission of revenge. It is true that he also lays 
 stress on the idea of human association: “non nobis solum 
 nati sumus—homines hominum causa esse generatos, ut 
 ipsi inter se alius alii prodesse possent,” i. 7,22; the first 
 thing always 1s, in a stoical fashion, “ universi generis 
 humani societas,” i1.16,50. But the bond of human 
 association 1s only “ratio et oratio;” the ptoper moral 
 bond and all deeper foundation are absent. He is un- 
 acquainted with love properly so called, and knows only 
 of a rendering of assistance which costs nothing, “ danti 
 
Notes to Lecture X. 399 
 
 non molesta,” i. 16, 51. Benevolence is to be regulated 
 by the deserts of others, i. 14, 42; “ut in beneficentia 
 delectus esset dignitatis,” i. 14, 45, xv. 46. Hence the 
 feeling of mercy is absent, and the ruling principle is 
 still the ancient spirit of self-righteousness; benevolence 
 itself being regarded from the point of view afforded by 
 justice. He requires that we should do good to our 
 friends, 1. 14, 43; our love is to be in proportion to the 
 love we receive from others, i. 14, 47,—in opposition to 
 which, comp. Matt. v. 40, sg. On the benevolent efforts 
 made under the influence of the new spirit in the times 
 of the Roman emperors, comp. Chastel, p. 67, sq.; 
 E. Schmidt, die biirgerl. Gesellschaft, ete., p. 361, sq. 
 
 (©) On the history of Christian mercy, comp. the 
 two above-named works of Chastel and Schmidt. For 
 an acquaintance with the works of mercy of the present 
 time, comp. Lehmann’s repeatedly quoted work, die 
 Werke der Liebe, 1870, which gives an able sketch of the 
 whole department of the Inner Mission; Natzinger’s 
 Geschichte der kirchlichen Armenpflege, 1868, is a good 
 and comprehensive account from the Roman Catholic 
 stand-point. 
 
 (7) On the section on friendship, comp. especially 
 the lecture of Curtius: On the importance of friendship 
 in ancient times with respect to morality, science, and 
 politics (in Gelzer’s Monatsblatt, July 1863), on which 
 it was chiefly founded; also from a humanistic stand- 
 point, Marklin’s Gymnasiwm - Programm, Heilbronn, 
 1842, on the position and importance of friendship in 
 ancient and modern times. Among the ancients the 
 subject has been most copiously handled by Aristotle, 
 Lith. Nicom. viii. and xi., and Cicero, Lelius sive dialogus 
 de anucita. In antiquity, the importance of marriage is 
 eclipsed by the importance of friendship. It is admitted 
 that the specifically ancient crime of so-called pederasty 
 was, even among the best, connected with the exaggera- 
 
400 Notes to Lecture X. 
 
 tion of friendship. This was not a merely intellectual, 
 but also a sensual affection. 
 
 (8) On the reproach cast from of old upon Christianity, 
 that it did not adequately appreciate friendship, comp. 
 Rothe, iv. 68, sg., where, however, the refutation is not 
 historically carried out. The most genuine and fervent 
 expressions perhaps ever uttered concerning Christian 
 friendship will be found in the charming little work, 
 Philemon, or Christian friendship, dedicated to the scat- 
 tered confessors of the Lord, by F. Delitzsch, 2nd edit. 
 1868, which is founded on the compositions of the 
 sisters Klettenberg and C. F. von Mosers, both known by 
 means of Goethe’s Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahren. 
 
 (°) In the middle of the last century, friendship was 
 cultivated to an excessive degree, and became a veritable 
 passion, especially in the literary circle of Halle-Halber- 
 stadt, of which Gleim was the centre. In the seven- 
 teenth century, in the cases of Opitz and Flemming, it 
 was a masculine, in the eighteenth, a sentimental attach- 
 ment. That friendship cannot be durable between those 
 of opposite religious opinions, is exemplified by the 
 cessation of the friendship which existed between Heine 
 and Spitta in their student days. 
 
 (1°) The subject of sociability is treated of by Schleier- 
 macher, Lntwurf eines Systems der Sittenlehre, edited by 
 Schweizer, 1835, p. 307, sq., and thoroughly discussed 
 by Rothe upon the basis of Schleiermacher’s remarks. 
 
 (1) On the dangers of sociability, comp. Rothe, v. 
 178, sq.; on its genuine and spurious Christianization, 
 p. 182, s¢. . 
 
 (7) On falsehood in general, and falsehoods of courtesy 
 in particular, comp. Rothe, iv. 349, sq. 
 
 (8) On play, comp. Rothe, v. 197, sq. 
 
Notes to Lecture X. 401 
 
 (1*) On the need of Christianity in the present age, 
 comp. eg. Const. Rossler, System der Staatslehre, p. 521, 
 sg. “ Against the enormous temptations furnished by 
 the immense dominion obtained by man over matter in 
 the nineteenth century, and by the contradiction between 
 the grand resources at the command of the whole, and 
 the limited privileges of each individual,—against these 
 temptations nothing can avail but powerful principles.” 
 In thus speaking, the Krewz-Zeitung is quite in the 
 right. Ifthe immeasurable acquisitions which the mind 
 of man has both theoretically and practically attained, 
 are not to be a curse, are not to plunge him into feeble- 
 ness, degeneration, and barbarism, he must take a firmer 
 stand than he has ever yet done on that eternal founda- 
 tion which can bear him up free and triumphant above 
 all earthly powers, and especially above the secret power 
 of the earthly. Its own dominion over things earthly is 
 the greatest danger to the mind. It is superior to this, 
 when it surrenders itself to the absolute power. Never 
 was religion more necessary to any age than to ours, 
 which has to choose between a noble use of precious 
 possessions and a shameful shipwreck through self-decay. 
 They who would deprive mankind of Christianity, that 
 absolute anchor of the mind in an extra-mundane basis, 
 are but miserable fools. How fatal is a breach with 
 religion, is shown by social democracy. It is worth 
 while calling attention to the words of the Berlin Sozial- 
 Demokrat of March 12, 1865: “They who take heaven 
 from the people must give them earth. ... When 
 the priesthood bowed the neck of mankind, it gave to 
 the suffering son of man, the kindly hope of another and 
 a better world. In all the misfortunes of life, in sorrow, 
 need, and sickness, a sweet hope was still left to a 
 believing mind. But what is now the case? There are 
 still poverty and privation, sorrow, need, and sickness. 
 These are artificially enhanced and heaped up upon one 
 class, while the pleasures and good things of the world 
 combine to enrich the other. ... What then have 
 
 2¢ 
 
402 Notes to Lecture X. 
 
 the favoured of human society to offer to those millions, 
 through whose sickness, increased by poverty and care, 
 they enjoy the pleasures of earth? We tolerate no 
 halfness and no expedients, we desire the full results, 
 the whole truth. Ye wretched Pharisees of free 
 churches, of liberal citizenship, who have deprived the 
 people of the consolations of faith, and yet will not 
 remove from them the iron yoke of your iron machines, 
 where then is your logic? The logic of history is sterner 
 than yours; the people have done with heaven—they 
 are justified in claiming earth.” 
 
 (*°) The legend of Prometheus has of late been re- 
 peatedly alluded to in this sense; comp. Martensen, die 
 Christl. Eihik, 1871, p. 76, sq and the names there 
 mentioned. 
 
 (°) This conviction was expressed in “ Lectures on 
 Fundamental Truths,” p. 173, and therefore in 1864: 
 “Hence I repeat it, the combination of religion with 
 modern progress is the vital question of the day for 
 Europe, and especially for Germany.” Even the date 
 might show how unworthy of regard is the discovery 
 made by one of the collaborateurs of the Protest. Kir- 
 chenzertung of the Protestant union (1872, No. 12), that 
 it shows a leaning towards the Protestant union, because 
 the latter has inscribed the reconciliation of Christianity 
 with culture upon its flag. But apart from the con- 
 sideration, that while much is talked very little is done 
 in this respect by the association in question, it also 
 understands this reconciliation in an entirely opposite 
 manner. For it would determine what is Christian by 
 the standard of this culture, ¢.c. of the notions of the age, 
 while I regard Christianity as an independent and self- 
 determined quantity, and speak of an alliance between 
 the two independent powers, Christianity and culture. 
 
 17) On progress without Christianit , etc., Wolf ang 
 prog a: gang 
 
Notes to Lecture X. 403 
 
 Menzel speaks in his vehement but true and striking 
 manner (Kritik des Modernen Zeitbewusstseins, p. 245) : 
 “There is an almost universal prejudice that mere 
 humanity and morality will suffice without the Church. 
 It is thought right to be horrified at all that is specifi- 
 cally Christian in Protestantism. ... Many are just 
 intelligent enough to perceive, that the Church is still 
 necessary for the common people, if they are ‘not to get 
 quite untractable, and that it is only the educated 
 classes who are justified in emancipating themselves 
 from its authority. Others, however, will never give 
 up the hope of being able, by means of popular instruc- 
 tion, to screw the common people up to the level of the 
 educated public. Such a disposition does good service 
 to the destructive tendencies, and has hitherto, beyond 
 ali other agencies, contributed in times of repose to the 
 promotion of revolution. With the avowed or secret 
 consent of the educated public, unbelief has been in- 
 creasingly diffused among the lower strata of society by 
 means of the press, especially by worthless local papers. 
 The number of those who no longer believe in anything, 
 is increasing enormously among the people. The 
 efforts in a contrary direction of those who believe are 
 suspected. If the Church acts independently, and 
 without the consent of the State, a most fearful hier- 
 archy is thought to be gaining ground. If the Church 
 is supported by the State, the whole Philisterhood 
 pitches its voice in the democratic key, and raises an 
 outcry about reaction and violence done to conscience. 
 The Philisterhood does not know what it is about, for 
 it does not really desire revolution, while yet it is play- 
 ing into its hand. Itis hke the wretched hedge-sparrow, 
 constantly trembling at the gigantic cuckoo changeling 
 in its nest, and yet with foolish affection continuing to 
 nourish it and foster its growth... . How we can get 
 on without God, and without the Church, will be seen 
 when the last volcanic upheavals of revolution shall 
 begin under the feet of the self-supported Philistines.” 
 
404. Notes to Lecture X. 
 
 Martensen (Christliche Ethik, p. 2'79) speaks in grave 
 terms on the severance of principles which is being 
 effected by the progress of culture: “ Humanity and 
 liberty are said to be the watchword of the age; and this, 
 rightly understood, expresses a demand sanctioned by 
 Christianity itself. For the development of human free- 
 dom and of culture is rooted in the original destiny of the 
 human race, and therefore in the Divine plan for its edu- 
 cation. This must not, however, constitute the final 
 purpose, the highest end, but must be only one of the con- 
 ditions, one of the means for the attainment of something 
 far higher. In presence of all the emancipation now 
 attained, and the grand development of natural powers | 
 now exhibited, the Gospel never ceases to testify: ‘If 
 the Son shall make you free, then are ye free indeed.’ 
 In presence of the colossal wealth of culture, a trea- 
 sure ever accumulating from age to age, the Gos- 
 pel of Christ unceasingly declares: ‘Blessed are the 
 poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven,’ 
 Yes, it is a component element of genuine humanity, 
 and of the human race itself, to thirst after God... . 
 We stand before the most profound of all the contrasts 
 which the history of our race has exhibited. For while, 
 on the one hand, man is ever attaining more liberty and 
 independence, and more firmly establishing and extend- 
 ine his dominion over the earth; and while, on the 
 other, the Gospel is unceasingly accompanying his path 
 with the very same demands with which it first made 
 its appearance in history, the great EttHER—OR is being 
 the more emphatically pressed upon the choice of man- 
 kind: either in loving submission to let the kingdom of 
 man be transfigured into the kingdom of God, or in 
 selfish arrogance to try to set up that kingdom without 
 and apart from the kingdom of God. . . . And when the 
 great question of historical progress is raised, we are 
 constrained to say, that the tension between these oppo- 
 sites Increases ever more and more. ... Hence the 
 prayer, ‘Thy kingdom come,’ includes within it the true 
 
Notes to Lecture X. 405 
 
 view of all mental progress; for in it we pray not only 
 that the kingdom of God, but also that the true and 
 genuine kingdom of humanity in its union with that of 
 God, may come. . . . Emancipation, by the alliance of 
 culture and civilization, which are in our days regarded 
 by many as the true tasks of history, and with which 
 they hope to see at last the dawn of a golden age, does 
 not absolutely constitute that progress which is all- 
 decisive. The progress upon which all finally turns, is 
 the increase of the mutual relation between the actually 
 existing kingdom of God, and the human race emanci- 
 pated for liberty, education, and civilization. And the 
 ultimate purpose of all history, and therefore that which 
 must be the object of all our efforts, is the wnion of the 
 kingdom of mankind and the kingdom of God—a union 
 which involves the completion of the work of redemp- 
 tion and emancipation, by which latter terms indeed we 
 understand that genuine and holy emancipation from 
 the powers of nature, and from all the unauthorized 
 powers of the world, which is recognised by Christianity 
 itself.” 
 
INDEX OF THE PRINCIPAL SUBJECTS. 
 
 Esthetic friendships, 245. 
 
 Agenda, the Prussian, 302. 
 
 Agriculture, 209; its civilizing in- 
 tluence, 371. 
 
 Ancient art, 231. 
 
 Ancient drama, the, 69. 
 
 Ancient ethics, 17, sg.; deficiency 
 of, 275. 
 
 Ancient morality, 67; acquainted 
 not with virtue, but the virtues, 
 68. 
 
 Ancient view of man, 49; of mar- 
 riage, 113 ; of children, 113 ; of the 
 State, 178 ; of the mutual relation 
 of different states, 201; of the 
 common duty of man, 372. 
 
 Architecture, 389. 
 
 Aristotle separates morality from 
 religion, 18 ; considers habit and 
 the restraints of law the way to 
 morality, 61 ; his moral ideal, 74, 
 238; his view of man, 178; of 
 conscience, 263; on virtue as a 
 matter of habit, 288 ; on friend- 
 ship, 290; on the standard of 
 morality, 292 ; on the great-souled 
 man, 292 ; on love, 317 ; on mar- 
 riage, 317 ; on slaves, 335 ; on the 
 origin of the State, 336 ; on trade, 
 373. 
 
 Art, its connection with science, 
 221, 383; with Christianity ; its 
 intrinsic necessity , 226 ; its labour 
 and enjoyment, 227; secular, de- 
 veloped from religious, 228 ; art 
 and artists; naturally moral, 
 232; perfected by Christianity, 
 230; because furnished by it with 
 its best matter, 231; and because 
 Christianity opens to it the world 
 of mind, 232. 
 
 Asceticism of the Romish Church, 
 82, 295. 
 
 Aryans, 209, 371. 
 Augsburg, Confession of, 308. 
 Augustine, St., 52, 223, 275. 
 
 Beautiful, the, and the useful, 227. 
 
 Benevolent institutions, 240. 
 
 Bernhard of Clairvaux as a man of 
 prayer, 296. 
 
 Bible, the, its importance to Chris- 
 tians, 95 ; to the German nation, 
 96 ; in the education of children, 
 149. 
 
 Bible, the, in the school, 332. 
 Bluntschli on religion in the school, 
 332, ‘ 
 Brain, different weight of, among 
 
 different nations, 284. 
 
 Brothers and sisters, mutual rela- 
 tions of, 155. 
 
 Buddhist morality, 294, 
 
 Calvin, 295. 
 
 Capital punishment, justice of, 186, 
 356 ; literature of the question of, 
 358. 
 
 Capital and labour, 375. 
 
 Cardinal virtues, the four, 17, 67. 
 
 Catechism, the, its place in educa- 
 tion, 149; opinions on Luther’s 
 Catechism, 331. 
 
 Chastity, 120. 
 
 Child, the, his moral judgment, 11 ; 
 its maintenance, 139 ; its baptism, 
 139 ; its education, 141 ; to obedi- 
 ence, 144; by punishment, 144; 
 to religion, 147 ; to independence, 
 150 ; its duties, 154. 
 
 Children, employment of, in fac- 
 tories, 327 ; work of, 216 ; educa- 
 tion of, 141; a blessing, 138; 
 paucity of, in France, 138. 
 
 Cholerics, 282 ; the choleric tempera- 
 ment, 45. 
 
408 Index of the Principal Subjects. 
 
 Christ (see Jesus). 
 
 Christian, the, 58 ; the aims of the 
 man, 66; a priest, 103 ; married 
 life, 111; practical life, 184 ; his 
 conduct in the conflict between 
 government and government, 
 192. 
 
 Christianity, its importance to natu- 
 ral life, 4; teaches the connection 
 between morality and religion, 22; 
 corrects the ancient view of man, 
 49; brought into the world the 
 unity of morality, 70 ; fits man for 
 the performance of his earthly 
 calling, 110 ; has raised woman to 
 her true position, 113 ; is the reli- 
 gion of reconciliation also between 
 man and man, 181 ; its relation to 
 the State, 182; to political life, 
 178 ; gave no new laws to states, 
 180; but transformed Jaw to the 
 gentleness of its spirit, 181; 
 Christianity and politics, 205 ; 
 Christianity and culture, 207; 
 Christianity and handicraft, 211 ; 
 Christianity and the social ques- 
 tion, 218; its historical and in- 
 trinsic connection with science, 
 224; they mutually require each 
 other, 224 ; Christianity takes art 
 into its service, 230; Christianity 
 and humanity, 234, 254; is not a 
 denial but the true assertion of 
 natural life, 257 ; Christianity and 
 the State, 350; Christianity and 
 theology, 881; Christianity and 
 music, 384; Christianity and art, 
 392 ; its need at the present time, 
 401 ; Christian virtues, the, 58 ; 
 Christian family, the, 135, 326; 
 Christian view of children, “138 ; 
 Christian education, 147; Chris- 
 tian State, the, 177, 352; Chris- 
 tian love and the administration of 
 justice, 181; Christian liberty 
 misunderstood, 189 ; Christian art, 
 230, 384; Christian mercy, 239 ; 
 its agency in war, 369; Christian 
 friendship, 243 ; Christian moral- 
 ity, nature of, 294, ete. 
 
 Chrysostom on preaching, 299, 
 
 Cicero, 20; his opinions on the 
 State, 340; on international law, 
 366 ; on handicraft and trade, 372 ; 
 on benevolence and the idea of 
 human association, 398, 
 
 Clergy, the, their relation to school- 
 masters, 334. 
 
 Communism, 159, 378. 
 
 Comparative philology, 209, 
 
 Compulsory education, 153, 334. 
 
 Comte, 264, 
 
 Confession, the, its: necessity and 
 authority, 306; engagement to, 
 
 Confessions of the different churches, 
 107 
 
 Conflict, the Christian, 83. 
 
 Confusion of tongues, 127. 
 
 Congregation, the, called to partici- 
 pate in church matters, 102. 
 
 Conquest, 200. 
 
 Conrady, his definition of culture, 
 370. 
 
 Conservatism, the virtue of the 
 countryman, 210. 
 
 Conscience, the organ of the moral, 
 79; cannot make us free, 53; its 
 nature and constitution, 263, 287; 
 absence of, 8; liberty. of, and 
 Christianity, 381. 
 
 Constitution of Church, 102; and 
 State, 343. 
 
 Constitutionalism, political, 103. 
 
 Conventional falsehoods, 248. 
 
 Conversation, 249. 
 
 Conversion, its stages, 65. 
 
 Cosmopolitanism, 195. 
 
 Cousin on religious education, 334. 
 
 Culture and morality, 60; cannot 
 replace religion, 253 ; culture and 
 Christianity, 207, 401; office of 
 culture, 207, 371; culture as dis- 
 tinguished from education, 234. 
 
 Culture, nations of, 200. 
 
 Customs, national and family, 136 ; 
 their pedagogic importance, 142 ; 
 their influence upon children, 328. 
 
 Dahlmann on the origin of the State, 
 337; on the State and the family, 
 347 ; on religion and the Church 
 in the State, 349, 
 
 Dancing, 250. 
 
 Defence of national possessions, 203. 
 
 Deism, 275. 
 
 Delitzsch, 287, 298; on capital 
 Bervanadens, 356 ; on friendship, 
 400. 
 
 Demagogues, popular flattery of, 194. 
 Demosthenes on the state of mar- 
 riage in Athens, 312. 
 
Index of the Principal Subjects. 
 
 Desire of the Christian, 79; for 
 home, 193. 
 
 Despotism as the supposed origin of 
 the State, 166. 
 
 Determinism, 275. 
 
 Diplomacy, its lawfulness and office, 
 204. 
 
 Disselhoff on culture, 371. 
 
 Divorce, 324. 
 
 Dogma and morals 
 united, 259. 
 
 Dollinger, 309, 324. 
 
 Drama, the religious, 393. 
 
 Duties of parents in respect of their 
 children’s maintenance, 139 ; edu- 
 cation, 140; punishment, 145 ; of 
 teachers, 154; of grown persons, 
 154 ; of children, 154. : 
 
 Dynasty, affection for the, 194. 
 
 intrinsically 
 
 Ecce Homo, 274. 
 Educated classes, the, 221. 
 Education, difference between, and 
 culture ; its nature and office, 
 234 ; its stages, 235 ; genuine edu- 
 cation demands religion, 236 ; its 
 object humanity, 237 ; cannot 
 take the place of religion, 254; 
 different aims of, in children, 330; 
 gennine education, 397; education 
 of girls, 124; in general, 140; is 
 ‘the duty of parents, 141 ; its office, 
 146 ; its aim, 151, 331. 
 Engel on the social question, 374, 
 Epic, ancient German, 197. 
 Erdmann on man and wife, 276; on 
 the analogy between memory and 
 obedience, 329; mentioned also 
 280, 283, 287. 
 Ethic view, the, 41. 
 
 Factories, their pernicious influence 
 on children, 141 ; in general, 215 ; 
 state of, in England, 327. 
 
 Faith, an associative force, 298. 
 
 Family, the, its antiquity and uni- 
 versal importance, 112; difference 
 between, and the State, 179 ; not 
 the origin of the State, 337; its 
 rights, 173 ; family customs, 137 ; 
 family worship, 127 ; must not iso- 
 late itself, 158 ; the family and the 
 State, 161. 
 
 Falsehood, conventional, 249. 
 
 Father of a family, his priestly dig- 
 nity, 323, 
 
 409 
 
 Female education, 235. 
 
 Fichte, 277 ; his idealism, 9. 
 
 Fidelity to the Church, 
 
 Fischer, Philip, on Shakespeare, 264; 
 on art, 385 ; on Christianity and 
 art, 386. 
 
 Franklin, 217; on working men, 
 376. 
 
 Frantz, Constantin, on the need of 
 a religious revival, 262; against 
 the separation of Church and 
 State, 272; on the origin of the 
 State, 337; on the dispersion of 
 nations, 297; on the State and 
 nation ; on the national principle, 
 342; on justice and the State, 
 345; on the State and religion, 
 dol, 
 
 Frenzel, on the theatre, 394. 
 
 Friendship in the ancient world, 241; 
 Christian, 243; is a moral rela- 
 tion, 245; mentioned also 400. 
 
 Games of chance, 250. 
 
 Gerger, on the influence of Chris- 
 tianity, 273. 
 
 Gerber's, V., definition of the State, 
 343. 
 
 Germans, their religions, 196 ; and 
 secular vocation, 197 ; German 
 patriotism, 195 ; family life, 325. 
 
 Germany, present greatness and duty 
 of, 5; its vocation, 284 ; and temp- 
 tation, 198. 
 
 Girls, education of, 321. 
 
 Gladstone on religious education, 
 334, 
 
 Gneist on the separation of Church 
 and State, 348, sq. 
 
 God the source of moral life, 23 
 our supreme good, 79. 
 
 God, love of, its connection with the 
 love of man, 239. 
 
 God, rest in, 79. 
 
 Goods, community of, 380. 
 
 Gospel and legislative enactments, 
 1/82 
 
 Gospels, old Saxon Harmony of, 197. 
 
 Grace of God, its relation to the edu- 
 cation of children, 146. 
 
 Grace, means of, their relation to the 
 Church, 299. 
 
 Gratitude, a Christian virtue, 78. 
 
 Greeks, their art and science, 221; 
 the nation of education in the 
 
 ncient world, 237; Greek art, 229. 
 
410 
 
 Gregory VII. on the origin of sove- 
 reign power, 339. 
 
 Guizot on the spiritual and tempo- 
 ral power, 347, 
 
 Gury, 315. 
 
 Guilds, the ancient, 211. 
 
 Gymnastics, 250. 
 
 Hamann, on art, 396. 
 
 Handicraft, its ancient and present 
 estimation, 210, sq., 372. 
 
 Harless, 287 ; on marriage, 313 ; on 
 rulers and subjects, 360 ; on the 
 conduct of the Christian in a strife 
 between government and govern- 
 ment, 363 ; on war, 368; on cul- 
 ture, 370; on poetry, 394. 
 
 Harmony, supposed, of the world, 
 255 ; of the earthly and heavenly 
 calling, 257. 
 
 Harmony of doctrine, necessity of, 
 306. 
 
 Hase on the religious drama, 393. 
 
 Hegel, his definition of the State, 
 3845; on punishment, 355; on 
 capital punishment, 357; on the 
 ancient and modern artistic ideal 
 386. 
 
 Herbart on the influence of home 
 upon children, 328. 
 
 Hereditary monarchy, 187. 
 
 History to be regarded with moral 
 interest, 12, sq. ; history and cul- 
 ture, 208 ; its treatment by Posi- 
 tivism, 264, sq. 
 
 Historical jurists, school of, 341. 
 
 Hofmann, V., on celibacy, 314, 315. 
 
 Holy Scripture, 94, sq., 299. 
 
 Home, the Christian, 133, 325, 
 oe its traditions and customs, 
 
 Huber on the social question, 376. 
 
 Humanism, 243. 
 
 Humanity in penal legislature, 182 ; 
 unable to ensure peace between 
 the nations, 204; humanity and 
 Christianity, 234, 380; the ob- 
 ject of human education, 238 ; its 
 source is Christianity, 240 ; effect- 
 ed by human progress, 251 ; : its 
 idea the aim of modern movye- 
 ment, 252; spurious humanity, 
 253. 
 
 Humboldt, W. v., on Sunday as a 
 day of rest, 304, 
 
 Humour, 250. 
 
 d 
 
 Index of the Principal Subjects. 
 
 Hundeshagen on the relation of 
 modern ideas to Christianity, 382." 
 
 Ideal, the moral, of man, 58 ; way to 
 its realization, 61; Plato’s ideal, 
 62; of the heathen world, was 
 pride, 74. 
 
 Ideality of youth, 150. 
 
 Lluminism, age of, destroyed the 
 ancient order of public worship, 
 302. , 
 
 Inclination and marriage, 122. 
 
 Indeterminism, 274. 
 
 Indo-Germans, 371. 
 
 Industrial orders, 213; their temp- 
 tations, 214. 
 
 Intellectual education, 236. 
 
 International law, 201; in history, 
 368. 
 
 Irreligion in the working classes, 
 220. 
 
 Jacobi, on the evil principle in man, 
 289. 
 
 Jager the Darwinist on the connec- 
 tion of morality and religion, 270. 
 
 Jean Paul on after anger, 330. 
 
 Jesus Christ the manifestation of 
 perfect morality, 23, 63; the ideal 
 of the Christian, 74; his conversa- 
 tion with the Samaritan woman, 
 64 ; our example in prayer, 86; is 
 the truth, 222; regarded in re- 
 spect of the temperaments, 280. 
 
 John, St., a melancholic, 43. 
 
 John, St., first Epistle of, its funda- 
 mental doctrine, 23. 
 
 Jouffroy on the importance of 
 Christianity as a popular matter, 
 381. 
 
 Joy, Christian, 79. 
 
 Judge, the, his office, 184; and dig- 
 nity, 355. 
 
 Justice must prevail in the State, 
 165 ; states are based on, 166, 200 ; 
 depends on an ordinance of God, 
 200 ; its enactments are based on 
 the history of a nation, 171. 
 
 Kahnis on art, 385. 
 
 Kant, his scepticism, 9, 45; his mo- 
 rality, 61; on conscience, 288 ; 
 Kant and Schiller, 289 ; on evil, 
 289 ; on marriage, 318 ; his defini- 
 tion of the State, 344; on capital 
 punishment, 357; on continual 
 
Index of the Principal Subjects. 
 
 Kant—continued. 
 peace, 370; on humanity, 397; 
 mentioned also, 25, 273. 
 
 Kingdom of God, the, highest aim of 
 politics, 205; the highest aim of 
 human effort, 256. 
 
 Kliefoth, on the Lutheran form of 
 public worship, 301. 
 
 Labour and capital, 374, 
 
 Labour question, the, only to be 
 solved by moral means, 219, 374. 
 
 Labour, division of, 373, sq. 
 
 Labouring classes, 209, sq. 
 
 Lange, J. P., on the difference be- 
 tween man and woman, 277. 
 
 Language, science of, 225. 
 
 Law, its strictness, 180; of the hea- 
 then and of Israel, 55; its import- 
 ance, 56, sq. 
 
 Legislation state, 342. 
 
 Legitimacy, the question of, 191, 362. 
 
 Liberalism, on the separation of 
 Church and State, 348 ; liberalism 
 and the social question, 374. 
 
 Liberty, true, of the will, 50; loved 
 by the young, 152 ; liberty of self- 
 determination, 12. 
 
 Life, the different ages of, compared 
 with the temperaments, 46. 
 
 ae on the Lutheran Catechism, 
 
 31. 
 
 Lotze on conscience, 263 ; on the dif- 
 ference between man and woman, 
 277; on the ditference of the 
 temperaments, 281; on the con- 
 nection between the mental con- 
 stitution and external nature, 283 ; 
 on slavery in the ancient world, 
 235. 
 
 Love of man and woman, its natural- 
 ness, 117, 317; its nature, 117; 
 its universality, 118 ; its object is 
 marriage, 118 ; parental Jove, 143 ; 
 Christian love and the administra- 
 tion of justice, 181; love of the 
 Christian for his home, his nation, 
 its manners and customs, 194 ; 
 love, the token of Christian dis- 
 cipleship, 162 ; love to the State, 
 364 ; further remarks on Christian 
 love, 292. 
 
 Luthardt, 269, 274, 275, 279, 286, 
 287, 288 ; on synods, 291 ; on the 
 necessity and authority of a con- 
 fession, 292 ; on religious painting, 
 
 411 
 
 Luthardt—continued. 
 
 ie ; on Christian art in general, 
 87. 
 
 Luther on love to God, 76 ; his Cate- 
 chism, 150,332; preached obedience 
 to government, 189; Luther and 
 the Reformation, 196 ; Luther and 
 art, 230; on music, 391 ; on hu- 
 mility, 294; as a man of prayer ; 
 on the Lord’s prayer, 296 ; answers 
 to his prayers, 297 ; on preaching 
 and on public worship, 300 ; charac- 
 terized by Rothe, 310 ; on marriage, 
 313; on the love of man and woman, 
 317 ; on the Church’s blessing on 
 a marriage, 321 ; on divorce, 324; 
 on. the Bible in the school, 332 ; 
 on the Divine foundation of the 
 State and of government, 340; on 
 government, 359 ; on sedition, 361 ; 
 on war, 367. 
 
 Lutheranism, its affinity with the 
 German mind, 310. 
 
 Machinery, 213. 
 
 Maintenance of children, 139. 
 
 Man, the religious features a part of 
 his nature, 253 ; his highest worldly 
 duty, 252 ; his vocation on earth, 
 256. 
 
 Man, rights of, 173, 346. 
 
 Mankind, common calling of, 207. 
 
 Manufacturers, their relation to their 
 work-people, 217 ; their sins, 220; 
 their care tor their work-people,217. 
 
 Mariana, 340 ; on the sovereign peo- 
 ple, 360. 
 
 Marriage, ancient view concerning, 
 113, 243 ; Christian view of, 110 ; 
 connection of, with the moral con- 
 dition of a people, 111; its anti- 
 quity, 112; a vocation, 114; its 
 importance to the whole life, 115; 
 an association of personal life, 121 ; 
 a moral association, 122 ; must be 
 undertaken under God’s guidance, 
 123 ; needs the consent of parents, 
 123; and a regard to position ; 
 the rights of the State and the 
 Church in the conclusion of a 
 marriage, 125; how it should be 
 carried on, 126 ; marriage and re- 
 ligious life ; the different position 
 of husband and wife, 127 ; a com- 
 munion of giving and receiving, 
 129; not merely enjoyment, but 
 
412 
 
 Marriage—continued. 
 a work upon ourselves and upon 
 each other, 130; faithfulness in, 
 131; is by its nature indissoluble, 
 132, 324; exception to this rule, 
 133 ; state of, among the Greeks 
 and Romans, 312. 
 
 Married life, its importance to the 
 moral condition of a nation, 111, 
 
 UW 
 
 Martensen, his Ethics, 260, 269 ; on 
 art and work, 386; on Christian 
 art, 388 ;.0n the severance in the 
 progress of culture, 404. 
 
 Masters and servants, 156. 
 
 Melancholic temperament, 43. 
 
 Memory and_ obedience, analogy 
 between, 329. 
 
 Menzel on the education of children, 
 330 ; on progress without Christi- 
 anity, 269. 
 
 Mercy, Christian history of, 239 ; its 
 agency in war, 369. 
 
 Missions and commerce, 202. 
 
 Ministry of the Word, 105. 
 
 Modern ideas, 382. 
 
 Monastic vows, 315. 
 
 Moral statistics, 268. 
 
 Morality, Christian, its fundamental 
 idea, 256 ; its social character, 260 ; 
 its connection with religion, 270. 
 
 More, Sir Thomas, and the social 
 question, 379. 
 
 Mother’s duty to teach her child to 
 pray, 331. 
 
 Mount, Sermon on the, inculcates the 
 unity of religion and morality, 23 ; 
 explains the Ten Commandments, 
 56 ; also mentioned, 261, 
 
 Murder, 186. 
 
 Tey 228 ; music and Christianity, 
 
 Nations, the, their individuality, 48 ; 
 are the foundations of the State, 
 168. 
 
 National distinctions arise 
 moral, 169, geographical, 
 and historical causes, 170. 
 
 National hatred, 201. 
 
 National intercourse, 200, 212. 
 
 ‘National schools, 333. 
 
 Nationality, principle of, 172, 205. 
 
 Naville, on the connection of morality 
 and religion, 21; mentioned also, 
 260, 266, 270. 
 
 from 
 169, 
 
 Index of the Principal Subjects. 
 
 Neighbour, love of, in the ancient 
 world, 238; in the Christian, 
 239, 
 
 Obedience, Christian, 79 ; of children, 
 144, 154, 329; demanded by rulers, 
 .191; when to be refused, 190; 
 obedience and memory, their 
 analogy, 329. 
 
 Oberammergauer Passion-play, 230. 
 
 Obligation to the confession, 307. 
 
 Oettingen on moral statistics, 260, 
 
 68, 275. 
 
 Old Testament combines morality 
 with religion in the Decalogue, 22. 
 
 Opposition legitimate to govern- 
 ment, 190. 
 
 Origen on the importance of Christi- 
 anity to all men, 380; also men- 
 tioned, 261. 
 
 Painting, religious, 384. 
 
 Pantheism of the Stoics, 20; men- 
 tioned also, 255, 275. 
 
 Papistic authors on the origin of 
 states, 166. 
 
 Parental love, 143. 
 
 Parental duties, 139, sq. 
 
 Patriotism, 5, 192-195 ; its religious 
 and moral task, 199. 
 
 Paul, St., on the dissolution of 
 marriage, 133. 
 
 Peace and war, 202; peace the aim 
 of human history, 205. 
 
 Pederasty, 399. 
 
 Peel, Sir Robert, on religion in the 
 schools, 334. 
 
 Persecution of Christians, 189. 
 
 Philanthropy in the heathen world, 
 398. 
 
 Philippe, 287. 
 
 Philosophy, ancient, 223; referred 
 to theology, 223. 
 
 Phlegmatics, 282. 
 
 Piety towards home, 193 ; piety and 
 custom, 137. , 
 
 Pietism and public worship, 302. 
 
 Plato on the world of sense, 120 ; on 
 the origin of the sexes, 276 ; on the 
 ee classes, 371 ; mentioned also, 
 
 78. 
 
 Play, its moral use, 250. 
 
 Plays, religious, 392. 
 
 Pliny, on Christian worship, 308. 
 
 Plutarch, on marriage, 312. 
 
 Poetry, the earliest nourishment of 
 
Index of the Principal Subjects. 
 
 Poetry—continued. 
 the infant mind, 148 ; mentioned 
 also, 385, 390, 
 
 Poetry, genuine, 395. 
 
 Poetry and poets, 395. 
 
 Political changes, 192. 
 
 Political character of ancient mora- 
 lity, 18. 
 
 Politics, a Christian’s participation 
 therein, 192. 
 
 Polygamy, 317, 319. 
 
 Positivism, 264. 
 
 Powers, the temporal and spiritual, 
 347. 
 
 Prayer, 85, sq. ; its connexion with 
 religion, 86; subject of, 90; the 
 hearing of, 90, 297 ; its educational 
 value, 147, 331; scriptural doctrine 
 
 _ of, 296 ; answers to prayer, 297. 
 
 Preaching in the Greek Church, 299 ; 
 its requirements, 300. 
 
 Priesthood, present general tendency 
 of, 15; its rejection of Christianity, 
 16; the universal, of Christians, 103. 
 
 Prostitution in Berlin, 319. 
 
 Puritanism, 101. 
 
 Pythagoras, 225 ; Pythagoreans, 242, 
 
 Ranke on the Catechism, 150. 
 
 Rationalism, 73. 
 
 Raumer, K. v., 321; on the relation 
 of teachers to the clergy, 334. 
 
 Reaction, morbid, 362. 
 
 Recreation, 250. 
 
 Reformation, the exalted preaching, 
 97 ; did not fully develop church 
 government, 101 ; insisted on the 
 universal priesthood of Christians, 
 103; was effected in Germany, 196. 
 
 Regicide, 360. 
 
 Religion and morality, 1, 15, 272; 
 regarded as extraneous to the 
 world, 15; its connection with 
 morality in the ancient world, 17 ; 
 its connection with marriage, 112 ; 
 is the object of a child’s education. 
 146 ; is brought home to a child’s 
 mind in poetry and history, 148 ; 
 is the source of German national 
 life, 196; the best help of the 
 working classes, 217 ; but rejected 
 by many, 218 ; takes the arts into 
 its service, 228; the prerequisite 
 of genuine refinement, 236 ; its 
 relation to religious association, 
 298 ; religion in the State, 349, 
 
 413 
 
 Religious education, 334. 
 
 Religious creed of a nation, its influ- 
 ence on legislative enactments, 176. 
 
 Religious life of the Christian, 85. 
 
 Religious drama, 392, 
 
 Religiousness and ideality, 150. 
 
 Repentance, 13. 
 
 Retail dealing, 211. 
 
 Revolution, a crime, 190, 361. 
 
 Riehl, 111; on the priestly dignity 
 of the father of a family, 323; on 
 the Christian home, 328 ; on cus- 
 toms, 326. 
 
 Rights of man, 346. 
 
 Ringseis, Emilie, on the religious 
 drama, 392. 
 
 Ritter, Karl, on the historical and in- 
 tellectual influence of the country, 
 169; mentioned also, 283. 
 
 Romans, the, esteemed agriculture, 
 210. 
 
 Roman view of marriage, 315. 
 
 Romish Church, 93; and art, 230; 
 its doctrine of orders, 106 ; on the 
 saints, 295. 
 
 Roscher, 111, on monogamy, 319; 
 on patriotism and religion, 366 ; 
 on the division of labour, 373 ; on 
 the diffusion of socialistic ideas, 
 378 ; on community of goods, 379. 
 
 Rossler, 289 ; on the one-sided prin: 
 ciple of nationality, 344; on re- 
 ligion in the State, 350; on the 
 need for Christianity in the present 
 age, 401 ; definition of the State, 
 
 45. 
 
 Rosseuw, St. Hilaire, on the differ- 
 ence between the French and 
 German character, 96. 
 
 Rothe on the difference between 
 man and woman, 278; on the 
 vocation of the German nation, 
 284 ; on the affinity of Lutheran- 
 ism with the German mind, 310; 
 on the Church’s right to solem- 
 nize marriages, 322; on love for 
 home, and for the State, 364; on 
 the moral importance of trade, 
 367 ; on the drama, 393. 
 
 Rousseau, 24, 60 ; on the State, 165 ; 
 on morality and Christianity, 273 ; 
 on the origin of the State, 338. 
 
 Sanguine, the, 281. 
 Sanguine temperament, 43. 
 Schaffle on the social question, 379, 
 
414 
 
 Schelling, 254; on sculpture and 
 painting, 385; his wife Caroline, 
 215. 
 
 Schenrl, V., on the Christian State, 
 352. 
 
 Schiller on morality, 61, 67; on 
 Christian morality, 61, 288 ; Schil- 
 ler and Kant, 289 ; mentioned also, 
 209, 298. 
 
 Schleiermacher on the connection 
 between Church and school, 333 ; 
 on love to the State, 364; on the 
 influence of Christianity on inter- 
 national intercourse, 366; on the 
 division of labour, 374. 
 
 School, the, its connection with the 
 Church, 333. 
 
 School question, the, opinions upon, 
 332. 
 
 Schopenhauer on mathematics, 264 ; 
 also mentioned 273, 278. 
 
 Schulze-Delitzsch on the separation 
 of Church and State, 348. 
 
 Science, its connection with art, 221, 
 383; its antiquity, 222; its con- 
 nection with Christianity, 223, 
 381 ; they mutually require each 
 other, 225; makes men humble, 
 224; is naturally moral, 233 ; 
 science and Protestantism, 383. 
 
 Sculpture and painting, 384, 388. 
 
 Sects, their relation to the State, 179. 
 
 Selfishness in public life, 195; the 
 ruling principle of, the ancient 
 world, 238 ; in friendship, 245. 
 
 Self-control, 236. 
 
 Self-determination of man, 12. 
 
 Sensuousness, its truth and its per- 
 version, 120. 
 
 Sentimental temperament, 281. 
 
 Shakespeare, the ethic spirit of his 
 dramatic poetry, 263; also men- 
 tioned 9, 69. ‘ 
 
 Sin, its nature, 71; its origin and 
 three stages, 72; its power, 83; 
 sin and shame, 120; our own, as 
 well as that of another, to be re- 
 sisted in marriage, 131 ; national 
 sins, 199. 
 
 Sisters, their office in the family, 155. 
 
 Slavery in the ancient world, 335, 
 
 Sociability, its nature, 246; its im- 
 portance, 247; its moral aspect, 
 248; its dangers and _ transgres- 
 sions, 249 ; mentioned also, 336. 
 
 Social education, 236. 
 
 Index of the Principal Subjects. 
 
 Social intercourse, 158. 
 
 Social question, the, 215, 374; only 
 to be solved in a moral way, 219. 
 Socialism in antiquity, 378, sq. ; in 
 
 the Reformation age, 379. 
 
 Socialists, the, 174; onmarriage, 319. - 
 
 Socrates on the way to attain to 
 virtue, 59, 69; on the connection 
 between virtue and knowledge, 59, 
 287 ; mentioned also, 242. 
 
 Spener as a man of prayer, 296. 
 
 Spinoza, 13 ; on repentance, 268. 
 
 Stahl on the Christian State, 352 ; 
 on punishment, 356; on capital 
 punishment, 357 ; on morbid re- 
 action, 362; on legitimacy, 362; 
 on commerce, 367. 
 
 State and Church at variance on the 
 subject of divorce, 133 ; its rights 
 with respect to education, 153 ; 
 shared by the Church, 334; its 
 origin, 163, 336; a product of 
 history, 165; does not arise from 
 the family, 164; nor from com- 
 pact, 165; nor force, 166 ; but is 
 based on justice, 166 ; its nature, 
 166-170; its definition ; requires 
 a national basis; State and real 
 life, 172 ; its relation to the rights 
 of man, of the family, and of 
 the religious community, 173 ; the 
 Christian state, 352 ; the State and 
 Christianity, 160-183; its office, 
 184 ; its duty of punishment, 185 ; 
 its position in the world, 200; 
 intercourse of the different States, 
 201; State and Church, their 
 separation, 348. 
 
 Statesmen, 205. 
 
 Statistics do not contradict moral 
 freedom, 13. 
 
 Stoa, 270; Stoics, 63, 238, 318; Stoic 
 philosophy seeks to base morality 
 on religion, 19 ; its opinions Pan- 
 theistic, 20 ; mentioned also, 74. 
 
 Symbolism required by the nature 
 of man, 228. 
 
 Synodal government, 105. 
 
 Tacitus on German marriage, 320. 
 
 Temperaments, the, connected with 
 the bodily constitution, 43 ; four, 
 42; temperamental virtues, so- 
 called, 45; compared with the 
 different ages, 46; also spoken 
 of 280. 
 
Index of the Principal Subjects. 
 
 Tertullian on the Divine authority 
 of government, 358. 
 
 Theatre, the, 393. 
 
 Theology is directed to philosophy, 
 226 ; theology and Christianity, 
 225, 381. } 
 
 Thiersch, Heinr., on divorce, 324 ; 
 on the obedience of children, 328 ; 
 on the corporeal punishment of 
 children, 329; on the educational 
 importance of prayer, 330. 
 
 Tocqueville on American democracy, 
 352. 
 
 Toleration of the State, 351. 
 
 Tradition in the family, 136. 
 
 Trendelenburg on the difference be- 
 tween man and woman, 278 ; on 
 marriage, 317; on the rights of 
 Church and State in the conclu- 
 sion of a marriage, 322; on the 
 rights and duties of the father of 
 a family, 323; on the indissolu- 
 bility of marriage, 325; on the 
 connection of Church and State, 
 301; on slavery, 336; on the 
 origin of the State, 336, 340; on 
 the constitution of a State, 343 ; 
 on the relation of the State to 
 religion, 351; on punishment, 
 355 ; on capital punishment, 358 ; 
 on revolution, 361; on war, 369; 
 on constant peace, 369; on com- 
 
 415 
 
 Trendelenburg—continued. 
 merce, 367 ; also mentioned 111, 
 313. 
 
 Unity, efforts of men to maintain, 
 168. 
 Universities, 226, 383. 
 
 Vinet on prayer, 91. 
 
 Virtues, the Christian, 58, 67; 
 Christian notion of virtue; its 
 identity for all, 70 ; its nature, 74 ; 
 the several Christian virtues, 78. 
 
 War, its unavoidableness, 179; its 
 reprobation and justification, 203, 
 367. ; 
 
 Wife, her position and power in the 
 family, 127 ; shares with the hus- 
 band the duty of education, 143. 
 
 Winckelmann on beauty, 386. 
 
 Wise, seven, men of Greece, 17. 
 
 Wit, 250. 
 
 Wives, community of, 319. 
 
 Woman, her peculiarity, as dis- 
 tinguished from man, 37. 
 
 Wurtemburg, Consistory of, on the 
 Bible in the school, 332. 
 
 Zeller, on ancient morality, 275 ; also 
 mentioned, 270, 285. 
 Zwingle and art, 230. 
 
 ERRATUM. 
 
 Page 334, line 19, for “ school discipline” read ¢ compulsory education.” 
 
 ee ee ee ee ee ee 
 MUIR AND PATERSON, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH, 
 
WORKS PUBLISHED 
 T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 
 
 Just published, in crown 8vo, price 6s., 
 APOLOGETIC LECTURES ON THE MORAL 
 TRUTHS OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 The Nature of Christian Morality; Man; The Christian and the 
 Christian Virtues; The Devotional Life of the Christian, and 
 his Attitude towards the Church; Christian Marriage; The 
 Christian Home; The State and Christianity ; The Life of the 
 Christian in the ‘State ; Culture and ite se ; Humanity 
 and Christianity. 
 
 By C. E, LUTHARDT, D.D., Leipsic. 
 
 By the same Author, in crown 8vo, Third Edition, price 6s., 
 LECTURES ON THE FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS 
 OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 The Antagonistic Views of the World in their Historical Develop- 
 ment ; The Anomalies of Existence; The Personal God; The 
 Creation of the World; Man; Religion ; Revelation ; History 
 of Revelation—Heathenism and Judaism : Christianity in 
 History ; The Person of Jesus Christ. 
 
 ‘‘We have never met with a volume better adapted to set forth the 
 evidences of Christianity in a form suited to the wants of our day. There 
 is no obscurity in the thoughts or in the style; the language is simple, the 
 ideas clear, and the argument logical, and generally, to our mind, conclusive. 
 
 The whole of this vast argument is illustrated by various and 
 profound learning in ancient and modern writer s, and the notes themselves 
 are an interesting study. We confidently recommend these valuable Lectures 
 both to the student and the general reader, as containing an unusual 
 amount of thought and information conveyed in elegant and forcible 
 language.’ ‘Guardian. ' 
 
 By the same Author, Second Edition, in crown 8vo, 6s., 
 APOLOGETIC LECTURES ON THE SAVING 
 TRUTHS OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 The Nature of Christianity ; Sin ; Grace; The God-Man ; The 
 Work of Jesus Christ ; The Trinity ; ; The Church ; "Holy 
 Scripture ; The Means of Grace ; ; The Last Things. 
 
 “These Lectures contain a réswmé of the doctrines of the Christian faith. 
 The author is a profound thinker, a skilled theologian, a man of wide and 
 varied culture, who knows how to express clearly and sharply what he 
 believes. The principles of the Gospel are expounded with singular force, 
 truth, and gracefulness of diction.” —Hvangelical Magazine. 
 
 “Dy, Luthardt is a profound scholar, but a very simple teacher, and 
 expresses himself on the gravest matters with the utmost simplicity, clear- 
 ness, and force.” —Literary World. 
 
2 WORKS PUBLISHED BY T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 
 
 In Three Volumes, royal 8vo, price 36s., 
 
 HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 By PHILLIP SCHARF, D:D. 
 Author of “The History of the Apostolic Church.” 
 From THE BrrtH or Curist TO GREGORY THE GREAT, A.D. 1-600. 
 
 ‘Dr, Schaff’s book is perhaps, taken all in all, the most convenient, 
 serviceable, and satisfactory of all our general Church histories, especially 
 for students.” —Presbyterian. 
 
 Just published, Third Edition, in crown 8vo, price 6s., 
 THE SINLESSNESS OF JESUS: 
 
 AN EVIDENCE FOR CHRISTIANITY. 
 By Dr. C. ULLMANN. 
 
 _ We welcome it in English as one of the most beautiful productions of 
 Germany, as not only readable for an English public, but as possessing, 
 along with not a few defects, many distinguished excellences. . . . We 
 warmly recommend this beautiful work as eminently fitted to diffuse, 
 among those who peruse it, a higher appreciation of the sinlessness and 
 moral eminence of Christ. The work has been blessed already, and may 
 have its use also to an English public,’—British and Foreign Evangelical 
 Review. < 
 
 Sixth Edition, crown 8vo, price 7s. 6d., 
 
 CHRIST’S SECOND COMING; 
 
 WI IT BE Pre-MILLENNIAL? 
 By Rey. DAVID BROWN, D.D. 
 
 “This is, in our judgment, one of the most able, comprehensive, and 
 conclusive of the numerous works which the millenarian controversy has 
 called forth.” — Watchman. 
 
 Lately published, in crown 8vo, price 3s. 6d., 
 
 APOLOGETIC LECTURES ON JOHN’S GOSPEL. 
 By J. J. VAN OOSTERZEE, D.D., 
 PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF UTRECHT. 
 
 I. Tar AUTHENTICITY OF St. JoHN’s GOSPEL. 
 Il. JoHN AND THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 
 III. Jonn’s Account oF CHRIST’S MIRACLES. 
 TV. Tur JoHANNEAN CHRIST. 
 V. TasiE oF APOLOGETICAL LITERATURE ON JOHN’S GOSPEL. 
 ‘<The small volume before us is the production of a strong and cultivated 
 
 mind. . . . . Nothing could be more able, seasonable, and complete. 
 — Watchman. 
 
WORKS PUBLISHED BY T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 3 
 
 In crown 8vo, price 5s., 
 
 ROME AND THE COUNCIL, 
 
 IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 By FELIX BUNGENER. 
 Translated from the French, with Additions by the Author. 
 
 “We very earnestly commend this book to the notice of our readers. It 
 is full and accurate in historic data, lucid in arrangement, pointed and 
 forcible in style, and at the same time calm, dispassionate, and free from 
 exaggeration. It will amply repay a careful perusal.” —Hvangelical 
 Magazine. 
 
 Just published, in crown 8vo, price 4s. 6d., 
 
 THE LEADING CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES, 
 
 AND THE PRINCIPLES ON WHICH TO ESTIMATE THEM. 
 By GILBERT WARDLAW, M.A. 
 
 x It is with great pleasure that we call the attention of the 
 
 reading public to this work of Mr. Wardlaw’s.”—Courant. 
 
 Third Edition, one volume, crown 8vo, price 5s, 
 
 GOTTHOLD’S EMBLEMS; 
 Or, INVISIBLE THINGS UNDERSTOOD BY THINGS THAT ARE MADE. 
 
 By CHRISTIAN SCRIVER, 
 Minister of Madgeburg in 1671. 
 
 Translated from the Twenty-eighth German Edition. 
 
 **It is a book for all men, from the beggar on his pallet of straw to the 
 prince upon his throne. With a strangely childish eye and charming lip, 
 Scriver leads us forth into nature, as into a vault, of mirrors, from which 
 the image of God everywhere shines forth.” —Clerical Journal. 
 
 In one volume, crown 8vo, price 4s, 6d. Sixth Edition. 
 
 THE SUFFERING SAVIOUR; 
 
 Or, Mepirarions on THE Lasr Days oF THE SUFFERINGS OF 
 CHRIST. 
 
 By Dr. F. W. KRUMMACHER. 
 
 “We give it preference to everything hitherto produced by the gifted 
 and* devoted author. It is divinity of the most thoroughly evangelical 
 description. Truth and tenderness have seldom been so successfully com- 
 bined.” —Christian Witness. 
 
4 WORKS PUBLISHED BY T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 
 
 In crown 8vo, price 4s. 6d., 
 
 THEH WORDS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 As altered by Transmission, and ascertained by Modern Criticism. 
 A BOOK FOR THE PHOPLE. 
 
 mviowW.* Males 1G AUN SSD: 
 Professor of Divinity and Biblical Criticism, Aberdeen. 
 AND 
 ALEXANDER ROBERTS, D.D., 
 Professor of Humanity, St. Andrews. 
 
 In one volume, handsomely bound, crown 8vo, price 7s. 6d., 
 
 THE FOOTSTLHPS Ofsc rh Rist. 
 Translated from the German of A. CASPERS, 
 
 By A. E. RODHAM. 
 I. CHRIST FOR US. III. CHRIST BEFORE US. 
 Il. CHRIST IN US. IV. CHRIST THROUGH US. 
 ‘‘ There is much deeply experimental truth and precious spiritual lore in 
 
 Caspers’ book. I do not always agree with his theology, but I own myself 
 much profited by his devout utterances.”—The Rev. C. H. Spurgeon. 
 
 Cheap Edition. In one volume, crown 8vo, price 6s., 
 FRIEDRICH WILHELM KRUMMACHER: 
 AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY. 
 Edited by his Daucurmr, and Translated by Rev. M. G. Easton, 
 M.A. Second Edition, revised, with a New Biographical 
 Supplement by the Editor, and a Preface by Rev. Dr. Carrs, 
 Berwick. 
 ‘This is one of the most charming of autobiographies; thoroughly 
 German, but simple, loving, and faithful, abounding in sketches of well- 
 
 known literary and theological characters, and rich in spiritual thought and 
 experience.” —Record. 
 
 In one volume, crown 8vo, price 5s. Third Edition, 
 LIGHT FROM THE CROSS: 
 
 SERMONS ON THE PASSION OF OUR LORD. 
 
 Translated from the German of A. THouucK, D.D., Professor of 
 Theology in the University of Halle. 
 
 By the Rev. R. C. LUNDIN BROWN, M.A. 
 
 ‘With no ordinary confidence and pleasure we commend these most 
 noble, solemnizing, and touching discourses,” —Jbritish and Foreign Evan- 
 gelical Review. ... 
 
Vm SS 
 i bois ec @ a 
 
 « 
 
Ae ey ae 
 v 
 
 a ed 
 
 py faire Lae 2 
 is Pare Ley 
 
 . 
 
ee 00