be quoted as an opponent of Delitzsch, but it must be remembered that he is equally an opponent of Hommel and those who train with him. He thinks that Hommel has been trying for a long time to bury the results of the literary criticism of the Bible, but that they refuse to stay in the grave while he shovels in the earth upon them. He has ever to dig the grave over again. On the whole Stade is of the opinion that the labors of the critics have produced good results. He says that the accusation against them, that they fail to distinguish between the time of the writing of a book and the time of the origin of the ideas and customs it describes, is mostly unjust as these two things are generally held apart by the critics. In conclusion just a word as to Stade's idea of the origin of the religion of Israel. Some descendants of Leah, who had a place of worship of their tribal God, Jaweh, in Kadisch, were leading a nomadic life in Goshen, and were oppressed by the Egyptians. These Moses called to freedom under the protection of Jaweh, and thus arose the fundamental idea of the religion of Israel-Jehovah, the God of Israel.

M. Friedlander. Although born and brought up a Jew he is in reality much nearer to Christianity than to Judaism. The one great thought that runs through all his writings is that the influence of Hellenism on the Jews of the dispersion worked beneficially in that it freed them from the narrowness of the law, and placed them in the religious condition of the Jews of the time of the prophets. All his many books tend to establish this one point. Although he is generally regarded as exaggerating the influence of Hellenism it may be of interest to give the titles of his books and longer articles. They are Das Judenthum in der vorchristlichen griechischen Welt (Judaism in the Pre-Christian Greek World) 1897; Der vorchristliche jüdische Gnostizismus (Pre-Christian Jewish Gnosticism) 1898; Der Antichrist in den vorchristlichen jüdischen Quellen (Antichrist According to Pre-Christian Jewish Sources) 1901; The Pauline Emancipation from the Law, a Product of the Pre-Christian Jewish Diospara (article in the Jewish Quarterly Review, vol. XIV, 1902); Geschichte des jüdischen Apologetik als Vorgeschichte des Christenthums (The History of Jewish Apologetics as a Preparation for the History of Christianity) 1903; Griechische Philosophie im Alten Testament (Greek Philosophy in the Old Testament) 1904; Die religiosen Bewegungen innerhalb des Judenthums im Zeitalter Jesu (The Religious Movements within Judaism in the Times of Jesus) 1905. The merest glance at these titles will suggest that Friedländer regards Christianity as a direct offspring of the Judaism of the dispersion-in other words Christianity is the product of the combined Jewish and Greek spirit. Nevertheless he does not deny the originality of Jesus. He says that the time was ripe for the Messiah, but this does not mean that the time produced the Messiah and his message, but merely that at that time there was a preparedness for him, the possibility of understanding and accepting him. But between him and his times. As to Jesus himself he says he was faithful to the law, but in the sense in which the non-pharisaic portion of the devout in Israel were faithful, that is, faithful to the spirit but

regardless of the letter. Jesus did not allow himself to be held to the ideas of Moses and the ancients, but went beyond them in the spirit of a newer age whose morals had already been purified by philosophy, so that his ethics were higher than the Mosaic-indeed, they were the completion of the Mosaic. In fact, therefore, he was free from the law. In his struggle with the Pharisees he came to constantly clearer conceptions of his own person. While at first he thought of himself as a successor of the prophets, a second John the Baptist, he soon felt that he had gone beyond them, and became conscious of his higher mission and of a power of God within him far surpassing any who had preceded him. No one was so nearly the manifestation of God's love as Jesus. For him God was not a reality merely in thought, he enjoyed such an incomparable fullness of conscious relation with God as had never been reached before. With his strong antipathy for legal Judaism, and this evident sympathy with Jesus and Christianity, it might seem strange that Friedländer does not become a Christian. And he has thought on that matter, but feels that Christianity is as much in need of purification from mixtures of error as Judaism is, and hence he would gain nothing by the exchange. The extravagance of his claims for Hellenism and its influence is very marked in his latest book, mentioned above, where he strives to make it appear that even Jesus was in a good measure the product of the Greek spirit. On the whole one may say that Friedländer has learned much from Paul, who teaches that legal Judaism is a later and relatively defective form of religion as compared with the earliest revelations of God to Abraham and others; and that the Christian doctrine of justification by faith has its parallel in the justification of Abraham.

RECENT THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE

Biblische Zeit- und Streitfragen (Disputed Questions concerning the Bible in Our Times). By Various Authors. Gross-Lichterfelde: Berlin, E. Runge, 1905. The series of booklets under the above general title treats many special themes: The Problem of Suffering: an Introduction to the Book of Job; The Lord's Supper in the New Testament; The Historicity of the gospel of Mark; The gospel of John and the synoptic gospels; The Resurrection of Jesus; Paul and Prayer; The Text of the New Testament; The New Message in the Teaching of Jesus; The Older Prophetism to the Time of Elijah and Elisha; Baptism in the New Testament; The Biblical Account of Primitive Times; New Testament Parallels to Buddhistic Documents; The Miracles of Jesus. Besides these many more are promised. The object of the series is twofold: first, to furnish a defensive statement of the teachings of the Scriptures which shall, in contrast to the older apologetics, be true to the historical spirit; and, second, to set forth these truths on the basis of the belief in revelation, in contrast with those who would explain away the supernatural in the Bible. Of course where so many different writers are engaged varying degrees of success in the work attempted must be expected. On the whole it must be said that what has been written is satisfactory.

All of the writers are

ranked in Germany as conservatives, and some of them have been quoted in recent months by Americans as on the conservative side. This is eminently true if by conservative is meant one who preserves all truth essential to the Christian faith. It is false in the sense in which the Americans referred to have represented them. They are not conservatives in the sense that they hold on to the so-called traditional views of the Bible, its origin, its history, its ethics, and its theology. This may be illustrated by a few specimens. Professor Sellin, in treating The Biblical Account of Primitive Times (Die biblische Urgeschichte), deals with the sources. J was begun under David, P was completed under Ezra. Where does the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch come in under such a scheme? Again he affirms the dependence of the writers of this early Bible history upon heathen mythology, chiefly, but not exclusively Babylonian. Whatever we may think of this, we can never again honestly rank Sellin as a conservative in the usual American sense of that word. Bernhard Weiss, writing on The Historicity of the gospel of Mark, holds that besides the recollections of Peter Mark used the so-called Logia-source, but with far less fidelity than that source is found in Matthew. He holds, also, that Mark does not give, and did not intend to give, us an historical record, but that he grouped his material around certain ideas which he wished to illustrate, and that for the real history of Jesus we must go to the gospel of John. Here again we find that the writer is guilty of maintaining the source theory; finding a gospel relatively untrustworthy; denying that in each gospel we have history. Evidently he will not rank as a conservative. Barth treats The gospel of John, and the synoptic gospels, in such a way as to show that the synoptics cannot be trusted, but that John's gospel can be trusted. Here again is no conservative. Beth deals with the miracles of Jesus in a way very unsatisfactory to American conservatives; for he affirms that in the synoptics and in the gospel of John alike Jesus is represented not as performing his miracles for the purpose of awakening faith, but because of his love and pity for human suffering. So far as this present writer is concerned all the writers in this series of booklets are tarred with the same critical stick. The difference is not in the method but in the presuppositions with which they came to the use of the method-in other words the difference is subjective.

Le dogme de la redemption. Essai d'étude historique (The Doctrine of Redemption Historically Considered). By Abbé J. Rivière. Paris, N. Lecoffre, 1905. The book is published with the sanction of the Archbishop of Albi. In the introductory pages the author gives a summary of the Roman Catholic doctrine of the redemptive work of Christ, and a discussion of the so-called rationalistic systems of more recent times. These systems have not necessarily any rationalism in them, but consist of any and all Protestant attempts to construe doctrinally the redeeming work of Christ. Nevertheless the author regards the Socinian negativism as the classic Protestant view-how erroneously all intelligent Protestants are aware. The last ripe fruit of the Reformation, according to our author,

is modern liberal Protestantism with its individualism, of which Albrecht Ritschl is the chief exponent. In the next section, which treats of redemption as taught in the Holy Scriptures, he decidedly softens down the ordinary Romanist judgments of the now celebrated Loisy. Following this comes a section on redemption according to the Greek fathers which concerns itself chiefly with an attempt to show that the doctrinal considerations of these fathers are much richer, and much more manifold, than Ritschl and Harnack have discovered. The section next following is on redemption according to the Latin fathers. He gives us a lengthy discussion of Anselm's satisfaction theory, which he calls a masterpiece which, by its originality and its actual influence upon the history of theology, has given to its author a place of honor alongside of the greatest church fathers. He says of it that even to-day it is, because of the power of the conception and the vigor of its development, the mightiest, if not the completest, effort to solve the problem of redemption which Christian literature has created. In opposition to Ritschl, Harnack, and Sabatier he defends the satisfaction theory of the atonement from every assault of every kind. To his mind the doctrine of Anselm is the classic form of the occidental tradition of the realistic theory of redemption. His condemnation of Abelard is, on the other hand, equally vigorous. Abelard, he says, by the radical character of his ideas recommends himself particularly to modern Protestants who see in him their forerunner. And in this they are not deceived, he thinks. By denying to the sufferings of Christ any objective value, and by reducing the saving efficacy of the redemptive death to a purely subjective influence, Abelard proves himself the pioneer of liberalism which finds itself again in this "deep and moving doctrine"! But it contradicts fundamentally the tradition of the church which would have had to give up its very existence had it not fought such enemies. The author thinks that the development reached its conclusion in Thomas Aquinas, whose form of the doctrine is Anselm's with but unessential modifications, but who gave the final expression to the doctrine. He says that Thomas by his wise reserve, his caution resulting from looking at every side, and his understanding of every shade of thought on this subject, was called to give us the full results of the preceding evolution. On the other hand he deals rather scornfully with Duns Scotus, whom he takes into account chiefly in relation to the question of the scope and worth of the satisfaction rendered by Christ. He thinks that Protestants have much overrated the significance of the teaching of Duns Scotus, in which they see an anticipation of the Socinian rationalism. The last section of the book deals with the rights of the devil, which have played so important a part in the history of the doctrine of redemption. The aspect of the subject was confined mostly to the early centuries. Anselm, Abelard, and Thomas Aquinas did away with all such mythologumenon. The conclusion sums up the whole development, attempting to show that the doctrine as developed was only the ever clearer unfolding of the original concept of the church made necessary by the opposition of heresy. Here the author identifies the doctrine of evolution with the doctrine of traditionalism-which is a most interesting procedure for a Roman Catholic.

GLIMPSES OF REVIEWS AND MAGAZINES

Full of freshness and living interest is The London Quarterly Review for July, well spiced with variety. A touching article by R. Wilkins Rees brings near to us the pathetic nobleness of Charles Lamb, of whom Coleridge, his fifty-years friend, said, "Lamb has more totality and individuality of character than any other man I have ever known in all my life." Ruskin said, "Lamb was the only writer in the world's history who had a human soul within his breast that cared for me and you"; which saying Arthur Symons echoes thus: "Kindness, in Lamb, embraces mankind, not with the wide engulfing arms of philanthropy, but with an individual caress." There exists an old suspicion that Lamb was profane. But the almost worshipful tributes of such men as were his friends is proof enough of the groundlessness of such a notion. Thackeray spoke of him with sincere love as "Saint Charles," and Wordsworth's epitaph on Lamb contains the line, "O, he was good, if e'er a good man lived." Mr. Rees says: "There was in him throughout a deep and true religiousness. As a young man he writes to his friend, Robert Lloyd, in a memorable letter, ‘Friends fall off, friends mistake us, they change, they grow unlike us, they go away, they die; but God is everlasting and incapable of change, and to him we may look with cheerful, unpresumptuous hope, while we discharge the duties of life in situations more untowardly than yours. You complain of the impossibility of improving yourself, but be assured that the opportunity of improvement lies more in the mind than the situation. Humble yourself before God, cast out the selfish principle, wait in patience, do good in every way you can to all sorts of people, never be easy to neglect a duty though a small one, praise God for all, and see his hand in all things, and he will in time raise you up many friends or be himself instead an unchanging friend.' With his oft-recurring and pathetic humility he writes to Coleridge of his own 'improvable portion of devotional feelings, though when I view myself in the light of divine truth, and not according to the common measures of human judgment, I am altogether corrupt and sinful. This is no cant. I am very sincere.' And to the same supreme friend he also says, 'In my poor mind 'tis best for us to consider God as our heavenly Father and our best friend without indulging too bold conceptions of his nature. Let us rejoice in the name of dear children, brethren, and co-heirs with Christ of the promises, seeking to know no further.'" Lamb's heroic unselfishness during the long tragedy of his life, endears him to his fellowmen. His patient devotion to his insane sister, and to his poor old palsied exacting dotard of a father, puts him in the calendar of saints. His sister Mary was perpetually on the brink of the next attack of madness. In one period of insanity she murdered their mother. Life was to them a horror of memory and of fear. He was always watching for signs of recurring mental aberration in her. Even when away together for a holiday, the ominous strait-jacket was carried in the trunk ready for use. When the black shadow was settling again over her mind he