__________________________________________________________________

   Title: The Person of Christ: The Miracle of History. With a Reply to
   Strauss and Renan, and a Collection of Testimonies of Unbelievers.
   Creator(s): Schaff, Philip (1819-1893)
   Print Basis: New York: Charles Scribner & Co. (1866)
   Rights: Public Domain
   CCEL Subjects: All
     __________________________________________________________________

    THE

                               PERSON OF CHRIST:

THE MIRACLE OF HISTORY.

    WITH

A REPLY TO STRAUSS AND RENAN,

    AND

  A COLLECTION OF TESTIMONIES OF UNBELIEVERS.

    BY

  PHILP SCHAFF, D.D.

NEW YORK:
CHARLES SCRIBNER & CO.

  No. 124 Grand Street.
  1866.

   Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1865, by
   THE AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY,
   In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of
   Massachusetts.

   GEO. C. RAND & AVERY,
   STEREOTYPERS AND PRINTERS.
     __________________________________________________________________

Prefatory Material
     __________________________________________________________________

PREFACE.

   "WHAT do ye think of the Son of Man?" This is the religious question of
   the age. We rejoice in it, and thank the infidel biographers of Jesus
   for having urged it upon the attention of the world. The result of the
   renewed struggle can not be doubtful: in all theological controversies,
   truth is the gainer in the end. Though nailed to the cross, and buried
   in the tomb, it rises again triumphant over error, taking captivity
   captive, and changing at times even a bitter foe, like Saul of Tarsus,
   into a devoted friend. Goethe says: "The conflict of faith and unbelief
   remains the proper, the only, the deepest theme of the history of the
   world and mankind, to which all others are subordinated." This very
   conflict centers in the Christological problem.

   The question of Christ is the question of Christianity, which is the
   manifestation of his life in the world; it is the question of the
   Church, which rests upon him as the immovable rock; it is the question
   of history, which revolves around him as the central sun of the moral
   universe; it is the question of every man, who instinctively yearns
   after him as the object of his noblest and purest aspirations; it is a
   question of personal salvation, which can only be obtained in the
   blessed name of Jesus. The whole fabric of Christianity stands or falls
   with its divine-human Founder; and if it can never perish, it is
   because Christ lives, the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever.

   The object of this book is simply to show, in a popular style, that the
   Person of Christ is the great central miracle of history, and the
   strongest evidence of Christianity. The very perfection of his humanity
   is a proof of his Divinity. The indwelling of God in him is the only
   satisfactory solution of the problem of his amazing character.

   From his miraculous Person, his miraculous works follow as an
   inevitable consequence. Being a miracle himself, he must perform
   miracles with the same ease with which ordinary men do their ordinary
   works. The contrary would be unnatural. The character of the tree
   determines the nature of the fruit. "Believe me that I am in the
   Father, and the Father in me; or else believe me for the very works'
   sake" (John xiv. 11; comp. x. 38). I believe in Christ, and therefore I
   believe the Bible, and all its wonderful words and wonderful works.

   Standing on this rock, I feel safe against all the attacks of
   infidelity. The person of Christ is to me the greatest and surest of
   all facts; as certain as my own personal existence; yea, even more so:
   for Christ lives in me, and he is the only valuable part of my being. I
   am nothing without my Saviour. I am all with him, and would not
   exchange him for ten thousand worlds. To give up faith in Christ is to
   give up faith in humanity. Such skepticism legitimately ends at last in
   the nihilism of despair.

   This volume has grown out of an essay of the author, on the Moral
   Character of Christ, originally prepared for the Porter Rhetorical
   Society, of the Theological Seminary at Andover, Mass., and delivered
   at its anniversary, Aug. 1, 1860. [1] The Collection of Testimonies of
   Unbelievers to the moral perfection of Christ, is, to my knowledge, the
   first attempt of the kind, and hence far from being complete. But all
   our works are mere fragments.

   Infidels are seldom convinced by argument; for the springs of unbelief
   are in the heart rather than in the head. But honest inquirers and
   earnest skeptics, like Nathanael and Thomas, who love the truth, and
   wish only for tangible support of their weak faith, will never refuse,
   when the evidence is laid before them, to embrace it with grateful joy,
   and to worship the incarnate God. Blessed are they that seek the truth;
   for they shall find it.

   P. S.

   Bible House, New York, May 11, 1865.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [1] The original title is: The Moral Character of Christ; or, The
   Perfection of Christ's Humanity a Proof of his Divinity. A Theological
   Tract for the People. The essay was first published as an article in
   the Mercersburg Review, Chambersburg, Penn., 1861, pp. 53; and twice
   republished in England, in the British and Foreign Evangelical Review,
   and by the London Religious Tract Society, 1863. It is referred to
   repeatedly in the seventh edition of Dr. Ullmaun's book on the
   Sinlessness of Jesus, as also in Dr. Dorner's essay on the same
   subject.
     __________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTORY.

   WHEN the angel of the Lord appeared to Moses in the burning bush, he
   was commanded to put off his shoes from his feet; for the place whereon
   he stood was holy ground. With what reverence and awe, then, should we
   approach the contemplation of the great reality--God manifest in the
   flesh--of which the vision of Moses was but a significant type and
   shadow![1]1

   The life and character of Jesus Christ is truly the holy of holies in
   the history of the world. Eighteen hundred years have passed away since
   he appeared, in the fullness of time, on this earth to redeem a fallen
   race from sin and death, and to open a never-ceasing fountain of
   righteousness and life. The ages before him anxiously awaited his
   coming, as the fulfillment of the desire of all nations: the ages after
   him proclaim his glory, and ever extend his dominion. The noblest and
   best of men under every clime hold him not only in the purest affection
   and the profoundest gratitude, but in divine adoration and worship. His
   name is above every name that may be named in heaven or on earth, and
   the only one whereby the sinner can be saved. He is the Author of the
   new creation; the Way, the Truth, and the Life; the Prophet, Priest,
   and King of regenerate humanity. He is Immanuel, God with us; the
   Eternal Word become flesh; very God and very man in one undivided
   person, the Saviour of the world.

   Thus he stands out to the faith of the entire Christian Church--Greek,
   Latin, and Evangelical--in every civilized country on the globe. Much
   as the various confessions and denominations differ in doctrines and
   usages, they are agreed in their love and adoration of Jesus. They lay
   down their arms when they approach the manger of Bethlehem or the cross
   of Calvary, where he was born and died for our sins that we might live
   for ever in heaven. He is the divine harmony of all human sects and
   creeds, the common life-center of all true Christians; where their
   hearts meet with their affections, prayers, and hopes, in spite of the
   discord of their heads in views and theories. The doctrines and
   institutions, the worship and customs, the sciences and arts, of all
   Christendom, bear witness to the indelible impression he made upon the
   world; countless churches and cathedrals are as many monuments of
   gratitude to his holy name; and thousands of hymns and prayers are
   daily and hourly ascending to his praise from public and private
   sanctuaries in all parts of the globe. His power is now greater, his
   kingdom larger, than ever; and it will continue to spread, until all
   nations shall bow before him, and kiss his scepter of righteousness and
   peace.

   Blessed is he who from the heart can believe that Jesus is the Son of
   God, and the fountain of salvation. True faith is indeed no work of
   nature, but an act of God wrought in the soul by the Holy Ghost, who
   reveals Christ to us in his true character, as Christ has revealed the
   Father. Faith, with its justifying, sanctifying, and saving power, is
   independent of science and learning, and may be kindled even in the
   heart of a little child and an illiterate slave. It is the peculiar
   glory of the Redeemer and his religion to be co-extensive with humanity
   itself, without distinction of sex, age, nation, and race. His saving
   grace flows and overflows to all and for all, on the simple condition
   of repentance and faith.

   This fact, however, does not supersede the necessity of thought and
   argument. Revelation, although above nature and above reason, is not
   against nature or against reason. On the contrary, nature and the
   supernatural, as has been well said by a distinguished New-England
   divine, "constitute together the one system of God."[2]2 Christianity
   satisfies the deepest intellectual as well as moral and religious wants
   of man, who is created in the image and for the glory of God. It is the
   revelation of truth as well as of life. Faith and knowledge, pistis and
   gnosis, are not antagonistic, but complementary forces; not enemies,
   but inseparable twin-sisters. Faith precedes knowledge, but just as
   necessarily leads to knowledge; while true knowledge, on the other
   hand, is always rooted and grounded in faith, and tends to confirm and
   to strengthen it. Thus we find the two combined in the famous
   confession of Peter, when he says, in the name of all the other
   apostles, "We believe and we know that thou art Christ."[3]3 So
   intimately are both connected, that we may also reverse the famous
   maxim of Augustine, Anselm, and Schleiermacher: "Faith precedes
   knowledge,"[4]4 and say: "Knowledge precedes faith."[5]5 For how can we
   believe in any object without at least some general historical
   knowledge of its existence and character? Faith even in its first form,
   as a submission to the authority of God and an assent to the truth of
   his revelation, is an exercise of the mind and reason as well as of the
   heart and the will. Hence faith has been defined as implying three
   things,--knowledge, assent, and trust or confidence. An idiot or a
   madman can not believe. Our religion demands not a blind, but a
   rational, intelligent faith; and this just in proportion to its
   strength and fervor, aims at an ever-deepening insight into its own
   sacred contents and object.

   As living faith in Christ is the soul and center of all sound practical
   Christianity and piety, so the true doctrine of Christ is the soul and
   center of all sound Christian theology. St. John makes the denial of
   the incarnation of the Son of God the criterion of Antichrist, and
   consequently the belief in this central truth the test of Christianity.
   The incarnation of the eternal Logos, and the divine glory shining
   through the veil of Christ's humanity, is the grand theme of his
   Gospel, which he wrote with the pen of an angel from the very heart of
   Christ, as his favorite disciple and bosom-friend. The Apostles' Creed,
   starting as it does from the confession of Peter, makes the article on
   Christ most prominent, and assigns to it the central position between
   the preceding article on God the Father, and the succeeding article on
   the Holy Ghost. The development of ancient Catholic theology commenced
   and culminated with the triumphant defense of the true divinity, and
   true humanity of Christ, against the opposite heresies of Judaizing
   Ebionism, which denied the former, and paganizing Gnosticism, which
   resolved the latter into a shadowy phantom. The evangelical Protestant
   theology, in its sound form, is essentially Christological, or
   controlled throughout by the proper idea of Christ as the God-Man and
   Saviour. This is emphatically the article of the standing or falling
   Church. In this, the two most prominent ideas of the Reformation--the
   doctrine of the supremacy of the Scriptures, and the doctrine of
   justification by grace through faith--meet, and are vitally united.
   Christ's word, the only unerring and efficient guide of truth; Christ's
   work, the only unfailing and sufficient source of peace; Christ all in
   all,--this is the principle of genuine Protestantism.

   In the construction of the true doctrine of Christ's person, we may,
   with St. John in the prologue to his Gospel, begin from above with his
   eternal Godhead, and proceed, through the creation and the preparatory
   revelation of the Old Testament economy, till we reach the incarnation
   and his truly human life for the redemption of the race. Or, with the
   other evangelists, we may begin from below with his birth from the
   Virgin Mary, and rise, through the successive stages of his earthly
   life, his discourses and miracles, to his assumption into that divine
   glory which he had before the foundation of the world. The result
   reached in both cases is the same; namely, that Christ unites in his
   person the whole fullness of the Godhead, and the whole fullness of
   sinless manhood.

   The older theologians, both Catholic and Evangelical, proved the
   divinity of the Saviour in a direct way from the miracles performed by
   him; from the prophecies and types fulfilled in him; from the divine
   names which he bears; from the divine attributes which are predicated
   of him; from the divine works which he performed; and from the divine
   honors which he claims, and which are fully accorded to him by his
   apostles and the whole Christian Church to this day.

   But it may also be proved by the opposite process,--the contemplation
   of the singular perfection of Christ's humanity; which rises by almost
   universal consent, even of unbelievers, so far above every human
   greatness known before or since, that it can only be rationally
   explained on the ground of such an essential union with the Godhead as
   he claimed himself, and as his inspired apostles ascribed to him. The
   more deeply we penetrate the veil of his flesh, the more clearly we
   behold the glory of the Only-Begotten of the Father shining through the
   same, full of grace and of truth.[6]6

   Modern evangelical theology owes this new homage to the Saviour. The
   powerful and subtle attacks of the latest phases of infidelity upon the
   credibility of the gospel history call for a more vigorous defense than
   was ever made before, and have already led, by way of re-action, to new
   triumphs of the old faith of the Church in her divine Head.

   Our humanitarian, philanthropic, and yet skeptical age is more
   susceptible to this argument, which proceeds from the humanity to the
   divinity, than the old dogmatic method of demonstration which follows
   the opposite process. With Thomas, the representative of honest and
   earnest skepticism among the apostles, many noble and inquiring minds
   refuse to believe in the divinity of the Lord, unless supported by the
   testimony of their senses, or the convincing arguments of reason: they
   desire to put the finger into the print of his nails, and to thrust the
   hand into his side, before they exclaim, in humble adoration: "My Lord
   and my God!" They can not easily he brought to believe in miracles on
   abstract reasoning or on historical evidence. But, if they once could
   see the great moral miracle of Christ's person and character, they
   would have no difficulty with the miracles of his works. For a
   superhuman being must of necessity do superhuman deeds; a miraculous
   person must perform miraculous works. The contrary would be unnatural,
   and the greatest miracle. The character of the tree accounts for the
   character of the fruit. We believe in the miracles of Christ because we
   believe in his person as the divine Man, and the central miracle of the
   moral universe.

   It is from this point of view that we shall endeavor, in as popular and
   concise a manner as the difficulty and dignity of the subject permit,
   to analyze and exhibit the human character of Christ. We propose to
   take up the man, Jesus of Nazareth, as he appears on the simple,
   unsophisticated record of the plain and honest fishermen of Galilee,
   and as he lives in the faith of Christendom; and we shall find him in
   all the stages of his life, both as a private individual and as a
   public character, so far elevated above the reach of successful
   rivalry, and so singularly perfect, that this very perfection, in the
   midst of an imperfect and sinful world, constitutes an irresistible
   proof of his divinity.

   A full discussion of the subject would require us to consider Christ in
   his official as well as personal character; and to describe him as a
   teacher, a reformer, a worker of miracles, and the founder of a
   spiritual kingdom universal in extent and. perpetual in time. From
   every point of view, we should be irresistibly driven to the same
   result. But our present purpose confines us to the consideration of his
   personal character; and this alone, we think, is sufficient for the
   conclusion.
     __________________________________________________________________

LITERATURE.

   The literature on the Life and Character of Christ has of late received
   very large additions in Germany, France, Holland, England, and the
   United States. We confine ourselves to a list of such books and tracts
   as treat more immediately of the moral character and sinlessness of
   Christ, and rise from the contemplation of his perfect humanity to his
   divinity.

   Dr. Carl Ullmann (formerly Professor of Church History in Heidelberg,
   died Jan. 1865):--Die Sündlosigkeit Jesu. Eine apologetische
   Betrachtung (i.e., The Sinlessness of Jesus: An Evidence of
   Christianity). First published as an article in the German Theological
   Quarterly Review, Studien und Kritiken, for 1828, No. 1; then as a
   separate book, 6th edition, Heidelberg, 1853; 7th edition, partly
   rewritten, 1863. (The references to this book in the following tract
   are partly to the 6th, partly to the 7th, edition.) English translation
   from the 6th edition by Lundin Brown. Edinburgh: 1858.

   Dr. James Waddell Alexander (of New York, died 1859):--The Character of
   Jesus: An Argument for the Divine Origin of Christianity. Published in
   the Lectures on the Evidences of Christianity delivered at the
   University of Virginia. New York: 1852. pp. 193-211.

   John Young:--The Christ of History: An Argument grounded in the Facts
   of his Life on Earth. London: Republished in New York, 1858.

   Dr. Horace Bushnell (of Hartford):--The Character of Jesus forbidding
   His Classification with Men. New York: 1861. (Originally the tenth
   chapter of his very able and interesting work, Nature and the
   Supernatural, as together constituting the one System of God. New York:
   1858. pp. 276-299.)

   Peter Bayne (M. A., of Scotland):--The Testimony of Christ to
   Christianity. Republished in Boston, 1862.

   Dr. Isaac Dorner (Professor of Theology at Berlin):--On the Sinless
   Perfection of Jesus (Ueber Jesu sündlose Vollkommenheit), in the Annals
   of German Theology. Gotha, vol. vii. 1862, pp. 49-106; and in pamphlet
   form. Also translated into French for the Revue Chrétienne, and into
   English by Prof. Dr. Henry B. Smith for the American Presbyterian
   Review. New York: 1863.

   Dr. J. J. van Oosterzee (Professor of Theology at Utrecht):--Das Bild
   Christi nach der Schrift. Hamburg: 1864. (The Image of Christ according
   to the Scriptures.) Translated from the Dutch by F. Meyeringh. It is
   the third part of a larger work of the author, published at Rotterdam,
   1855-1861, in three parts,--part first treating of the Christology of
   the Old Testament, part second of the Christology of the New Testament,
   part third stating the results, and forming a complete work by itself.
   It describes the Son of God before his incarnation, the Son of God in
   the flesh, and the Son of God in glory.

   Two French works, which seem to follow the same train of thought, I
   know only by name: E. Dandiran: Essai sur la divinité du charactère
   moral de Jésus-Christ. Genève: 1850. And Edm. de Pressensé:--Le
   Rédempteur. Paris: 1854. (Recently translated into English.) I also
   direct attention to M. Guizot:--Méditations sur l'essence de la
   religion chrétienne. Première série. Paris and Leipzig: 1864. The 8th
   Meditation, pp. 251-329, treats of Christ according to the Gospels.

   For older works on the sinless character of Christ, see Ullmann's book
   above quoted, pp. 231-240 of the seventh edition.

   To this list may be added the works on the Life of Christ by Hase,
   Neander, Lange (whose full and comprehensive Life of the Lord Jesus
   Christ has just been translated and published in Scotland in six vols.,
   Edinburgh, 1864), Ebrard, Sepp (R. C.), Kuhn (R. C.), Lichtenstein,
   Ewald, Riggenbach, Baumgarten, Ellicott, Andrews; and the very numerous
   apologetic replies to the infidel Leben Jesu of D. F. Strauss, and the
   Vie de Jésus of E. Renan, both of which have indirectly done great
   service to truth by inviting new and more thorough investigation of the
   gospel history in all its parts. Reference will be made to them in the
   course of our discussion, especially at the close.
     __________________________________________________________________
     __________________________________________________________________

                             THE PERSON OF CHRIST.
     __________________________________________________________________

HIS CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH.

   CHRIST passed through all the stages of human life from infancy to
   manhood, and represented each in its ideal form, that he might redeem
   and sanctify them all, and be a perpetual model for imitation. He was
   the model infant, the model boy, the model youth, and the model
   man.[7]7 But the weakness, decline, and decrepitude of old age would be
   incompatible with his character and mission. He died and rose in the
   full bloom of early manhood, and lives in the hearts of his people in
   unfading freshness and unbroken vigor for ever.

   Let us first glance at the INFANCY and CHILDHOOD of our Saviour. The
   history of the race commences with the beauty of innocent youth in the
   garden of Eden, "when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons
   of God shouted for joy," in beholding Adam and Eve created in the image
   of their Maker,--the crowning glory of all his wonderful works. So the
   second Adam, the Redeemer of the fallen race, the Restorer and
   Perfecter of man, comes first before us in the accounts of the Gospels
   as a child, born, not in Paradise, it is true, but among the dreary
   ruins of sin and death; from an humble virgin, in a lowly manger, yet
   pure and innocent,--the subject of the praise of angels, and the
   adoration of men. Even the announcement and expectation of his birth
   transforms his virgin mother, the bride of the humble carpenter, into
   an inspired prophetess and poetess; rejuvenates the aged parents of the
   Baptist in hopeful anticipation of the approaching salvation; and makes
   the unborn babe leap in Elizabeth's womb,--the babe who was to prepare
   the way for his coming. The immortal psalms of Elizabeth, Mary, and
   Zacharias, combine the irresistible charms of poetry with truth, and
   are a worthy preparation for the actual appearance of the Christ-child,
   at the very threshold of the gospel salvation, when the highest poetry
   was to become reality, and reality to surpass the sublimest ideal of
   poetry.[8]8 And, when the heavenly child was born, heaven and earth,
   the shepherds of Bethlehem in the name of Israel longing after
   salvation, and the wise men from the East as the representatives of
   heathenism in its dark groping after the "unknown God," unite in the
   worship of the infant King and Saviour.

   Here we meet, at the very beginning of the earthly history of Christ,
   that singular combination of humility and grandeur, of simplicity and
   sublimity, of the human and divine, which characterizes it throughout,
   and distinguishes it from every other history. He appears ill the world
   first as a child, as a poor child, in one of the smallest towns of a
   remote country,[9]9 in one of the lowliest spots of that town, in a
   stable, in a manger, a helpless fugitive from the wrath of a cruel
   tyrant,--thus presenting, at first sight, every stumbling-block to our
   faith. But, on the other hand, the appearance of the angel; the
   inspired hymns of Zacharias and Mary; the holy exultation of Elizabeth,
   Hannah, and Simeon; the prophecies of Scripture; the theological lore
   of the scribes at Jerusalem; even the dark political suspicion of
   Herod; the star of Bethlehem; the journey of the magi from the distant
   East; the dim light of astrology; the significant night-vision of
   Joseph; and God's providence overruling every event,--form a glorious
   array of evidences for the divine origin of the Christ-child; and
   heaven and earth seem to move around him as their center, which repels
   whatever is dark and evil, and by the same power attracts what is good
   and noble. What a contrast! A child in the manger, yet hearing the
   salvation of the world; a child hated and feared, yet longed for and
   loved; a child poor and despised, yet honored and adored,--beset by
   danger, yet marvelously preserved; a child setting the stars in heaven,
   the city of Jerusalem, the shepherds of Judea, and the sages of the
   East, in motion,--attracting the best elements of the world, and
   repelling the evil! This contrast, bringing together the most opposite
   yet not contradictory things, is too deep, too sublime, too
   significant, to be the invention of a few illiterate fishermen.[10]10

   Yet, with all these marks of divinity upon him, the infant Saviour is
   not represented, either by Matthew or Luke, as an unnatural prodigy,
   anticipating the maturity of a later age, but as a truly human child,
   silently lying and smiling on the bosom of his virgin mother; "growing"
   and "waxing strong in spirit,"[11]11 and therefore subject to the law
   of regular development, yet differing from all other children by his
   supernatural conception and perfect freedom from hereditary sin and
   guilt. He appears in the celestial beauty of unspotted innocence, a
   veritable flower of paradise. He was "that Holy Thing," according to
   the announcement of the angel Gabriel (Luke i. 35), admired and loved
   by all who approached him in a child-like spirit, but exciting the dark
   suspicion of the tyrant king who represented his future enemies and
   persecutors.

   Who can measure the ennobling, purifying, and cheering influence which
   proceeds from the contemplation of the Christ-child, at each returning
   Christmas season, upon the hearts of young and old in every land and
   nation! The loss of the first estate is richly compensated by the
   undying innocence of paradise regained.

   Of the BOYHOOD of Jesus we know only one fact, recorded by Luke; but it
   is in perfect keeping with the peculiar charm of his childhood, and
   foreshadows at the same time the glory of his public life as one
   uninterrupted service of his heavenly Father.[12]12 When twelve years
   old, we find him in the temple, in the midst of the Jewish doctors; not
   teaching and offending them, as in the apocryphal Gospels, by any
   immodesty or forwardness, but hearing and asking questions: thus
   actually learning from them, and yet filling them with astonishment at
   his understanding and answers. There is nothing premature, forced, or
   unbecoming his age, and yet a degree of wisdom and an intensity of
   interest in religion which rises far above a purely human youth. "He
   increased," we are told, "in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God
   and man" (Luke ii. 52). He was subject to his parents, and practiced
   all the virtues of an obedient son; and yet he filled them with a
   sacred awe as they saw him absorbed in "the things of his
   Father,"[13]13 and heard him utter, words which they were unable to
   understand at the time, but which Mary treasured up in her heart as a
   holy secret, convinced that they must have some deep meaning answering
   to the mystery of his supernatural conception and birth.

   Such an idea of a harmless and faultless heavenly childhood, of a
   growing, learning, and yet surprisingly wise boyhood, as it meets us in
   living reality at the portal of the gospel history, never entered the
   imagination of a biographer, poet, or philosopher, before. On the
   contrary, as has been justly observed,[14]14 "in all the higher ranges
   of character, the excellence portrayed is never the simple unfolding of
   a harmonious and perfect beauty contained in the germ of childhood, but
   is a character formed by a process of rectification in which many
   follies are mended and distempers removed; in which confidence is
   checked by defeat, passion moderated by reason, smartness sobered by
   experience. Commonly a certain pleasure is taken in showing how the
   many wayward sallies of the boy are, at length, reduced by discipline
   to the character of wisdom, justice, and public heroism so much
   admired. Besides, if any writer, of almost any age, will undertake to:
   describe, not merely a spotless but a superhuman or celestial
   childhood, not having the reality before him, he must be somewhat more
   than human himself if he does not pile together a mass of clumsy
   exaggerations, and draw and overdraw, till neither heaven nor earth,
   can find any verisimilitude in the picture."

   This unnatural exaggeration, into which the mythical fancy of man, in
   its endeavor to produce a superhuman childhood and boyhood, will
   inevitably fall, is strikingly exhibited in the myth of Hercules, who,
   while yet a suckling in the cradle, squeezed two monster serpents to
   death with his tender hands; and still more in the accounts of the
   apocryphal Gospels on the wonderful performances of the infant Saviour.
   These apocryphal Gospels are related to the canonical Gospels as a
   counterfeit to the genuine coin, or as a revolting caricature to the
   inimitable original; but, by the very contrast, they tend, negatively,
   to corroborate the truth of the evangelical history. The strange
   contrast has been frequently urged, especially in the
   Strauss-controversy, and used as an argument against the mythical
   theory. While the evangelists expressly reserve the performance of
   miracles to the age of maturity and public life, and observe a
   significant silence concerning the parents of Jesus, the
   pseudo-evangelists fill the infancy and early years of the Saviour and
   his mother with the strangest prodigies, and make the active
   intercession of Mary very prominent throughout. According to their
   representation, even dumb idols, irrational beasts, and senseless
   trees, bow in adoration before the infant Jesus on his journey to
   Egypt; and after his return, when yet a boy of five or seven years, he
   changes balls of clay into flying birds for the idle amusement of his
   playmates, strikes terror round about him, dries up a stream of water
   by a mere word, transforms his companions into goats, raises the dead
   to life, and performs all sorts of miraculous cures through a magical
   influence which proceeds from the very water in which he was washed,
   the towels which he used, and the bed on which he slept.[15]15 Here we
   have the falsehood and absurdity of unnatural fiction; while the New
   Testament presents to us the truth and beauty of a supernatural yet
   most real history, which shines out only in brighter colors by the
   contrast of the mythical shadow.
     __________________________________________________________________

HIS TRAINING.

   WITH the exception of these few but significant hints, the youth of
   Jesus, and the preparation for his public ministry, are enshrined in
   mysterious silence. But we know the outward condition and circumstances
   under which he grew up; and these furnish no explanation for the
   astounding results, without the admission of the supernatural and
   divine element in his life.

   He grew up among a people seldom and only contemptuously named by the
   ancient classics, and subjected at the time to the yoke of a foreign
   oppressor; in a remote and conquered province of the Roman Empire; in
   the darkest district of Palestine; in a country-town of proverbial
   insignificance.[16]16 He spent his youth in poverty and manual labor,
   in the obscurity of a carpenter's shop; far away from universities,
   academies, libraries, and literary or polished society; without any
   help, as far as we know, except the parental care, the daily wonders of
   Nature, the Old-Testament Scriptures, the weekly Sabbath services of
   the synagogue at Nazareth (Luke iv. 16), the annual festivals in the
   Temple of Jerusalem (Luke ii. 42 ff.), and the secret intercourse of
   his soul with God, his heavenly Fattier. These are indeed the great
   educators of the mind and heart. The book of Nature and the book of
   Revelation are filled with richer and more important lessons than all
   the works of human art and learning; but they were accessible alike to
   every Jew, and gave no advantage to Jesus over his humblest neighbor.

   Hence the question of Nathanael: "What good can come out of Nazareth?"
   Hence the natural surprise of the Jews, who knew all his human
   relations and antecedents. "How knoweth this man letters," they asked
   when they heard Jesus teach, "having never learned?" (John vii. 15.)
   And on another occasion, when he taught in the synagogue: "Whence has
   this man this wisdom and these mighty works? Is not this the
   carpenter's son? is not his mother Mary? and his brethren (brothers),
   James and Joses and Simon and Judas? And his sisters--are they not all
   with us? Whence, then, hath this man all these things?"[17]17 These
   questions are unavoidable and unanswerable, if Christ be regarded as a
   mere man; for each effect presupposes a corresponding cause.

   The difficulty here presented can by no means be solved by a reference
   to the fact that many, perhaps the majority of great men, especially in
   the Church, have risen, by their own industry and perseverance, from
   the lower walks of life, and from a severe contest with poverty and
   obstacles of every kind. The fact itself is readily conceded; but, in
   every one of these cases, schools or books, or patrons and friends, or
   peculiar events and influences, can be pointed out as auxiliary aids in
   the development of intellectual or moral greatness. There is always
   some human or natural cause, or combination of causes, which accounts
   for the final result.

   Luther, for instance, was indeed the son of poor peasants, and had a
   very hard youth: but he went to the schools of Mansfeld, Magdeburg, and
   Eisenach; to the university of Erfurt; passed through the ascetic
   discipline of convent life; studied and labored among professors,
   students, and libraries; and was innocently, as it were, made a
   reformer by extraordinary events, and the irresistible current of his
   age.

   Shakspeare is generally and justly regarded as the most remarkable and
   most wonderful example of a self taught man; who, without the regular
   routine of school education, became the greatest dramatic poet, not
   only of his age and country, but of all times. But the absurd idea that
   the son of the Warwickshire yeoman or butcher or glover--we hardly know
   which--was essentially an unlearned man, and jumped with one bound from
   the supposed though poorly authenticated youthful folly of
   deer-stealing to the highest position in literature, has long since
   been abandoned by competent judges. It is certain that he spent several
   years in the free grammar-school of Stratford on Avon, where he
   probably acquired the "small Latin, and less Greek," which, however
   small in the eyes of so profound a classical scholar as Ben Jonson, was
   certainly large enough to make the fortune of any enterprising youth
   from New England. And, whatever were the defects of his training, he
   must have made them up by intense private study of books, and the
   closest observation of men and things: for his dramas--the occasional
   chronological, historical, and geographical mistakes notwithstanding,
   which are small matters at all events, and in most cases, as in
   "Pericles" and in "Midsummer-Night's Dream," either intentional, or
   mere freaks of fancy--abound in the most accurate and comprehensive
   knowledge of human nature under all its types and conditions,--in the
   cold North and the sunny South; in the fifteenth century, and at the
   time of Caesar, under the influence of Christianity and of
   Judaism,--together with a great variety of historical and other
   information, which can not be acquired without immense industry, and
   the help of oral or printed instruction. Moreover, he lived in the city
   of London; united the offices of actor, manager, and writer, in the
   classic age of Elizabeth, in the company of genial and gifted friends,
   with free access to the highest ranks of blood, wealth, and wit, and
   during the closing scenes of the greatest upheaving of the human mind
   which ever took place since the introduction of Christianity.[18]18

   In the case of Christ, no such natural explanation can be given. He can
   be ranked neither with the school-trained nor with the self-trained or
   self-made men; if by the latter we understand, as we must, those who,
   without the regular aid of living teachers, yet with the same
   educational means, such as books, the observation of men and things,
   and the intense application of their mental faculties, attained to
   vigor of intellect, and wealth of scholarship,--like Shakspeare, Jacob
   Boehm, Benjamin Franklin, and others. All the attempts to bring him
   into contact with Egyptian wisdom, or the Essenic theosophy, or other
   sources of learning, are without a shadow of proof, and explain nothing
   after all. He never quotes from books, except the Old Testament. He
   never refers to secular history, poetry, rhetoric, mathematics,
   astronomy, foreign languages, natural sciences, or any of those
   branches of knowledge which make up human learning and literature. He
   confined himself strictly to religion. But, from that center, he shed
   light over the whole world of man and nature. In this department,
   unlike all other great men, even the prophets and the apostles, he was
   absolutely original and independent. He taught the world as one who had
   learned nothing from it, and was under no obligation to it. He speaks
   from divine intuition, as one who not only knows the truth, but is the
   truth; and with an authority that commands absolute submission, or
   provokes rebellion, but can never be passed ly with contempt or
   indifference. "His character and life were originated and sustained in
   spite of circumstances with which no earthly force could have
   contended, and therefore must have had their real foundation in a force
   which was preternatural and divine."[19]19

   At the same time, it is easy to see, from the admission of Christ's
   divinity, that by this condescension he has raised humble origin,
   poverty, manual labor, and the lower orders of society, to a dignity
   and sacredness never known before, and has revolutionized the false
   standard of judging the value of men and things from their outward
   appearance, and of associating moral worth with social elevation, and
   moral degradation with low rank.
     __________________________________________________________________

HIS PUBLIC LIFE.

  THE SHORT DURATION AND MIGHTY EFFECT OF HIS MINISTRY. ABSENCE OF ALL
  OSTENTATION AND WORLDLY GREATNESS.

   WE now approach the public life of Jesus. In his thirtieth year, after
   the Messianic inauguration through the baptism by John as his immediate
   forerunner, and as the representative of the Old Testament, both in its
   legal and prophetic or evangelical aspect, and after the Messianic
   probation by the temptation in the wilderness,--the counterpart of the
   temptation of the first Adam in paradise,--he entered upon his great
   work.

   His public life lasted only three years; and, before he had reached the
   age of ordinary maturity, he died, in the full beauty and vigor of
   early manhood, without tasting the infirmities of declining years,
   which would inevitably mar the picture of the Regenerator of the race,
   and the Prince of life. He retained the dew of his youth upon him: he
   never became an old man. Both his person and his work, every word he
   spoke, and every act he performed, has the freshness, brilliance, and
   vigor of youth, and will retain it to the end of time. All other things
   fade away; every book of man loses its interest after repeated reading:
   but the gospel of Jesus never wearies the reader; it becomes more
   interesting the more it is read, and grows deeper at every attempt to
   fathom its depth. Even Napoleon is reported to have said on St. Helena,
   pointing to a copy of the Testament on his table: "I never tire with
   reading it, and I read it daily with equal delight. The gospel is not a
   book, but a living power which overwhelms every opposing force. The
   soul which is captivated by the beauty of the gospel does no more
   belong to itself or to the world, but to God. What an evidence is this
   of the divinity of Christ!"

   And yet, unlike all other men of his years, Christ combined, with the
   freshness, energy, and originating power of youth, that wisdom,
   moderation, and experience, which belong only to mature age. The short
   triennium of his public ministry contains more, even from a purely
   historical point of observation, than the longest life of the greatest
   and best of men. It is pregnant with the deepest meaning of the counsel
   of God and the destiny of the race. It is the ripe fruit of all
   preceding ages, the fulfillment of the hopes and desires of the Jewish
   and heathen mind, and the fruitful germ of succeeding
   generations,--containing the impulse to the purest thoughts and noblest
   actions down to the end of time. It is "the end of a boundless past,
   the center of a boundless present, and the beginning of a boundless
   future."[20]20

   How remarkable, how wonderful, this contrast between the short duration
   and the immeasurable significance of Christ's ministry! The Saviour of
   the world a youth!

   Other men require a long succession of years to mature their mind and
   character, and to make a lasting impression upon the world. There are
   exceptions, we admit. Alexander the Great, the last and most brilliant
   efflorescence of the ancient Greek nationality, died a young man of
   thirty-three, after having conquered the East to the borders of the
   Indus. But who would think of comparing an ambitious warrior, conquered
   by his own lust, and dying a victim of his passion, with the spotless
   Friend of sinners? a few bloody victories of the one with the peaceful
   triumphs of the other? and a huge military empire of force, which
   crumbled to pieces as soon as it was erected, with the spiritual
   kingdom of truth and love which stands to this day, and will last for
   ever? Nor should it be forgotten, that the true significance and only
   value of Alexander's conquest lay beyond the horizon of his ambition
   and intention; and that by carrying the language and civilization of
   Greece to Asia, and bringing together the Oriental and Occidental
   world, it prepared the way for the introduction of the universal
   religion of Christ. Napoleon, in his conversations with Gen. Bertrand
   at St. Helena, made the striking remark: "The world admires the
   conquest of Alexander; but Christ is a conqueror who attracts, unites
   to himself, and incorporates with him, for its own benefit, not a
   nation,--no, but the whole human race. What a miracle! The human soul,
   with all its faculties, becomes an annex of the existence of Christ."

   There is another striking distinction of a general character, between
   Christ and the heroes of history, which we must notice here. We should
   naturally suppose that such an uncommon personage, setting up the most
   astounding claims and proposing the most extraordinary work, would
   surround himself with extraordinary circumstances, and maintain a
   position far above the vulgar and degraded multitude around him. We
   should expect something uncommon and striking in his look, his dress,
   his manner, his mode of speech, his outward life, and the train of his
   attendants.

   But the very reverse is the case. His greatness is singularly
   unostentatious, modest, and quiet; and, far from repelling the
   beholder, it attracts and invites him to familiar approach. His public
   life never moved on the imposing arena of secular heroism, but within
   the humble circle of every-day life, and the simple relations of a son,
   a brother, a citizen, a teacher, and a friend. He had no army to
   command, no kingdom to rule, no prominent station to fill, no worldly
   favors and rewards to dispense. He was an humble individual, without
   friends and patrons in the Sanhedrin or at the court of Herod. He never
   mingled in familiar intercourse with the religious or social leaders of
   the nation, whom he had startled in his twelfth year by his questions
   and answers. He selected his disciples from among the illiterate
   fishermen of Galilee, and promised them no reward in this world but a
   part in the bitter cup of his sufferings. He dined with publicans and
   sinners, and mingled with the common people, without ever condescending
   to their low manners and habits. He was so poor, that he had no place
   on which to rest his head. He depended, for the supply of his modest
   wants, on the voluntary contributions of a few pious females; and the
   purse was in the hands of a thief and a traitor. Nor had he learning,
   art, or eloquence, in the usual sense of the term, or any other kind of
   power by which great men arrest the attention and secure the admiration
   of the world. The writers of Greece and Rome were ignorant even of his
   existence, until, several years after the crucifixion, the effects of
   his mission, in the steady growth of the sect of his followers, forced
   from them some contemptuous notice, and then roused them to opposition.

   And yet this Jesus of Nazareth, without money and arms, conquered more
   millions than Alexander, Caesar, Mohammed, and Napoleon; without
   science and learning, he shed more light on things human and divine
   than all philosophers and scholars combined; without the eloquence of
   schools, he spoke such words of life as were never spoken before or
   since, and produced effects which lie beyond the reach of any orator or
   poet; without writing a single line, he set more pens in motion, and
   furnished themes for more sermons, orations, discussions, learned
   volumes, works of art, and sweet songs of praise, than the whole army
   of great men of ancient and modern times. Born in a manger, and
   crucified as a malefactor, he now controls the destinies of the
   civilized world, and rules a spiritual empire which embraces one-third
   of the inhabitants of the globe. There never was in this world a life
   so unpretending, modest, and lowly in its outward form and condition.
   and yet producing such extraordinary effects upon all ages, nations,
   and classes of men. The annals of history produce no other example of
   such complete and astounding success, in spite of the absence of those
   material, social, literary, and artistic powers and influences which
   are indispensable to success for a mere man. Christ stands, in this
   respect also, solitary and alone among all the heroes of history, and
   presents to us an insolvable problem, unless we admit him to be more
   than man, even the eternal Son of God.

   We will now attempt to describe his personal or moral and religious
   character as it appears in the record of his public life, and then
   examine his own testimony of himself as giving us the only rational
   solution of this mighty problem.
     __________________________________________________________________

HIS FREEDOM FROM SIN.

   THE first impression which we receive from the life of Jesus is that of
   perfect innocency and sinlessness in the midst of a sinful world. He,
   and he alone, carried the spotless purity of childhood untarnished
   through his youth and manhood. Hence the lamb and the dove are his
   appropriate symbols.

   He was, indeed, tempted as we are; but he never yielded to
   temptation.[21]21 His sinlessness was at first only the relative
   sinlessness of Adam before the fall; which implies the necessity of
   trial and temptation, and the peccability, or the possibility of the
   fall. Had he been endowed with absolute impeccability from the start,
   he could not be a true man, nor our model for imitation: his holiness,
   instead of being his own self-acquired act and inherent merit, would be
   an accidental or outward gift, and his temptation an unreal show. As a
   true man, Christ must have been a free and responsible moral agent:
   freedom implies the power of choice between good and evil, and the
   power of disobedience as well as obedience to the law of God. But here
   is the great fundamental difference between the first and the second
   Adam: the first Adam lost his innocence by the abuse of his freedom,
   and fell, by his own act of disobedience, into the dire necessity of
   sin; while the second Adam was innocent in the midst of sinners, and
   maintained his innocence against all and every temptation. Christ's
   relative sinlessness became more and more absolute sinlessness by his
   own moral act, or the right use of his freedom in perfect active and
   passive obedience to God. In other words, Christ's original possibility
   of not sirning,[22]22 which includes the opposite possibility of
   sinning, but excludes the actuality of sin, was unfolded into the
   impossibility of sinning,[23]23 which can not sin because it will not.
   This is the highest stage of freedom where it becomes identical with
   moral necessity, or absolute and unchangeable self-determination for
   goodness and holiness. This is the freedom of God, and also of the
   saints in heaven; with this difference,--that the saints obtain that
   position by deliverance and salvation from sin and death, while Christ
   acquired it by his own merit.[24]24

   In vain we look through the entire biography of Jesus for a single
   stain or the slightest shadow on his moral character. There never lived
   a more harmless being on earth. He injured nobody, he took advantage of
   nobody. He never spoke an improper word, he never committed a wrong
   action. He exhibited a uniform elevation above the objects, opinions,
   pleasures, and passions of this world, and disregard to riches,
   displays, fame, and favor of men. "No vice that has a name can be
   thought of in connection with Jesus Christ. Ingenious malignity looks
   in vain for the faintest trace of self-seeking in his motives;
   sensuality shrinks abashed from his celestial purity; falsehood can
   leave no stain on Him who is incarnate truth; injustice is forgotten
   beside his errorless equity; the very possibility of avarice is
   swallowed up in his benignity and love; the very idea of ambition is
   lost in his divine wisdom and divine self abnegation."[25]25

   The apparent outbreak of passion in the expulsion of the profane
   traffickers from the temple is the only instance on the record of his
   history which might be quoted against his freedom from the faults of
   humanity. But the very effect which it produced shows that, far from
   being the outburst of passion, the expulsion was a judicial act of a
   religious reformer, vindicating, in just and holy zeal, the honor of
   the Lord of the temple. It was an exhibition, not of weakness, but of
   dignity and majesty, which at once silenced the offenders, though
   superior in number and physical strength, and made them submit to their
   well-deserved punishment without a murmur, and in awe of the presence
   of a superhuman power. The cursing of the unfruitful fig-tree can still
   less be urged; as it evidently was a significant symbolical act,
   foreshadowing the fearful doom of the impenitent Jews in the
   destruction of Jerusalem. On the contrary, these two facts become fully
   intelligible only by the assumption of the presence of the Divinity in
   Christ; for they represent him as the Lord of the temple, and as the
   Lord of creation.

   The perfect innocence of Jesus, however, is based, not only negatively
   on the absence of any recorded word or act to the contrary, and his
   absolute exemption from every trace of selfishness and worldliness, but
   positively also, on the unanimous testimony of John the Baptist, and
   the apostles who bowed before the majesty of his character in unbounded
   veneration, and declare him "just," "holy," and "without sin."[26]26 It
   is admitted, moreover, by his enemies,--the heathen judge Pilate, and
   his wife, representing, as it were, the Roman law and justice when they
   shuddered with fear, and Pilate washed his hands to be clear of
   innocent blood; by the rude Roman centurion confessing under the cross,
   in the name of the disinterested spectators: "Truly this was the Son of
   God;" and by Judas himself, the immediate witness of his whole public
   and private life, exclaiming in despair: "I sinned in betraying
   innocent blood."[27]27 Even dumb nature responded in mysterious
   sympathy; and the beclouded heavens above, and the shaking earth
   beneath, united in paying their unconscious tribute to the divine
   purity of their dying Lord.

   The objection that the evangelists were either not fully informed
   concerning the facts, or mistaken in their estimate of the character of
   Christ, is of no avail. For, in addition to their testimony, we have
   his own personal conviction of entire freedom from sin and
   unworthiness; which leaves us only the choice between absolute moral
   purity and absolute hypocrisy: such hypocrisy would indeed be both the
   greatest miracle and the greatest moral monstrosity on record.

   The very fact that Christ came for the express purpose of saving
   sinners, implies his own consciousness of personal freedom from guilt
   and from all need of salvation. And this is the unmistakable impression
   made upon us by his whole public life and conduct. He nowhere shows the
   least concern for his own salvation, but knows himself to be in
   undisturbed harmony with his heavenly Father. While calling most
   earnestly upon all others to repent, he stood in no need of conversion
   and regeneration, but simply of the regular harmonious unfolding of his
   moral powers. While directing all his followers, in the fourth petition
   of his model prayer, to ask daily for the forgiveness of their sins as
   well as their daily bread, he himself never asked God for pardon and
   forgiveness except in behalf of others. While freely conversing with
   sinners, he always did so with the love and interest of a Saviour of
   sinners. He always did so: this is the historical fact, no matter how
   you may explain it. And, to remove every doubt, we have his open and
   fearless challenge to his bitter enemies: "Which of you convinceth me
   of sin?"[28]28 In this question, which remains unanswered to this day,
   he clearly exempts himself from the common fault and guilt of the race.
   In the mouth of any other man, this question would at once betray
   either the hight of hypocrisy, or a degree of self-deception bordering
   on madness itself, and would overthrow the very foundation of all human
   goodness; while, from the mouth of Jesus, we instinctively receive it
   as the triumphant self-vindication of one who stood far above the
   possibility of successful impeachment or founded suspicion.

   The assumption that Christ was a sinner, and knew himself such,
   although he professed the contrary, and made upon friends and enemies
   the impression of spotless innocency, is the most monstrous deception
   that can well be imagined. "If Jesus was a sinner, he was conscious of
   sin as all sinners are, and therefore was a hypocrite in the whole
   fabric of his character; realizing, so much of divine beauty in it,
   maintaining the show of such unfaltering harmony and celestial grace,
   and doing all this with a mind confused and fouled by the affectations
   acted for true virtues! Such an example of successful hypocrisy would
   be itself the greatest miracle ever heard of in the world."[29]29

   It is an indisputable fact, then, both from his mission and uniform
   conduct, and his express declaration, that Christ knew himself free
   from sin and guilt. The only rational explanation of this fact is that
   Christ was no sinner. And this is readily conceded by the greatest
   divines, even those who are by no means regarded as orthodox.[30]30 The
   admission ol this fact implies the further admission, that Christ
   differed from all other men, not in degree only, but in kind. For
   although we must utterly repudiate the pantheistic notion of the
   necessity of sin, and maintain that human nature in itself considered
   is capable of sinlessness, that it was sinless, in fact, before the
   fall, and that it will ultimately become sinless again by the
   redemption of Christ,--yet it is equally certain that human nature in
   its present condition is not sinless, and never has been since the
   fall, except in the single case of Christ; and that, for this very
   reason, Christ's sinlessness can only be explained on the ground of
   such an extraordinary indwelling of God in him as never took place in
   any other human being before or after.

   The Bible, the conscience of man, and the daily experience of life,
   unite in testifying to the universal fact of sin, no matter how we may
   explain it. Sin is the deep, dark mystery of existence, the
   stumbling-block to reason, the problem of problems, the fruitful source
   of all misery and woe. The literature of all nations and ages is full
   of lamentations over this most awful and most stubborn of all facts.
   Even heathen philosophers, historians, and poets acknowledge it in the
   strongest terms. "The evil passions," says Plutarch, "are inborn in
   man, and were not introduced from without; and, if strict discipline
   would not come to aid, man would hardly be tamer than the wildest
   beast." The well-known line of the Roman poet:--

   "Video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor;"

   and that other:--

   "Nitimur in vetitum semper cupimusque negata,"--

   have often been quoted as a striking response of the heathen conscience
   and experience to the inspired description of this ethical conflict
   betwen heaven and hell in every soul (Rom. vii.). And as to the actual
   condition of morals in the age of Christ and the apostles, Seneca,
   Tacitus, Persius, and Juvenal give the most unfavorable accounts, which
   fully corroborate the dark picture of St. Paul in the first chapter of
   his Epistle to the Romans. "All is full of crime and vice," says
   Seneca: "they are open and manifest: iniquity prevails in every heart,
   and innocence has not only become rare, but has entirely disappeared."
   Marcus Aurelius, the Stoic philosopher on the throne and the persecutor
   of Christians, complains that "faithfulness, the sense of honor,
   righteousness and truth, have taken their flight from the wide earth to
   heaven."

   If this is the testimony of the sages of heathenism, what shall we say
   of the Christian, whose sense of sin and guilt is deepened and
   sharpened in proportion to his knowledge of God's holiness and his
   experience of God's redeeming grace. The entire Christian world, Greek,
   Latin, and Protestant, agree in the scriptural doctrine of the
   universal depravity of human nature since the apostasy of the first
   Adam. Even the modern and unscriptural dogma of the Roman Catholic
   Church, that the Virgin Mary was free from hereditary as well as actual
   sin, can hardly be quoted as an exception; for her sinlessness is
   explained, in the papal decision of 1854, by the assumption of a
   miraculous interposition of divine favor, and the reflex influence of
   the merits of her Son. There is not a single mortal who has not to
   charge himself with some defect or folly; and man's consciousness of
   sin and unworthiness deepens just in proportion to his self-knowledge,
   and progress in virtue and goodness. There is not a single saint who
   has not experienced a new birth from above, and an actual conversion
   from sin to holiness, and who does not feel daily the need of
   repentance and divine forgiveness. The very greatest and best of them,
   as St. Paul and St. Augustine, passed through a violent struggle and a
   radical revolution; and their whole theological system and religious
   experience rest on the felt antithesis of sin and grace.

   But in Christ we have the one solitary and absolute exception to this
   universal rule,--an individual thinking like a man, feeling like a man,
   speaking, acting, suffering, and dying like a man, surrounded by
   sinners in every direction, with the keenest sense of sin, and the
   deepest sympathy with sinners, commencing his public ministry with the
   call: "Repent; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matt. iv. 17);
   yet never touched in the least by the contamination of the world; never
   putting himself in the attitude of a sinner before God; never shedding
   a tear of repentance; never regretting a single thought, word, or deed;
   never needing or asking divine pardon; never concerned about the
   salvation of his own soul; and boldly facing all his present and future
   enemies, in the absolute certainty of his spotless purity before God
   and man.
     __________________________________________________________________

HIS PERFECT HOLINESS.

   A SINLESS Saviour, surrounded by a sinful world, is an astounding fact
   indeed; a sublime moral miracle in history. But this freedom from the
   common sin and guilt of the race is, after all, only the negative side
   of his character; which rises in magnitude as we contemplate the
   positive side,--namely, absolute moral and religious perfection.

   It is universally admitted, even by deists and rationalists, that
   Christ taught the purest and sublimest system of ethics, one which
   throws all the moral precepts and maxims of the wisest men of antiquity
   far into the shade. The Sermon on the Mount alone is worth infinitely
   more than all that Confucius, Cakya-Mouni, Zoroaster, Socrates, and
   Seneca ever said or wrote on duty and virtue. Men of the world can
   hardly resist its power. Napoleon Bonaparte had it once read to him and
   his friends in the solitude of exile by a son of Count De Las Cases,
   and "expressed himself struck with the highest admiration of the
   purity, the sublimity, the beauty of the morality which it contained."
   De Las Cases, who relates this fact in his Memoires, adds: "We all
   experienced the same feeling."

   But the difference between Christ and the great moralists of ancient or
   modern times is still greater if we come to the more difficult task of
   practice. All the systems of moral philosophy combined could not
   regenerate the world. Words are nothing unless they are supported by
   deeds. A holy life is a far greater power for good than the finest
   moral maxim or essay. In this respect, the difference between Jesus and
   the great sages is so radical and fundamental, that all comparison
   ceases. Cicero, who, with all his excessive vanity, was one of the
   noblest and purest of old Roman characters, confessed that he never
   found a perfect sage in his life, and that philosophy only taught how
   he ought to be if he should ever appear on earth. It is well known that
   the wisest men of Greece and Rome sanctioned slavery, oppression,
   revenge, infanticide or exposure of infants, polygamy or concubinage,
   and worse vices; or, like the avaricious and venal Seneca, belied even
   their purer moral maxims by their conduct.[31]31 The greatest saints of
   the Old Testament, even with the help of divine grace, did not rise
   above reproach; and some of them are stained with the guilt of blood
   and adultery. It may be safely asserted, that the wisest and best of
   men, even among Christian nations, never live up to their own imperfect
   standard of excellency.

   But how is it with Christ? He fully carried out his perfect doctrine in
   his life and conduct. He both was and did that which he taught: he
   preached his own life, and lived his own doctrine. He is the living
   incarnation of the ideal standard of virtue and holiness, and
   universally acknowledged to be the highest model for all that is pure
   and good and noble in the sight of God and man. Even unbelievers must
   admit this fact. "Christ unites in himself," says the late Theodore
   Parker, "the sublimest precepts and divinest practices, thus more than
   realizing the dream of prophets and sages; rises free from all
   prejudice of his age, nation, or sect; gives free range to the Spirit
   of God in his breast; sets aside the law, sacred and true, honored as
   it was,--its forms, its sacrifice, its temple, its priests; puts away
   the doctors of the laws--subtle, irrefragable; and pours out a doctrine
   beautiful as the light, sublime as heaven, and true as God."[32]32 And
   Renan, much as he perverts the life and character of Jesus, freely
   acknowledges, that both in word and in work, in the doctrine and
   practice of morality, the hero of Nazareth "is without an equal;" that
   "his glory remains perfect, and will be renewed for ever."[33]33

   We find Christ moving in all ordinary and essential relations of
   life,[34]34 as a son, a brother, a friend, a citizen, a teacher, at
   home and in public. We find him among all classes of society,--with
   sinners and saints; with the poor and the wealthy; with the sick and
   the healthy; with little children, grown men and women; with plain
   fishermen and learned scribes; with despised publicans and honored
   members of the Sanhedrin; with friends and foes; with admiring
   disciples and bitter persecutors; now with an individual, as Nicodemus
   or the woman of Samaria; now in the familiar circle of the twelve; now
   in the crowds of the people. We find him in all situations,--in the
   synagogue and the temple; at home and on journeys; in villages and the
   city of Jerusalem; in the desert and on the mountain; along the banks
   of Jordan and the shores of the Galilean Sea; at the joyous
   wedding-feast and the solemn grave; in the awful agony of Gethsemane;
   in the judgment-hall, before the high-priest, the king, the Roman
   governor, rude soldiers, and the fanatical multitude; and at last in
   the bitter pains of the cross on Calvary.

   In all these various relations, conditions, and situations, as they are
   crowded within the few years of his public ministry, he sustains the
   same consistent character throughout, without ever exposing himself to
   censure. As God, according to the Bible, is one and the same always, so
   also Christ, according to the gospel. Guizot (in his recently published
   "Meditations on the Essence of the Christian Religion") justly remarks:
   "The most perfect, the most constant unity reigns in Jesus, in his life
   as in his soul, in his words as in his acts. He progresses according to
   the circumstances in which he lives; but his progress produces in him
   no change of character or design. As he appeared already in his twelfth
   year in the temple, full of the sense of his divine nature, so he
   remains and manifests himself during the whole course of his public
   mission. . . . . Everywhere, and under all circumstances, he is
   animated by the same spirit, he sheds the same light, he proclaims the
   same law." He fulfills every duty to God, to man, and to himself, with
   perfect ease and freedom, and exhibits an entire conformity to the law,
   in the spirit as well as the letter. His life is one unbroken service
   of God in active and passive obedience to his holy will; one grand act
   of absolute love to God and love to man; of personal self-consecration
   to the glory of his heavenly Father, and the salvation of a fallen
   race. In the language of the people who were "beyond measure astonished
   at his works," we must say, the more we study his life: "He did all
   things well."[35]35 In a solemn appeal to his heavenly Father in the
   parting hour, he could proclaim to the world that he had glorified him
   in the earth, and finished the work he gave him to do (John xvii. 3,
   22).
     __________________________________________________________________

UNITY OF VIRTUE AND PIETY.

   THE first feature in this singular perfection of Christ's character
   which strikes our attention is the perfect harmony of virtue and piety,
   of morality and religion, or of love to God and love to man. He is more
   than moral, and more than pious: he is holy in the strict and full
   sense of the word. There is a divine beauty and perfection in his
   character, the mere contemplation of which brings purity, brightness,
   peace, and bliss to the soul.

   Piety was the soul of his morality, and lifted it far above the sphere
   of legality or conformity to law. Every moral action in him proceeded
   from supreme love to God, and looked to the temporal and eternal
   welfare of man. The groundwork of his character was the most intimate
   and uninterrupted union and communion with his heavenly Father, from
   whom he derived, to whom he referred, every thing. Already in his
   twelfth year he found his life-element end delight in the things of his
   Father (Luke ii. 49). It was his daily food to do the will of Him that
   sent him, and to finish his work (John iv. 34; comp. v. 30). To him he
   looked in prayer before every important act, and taught his disciples
   that model prayer, which, for simplicity, brevity, comprehensiveness,
   and suitableness, can never be surpassed. He often retired to a
   mountain or solitary place for prayer, and spent days and nights in
   this blessed privilege. But so constant and uniform was his habit of
   communion with the great Jehovah, that he kept it up amid the
   multitude, and converted the crowded city into a religious retreat. His
   self-consciousness was at every moment conditioned, animated, and
   impregnated by the consciousness of God. Even when he exclaimed in
   indescribable anguish of body and soul, and in vicarious sympathy with
   the misery of the whole race: "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken
   me?"[36]36 the bond of union was not broken, or even loosened, but
   simply obscured for a moment, as the sun by a passing cloud; and the
   enjoyment, not the possession, of it was for a moment withdrawn from
   his feelings: for immediately afterward he triumphantly exclaimed: "It
   is finished!" and commended his soul into the hands of his Father. So
   strong and complete was this moral union of Christ with God at every
   moment of his life, that he fully realized the idea of religion whose
   object is to bring about such a union, and that he is the personal
   representative and living embodiment of Christianity as the true and
   absolute religion.

   With all this, the piety of Christ was no inactive contemplation, or
   retiring mysticism, and selfish enjoyment, but thoroughly practical,
   ever active in works of charity, and tending to regenerate and
   transform the world into the kingdom of God. "He went about doing
   good." His life is an unbroken series of good works and virtues in
   active exercise; all proceeding from the same union with God, animated
   by the same love, and tending to the same end,--the glory of God, and
   the happiness of man.
     __________________________________________________________________

COMPLETENESS AND UNIVERSALITY OF HIS CHARACTER.

   THE next feature we would notice is the completeness or pleromatic
   fullness of the moral and religious character of Christ. While all
   other men represent, at best, but broken fragments of the idea of
   goodness and holiness, he exhausts the list of virtues and graces which
   may be named. His soul is a moral paradise full of charming flowers,
   shining in every variety of color under the blue dome of the skies,
   drinking in the refreshing dews of heaven and the warming beams of the
   sun, sending its sweet fragrance around, and filling the beholder with
   rapturous delight.

   History exhibits to us many men of commanding and comprehensive genius,
   who stand at the head of their age and nation, and furnish material for
   the intellectual activity of whole generations and periods, until they
   are succeeded by other heroes at a new epoch of development. As rivers
   generally spring from high mountains, so knowledge and moral power rise
   and are ever nourished from the hights of humanity.

   Abraham, the father of the faithful; Moses, the lawgiver of the Jewish
   theocracy; Elijah among the prophets; Peter, Paul, and John among the
   apostles; Athanasius and Chrysostom among the Greek, Augustine and
   Jerome among the Latin, fathers; Anselm and Thomas Aquinas among the
   schoolmen; Leo I. and Gregory VII. among the popes; Luther and Calvin
   in the line of Protestant reformers and divines; Socrates, the
   patriarch of the ancient schools of philosophy; Homer, Dante,
   Shakspeare and Milton, Goethe and Schiller, in the history of poetry
   among the various nations to which they belong; Raphael among painters;
   Charlemagne, the first and greatest in the long succession of German
   emperors; Napoleon, towering high above all the generals of his
   training; Washington, the wisest and best, as well as the first, of
   American presidents, and the purest and noblest type of the American
   character,--may be mentioned as examples of those representative heroes
   in history who anticipate and concentrate the powers of whole
   generations.

   But all these characters represent only sectional, never universal,
   humanity: they are identified with a particular people or age, and
   partake of their errors, superstitions, and failings, almost in the
   same proportion in which they exhibit their virtues. Moses, though
   revered by the followers of three religions, was a Jew in views,
   feelings, habits, and position, as well as by parentage; Socrates never
   rose above the Greek type of character; Luther was a German in all his
   virtues and faults, in his strength and weakness, and can only be
   properly understood as a German; Calvin, though an exile from his
   native land, remained a Frenchman; and Washington can be to no nation
   on earth what he is to the American. The influence of these great men
   may and does extend far beyond their respective national horizons; yet
   they can never furnish a universal model for imitation. We regard them
   as extraordinary but fallible and imperfect men, whom it would be very
   unsafe to follow in every view and line of conduct. Very frequently,
   the failings and vices of great men are in proportion to their virtues
   and powers, as the tallest bodies cast the longest shadows. Even the
   three leading apostles are models of piety and virtue only as far as
   they reflect the image of their heavenly Master; and it is with this
   express limitation that Paul exhorts his spiritual children: "Be ye
   followers of me, even as I also am of Christ."[37]37

   What these representative men were to particular ages or nations or
   sects, or particular schools of science and art, Christ was to the
   human family at large in its relation to God. He, and he alone, is the
   universal type for universal imitation. Hence he could, without the
   least impropriety, or suspicion of vanity, call upon all men to forsake
   all things, and to follow him.[38]38 He stands above the limitations of
   age, school, sect, nation, and race. He was indeed an Israelite as to
   the flesh; walked about in the dress of a Jewish rabbi, and not of a
   Greek philosopher; and conformed, no doubt, to the Jewish habits of
   daily life. But this was his merest outside. If we look at his inner
   man, his thoughts and actions, they are of universal significance.
   There is nothing Jewish about him that is not at the same time found
   among other nations. The particular and national in him is always duly
   subordinated to the general and human. Still less was he ever
   identified with a party or sect. He was equally removed from the stiff
   formalism of the Pharisees, the loose liberalism of the Sadducees, and
   the inactive mysticism of the Essenes. He rose above all the
   prejudices, bigotries, and superstitions of his age and people, which
   exert their power even upon the strongest and otherwise most liberal
   minds.

   Witness his freedom in the observance of the Sabbath, by which he
   offended the scrupulous literalists, while he fulfilled, as the Lord of
   the Sabbath, the true spirit of the law in its universal and abiding
   significance;[39]39 his reply to the disciples, when they traced the
   misfortune of the blind man to a particular sin of the subject or his
   parents;[40]40 his liberal conduct toward the Samaritans, as contrasted
   with the inveterate hatred and prejudice of the Jews, including his own
   disciples, at the time;[41]41 and his charitable judgment of the
   slaughtered Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their
   sacrifices, and the eighteen upon whom the tower in Siloam fell and
   slew them (Luke xiii. 1-4). "Think ye," he addressed the children of
   superstition, "that these men were sinners above all the Galileans, and
   above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem, because they suffered such
   things? I tell you, Nay; but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise
   perish." The only instance of Christ's complicity with popular error
   and superstition, which rationalists can point to with some degree of
   plausibility, is his belief in the devil and in demons. But they may
   say what they please against such a belief as irrational; experience
   everywhere disproves their arguments: while they get rid of one devil,
   they cannot deny the many devils in human shape, and leave them even
   more inexplicable; for it is much more irrational to believe in the
   continued existence of a chaotic wilderness of bad men and principles,
   than in an organized empire of evil with a controlling head.

   As the pyramid rises high above the plains of Egypt, so Christ towers
   above all human teachers and founders of sects and religions. lie is,
   in the language of Renan, "a man of colossal" (we may well add, of
   infinite) "dimensions." He found disciples and worshipers among the
   Jews, although he identified himself with none of their sects and
   traditions; among the Greeks, although he proclaimed no new system of
   philosophy; among the Romans, although he fought no battle, and founded
   no worldly empire; among the Hindoos, who despise all men of low caste;
   among the black savages of Africa, the red men of America, as well as
   the most highly civilized nations of modern times in all quarters of
   the globe. All his words and all his actions, while they were fully
   adapted to the occasions which called them forth, retain their force
   and applicability undiminished to all ages and nations. He is the same
   unsurpassed and unsurpassable model of every virtue to the Christians
   of every generation, every clime, every sect, every nation, and every
   race.
     __________________________________________________________________

HARMONY OF ALL GRACES AND VIRTUES IN CHRIST.

   IT must not be supposed that a complete catalogue of virtues would do
   justice to the character under consideration. It is not only the
   completeness, but still more the even proportion and perfect harmony of
   virtues and graces apparently opposite and contradictory, which
   distinguishes him specifically from all other men. This feature gives
   the finish to that beauty of holiness which is the sublimest picture
   that can be presented to our contemplation. It has struck with singular
   force all the more eminent writers on the subject.[42]42

   Christ was free from all one-sidedness; which constitutes the weakness
   as well as the strength of the most eminent men. He was not a man of
   one idea, nor of one virtue towering above all the rest. The moral
   forces were so well tempered and moderated by each other, that none was
   unduly prominent, none carried to excess, none alloyed by the kindred
   failing. Each was checked and completed by the opposite grace. His
   character never lost its even balance and happy equilibrium, never
   needed modification or re-adjustment. It was thoroughly sound and
   uniformly consistent from the beginning t6 the end.

   We can not properly attribute to him any one temperament. He was
   neither sanguine, like Peter; nor choleric, like Paul; nor melancholy,
   like John; nor phlegmatic, as James is sometimes, though incorrectly,
   represented to have been: but he combined the vivacity without the
   levity of the sanguine, the vigor without the violence of the choleric,
   the seriousness without the austerity of the melancholic, the calmness
   without the apathy of the phlegmatic, temperament.

   He was equally far removed from the excesses of the legalist, the
   pietist, the ascetic, and the enthusiast. With the strictest obedience
   to the law, he moved in the element of freedom; with all the fervor of
   the enthusiast, he was always calm, sober, and self-possessed.
   Notwithstanding his complete and uniform elevation above the affairs of
   this world, he fireely mingled with society, male and female, dined
   with publicans and sinners, played with little children and blessed
   them, sat at the wedding-feast, shed tears at the sepulcher, delighted
   in God's nature, admired the beauties of the lilies, and used the
   occupations of the husbandman for the illustration of the sublimest
   truths of the kingdom of heaven. His virtue was healthy, manly,
   vigorous, yet genial, social, and truly human; never austere and
   repulsive; always in full sympathy with innocent joy and pleasure. He,
   the purest and holiest of men, provided wine for the wedding-feast;
   introduced the fatted calf and music and dancing into the picture of
   welcome of the prodigal son to his father's house; and even provoked
   the sneer of his adversaries, that he "came eating and drinking," and
   was a "glutton" and a "winebibber."

   His zeal never degenerated into passion, nor his constancy into
   obstinacy, nor his benevolence into weakness, nor his tenderness into
   sentimentality. His unworldliness was free from indifference and
   unsociability, his dignity from pride and presumption, his affability
   from undue familiarity, his self-denial from moroseness, his temperance
   from austerity. He combined child-like innocence with manly strength,
   all-absorbing devotion to God with untiring interest in the welfare of
   man, tender love to the sinner with uncompromising severity against
   sin, commanding dignity with winning humility, fearless courage with
   wise caution, unyielding firmness with sweet gentleness.

   He is justly compared with the lion in strength, and with the lamb in
   meekness. He equally possessed the wisdom of the serpent and the
   simplicity of the dove. He brought both the sword against every form of
   wickedness, and the peace which the world can not give. He was the most
   effective, and yet the least noisy, the most radical, and yet the most
   conservative, calm, and patient, of all reformers. He came to fulfill
   every letter of the law; and yet he made all things new. The same hand
   which drove the profane traffickers from the Temple blessed little
   children, healed the lepers, and rescued the sinking disciple; the same
   ear which heard the voice of approbation from heaven was open to the
   cries of the woman in travail; the same mouth which pronounced the
   terrible woe on hypocrites, and condemned the impure desire and unkind
   feeling as well as the open crime, blessed the poor in spirit,
   announced pardon to the adulteress, and prayed for his murderers; the
   same eye which beheld the mysteries of God, and penetrated the heart of
   man, shed tears of compassion over ungrateful Jerusalem, and tears of
   friendship at the grave of Lazarus.

   These are indeed opposite traits of character, yet as little
   contradictory as the different manifestations of God's power and
   goodness in the tempest and the sunshine, in the towering Alps and the
   lily of the valley, in the boundless ocean and the dew-drop of the
   morning. They are separated in imperfect men indeed, but united in
   Christ, the universal model for all.
     __________________________________________________________________

HIS PASSION AND CRUCIFIXION.

   AS all active virtues meet in Jesus, so he unites the active or heroic
   virtues with the passive and gentle. He is the highest standard of all
   true martyrdom.

   No character can become complete without trial and suffering; and a
   noble death is the crowning act of a noble life. Edmund Burke said to
   Fox, in the English Parliament, "Obloquy is a necessary ingredient of
   all true glory, Calumny and abuse are essential parts of triumph." The
   ancient Greeks and Romans admired a good man struggling with
   misfortune, as a sight worthy of the gods. Plato describes the
   righteous man as one who, without doing any injustice, yet has the
   appearance of the greatest injustice, and proves his own justice by
   perseverance against all calumny unto death; yea, he predicts, that, if
   such a righteous man should ever appear, he would be scourged,
   tortured, bound, deprived of his sight, and, after having suffered all
   possible injury, nailed to a post.[43]43 No wonder that the ancient
   fathers and modern divines saw in this remarkable passage a striking
   parallel to the description of Isaiah, ch. liii., and an unconscious
   prophecy of the suffering Christ. But how far is this abstract ideal of
   the great philosopher from the actual reality as it appeared three
   hundred years afterward! The great men of this world, who rise even
   above themselves on inspiring occasions, and boldly face a superior
   army, are often thrown off their equilibrium in ordinary life, and grow
   impatient at trifling obstacles. Only think of Napoleon at the head of
   his conquering legions and at the helm of an empire, and the same
   Napoleon after the defeat at Waterloo and on the Island of St. Helena!
   The highest form of passive virtue attained by ancient heathenism or
   modern secular heroism is that stoicism which meets and overcomes the
   trials and misfortunes of life in the spirit of haughty contempt and
   unfeeling indifference which destroys the sensibilities, and is but
   another exhibition of selfishness and pride.

   Christ has set up a far higher standard by his teaching and example,
   never known before or since, except in imperfect imitation of him. He
   has revolutionized moral philosophy, and convinced the world that
   forgiving love to the enemy, holiness and humility, gentle patience in
   suffering, and cheerful submission to the holy will of God, are the
   crowning excellency of moral greatness. "If thy brother," he says,
   "trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day
   turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him" (Luke
   xvii. 4). "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to
   them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you and
   persecute you " (Matt. v. 44). This is a sublime maxim truly; but still
   more sublime is its actual exhibition in his life.

   Christ's passive virtue is not confined to the closing scenes of his
   ministry. As human life is beset at every step with trials, vexatious,
   and hindrances, which should serve the educational purposes of
   developing its resources and proving its strength, so was Christ's.
   During the whole state of his humiliation, he was "a man of sorrows,
   and acquainted with grief" (Isa. liii. 3), and had to endure the
   "contradiction of sinners" (Heb. xii. 3). He was poor, and suffered
   hunger and fatigue; he was tempted by the devil; his path was
   obstructed with apparently insurmountable difficulties from the outset;
   his words and miracles called forth the bitter hatred of the world,
   which resulted at last in the bloody counsel of death. The Pharisees
   and Sadducees forgot their jealousies and quarrels in opposing him.
   They rejected and perverted his testimony; they laid snares for him by
   insidious questions; they called him a glutton and a wine-bibber for
   eating and drinking like other men; a friend of publicans and sinners
   for his condescending love and mercy; a Sabbath-breaker for doing good
   on the Sabbath day: they charged him with madness and blasphemy for
   asserting his unity with the Father, and derived his miracles from
   Beelzebub, the prince of devils. The common people, though astonished
   at his wisdom and mighty works, pointed sneeringly at his origin; his
   own country and native town refused him the honor of a prophet: even
   his brothers, we are told, did not believe in him; and, in their
   impatient zeal for a temporal kingdom, they found fault with his
   unostentatious mode of proceeding.[44]44 Even his apostles and
   disciples, notwithstanding their profound reverence for his character,
   and faith in his divine origin and mission as the Messiah of God, yet
   by their ignorance, their carnal Jewish notions, and their almost
   habitual misunderstanding of his spiritual discourses, must have
   constituted a severe trial of patience to a teacher of far less
   superiority to his pupils.

   To all this must be added the constant sufferings from sympathy with
   human misery as it met him in ten thousand forms at every step. What a
   trial for him, the purest, gentlest, most tender-hearted of men, to
   breathe more than thirty years the foul atmosphere of this fallen
   world; to see the constant outbursts of sinful passions; to hear the
   great wail of humanity borne to his ears upon the four winds of heaven;
   to be brought into personal contact with the blind, the lame, the deaf,
   the paralytic, the lunatic, the possessed, the dead; and to be
   assaulted, as it were, by the concentrated force of sickness, sorrow,
   grief, and agony!

   But how shall we describe his passion, more properly so called, with
   which no other suffering can be compared for a moment? There is a
   lonely grandeur in it, foreshadowed in the word of the prophet: "I have
   trodden the wine-press alone, and of the people there was none with me"
   (Isa. lxiii. 3). If great men occupy a solitary position, far above the
   ordinary level, on the sublime hights of thought or action, how much
   more, then, Jesus in his sufferings,--he, the purest and holiest of
   beings! The nearer a man approaches to moral perfection, the deeper are
   his sensibilities, the keener his sense of sin and evil and sorrow in
   this wicked world.

   Never did any man suffer more innocently, more unjustly, more
   intensely, than Jesus of Nazareth. Within the narrow limits of a few
   hours, we have here a tragedy of universal significance, exhibiting
   every form of human weakness and infernal wickedness; of ingratitude,
   desertion, injury, and insult; of bodily and mental pain and anguish;
   culminating in the most ignominious death then known among the Jews and
   Gentiles,--the death of a malefactor and a slave. The government and
   the people combined against Him who came to save them. His own
   disciples forsook him; Peter denied him; Judas, under the inspiration
   of the devil, betrayed him; the rulers of the nation condemned him;
   rude soldiers mocked him; the furious mob cried, "Crucify him!" He was
   seized in the night, hurried from tribunal to tribunal, arrayed in a
   crown of thorns, insulted, smitten, scourged, spit upon, and hung like
   a criminal and a slave between two robbers and murderers!

   How did Christ bear all these little and great trials of life, and the
   death on the cross?

   Let us remember first, that, unlike the icy Stoics in their unnatural
   and repulsive pseudo-virtue, he had the keenest sensibilities and the
   deepest sympathies with all human grief, that made him even shed tears
   at the grave of a friend and in the agony of the garden, and provide a
   refuge for his mother in the last dying hour. But with this touching
   tenderness and delicacy of feeling he ever combined an unutterable
   dignity and majesty, a sublime self-control, and imperturbable calmness
   of mind. There is a commanding grandeur and majesty in his deepest
   sufferings, which forbid a feeling of pity and compassion on our side
   as incompatible with the admiration and deference for his character. We
   feel the force of his words to the women of Jerusalem, when they
   bewailed him on the way to Calvary: "Weep not for me, but weep for
   yourselves and your children." We never hear him break out in angry
   passion and violence, although he was at war with the whole ungodly
   world. He clearly and fully foresaw, and repeatedly foretold his
   sufferings to his disciples.

   And yet he never murmured,--never uttered discontent, displeasure, or
   resentment. He was never disheartened, discouraged, ruffled, or
   fretted, but full of unbounded confidence that all was well ordered in
   the providence of his heavenly Father. His calmness in the tempest on
   the lake, when his disciples were trembling on the brink of destruction
   and despair, is an illustration of his heavenly frame of mind. All his
   works were performed with a quiet dignity and ease that contrast most
   strikingly with the surrounding commotion and excitement. He never
   asked the favor, or heard the applause, or feared the threat, of the
   world. He moved serenely, like the sun, above the clouds of human
   passions and trials and commotions as they sailed under him. He was
   ever surrounded with the element of peace, even in his parting hour in
   that dark and solemn night, when he said to his disturbed disciples:
   "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you; not as the world
   giveth give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it
   be afraid" (John xiv. 27). He was never what we call unhappy, but full
   of inward joy, which he bequeathed to his disciples in that sublimest
   of all prayers, "that they might have his joy fulfilled in themselves"
   (John xvii. 13; comp. xvi. 33). With all his severe rebuke to the
   Pharisees, he never indulged in personalities. He ever returned good
   for evil. He forgave Peter for his denial; and would have forgiven
   Judas, if, in the exercise of sincere repentance, he had sought his
   pardon. Even while hanging on the cross, he had only the language of
   pity for the wretches who were driving the nails into his hands and
   feet; and prayed in their behalf: "Father, forgive them; for they know
   not what they do." He did not seek or hasten his martyrdom, like many
   of the early martyrs of the Ignatian type, in their morbid enthusiasm
   and ambitious humility, but quietly and patiently waited for the hour
   appointed by the will of his heavenly Father.

   But, when the hour came, with what self: possession and calmness, with
   what strength and meekness, with what majesty and gentleness, did he
   pass through its dark and trying scenes! A prisoner before Pilate, who
   represented the power of the Roman Empire, he professes himself a king
   of truth, and makes the governor tremble before him (John xviii. 37;
   Matt. xxvii. 19, 24). Charged with crime at the tribunal of the
   high-priest, he speaks to him with the majesty and dignity of the Judge
   of the world (Matt. xxvi. 64); and in the agony of death on the cross
   he dispenses a place in paradise to the penitent robber (Luke xxii.
   43). In the history of the passion, every word and act are unutterably
   significant; from the agony in Gethsemane, when overwhelmed with the
   sympathetic sense of the entire guilt of mankind, and in full view of
   the terrible scenes before him,--the only guiltless being in the
   world,--he prayed that the cup might pass from him, but immediately
   added: "Not my, but thy, will be done," to the triumphant exclamation
   on the cross: "It is finished!" Even his dignified silence before the
   tribunal of his enemies and the furious mob, when, "as a lamb dumb
   before his shearers, he opened not his mouth," is more eloquent than
   any apology. Who will venture to bring a parallel from the annals of
   ancient or modern sages, when even a Rousseau confessed: "If Socrates
   suffered and died like a philosopher, Christ suffered and died like a
   God "?[45]45 The nearer we approach to them, the more we feel that the
   sufferings of Christ are unlike any other suffering; that he died the
   just for the unjust, the Holy One for sinners; and washed out with his
   blood the guilt of a fallen world. We bow down, and adore the atoning
   sacrifice of boundless love. The mere idea of a merciful divine-human
   Redeemer of the race from the thralldom of misery and of sin and death,
   is surpassingly sublime and irresistibly attractive: how much more the
   actual reality! It is, indeed, a mystery which we can not fully grasp;
   but a mystery so palpably divine and heavenly in its origin and
   character, so blessed in its effects, that head and heart are
   constrained to bow in adoration and praise, and are filled with
   gratitude and joy. The passion and crucifixion of Jesus, like his whole
   character, stand without a parallel, solitary and alone in their glory,
   and will ever continue to be what they have been for these eighteen
   hundred years,--the most sacred theme of meditation, the highest
   exemplar of suffering virtue, the strongest weapon against sin and
   Satan, the deepest source of comfort to the noblest and best of men.
     __________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY.

  CHRIST'S CHARACTER THE GREATEST MORAL MIRACLE OF HISTORY.

   SUCH was Jesus of Nazareth,--a true man in body, soul, and spirit, yet
   differing from all men; a character absolutely unique and original from
   tender childhood to ripe manhood, moving in unbroken union with God,
   overflowing with the purest love to man, free from every sin and error,
   innocent and holy, teaching and practicing all virtues in perfect
   harmony, devoted solely and uniformly to the noblest ends, sealing the
   purest life with the sublimest death, and ever acknowledged since as
   the one and only perfect model of goodness and holiness! All human
   greatness loses on closer inspection; but Christ's character grows more
   pure, sacred, and lovely, the better we know him. The whole range of
   history and fiction furnishes no parallel to it. There never was any
   thing even approaching to it, before or since, except in faint
   imitation of his example.

   No biographer, moralist, or artist can be satisfied with any attempt of
   his to set forth the beauty of holiness which shines from the face of
   Jesus of Nazareth. It is felt to be infinitely greater than any
   conception or representation of it by the mind, the tongue, or the
   pencil of man or angel. We might as well attempt to empty the waters of
   the boundless sea into a narrow well, or to portray the splendor of the
   risen sun and the starry heavens with ink. No picture of the Saviour,
   though drawn by the master hand of a Raphael or Dürer or Rubens; no
   epic, though conceived by the genius of a Dante or Milton or
   Klopstock,--can improve on the artless, narrative of the Gospels, whose
   only but all-powerful charm is truth. In this case, certainly, truth is
   stranger than fiction, and speaks best for itself without comment,
   explanation, or eulogy. Here, and here alone, the highest perfection of
   art falls short of the historical fact, and fancy finds no room for
   idealizing the real; for here we have the absolute ideal itself in
   living reality. It seems to me that this consideration alone should
   satisfy any reflecting mind that Christ's character, though truly
   natural and human, rises far above the ordinary proportions of
   humanity, and can not be classified with the purest and greatest of our
   race.

   This conviction has forced itself more or less clearly even upon some
   opponents of Christianity, and many of the greatest worldly intellects,
   in proportion as they allowed themselves to yield to the light of truth
   and the power of facts. Jean Jacques Rousseau, one of the leaders of
   French infidelity in the eighteenth century, admitted, in his "Émile,"
   that there could be no comparison between Socrates and Christ; as
   little as between a sage and a God. Napoleon, though a perfect stranger
   to religion in his heart, saw with his keen eagle-eye that Christ was
   more than man; and that, once admitting his divinity, the Christian
   system becomes as clear and precise as a problem of algebra. I refer,
   of course, to his remarkable utterances on this subject at St. Helena,
   which may have been somewhat modified and expanded, but bear the
   unmistakable evidence of the Napoleonic grasp and style. Goethe, the
   most universal and finished, but at the same time the most worldly and
   self-sufficient, of all modern poets, calls Christ "the Divine Man,"
   "the Holy One," and represents him as the pattern and model of
   humanity. Jean Paul Frederick Richter, the greatest of German
   humorists, pays this homage of genius to Jesus of Nazareth: "He is the
   purest among the mighty, the mightiest among the pure, who with his
   pierced hand has raised empires from their foundations, turned the
   stream of history from its old channel, and still continues to rule and
   guide the ages."[46]46 Thomas Carlyle, the British hero-worshiper,
   found no equal in all the range of ancient and modern heroism. He calls
   his life a "perfect ideal poem," and his person "the greatest of all
   heroes," whom he does not name, leaving "sacred silence to meditate
   that sacred matter." Ernest Renan, the famous French orientalist and
   critic, who views Jesus from the stand-point of a Pantheistic
   naturalism, and expels all miracles from the gospel-history, feels
   constrained to call him "a man of colossal dimensions;" "the
   incomparable man, to whom the universal conscience has decreed the
   title of Son of God, and that with justice, since he caused religion to
   take a step in advance incomparably greater than any other in the past,
   and probably than any yet to come;" and he closes his "Life of Jesus"
   with the remarkable concession: "Whatever may be the surprises of the
   future, Jesus will never be surpassed. His worship will grow young
   without ceasing; his legend will call forth tears without end; his
   sufferings will melt the noblest hearts; all ages will proclaim, that,
   among the sons of men, there is none born greater than Jesus."[47]47
   Dr. Baur, the teacher of Strauss, the master of the modern critical
   school, and the ablest and most earnest scholar among all modern
   heretics and infidels, came to the conclusion at last, after all the
   critical investigations of a long and intensely studious life, that the
   person of Christ remains a great mystery in history; and that, at all
   events, the whole world-historical significance of Christianity hangs
   on his person.[48]48

   Yes: Christ's person is, indeed, a great but blessed mystery. It can
   not be explained on purely humanitarian principles, nor derived from
   any intellectual and moral forces of the age in which he lived. On the
   contrary, it stands in marked contrast to the whole surrounding world
   of Judaism and Heathenism, which presents to us the dreary picture of
   internal decay, and which actually crumbled into ruin before the new
   moral creation of the crucified Jesus of Nazareth. He is the one
   absolute and unaccountable exception to the universal experience of
   mankind. He is the great central miracle of the whole gospel-history.
   All his miracles are but the natural and necessary manifestations of
   his miraculous person, and hence they were performed with the same ease
   with which we perform our ordinary daily works. In the Gospel of St.
   John, they are simply and justly called his "works." It would be the
   greatest miracle indeed, if He, who is a miracle himself, should have
   performed no miracles.

   Here is just the logical inconsistency, contradiction, and absurdity of
   those unbelievers who admit the extraordinary character of Christ's
   person, and yet deny his extraordinary works. They admit a cause
   without a corresponding effect, and involve the person in conflict with
   his works, or the works with the person. You may as well expect the sun
   to send forth darkness as to expect ordinary works from such an
   extraordinary being. The person of Christ accounts for all the
   wonderful phenomena in his history, as a sufficient cause for the
   effect. Such a power over the soul as he possessed, and still exercises
   from day to day throughout Christendom,--why should it not extend also
   over the lesser sphere of the body? What was it for him, who is
   spiritually the Resurrection and the Life of the race, to call forth a
   corpse from the grave? Could such a heavenly life and heavenly death as
   his end in any other way than in absolute triumph over death, and in
   ascension to heaven, its proper origin and home?

   The supernatural and miraculous in Christ, let it be borne in mind, was
   not a borrowed gift or an occasional manifestation, as we find it among
   the prophets and apostles, but an inherent power in constant silent or
   public exercise. An inward virtue dwelt in his person, and went forth
   from him, so that even the fringe of his garment was healing to the
   touch through the medium of faith which is the bond of union between
   him and the soul. He was the true Shekinah, and shone in all his glory,
   not before the multitude or the unbelieving Pharisees and scribes, but
   when he was alone with his Father, or walked in the dark night over the
   waves of the sea, calming the storm of nature and strengthening the
   faith of his timid disciples, or when he stood between Moses and Elijah
   before his favorite three on the mount of transfiguration.

   Thus from every direction we arrive at the conclusion, that Christ,
   though truly natural and human, was at the same time truly supernatural
   and divine. The wonderful character of his person forces upon us the
   inevitable admission of the indwelling of the Divinity in him, as the
   only rational and satisfactory explanation of this mysterious fact; and
   this is the explanation which he gives himself.
     __________________________________________________________________

CHRIST'S OWN TESTIMONY CONCERNING HIMSELF.

   THERE is but one rational explanation, of this sublime mystery; and
   this is found in Christ's own testimony concerning his superhuman and
   divine origin and character.[49]49

   This testimony challenges at once our highest regard and belief from
   the absolute veracity which no one ever denied him, or could deny,
   without destroying at once the very foundation of his universally
   conceded moral purity and greatness.

   Christ strongly asserts his humanity, and calls himself; about eighty
   times in the Gospels, the Son of man.[50]50 This expression, while it
   places him in one view on common ground with us as flesh of our flesh,
   and bone of our bone, already indicates at the same time that he is
   more than an ordinary individual,--not merely a son of man like all
   other descendants of Adam, but the Son of man; the Man in the highest
   sense; the ideal, the universal, the absolute Man; the second Adam,
   descended from heaven; the Head of a new and superior order of the
   race, the King of Israel, the Messiah.[51]51 The same is the case
   substantially, though less clearly, with the cognate term, "the Son of
   David," which is frequently given to Christ as an official title of the
   promised Messiah, the King of Israel, as by the two blind men, the
   Syrophenician woman, and the people at large.[52]52

   The appellation the Son of man does not express, then, as many suppose,
   the humiliation and condescension of Christ simply, but his elevation
   rather above the ordinary level, and the actualization, in him and
   through him, of the ideal standard of human nature under its moral and
   religious aspect, or in its relation to God. This interpretation is
   suggested grammatically by the use of the definite article, and
   historically by the origin of the term in Dan. vii. 13, where it
   signifies the Messiah, as the head of a universal and eternal kingdom.
   It commends itself, moreover, at once as the most natural and
   significant, in such passages as, "Ye shall see the heavens open, and
   the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man" (John
   i. 51); "He that came down from heavens even the Son of man which is in
   heaven" (John iii. 13); "The Son of man hath power to forgive sins"
   (Matt. ix. 6; Mark ii. 10); "The Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath
   day" (Matt. xii. 8; Mark ii. 28); "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son
   of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you" (John vi. 53);
   "The Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father;"[53]53 "The Son
   of man is come to save " (Matt. xviii. 11; comp. Luke xix. 10); "The
   Father hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is
   the Son of man" (John v. 27). Even those passages which are quoted for
   the opposite view, receive, in our interpretation, a greater force and
   beauty from the sublime contrast which places the voluntary
   condescension and humiliation of Christ in the most striking light, as
   when he says: "Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but
   the Son of man hath not where to lay his head" (Luke ix. 58): or,
   "Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant; even as
   the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to
   give his life a ransom for many" (Matt. xx. 27, 28). Thus the manhood
   of Christ, rising far above all ordinary manhood, though freely coming
   down to its lowest ranks with the view to their elevation and
   redemption, is already the portal of his Godhood.

   But he calls himself at the same time, as he is most frequently called
   by his disciples, the Son of God, in an equally emphatic sense. He is
   not merely a son of God among others,--angels, archangels, princes and
   judges and redeemed men,--but the Son of God as no other being ever
   was, is, or can be; all others being sons or children of God only by
   derivation or adoption, after a new spiritual birth, and in dependence
   on his absolute and eternal Sonship.[54]54 He is, as his favorite
   disciple calls him, the only-begotten Son, or, as the old catholic
   theology expresses it, "eternally begotten of the substance of the
   Father." In this high sense the title is freely given to him by his
   disciples,[55]55 without a remonstrance on his part; and by God, the
   Father himself, at his baptism and at the transfiguration.[56]56 It is
   significant too, that, while he directs us to address God as "our
   Father," he himself always addresses him: "My Father," because he
   sustains a peculiar relation to him far above the level of human
   children of God, who are made such only by regeneration and adoption.

   Christ founds his whole doctrine and kingdom on his own person. His
   divine-human person is his constant theme, his cause. He is himself the
   gospel. All this he does without the remotest sense of pride or
   ambition or vanity, but with the simplicity and authority of
   self-evident truth. Hence his words have such an overwhelming power
   over the hearts. "Verily, verily, I say unto you." So God speaks in the
   Old Testament, but no man. "If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall
   die in your sins " (John viii. 24). What a majesty is implied in this
   declaration!

   Christ represents himself constantly as being "not of this world," but
   "sent from God," as having "come from God," and as "being in heaven"
   while living on earth (John iii. 13). He not only announces and
   proclaims the truth as other messengers of God, but declares himself to
   be "the Light of the World" (John viii. 12); "the Way, the Truth, and
   the Life" (John xiv. 6); "the Resurrection and the Life" (John xi. 25).
   "All things," he says, "are delivered unto me of my Father; and no man
   knoweth the Son but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father save
   the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him."[57]57 He
   invites the weary and heavy-laden to come to him for rest and peace
   (Matt. xi. 28); he promises life in the highest and deepest sense, even
   eternal life, to every one who believes in him;[58]58 he claims and
   admits himself to be the Christ, or the Messiah, of whom Moses and the
   prophets of old testify, and the King of Israel.[59]59 When, in view of
   his approaching death, and under a solemn appeal to the living God, he
   was challenged by the Jewish high priest, in the name of the venerable
   though corrupt theocracy, with the question: "Art thou the Christ (the
   promised Messiah), the Son of God?" he calmly and deliberately answered
   in the affirmative, and pointed him to his glorious return in the
   clouds of heaven; thus proclaiming himself, in the moment of the
   deepest humiliation and in the face of the apparent triumph of the
   powers of darkness, the God-like Ruler and Judge of mankind![60]60

   The only choice here is between a truly divine man and a mad
   blasphemer. The high priest understood the meaning of this solemn
   affirmation better than many modern commentators: he rent his
   sacerdotal garment, and exclaimed in indignation and horror: "Thou hast
   spoken blasphemy!"

   Jesus, moreover, repeatedly represents himself as the Lawgiver of. the
   new and last dispensation (Matt. v. 22-24; xxviii. 19, 20); as the
   Founder of a spiritual kingdom co-extensive with the race, and
   everlasting as eternity itself;[61]61 as the appointed Judge of the
   quick and the dead;[62]62 as the only Mediator between God and man; as
   the Saviour of the world.[63]63 He parts from his disciples with those
   sublime words, which alone certify his divinity: "All power is given to
   me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations,
   baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
   Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have
   commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the
   world" (Matt. xxviii. 18-20).

   Finally, he claims such a relation to the Father as implies both the
   equality of substance and the distinction of person, and which, in
   connection with his declarations concerning the Holy Spirit, leads
   with. logical necessity, as it were, to the doctrine of the Holy
   Trinity. For this doctrine alone saves the divinity of Christ and of
   the Holy Spirit, without affecting the fundamental truth of the Unity
   of the Godhead; and keeps the proper medium between an abstract and
   lifeless monotheism and a polytheistic tritheism.

   Christ always distinguishes himself from God the Father, who sent him,
   whose works he came to fulfill, whose will he obeys, by whose power he
   performs his miracles, to whom he prays, and with whom he communes, as
   a self-conscious personal being. And so lie distinguishes himself with
   equal clearness from the Holy Spirit, whom he received at his baptism,
   whom he breathed into his disciples, and whom he promised to send and
   did send on them as the other Paraclete, as the Spirit of truth and
   holiness, with the whole fullness of the accomplished salvation. But he
   never makes a similar distinction between himself and the Son of God:
   on the contrary, he identifies himself with the Son of God, and uses
   this term, as already remarked, in a sense which implies much more than
   the Jewish conception of the Messiah, and nothing short of the equality
   of essence or substance.

   For he claims, as the Son, a real, self-conscious pre-existence before
   man, and even before the world: consequently, also, before time; for
   time was created with the world.[64]64 Hence the Arian notion of a
   temporal preexistence of Christ is metaphysically untenable. It assumes
   a creature to have existed before the creation, and a finite being to
   have begun existence before time. Before the act of creation, there was
   nothing but God and eternity. Time is the necessary form under which
   the world exists successively, as space is the form under which all
   material substances exist simultaneously. Time, before the world, could
   only have referred to God, who does not exist in time, but in eternity.
   "Before Abraham was," or began to be, says Christ, "I am;"
   significantly using the past tense in the one and the present in the
   other case to mark the difference between man's temporal and his own
   eternal mode of existence.[65]65 In the sacerdotal prayer, he asks to
   be clothed again with the glory which he had with the Father before the
   foundation of the world.[66]66 He assumes divine names and attributes
   as far as consistent with his state of humiliation; he demands and
   receives divine honors (John v. 23); he freely and repeatedly exercises
   the prerogative of pardoning sin in his own name, which the unbelieving
   scribes and Pharisees, with a logic whose force is irresistible on
   their premises, looked upon as blasphemous presumption;[67]67 he
   familiarly classes himself with the infinite majesty of Jehovah in one
   common plural, and boldly declares: "He that hath seen me hath seen the
   Father" (John xiv. 9); "I and the Father are one" (John x. 30).[68]68
   He co-ordinates himself, in the baptismal formula, with the Divine
   Father and the Divine Spirit (Matt. xxviii. 19); and allows himself to
   be called by Thomas, in the name of all the apostles, "My Lord and my
   God!" (John xx. 28.)

   These are the most astounding and transcendent pretensions ever set up
   by any being. He, the humblest and lowliest of men, makes them
   repeatedly and uniformly to the last, in the face of the whole
   world,--even in the darkest hour of suffering. He makes them, not in
   swelling, pompous, ostentatious language, which almost necessarily
   springs from false pretensions, but in a natural, spontaneous style,
   with perfect ease, freedom, and composure, as a native prince would
   speak of the attributes and scenes of royalty at his father's court. He
   never falters or doubts, never apologizes for them, never enters into
   an explanation: he sets them forth as self-evident truths, which need
   only be stated to challenge the belief and submission of mankind.

   Now, suppose for a moment a purely human teacher, however great and
   good; suppose a Moses or Elijah, a John the Baptist, an Apostle Paul,
   or John,--not to speak of any church-father, schoolman, or
   reformer,--to say: "I am the Light of the world;" "I am the Way, the
   Truth, and the Life;" "I and the Father are one;" and to call upon all
   men, "Come unto me;" "Follow me," that you may find "life" and "peace,"
   which you can not find elsewhere: would it not create a universal
   feeling of pity or indignation? No human being on earth could set up
   the least of these pretensions, without being set down at once as a
   madman or a blasphemer.[69]69

   But from the mouth of Christ these colossal pretensions excite neither
   pity nor indignation, nor even the least feeling of incongruity or
   impropriety. We read and hear them over and over again without
   surprise.[70]70 They seem perfectly natural, and well sustained by the
   most extraordinary life and the most extraordinary works. There is no
   room here for the least suspicion of vanity, pride, or self-deception.
   For these eighteen hundred years, these claims have been acknowledged
   by millions of people of all nations and tongues, of all classes and
   conditions, of the most learned and mighty as well. as the most
   ignorant and humble, with an instinctive sense of the perfect agreement
   of what Christ claimed to be with what he really was.

   Is not this fact most remarkable? Is it not a triumphant vindication of
   Christ's character, and an irresistible proof of the truth of his
   pretensions? And can we deny the truth, and refuse to acknowledge his
   divinity, without destroying his veracity, and overthrowing the very
   foundation of his moral goodness and purity, as universally
   acknowledged even by heretics and unbelievers? If he, the wisest, the
   best, the holiest of men, the greatest teacher and benefactor of the
   race,--acknowledged as such by the common consent of the civilized
   world,--declares himself one with the Father, and so identifies himself
   in will and aim, in essence and attributes, with the infinite God, to
   an extent and in a sense as no man or angel or archangel could do for a
   moment, without blasphemy or insanity, and if he receives the divine
   adoration fro-m his own intimate disciples, how can we, in logical
   consistency, as well as in harmony with the deepest moral and religious
   instincts of our nature, refuse to fall down before him, and, with
   Thomas,--the representative of honest, truth-loving skepticism among
   his disciples,--to exclaim from the depths of our soul: "My Lord and my
   God"?

   This is the "testimonium animæ naturaliter Christianæ," to use a
   celebrated expression of Tertullian. It is the testimony of the soul
   which is originally made for Christ, and longs for him, and finds no
   satisfaction of its infinite desires for truth, beauty, and goodness,
   until it believes in Christ,--the Way, the Truth, and the Life, the
   divine Man and the incarnate God in one undivided person for ever.
     __________________________________________________________________

EXAMINATION OF FALSE THEORIES.

   THERE is no other solution of the mighty problem within the reach of t
   human learning and ingenuity.

   All the infidel and semi-infidel theories of Christ's person substitute
   an unnatural wonder in the place of the supernatural miracle which they
   endeavor to escape. The falsehood of Christ's testimony concerning
   himself, as understood and accepted by the universal belief of
   Christendom, is not only a mightier wonder than the truth of the same,
   but a moral absurdity and monstrosity. Hume says, in his famous "Essay
   on Miracles:" "When any one tells me that he saw a dead man restored to
   life, I immediately consider with myself, whether it be more probable
   that this person should either deceive or be deceived, or that the fact
   he relates should really have happened. I weigh the one miracle against
   the other; and, according to the superiority which I discover, I
   pronounce my decision, and always reject the greater miracle. If the
   falsehood of his testimony would be more miraculous than the event
   which he relates, then, and not till then, can he pretend to demand my
   belief or opinion." We need not fear this test, and can turn it in our
   case against Hume and against every doubter of the great miracle of
   Christ's person.

   Let us briefly review, in detail, the various attempts of Unitarians
   and unbelievers to account for the character of Christ without
   admitting his divinity.
     __________________________________________________________________

  I.--The Unitarian Theory.

  CHANNING.

   The semi-infidelity of the older Socinians and modern Unitarians is
   singularly inconsistent. Admitting the faultless perfection of Christ's
   character, and the truthfulness of the gospel-history, including the
   miracles, and yet denying his divinity, they must either charge him
   with such egregious exaggerations and conceit as would overthrow at
   once their concession of his moral perfection, or they must so weaken
   and pervert his testimony. concerning his relation to God as to violate
   all the laws of grammar and sound interpretation.

   Dr. W. E. Channing, the ablest and noblest representative of modern
   Unitarianism, prefers to avoid the difficulty which he was unable to
   solve. In his admirable discourse on the "Character of Christ," he goes
   as far almost as any orthodox divine in vindicating to him the highest
   possible purity and excellency as a man; but he stops half-way, and
   passes by in silence those extraordinary claims which are inexplicable
   on merely humanitarian and Socinian principles. He approaches, however,
   the very threshold of the true faith in the following remarkable
   passage, which we have a right to quote against his own system: "I
   confess," he says, "when I can escape the deadening power of habit, and
   can receive the full import of such passages as the following,--Come
   unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you
   rest;' I am come to seek and to save that which was lost;' He that
   confesseth me before men, him will I confess before my Father in
   heaven;' Whosoever shall be ashamed of me before men, of him shall the
   Son of man be ashamed when he cometh in the glory of the Father with
   the holy angels;' In my Father's house are many mansions; I go to
   prepare a place for you:' I say, when I can succeed in realizing the
   import of such passages, I feel myself listening to a being such as
   never before and never since spoke in human language. I am awed by the
   consciousness of greatness which these simple words express; and, when
   I connect this greatness with the proofs of Christ's miracles which I
   gave you in a former discourse, I am compelled to exclaim with the
   centurion: Truly, this was the Son of God.'"[71]71

   But this is not all. We have seen that Christ goes much farther than in
   the passages here quoted; that he forgives sins in his own name; that
   he asserts pre-existence before Abraham and before the world, not only
   ideally in the mind of God,--for this would not distinguish him from
   Abraham or any other creature,--but in the real sense of self-conscious
   personal existence; that he claims and receives strictly divine
   attributes and honors, and makes himself equal with the great Jehovah.
   How can a being so pure and holy, and withal so humble and lowly, so
   perfectly free from every trace of enthusiasm and conceit, as Dr.
   Channing freely and emphatically asserts Christ to have been, lay claim
   to any thing which he was not in fact? Why, then, not also go beyond
   the exclamation of the heathen centurion, and unite with the confession
   of St. Peter and the adoration of the skeptical St. Thomas: "My Lord
   and my God"?[72]72 Dr. Channing rose indeed to the high Arian view of
   Christ in admitting his pre-existence before the world, yet denying his
   eternity. But this notion involves the metaphysical absurdity of a
   creature before creation, or of a temporal being before time; for time
   and world were made together, and are inseparable.

   Unitarianism admits altogether too much for its own conclusions, and is
   therefore driven to the logical alternative of falling back upon an
   infidel, or of advancing to the orthodox, Christology. Theodore Parker
   felt this, and gave up the supernatural altogether. Channing, who was
   certainly under the influence of the holy example of Christ, inclined
   to the other alternative, as we may infer from his general spirit, and
   from his last address, delivered at Lenox, Mass., in 1842, shortly
   before his death, where he said: "The doctrine of the Word made flesh
   shows us God uniting himself intimately with our nature, manifesting
   himself' in a human form, for the very end of making us partakers of
   his own perfection."
     __________________________________________________________________

  II.--The Hypothesis of Imposture.

  REIMARUS.

   The infidelity of the enemies of Christianity, which denies the
   supernatural and miraculous altogether, is logically more consistent
   than Arianism, Socinianism, and modern Unitarianism, but absolutely
   untenable in the premises. It resorts either to IMPOSTURE, or
   ENTHUSIASM, or POETICAL FICTION. These are the only possible
   hypotheses; which may, however, assume various modifications; and their
   refutation leaves us no alternative but either absolute
   skepticism,--which gives up the problem, and ends in nihilism and
   despair,--or a return to the old and time-honored faith of the
   Christian Church of all ages.

   The hypothesis of imposture is so revolting to moral as well as common
   sense, that its mere statement is its condemnation. It has never been
   seriously carried out, and no scholar of any decency and self-respect
   would now dare to profess it openly.[73]73 How, in the name of logic,
   common sense, and experience, could an impostor--that is, a deceitful,
   selfish, depraved man--have invented, and consistently maintained from
   beginning to end, the purest and noblest character known in history
   with the most perfect air of truth and reality? How could he have
   conceived, and successfully carried through, in the face of the
   strongest prejudices of his people and age, a plan of unparalleled
   beneficence, moral magnitude and sublimity, and sacrificed his own life
   for it?

   The difficulty is not lessened by shifting the charge of fraud from
   Christ upon the apostles and evangelists; for they were any thing but
   designing hypocrites and deceivers, and leave upon every
   unsophisticated reader the irresistible impression of an artless
   simplicity and honesty rarely equaled and never surpassed by any
   writers, learned or unlearned, of ancient or modern times. What
   imaginable motive could have induced them to engage in such a wicked
   scheme, when they knew that the whole world would persecute them even
   to death? How could they have formed and successfully sustained a
   conspiracy for such a purpose, without ever falling out, or betraying
   themselves by some inconsistent word or act?

   And who can seriously believe, for a moment, that the Christian Church
   for these eighteen hundred years, now embracing nearly the whole
   civilized world, and among them the strongest intellects and the
   noblest hearts, the greatest divines, philosophers, poets, orators,
   statesmen, and benefactors of the race, could have been duped and
   fooled by a Galilean carpenter or a dozen illiterate fishermen? Verily,
   this lowest form of infidelity is the grossest insult to all sound
   reason and sense, and to the dignity of human nature.
     __________________________________________________________________

  III.--The Theory of Enthusiasm or Self-deception.

   The hypothesis of enthusiasm or self-deception, though less
   disreputable, is equally unreasonable, in view of the uniform
   clearness, calmness, self-possession, humility, dignity, and patience
   of Christ,--qualities the very opposite of those which characterize an
   enthusiast. We might imagine a Jew of that age to have fancied himself
   the Messiah and the Son of God; but instead of opposing all the popular
   notions, and discouraging all the temporal hopes, of his countrymen, he
   would, like Barcokeba of a later period, have headed a rebellion
   against the hated tyranny of the Romans, and endeavored to establish a
   temporal kingdom. Enthusiasm, which in this case must have bordered on
   madness itself, instead of calmly and patiently bearing the malignant
   opposition of the leaders of the nation, would have broken out in
   violent passion and precipitate action.

   Christ's intellect is truly marvelous. He never erred in his judgment
   of men and things; he was never deceived by appearances; he penetrated
   through the surface, and always went straight to the heart and marrow;
   he never asked a question which was not perfectly appropriate; he never
   gave an answer which was not fully to the point, or which could be
   better conceived and expressed. How often did he silence his cavilers,
   the shrewd and cunning priests and scribes, by a short sentence which
   hit the nail on the head, or struck like lightning into their
   conscience, or wisely evaded the trap laid for him! When the Pharisees
   and Herodians, with the malicious intention to entangle him into their
   political party quarrels, asked him whether it was lawful to pay taxes
   to the Roman government, he, perceiving their wickedness, called for a
   penny with the superscription of the Roman emperor, and said: "Render
   unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and unto God the things that
   are God's,"--a word which settles, in, principle, the whole vexed
   question between Church and State, and which may be called the wisest
   answer ever given by any man. When the Sadducees, who denied the
   resurrection, laid before him a perplexing question concerning the
   marriage relation in the future state, he solved the difficulty by
   removing all foundation for it; and then, appealing to the very part of
   the Old Testament which they professed to believe to the exclusion of
   the later parts of the canon, he asked them: "Have ye not read that
   which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and
   the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead,
   but of the living." By this short comment he opened the profound
   meaning of this title of God, which no one had seen in it before, but
   which, being once brought to light, was so clear and transparent that
   even the Sadducees were silenced, and the multitude astonished. And
   when the sanctimonious hypocrites, in the case of the adulterous woman,
   hoped to involve him in a contradiction with the rigor of the law, he
   brought the matter home to their own conscience by saying: "He that is
   without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her;" and they,
   "being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one,
   beginning at the eldest, even unto the last." Christ never lost the
   balance of mind under excitement, nor the clearness of vision under
   embarrassment; he never violated the most perfect good taste in any of
   his sayings.

   Is such an intellect--clear as the sky, bracing as the mountain air,
   sharp and penetrating as a sword, thoroughly healthy and vigorous,
   always ready and always self-possessed--liable to a radical and most
   serious delusion concerning his own character and mission? Preposterous
   imagination!

   Let us hear the most eminent Unitarian divine on this hypothesis:--

   "The charge," says Dr. Channing, "of an extravagant, self-deluding
   enthusiasm is the last to be fastened on Jesus. Where can we find the
   traces of it in his history? Do we detect them in the calm authority of
   his precepts; in the mild, practical, and beneficent spirit of his
   religion; in the unlabored simplicity of the language with which he
   unfolds his high powers and the sublime truths of religion; or in the
   good sense, the knowledge of human nature, which he always discovers in
   his estimate and treatment of the different classes of men with whom he
   acted? Do we discover this enthusiasm in the singular fact, that whilst
   he claimed power in the future world, and always turned men's minds to
   heaven, he never indulged his own imagination, or stimulated that of
   his disciples, by giving vivid pictures, or any minute description, of
   that unseen state? The truth is, that, remarkable as was the character
   of Jesus, it was distinguished by nothing more than by calmness and
   self-possession. This trait pervades his other excellences. How calm
   was his piety! Point me; if you can, to one vehement, passionate
   expression of his religious feelings. Does the Lord's Prayer breathe a
   feverish enthusiasm? . . . . His benevolence, too, though singularly
   earnest and deep, was composed and serene. He never lost the possession
   of himself in his sympathy with others; was never hurried into the
   impatient and rash enterprises of an enthusiastic philanthropy; but did
   good with the tranquillity and constancy which mark the providence of
   God."[74]74
     __________________________________________________________________

  IV.--The Rationalistic Explanation.

  PAULUS.

   But the champions of this theory may admit all this, and yet fasten the
   delusion upon the disciples of Christ, who were so dazzled by his
   character, words, and works, that they mistook an extraordinary man for
   a divine being, and extraordinary medical cures for supernatural
   miracles.

   This is the view of the older German Rationalism.[75]75 It forms a
   parallel to the heathen rationalism of Euhemerus, of the Cyrenaic
   school: he explained the gods of the Greek mythology as human sages,
   heroes, kings, and tyrants, whose superior knowledge or great deeds
   secured them divine honors, or the hero-worship of posterity.[76]76

   The rationalistic explanation, after having been tried first, by
   Eichhorn and others, with the miracles of the Old Testament, was fully
   developed and applied to the gospel-history, with an unusual degree of
   patient and painstaking learning and acumen, by the late professor H.
   E. G. Paulus, of Heidelberg.[77]77 This German Euhemerus takes the
   gospel-history as actual history; but, by a critical separation of what
   he calls fact from what he calls judgment of the actor or narrator, he
   explains it exclusively from natural causes, and thus brings it down to
   the level of everyday experience. In other words, the supernatural
   events related by the evangelists, and honestly believed by them, are
   erroneous conceptions and innocent amplifications of historical facts
   which fall within the sphere of the laws of nature. Sometimes the fault
   lies only in the reader or interpreter, and the supposed miracle turns
   out to be a grammatical blunder; as, for example, when Christ's walking
   epi tes thalasses (Matt. xiv. 25), which means simply his walking on
   the bank of the sea, or on the high shore above the sea,--a very easy
   and natural performance indeed!--is turned into a walking on the sea,
   or over the sea.[78]78

   This interpretation, however, which claims to be "natural," turns out
   to be very unnatural, and commits innumerable sins against the context,
   the laws of hermeneutics, and against common sense itself. To prove
   this, it is only necessary to give some specimens from the exegesis of
   Paulus and his school. The glory of the Lord, which, in the night of
   his birth, shone around the shepherds of Jerusalem, was simply an ignis
   fatuus, or a meteor, or a lantern which was flashed in their eyes. The
   miracle at Christ's baptism may be easily reduced to thunder and
   lightning, and a sudden disappearance of the clouds. The tempter in the
   wilderness was a cunning Pharisee, and was only mistaken by the
   evangelists for the devil, who does not exist, except in the
   imagination of the superstitious. The supposed miraculous cures of the
   Saviour turn out, on closer examination, to be simply deeds either of
   philanthropy, or medical skill, or good luck: thus the healing of the
   blind was accomplished through an efficacious powder applied to the
   eye,--a circumstance which was unnoticed by the miracle-loving
   reporters. The coin for the payment of tribute was to be obtained by
   Peter, not in the mouth of the fish, but by selling the fish in the
   market. The changing of water into wine was an innocent and benevolent
   wedding-joke; and the delusion of the company, by the sudden appearance
   of the wine previously provided by the disciples, must be charged on
   the twilight, not upon Christ. The miraculous feeding of the five
   thousand is easily explained by secret magazines, or by provisions
   which the people brought with them in their pockets,--Jesus, like a
   true philanthropist, advising the rich to share their abundance with
   the poor. The daughter of Jairus, the youth of Nain, Lazarus,. and
   Jesus himself, were raised, not from real death, but simply from a
   trance or swoon; and the angels of the resurrection were nothing more
   nor less than the white linen cloths which the pious mistook for
   celestial beings. And, finally, the ascension of the Lord resolves
   itself into his sudden disappearance behind a cloud that accidentally
   intervened between him and his disciples!

   And yet these very evangelists, who, according to this most unnatural
   "natural exegesis," must have been destitute of the most ordinary
   talent of observation, and even of common sense, have contrived to
   paint a character and to write a story, which, in sublimity, grandeur,
   and interest, throws the productions of the proudest historians into
   the shade, and has exerted an irresistible charm upon Christendom for
   these eighteen hundred years! No wonder that those absurdities of a
   misguided learning and ingenuity hardly survived their author. It is a
   decided merit of Strauss, that he, in his larger work on the "Life of
   Jesus," has thoroughly refuted the system of his predecessor, and given
   it the critical death-blow. But his own theory will share no better
   fate. Renan too, in his "Essay on the Critical Historians of Jesus,"
   speaks quite contemptuously of this "very narrow exegesis," this
   "shabby method of interpretation," "an exegesis made up of subtilties,
   founded on the mechanical use of a few incidents,--ecstasy, lightning,
   storm, cloud, etc.;" and says: "The so-called rationalistic
   interpretation may have satisfied the first bold desire of the human
   mind on its taking possession of a long-forbidden domain; but
   experience could not but disclose very soon the inexcusable defects,
   the dryness, the coarseness of it. Never was better realized the
   ingenious allegory of the daughters of Minos, who were turned into bats
   for having seriously criticised the vulgar credences. There is as much
   simplicity and credulity, and much less poetry, in clumsily discussing
   a legend in its details, as in accepting it, once for all, as it
   is."[79]79 So one infidel refutes the other, and by the very process
   undermines his own system.
     __________________________________________________________________

  V.--The Theory of Poetical Fiction.

   The last, the least dishonorable, and the most plausible, of the false
   theories of the life of Christ, is the hypothesis of poetical fiction.
   This may, again, assume two forms,--the mythical and the legendary. The
   former derives its support mainly from the formation of the ancient
   myths of heathen gods and demigods; the latter, from the medieval
   legends of Christian martyrs and saints.

   The one was matured and carried out by Dr. David Frederick Strauss,
   with all the patient research, learning, and solidity of a German
   scholar; the other, by Prof. Joseph Ernest Renan, with all the
   brilliancy, elegance, and levity of a Parisian novelist: the one was
   written for students, the other for the people; the one rests on the
   philosophical basis of a speculative or logical pantheism, the other on
   that of a sentimental or poetical pantheism. Strauss's "Leben Jesu" is
   related to Renan's "Vie de Jésus," as the heavy armor of a mediæval
   knight to the parade uniform of a holiday-soldier, or as a siege-cannon
   to a popgun, or as an iron statue to a tawdry wax figure; but both
   start essentially from the same naturalistic premises, and arrive at
   the same conclusions. They are equally opposed to the miraculous and
   supernatural in the life of our Saviour, and leave a mere spectral
   shadow, the corpus mortuum, of the real Jesus of the Gospels.
     __________________________________________________________________

    THE MYTHICAL HYPOTHESIS OF STRAUSS.

   Dr. Strauss wrote two works on the life of Jesus: a large one for
   scholars, which appeared first in 1835, in two volumes; and a condensed
   one for the people, in 1864, in one volume.[80]80 In both he maintains
   the same theory, with unimportant modifications. The former is no doubt
   the ablest and strongest work ever written against Christianity, and is
   at the same time a well-arranged storehouse of all the older arguments
   of infidelity in its attacks upon the gospel history. It is therefore
   worthy of a more serious examination and refutation than any other.

   Strauss has found an eloquent advocate in the erratic genius and
   misguided philanthropist, Theodore Parker, who passed like a brilliant
   meteor over the American skies to disappear in a foreign land.[81]81

   What Gabler, Vater, Bauer, De Wette, and other critics, had already
   done with the miracles of the Old Testament, and some portions of the
   New, Strauss fully matured and carried out with reference to the whole
   life of Christ. He sinks the gospel history, as to the mode of its
   origin and realness, substantially on a par with the ancient
   mythologies of Greece and Rome.

   A myth is the representation of a religious idea or truth in the form
   of a fictitious narrative; and in this respect it resembles the fable
   and the parable, but differs from both by blending the idea with the
   fact, without any consciousness of a difference between them. The fable
   is a fictitious story, based upon palpable impossibilities,--as
   thinking and speaking animals,--and invented for the express purpose of
   inculcating some moral maxim, or lesson of prudence; the parable is
   likewise a fictitious narrative, deliberately produced, but based upon
   possibilities, and thus intrinsically truthful, for the purpose of
   illustrating a spiritual truth; a myth is unconsciously produced, with
   the most simple and unreflecting faith in the actual occurrence of the
   story. The mytho-poetic faculty presupposes--and this we may remark, by
   way of anticipation, is a very telling argument against the theory of
   Strauss--a childlike age of the human race, an entire absence of
   reflection and criticism. It works like the imagination of children,
   who delight in stories, invent stories, and believe their own stories
   without the least misgiving or doubt, without raising the question of
   truth or falsehood. In this way, according to the theory of some
   distinguished German scholars like Ottfried Müller, and English writers
   like Grote, the Greek mythology took its rise, as the spontaneous
   growth, or unconscious poem, of a child-like fancy, which peopled the
   air and the sea, the mountains and the groves, the trees and the
   brooks, with divinities, with the fullest belief in their actual
   existence. So, also, much of the legendary of mediæval Christianity can
   be accounted for; with the difference, however, that the legends of
   martyrs and saints have, in most cases, some foundation, not only in a
   psychological state, but also in some historical fact. The rest is
   either harmless poetry of simple souls, or pious fraud of monks and
   priests.

   Strauss does not deny by any means, as is sometimes ignorantly or
   maliciously asserted, the historical existence of Jesus, and even
   admits him to have been a religious genius of the first magnitude. But
   from pantheistic and naturalistic premises, and by a cold process of
   hypercritical dissection of the apparently contradictory accounts of
   the witnesses, he resolves all the supernatural and miraculous elements
   of Christ's person and history, from his birth to the resurrection and
   ascension, into myths, or imaginative representations of religious
   ideas in the form of facts, which were honestly believed by the authors
   to have actually occurred. The ideas symbolized in these facts,
   especially the idea of the essential unity of the divine and human, are
   declared to be true in the abstract, or as applied to humanity as a
   whole; but denied to be false in the concrete, or in their application
   to an individual. The authorship of the evangelical myths is ascribed
   to the primitive Christian community, pregnant with Jewish Messianic
   hopes, and kindled to hero-worship by the appearance of the
   extraordinary person of Jesus of Nazareth, whom they took to be the
   promised Messiah, and adorned with this innocent poetry of miracles
   within thirty or forty years after his death. The theory may be reduced
   to the following syllogism: There was a fixed idea in the Jewish mind,
   nourished by the Old Testament writings, that the Messiah would perform
   certain miracles,--heal the sick, raise the dead, &c.; there was a
   fixed persuasion in the minds of the disciples of Jesus that he
   actually was the promised Messiah: therefore the mytho-poetic faculty
   instinctively invented the miracles corresponding to the Messianic
   conception, and ascribed them to him.

   In the execution of his task, Strauss avails himself, at the same time,
   of all the difficulties and objections which the ingenuity of
   unbelievers of opposite philosophical tendencies, from Celsus and
   Porphyry to Reimarus and Paulus, have urged against the credibility of
   the gospel narrative; grouping them with consummate skill for
   rhetorical effect; presenting the most complex details with rare
   clearness; changing his mode of attack from round assertion to cautious
   insinuation or suggestive inquiry, and then massing his forces for a
   final assault upon the citadel, against which the gates of hell shall
   never prevail.

   Let us now proceed to examine this system.

   First, The philosophic foundation on which the mythical hypothesis
   professedly rests is the alleged impossibility of a miracle; which,
   again, has its root in a pantheistic denial of a personal God and an
   Almighty Maker of heaven and earth. This fundamental principle,
   however, is a mere assumption, which the author never attempts to
   prove. His work, as to its philosophical groundwork, is a petitio
   principii, and begs the very question which it was one of its prime
   objects to discuss. Much as he boasted of possessing that freedom from
   doctrinal prepossessions (dogmatische Voraussetzungslosigkeit) as a
   first prerequisite for a scientific biography of Jesus, he starts with
   a stubborn prejudice. Moreover, he and Renan falsely assume that a
   miracle is necessarily a violation and suspension of the immutable laws
   of nature, and deranges the divinely appointed course of events. But a
   miracle is no such thing; it is simply a manifestation of a higher law;
   it is only above nature, not against nature. Bushnell, in his classical
   work on "Nature and the Supernatural," has conclusively shown, I think,
   that there is no more a suspension of the laws of nature, when God
   acts, than when man acts; since nature, by its very laws, is subject to
   God's and man's uses, to be swayed, modified, and made subservient to
   the higher kingdom. The laws of nature are not, as modern naturalists
   and materialists seem to suppose, iron chains by which the living God,
   so to say, is bound hand and feet, but elastic cords rather, which he
   can lengthen or shorten at his sovereign will.

   Creation is the first miracle; and the Almighty Will, which called the
   world into existence, still lives with his power undiminished. God is
   the Lord of nature, and can reveal himself in his own realm. Geological
   discovery tells us, that, even before man, new races of animals and
   plants have at different times been created. The testimony of the rocks
   is full of such miracles. Mlan must have had a beginning,--even
   according to the pantheistic theory of development, if we trace it back
   in an unbroken line to the first link,--and he can not be explained
   from a lower kingdom, but only by a creative fact. As the plant is a
   miracle over against the stone, the animal over against the plant, so
   man is a miracle as compared with the irrational brute. In man himself,
   his intelligence is supernatural as compared with the body, and asserts
   its higher power continually over nature. If we raise our arm in
   obedience to our will, the law of gravity is held in temporary
   abeyance, or subordinated to the higher law of free action, but not
   abrogated or discontinued. Every virtue is a victory over nature,
   though not an annihilation of it. All this is no proper miracle, but it
   involves all the speculative difficulties of the miracle. If man can
   act upon nature from without, and control it, why not much more God,
   the independent Author and Executor of the laws of nature? Reasoning
   thus from analogy, we have a right to ascend to a higher sphere.

   The belief in the supernatural, far from being a sign of a weak mind,
   has been held by intellectual giants among all nations and ages. St.
   Paul and St. John, Augustine and Chrysostom, Anselm and Thomas Aquinas,
   Luther and Calvin, Bacon and Newton, Pascal and Guizot, Kepler and
   Leibnitz, Rothe and Lange, Edwards and Bushnell, are all arrayed here
   against Strauss and Renan, and have, to say the very least, furnished
   far stronger arguments in favor of the supernatural than these
   champions of modern naturalism have urged against it; for they merely
   oppose a modern à-priori assumption to a faith which is as old and
   universal as the race.

   In the case of Christ, the presumption is altogether in favor of his
   having performed miracles; and the onus probandi lies on those who take
   the opposite view. Christ, we have seen, is himself a miracle, compared
   with all ordinary men before and after him. His doctrine and life not
   only rise far above his age and nation, but have never been surpassed
   or equaled since. Even Strauss, Renan, and Parker can not deny this
   fact, which is itself a miracle in the pantheistic development theory,
   so far as this requires a constant progress and improvement of the
   race. What else, then, can we expect from such a marvelous person, from
   the restorer of the race, the author of a new moral creation, the
   founder of a universal and everlasting kingdom of truth and
   righteousness, but marvelous works, which are clearly established by
   the united evidence of his own testimony and that of all his disciples?
   To believe in Christ's person is to believe in his works, just as the
   belief in an Almighty God implies the belief in the creation, which is
   the first and great miracle and stumbling-block of naturalism. To deny
   the possibility of miracles is to deny the existence of a living God
   and Almighty Creator.

   Secondly, The critical foundation of the mythical theory is as unsafe
   as the philosophical, and is one of the weakest parts of the book of
   Strauss, who was justly censured by his teacher, Baur, for attempting
   to write a criticism of the gospel history without a criticism of the
   Gospels. In order to avoid the necessity of supposing that Christ and
   the apostles were deceivers or self-deceived, and to allow a sufficient
   time for the formation of myths, he must bring down the canonical
   Gospels at least a century later than Christ. But at that time they
   were already universally acknowledged as canonical writings, and used
   in the Christian churches. Strauss has to encounter here the
   overwhelming mass of patristic testimonies in favor of the apostolic
   origin of these Gospels, which far exceed in number and weight the
   testimony that can be brought to the support of any of the classical
   writers of Greece or Rome.

   At one time, feeling the force of the unanimous voice of Christian
   antiquity and modern critical investigation, Strauss was disposed to
   admit the authenticity of the Gospel of John; but, seeing the fatal
   effect of this concession upon his conclusions, he soon after withdrew
   it, in the third edition of his large work. But, since that time, the
   evidence in favor of John's authorship has only increased by the
   discovery of the "Philosophumena" of Hippolitus; from which it appears
   that the fourth Gospel was already used, even by the Gnostic heretics,
   in the early part of the second century. The whole controversy
   concerning the origin and character of the canonical Gospels, into
   which we can not here enter, has assumed half a dozen new phases since
   the first appearance of Strauss's book in 1835; so that this, in
   respect to the indispensable preliminary investigations of a scientific
   biography of Jesus, is quite out of date. As to the fourth Gospel,
   especially, the only alternative in the present stage of the
   controversy is truth or fraud. The assumption of unconscious
   mytho-poetical fiction is exploded by the latter developments of the
   Tübingen critics. Strauss himself now admits, in this case, conscious
   fiction and philosophical construction, and thus approaches the very
   border of the infamous theory of imposture.[82]82

   But suppose we give up the four Gospels: there still remain the Acts
   and the Epistles of the New Testament to substantiate all the
   fundamental facts of the life of Christ, especially the
   resurrection,--the great crowning and sealing miracle of his work,
   without which the Apostolic Church could never have risen at all. Even
   Dr. Baur, who, in bold negative and reconstructive criticism, went
   farther than any skeptic ever did, and who resolved most of the
   New-Testament writings into "tendency" books written in the conscious
   interest of contending parties and sections of the post-apostolic age,
   ultimately blended in the system of ancient Catholicism,--a theory, by
   the way, which is quite inconsistent with the unconscious mytho-poetic
   origin of the Gospels,--leaves the Apocalypse of St. John, and four
   Epistles of St. Paul, viz., those to the Romans (excepting the last two
   chapters), the Corinthians and Galatians, standing as genuine apostolic
   writings. This is enough for our purpose. It may perhaps be imagined
   that an illiterate fisherman of Galilee was simple and child-like
   enough to invent miracles, and to mistake the creatures of his fancy
   for actual facts. But this is a psychological impossibility in the case
   of Paul,--the learned, acute, subtle, dialectic, well-drilled rabbi of
   the school of Gamaliel, and so long the open and bitter enemy of
   Christianity. How could he submit his strong and clear mind, which was
   equal to that of any philosopher, ancient or modern, and devote all the
   energies of his noble life, which made him one of the greatest
   benefactors of mankind, to a poetical fiction, or empty dream of the
   very sect which he fanatically persecuted unto death?

   The difficulty presented here to the infidel biographers of Jesus is
   absolutely insurmountable; and the chapter on the resurrection is the
   weakest part of Strauss's book, where his mythological hypothesis
   breaks down completely. He himself must admit that all the apostles
   believed in the resurrection, and could only by this belief pass from
   the despondency created by the death of Jesus, to the joy and
   enthusiasm necessary to spread the gospel and found churches at the
   risk of their lives. But he can not explain this astounding transition,
   which took place already on the third day. Rejecting the miracle, and
   also the natural interpretation of a resurrection from a trance, he
   resorts to a purely psychological resurrection of Christ in the
   visionary faith of his disciples, including St. Paul, and the more than
   five hundred to whom he appeared at once! (1 Cor. xv. 6.) As if an
   empty dream and unreal vision could suddenly turn desponding gloom into
   enthusiastic joy and world-conquering faith, and this in so many
   persons at the same time, and lay the foundation to the indestructible
   structure of the Christian Church! Credat Judæus Apella. Here, if
   anywhere, we must bow before the overwhelming force of a most glorious
   fact. Dr. Baur, the teacher of Strauss, and the acknowledged master of
   the modern critical school, felt the difficulty, and, toward the close
   of his long and earnest studies, honestly made the remarkable
   concession, that the conversion of Paul was to him a mystery, which
   could only be explained by "the miracle of the resurrection."[83]83
   This concession overthrows the whole mythological fabric. Admit the
   resurrection of Christ, and there can be no difficulty with the other
   miracles.

   A third fundamental error of the mythical hypothesis consists in a
   radical inversion of the natural order and relation of history and
   poetry, as it exists in any historical age like that in which Christ
   made his appearance on earth. Facts give rise to songs, and not vice
   versâ. Prophecies, and expectations, too, may foreshadow events, but do
   not create them. The real object precedes the picture of the artist;
   the hero, the epic. Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progress" presupposes the
   Christian experience of which it is a beautiful allegory. Milton's
   "Paradise Lost" could never have produced the belief in the fall of
   man, but rests on this belief and the fact it describes with all the
   charm and splendor of sanctified genius. All the great revolutions in
   the world have been effected, not by fictitious personages, but by real
   living men whose power corresponded to their influence. So the American
   and French Revolutions in the eighteenth, the Puritan Revolution in the
   seventeenth, the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century; the
   founding of modern, mediaeval, and ancient empires; the inventions of
   arts, and the discoveries of new countries,--can all be traced to
   strictly historical and well-defined persons as originators or leaders.
   Why should Christianity, which produced the greatest of all moral
   revolutions of the race, form an exception? Ideas, without living men
   to represent and explain them, are shadows and abstractions. The
   pantheistic philosophy, on which the criticism of Strauss and Renan is
   based, by denying the personality of God, destroys also the proper
   significance of the personality of man, and consistently ends in
   denying the immortality of the soul.

   In the case before us, the difficulty is greatly increased by making,
   not one great towering genius, as Homer, but an illiterate and
   comparatively ignorant multitude, responsible for the gospel poem,
   which in purity and sublimity rises infinitely above all ancient
   mythologies. Strauss assumes a Messianic community in some terra
   incognita, probably in the midst of Palestine, independent of the
   apostles, about thirty or forty years after the death of Christ, to
   have produced the gospel history. But this is a mere fiction of his
   brain. At that time, Christianity was already planted all over the
   Roman Empire, as is evident from the Epistles of Paul as well as from
   the Acts; and all these congregations stood under the guidance of
   apostles and apostolic men who were eye-witnesses of the events of
   Christ, and controlled the whole Christian tradition. The Gospels,
   moreover, with the exception of that of Matthew, bear not the Jewish,
   but the Gentile-Christian stamp, and were written outside of Palestine,
   on Greek and Roman soil; which shows that the same traditions were
   spread all over the empire, and must form a part of the original
   Christianity of the apostles themselves. The mythological hypothesis
   breaks down half-way, and is forced to make the apostles responsible
   for the story; that is, to charge them with downright fraud. If Christ
   did not actually perform miracles, they must have been invented by the
   primitive disciples, the apostles, and evangelists, to account at all
   for their rapid and universal spread and acceptance among Jewish and
   Gentile Christians from Jerusalem to Rome.

   But admitting such a consolidated, central, and yet independent
   mytho-poetic community of the second generation of Christians, how
   could this Messianic congregation itself originate without a Messiah?
   How could the disciples believe in Jesus, without the indispensable
   signs of the Messiahship? If the early Christians produced Christ, who
   produced the early Christians? Whence did they derive their high
   spiritual ideal? Were not the Messianic expectations of the Jews at the
   time sectional, political, and carnal,--the very reverse of those
   encouraged by Christ? Who ever heard of a poem unconsciously produced
   by a mixed multitude, and honestly mistaken by them all for actual
   history? How could the five hundred persons, to whom the risen Saviour
   is said to have appeared (1 Cor. xv. 6), dream the same dream at the
   same time, and then believe it as a veritable fact, at the risk of
   their lives? How could such an illusion stand the combined hostility of
   the Jewish and Heathen world, and the searching criticism of an age,
   not of child-like simplicity, but of high civilization, of critical
   reflection,--even of incredulity and skepticism? How strange, that
   unlettered and unskilled fishermen, or rather their obscure friends and
   pupils, and not the philosophers and poets of classic Greece and Rome,
   should have composed such a grand poem, and painted a character to whom
   Strauss himself is forced to assign the very first rank among all the
   religious geniuses and founders of religion! And would they not rather
   have given us at best an improved picture of such a rabbi as Hillel or
   Gamaliel, or of a prophet like Elijah or John the Baptist, instead of a
   universal reformer who rises above all the limitations of nation or
   sect?

   The poets must in this case have been superior to the hero. John must
   have surpassed Jesus, whom he represented as the incarnate God.[84]84
   And yet the hero is admitted by these skeptics themselves to be the
   purest and greatest man that ever lived!

   But where are the traces of a fervid imagination and mytho-poetic art
   in the gospel history? Is it not, on the contrary, remarkably free from
   all rhetorical and poetical ornament, from every admixture of
   subjective notions and feelings, even from the expression of sympathy,
   admiration, and praise? The writers evidently felt that the story
   speaks best for itself, and could not be improved by the art and skill
   of man. Their discrepancies, which at best do not affect the picture of
   Christ's character in the least, but only the subordinate details of
   his history, prove the absence of collusion, attest the honesty of
   their intentions, and confirm the general credibility of their
   accounts. The Gospels have the character of originality and freshness
   stamped upon every page : they breathe the very presence of Jesus
   Christ; and this constitutes their irresistible charm to every
   unsophisticated reader. It is the history itself which speaks to us
   face to face, without intervening reflections and subjective notions.
   The few occasional references to geography, archaeology, and secular
   history, only confirm their general credibility. How different in all
   these respects the apocryphal Gospels! They are flat, puerile, insipid,
   the absurd productions of a diseased religious imagination. Here,
   indeed, we might speak of mythical or legendary fiction, or of
   downright imposition and pious fraud. But this very contrast proves the
   truth of the original. history, as the counterfeit implies the
   existence of the genuine coin.[85]85

   Verily, the gospel history, enacted not in an obscure corner (Acts
   xxvi. 26), but before the eyes of the people; before Pharisees and
   Sadducees; before Herod and Pilate; before Jews and Romans; friends and
   foes in Galilee, Samaria, and Judæa; a history related with such
   unmistakable honesty and simplicity by immediate witnesses and their
   pupils; proclaimed in open daylight from Jerusalem to Rome; believed by
   thousands of cotemporary Jews and Gentiles; sealed with the blood of
   apostles, evangelists, and saints of every grade of society and
   culture,--is better attested by external and internal evidence than any
   other history in the world.

   The mere fact of the Christian Church, with its unbroken history of
   eighteen hundred years, is an overwhelming evidence of the Christ of
   the Gospels; and the institution of Christian baptism and the holy
   communion testify every day, all over the world, to the two fundamental
   doctrines of the holy Trinity, and of the atonement by the sacrifice on
   the cross. Strauss would make us believe in a stream without a
   fountain, in a house without a foundation, in an effect without a
   cause; for the facts which he and Renan leave untouched are not
   sufficient to account for the subsequent exaggerations and fictions,
   The same negative criticism which Strauss applied to the evangelists,
   would, with equal plausibility, destroy the strongest chain of evidence
   before a court of justice, and resolve the life of Socrates or
   Charlemagne or Luther or Napoleon into a mythical dream.[86]86

   But the secret spring of this hypercriticism is the pantheistic or
   atheistic denial of a personal, living God, which consistently and
   professedly ends with the denial of personal immortality; for the
   relative personality of man depends upon the self-conscious,
   self-existent, absolute personality of God. In its details, the
   mythical hypothesis is so complicated and artificial, that it can not
   be consistently carried out. It continually crosses the boundary-line
   which divides the mythical from the mendacious; and at the most
   critical points, as in the origin of the fourth Gospel and the miracle
   of the resurrection, it is driven to the alternative of admitting the
   truth, or relapsing to the vulgar and disreputable hypothesis of
   intentional fraud, from which it professed, at the start, to shrink
   back with horror and contempt.
     __________________________________________________________________

    THE LEGENDARY HYPOTHESIS.--RENAN.

   This alternative is still more clearly forced upon us by the latest
   phase in the progress of infidelity,--the book of the Strauss of
   France.

   Renan has eclipsed all former infidel biographers of Christ, so far as
   popularity and ephemeral effect is concerned. His "Life of Jesus,"
   which first appeared in 1863, has had all the success of a sensation
   novel, and will probably share the same fate before it is ten years
   old.[87]87 In disposing of it, we can be much briefer, since a
   refutation of Strauss is also a refutation of Renan.

   He essentially agrees, as already remarked, with Strauss, to whom he
   expressly refers as his main authority for critical research in detail;
   but he correctly remarks that the term myths is better applicable to
   India and primitive Greece than to the ancient traditions of the
   Hebrews and the Semitic nations in general; and prefers the words
   legends and legendary narratives, "which, while they concede a large
   influence to the working of opinions, allow the action and the personal
   character of Jesus to stand out in their completeness."[88]88 This
   brings the gospel history down to a level with the history of Francis
   of Assissi, and other marvelous saints of the Romish Church; although
   Renan, inconsistently enough, prefers a parallel between the myth of
   his favorite Cakya-Mouni, the founder of Buddhism, and the legend of
   Jesus, which again throws him back to the mythical theory.[89]89 He
   regards the so-called legend of Jesus as the fruit of consentaneous
   enthusiasm, and imaginative impulse of the primitive disciples. No
   great event in history has passed without a cycle of fables; and Jesus
   could not, had he wished, have silenced these popular creations.[90]90
   He, moreover, differs from Strauss by admitting the essential
   authenticity of the chief portions of the four Gospels, including even
   the most contested of all, that of John,--a concession almost as fatal
   to his own as to the cognate mythical theory, and hence pronounced by
   Strauss the one essential error of Renan. He consequently allows a
   larger body of facts in the life of Christ. He undertakes, to some
   extent, the task of reconstruction, and proposes to clothe the cloudy
   phantom and dim shadow of the mythical Jesus with real flesh and blood.
   In his essay on the "Critical Historians of Jesus," he quotes with
   approbation the objection of Colani to Strauss: "No doubt the apostles,
   once believing in the Messianic character of Jesus, may have added to
   his actual image some lineaments borrowed from prophecy; but how came
   they to believe in his Messianic character? Strauss has never explained
   this. What he leaves of the Gospels is insufficient as ground for the
   apostles' faith; and it is useless to ascribe to them a disposition to
   be content with the minimum of proof: the proofs must needs have been
   very strong to overcome the crushing doubts occasioned by the death on
   the cross. In other words, the person of Jesus must have singularly
   surpassed ordinary proportions: a large part of the evangelical
   narratives must be true."[91]9l His "Life of Jesus" is, moreover,
   interspersed with truly eloquent and enthusiastic tributes to
   Jesus,--concessions which must either overthrow his whole legendary
   hypothesis, or else resolve themselves into empty declamation. So far,
   we may regard the French child as an improvement on its German parent,
   and a progress in the skeptical world towards the acknowledgment of the
   truth.

   But while Renan, aided by clear common sense, a lively French
   imagination, and a fresh contemplation of the Holy Land, which he calls
   the "fifth Gospel," surpasses Strauss in the estimate of the historical
   character of the gospel-record, he is equally hostile to all miracles,
   which, in his oracular opinion, "always imply imposture or fraud;" and
   falls far below him on the score of scholarship, consistency, and even
   morality. We mean, of course, the morality of his theory, and have
   nothing to do with the morality of his life or private character.
   Compared with this critical master, Renan is a mere dilettante and a
   charlatan. He nowhere makes a serious attempt to prove any of his novel
   and arbitrary positions; refers for detail, once for all, to Strauss
   and half a dozen inferior infidel books; ignores their refutation, and
   the whole apologetic literature of the last thirty years; and deals in
   oracular assertions and eloquent declamations for artistic effect. His
   book nowhere rises to the dignity of solid science and scholarship. It
   is essentially a religious romance, with Jesus as the hero, adapted to
   the tastes of the fashionable world.[92]92

   According to Renan, Jesus was born at Nazareth (not at Bethlehem), but
   assumed the title of Son of David as a necessary condition of success.
   TIe grew up amidst the charming scenery of Galilee, an ignorant peasant
   of extraordinary genius and spotless virtue. He was a delicious Rabbi
   (Rabbi delicieux), of ravishing beauty, a preacher of the purest code
   of morals, and a healer of many diseases of body and mind. But finding
   at last that he had either to satisfy the foolish Messianic
   expectations of his people, or to renounce his mission, he yielded to
   his friends, and entered on a course of mild and beneficent deception.
   By a sudden and unaccountable transformation of character, this
   greatest man born of woman became a disappointed and morbid fanatic, a
   thaumaturgist, and a charlatan, who connived even at downright
   imposture and falsehood in the so-called resurrection of Lazarus, and
   paid for his error with his blood.[93]93 His life was at first a
   delightful pastoral and lovely idyl, at last a terrible tragedy, and
   ends for the historian with his expiring sigh on the cross. But so deep
   was the impression which this sublime though deluded genius and hero
   made, that he arose in the belief of his ignorant and credulous
   disciples. Thus the death of the man Jesus was the beginning of his
   worship as the incarnate God. The exact truth about the resurrection,
   Renan thinks, "on account of the contradictory documents," we shall
   never know, except that "the strong imagination of Mary Magdalene here
   enacted a chief part." "Divine power of love!" adds the enthusiastic
   declaimer; "sacred moments, when the passion of a hallucinated woman
   gave to the world a risen God!"[94]94

   And what a God!--such a God as only a heathen idolater, or a polluted
   fancy, or a crazy intellect, could worship; a Jesus who is idolized on
   the one hand as the perfect man, "whose legend will call forth tears
   without end, whose worship will grow young without ceasing;" and who
   almost in the same breath is charged with vanity, self-delusion, erotic
   sentimentalism, fanaticism, and complicity with fraud! We can hardly
   trust our eyes when we see this great Orientalist digging from the
   grave of disgrace and contempt the exploded hypothesis of vulgar
   imposture, as if it were the last conclusion of science; and read the
   suggestion that the resurrection of Lazarus was a pious fraud,
   contrived by himself and his two sisters, and weakly connived at by
   Jesus, in the hope of producing an impression among the unbelieving
   Jews. But this wretched opinion is, if possible, eclipsed by an
   entirely original invention of which neither Reimarus nor Paulus nor
   Strauss nor Celsus ever dreamed. Renan is not ashamed to outrage the
   feelings of all Christendom, and to disgrace himself, by profaning even
   the sacred agony in Gethsemane with the sensuous picture of a Parisian
   love-novel.[95]95 May God forgive him the criminal intrusion of such
   wanton fancies, from which every pious mind instinctively recoils in
   horror, as from a blasphemy of the Son of Man, and a direct approach to
   the unpardonable sin,--the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit! Much rather
   give up, with Strauss, the whole scene in the garden as unhistorical,
   than thus pollute and insult the suffering Redeemer, while bearing in
   boundless love the accumulated guilt of the whole race.

   Renan's Jesus is the most contradictory and impossible character ever
   conceived. There are many happy and unhappy inconsistencies in the
   world, and even great and good men sometimes combine conflicting traits
   of character. But there is a great difference between inconsistencies
   and absolute contradictions; and not until all the laws of logic and
   psychology are overthrown, nor until fire and water, health and poison,
   dwell together in peace, will thinking, sensible people be made to
   believe that one and the same person can be a sentimentalist, an
   enthusiast, a fanatic, an impostor, a wise and charming rabbi, an
   unequaled saint, and an incarnate God. The Christ of the Gospels
   requires faith; the Jesus of Renan, the utmost stretch of credulity.
   The Christ of history is a moral miracle; the Christ of romance, a
   moral monstrosity and an absurdity. Renan exposes himself to the
   combined force of the objections which have been urged in the preceding
   pages against all the false theories of the gospel history. His
   self-contradictory picture of Jesus, divested of the meretricious
   charms of a brilliant style and sentimental hero-worship, is an insult
   to sound sense and the dignity of man: it rouses the noblest instincts
   of our nature to just indignation, and is unworthy of a serious
   refutation. To state it in its nakedness is to expose, to refute, and
   to condemn it. Even as an artist he has failed in the main figure,
   since his hero lacks the essential quality of truthfulness of
   conception, unity and consistency of character; a defect arising not
   from any want of artistic power of representation, which we freely
   accord to him in an eminent degree, but from a sort of inevitable
   judgment which must overtake every one who dares, with unclean hands,
   to enter the sanctissimum of history, and to draw the picture of the
   purest of the pure and the holiest of the holy.[96]96
     __________________________________________________________________

CONCLUSION.

   NEBICULA est; transibit,"--"It is a little cloud; it will pass away."
   This was said first, I believe, by Athanasius, of Julian the Apostate
   who, after a short reign of intense hostility to Christianity, perished
   with his work, "leaving no wreck behind."[97]97 The same may be applied
   to all the recent attempts to undermine the faith of humanity in the
   person of its divine Lord and Saviour. The clouds, great and small,
   pass away; the sun continues to shine: darkness has its hour; the light
   is eternal. No argument against the existence or attack upon the
   character of the sun will drive the king of day from the sky, or
   prevent him from blessing the earth. And the eye of man, with its
   sun-like nature, will ever turn to the sun, and drink the rays of light
   as they emanate from the face of Jesus, the "Light of the world." "God,
   who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our
   hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the
   face of Jesus Christ" (2 Cor. iv. 4).

   With its last and ablest efforts, infidelity seems to have exhausted
   its scientific resources. It could only repeat itself hereafter. Its
   different theories have all been tried, and found wanting. One has in
   turn refuted and superseded the other, even during the lifetime of
   their champions. They explain nothing in the end: on the contrary, they
   only substitute an unnatural prodigy for a supernatural miracle, an
   inextricable enigma for a revealed mystery. They equally tend to
   undermine all faith in God's providence, in history, and ultimately in
   every principle of truth and virtue; and they deprive a poor and fallen
   humanity, in a world of sin, temptation, and sorrow, of its only hope
   and comfort in life and in death.

   Dr. Strauss, by far the clearest and strongest of all the infidel
   biographers of Jesus, seems to have had a passing feeling of the
   disastrous tendency of his work of destruction, and the awful
   responsibility he assumed. "The results of our inquiry," he says in the
   closing chapter of his large "Life of Jesus," "have apparently
   annihilated the greatest and most important part of that which the
   Christian has been wont to believe concerning his Jesus; have uprooted
   all the encouragements which he has derived from his faith, and
   deprived him of all his consolations. The boundless stores of truth and
   life which for eighteen hundred years have been the aliment of humanity
   seem irretrievably devastated, the most sublime leveled with the dust,
   God divested of his grace, man of his dignity, and the tie between
   heaven and earth broken. Piety turns away with horror from so fearful
   an act of desecration, and, strong in the impregnable self-evidence of
   its faith, boldly pronounces that--let an audacious criticism attempt
   what it will--all that the Scriptures declare and the Church believes
   of Christ will still subsist as eternal truth; nor need one iota of it
   be renounced."[98]98 Strauss makes then an attempt, it is true, at a
   philosophical reconstruction of what he vainly imagines to have
   annihilated as an historical fact by his sophistical criticism. He
   professes to admit the abstract truth of the orthodox Christology, or
   the union of the divine and human, but perverts it into a purely
   intellectual and pantheistic meaning. He refuses divine attributes and
   honors to the glorious Head of the race, but applies them to a
   decapitated humanity. He thus substitutes, from pantheistic prejudice,
   a metaphysical abstraction for a living reality; a mere notion for an
   historical fact; a progress in philosophy and mechanical arts for the
   moral victory over sin and death; a pantheistic hero-worship, or
   self-adoration of a fallen race, for the worship of the only true and
   living God; the gift of a stone for the nourishing bread; a gospel of
   despair and final annihilation, for the gospel of hope and eternal
   life.[99]99

   Humanity scorns such a miserable substitute, which has yet to give the
   first proof of any power for good, and which is not likely ever to
   convert or improve a single individual. Humanity must have a living
   Head, a real Lord, and Saviour from sin and death. With renewed faith
   and stronger confidence, it will return from the dreary desolations of
   a heartless infidelity, and the vain conceits of a philosophy falsely
   so called, to the historical Christ, the promised Messiah, the God
   incarnate, and exclaim with Peter: "Lord, where shall we go but to
   thee? Thou alone hast the words of eternal life, and we believe and are
   sure that thou art the Son of God!"

   Yes! He still lives, the divine Man and incarnate God, on the
   ever-fresh and self-authenticating records of the Gospels, in the
   unbroken history of eighteen centuries, and in the hearts and lives of
   the wisest and best of our race; and there he will live for ever. His
   person and work are the book of life, which will never grow old.
   Christianity lives and will continue to live with him, and because he
   lives, the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever.

   Jesus Christ is the most certain, the most sacred, and the most
   glorious, of all facts; arrayed in a beauty and majesty which throws
   the "starry heavens above us and the moral law within us" into
   obscurity, and fills us truly with ever-growing reverence and awe. He
   shines forth with the self-evidencing light of the noonday sun. He is
   too great, too pure, too perfect, to have been invented by any sinful
   and erring man. His character and claims are confirmed by the sublimest
   doctrine, the purest ethics, the mightiest miracles, the grandest
   spiritual kingdom, and are daily and hourly exhibited in the virtues
   and graces of all who yield to the regenerating and sanctifying power
   of his spirit and example. The historical Christ meets and satisfies
   all our intellectual and moral wants. The soul, if left to its noblest
   impulses and aspirations, instinctively turns to him, as the needle to
   the magnet, as the flower to the sun, as the panting hart to the fresh
   fountain. We are made for him, and "our heart is without rest until it
   rests in him." He commands our assent, he wins our admiration, he
   overwhelms us with adoring wonder. We can not look upon him without
   spiritual benefit. We can not think of him without being elevated above
   all that is low and mean, and encouraged to all that is good and noble.
   The very hem of his garment is healing to the touch. One hour spent in
   his communion outweighs all the pleasures of sin. He is the most
   precious and indispensable gift of a merciful God to a fallen world. In
   him are the treasures of true wisdom, in him the fountain of pardon and
   peace, in him the only substantial hope and comfort in this world and
   that which is to come. Mankind could better afford to lose the whole
   literature of Greece and Rome, of Germany and France, of England and
   America, than the story of Jesus of Nazareth. Without him, history is a
   dreary waste, an inextricable enigma, a chaos of facts without a
   meaning, connection, and aim: with him, it is a beautiful, harmonious
   revelation of God, the slow but sure unfolding of a plan of infinite
   wisdom and love.; all ancient history converging to his coming, all
   modern history receiving from him its higher life and impulse. He is
   the glory of the past, the life of the present, the hope of the future.
   We can not even understand ourselves without him. According to an old
   Jewish proverb: "The secret of man is the secret of the Messiah." He is
   the great central Light of history, as a whole; and, at the same time,
   the Light of every soul: he alone can solve the mystery of our being,
   and fulfill all our intellectual desires after truth, all our moral
   aspirations after goodness and holiness, and the longing of our
   feelings after peace and happiness.

   Not for all the wealth and wisdom of this world would I weaken the
   faith of the humblest Christian in his divine Lord and Saviour; but if,
   by the grace of God, I could convert a single skeptic to a child-like
   faith in Him who lived and died for me and for all, I would feel that I
   had not lived in vain.
     __________________________________________________________________

                                CRITICAL NOTES.

   NOTE 1, page 9. The painter-monk Fra Beato Angelico da Fiesole (born in
   Fiesole, near Florence, in 1387, died in Rome in 1455), one of the
   purest characters in the whole history of art, who from the seraphic
   beauty of his angels and glorified saints was called "the blessed" and
   "the angelic," painted the head of Christ and of the holy Virgin always
   in a praying frame of mind and on his knees. " It would be well for
   criticism," says E. Renan (in his "Studies of Religious History and
   Criticism," transl. by O. B. Frothingham, New York, 1864, p. 168), "to
   imitate his example, and, only after having adored them, to face the
   radiance of certain figures before which the ages have bent low."
   Unfortunately, the French philosopher understands this in the sense of
   pantheistic hero-worship. We regard only one man as worthy of divine
   honor and worship,--the God-Man, Jesus of Nazareth.

   NOTE 2, page 12. See Dr. Horace Bushnell's able work on "Nature and the
   Supernatural." The same idea is expressed by Dr. John W. Nevin, in his
   book on "The Mystical Presence," Phil., 1846, p. 199, in these words:
   "Nature and revelation, the world and Christianity, as springing from
   the same Divine Mind, are not two different systems joined together in
   a merely outward way. They form a single whole, harmonious with itself
   in all its parts. The sense of the one, then, is necessarily included
   and comprehended in the sense of the other. The mystery of the new
   creation must involve, in the end, the mystery of the old; and the key
   that serves to unlock the meaning of the first must serve to unlock the
   inmost secret of the last."

   NOTE 3, page 13. John vi. 69: "We have believed and know" (hemeis
   pepisteukamen kai egnokamen, credidimus et cognovimus). The reverse
   order we have in John x. 38: "That ye may know and believe that the
   Father is in me, and I in him;" and in 1 John v. 13.

   NOTE 4, page 13. Fides præcedit intellectum. Or more fully, in the
   language of Anselm of Canterbury, adopted by Schleiermacher as the
   motto of his Dogmatics: "Neque enim quæro intelligere ut credam sed
   credo ut intelligam. Nam qui non crediderit, non experietur, et qui
   expertus non fuerit, non intelliget."

   NOTE 5, page 13. Intellectus præcedit fidem. This was Abelard's maxim,
   which, without the restriction of the opposite maxim, must lead to
   rationalism and skepticism.

   NOTE 6, page 17. Dr. Ullmann, "Die Sündlosigkeit Jesu," 6th ed. p. 215:
   "So führt schon das Vollendet-Menschliche in Jesu, wenn wir es mit
   allem Uebrigen, was die Menschheit darbietet, vergleichen, zur
   Anerkennung des Göttlichen in ihm." Dorner, "Entwicklungsgeschichte der
   Lehre von der Person Christi," 2d ed. vol. ii. p. 1211: "Jesu
   Heiligkeit und Weisheit, durch die er unter den sündigen, viel-irrenden
   Menschen einzig dasteht, weiset . . . . auf einen übernatürlichen
   Ursprung seiner Person. Diese muss, um inmitten der Sünderwelt
   begreiflich zu sein, aus einer eigenthümlichen und wunderbar
   schöpferischen That Gottes abgeleitet, ja es muss in Christus . . . .
   von Gott aus betrachtet, eine Incarnation göttlicher Liebe, also
   göttlichen Wesens gesehen werden, was ihn als den Punkt erscheinen
   lässt, wo Gott und die Menschheit einzig und innigst geeinigt sind."
   Compare also Ebrard, "Christliche Dogmatik," 1852, vol. ii. pp. 24-31;
   and W. Nast, "Commentary on Matthew and Mark," Cincinnati, 1864, Gener.
   Introd., pp. 120.

   NOTE 7, page 23. This idea is almost as old as the Christian Church,
   and was already pretty clearly taught by Irenæus, who, through the
   single link of his teacher Polycarp, stood connected with the age of
   St. John the apostle. He says ("Adv. Hæreses." lib. ii. cap. 22, § 4):
   "Omnes enim venit [Christus] per semetipsum salvare, omnes, inquam, qui
   per eum renascuntur in Deum, infantes et parvulos et pueros et
   seniores. Ideo per omnem venit ætatem et infantibus infans factus,
   sanctificans infantes; in parvulis parvulus, sanctificans hanc ipsam
   habentes ætatem, simul et exemplum illis pietatis effectus et justitiæ
   et subjectionis; in juvenibus juvenis, exemplum juvenibus fiens et
   sanctificans Domino. Sic et senior in senioribus (?), ut sit perfectus
   magister in omnibus," &c. But Irenæus erred in carrying the idea too
   far, and assuming Christ to have lived over fifty years, on the ground
   of the indefinite estimate of the Jews, John viii. 57. Hippolytus, in
   his recently discovered "Philosophumena," expresses the same view.

   NOTE 8, page 25. See Luke i. 41-45: the Magnificat, or the Virgin's
   Song, ver. 46-55; the Benedictus, or the Song of Zacharias, ver. 67-79.

   NOTE 9, page 26. Bethlehem was indeed the ancestral seat of the house
   of David (Ruth i. 1, 2), and fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chron. xi. 16),
   but remained an insignificant place, and is not even mentioned among
   the towns of Judah in the Hebrew text of Joshua, nor in Neh. xi. 25.
   Comp. Mich. v. 1, where the prophet thus contrasts its insignificance
   with its future destiny as the birthplace of the Saviour (according to
   the Hebrew text): "But thou Bethlehem Ephratah, too small to be among
   the thousands of Judah b'lphy yhvdh--i. e., the central towns where the
   heads of thousands or subordinate divisions of tribes resided], out of
   thee shall come forth unto me One who is to be the Ruler in Israel;
   whose origin is from the first of time, from the days of eternity."

   NOTE 10, page 27. Compare the rich remarks of Dr. Lange in his
   commentary on the second chapter of Matthew, ver. 1-11. "Bibelwerk,"
   vol. i. p. 19 ff. (Am. ed. vol. i. p. 55 ff.)

   NOTE 11, page 27. Luke ii. 40: to paidion euxanen kai ekrataiouto
   pneumati. "And the child grew and waxed strong in spirit;" precisely
   the same expression which Luke used, i. 80, of John the Baptist.
   Compare also, for the human growth and development of Christ, Luke ii.
   52; Heb. ii. 10-18 and v. 8 and 9, where it is said that he learned
   obedience, and, being made perfect, he became the author of eternal
   salvation.

   NOTE 12, page 28. Dr. J. P. Lange, in his "Leben Jesu nach den
   Evangelien," Heidelberg, 1844 ff. vol. ii. p. 127, says: "The history
   of Jesus in his twelfth year represents his whole development. It is
   the characteristic deed of his youth, the revelation of his youthful
   life, a reflection of his birth, a sign and anticipation of his future
   heroic career. It represents the childhood of his ideality, therefore
   also the ideality of childhood in general." Compare also the suggestive
   remarks of Olshausen on that passage, "Commentar" (3d Germ. ed. vol. i.
   p. 145 ff.); and of Van Oosterzee, in Lange's "Bibelwerk."

   NOTE 13, page 29. Luke ii. 49: en tois tou patros mou dei, [dei
   indicates a moral necessity which is identical with true freedom],
   einai me. The fathers and most of the modern commentators refer the
   tois to the house of God, or the temple. This is grammatically
   allowable, but restricts the sense, and deprives it of its deeper
   meaning; for he could only occasionally be in the temple of Jerusalem.
   Nearly all the English versions, Tyndale, Cranmer, the Genevan, and
   James, translate more correctly, "about my Father's business." But we
   object to the term business in this connection, and prefer the more
   literal translation "in (not about) the things (or affairs) of my
   Father." The in signifies the life-element in which Christ moved during
   his whole life, whether in the temple or out of it.

   NOTE 14, page 30. By Dr. Horace Bushnell, in his genial work, already
   quoted, on "Nature and the Supernatural," page 280 ("The Character of
   Jesus," page 19 ff.)

   NOTE 15, page 33. See the particulars, with ample quotations from the
   sources, in Rud. Hoffmaann's "Leben Jesu nach den Apokryphen im
   Zusammenhang aus den Quellen erzaehlt und wissenschaftlich untersucht."
   Leipzig, 1851, p. 140-263.

   NOTE 16, page 34. Renan, in his Life, or Romance rather, of Jesus,
   chap. ii., gives a graphic description of the natural beauties of
   Nazareth, as among the educational influences which account for the
   greatness of Christ; but all this can not do away with the seclusion
   and proverbial insignificance of the place (John i. 48), and loses much
   of its force when we remember the narrow streets and filth of an
   Oriental town. "Nazareth," says Renan, "was a little town, situated in
   a fold of land broadly open at the summit of the group of mountains
   which closes on the north the Plain of Esdralon. The population is now
   from three to four thousand, and it can not have varied very much . . .
   . The environs are charming, and no place in the world was so well
   adapted to dreams of absolute happiness. Even in our days, Nazareth is
   a delightful sojourn,--the only place perhaps, in Palestine, where the
   soul feels a little relieved of the burden which weighs upon it in the
   midst of this unequaled desolation. The people are friendly and
   good-natured; the gardens are fresh and green . . . . The beauty of the
   women who gather there at night--this beauty which was already remarked
   in the sixth century, and in which was seen the gift of the Virgin Mary
   (by Antonius Martyr, Itiner. § 5)--has been surprisingly well
   preserved. It is the Syrian type in all its languishing grace."

   NOTE 17, page 36. Matt. xiii. 54-56. Compare also Mark vi. 3: "Is not
   this the carpenter, the son of Mary?" &c.; from which it would appear
   that Jesus himself engaged in the trade of Joseph. This is comfirmed by
   ancient tradition and the custom of Jewish Rabbins. Thus St. Paul was a
   tent-maker (Acts xviii. 3). The profession of a carpenter was by no
   means degrading, but regarded among the most honorable and useful.
   Hence the question of the Nazarenes, "Is not this the carpenter's son?"
   is to be taken as a question of surprise rather than of contempt. They
   denied the social superiority, not the equality of Jesus with them; and
   could not understand from his social position how he could rise above
   the common level, and perform such wonderful works.

   NOTE 18, page 39. Comp. G. G. Gervinus: "Shakspeare," Leipzig, 1850,
   vol. i. pp. 38-41. This masterly critic and expounder of the British
   poet pronounces him one of the best and most extensively informed men
   of his age: "Es ist heute kein Wagniss mehr, zu sagen, dass Shakspeare
   in jener Zeit an Umfang vielfachen Wissens sehr wenige seines Gleichen
   gehabt habe."

   NOTE 19, page 41. John Young: "The Christ of History," p. 35.

   NOTE 20, page 44. Heinrich Steffens, a follower of Schelling, and a
   Christian philosopher, speaks thus of man, and bases upon this thought
   his "System of Anthropology." But it may be applied in its fullest and
   absolute sense to Christ, as the ideal man, in whom and through whom
   alone the race can become complete.

   NOTE 21, page 51. Comp. with the history of the temptation in the
   wilderness, Matt. iv. and Luke iv., the significant passages in the
   Epistle to the Hebrews, iv. 15, "Tempted in all points as we are, yet
   without sin" (pepeirasmenon kata panta kath' homoioteta choris
   hamartias), and v. 8 "Though he was a son, yet learned he obedience by
   the things which he suffered" (kaiper on huios, emathen aph' hon
   epathen ten hupakoen, kai teleiotheis egeneto, k. t. l.)

   NOTE 22, page 52. In scholastic terminology, the posse non peccare, or
   the impeccabilitas minor. To this corresponds the posse non mori, or
   the immortalitas minor, i. e. the relative or conditional immortality
   of Adam in Paradise, which depended on his probation, and was lost by
   the fall.

   NOTE 23, page 53. The non posse peccare, or the impeccabilitas major.
   With this is closely connected the non posse mori, or the immortalitas
   major, the absolute immortality of the resurrection-state, which can
   never be lost.

   NOTE 24, page 53. The Rev. Dr. Jos. Berg, professor in the Theological
   Seminary at New Brunswick, in a friendly notice of the first edition of
   this essay (in his "Evangelical Quarterly" for April, 1861, p. 289),
   objects to this view of the peccability of the man Jesus, as being
   inconsistent with his absolute holiness. But I can not see the force of
   his objection. Peccability is merely the possibility of sin, such as
   attached also to Adam in the state of innocence; and it by no means
   involves Christ in the reality of sin, either original or actual.
   Against such an inference the language of the text is sufficiently
   guarded. It is true, the angel called Christ the Holy Thing from the
   moment of his conception, to gennomenon hagion (Luke i. 35). But was
   not Adam holy too, though "subject to fall"? (as the Larger Westminster
   Confession expresses it, qu. 17.) Moreover, this original holiness can
   not exclude the idea of the development and physical and moral growth
   of the Christ-child; for this is distinctly asserted by the same
   evangelist, Luke ii. 40, 52: comp. Heb. v. 8. The denial of the
   possibility of sin overthrows the realness of Christ's humanity, and
   turns the history of the temptation into a Gnostic phantom and mere
   sham. It is just because Christ was really and actually tempted, and
   this not only by the Devil in the wilderness (Matt. iv.), but
   throughout his whole life (Luke xxii. 28, Heb. iv. 15), and because he
   successfully resisted the temptation under every form, that he became
   both our Saviour and our Example: comp. Heb. v. 7-9.

   NOTE 25, page 54. Peter Bayne: "The Testimony of Christ to
   Christianity." Boston, 1862, pp. 105.

   NOTE 26, page 55. Comp. Acts iii. 14; 1 Pet. i. 19; ii. 22; iii. 18; 2
   Cor. v. 21; 1 John ii. 29; iii. 5, 7; Heb. iv. 15; vii. 26. Considering
   the infinite superiority of the ethics of the apostles to the ethics of
   the ancient Greeks, it is absurd to weaken the force of this unanimous
   testimony (as is done by D. F. Strauss, "Die christliche
   Glaubenslehre," vol. ii. p. 192; and to some extent even by Hase,
   "Leben Jesu," p. 61) by a reference to Xenophon's estimate of Socrates:
   "No one ever saw Socrates do, or heard him say, any thing impious or
   unholy" (Oudeis popote Sokratous ouden asebes oude anosion oute
   p`attontos eiden, oute legontos ekousen.--Memorab., i. 11). In the best
   case, this is only a negative judgment of his conduct, and not of the
   state of his heart; and acquits Socrates of all manifestation of
   impiety, without attributing to him, positively, religious or moral
   perfection. Moreover, it is a very different thing to assert of a man
   that he was free from sin and error, and to set forth in actual life a
   consistent sinless character. The purest man, if he were to invent such
   a character, would inevitably mix up with it some traits of human
   imperfection, or overdraw the picture beyond the truly human sphere.
   But the gospel-picture of Christ strikes us throughout as perfectly
   original and truthful, and maintains its spotless purity in every
   trait, and under every situation and temptation.

   NOTE 27, page 56. Matt. xxvii. 19, 24-54; Luke xxiii. 22-47; Matt.
   xxvii. 4.

   NOTE 28, page 58. John viii. 46. Compare the commentators and the
   reflections of Ullmann, 1. c. p. 92 ff.

   NOTE 29, page 59. Quoted from Dr. H. Bushnell, 1. c. p. 325. The
   sinlessness of Jesus is denied by D. F. Strauss, in his two destructive
   works, "The Life of Jesus," and "The Dogmatics in Conflict with Modern
   Science;" and this mainly from the à-priori philosophical argument of
   the impossibility of sinlessness, or the pantheistic notion of the
   inseparableness of sin from all finite existence. The only exegetical
   proof he urges ("Dogmat.," ii. 192) is Christ's word, Matt. xix. 17:
   "There is none good but one, that is God." But Christ answers here to
   the preceding question, and the implied misconception of goodness. He
   does not decline the epithet good as such, but only in the superficial
   sense of the rich youth who regarded him simply as a distinguished
   Rabbi and a good man, not as one with God. He did not say, I am not
   good; but, None is good, no man is good,--much less in comparison with
   God. In other words, he rejected not so much the title Good Master, as
   that spirit and state of mind which looked upon him only as an exemplar
   of worldly wisdom and morality. In no case can he be supposed to have
   contradicted his own testimony concerning his innocence. See the
   commentators ad locum, especially Olshausen, Meyer, and Lange. A French
   writer, F. Pecaut, "Le Christ et la Conscience," Paris, 1859, likewise
   denies the sinlessness of Christ. Pecaut refers to the following facts
   as evidences of moral imperfection,--the conduct of Jesus toward his
   mother in his twelfth year, his rebuke administered to her at the
   wedding feast of Cana, his expulsion of the profane traffickers from
   the temple, his cursing of the unfruitful fig-tree, the destruction of
   the herd of swine, his bitter invectives against the Pharisees, and his
   own rejection of the attribute good in the dialogue with the rich
   youth. But all these difficulties are of easy solution, and not to be
   compared with the difficulties on the other side as presented in the
   text. On the other hand, Pecaut himself, inconsistently enough, admits
   in a very eloquent passage that Christ's moral character rose beyond
   comparison above that of any other great man in antiquity, and was
   wholly penetrated by God. How, in the name of logic, is it possible to
   admit so much of goodness, and yet to impeach his veracity when he
   claims to be entirely free from sin, and equal with God? Veracity and
   honesty are the very foundation of a good character, and there can be
   no morality without them. Compare also, against Pecaut, the remarks of
   Dr. Van Oozterzee in his work on Christ, German translation, page 166
   ff.

   NOTE 30, page 59. So Schleiermacher, the greatest theological genius
   since Calvin, in his work, "Der christliche Glaube," 3d edition (1836),
   vol. ii. p. 78: "Christus war von allen andern Menschen unterschieden
   durch seine wesentliche Unsündlichkeit und seine schlechthinige
   Vollkommenheit;" i.e., "Christ differed from all other men by his
   essential sinlessness and his absolute perfection;" a proposition which
   Schleiermacher most ably establishes not only in his "Dogmatics," but
   also in many of his sermons. Karl Hase, "Leben Jesu," 4th edition,
   1854, page 60 (Clarke's English translation, Boston, 1860, p. 54),
   likewise admits that Christ was free from sin.

   NOTE 31, page 67. Cicero, Quæst. Tuscul., ii. 22: "Quem [in quo erit
   perfecta sapientia] adhuc nos quidem vidimus neninem, sed philosophorum
   sententiis, qualis futurus sit, si modo aliquando fuerit, exponitur."
   The same writer, in the same work, ii. 4, speaks in the strongest terms
   of the gross contrast between the doctrine and the life of the
   philosophers; and Quintilian accuses them of concealing the worst vices
   under the name of the ancient philosophy (Instit. i. Prooem.). The
   virtue of chastity, in our Christian sense, was almost unknown among
   the heathen. Woman was essentially a slave of man's lower passions. It
   is notorious that disreputable women, called hetairai, or amicæ, were
   attached in Corinth to the Temple of Aphrodite, ant) enjoyed the
   sanction of religion for the practice of vice These dissolute
   characters were esteemed above housewives, and became the proper
   representatives of fe male culture and social elegance. Remember
   Aspasia Phryne, Laïs, Theodora, who attracted the admiration and
   courtship even of earnest philosophers like Socrates, and statesmen
   like Pericles. To the question of Socrates, "Is there any one with whom
   you converse less than with the wife?" his pupil Aristobulus replied,
   "No one, or at least very few." Worse than this, the disgusting vice of
   pæderastia, which even depraved nature abhors, was practiced as a
   national habit among the Greeks, without punishment or dishonor; was
   freely dis cussed, commended, and( praised by their poets and
   philosophers, and likewise divinely sanctioned by the lewdness of
   Jupiter with Ganymede. Dr. Döllinger, in his very instructive and
   learned work, "Heidenthum und Judenthum," 1857, p. 684 ff., sums up his
   investigation on this subject with the following statement: "Bei den
   Griechen tritt das Laster der Pæderastie mit allen Symptomen einer
   grossen nationalen Krankheit, gleichsam eines ethischen Miasma auf; es
   zeigt sich als ein Gefühl, das stärker und heftiger wirkte, als die
   Weiberliebe bei anderen Volkern, massloser, leidenschaftlicher in
   seinen Ansbrüchen war. Rasende Eifersucht, unbedingte Hingebung,
   sinnliche Gluth, zärtliche Tändelei, nächtliches Weilen vor der Thüre
   des Geliebten, Alles, was zur Carricatur der natürlichen
   Geschlechtsliebe gehört, findet sich dabei. Auch die ernstesten
   Moralisten waren in der Beurtheilung des Verhältnisses höchst
   nachsichtig, sie behandelten die Sache häufig mehr mit leichtsinnigem
   Scherze, und duldeten die Schuldigen in ihrer Gesellschaft. In der
   gauzen Literatur der vorchristlichen Periode ist kaum ein
   Schriftsteller zu finden, der sich entschieden dagegen erklärt hatte.
   Vielmehr war die ganze Gesellschaft davon angesteckt, und man athmete
   das Miasma, so zu sagen, mit der Luft ein." On the whole subject of
   heathen morals, compare this work of Döllinger; also C. Schmidt, "Essai
   historique sur la société dans le mond romain, et sur la transformation
   par le Christianisme, Paris, 1853; and Schaff, "History of the
   Apostolic Church," p. 147 ff., 157 ff., 443 ff., 454 ff.; and "History
   of the Christian Church, from Christ to Constantine," p. 302 ff.

   NOTE 32, page 68. Theodore Parker: "Discourses of Religion," p. 294.

   NOTE 33, page 69. Renan makes some striking admissions on this point,
   though not unmixed with error. "Morality," he says in the fifth chapter
   of his "Vie de Jésus," "is not composed of principles more or less well
   expressed. The poetry of the precept which makes it lovely is more than
   the precept itself, taken as an abstract verity. Now, it can not be
   denied that the maxims borrowed by Jesus from his predecessors" [Christ
   borrowed nothing from anybody] "produce in the gospel an effect totally
   different from that in the ancient Law, in the Pirke Aboth, or in the
   Talmud. It is not the ancient Law, it is not the Talmud, which has
   conquered and changed the world. Little original in itself [?], if by
   that is meant that it can be recomposed almost entirely with more
   ancient maxims, the evangelical morality remains none the less the
   highest creation which has emanated from the human consciousness, the
   most beautiful code of perfect life that any moralist has traced (la
   morale évangélique n'en reste pa moins la plus haute création qui soit
   sortie de la conscience humaine, le plus beau code de la vie parfaite
   qu'aucun moraliste ait tracé).". . . "Jesus, son of Sirach, and Hillel,
   had enunciated aphorisms almost as lofty as those of Jesus. Hillel,
   however, will never be considered the real founder of Christianity. In
   morality, as in art, words are nothing; deeds are every thing. The idea
   which is concealed beneath a picture of Raphael is a small thing: it is
   the picture alone that counts. Likewise, in morality, truth becomes of
   value only if it pass to the condition of feeling; and it attains all
   its preciousness only when it is realized in the world as a fact. Men
   of indifferent morals have written very good maxims. Men very virtuous,
   also, have done nothing to continue the tradition of their virtue in
   the world. The palm belongs to him who has been mighty in word and in
   work; who has felt the truth, and, at the price of his blood, has made
   it triumph. Jesus, from this double point of view, is without equal:
   his glory remains complete, and will be renewed for ever. (Jésus, à se
   double point de vue, est sans égal; sa gloire reste entière et sera
   toujours renouvelée.)"

   NOTE 34, page 69. The relation of husband and father must be excepted,
   on account of his elevation above all equal partnership, and the
   universalness of his character and mission, which requires the entire
   community of the redeemed as his bride instead of any individual
   daughter of Eve.

   NOTE 35, page 71. Mark vii. 37. The expression of the people, kalos
   panta pepoieke (bene omnia fecit), must be taken as a general judgment,
   inferred not only from the particular case related before, but from all
   they had heard and seen of Christ.

   NOTE 36, page 74. Matt. xxvii. 46. It should be remembered that Jesus
   speaks here in the prophetical and typical words of David, Ps. xxii. 2;
   while, when speaking in his own language, he uniformly addresses God as
   his Father. Compare also the instructive reflections of Dr. Lange, in
   his commentary on this passage, Am. edition, pp. 526, 530.

   NOTE 37, page 79. 1 Cor. xi. 1. Comp. 1 Thess. i. 6: "Ye became
   followers of us and of the Lord."

   NOTE 38, page 80. Matt. iv. 19; viii. 22; ix. 9; Mark ii. 14; viii. 84;
   x. 21; Luke v. 27; ix. 23; 59; xviii. 22; John i. 43; x. 27; xii. 26.

   NOTE 39, page 81. Matt. xii. 1-8; Mark ii. 23-28; Luke v. 1-9; John v.
   16-18.

   NOTE 40, page 81. John ix. 3: "Neither hath this man sinned, nor his
   parents; (but he was born blind,) that the works of God should be made
   manifest in him."

   NOTE 41, page 81. See the dialogue with the woman of Samaria, John iv.
   5 ff.; and the parable of the merciful Samaritan, Luke x. 30-37.

   NOTE 42, page 84. Comp. Ullmann, "Sündlosigkeit," p. 67; J. P. Lange,
   "Leben Jesu," i. 27-34; Ebrard, "Dogmatik," vol. ii. 23, 24. Also Hase,
   in his "Leben Jesu," p. 63 (4th ed.), places the ideal beauty of
   Christ's character in "das schöne Ebenmaass aller Kräfte," and in
   "vollendete Gottesliebe dargestellt in reinster Humanität" ("The
   beautiful symmetry of all powers, and perfect love to God, exhibited in
   purest humanity"). Bishop D. Wilson, in his "Evidences of
   Christianity," vol. ii. 116 (Boston ed. of 1830), remarks: "The
   opposite, and to us apparently contradictory, graces were found in
   Christ in equal proportion." Dr. W. E. Channing, the Unitarian, in his
   able and remarkable sermon on the "Character of Christ" (Works, vol.
   iv. p. 23), says: "This combination of the spirit of humanity, in its
   lowliest, tenderest form, with the consciousness of unrivaled and
   divine glories, is the most wonderful distinction of this wonderful
   character." Guizot, Méditations sur 1'essence de la relig. chrétienne,
   1864, p. 274: "Rien ne me frappe plus dans les Évangiles que ce double
   charactère de sévérité et d'amour, de pureté austère et de sympathie
   tendre qui apparaît et règne constamment dans les actes et dans les
   paroles de Jésus-Christ, en tout ce qui touche aux rapports de Dieu
   avec les hommes." I add a testimony from an excellent little apologetic
   work which has just come to hand,--"Apologetischle Vorträge über die
   Grundwahrheiten des Christenthums, von Dr. Chr. E. Luthardt," Leipz.
   1864, p. 204: "The image of Jesus is the ilnage of the highest and
   purest, harmony both of his natural and his moral being. With all other
   Inen, there is some discrepancy in the inner life. The two poles of
   intellectual life, knowledge, and feeling, head and heart; the two
   powers of the moral life, thought and will,--in whom are they fully
   agreed? ]But as to Jesus, we all have the lively impression, here
   reigns perfect harmony of the inner spiritual life. His soul is at
   absolute peace. . . . He is all love, all heart, all feeling; and yet,
   on the other hand, all intellect, all clearness, all majesty. . . . All
   is quiet greatness, peaceful simplicity, sublime harmony."

   NOTE 43, page 91. "Politia," p. 74 sq. ed. Ast. ("Plat. Opera," vol.
   iv. p. 360, E. ed. Bip.) Compare, the author's "History of the
   Apostolic Church," English edition, § 109, page 433 f. Even Jean
   Jacques Rousseau was struck with this remarkable heathen prophecy of
   the suffering Saviour, who died the death of a malefactor and a slave
   to redeem us. "Quand Platon," he says in his "Émil," "peint son juste
   imaginaire couvert de tout l'opprobre du crime et digne de tous les
   prix de la vertu, il peint trait pour trait Jésus Christ: la
   ressemblance est si frappante, que tous les pères l'ont sentée, et
   qu'il n'est pas possible de s'y tromper."

   NOTE 44, page 94. John vii. 3-10. It is immaterial for our purpose
   whether we understand by his brothers (not "brethren," as the Common
   Version has it) younger sons of Joseph and Mary, or older sons of
   Joseph from a former marriage, or cousins of Jesus. They appear, at all
   events, as members and inmates of the holy family either by birth or
   adoption. Compare the author's exegetical article on the "Brothers of
   Christ," in the "Bibliotheca Sacra" for October, 1864; and notes in his
   edition of Lange's "Commentary on Matthew," p. 256 if.

   NOTE 45, page 102. Rousseau, "Émil," iv. p. 111: "Oui, si la vie et la
   mort de Socrate sont d'un sage; la vie et la mort de Jésus sont d'un
   dieu!"

   NOTE 46, page 108. "Der Reinste unter den Mächtigen, der Mächtigste
   unter den Reinen, der mit seiner durchstochenen Hand Reiche aus der
   Angel, den Strom der Jahrhunderte aus dem Bette hob und noch
   fortgebietet den Zeiten." Jean Paul: "Ueber den Gott in der Geschichte
   und im Leben." Sämmtliche Werke, vol. xxxiii. 6.

   NOTE 47, page 109. "Vie de Jésus," 7th ed. Paris, 1864, p. 325: "Quels
   que puissent être les phénomènes inattendues de l'avenir, Jésus ne sera
   pas surpassé. Son culte se rajeunira sans cesse; sa légende provoquera
   des larmes sans fin; ses souffrances attendiront les meilleurs coeurs;
   tous les siècles proclameront qu'entre les fils des hommes, il n'en est
   pas né de plus grand que Jésus." Renan, however, spoils all his
   concessions, which are quite frequent and enthusiastic, by his
   pantheistic man-worship, and by placing such a comparatively obscure
   individual as Cakya-Mouni, or Saint Sakya, the founder of Buddhism, on
   a par with Christ. Compare the last chapter of his "Vie de Jésus," and
   also the conclusion of his essay on the "Critical Historians of Jesus,"
   where he says of Christ: "The wonder-worker and the prophet will die;
   the man and the sage will endure; or, rather, the eternal beauty will
   live for ever in this sublime name, as in all those whom humanity has
   chosen to keep it in mind of its own nature, and to transport it by the
   view of its own image. Behold there the living God! This is the
   adorable One!"

   NOTE 48, page 109. Dr. Baur: "Das Christenthum und die christliche
   Kirche der drei ersten Jahrhunderte," second revised edition, which
   appeared shortly before his death (1860), p. 53 f. The resurrection
   especially remained for Dr. Baur an unsolved problem; and this fact is
   the very foundation on which the Christian Church is built, and has
   ever since defied the gates of hell.

   NOTE 49, page 113. For a very full exposition of this testimony, we
   refer to the instructive and able work of W. Fr. Gess: "Die Lehre von
   der Person Christs entwickelt aus dem Sebstbewusstsein Christi und aus
   dem Zeugnisse der Apostel." Basel. 1856. Dr. Bushnell's admirable essay
   on the character of Jesus is defective here. He does not establish the
   proper divinity of Christ, but seems content with the proof that he was
   more than man, and can not be classified with men. Having carried the
   reader over the great difficulty, and beyond the boundary of
   Humanitarianism, he leaves him to his own conclusion concerning the
   merits of the orthodox view of Christ.

   NOTE 50, page 113. Compare the dictionaries, and especially Schmid's
   and Bruder's Greek, or Bagster's English Concordance of the New
   Testament (the latter republished by the Harpers, New York, 1855), sub
   verbo huios tou anthropou.

   NOTE 51, page 114. So many modern German commentators, and also Dr.
   Trench, who remarks: "He was Son of man,' as alone realizing all which
   in the idea of man was contained, as the second Adam, the head and
   representative of the race,--the one true and perfect flower, which
   ever unfolded itself, of the root and stock of humanity. Claiming this
   title as his own, he witnessed against opposite poles of error
   concerning his person,--the Ebionite, to which the exclusive use of the
   title 'Son of David' might have led; and the Gnostic, which denied the
   reality of the human nature that bore it" ("Notes on the Parables,"
   ninth London edition, p. 84). Philo, the Jewish divine and philosopher,
   a cotemporary of Christ, calls the Logos (the eternal Word) the true
   man, ho alethinos anthropos.

   NOTE 52, page 114. Matt. ix. 27; xv. 22; xii23; xxi. 9; xxii. 41 ff.,
   &c.

   NOTE 53, page 115. Matt. xvi. 17; compare xix 28; xxiv. 30; xxv. 31;
   xxvi. 64; Luke xxi. 27, 36.

   NOTE 54, page 117. Matt. xi. 27; xxi. 37; xxii 42; xxvi. 63 f.; xxvii.
   43; Mark xii. 6; xiii. 32; xiv 62; Luke x. 22; John v. 19-26; ix.
   35-38; x. 36; xi. 4; xiv. 13; xvii. 1; xix. 7.

   NOTE 55, page 117. Matt. xvi. 16; Mark iii. 11; John i. 18, 34, 49; xi.
   27; xx. 31,--besides the many passages in the Acts and Epistles, where
   the term huios tou Theou is as frequent as the term huios tou anthropou
   in the Gospels.

   NOTE 56, page 117. Matt. iii. 17; Luke iii. 22; Matt. xvii. 5; Luke ix.
   35.

   NOTE 57, page 119. Matt. xi. 27. This passage is a striking parallel to
   the sublimest sayings in the fourth Gospel, and proves the essential
   identity of the Synoptist and Johannean picture of Christ. Comp.
   Lange's "Commentary on Matthew," Amer. ed. p. 213.

   NOTE 58, page 119. John iii. 36; v. 24; vi. 40, 47, 50-58; xi. 25.

   NOTE 59, page 119. John iv. 26; v. 39, 36; Matt. xiv. 33; xvi. 16 f.;
   xxvi. 63 f., &c.

   NOTE 60, page 119. Matt. xxvi. 63-65. Schleiermacher pronounces this
   affirmative Yea of Christ, in view of the surrounding circumstances,
   the greatest word ever spoken by any man, the most glorious apotheosis,
   and the most certain assurance by which any divinity could proclaim
   itself ("das grösste Wort, was je ein Sterblicher gesagt hat, die
   herrlichste Apotheose; keine Gottheit kann gewisser sein als die,
   welche so sich selbst verkündiget"). See his youthful work, "Discourses
   on Religion" (Reden über die Religion), 4th edition, Berlin, 1831,
   pages 292 and 293. Compare also the remarks of Luthardt, "Apologetische
   Vorträge," p. 213 f.

   NOTE 61, page 120. Matt. xvi. 19; xxvii. 11; Luke xxii. 30; John xviii.
   36. Comp. Dan. vii. 13; Luke i. 33.

   NOTE 62, page 120. John v. 22, 25-27; Matt. xxv. 31 ff., &c.

   NOTE 63, page 120. Matt. xviii. 11; Luke ix. 56; xix. 10; John iii. 17;
   v. 34; x. 9; xii. 47. Compare Luke i. 47; ii. 11; John iv. 42, &c.

   NOTE 64, page 122. "Mundus non factus est in tempore, sed cum tempore."

   NOTE 65, page 123. John viii. 58: amen, amen [the solemn announcement
   of an important truth] lego humin, prin Abraam genesthai ego eimi. Mark
   also the difference of the verb (which is lost in our English version),
   besides the difference of the tense. For ginesthai, to become, werden,
   to begin to be, to pass from non-existence into existence, implies
   origin in time or previous non-existence, and is applicable only to
   created beings; while einai is equally applicable to God and eternal
   existence. Compare the en of the Logos (John i. 1) with the egeneto of
   the man John, ver. 6. H. A. W. Meyer, the best grammatical commentator
   now living, correctly remarks on John viii. 58 (pages 249, 250): "Da
   Abraham nicht präexistist hatte, sondern (durch seine Geburt) zur
   Existenz kam, so steht genesthai, wogegen mit eimi das Sein an sich
   gemeint ist, welches bei Jesu (sofern er nach seinem göttlichen Wesen
   vorzeitlich war) ohne vorgängiges Gewordensein war. Das Praesens
   bezeichnet das aus der Vergangenheit her Fortdauernde. Vrgl. lxx. Jer.
   xxi. 5; Ps. xc. 2; Winer, Gramm. p. 309." Meyer then goes on to refute
   the Socinian and rationalistic misinterpretations of the passage.

   NOTE 66, page 123. John xvii. 5. Comp. the testimony of the apostles on
   the pre-existence,--John i. 1-14; Col. i. 16; Heb. i. 2, 3.

   NOTE 67, page 123. Matt. ix. 6; Luke v. 20-24; vii. 47, 48.

   NOTE 68, page 124. John x. 30. The passage teaches, certainly, more
   than the ethical unity of will: it asserts, according to the context,
   the unity of power which is based on the unity of essence, or the
   homousia. The hen excludes Arianism; the plural esmen, Sabellianism and
   Patripassianism.

   NOTE 69, page 125. Dr. Hengstenberg, in his "Commentary on the Gospel
   of St. John," 1863, vol. iii. p. 361 f., justly remarks: "Menschen, die
   sich selbst zu Gott machen, sind immer entweder Verrückte oder
   Bösewichter. Wer anders als wer selbst ein Frevler ist, wird es wagen
   Jesum in die eine oder die andere dieser Classen zu setzen?"--i.e., men
   who pretend to be God are always either mad or wicked.

   NOTE 70, page 125. "Of all the readers of the gospel," says Bushnell,
   p. 290, "it probably never even occurs to one in a hundred thousand to
   blame his conceit, or the egregious vanity of his pretensions." Even
   the better class of Unitarians instinctively bow before these claims.
   See the remarkable passage of Dr. Channing quoted below.

   NOTE 71, page 133. Discourse on the "Character of Christ," in
   Channing's Works, vol. iv. p. 20.

   NOTE 72, page 134. The explanation which some Unitarian divines give of
   these words of Thomas, by resolving them into a mere exclamation of
   surprise at the fact of the resurrection, "O my God!" is simply absurd,
   and only worthy of notice as revealing the inextricable difficulty
   which it presents to the Unitarian Christology.

   NOTE 73, page 136. Is was first suggested by the heathen assailants of
   Christianity, Celsus and Julian the Apostate, then insinuated by French
   deists of the school of Voltaire, but never raised to the dignity of
   scientific argument. The only attempt to carry it out, and that a mere
   fragmentary one, was made by the anonymous "Wolfenbüttel Fragmentist,"
   since known as Hermann Samuel Reimrus, professor of Oriental Literature
   in the College at Hamburg, who died in 1786. His "Fragments" were never
   intended for publication, but only for a few friends. Lessing found
   them in the library at Wolfenbüttel, and commenced to publish them,
   without the author's knowledge, in 1774; not, as he said, because he
   agreed with them, but because he wished to arouse the spirit of
   investigation. This mode of procedure, Semler, the father of German
   neology, wittily compared to the act of setting a city on fire for the
   purpose of trying the engines. In our own time, Bruno Bauer, a
   theological weathercock, vagabond, and final apostate (not to be
   confounded with the far superior Dr. F. Ch. Baur), has endeavored to
   revive, but without effect, this exploded theory, and misrepresented
   the Gospels as deliberate fabrications. But even Strauss ignores him
   (in his new "Life of Jesus"), as unfit for his company.

   NOTE 74, page 143. "Discourse on the Character of Christ."--Channing's
   Works, vol. iv. 17, 18.

   NOTE 75, page 144. The so-called rationalismus communis, or vulgaris,
   or the rationalism of common sense, as distinct from the transcendental
   rationalism of uncommon sense or speculative reason. The sense of both
   systems, however, ends in nonsense. Dr. Marheineke defined a
   Rationalist, or, as Paulus (not of Tarsus, but of Heidelberg) called
   him, a Denkgläubige, as a man, der zu denken glaubt und zu glauben
   denkt; es ist aber mit beidem gleich null; i.e., a man who believes
   that he thinks, and thinks that he believes; but both amounts to
   nothing. The Hegelian School has successfully ridiculed common or
   vulgar rationalism, and made every scholar of philosophical pretensions
   ashamed of it. But the infidel wing of that school has at last relapsed
   into the same or still greater absurdities.

   NOTE 76, page 144. Comp. Diodorus Siculus, Bibli. Fragm., i. 7; Cicero,
   De natura deor., i. 42; Sextus Empir., Adv. math. ix. 17.

   NOTE 77, page 144. Dr. Paulus was born in the kingdom of Württemberg,
   1761; then successively professor in different universities; at last in
   Heidelberg, where he died in 1847, after having long outlived himself.
   His rationalistic exegesis is laid down in his "Commentary on the
   Gospels," published since 1800; and in his "Life of Jesus," 1828.

   NOTE 78, page 145. The rationalistic interpretation of peripaton epi
   tes thalusses (according to the reading of the received text), or epi
   ten thalassan (according to the better authenticated reading of the
   modern critical editions), in Matt. xiv. 25, is perfectly inconsistent
   with the context and with the expression in verse 29, periepatesen epi
   ta hudata, and abandoned by all good commentators. It is true that the
   Greek preposition epi with the genitive may mean, on the bank of, but
   only after verbs of rest, as in John xx., epi tes thalasses tes
   Tiberiados, not after verbs of motion, as peripatein, and still less
   with the accusative, according to the proper reading of the oldest
   manuscripts.

   NOTE 79, page 149. Renan: "Studies of Religious history and Criticism,"
   translated by O. B. Frothingham. New York, 1864. pp. 176, 177.

   NOTE 80, page 151. David Friederich Strauss, Doctor of Philosophy (not
   of Theology), was born at Ludwigsburg, near Stuttgart, in Württemberg,
   a little kingdom which has produced an unusual number of distinguished
   men,--poets like Schiller and Uhland, philosophers like Schelling and
   Hegel, astronomers like Kepler, and some of the most orthodox and pious
   divines, as Bengel and Storr; but also the very leaders of both the
   common and the transcendental rationalism, viz. Paulus, Baur, and
   Strauss. The late Dr. Baur, Professor of Church History in Tübingen
   (died 1860), is the founder of the so-called Tübingen School of
   negative historical criticism, which aimed at a radical reconstruction
   of the history of primitive Christianity, on the basis of a pantheistic
   (Hegelian) intellectualism; and is, upon the whole, the ablest and most
   respectable of all the opponents of Christianity. It was mainly under
   his instruction that Strauss was educated. and unfitted for the
   Christian ministry, at the University of Tübingen. He was the first in
   his class, and exhibited unusual talent and industry. After a literary
   journey to the north of Germany, he became Repetent, or theological
   tutor and lecturer, at the Stift (Seminary) of his Alma Mater; but was
   removed from this post and the service of the Church in 1836, after the
   publication of his famous "Life of Jesus," which created an
   extraordinary sensation in the theological and literary world, and gave
   him an unenviable notoriety for all time to come. Since that time, he
   has led a rather unsteady and apparently unhappy life in different
   places,--at Ludwigsburg, Stuttgart, Heilbronn, Weimar, Cologne, Munich,
   and again at Heilbronn. He married a famous actress, Agnese Schebest;
   but was shortly afterwards divorced from her, on account, not of
   immorality, but of incompatibility of temper, and of his extreme
   selfishness of disposition. In 1839, he was called to a professorship
   of didactic theology at the University of Zurich, but was prevented
   from taking possession of his chair by a revolution of the people of
   the canton, who stormed the city, and expelled the radical and infidel
   administration that called him to undermine the very foundations of the
   Christian faith in the rising ministry of the Church.

   Strauss is a good classical and general scholar, and a master in the
   art of composition. He has a remarkably clear, methodical, logical, and
   acute mind, a rare power of critical analysis, but no constructive
   power whatever. He has talent of high order, but no genius; he can
   destroy, but not build up; he sees difficulties and differences, but no
   unity and harmony. He is an unscrupulous advocate and special pleader,
   who can tear the testimony of witnesses to pieces, but is unable to
   gain a positive result. In one word, he is a skillful "architect of
   ruin." As to his moral character, he is correct, temperate, and
   studious, but cold, selfish, and heartless. When a student, he was
   quite superstitious, and believed in all the ghost-stories and
   demoniacal possessions which then agitated Württemberg, and clustered
   around his friend, the amiable and humorous poet-physician and
   ghost-seer, Justinus Kerner of Weinsberg (who, by the way, called
   Strauss's marriage and subsequent divorce a mere "myth," and played
   many good-humored jokes on him). This is a striking illustration of the
   close affinity of superstition and infidelity, and the easy transition
   from one to the other. We have the same law exemplified on a large
   scale in the close alliance between infidelity and modern spiritualism
   falsely so called. Man must believe in something; either in the true
   God or in dumb idols, either in the Holy Ghost or in specters. Some
   time ago, it was currently reported in American papers that Strauss had
   changed his views, and was going to refute his "Life of Jesus;" but
   this dream is dissolved by the appearance of his new "Life of Jesus,"
   which is as bad or even worse than the old.

   The first and larger "Leben Jesu" of Strauss appeared at Tübingen in
   1835 and '36, in two volumes; the fourth and probably the last edition
   in 1840; and was translated into French by Émile Littré, member of the
   Institute (Paris, 2d ed. 1856), and into English by Miss Marian Evans
   (London, 1846, in three volumes; republished in New York by some
   obscure house, 1850). The smaller work under the same title, in one
   volume of 633 pages, appeared at Leipzig in 1864, and has already gone
   through several editions. While the first was intended exclusively for
   learned readers, the second is more popular (für das deutsche Volk
   bearbeitet, as the title-page says), and aims to be the same for the
   German people that Renan's "Vie de Jésus" was for the French, although
   it is as far behind the latter in easy elegance and popularity as it is
   above it in scholarship and accuracy. He dedicated it to the memory of
   his deceased brother, as Renan dedicated his work to the memory of his
   deceased sister. With slight modifications, he adheres to his old
   position, with increased bitterness to the clergy and the church, whom
   he now gives up hopelessly, turning to the people, and assuming the
   part of a theological deserter and spiritual demagogue. He has the
   impudence, in the preface (page 12), to appeal to the example of St.
   Paul, who, after being rejected by the Jews, offered the gospel to the
   Gentiles. He hopes that the annihilation of the popular faith in
   miracles will overthrow at last the Christian ministry, as a useless
   and even injurious encumbrance of society in the present advanced state
   of civilization. "Wer die Pfaffen aus der Kirche schaffen will," he
   says (preface, page 9), "der muss erst das Wunder aus der Religion
   schaffern." The nature of the religion or philosophy which he would
   like to substitute for a supernatural Christianity may be judged from
   his undisguised denial of the immortality of the soul. He praises his
   deceased brother, in the words of dedication, for having never yielded,
   not even on his death-bed, to the deceitful temptation of deriving
   comfort from the empty dream of another world. "Du hast," he says,
   "selbst in solchen Augenblicken, wo jede Lebenshoffnung erloschen war,
   niemals der Versuchung nachgegeben, durch Anlehnen beim Jenseits dich
   zu täuschen." Strauss has unwillingly done great service to the cause
   of truth by calling forth a library of learned defenses of the gospel
   history. Among his ablest opponents are Tholuck, Neander, Ullmann,
   Lamge, Ebrard, Jul. Muller, Hoffmann, Hug. Compare also a series of
   scholarly articles of Prof. Geo. P. Fisher of Yale College, on the
   "Conflict with Skepticism and Unbelief," the second of which reviews
   and refutes the mythical theory of Strauss, in the "New-Englander" for
   April, 1864. These articles, which appeared successively in the
   "New-Englander" and other American quarterly reviews, are well worth
   reprinting in permanent book form. In his new book, Strauss thinks it
   convenient to ignore almost entirely many of the best books bearing
   directly on the subject; as Tholuck's "Credibility of the Gospel
   History," Lange's "Life of Christ," and the masterly exegetical and
   critical labors of Meyer, Bleek, and others.

   NOTE 81, page 151. Theodore Parker, born in Massachusetts, 1810; died
   in Florence, 1860. "Discourse of Matters pertaining to Religion," 1849.
   Comp. his review of Strauss in the "Christian Examiner" for April,
   1840. Mr. Weiss makes out a distinction between the theories of Strauss
   and Parker, but on a partial misapprehension of the former. The
   difference lies more in the practical turn of the American agitator and
   the speculative turn of the German student. See "Life and
   Correspondence of Theodore Parker," by John Weiss, New York, 1864, 2
   vols.; and an able review of this work by Prof. Noah Porter in the
   "New-Englander" for 1864, page 359 ff.

   NOTE 82, page 163. In his new "Leben Jesu," page 79, Strauss says, with
   reference to the Gospel of John: "Hier hat sogar die Einmischung
   philosophischer Construction und bewusster Dichtung alle
   Wahrscheinlichkeit." Comp. page 98. For a clear digest of the recent
   gospel controversy, we refer the English reader to two articles of
   Prof. G. B. Fisher in the "Bibliotheca Sacra" for April, 1864, on the
   genuineness of John; and another article in the "New Englander" for
   October, 1864, on the Synoptists.

   NOTE 83, page 167. Dr. Baur, in the second revised edition of his last
   important work on "Christianity and the Christian Church in the First
   Three Centuries," which appeared shortly before his death (a. 1860),
   makes the remarkable concession that the conversion of St. Paul
   remained at all times an enigma to him, which cannot be satisfactorily
   solved by any psychological or dialectical analysis. "Keine weder
   psychologische noch dialektische Analyse kann das innere Geheimniss des
   Actes erforschen, in welchem Gott seinen Sohn in ihm enthüllte" (p.
   45). In this connection, he allows himself to speak of the miracle of
   the resurrection, "which alone could disperse the doubts of the older
   apostles, which seemed to doom faith itself to the eternal night of
   death" ("das Wunder der Auferstehung, das allein die Zweifel der
   älteren Apostel zerstreuen konnte, welche den Glauben selbst in die
   ewige Nacht des Todes verstossen zu müssen schienen" (p. 39); and of
   the miracle of Paul's conversion, which appears the greater, since he,
   "in the sudden change from the most violent enemy to the most
   determined herald of Christianity, broke through the barriers of Jewish
   particularism, and dissolved it in the universal idea of Christianity"
   (p. 45). We honor the honesty of this greatest of modern skeptics, and
   cherish the hope that he was saved at last from the eternal night of
   despair which is the legitimate end of skepticism.

   NOTE 84, page 172. The same objection against the theory of fiction was
   already raised by the infidel Rousseau, in his "Émile," L. iv. p. 111:
   "Jamais des auteurs juifs n'eussent trouvé ni ce ton, ni cette morale;
   et l'évangile a des caractères de vérité si grands, si frappans, si
   parfaitement inimitable, que l'inventeur en serait plus étonnant que le
   héros." Theodore Parker, in arguing against the total denial of the
   existence of Jesus, which no sane man ever ventured upon, supplies an
   argument against the partial denial: "Measure Jesus by the shadow he
   has cast into the world; no, by the light he has shed upon it. Shall we
   be told such a man never lived? the whole story is a lie? Suppose that
   Plato and Newton never lived. But who did their works, and thought
   their thought? It takes a Newton to forge a Newton. What man could have
   fabricated a Jesus? None but a Jesus." Even Renan himself, unmindful of
   his theory, says, "Life of Jesus," ch. xxviii. p. 367: "Far from having
   been created by his disciples, Jesus appears in all things superior to
   his disciples. They, St. Paul and St. John excepted, were men without
   talent or genius. . . . Upon the whole, the character of Jesus, far
   from having been embellished by his biographers, has been belittled by
   them." What a pity that the world had to wait eighteen hundred years
   for a restoration of thd true picture of Jesus from the imperfect and
   distorted fragments of his ignorant disciples!

   NOTE 85, page 174. Goethe, in his "Conversations with Eckermann" (vol.
   iii. 371), fully acknowledges the genuineness, credibility, and
   incomparable majesty of the Gospels, and says: "Ich halte die
   Evangelien für durchaus ächt; denn est is in ihnen der Abglanz einer
   Hoheit wirksam, die von der Person Christi ausging und die so
   göttlicher Art, wie nur je auf Erden das Göttliche erschienen ist."
   Guizot, in his "Méditations," première série, p. 252, makes the
   following striking and truthful remarks on the Gospels: "The mighty
   power of these books and their accounts has been tested and proved.
   They have overcome paganism; they have conquered Greece, Rome, and
   barbarous Europe; they are on the way of conquering the world. And the
   sincerity of the authors is no less certain than the power of the
   books. We may contest the learning and critical sagacity of the first
   historians of Jesus Christ; but it is impossible to contest their good
   faith; it shines from their words: they believed what they said; they
   sealed their assertions with their blood."

   NOTE 86, page 175. This has been done with good effect, with reference
   to Hume, by Archbishop Whately, in his "Historic Doubts relative to
   Napoleon Bonaparte," Oxford, 1821; and against Strauss (which means
   Ostrich) by Dr. Wurm (under the name of Casuar, i.e. Cassowary, a
   cousin to the ostrich, not Caspar, as Prof. Fisher, in the
   "New-Englander," 1864, p. 242, has it), in his "Life of Luther," 1839,
   but dated Mexico, 1936 (not 2836), a hundred years after Strauss's
   "Life of Jesus," when criticism shall have reached its climax in the
   New World. A very clever parody, which strictly follows the method of
   Strauss, and applies it to the documents relating to the life of
   Luther, which are often contradictory; for instance, as to his
   birthplace, Möhra, or Eisleben, or Mansfeld (compare Bethlehem and
   Nazareth), and the date and manner of his conversion at Erfurt, whether
   it was brought about by a duel, or by a thunder-storm and lightning,
   &c. Professor Norton, in his "Internal Evidences of the Gospels," as we
   learn from Prof. Fisher, has likewise employed this weapon against
   Strauss, and by his own process conclusively proven that Julius Cæsar
   was never assassinated.

   NOTE 87, page 177. Joseph Ernest Renan was born Feb. 27, 1823, at
   Treguier in Brittany, of humble (some say of Jewish) parents, and
   educated for the Romish priesthood in the Theological Seminary of St.
   Sulpice, at Paris. But, before taking orders, he was compelled to leave
   this institution on account of some religious difficulties which his
   superiors were unable or unwilling to solve. He then devoted himself to
   the comparative study of the Semitic languages, for which he endeavored
   to do what Prof. Bopp of Berlin had so successfully accomplished for
   the Indo-Germanic or Aryan family of languages. In 1847, he gained the
   Volney Prize for an essay, since expanded into a history of the Semitic
   languages, and acquired the reputation of one of the first living
   Orientalists of Europe. In 1856, he was elected (in place of Augustin
   Thierry) a member of the Institute of France. In 1860, he was intrusted
   by Napoleon III. with a mission for archaeological explorations on the
   supposed sites of the Phoenician cities, and published the results of
   his investigations in an ample collection of epigraphic monuments from
   the time of the Assyrian domination to that of the Seleucides. On his
   return, he was appointed to the professorship of Hebrew in the College
   of France, but lost his position in consequence of his inaugural
   address, in which he boldly attacked, in the name of free science, the
   traditional orthodoxy of the clerical party, and the venerable dogma of
   the divinity of Christ.

   Renan's "Vie de Jésus" was prepared, as to its outline, during his
   journey in the East, at the side of his since departed sister, in fresh
   view of the holy places, and published at Paris in 1863, as the first
   part of a work (to be finished in four volumes) on the "Origins of
   Christianity." It marks an epoch in the religious literature of France,
   and found an unparalleled circulation on the continent of Europe, and
   even i! England and America. I have before me the seventh edition,
   Paris, 1864. An English translation, by Ch. E. Wilbour, appeared in New
   York, 1864. The book of Renan has all the charm of a religious novel,
   and may have benefited many Frenchmen, who never knew that Jesus was
   such an interesting character, by inducing them to study the New
   Testament. So good will no doubt come out of evil also in this case.
   But, as a critical or scientific work, it has no value whatever. In the
   introduction, he refers, among six works, mainly to the "Life of Jesus"
   by Strauss, as translated by Littré, for information in critical
   details; and contents himself with stating his views with oracular
   self-assurance, and a show of indiscriminate references to the New.
   Testament and the Talmud, several of which prove the very reverse of
   the assertions in the text. Of the many refutations of Strauss he says
   not a word. He published also a smaller edition of his "Life of Jesus,"
   presenting him, as he; says, in "pure white marble" (in sugar-candy
   rather), without spot or wrinkle, for the edification of the French
   people. Among the many replies to Renan, I mention those of E. de
   Pressensé of France, Van Oosterzee of Holland, Beyschlag of Germany,
   and H. B. Smith of the United States.

   NOTE 88, page 177. See Renan's essay on the "Critical Historians of
   Jesus," in his "Studies of Religious History and Criticism," translated
   by O. B. Frothinghan, New York, 1864, p. 189.

   NOTE 89, page 178. In the essay just quoted, p. 197, Renan says: "The
   legend of the Buddha Cakya-Mouni is the one which, in its mode of
   formation, most resembles that of Christ; as Buddhism is the religion
   which, in the law of its development, most resembles Christianity." The
   mere fact of the comparative obscurity of this fellow, Cakya-Mouni, in
   the civilized world, makes the repeated comparison of Jesus with him by
   this French novelist simply ridiculous, if not blasphemous.

   NOTE 90, page 178. "Vie de Jésus" (ch. xv. p. 172): "La légende était
   ainsi le fruit d'une grande conspiration toute spontanée et s'élaborait
   autour de lui de son vivant. Aucun grand événement de l'histoire ne
   s'est passé sans donner lieu à un cycle de fables, et Jésus n'eût pu,
   quand il l'eût voulu, couper court à ces créations populaires."

   NOTE 91, page 179. "Studies of Religious History and Criticism," &c.,
   p. 192.

   NOTE 92, page 181. All competent judges seem to agree in a very low
   estimate of the scientific and critical value of Renan's book. Dr. H.
   B. Smith of New York, in his excellent review of Renan's "Life of
   Jesus," in the "American Presbyterian and Theological Review" for
   January, 1864, p. 145, justly remarks: "In point of learning,
   intellect, and consistency, the Teutonic work of Strauss is
   immeasurably superior to the light and airy French romance." Prof.
   Fisher expresses the same opinion in the article already quoted, "New
   Englander" for 1854, p. 264: "There is nothing formidable in Renan's
   attack upon Christianity. It is too unscientific in its whole method to
   make a lasting impression. In comparison with the work of Strauss, it
   is of little account; and we doubt not that the ultimate effect of the
   commotion it has excited, and of the examination it must undergo, will
   be to exhibit more impressively than ever the difficulty of
   overthrowing the proofs of revelation." The Rev. Marcus Dods, in the
   preface to the Edinburgh translation of Lange's "Life of Christ," vol.
   i. p. xiv., calls Renan's book "the most deplorable literary mistake of
   this century," and remarks that it reveals a lamentable ignorance on
   the part of the French public, that a book, which in Germany would have
   been out of date twenty years ago, should now create so much excited
   interest. The Rev. Samuel J. Andrews, in the preface to a new edition
   of his unpretending, but judicious, careful, and reliable "Life of our
   Lord upon Earth," New York, 1864, p. vi., denies to Renan's book all
   critical value, and adds: "I do not recall any particular in which it
   adds any thing to our knowledge of the gospel history, even in its
   external features: much less does it render us any aid in the
   understanding of its higher meaning."

   NOTE 93, page 182. "Jesus was a thaumaturgist only at a late period,
   and against his will." "He was a miracle-worker and an exorcist only in
   spite of himself. Miracles are ordinarily the work of the public even
   more than of him to whom they are attributed. . . . The miracles of
   Jesus were a violence done him by his time, a concession which the
   necessity of the hour wrung from him. So the exorcist and the
   miracle-worker have fallen; but the religious reformer, shall live for
   ever" (Renan, ch. xvi.). "Desperate, pushed to extremities, he no
   longer retained possession of himself. His mission imposed itself upon
   him, and he obeyed the torrent. As always happens in great and divine
   careers, he suffered the miracles which public opinion demanded of him,
   rather than performed them. Thoroughly persuaded that Jesus was a
   worker of miracles, Lazarus and his two sisters may have aided in the
   performance of one [the apparent resurrection of Lazarus], as so many
   pious men, convinced of the truth of their religion, have sought to
   triumph over human obstinacy by means of the weakness of which they
   were well aware. The state of their conscience was that of the
   Stigmatists, the Convulsionists, the Observed Nuns, led on by the
   influence of the world in which they live, and by their own belief in
   the pretended acts. As to Jesus, he had no more power than St. Bernard
   or St. Francis d'Assisi to moderate the avidity of the multitude and of
   his own disciples for the marvellous. Death, moreover, was in a few
   days to restore to him his divine liberty, and to snatch him from the
   fatal necessities of a character which became each day more exacting,
   more difficult to sustain" (chap. xxii.). So Jesus lent himself an
   instrument to a pious fraud. Of course, it would not be in keeping with
   French politeness or ordinary prudence to say, in plump terms, that
   Christ was an impostor; but the insinuation is clear enough for any
   reflecting reader.

   NOTE 94, page 183. At the close of chap. xxvi. (page 308 of the French
   original): "Son corps avait-il été enlevé, ou bien l'enthusiasme,
   toujours crédule fit-il éclore après coup l'ensemble de récits par
   lesquels on chercha à établir la foi à la resurrection? C'est ce que,
   faute de documents contradictories--[which the American translation,
   page 357, has softened into, for want of peremptory evidence']--nous
   ignorerons à jamais. Disons cependant que la forte imagination de Marie
   de Magdala joua dans cette circonstance un rôle capital. Pouvoir divin
   de l'amour! moments sacrés où la passion d'une hallucinée donne au
   monde un Dieu resuscité!"

   NOTE 95, page 184. The reader will hardly believe it, until he reads
   the passage in "Vie de Jésus," chap. xxiii., which we reluctantly copy:
   "Did he [Christ in Gethsemane] recall the clear fountains of Galilee
   where he might have refreshed himself; the vineyard and fig-tree under
   which he might have been seated; les jeunes filles qui auraient
   peut-être consenti à l'aimer? Maudit-il son âpre destinée, qui lui
   avait interdit les joies concédées à tous les autres? Regrettat-il sa
   trop haute nature, et, victime de sa grandeur, pleura-t-il de n'être
   pas resté un simple artisan de Nazareth?" Renan most arbitrarily places
   the scene in Gethsemane several days before the night of the passion,
   contrary to the unanimous testimony of the Synoptical Gospels as well
   as the inherent probability of the case. But the opinions of this
   frivolous critic on such subjects are worth nothing at all. The maidens
   of Galilee and Judea figure prominently in this novel of Jesus, and
   make it the more palatable to French taste. In chap. v. (page 52 of the
   original, page 102 of the English translation) occurs the following
   passage: "All his power to love was transferred to what he considered
   his celestial vocation. The extremely delicate feeling (le sentiment
   extrêmement délicat) which we notice in him towards women never
   departed from the exclusive devotion which he had to his idea. He
   treated as sisters, like Francis d'Assisi and Francis de Sales, those
   women who were enamored with the same work as he: he had his St.
   Claires, his Françoises de Chantal. Only it is probable that they loved
   him more than the work. He was undoubtedly more loved than loving. As
   often happens in very lofty natures, tenderness of heart was in him
   transformed into an infinite sweetness, a vague poetry, a universal
   charm. His relations, intimate and free, but of an entirely moral
   order, with women of equivocal conduct (avec des femmes d'une conduite
   équivoque), are explained also by the passion which attached him to the
   glory of his Father, and inspired in him a kind of jealousy of all
   beautiful creatures (une sorte de jalousie pour toutes les belles
   créatures) who might contribute to it." In proof of this reckless and
   frivolous talk, Renan quotes Luke vii. 37; John iv. 7; viii. 3. Guizot,
   no doubt with reference to Renan, devotes a special chapter of his
   Méditations to Jésus-Christ et les femmes (p. 309 if.), and justly
   maintains that nowhere is there less of man, and more of the God, than
   in Christ's relations with the women who approach him, and in the
   absolute purity which characterizes his sayings on adultery and on the
   sanctity of the marriage relation. Comp. Matt. v. 27, 28; xix. 4-9,
   etc.

   NOTE 96, page 186. Dr. H. B. Smith, in the article alluded to, pages
   157 and 169, thus severely but justly condemns the book of Renan: "In
   passing judgment on such a representation, there is no need of
   circumlocution or euphonisms. It is utterly disgraceful and
   disingenuous. It assails the very honesty and credibility of Jesus. It
   makes success the standard. It is the essence of Jesuitism. The apology
   is as superficial as it is ignominious. The worst ethics of the French
   stage cannot surpass it. Nobody but a Frenchman could, after this,
   still idolize his hero as the perfection of humanity. And, in the midst
   of such profligate representations, to interject phrases about our
   profound seriousness,' rigid conscience,' and absolute sincerity,' in
   contrast with the delusions and falsity attributed to Jesus, is to
   carry to its hight a base invention, from which every right-minded man
   will instinctively recoil, and which every true believer in Christ will
   stamp as blasphemy. Better for Jesus,--as a mere man,--a thousand-fold
   better, to have died unknown, than to have lent himself to impostures
   which he must have known to be false, to a conspiracy founded on a lie
   or a hallucination. But this is not all, nor the worst. The part of the
   Messiah made it necessary that Jesus should also give himself forth as
   an exorcist and a thaumaturge.' Charlatanry must complete the work
   begun in hallucination. . . . The Jesus depicted by Renan is a figment
   of naturalism, a conception that can neither be imaged forth nor
   realized. It has the outward forms and framework of human life; but
   within there is not even an immortal personal consciousness. We have,
   in the last analysis, only the shadow of death. And here is the essence
   of naturalism. The Jesus of the Gospels, of the Epistles, and of the
   Church, is human and divine, is king and priest in an eternal kingdom,
   is the essence of supernaturalismn; and naturalism must expel Christ
   from the heart and the church, from the conscience and the life, before
   it can expel supernaturalism from human history."

   NOTE 97, page 187. The dying exclamation of Julian the
   Apostate--"Galilæan, thou hast conquered!"--rests on too late
   authorities to claim credibility, especially in view of the full
   account of the impartial Ammianus Marcellinus on the last hours of the
   emperor. But it contains the philosophy of his reign, and the Italian
   proverb may be applied to it: Se non e vero, e ben trovato.

   NOTE 98, page 190. See his large "Leben Jesu," Schlussabhandlung, vol.
   ii. page 663 (4th ed., 1840). Compare a similar conclusion in his
   popular "Leben Jesu," page 627.

   NOTE 99, page 191. "In an individual," says Strauss, "Leben Jesu," vol.
   ii. page 710, "in one God-man, the properties and functions which the
   church doctrine ascribes to Christ contradict themselves; in the idea
   of the race, they agree. Humanity is the union of the two natures,--the
   incarnate God, the Infinite externalizing itself in the finite, and the
   finite spirit remembering its infinitude. It is the child of the
   visible mother and the invisible father, Nature and Spirit; it is the
   worker of miracles, in so far as in the course of human history the
   spirit more and more completely subjugates nature both within and
   around man, until it lies before him as an inert matter of his
   activity; it is the sinless existence, for the course of its
   development is a blameless one: pollution cleaves to the individual
   only, and does not touch the race or its history. It is humanity that
   dies, rises, and ascends to heaven: for from the negation of its
   natural life there ever proceeds a higher spiritual life;' from the
   suppression of its limitation as a personal, rational, and terrestrial
   spirit, arises its union with the infinite Spirit of the heavens. By
   faith in this Christ, especially in his death and resurrection, man is
   justified before God; that is, by the kindling within him of the idea
   of humanity, especially by the negation of its natural and sensual
   aspects, the individual man partakes of the divinely human life of the
   species." The popular "Life of Jesus," by the same author, concludes in
   a similar manner, page 627. But the idea of the union of the human and
   divine is no more contradictory in an individual than in the race. What
   is true in idea or principle must also actualize itself, or be capable
   of actualization, in a concrete living fact. History teaches, moreover,
   that every age, every great movement, and every nation, have their
   representative heads, who comprehend and act out the life of the
   respective whole. Compare the remarks on page 77 ff. This analogy
   points us to a general representative head of the entire race,--Adam in
   the natural, and Christ in the spiritual order. The divine humanity of
   Strauss is like a stream without a fountain, or like a body without a
   head.
     __________________________________________________________________

POSTSCRIPT.

   In his latest book,--The Christ of Faith and the Jesus of History,
   Berlin, 1865,--which may be regarded as an Appendix to his second Life
   of Jesus, Strauss repeats, without proof, the same objection to the
   universal faith of the Christian Church: viz., that Jesus can not have
   been both a true man and a perfect superhuman being; in other words,
   that personality necessarily implies limitation and defect. This work
   presents no new features, but ably exposes the. fallacies of
   compromises between truth and error, and so far unwillingly serves the
   cause of truth. It is a clear and acute analysis of the posthumous
   Lectures of Schleiermacher on the Life of Jesus, with a sarcastic
   appendix against Schenkel's Charakter-Bild Jesu. Schleiermacher was a
   supernaturalist in Christology and a rationalist in exegesis, combining
   personal faith in Christ as his Saviour with the boldest criticism of
   the gospel history. Strauss vainly imagines that the failure of this
   last attempt to reconcile the old faith with modern philosophy and
   criticism must be disastrous to Christianity; as if this depended on
   Schleiermacher or any other man, or number of men! The whole issue
   raised by Strauss in the title of his book is false. The Christ of
   faith is the Jesus of history, and has stood the test of centuries; but
   the Jesus of rationalism and pantheism is a modern fiction, which will
   soon take its place among the exploded errors and follies of the human
   mind.
     __________________________________________________________________

COLLECTION

    OF

                          TESTIMONIES OF UNBELIEVERS.
     __________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.

   We present here, by way of an Appendix to our argument for the Divinity
   of Christ, a collection of the more remarkable testimonies of
   unbelievers to the character of Christ, arranged in chronological
   order, and accompanied with explanatory notes.

   Dr. Nathaniel Lardner (born in 1684, died in 1768), although a
   Socinian, or Unitarian, in his views on Christ's person, did excellent
   service to the cause of revealed religion against the Deism of his day
   by his truly learned and valuable work on the "Credibility of the
   Gospel History" (in seventeen books, published from 1727 to 1757), in
   which he collected with untiring industry, and examined with critical
   judgment, the heathen, Jewish, and Christian testimonies of antiquity
   in favor of the historical truthfulness of the apostolic writings. A
   similar service might be done to the true doctrine of the person of
   Christ, by bringing together, in proper order, the testimonies to his
   Divinity, as embodied in the creeds, the worship, and the institutions
   of all ages and denominations of Christendom, and exhibited from day to
   day in the practical fruits of faith in Christ among all classes and
   conditions of men.

   Our present task is limited to the testimonies of opponents of the old
   faith of the Church in her divine-human Head and Saviour. The
   concession of an enemy sometimes carries more weight in an argument
   than the assertion of a friend. Honey may be extracted even from a dead
   lion. "Out of the eater came forth meat, and out of the strong came
   forth sweetness" (Judges xiv. 14).

   The testimonies we are going to produce are important and interesting
   in various ways. They prove, especially those of more recent times,
   that there is in the inmost heart of man an instinctive and growing
   reverence and admiration for the spotless purity and perfection of
   Christ as the holy of holies in the history of the race. Infidels may
   deny his miracles; but they cannot deny his power, or assail his
   character, without doing violence to the noblest feelings and
   aspirations of their own nature, and forfeiting all claim to the moral
   respect of their fellow-men. It seems to be felt more and more, that he
   is, without controversy, the very best being that ever walked on this
   earth, and that an attack on his character is an insult to the honor
   and dignity of humanity itself. And this feeling and conviction becomes
   stronger and deeper as history advances. The impression of Christ upon
   the world, far from losing ground, is gaining new strength with every
   stage of civilization, and controls even the best thinking of his
   enemies.

   These testimonies; on the other hand, expose also the glaring
   inconsistency of unbelief, in admitting the absolute purity and
   truthfulness of Christ, and yet refusing his own testimony concerning
   himself; in praising his perfection as a man, and yet denying his
   Divinity on which it rests, and which alone Call satisfactorily explain
   it in a universally imperfect world.

   This inconsistency, which has been repeatedly noticed in the preceding
   Essay, is clearly brought out, with special reference to Renan, by the
   distinguished statesman and historian, M. Guizot, who consecrates the
   closing years of his retreat to the defence of revealed religion. I beg
   leave to conclude these introductory remarks with an appropriate
   quotation from his recent "Meditations on the Essence of the Christian
   Religion:" [2] --

   "Those who do not; believe in Jesus, nor admit the supernatural
   character of his person, of his life, and of his work, are free of this
   difficulty [of giving adequate expression in human language to the
   intimate and continual intermixture of the divine and human in Christ].
   Having beforehand suppressed the divinity and the miracles, they see in
   the history of Jesus Christ nothing more than an ordinary history,
   which they narrate and explain like any other biography of man. But
   they fall into a far different difficulty, and wreck themselves on a
   far different rock. The supernatural being and power of Jesus Christ
   may be disputed; but the perfection, the sublimity of his actions and
   of his precepts, of his life and of his moral law, are incontestable:
   and, in effect, not only are they not contested, but they are admired
   and celebrated enthusiastically and complacently. It would seem as if
   it were desired to restore to Jesus Christ as a mere man the
   superiority of which they deprive him in refusing to see in him the
   Godhead. But then, what incoherence, what contradictions, what
   falsehood, what moral impossibility, in his history, such as they make
   it! What a series of suppositions, irreconcilable with the facts which
   they admit! This man they make so perfect and sublime becomes by turns
   a dreamer or a charlatan; at once dupe and deceiver,--dupe of his own
   mystical enthusiasm in believing in his own miracles, willful deceiver
   in tampering with evidence in order to accredit himself. The history of
   Jesus Christ is thus but a tissue of fables and falsehood; and,
   nevertheless, the hero of this history remains perfect, sublime,
   incomparable,--the greatest genius, the noblest heart, that the world
   ever saw; the type of virtue and moral beauty; the supreme and rightful
   chief of mankind. And his disciples in their turn, justly admirable,
   have braved every thing, suffered every thing, in order to abide
   faithful to him, and to accomplish his work; and, in effect, the work
   has been accomplished,--the Pagan world has become Christian, and the
   whole world has nothing better to do than to follow the example.

   "What a contradictory and insolvable problem they present to us instead
   of the one they labor so hard to suppress! " History reposes upon two
   foundations,--the positive evidence or documents concerning the facts
   and persons, and presumptive evidence or moral probabilities resulting
   from the connection of facts and the action of persons. These two
   foundations are entirely wanting in the history of Jesus Christ, such
   as it is related, or rather constructed, in these days. It is, on the
   one hand, in evident and shocking contradiction with the testimony of
   the men who saw Jesus Christ, or of the men who lived near those who
   had seen him: on the other hand, it equally conflicts with the natural
   laws presiding over the actions of men and the course of events. This
   does not deserve the name of historical criticism: it is a
   philosophical system and a romantic narrative substituted for the
   substantial proof of the moral evidence; it is a Jesus false, and
   impossible, made by the hand of man, pretending to dethrone the real
   living Jesus Christ, the Son of God. [3]

   "The choice lies between the system and the mystery; between the
   romance of man and the design of God."

COLLECTION

    OF

                          TESTIMONIES OF UNBELIEVERS.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [2] "Méditations sur l'Essence de la Religion chrétienne" (Paris and
   Leipzig, 1864, pp. 324-327). The English translation, which has just
   appeared in New York, 1865 (comp. p. 335 ff.), omits the Scripture
   quotations of Guizot from the Latin Vulgate (which are intended for
   Roman-Catholic readers), but contains, instead, a valuable note from
   the distinguished biblical scholar, Prof. Tayler Lewis of Union
   College, N. Y. (a layman, like Guizot), in answer to the superficial
   strictures of M. Munk, and G. Guizot, jun., on the grammatical purity
   of the biblical Hebrew and Greek.

   [3] "C'est un Jesus-Christ faux et impossible, fait de main d'homme,
   qui prétend à détrôner le Jesus-Christ réel et vivant, fils de Dieu."
   This applies especially to the legendary Jesus of Renan, even more than
   to the mythical Jesus of Strauss.
     __________________________________________________________________

PONTIUS PILATE AND HIS WIFE.

  MATT. XXVII. 19, 24.

   WHEN he [Pilate] was set down on the judgment-seat, his wife sent unto
   him, saying: Have thou nothing to do with that just man; for I have
   suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.

   "When Pilate saw that he could prevail [avail] nothing, but that rather
   a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the
   multitude, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just person; see
   ye to it."

   Note.--It is a remarkable fact, that a heathen woman had the courage to
   plead the cause of our Saviour when his own disciples forsook him, and
   when the Jewish people and authorities thirsted for his innocent blood.
   It is equally remarkable, that she and her weak husband, clothed with
   the authority of the Roman law and justice, should characterize the
   condemned Jesus as that just man (dikaios ekeinos). The student of the
   unconscious prophecies of heathenism will naturally connect this
   expression with the famous passage in Plato's "Republic," where the
   great sage of Greece describes the ideal of a just man (dikaios), as
   one who, "without doing any wrong, may assume the appearance of the
   grossest injustice (meden gar adikon doxan echeto tes megistes
   adikias);" yea, who "shall be scourged, tortured, fettered, deprived of
   his eyes, and, after having endured all possible sufferings, fastened
   to a post, and must restore again the beginning and prototype of
   righteousness " (Plato's Works, vol. iv., p. 74, sqq. ed. Ast., p. 360,
   E. ed. Bip.). Aristotle also says of the perfectly just man, "that he
   stands far above the political order and constitution as it exists;
   that he must break it wherever he appears." The prophecies of Greek
   wisdom, and the majesty of the Roman law, here unite in a Roman lady,
   the wife of the imperial representative in Jerusalem, to testify to the
   innocence and righteousness of Christ in the darkest hour of his trial
   before wicked men. She was probably a proselyte of the gate, or one of
   those God-fearing heathen, who, without embracing the Jewish religion,
   were longing and groping in the dark after "the unknown God." As to
   Pilate, he washed his hands, but not his heart; and in delivering up
   Christ, whom he pronounced innocent and just, he condemned himself.
   (From the author's additions to Dr. Lange's "Commentary on Matthew,"
   Am. ed. p. 511, f.)
     __________________________________________________________________

THE CENTURION AT THE CROSS.

  MATT. XXVII. 54. Comp. MARK XV. 39.

   "Now, when the centurion, and they that were with him watching Jesus,
   saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared
   greatly, saying: Truly this was the [a] Son of God."

  LUKE XXIII. 47.

   "Now, when the centurion saw what was done, he glorified God, saying:
   Certainly this was a righteous man."

   Note.--The centurion here spoken of is the one who, according to Roman
   custom, presided over the execution (hence called by Seneca centurio
   supplicio præpositus; or by Tacitus, exactor mortis). This centurion,
   the captain in Capernaum (Matt. viii.), and the captain Cornelius at
   Cæsarea (Acts x.), form a triumvirate of believing Gentile soldiers in
   the New Testament. The confession, "Truly this (or this man, as Mark
   has it) was a Son of God" (theou huios), may be taken (with Meyer) in a
   polytheistic sense, or equivalent to demigod; an interpretation which
   is supported by the absence of the definite article before huios, and
   by the parallel passage of Luke, who substitutes dikaios for the theou
   huios of Matthew and Mark. But Lange and Alford maintain that the
   centurion used the expression in a Jewish or Christian sense,
   acknowledging Jesus as the Messiah. It is by no means improbable that
   he was previously acquainted with the Jewish expectations and the
   claims of Christ. Compare the remarks in Lange's "Matthew," Am. ed., p.
   518.
     __________________________________________________________________

JUDAS, THE TRAITOR.

  MATT. XXVII. 3, 4.

   "Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned,
   repented himself, and brought again [brought back] the thirty pieces of
   silver to the chief priests and elders, saying: I have sinned, in that
   I have betrayed the innocent blood."

   Note.--The confession of the despairing traitor--Hemarton paradous
   haima athoon--may be more concisely and pointedly translated, "I sinned
   in betraying innocent blood." In connection with the testimony of
   Pilate, and that of the Sanhedrin, which could prefer no other charge
   against Jesus than that he had called himself the Messiah, this
   confession amounts to a complete vindication of the innocence of Jesus.
   If Judas, from three years' familiar intercourse, had known any thing
   in the least degree affecting the moral purity of his Master, he would
   have eagerly availed himself of it for his self-justification, and
   peace of conscience. Compare the comments in Lange's "Matthew," Am.
   ed., p. 501 ff.
     __________________________________________________________________

FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS.

  FROM THE "ANTIQUITIES OF THE JEWS," BOOK XVIII. CH. III. SECT. III.

   "About this time lived Jesus, a wise man, if it be proper to call him a
   man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, [4] --a teacher of such men
   as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of
   the Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. [5] And when
   Pilate, at the instigation of the principal men among us, had condemned
   him to the cross, those who had loved him at first did not forsake him.
   For he appeared to them alive again on the third day; [6] the divine
   prophets having foretold these and many other wonderful things
   concerning him. And the sect of Christians, so named after him, are not
   extinct to this day."

   Note.--This remarkable testimony of the celebrated Jewish priest and
   historian, who flourished in the latter part of the first century, is
   found in all the known copies of his works, both printed and
   manuscript; is twice quoted at large by Eusebius, without suspicion of
   an interpolation; and is therefore received as genuine by many learned
   divines. It may also be urged in favor of the passage, that Josephus,
   in a complete history of the Jews, reaching down to A.D. 66, and
   written about A.D. 93, could not easily pass by Christ, especially as
   he made honorable mention of John the Baptist and James the Just in
   other parts of the same work. In speaking of the martyr-death of James
   (Arch., book xx. chap. 9, sect. 1), he refers to our passage; and there
   are no good reasons to reject the passage on James, together with that
   on Christ.

   But the majority of recent critics since Lardner reject the testimony
   in its present form, either in whole or at least in part, as an early
   interpolation by some Christian hand, for the following reasons:--

   1. This paragraph is not noticed by any Christian writer before
   Eusebius, who died A.D. 340. Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria,
   Origen, Tertullian, and other ante-Nicene fathers, might and probably
   would have made good use of it in their apologetic and polemic works
   against Jews and Gentiles, if they had known it.

   2. The paragraph is not necessary for the connection, but rather
   interrupts the course of the preceding narrative about a sedition and
   consequent calamity of the Jews, which occurred under Pilate; and the
   following narrative about "another sad calamity,"--namely, the
   banishment of the Jews from Rome by order of Tiberius. Josephus might,
   however, have reckoned the crucifixion of Jesus among the calamities of
   the Jews.

   3. The disputed passage is inconsistent with the whole character and
   position of Josephus. He could not have thus written of Christ, without
   being, at least in theory or in conviction, a Christian, and belying
   his profession as a Jewish priest and Pharisee. But Josephus, it is
   urged against this argument, may have been inconsistent in this as he
   was in other things. Though learned and eminent, he was contemptibly
   weak in character; and showed in all his positions, as a Jewish priest
   and magistrate, and as a Roman general and courtier, a worldly mind,
   and an easy disposition to accommodate himself to different stations
   and employments, even at the sacrifice of principle.

   In view, then, of the great improbability of an absolute silence of
   Josephus on the history of Christ, and the still greater improbability
   of such a Christian testimony from his pen, the hypothesis becomes
   quite plausible, that Josephus, like the Pharisees and scribes in the
   Gospels and the compilers of the Jewish Talmud, represented Jesus as a
   pseudo-prophet and magician, who performed miracles by Beelzebub, but
   that a Christian changed the offensive passage at an early time, before
   Eusebius, into its present shape and form. This is substantially the
   view recently brought out by the great Oriental scholar, Ewald.

   Renan, in his "Life of Jesus," goes farther, and considers the passage
   authentic, with the exception of a few changes, as Christos outos en
   (he was the Christ), for the supposed original non-cocnmittal sentence,
   Christos outos elegeto (he was called the Christ). "Je crois," he says
   (Vie de Jésus, Introduction, p. xii.), "le passage sur Jésus
   authentique. II est parfaitement dans le goût de Josèphe, et si cet
   historien a fait mention de Jésus, c'est bien comme cela qu'il a dû
   enparler. On sent seulement qu'une main chrétienne a retouché le
   morceau, y a ajouté quelques mots sans lesquels il eût été presque
   blasphématoire, a peut-être retranché ou modifié quelques expressions."

   The literature on this much-disputed passage, see in Haverkamp's
   edition of "Josephus," vol. ii. Appendix; in Hase's "Life of Jesus,"
   sect. 10, p. 12 (fourth ed.); in Winer's "Bibl. Realwörterbuch," vol.
   i. p. 558 (third ed.). Comp. also Ewald, "Geschichte Christus," pp.
   104-107; and Paret, art. "Josephus," in Herzog's Theol. Encyclop., vol.
   vii. p. 27 ff.

   In many respects, the writings of Josephus contain, indirectly, much
   valuable testimony to the truth of the gospel history. His history of
   the Jewish war is undesignedly a striking commentary on the predictions
   of our Saviour concerning the destruction of the city and the temple of
   Jerusalem; the great distress and affliction of the Jewish people at
   that time; the famine, pestilence, and earthquake; the rise of false
   prophets and impostors, and the flight of his disciples at the approach
   of these calamities. All these coincidences have been traced out in
   full by the learned Dr. Lardner, in his "Collection of Ancient Jewish
   and Heathen Testimonies to the Truth of the Christian Religion" (see
   vol. vi. p. 406 ff. of his works, ed. by Kippis, Lond. 1838).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [4] paradoxon ergon p9oietes.

   [5] ho Christos outos en.

   [6] ephane gar autois triten echon hemeran zon.
     __________________________________________________________________

THE TALMUD.

   The Talmud (tlmvd, i.e. Doctrine, Book of Doctrines, Corpus Doctrinæ),
   that immense depository of Jewish theology and jurisprudence, of
   Rabbinical wisdom and folly, embracing twelve large folio volumes, for
   good reasons, no doubt, has very little to say about Christ and his
   religion, which is the fulfillment of the law and the prophets, and
   without which the Old Testament is a sealed book.

   The first part, called the Mishna (i.e. Repetition, viz. of the law),
   which comprehends the oral traditions and Rabbinical expositions of the
   law from about 400 before to about 200 after Christ's birth, says not a
   word about Christianity, although it includes the sayings of many
   Rabbins of the first century, and was composed, according to Dr. Jost,
   about the year 230, in the city of Tiberias, on the Lake of Galilee,
   where Jesus lived and taught.

   The second part of the Talmud, called the Gemara (i.e. Conclusion, viz.
   of Rabbinical wisdom), or the Talmud proper, is a vast collection of
   the Rabbinical expositions of the Mishna, which again became a subject
   of investigation and interpretation. There are two Gemaras,--that of
   Jerusalem, compiled in Palestine about A.D. 390; and that of Babylon,
   compiled about A.D. 500, under the supervision of the Patriarch of
   Babylon. Both these Gemaras--the Palestinian and the Babylonian--allude
   to Jesus and the apostles, but very briefly, in a few passages, in a
   bitter and malignant spirit, yet admitting the miracles of Jesus,
   although they derive them from evil spirits, like the Pharisees in the
   Gospels. [7] According to the Gemara, Jesus was the illegitimate son of
   Mary (a hairdresser) and a man variously called Pandira, [8] Stada, and
   Papus (a soldier); learned the magical arts in Egypt, practiced them in
   Palestine; and for this reason, as well as for seducing and instigating
   the Israelites, he was crucified on the day preceding the Passover. We
   have here evidently a malignant perversion and indirect admission of
   the facts of the supernatural conception, the flight to Egypt, the
   miracles, and the crucifixion of our Saviour.

   At a later period, the Jewish hatred of Christianity produced an
   infamous book, entitled "Toldoth Jeschu," i.e. the "Birth or History of
   Jesus," where the Talmudic tradition, especially the wretched slander
   about the birth of our Saviour, and the most absurd fables, are related
   with malignant hatred. Even according to this miserable production,
   Christ performed miracles; not, however, by an art acquired in Egypt,
   as the Talmud and Celsus assert, but by pronouncing the holy name of
   Jehovah, which was a secret known only to the founder of Christianity.
   [9] In a very different sense, Christ has indeed made known the name of
   the only true and living God.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [7] The passages of the Talmud relating to Christ are collected in
   Larduer's work already quoted; and in Scheidii "Loca talmudica, in
   quibus Jesu et discipulorum ejus fit mentio;" also in Meelfuhrer,
   "Jesus in Tulmude." Altdorf, 1699, 2 vols.

   [8] This Pandira, who figures also in the book of Celsus, and in
   Toldoth Jeschu (where he is called Joseph Pandira), is no doubt a name
   of hatred and contempt invented by the Jews, and means either scourge;
   or, like the Greek panther, and the Latin lupa, it is synonymous with
   ravenous lust, and hence used as a symbolical name for moicheia.

   [9] There are two very different versions of this book: the one
   published by Wagenseil, under the title, "Tela ignea Satanæ; hoc est
   arcani et horribiles Judæorum adversus Christurn Deum et christianam
   religionem anecdoti," Altdorf, 1681; the other, edited by Huldreich,
   Leyden, 1705.
     __________________________________________________________________

THE HEATHEN WRITERS AGAINST CHRISTIANITY.

   The Greek and Roman writers of the first five centuries take, upon the
   whole, very little notice of Christ and Christianity, and were mostly
   quite ignorant of their character and history. Tacitus, Suetonius, the
   younger Pliny, Epictetus, Lucian, Aristides, Galenus, Lampridius, Dio
   Cassius, Himerius, Libanius, Ammianus Marcellinus, Eunapius, and
   Zosimus, mention them incidentally, and generally with contempt or
   hatred. The only heathen authors who wrote special works against the
   Christian religion are Lucian (who assailed it at least indirectly),
   Celsus, Porphyry, Hierocles, and Julian the Apostate.

   But even the incidental allusions of the former and the assaults of the
   latter contain much that tends to confirm the credibility of the gospel
   history and the miracles of Christ. Let us briefly sum up the chief
   inferences. [10]
     __________________________________________________________________

   [10] For a fuller discussion of the heathen attacks on Christianity,
   the reader is referred to the author's "History of the Christian Church
   of the First Three Centuries," New York, p. 185 ff.
     __________________________________________________________________

TACITUS AND PLINY.

   Tacitus (who lived in the second half of the first and the first
   quarter of the second century), in giving an account of the Neronian
   persecution of the Christians at Rome, which occurred A.D. 64, [11]
   incidentally attests that Christ was put to death as a malefactor by
   Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius; that he was the founder of the
   Christian sect; that the latter took its rise in Judea, and spread, in
   spite of the ignominious death of Christ, and the hatred and contempt
   it encountered throughout the empire, so that a vast multitude
   (multitudo ingens) of them were most cruelly put to death in the city
   of Rome alone as early as the year 64. He also bears valuable
   testimony, in the fifth book of his History, together with Josephus,
   from whom he mainly, though not exclusively, takes his account, to the
   fulfillment of Christ's prophecy concerning the destruction of
   Jerusalem, and the overthrow of the Jewish people.

   Pliny the Younger, a cotemporary and friend of Tacitus and the Emperor
   Trajan, in his famous letter to Trajan, about 107, bears testimony to
   the rapid spread of Christianity in Asia Minor at that time among all
   ranks of society; the general moral purity and steadfastness of its
   professors amid cruel persecution; their mode and time of worship;
   their adoration of Christ as God; their observance of a "stated day,"
   which is undoubtedly Sunday; and other facts of importance in the early
   history of the Church. Trajan's rescript, in reply to Pliny's inquiry,
   furnishes evidence of the innocence of the Christians. He notices no
   charge against them except their disregard of the worship of the gods,
   and forbids them to be sought after.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [11] Annales, lib. xv. c. 44.
     __________________________________________________________________

CELSUS AND LUCIAN.

   Celsus, a Grecian eclectic philosopher of the second century, is the
   first heathen author who wrote an express work against Christianity. It
   bears the title, "A True Discourse." Origen, in his able and effective
   refutation, has faithfully preserved the principal portions of it in
   the author's own language. Celsus employs all the aids which the
   culture of his age afforded--the weapons of learning, philosophy,
   common sense, wit, sarcasm, and dramatic animation of style--to
   disprove and ridicule Christianity and its followers. He combines the
   hatred of Judaism and the contempt of heathenism, and anticipates most
   of the arguments and sophisms of the Deists and Naturalists of later
   times.

   And yet even this able infidel assailant, who lived almost within
   hailing distance of the apostolic age, bears witness, as St. Chrysostom
   already remarked, to the antiquity of the apostolic writings and the
   main facts of the gospel history. He thus furnishes a strong argument
   against the modern mythical and legendary biographists of Jesus. Celsus
   refers to the Gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John; and makes, upon the
   whole, about eighty allusions to, or quotations from, the New
   Testament. He takes notice of Christ's birth from a virgin in a small
   village of Judæa; the adoration of the wise men from the East; the
   slaughter of the infants by order of Herod; the flight to Egypt, where
   he supposes Christ learned the charms of magicians; his residence in
   Nazareth; his baptism, and the descent of the Holy Spirit in the shape
   of a dove, and the voice from heaven; the election of his disciples;
   his friendship with publicans and other low people; his cures of the
   lame and the blind, and raising of the dead; the betrayal of Judas; the
   denial of Peter; the principal circumstances in the history of the
   passion and crucifixion; also the resurrection of Christ. It is true,
   he perverts or abuses most of these facts; but, according to his own
   showing, they were then generally, and had always been, believed by the
   Christians. He does not deny the miracles of Jesus, but, like the Jews,
   he derives them from evil spirits, and makes Jesus a magician and
   impostor. He alludes also to some of the principal doctrines of the
   Christians, to their private assemblies for worship, and to the office
   of presbyters. He omits the grosser charges of immorality, which he
   probably considered absurd and incredible. [12]

   Lucian, a brilliant but frivolous rhetorician of Syria, who died in
   Egypt or Greece about A.D. 200, wrote at least indirectly against
   Christianity in his "Life of Peregrinus," and treated it under
   disguise, as one of the many follies of the age, with the light weapons
   of wit and ridicule. Yet he never calls Christ an impostor, as Celsus
   did, but a "crucified sophist;" a term which he uses as often in a good
   sense as in the bad. [13]
     __________________________________________________________________

   [12] For a fuller account of Celsus' argument, see the author's "Church
   History," vol. i. p. 187 ff. Lardner, Doddridge, and Leland made good
   use of Celsus against the Deists of their day. He may, with still
   greater effect, be turned against Strauss and Renan.

   [13] Comp. on Lucian the author's "Church History," vol. i. p. 189 f.
     __________________________________________________________________

PORPHYRY.

  FROM HIS PHILOSOPHY OF ORACLES.

   Porphyry, a Phoenician by birth, was a heathen philosopher of the new
   Platonist school toward the end of the third century, and taught and
   died at Rome A.D. 304. [14] He wrote, besides a number of books which
   have no bearing upon the subject before us, an extensive work against
   the Christian religion, in fifteen books; [15] and a sort of text-book
   of heathen theology, under the title "The Philosophy of Oracles." [16]
   Both are lost, with the exception of some fragments in the writings of
   the fathers. A letter to his wife Marcella has been recently brought to
   light. Porphyry is more serious and profound in spirit, and respectful
   in tone toward Christianity, than Lucian and Celsus or any heathen
   opponent before him. He made an approach to some Christian ideas, or
   was unconsciously under the influence which they exerted over the
   intelligent and reflecting minds of that age. In the letter to his
   wife, he represents the ethical triad of St. Paul,--faith, love, and
   hope,--in connection with truth, as the foundation of true piety. [17]
   In the same letter, he utters other sentences which sound like
   reminiscences of Bible passages, although he no doubt put a different
   philosophical meaning into them. Like many Rationalists of more recent
   times, he made a distinction between the original, pure Christianity of
   Christ, and the corruption of Christianity by the apostles. In his work
   on the "Philosophy of Oracles," he says of Christ, as quoted by St.
   Augustine ("De Civitate Dei," l. xix. cap. 23; comp. also Eusebius'
   "Demonst. Evang.," iii. 6):--

   "The oracle declared Christ to be a most pious man, and his soul, like
   the soul of other pious men after death, favored with immortality; and
   that the mistaken Christians worship him. And when we asked, Why, then,
   was he condemned? the goddess (Hecate) answered in the oracle: The body
   indeed is ever liable to debilitating torments; but the soul of the
   pious dwells in the heavenly mansion. But that soul has fatally been
   the occasion to many other souls to be involved in error, to whom it
   has not been given to acknowledge the immortal Jove. But himself is
   pious, and gone to heaven as other pious men do. Him, therefore, thou
   shalt not blaspheme; but pity the folly of men, because of the danger
   they are in."
     __________________________________________________________________

   [14] Comp. the author's "Church History from Christ to Constantine," p.
   190 ff.

   [15] Kata Christianon logoi. Comp. Eusebius, "Hist. Eccles." lib. vi.
   cap. 19; Socrates, "Hist. Eccl.," i. 9 (in a letter of Constantine, who
   boasts of having caused the destruction of the infamous writings of
   Porphyry), iii. 23; Euseb., "Præpar. Evang.," &c.

   [16] Peri tes ek logion philosophias. Extracts from it are contained in
   Eusebius' "Præparatio Evangelica and Demonstratio Evangelica;" in
   Augustine's "De Civitate Dei;" and in Theodoret's "Twelve Apologetic
   Discourses." Lardner denies the genuineness of this work, on
   insufficient grounds; but Fabricius, Mosheim, Neander, and others,
   treat it as a production of Porphyry.

   [17] Ep. ad. Marcellam (ed. by Card. Angelo Mai, Milan, 1816), cap.
   xxiv.: Tessara stoicheia malista kakratuntho peri theou, pistis,
   aletheia, eros [a Platonic substitute for the Christian agape], elpis.
   Angelo Mai inferred, without good reason, that Marcella was a
   Christian.
     __________________________________________________________________

JULIAN THE APOSTATE.

  From CYRILLUS ALEX. Contra Julian., lib. vi. p. 191.

   Julian the Apostate, Roman emperor from 361 to 363, the most gifted and
   most bitter of all the ancient assailants of Christianity, endeavored,
   with the whole combined influence of his station, talent, and example,
   to restore idolatry throughout the Roman Empire, but in vain. His reign
   passed away like the "baseless fabric of a vision, leaving no wreck
   behind," save the important lesson that ancient paganism was hopelessly
   extinct, and that no human power can arrest the triumphant march of
   Christianity. [18]

   In his work against the Christian religion, where he combined all
   former attacks, and infused into them his own sarcastic spirit, he says
   of Christ, as quoted by his opponent Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria,
   "Contr. Jul." vi. p. 191:--

   "Jesus, having persuaded a few among you [Galileans, as he
   contemptously called the Christians], and those of the worst of men,
   has now been celebrated about three hundred years; having done nothing
   in his lifetime worthy of fame, [19] unless any one thinks it a very
   great work to heal lame and blind people and exorcise demoniacs [20] in
   the villages of Bethsaida and Bethany."

   Note.--This is sufficiently bitter and contemptuous; and yet it
   concedes to Christ the power of working miracles; and these miracles,
   having all the highest moral and benevolent character, are an argument
   for the purity and divine mission of Christ's person. The learned and
   critical Dr. Lardner, in his "Credibility of the Gospel History," makes
   the following judicious remarks on this passage: [21] --

   "(1) This is plainly acknowledging the truth of the evangelical
   history, though he [Julian] does not refer to the whole of it, nor
   specify all the great works that Jesus did, nor all the places in which
   they were performed. (2) He acknowledgeth that, for three hundred years
   or more, Jesus had been celebrated; which regard for him was founded
   upon the works done by him in his lifetime; which works had been
   recorded by his disciples, eye-witnesses of those works; and the
   tradition had been handed down from the beginning to the time in which
   Julian lived. (3) Why should not healing lame and blind men, and such
   as were afflicted with other distempers generally ascribed to demons,'
   be reckoned great works? All judicious and impartial men must esteem
   them great works when performed on the sudden, and completely, as all
   our Lord's works of healing were,--greater works than founding cities,
   erecting an extensive monarchy, or subduing whole nations by slaughter
   and the common methods of conquest, though such things have been often
   thought more worthy to be numbered and recorded by historians. (4) If
   there were but a few only persuaded by Jesus during his abode on this
   earth, it was not for want of sufficient evidence. There was enough, it
   seems, to persuade some bad men, called in the Gospels publicans and
   sinners;' the worst men,' as you say. But there were also some serious
   and pious men, thoughtful and inquisitive, as Nathanael, Nicodemus, and
   others, who were persuaded and fully satisfied, though for a while they
   had been averse and prejudiced. And there were worse men than those
   whom you call the worst,' even scribes and Pharisees, proud, covetous,
   ambitious men, whom no rational evidence, however clear and strong,
   could persuade to receive religious principles contrary to their
   present worldly interests."

   The same writer, after a careful examination of all the arguments of
   Julian against the religion of the Bible and the character of Christ
   and his apostles, thus ably and truthfully sums up their value as an
   undesigned and involuntary indirect testimony for the truth and
   credibility of the gospel history: [22] --

   "Julian has borne a valuable testimony to the history and to the books
   of the New Testament, as all must acknowledge who have read the
   extracts just made from his works. He allows that Jesus was born in the
   reign of Augustus, at the time of the taxing made in Judæa by Cyrenius;
   that the Christian religion had its rise, and began to be propagated,
   in the times of the emperors Tiberius and Claudius. He bears witness to
   the genuineness and authenticity of the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark,
   Luke, and John, and the Acts of the Apostles; and he so quotes them as
   to intimate that they were the only historical books received by
   Christians as of authority, and the only authentic memoirs of Jesus
   Christ and his apostles, and the doctrines preached by them. He allows
   their early date, and even argues for it. He also quotes, or plainly
   refers to, the Acts of the Apostles, to St. Paul's Epistles to the
   Romans, the Corinthians, and the Galatians. He does not deny the
   miracles of Jesus Christ, but allows him to have healed the blind, and
   the lame, and demonaics;' and to have rebuked the winds, and walked
   upon the waves of the sea.' He endeavors, indeed, to diminish these
   works, but in vain. The consequence is undeniable,--such works are good
   proofs of a divine mission. IIe endeavors also to lessen the number of
   the early believers in Jesus; and yet he acknowledgeth that there were
   multitudes of such men in Greece and Italy' before St. John wrote his
   Gospel. He likewise affects to diminish the quality of the early
   believers; and yet acknowledgeth, that, beside men-servants and
   maid-servants,' Cornelius, a Roman centurion at Cæsarea, and Sergius
   Paulus, Proconsul of Cyprus, were converted to the faith of Jesus
   before the end of the reign of Claudius. And he often speaks with great
   indignation of Peter and Paul, those two great apostles of Jesus, and
   successful preachers of his gospel. So that, upon the whole, he has
   undesignedly borne witness to the truth of many things recorded in the
   books of the New Testament. He aimed to overthrow the Christian
   religion, but has confirmed it: his arguments against it are perfectly
   harmless, and insufficient to unsettle the weakest Christian. He justly
   excepts to some things introduced into the Christian profession by the
   late professors of it, in his own time or sooner, but has not made one
   objection of moment against the Christian religion as contained in the
   genuine aud authentic books of the New Testament."
     __________________________________________________________________

   [18] For a fuller account of Julian and his reign, see the author's
   "Church History," vol. ii. (now in course of publication), p. 39 ff.,
   and p. 75 ff.

   [19] ouden akoes axion.

   [20] tous kullous kai tous tuphlous iasasthai, k9ai daimonontas
   ephorkizein.

   [21] Lardner's Works, ed. by Dr. Kippis, London, 1838, vol. vii. p.
   628.

   [22] Lardner's Works, vii. pp. 638, 639.
     __________________________________________________________________

THOMAS CHUBB.

  An English Deist (1679-1748). From the "True Gospel of Jesus Christ," sect.
  viii. pp. 55, 56.

   "In Christ we have an example of a quiet and peaceable spirit; of a
   becoming modesty and sobriety; just, honest, upright, sincere; and,
   above all, of a most gracious and benevolent temper and behavior. One
   who did no wrong, no injury to any man; in whose mouth was no guile;
   Who went about doing good, not only by his ministry, but also in curing
   all manner of diseases among the people. His life was a beautiful
   picture of human nature in its native purity and simplicity, and showed
   at once what excellent creatures men would be when under the influence
   and power of that gospel which he preached unto them."
     __________________________________________________________________

DENIS DIDEROT.

   This French philosopher, who was born in Langres, 1713, and died in
   Paris, 1784, founded and edited, with other free-thinkers, the famous
   "Encyclopédie" (since 1751), which, with the professed aim of
   presenting a summary of all the branches of human learning and art,
   became the chief repository of the revolutionary and infidel ideas of
   the eighteenth century, and was several times suspended by the
   government, but completed at last. He was all his life considered a
   confirmed atheist; but during his later years, to the astonishment of
   his friends, he made the Bible a part of the education of his only
   daughter, who subsequently wrote his "Mémoires," and frequently
   received visits from a clergyman.

   The late venerable Antistes Hess of Zurich, the author of a "Life of
   Jesus " and other good works, relates from the mouth of a personal
   witness the following interesting anecdote, which we will give (from
   Stier's "Reden Jesu," part vi. p. 496) in the original French, and in
   an English translation--

   "Dans une de ces soirées du Baron d'Holbach où se reunissaient les plus
   célèbres incredules du siècle, on venait de se donner pleine carrière
   pour rélever le plus plaisamment du monde les prétendues absurdités,
   les bêtises, les inepties de tout genre dont fourmillent nos livres
   sacrés. Le philosophe Diderot, qui n'avait pas pris lui-même une mince
   part à la conversation, finit par l'arrêter tout à coup en disant:

   "A merveilles, messieurs, à merveilles, je ne connais personne en
   France ni ailleurs, qui sache écrire et parler avec plus d'art et de
   talent. Cependant malgré tout le mal que nous avons dis, et sans doute
   avec beaucoup de raison, de ce diable de livre, j'ose vous défier, tout
   sant que vous êtes, de faire un recit qui soit aussi simple, mais en
   même temps aussi sublime, aussi touchant que le récit de la passion et
   de la mort de Jésus-Christ, qui produise le même effet, qui fasse une
   sensation aussi forte, aussi généralement ressentie, et dont
   l'influence soit encore la même après tant de siècles."

   "Cette apostrophe imprévue étonna tous les auditeurs, et fut suivie
   même d'un assez long silence."

   "In one of those evening parties of Baron d'Holbach, where the most
   celebrated infidels of the century used to assemble, the conversation
   turned fieely, and in thie most amusing manner, on the supposed
   absurdities, stupidities, and all kind of inconsistencies, of the
   Sacred Scriptures. The philosopher Diderot, who had taken no small part
   in the conversation, brought it suddenly to a close by the following
   remark:--

   "For a wonder, gentlemen, for a wonder, I know nobody, either in France
   or anywhere else, who could write and speak with more art and talent.
   Notwithstanding all the bad which we have said, and no doubt with good
   reason, of this devil of a book (de ce diable de livre), I defy you
   all--as many as are here to prepare a tale so simple, and at the same
   time so sublime and so touching, as the tale of the passion and death
   of Jesus Christ; which produces the same effect, which makes a
   sensation as strong and as generally felt, and whose influence will be
   the same, after so many centuries."

   This unexpected speech astonished all the hearers, and was followed by
   a pretty long silence."
     __________________________________________________________________

JEAN JACQUES ROUSSEAU.

   From his "Émile ou de L'Education," livre iv. (Profession de Foi du
   Vicaire Savoyard), OEuvres complètes. Paris, 1839, tome iii. pp.
   365-367.

   This famous French philosopher and rhetorician was born in Geneva, the
   city of Calvin, in 1712; and died, after a restless, changeful, and
   unhappy life, near Chantilly, in 1778. He did as much as any. writer,
   Voltaire not excepted, to prepare the way for the French Revolution,
   and the consequent overthrow of the whole social order in France. His
   life. is marked by a series of blunders, caprices, glaring
   inconsistencies, and violent changes from Calvinism to Romanism; from
   Romanism to infidelity; from infidelity to transient belief; from
   poverty and misery, persecution and exile, to glory and happiness, and
   back again to misery; from philanthropy to misanthropy; from sense to
   the very borders of insanity,--all illuminated by flashes of genius.
   tie was one of the most eloquent and fascinating, but also one of the
   most paradoxical and dangerous, of writers. He viewed every thing from
   his lively imagination, and wrote every line under the impulse of
   feeling and passion. His judgment was on the side of virtue and
   religion; but in his conduct he betrayed every principle he enjoined.
   He drew the most charming pictures of female loveliness, and married,
   after long-continued illegal intercourse, his servant,--a vulgar and
   ill-tempered woman. He rebuked the ladies of France for intrusting
   their children to nurses, and yet placed his own in a
   foundling-hospital. His remarkable testimony to Christ and the Gospels
   is the best thing he ever wrote, and will last the longest. It was
   written about A.D. 1760, and appeared in his famous work on education,
   which was condemned for its dangerous speculations on religion and
   morals by the Parliament of France, and caused his banishment from the
   kingdom. We quote it both in the original French and in an English
   translation:--

   "Je vous avoue aussi que la majesté des Écritures m'étonne, la sainteté
   de l'Évangile parle à mon coeur. [23] Voyez les livres des philosophes
   avec toute leur pompe; qu'ils sont petits près de celui-là! Se peut-il
   qu'un livre à la fois si sublime et si simple soit l'ouvrage des
   hommes? Se peut-il que celui dont il fait l'histoire ne soit qu'un
   homme lui-même? Est-ce là le ton d'un enthousiaste ou d'un ambitieux
   sectaire? Quelle douceur, quelle pureté, dans ses moeurs! quelle grace
   touchante dans ses instructions! quelle élévation dans ses maximes!
   quelle profonde sagesse dans ses discours! quelle présence d'esprit,
   quelle finesse et quelle justesse dans ses réponses! quel empire sur
   ses passions! Où est l'homme, où est le sage qui sait agir, souffrir et
   mourir sans foiblesse et sans ostentation? Quand Platon peint son juste
   imaginaire [24] couvert de tout l'opprobre du crime, et digne de tous
   les prix de la vertu; il peint trait pour trait Jésus-Christ: la
   ressemblance est si frappante, que tous les Pères l'ont sentie, et
   qu'il n'est pas possible de s'y tromper. [25] Quels préjugés, quel
   aveuglement: [26] ne faut-il point avoir pour oser comparer le fils de
   Sophronisque au fils de Marie? Quelle distance de l'un à l'autre!
   Socrate, mourant sans douleur, sans ignomie, soutint aisément jusqu'au
   bout son personage; et si cette facile mort n'eût honoré sa vie, on
   douteroit si Socrate, avec tout son esprit, fut autre chose qu'un
   sophiste. Il inventa, dit-on, la morale; d'atutres avant lui l'avoient
   mise en pratique: il ne fit que dire ce qu'ils avoient fait, il ne fit
   que mettre en leçons leurs exemples. Aristide avoit été juste avant que
   Socrate eût dit ce que c'étoit que justice. Léonidas étoit mort pour
   son pays avant que Socrate eût fait un dévoir d'aimer la patrie; Sparte
   étoit sobre avant que Socrate eût loué la sobriété; avant qu'il eût
   défini la vertu, la Grèce abondoit en hommes vertueux. Mais où Jesus
   avoit-il pris chez les siens cette morale élevée et pure dont lui seul
   a donné les leçons et l'exemple? [27] Du sein du plus furieux fanatisme
   la plus haute sagesse se fit entendre, et la simplicité des plus
   héroïques vertus honora le plus vil de tous les peuples. La mort de
   Socrate, philosophant tranquillement avec ses amis, est la plus douce
   qu'on puisse desirer; celle de Jésus expirant dans les tourments,
   injurié, raillé, maudit de tout un peuple, est a plus horrible qu'on
   puisse craindre. Socrate prenant la coupe empoisonnée bénit celui qui
   la lui présenté et qui pleure; Jésus, aux milieu d'un supplice affreux,
   prie pour ses bourreaux acharnés.

   "Oui, si la vie et la mort de Socrate sont d'un sage, la vie et la mort
   de Jesus sont d'un Dieu. Dirons-nous que l'histoire de l'Évangile est
   inventée à plaisir? Mon ami, ce n'est pas ainsi qu'on invente; et les
   faits de Socrate dont personne ne doute, sont moins attestés que ceux
   de Jésus-Christ. Au fond, c'est reculer la difliculté sans la détruire;
   il seroit plus inconcevable que plusieurs hommes d'accord [28] eussent
   fabriqué ce livre, qiu'il ne l'est qu'un seul en ait fourni le sujet.
   Jamais des auteurs juifs n'eussent trouvé ni ce ton, ni cette morale;
   et l'Évangile a des caractères de vérite si grands, si frappants, si
   parfaitement inimitables, que l'inventeur en seroit plus étonnant que
   le heros. [29] Avec tout cela, ce même Évangile est plein de choses
   incroyables, de choses qui répugnent à la raison, et qu'il est
   impossible à tout homme sensé de concevoir ni d'admettre. Que faire au
   milieu de tontes ces contradictions? Étre toujours modeste et
   circonspect, mon enfant; respecter en silence ce qu'on ne sauroit ni
   rejeter, ni comprendre, et s'humilier devant le grand Étre, qui seul
   sait la vérité."

   "I will confess to you, that the majesty of the Scriptures strikes me
   with admiration, as the purity of the gospel has its influence on my
   heart. Peruse the works of our philosophers, with all their pomp of
   diction, how mean, how contemptible, are they, compared with the
   Scriptures! Is it possible that a book, at once so simple and so
   sublime, should be merely the work of man? Is it possible that the
   sacred personage whose history it contains should be himself a mere
   man? Do we find that he assumed the tone of an enthusiast or ambitious
   sectary? What sweetness, what purity, in his manner! What an affecting
   gracefulness in his instructions! What sublimity in his maxims! What
   profound wisdom in his discourses! What presence of mind, what
   subtlety, what fitness, in his replies! How great the command over his
   passions! Where is the man, where the philosopher, who could so live
   and so die, without weakness, and without ostentation? When Plato
   describes his imaginary righteous man, loaded with all the punishments
   of guilt, yet meriting the highest rewards of virtue, he describes
   exactly the character of Jesus Christ: the resemblance is so striking,
   that all the Church Fathers perceived it. What prepossession, what
   blindness, must it be to compare the son of Sophroniscus to the son of
   Mary! What an infinite disproportion there is between them! Socrates,
   dying without pain or ignominy, easily supported his character to the
   last; and, if this easy death had not crowned his life, it might have
   been doubted whether Socrates, with all his wisdom, was any thing more
   than a mere sophist. He invented, it is said, the theory of ethics.
   Others, however, had before put them into practice: he had only to say,
   therefore, what they had done, and to reduce their examples to
   precepts. Aristides had been just before Socrates defined justice.
   Leonidas had given up his life for his country before Socrates declared
   patriotism to be a duty. The Spartans were a sober people before
   Socrates recommended sobriety. Before he had even defined virtue,
   Greece abounded in virtuous men. But where could Jesus learn, among his
   cotemporaries, that pure and sublime morality of which he only had
   given us both precept and example? The greatest wisdom was made known
   among the most bigoted fanaticism; and the simplicity of the most
   heroic virtues did honor to the vilest people on earth. The death of
   Socrates, peacefully philosophizing among friends, appears the most
   agreeable that one could wish: that of Jesus, expiring in agonies,
   abused, insulted, and accused by a whole nation, is the most horrible
   that one could fear. Socrates, indeed, in receiving the cup of poison,
   blessed the weeping executioner who administered it; but Jesus, amidst
   excruciating tortures, prayed for his merciless tormentors.

   "Yes, if the life and death of Socrates were those of a sage, the life
   and death of Jesus are those of a God. Shall we suppose the evangelical
   history a mere fiction? Indeed, my friend, it bears no marks of
   fiction. On the contrary, the history of Socrates, which no one
   presumes to doubt, is not so well attested as that of Jesus Christ.
   Such a supposition, in fact, only shifts the difficulty without
   obviating it: it is more inconceivable that a number of persons should
   agree to write such a history, than that one should furnish the subject
   of it. The Jewish authors were incapable of the diction, and strangers
   to the morality contained in the gospel. The marks of its truth are so
   striking and inimitable, that the inventor would be a more astonishing
   character than the hero. With all this, the same gospel is full of
   incredible things which are repugnant to reason, and which it is
   impossible for a sensible man to conceive and to admit. What shall we
   do in the midst of all these contradictions? We should be always modest
   and circumspect, my child; respect in silence what we can neither
   reject nor understand; and humble ourselves before that great Being who
   alone knows the truth."
     __________________________________________________________________

   [23] Var. Je vous avoue aussi que la sainteté de l'Evangile est un
   argument qui parle à mon coeur, et auquel j'aurais même regret de
   trouver quelque bonne réponse. Voyez les livres. . . .

   [24] De Rep. lib. i.

   [25] Cette ressemblance est le resultat général des deux premiers
   livres on dialogues du traité de Platon, intitulé De la République. Le
   passage le plus remarquable à ce sujet est celui qu'il met dans la
   bouche de son adversaires (tome ii. p. 361, E. édition de H. Etienne,
   ou tome vi. pp. 215 et 216, édition de Deux-Ponts). Quant aux Pères de
   l'Église dont il est question ici, voyez entre autres Saint Justin
   (Apologia prima, No. 5), et Saint Clément d'Alexandrie (Stromata, lib.
   iv.).

   [26] Var. . . Quel aveuglemnent ou quelle mourvaise foi ne. . . .

   [27] Voyez, dans le discours sur la montagne, le parallèle qu'il fait
   lui-même de la morale de Moïse à la sienne Matt. cap. v. vers. 21 et
   seq.

   [28] Var. . . . . que quatre hommes d'accord. . . . A la suite de ces
   mots est une note ainsi conçue: Je veux bien n'en pas compter
   davantage, parceque leurs quatre livres sont les seules vies de
   Jésus-Christ qui nous sont restées du grand nombre qui avoient été
   écrites.

   [29] Dans une lettre à M. de . . ., datée de 1769, Rousseau revient
   encore sur ce parallèle établi par lui entre Jésus et Socrate; et ne
   supposant aucun caractère divin ni mission surnaturelle au sage hébreu,
   qu'il oppose de nouveau au sage grec, il présente sur les vue et la
   conduite du premier des considérations toutes nouvelles. Voyez la
   Correspondance.
     __________________________________________________________________

NAPOLEON BONAPARTE.

   Napoleon the First grew up in the infidel atmosphere of the eighteenth
   century, and was all his life so much absorbed with schemes of military
   conquest and political dominion that he had no time, even if he had the
   inclination, to reflect seriously on the subject of religion. Ambition
   was the idol monster to which he sacrificed millions of human beings,
   and even his devoted wife, whom he ardently loved and admired. But he
   had too profound an intellect ever to be an atheist. He was
   constitutionally inclined to fatalism; and like his nephew, the present
   Emperor of France, he believed in his star. He knew that religion was
   an essential element in human nature, and the strongest pillar of
   public morals and social order. In his Egyptian campaign, it is said,
   he carried with him a New Testament along with the Koran, under the
   characteristic title, "Politics." It was from this political point of
   view that he restored the Roman-Catholic Church in France, which the
   folly of the Revolution had swept away, but kept it always in
   subordination to the secular power, and secured to the Protestants the
   liberty of conscience and of public worship.

   During his exile at St. Helena, Napoleon had the best opportunity of
   reflecting on his unrivaled career of brilliant victory and crushing
   defeat, and the vanity of all earthly things. He frequently read the
   Bible. Count de las Cases relates (in his "Memoirs of the Life, Exile,
   and Conversations of the Emperor Napoleon," Eng. trans., ed. N. Y.,
   1857, vol. ii. p. 256) the following fact, which proves at least his
   respect for the morality of the gospel: "The emperor ended the
   conversation by desiring my son to bring him the New Testament; and,
   taking it from the beginning, he read as far as the conclusion of the
   discourse of Jesus on the mount. He expressed himself struck with the
   highest admiration of the purity, the sublimity, the beauty, of the
   morality which it contained; and we all experienced the same feeling."
   In his last will and testament, which was drawn up six years before his
   death, April 15, 1815, at Longwood, Island of St. Helena, he declares:
   "I die in the apostolic Roman religion, in the bosom of which I was
   born more than fifty years since." In 1819, he sent for two Italian
   priests,--the aged Abbé Buonavita, who had been chaplain to his mother
   at Elba and to the Princess Pauline at Rome; and the young Abbe
   Vignali, who was also a physician. He professed his assent and
   submission to the faith and discipline of the Catholic Christian
   religion, attended mass every Sunday, and received the sacrament of
   extreme unction before his death.

   These are indisputable facts. They do not by any means justify the
   inference that Napoleon was a true Christian, as his American
   biographer seems to think, who very deservedly was honored with a
   golden snuff-box by the present Emperor of France for eulogizing and
   canonizing his uncle. His public and private life exhibit no trace of
   piety. His submission to the rites of the Roman Church on his death-bed
   is hardly sufficient to be construed into an act of genuine repentance,
   and may have been dictated in part by policy, or a prudent regard for
   his own reputation, the interests of his dynasty, and the public
   sentiment in France. He died amidst dreams and visions of war and
   victory. "France! Josephine! head of the army!" were his last words,--a
   suitable summing-up of his life.

   But I have no doubt that his intellect bowed before the majesty of
   Christ. Reasoning from the overpowering authority and dignity of Christ
   as a teacher, from the amazing result of his peaceful mission, and the
   imperishable nature of his kingdom as contrasted with the vanity of all
   human conquests and secular empires, he justly inferred that Christ was
   more than man; that he was truly divine, and that his Divinity is the
   key which unlocks the mysteries of Christianity. In this respect, he
   went farther than any of the witnesses in this collection, who stop
   with the concession of the unparalleled human greatness of Christ. The
   logical conclusion of the marvelous intellect of Napoleon, and his
   profound knowledge of men, may be fairly set over against the illogical
   denial of Christ's Divinity by inferior minds.

   It is with these restrictions that we insert here the famous testimony
   of the greatest military genius of all times, which has been published
   by Religious Tract Societies in Europe and America, extensively
   circulated, and is embodied, among other books, in John S. C. Abbott's
   "Life of Napoleon" (vol. ii. chap. xxxii. p. 612 ff.), as also in
   Abbott's "Confidential Correspondence of the Emperor Napoleon with the
   Empress Josephine" (New York, 1855, pp. 353-363), without, however,
   being traced to a reliable source. A letter to Mr. Abbott, respectfully
   asking him for his authority, remained unanswered. General Bertrand, an
   avowed unbeliever, and General Montholon, who, after his return to
   Europe, became a believer, or at least seriously inclined, would be the
   proper vouchers, since they heard, and must have reported, these
   utterances at St. Helena; but I can not find it in their writings, so
   far as they came to my knowledge. I was informed by Dr. Stowe, that
   General Bertrand, when on a visit to this country, was asked by a
   company of ministers at Pittsburg, whether Napoleon really uttered
   those sentiments in conversations with him, and that he gave an
   affirmative answer. But, on further inquiry, I could get no
   satisfactory reply from Pittsburg. I also looked in vain for such
   strong and explicit confessions in the Memoirs of Las Cases,
   Antommarchi, and O'Meara, and other authentic sources on the life of
   Napoleon at St. Helena, although they contain some religious
   conversations of the emperor, more or less favorable to Christianity
   and the Bible. The tracts containing Napoleon's sentiments on
   Christianity are probably derived from a book, of which, unfortunately,
   I could only find the title, in French catalogues; viz.,
   "Robert-Antoine de Beauterne: Sentiments de Napoléon sur le
   Christianisme. Conversations religieuses recueillies a Sainte-Hélène,
   par le Gén. comte de Montholon." Paris, 1843, third ed. (see the title
   in Oettinger's "Bibliographie Biographique"). From Guerard's
   "Literature Française Contemporaine," XIX. Siècle, tom. i., Paris,
   1842, I infer that this is the same author who wrote a book entitled:
   "Une Lamentation chrétienne, ou Mort d'un enfant impie," Paris, 1836,
   which contains a chapter on the religious death of Napoleon ("Mort de
   Napoléon religieux"). How far this book is based upon personal
   communications of Montholon or other authentic sources, I am unable to
   say, having sought in vain for a copy in the public libraries of New
   York. Professor G. de Felice of Montauban, in a letter to the "New-York
   Observer" of April 16, 1842, asserts that the testimony, as published
   in the French tract below, is undoubtedly genuine, but gives no proof;
   and states also that Rev. Dr. Bogue sent to Napoleon at St. Helena a
   copy of his essay on the "Divinity and Authority of the New Testament,"
   which, according to the testimony of eye-witnesses, he read with
   interest and satisfaction. In view of all I could gather, I am inclined
   to believe that these religious conversations of Napoleon have been
   considerably enlarged or modified in the recollection of Bertrand,
   Montholon, and other reporters, but are authentic in substance; because
   they have the grandiloquent and egotistic Napoleonic ring, and are
   marked by that massive grandeur and granite-like simplicity of thought
   and style which characterize the best of his utterances. They are,
   moreover, quite consistent with the undeniable fact, that he expressed
   himself, both in his testament and on his death-bed, a believer in the
   Catholic Christian religion, which always taught the Divinity of Christ
   as a fundamental article of faith.

   We give the testimony as we find it, first in the original form, a
   French tract, marked No. 51, but without date; and then in an enlarged
   translation from Tract No. 477 of the American Tract Society (New
   York); and from Abbott's works on Napoleon, alluded to above.

   NAPOLÉON. [30]

   Il est vrai que le Christ propose à notre foi une série de mystères. Il
   commande avec autorité d'y croire, sans donner d'autres raisons que
   cette parole épouvantable: Je suis Dieu.

   Sans doute il faut la foi pour cet article-là, qui est celui duquel
   dérive tous les autres articles. Mais le caractère de la divinité du
   Christ une fois admis, la doctrine chrétienne se présente avec la
   précision et la clarté de l'algèbre: il faut y admirer l'enchaînement
   et l'unité d'une science.

   Appuyée sur la Bible, cette doctrine explique le mieux les traditions
   du monde; elle les éclaircit, et les autres dogmes s'y rapportent
   étroitement comme les anneaux scellés d'une même chaîne. L'existence du
   Christ d'un bout à l'autre est un tissu tout mystérieux, j'en conviens,
   mais ce mystère répond à des difficultés qui sont dans toutes les
   existences; rejetez-le, le monde est une énigme: acceptez-le, vous avez
   une admirable solution de l'histoire de l'homme.

   Le christianisme a un avantage sur tous les philosophes et sur toutes
   les religions: les chrétiens ne se font pas illusion sur la nature des
   choses. On ne peut leur reprocher ni la subtilité ni le charlatanisme
   des idéologues, qui ont cru résoudre la grande énigme des questions
   théologiques, avec des vaines dissertations sur ces grands objets.
   Insensés, dont la folie ressemble à celle d'un petit enfant qui veut
   toucher le ciel avec sa main, ou qui demande la lune pour son jouet ou
   sa curiosité. Le christianisme dit avec simplicité: "Nul homme n'a vu
   Dieu, si ce n'est Dieu. Dieu a révelé ce qu'il était: sa révélation est
   un mystère que la raison ni l'esprit ne peuvent concevoir. Mais puisque
   Dieu a parlé, il faut y croire." Cela est d'un grand bon sens.

   L'Evangile possède une vertu secrète, je ne sais quoi d'efficace, une
   chaleur qui agit sur l'entendement et qui charme le coeur; on éprouve à
   le méditer, ce qu'on éprouve à contempler le ciel. L'Evangile n'est pas
   un livre, c'est un être vivant, avec une action, une puissance, qui
   envahit tout ce qui s'oppose à son extension. Le voici sur cette table,
   cc livre par excellence [et ici l'Empereur le toucha avec respect]; je
   ne me lasse pas de le lire, et tous les jours avec le même plaisir.

   Le Christ ne varie pas, il n'hésite jamais dans son enseignement, et la
   moindre affirmation de lui est marquée d'un cachet de simplicité et de
   profondeur qui captive l'ignorant et le savant, pour peu qu'ils y
   prêtent leur attention.

   Nulle part on ne trouve cette série de belles idées, de belles maximes
   morales, qui défilent comme les bataillons de la milice céleste, et qui
   produisent dans notre âme le même sentiment que l'on éprouve à
   considérer l'étendue infinie du ciel resplendissant, par une belle nuit
   d'été, de tout l'éclat des astres.

   Non seulement notre esprit est préoccupé, mais il est dominé par cette
   lecture, et jamais l'âme ne court risque de s'égarer avec ce livre.

   Une fois maître de notre esprit, l'Evangile fidèle nous aime. Dieu même
   est notre ami, notre père et vraiment notre Dieu. Une mère n'a pas plus
   de soin de l'enfant qu'elle allaite. L'âme séduite par la beauté de
   l'Evangile, no s'appartient plus. Dieu s'en empare tout-à-fait; il en
   dirige les pensées et toutes les facultés, elle est à lui.

   Quelle preuve de la divinité du Christ! avec un empire aussi absolu, il
   n'a qu'un seul but, l'amélioration spirituelle des individus, la pureté
   de la conscience, l'union à ce qui est vrai, la sainteté de l'âme.

   Enfin, et c'est mon dernier argument, il n'y a pas de Dieu dans le
   ciel, si un homme a pu concevoir et exécuter, avec un plein succès, le
   dessein gigantesque de dérober pour lui le culte suprême, en usurpant
   le nom de Dieu. Jésus est le seul qui l'ait osé, il est le seul qui ait
   dit clairement, affirmé imperturbablement lui-même de lui-même: Je suis
   Dieu. Ce qui est bien différent de cette affirmation: Je suis un dieu,
   ou de cette autre: Il y a des dieux. L'histoire ne mentionne aucun
   autre individu qui se soit qualifié lui-même de ce titre de Dieu dans
   le sens absolu. La fable n'établit nulle part, que Jupiter et les
   autres dieux se soient eux-mêmes divinisés. C'eut été de leur part le
   comble de l'orgueil, et une monstruosité, une extravagance absurde.
   C'est la postérité, ce sont les héritiers des premiers despotes qui les
   ont déifiés. Tous les hommnes étant d'une même race, Alexandre a pu se
   dire le fils de Jupiter. Mais toute la Grêce a souri de cette
   supercherie; et de même l'apothéose des empereurs romains n'a jamais
   été une chose sérieuse pour les Romains. Mahomet et Confucius se sont
   donnés simplement pour des agents de la divinité. La déesse Egérie de
   Numa, n'a jamais été que la personnification d'une inspiration puisée
   dans la solitude des bois. Les dieux Brama, de l'Inde, sont une
   innovation psychologique.

   Comment donc un juif, dont l'existence historique est plus avéré que
   toutes celles des temps où il a vécu, lui seul, fils d'un charpentier,
   se donne-t-il tout d'abord pour Dieu même, pour l'être par excellence,
   pour le Créateur de tous les êtres. Il s'arroge toutes les sortes
   d'adorations. Il bâtit son culte de ses mains, non avec des pierres,
   mais avec des hommes. On s'extasie sur les conquêtes d'Alexandre! Eh
   bien! voici un conquérant qui confisque à son profit, qui unit, qui
   incorpore à lui-même, non pas une nation, mais l'espèce humaine. Quel
   miracle! l'âme humaine, avec toutes ses facultés, devient une annexe
   avec l'existence du Christ.

   Et comment? par un prodige qui surpasse tout prodige. Il veut l'amour
   des hommes, c'est-à-dire, ce qu'il est le plus difficile au monde
   d'obtenir: ce qu'un sage demande vainement à quelques amis, un père à
   ses enfants, une épouse à son époux, un frère à son frère, en un mot,
   le coeur: c'est la ce qu'il vent pour lui, il l'exige absolument, et il
   y réussit tout de suite. J'en conclus sa divinité. Alexandre, César,
   Annibal, Louis XIV., avec tout leur génie, y ont échoué. Ils ont
   conquis le monde et il n'ont pu parvenir à avoir un ami. Je suis
   peut-être le seul, de nos jours, qui aime Annibal, César, Alexandre. Le
   grand Louis XIV., qui a jeté tant d'éclat sur la France et dans le
   monde, n'avait pas un ami dans tout son royaume, même dans sa famille.
   Il est vrai, nous aimons nos enfants: pourquoi? Nous obéissons à un
   instinct de la nature, à une volonté de Dieu, à une necessite que les
   bêtes elles-mêmes reconnaissent et remplissent; mais combien d'enfants
   qui restent insensibles à nos caresses, à tant de soins que nous leur
   prodiguons, combien d'enfants ingrats? Vos enfants, général Bertrand,
   vous aiment-ils? vous les aimez, et vous n'êtes pas sûr d'être payé de
   retour. Ni vos bienfaits, ni la nature, ne réussiront jamais à leur
   inspirer un amour tel que celui des chrétiens pour Dieu! Si vous veniez
   à mourir, vos enfants se souviendraient de vous en dépensant votre
   fortune, sans doute, mais vos petits enfants sauraient à peine si vous
   avez existé. Et vous êtes le général Bertrand! Et nous somiames dans
   une île, et vous n'avez d'autre distraction que la vue de votre
   famille.

   Le Christ parle, et désormais le générations lui appartiennent par des
   liens plus étroits, plus intimes que ceux du sang; par une union plus
   sacrée, plus impérieuse que quelque union que ce soit. Il allume la
   flamme d'un amour qui fait mourir l'amour de soi, qui prévaut sur tout
   autre amour.

   A ce miracle de sa volonté, comment ne pas reconnaître le Verbe
   créateur du monde.

   Les fondateurs de religion n'ont pas même eu l'idée de cet amour
   mystique, qui est l'essence du christianisme, sous le beau nom de
   charité.

   C'est qu'il n'avaient garde de se lancer contre un ecueil. C'est que
   dans un opération semblable, se faire aimer, l'homme porte en lui-même
   le sentiment profond de son impuissance.

   Aussi le plus grand miracle du Christ, sans contredit, c'est la règne
   de la charité.

   Lui seul, il est parvenu à élever le coeur des hommnes jusqu'à
   l'invisible, jusqu'au sacrifice du temps: lui seul, en créant cette
   immolation, a crée un lien entre le ciel et la terre.

   Tous ceux qui croient sincèrement en lui ressentent cet amour
   admirable, surnaturel, supérieur; phenomène inexplicable, impossible à
   la raison, et aux forces de l'homme; feu sacré donné à la terre par ce
   nouveau Prométhée, dont le temps, ce grand destructeur, ne peut ni user
   la force ni limiter la durée. Moi, Napoléon, c'est ce que j'admire
   davantage, parce que j'y ai pensé souvent. Et c'est ce qui me prouve
   absolument la divinité du Chlrist!

   J'ai passionne des multitudes qui mouraient pour moi. A Dieu ne plaise
   que je forme aucune comparaison entre l'enthousiasme des soldats et la
   charité chrétienne, qui sont aussi différents que leur cause.

   Mais enfin, il fallait ma presence, l'électricité de mon regard, mon
   accent, une parole de moi; alors, j'allumais le feu sacré dans les
   coeurs. Certes je possède le secret de cette puissance magique qui
   enlève l'esprit, mais je ne saurais le communiquer à personne; aucun de
   mes généraux ne l'a reçu ou deviné de moi; je n'ai pas d'avantage le
   secret d'éterniser mon nom et mon amour dans les coeurs, et d'y opérer
   des prodiges sans les secours de la matière.

   Maintenant que je suis à Sainte-Hélène--maintenant que je suis seul et
   cloué sur ce roc, qui bataille et conquiert des empires pour moi? Où
   sont les courtisans de mon infortune? Pense-t-on à moi? Qui se remue
   pour moi en Europe? Qui m'est demeure fidèle, où sont mes amis? Oui,
   deux ou trois, que votre fidélité immortalise, vous partagez, vous
   consolez mon exil.

   Ici la voix de l'Empereur prit un accent particulier d'ironique
   mélancolie et de profonde tristesse. "Oui, notre existence a brillé de
   tout l'éclat du diadême et de la souveraineté; et la votre, Bertrand,
   réfléchissait cet éclat comme le dôme des Invalides, doré par nous,
   réfléchit les rayons du soleil. Mais les revers sont venus, l'or peu à
   peu s'est effacé. La pluie du malheur et des outrages, dont on
   m'abreuve chaque jour, en emporte les dernières parcelles. Nous ne
   sommes plus que du plomb, général Bertrand, et bientôt je serai de la
   terre.

   "Telle est la destinée des grands hommes! Telle de César et
   d'Alexandre, et l'on nous oublie! et le nom d'un conquérant, comme
   celui d'un empereur, n'est plus qu'un thème de collége! Nos exploits
   tombent sous la férule d'un pédant qui nous insulte ou nous loue.

   "Que de jugements divers on se permet sur le grand Louis XIV.! A peine
   mort, le grand roi lui-même fut laissé seul, dans l'isolement de sa
   chambre à coucher de Versailles--négligé par ses courtisans et
   peut-être l'objet de la risée. Ce n'était plus leur maître! C'était un
   cadavre, un cercueil, une fosse, et l'horreur d'une imminente
   décomposition.

   "Encore un moment:--voilà mon sort et ce qui va m'arriver a
   moi-même--assassiné par l'oligarchie anglaise, je meurs avant le temps,
   et mon cadavre aussi va être rendu à la terre pour y devenir la pâture
   des vers.

   "Voila la destinée très prochaine du grand Napoléon--Quel abîme entre
   ma misère profonde, et le règne éternel du Christ prêché, encensé,
   aimé, adoré, vivant dans tout l'univers--Est-ce là mourir? n'est-ce pas
   plutôt vivre? voilà la mort du Christ? voilà celle de Dieu."

   L'empereur se tut, et comme le général Bertrand gardait également le
   silence: "Vous ne comprenez pas, reprit l'empereur, que Jésus-Christ
   est Dieu; eh bien! j'ai eu tort de vous faire général!"

   NAPOLEON.

   One day, Napoleon was speaking of the Divinity of Christ; when General
   Bertrand said:--

   "I can not conceive, sire, how a great man like you can believe that
   the Supreme Being ever exhibited himself to men under a human form,
   with a body, a face, mouth, and eyes. Let Jesus be whatever you
   please,--the highest intelligence, the purest heart, themost profound
   legislator, and, in all respects, the most singular being who has ever
   existed: I grant it. Still, he was simply a man, who taught his
   disciples, and deluded credulous people, as did Orpheus, Confucius,
   Brahma. Jesus caused himself to be adored, because his predecessors,
   Isis and Osiris, Jupiter and Juno, had proudly made themselves objects
   of worship. The ascendency of Jesus over his time was like the
   ascendency of the gods and the heroes of fable. If Jesus has
   impassioned and attached to his chariot the multitude, if he has
   revolutionized the world, I see in that only the power of genius, and
   the action of a commanding spirit, which vanquishes the world, as so
   many conquerors have done--Alexander, Cæsar, you, sire, and
   Mohammed--with a sword."

   Napoleon replied:--

   "I know men; and I tell you that Jesus Christ is not a man. Superficial
   minds see a resemblance between Christ and the founders of empires, and
   the gods of other religions. That resemblance does not exist. There is
   between Christianity and whatever other religions the distance of
   infinity.

   "We can say to the authors of every other religion, You are neither
   gods, nor the agents of the Deity. You are but missionaries of
   falsehood, moulded from the same clay with the rest of mortals. You are
   made with all the passions and vices inseparable from them. Your
   temples and your priests proclaim your origin.' Such will be the
   judgment, the cry of conscience, of whoever examines the gods and the
   temples of paganism.

   "Paganism was never accepted as truth by the wise men of Greece;
   neither by Socrates, Pythagoras, Plato, Anaxagoras, or Pericles. On the
   other side, the loftiest intellects, since the advent of Christianity,
   have had faith, a living faith, a practical faith, in the mysteries and
   the doctrines of the gospel; not only Bossuet and Fenelon, who were
   preachers, but Descartes and Newton, Leibnitz and Pascal, Corneille and
   Racine, Charlemagne and Louis XIV.

   "Paganism is the work of man. One can here read but our imbecility.
   What do these gods, so boastful, know more than other mortals; these
   legislators, Greek or Roman; this Numa; this Lycurgus; these priests of
   India or of Memphis; this Confucius; this Mohammed'?-absolutely
   nothing. They have made a perfect chaos of mortals. There is not one
   among them all who has said any thing new in reference to our future
   destiny, to the soul, to the essence of God, to the creation. Enter the
   sanctuaries of paganism: you there find perfect chaos, a thousand
   contradictions, war between the gods, the immobility of sculpture, the
   division and the rending of unity, the parceling out of the divine
   attributes mutilated or denied in their essence, the sophisms of
   ignorance and presumption, polluted fêtes, impurity and abomination
   adored, all sorts of corruption festering in the thick shades, with the
   rotten wood, the idol, and the priest. Does this honor God, or does it
   dishonor him? Are these religions and these gods to be compared with
   Christianity?

   "As for me, I say, No. I summon entire Olympus to my tribunal. I judge
   the gods, but am far from prostrating myself before their vain images.
   The gods, the legislators of India and of China, of Rome and of Athens,
   have nothing which can overawe me. Not that I am unjust to them. No: I
   appreciate them, because I know their value. Undeniably, princes, whose
   existence is fixed in the memory as an image of order and of power, as
   the ideal of force and beauty: such princes were no ordinary men.

   "I see, in Lycurgus, Numa, and Mohammed, only legislators, who have the
   first rank in the State; have sought the best solution of the social
   problem: but I see nothing there which reveals Divinity. They
   themselves have never raised their pretensions so high. As for me, I
   recognize the gods, and these great men, as beings like myself. They
   have performed a lofty part in their times, as I have done. Nothing
   announces them divine. On the contrary, there are numerous resemblances
   between them and myself,--foibles and errors which ally them to me and
   to humanity.

   "It is not so with Christ. Every thing in him astonishes me. His spirit
   overawes me, and his will confounds me. Between him and whoever else in
   the world there is no possible term of comparison. He is truly a being
   by himself. His ideas and his sentiments, the truths which he
   announces, his manner of convincing, are not explained either by human
   organization or by the nature of things.

   "His birth, and the history of his life; the profundity of his
   doctrine, which grapples the mightiest difficulties, and which is of
   those difficulties the most admirable solution; his gospel, his
   apparition, his empire, his march across the ages and the
   realms,--every thing is for me a prodigy, a mystery insoluble, which
   plunges me into reveries which I can not escape; a mystery which is
   there before my eyes; a mystery which I can neither deny nor explain.
   Here I see nothing human.

   "The nearer I approach, the more carefully I examine, every thing is
   above me; every thing remains grand,--of a grandeur which overpowers.
   His religion is a revelation from an intelligence which certainly is
   not that of man. There is there a profound originality which has
   created a series of words and of maxims before unknown. Jesus borrowed
   nothing from our science. One can absolutely find nowhere, but in him
   alone, the imitation or the example of his life. He is not a
   philosopher, since he advances by miracles; and, from the commencement,
   his disciples worshiped him. He persuaded them far more by an appeal to
   the heart than by any display of method and of logic. Neither did he
   impose upon them any preliminary studies, or any knowledge of letters.
   All his religion consists in believing.

   "In fact, the sciences and philosophy avail nothing for salvation; and
   Jesus came into the world to reveal the mysteries of heaven and the
   laws of the spirit. Also he has nothing to do but with the soul; and to
   that alone he brings his gospel. The soul is sufficient for him, as he
   is sufficient for the soul. Before him, the soul was nothing. Matter
   and time were the masters of the world. At his voice, every thing
   returns to order. Science and philosophy become secondary. The soul has
   reconquered its sovereignty. All the scholastic scaffolding falls, as
   an edifice ruined, before one single word,--faith.

   "What a master, and what a word, which can effect such a revolution!
   With what authority does he teach men to pray! He imposes his belief;
   and no one, thus far, has been able to contradict him: first, because
   the gospel contains the purest morality; and also because the doctrine
   which it contains of obscurity is only the proclamation and the truth
   of that which exists where no eye can see, and no reason can penetrate.
   Who is the insensate who will say No' to the intrepid voyager who
   recounts the marvels of the icy peaks which he alone has had the
   boldness to visit? Christ is that bold voyager. One can, doubtless,
   remain incredulous; but no one can venture to say, It is not so.'

   "Moreover, consult the philosophers upon those mysterious questions
   which relate to the essence of man and the essence of religion. What is
   their response? Where is the man of good sense who has never learned
   any thing from the system of metaphysics; ancient or modern, which is
   not truly a vain and pompous ideology, without any connection with our
   domestic life, with our passions? Unquestionably, with skill in
   thinking, one can seize the key of the philosophy of Socrates and
   Plato. But, to do this, it is necessary to be a metaphysician; and
   moreover, with years of study, one must possess special aptitude. But
   good sense alone, the heart, an honest spirit, are sufficient to
   comprehend Christianity. The Christian religion is neither ideology nor
   metaphysics, but a practical rule which directs the actions of man,
   corrects him, counsels him, and assists him in all his conduct. The
   Bible contains a complete series of facts and of historical men, to
   explain time and eternity, such as no other religion has to offer. If
   it is not the true religion, one is very excusable in being deceived;
   for every thing in it is grand, and worthy of God. I search in vain in
   history to find the similar to Jesus Christ, or any thing which can
   approach the gospel. Neither history, nor humanity, nor the ages, nor
   nature, offer me any thing with which I am able to compare it or to
   explain it. Here every thing is extraordinary. The more I consider the
   gospel, the more I am assured that there is nothing there which is not
   beyond the march of events, and above the human mind. Even the impious
   themselves have never dared to deny the sublimity of the gospel, which
   inspires them with a sort of compulsory veneration. What happiness that
   book procures for those who believe it I What marvels those admire
   there who reflect upon it!

   "All the words there are embedded, and joined one upon another, like
   the stones of an edifice. The spirit which binds these words together
   is a divine cement, which now reveals the sense, and again vails it
   from the mind. Each phrase has a sense complete, which traces the
   perfection of unity, and the profundity of the whole. Book unique!
   where the mind finds a moral beauty before unknown; and an idea of the
   Supreme, superior even to that which creation suggests. Who but God
   could produce that type, that idea of perfection, equally exclusive and
   original?

   "Christ, having but a few weak disciples, was condemned to death. He
   died the object of the wrath of the Jewish priests, and of the contempt
   of the nation, and abandoned and denied by his own disciples.

   "They are about to take me, and to crucify me,' said he. I shall be
   abandoned of all the world. My chief disciples will deny me at the
   commencement of my punishment. I shall be left to the wicked. But then,
   divine justice being satisfied, original sin being expiated by my
   sufferings, the bond of man to God will be renewed, and my death will
   be the life of my disciples. Then they will be more strong without me
   than with me; for they shall see me rise again. I shall ascend to the
   skies, and I shall send to them from heaven a Spirit who will instruct
   them. The Spirit of the Cross will enable them to understand my gospel.
   In fine, they will believe it; they will preach it; and they will
   convert the world.'

   "And this strange promise, so aptly called by Paul 'the foolishness of
   the cross,' this prediction of one miserably crucified, is literally
   accomplished; and the mode of the accomplishment is perhaps more
   prodigious than the promise.

   "It is not a day, nor a battle, which has decided it. Is it the
   lifetime of a man? No: it is a war, a long combat, of three hundred
   years, commenced by the apostles, and continued by their successors and
   by succeeding generations of Christians. In this conflict, all the
   kings and all the forces of the earth were arrayed on one side. Upon
   the other, I see no army but a mysterious energy, individuals scattered
   here and there, in all parts of the globe, having no other rallying
   sign than a common faith in the mysteries of the cross.

   "What a mysterious symbol, the instrument of the punishment of the
   Man-God! His disciples were armed with it. The Christ,' they said, God,
   has died for the salvation of men.' What a strife, what a tempest,
   these simple words have raised around the humble standard of the
   punishment of the Man-God! On the one side, we see rage and all the
   furies of hatred and violence; on the other, there are gentleness,
   moral courage, infinite resignation. For three hundred years, spirit
   struggled against the brutality of sense, conscience against despotism,
   the soul against the body, virtue against all the vices. The blood of
   Christians flowed in torrents. They died kissing the hand which slew
   them. The soul alone protested, while the body surrendered itself to
   all tortures. Everywhere Christians fell, and everywhere they
   triumphed.

   "You speak of Cæsar, of Alexander, of their conquests, and of the
   enthusiasm which they enkindled in the hearts of their soldiers; but
   can you conceive of a dead man making conquests, with an army faithful,
   and entirely devoted to his memory. My armies have forgotten me even
   while living, as the Carthaginian army forgot Hannibal. Such is our
   power! A single battle lost crushes us, and adversity scatters our
   friends.

   "Can you conceive of Cæsar as the eternal emperor of the Roman senate,
   and, from the depth of his mausoleum, governing the empire, watching
   over the destinies of Rome? Such is the history of the invasion and
   conquest of the world by Christianity; such is the power of the God of
   the Christians; and such is the perpetual miracle of the progress of
   the faith, and of the government of his Church. Nations pass away,
   thrones crumble; but the Church remains. What is, then, the power which
   has protected this Church, thus assailed by the furious billows of rage
   and the hostility of ages? Whose is the arm, which, for eighteen
   hundred years, has protected the Church from so many storms which have
   threatened to ingulf it?

   "Alexander, Cæsar, Charlemagne, and myself founded empires. But on what
   did we rest the creations of our genius? Upon force. Jesus Christ alone
   founded his empire upon love; and, at this hour, millions of men would
   die for him.

   "In every other existence but that of Christ, how many imperfections!
   Where is the character which has not yielded, vanquished by obstacles?
   Where is the individual who has never been governed by circumstances or
   places; who has never succumbed to the influences of the times; who has
   never compounded with any customs or passions? From the first day to
   the last, he is the same, always the same; majestic and simple;
   infinitely firm, and infinitely gentle.

   "Truth should embrace the universe. Such is Christianity,--the only
   religion which destroys sectional prejudices; the only one which
   proclaims the unity and the absolute brotherhood of the whole human
   family; the only one which is purely spiritual; in fine, the only one
   which assigns to all, without distinction, for a true country, the
   bosom of the Creator, God. Christ proved that he was the Son of the
   Eternal by his disregard of time. All his doctrines signify one only
   and the same thing,--eternity.

   "It is true that Christ proposes to our faith a series of mysteries. He
   commands with authority, that we should believe them,--giving no other
   reason than those tremendous words, I am God.' He declares it. What an
   abyss he creates by that declaration between himself' and all the
   fabricators of religion! What audacity, what sacrilege, what blasphemy,
   if it were not true! I say more: The universal triumph of an
   affirmation of that kind, if the triumph were not really that of God
   himself, would be a plausible excuse, and the proof of atheism.

   "Moreover, in propounding mysteries, Christ is harmonious with Nature,
   which is profoundly mysterious. From whence do I come? whither do I go?
   who am I? Human life is a mystery in its origin, its organization, and
   its end. In man and out of man, in Nature, every thing is mysterious.
   And can one wish that religion should not be mysterious? The creation
   and the destiny of the world are an unfathomable abyss, as also are the
   creation and destiny of each individual. Christianity at least does not
   evade these great questions; it meets them boldly: and our doctrines
   are a solution of them for every one who believes.

   "The gospel possesses a secret virtue, a mysterious efficacy, a warmth
   which penetrates and soothes the heart. One finds, in meditating upon
   it, that which one experiences in contemplating the heavens. The gospel
   is not a book: it is a living being, with an action, a power, which
   invades every thing that opposes its extension. Behold! it is upon this
   table: this book, surpassing all others [here the emperor deferentially
   placed his hand upon it], I never omit to read it, and every day with
   the same pleasure.

   "Nowhere is to be found such a series of beautiful ideas; admirable
   moral maxims, which pass before us like the battalions of a celestial
   army, and which produce in our soul the same emotions which one
   experiences in contemplating the infinite expanse of the skies,
   resplendent in a summer's night with all the brilliance of the stars.
   Not only is our mind absorbed; it is controlled: and the soul can never
   go astray with this book for its guide. Once master of our spirit, the
   faithful gospel loves us. God even is our friend, our father, and truly
   our God. The mother has no greater care for the infant whom she nurses.

   "What a proof of the Divinity of Christ! With an empire so absolute, he
   has but one single end,--the spiritual melioration of individuals, the
   purity of the conscience, the union to that which is true, the holiness
   of the soul.

   "Christ speaks, and at once generations become his by stricter, closer
   ties than those of blood,--by the most sacred, the most indissoluble,
   of unions. He lights up the flames of a love which prevails over every
   other love. The founders of other religions never conceived of this
   mystical love, which is the essence of Christianity, and is beautifully
   called charity. In every attempt to affect this thing, viz. to make
   himself beloved, man deeply feels his own impotence. So that Christ's
   greatest miracle undoubtedly is the reign of charity.

   "I have so inspired multitudes, that they would die for me. God forbid
   that I should form any comparison between the enthusiasm of the soldier
   and Christian charity, which are as unlike as their cause!

   "But, after all, my presence was necessary: the lightning of my eye, my
   voice, a word from me, then the sacred fire was kindled in their
   hearts. I do, indeed, possess the secret of this magical power which
   lifts the soul; but I could never impart it to any one. None of my
   generals ever learned it from me. Nor have I the means of perpetuating
   my name and love for me in the hearts of men, and to effect these
   things without physical means.

   "Now that I am at St. Helena, now that I am alone, chained upon this
   rock, who fights and wins empires for me? who are the courtiers of my
   misfortune? who thinks of me? who makes effort for me in Europe? Where
   are my friends? Yes: two or three, whom your fidelity immortalizes, you
   share, you console, my exile."

   Here the emperor's voice trembled with emotion, and for a moment he was
   silent. He then continued:--

   "Yes: our life once shone with all the brilliance of the diadem and the
   throne; and yours, Bertrand, reflected that splendor, as the dome of
   the Invalides, gilt by us, reflects the rays of the sun. But disaster
   came: the gold gradually became dim. The rain of misfortune and
   outrage, with which I am daily deluged, has effaced all the brightness.
   We are mere lead now, General Bertrand; and soon I shall be in my
   grave.

   "Such is the fate of great men! So it was with Cæsar and Alexander. And
   I, too, am forgotten; and the name of a conqueror and an emperor is a
   college theme! Our exploits are tasks given to pupils by their tutors,
   who sit in judgment upon us, awarding censure or praise. And mark what
   is soon to become of me: assassinated by the English oligarchy, I die
   before my time; and my dead body, too, must return to the earth, to
   become food for worms. Behold the destiny, near at hand, of him whom
   the world called the great Napoleon! What an abyss between my deep
   misery and the eternal reign of Christ, which is proclaimed, loved,
   adored, and which is extending over all the earth! Is this to die? is
   it not rather to live? The death of Christ--it is the death of God!"

   For a moment the emperor was silent. As General Bertrand made no reply,
   he solemnly added, "If you do not perceive that Jesus Christ is God,
   very well: then I did wrong to make you a general."
     __________________________________________________________________

   [30] Les documents que je publie, contiennent la pensée intime de
   Napoléon sur le Christianisme, et spécialement sur la divinité de
   l'Homme-Dieu.
     __________________________________________________________________

WILLIAM ELLERY CHANNING.

   We are far from placing Dr. Channing, the great leader of American
   Unitarianism, and one of the brightest ornaments of American literature
   (born 1780, at Newport, Rhode Island; died 1842, at Bennington,
   Vermont), in the company of unbelievers. Although heretical on the
   fundamental articles of the Holy Trinity, the Divinity of Christ, and
   the Atonement, he was, in his way, a worshiper of Jesus, and exhibited
   the power of his holy example in his lovely character and written
   works. He was deeply penetrated by the ethical spirit of Christianity,
   and certainly "not far from the kingdom of heaven." We select two
   passages from his admirable Sermons, which bear strong testimony to the
   perfection of Christ's character. The italics are our own. Compare the
   remarks on his inconsistency on p. 131 ff.

   From the Sermon on the "Character of Christ" (on Matt. xvii. 5), in Dr.
   Channing's Works, Boston, 1848, vol. iv. pp. 1-29:--

   "This Jesus lived with men: with the consciousness of unutterable
   majesty, he joined a lowliness, gentleness, humanity, and sympathy
   which have no example in human history. I ask you to contemplate this
   wonderful union. In proportion to the superiority of Jesus to all
   around him, was the intimacy, the brotherly love, with which he bound
   himself to them. I maintain that this is a character wholly remote from
   human conception. To imagine it to be the production of imposture or
   enthusiasm, shows a strange unsoundness of mind. I contemplate it with
   a veneration second only to the profound awe with which I look up to
   God. It bears no mark of human invention. It was real. It belonged to,
   and it manifested, the beloved Son of God. . . .

   "Here I pause; and indeed I know not what can be added to highten the
   wonder, reverence, and love which are due to Jesus. When I consider
   him, not only as possessed with the consciousness of an unexampled and
   unbounded majesty, but as recognizing a kindred nature in human beings,
   and living and dying to raise them to a participation of his divine
   glories; and when I see him, under these views, allying himself to men
   by the tenderest ties, embracing them with a spirit of humanity, which
   no insult, injury, or pain could for a moment repel or overpower,--I am
   filled with wonder as well as reverence and love. I feel that this
   character is not of human invention; that it was not assumed through
   fraud, or struck out by enthusiasm; for it is infinitely above their
   reach. When I add this character of Jesus to the other evidences of his
   religion, it gives, to what before seemed so strong, a new and a vast
   accession of strength: I feel as if I could not be deceived. The
   Gospels must be true: they were drawn, from a living original; they
   were founded on reality. The character of Jesus is not a fiction: he
   was what he claimed to be, and what his followers attested. Nor is this
   all. Jesus not only was, he is still, the Son of God, the Saviour of
   the world. He exists now: he has entered that heaven to which he always
   looked forward on earth. There he lives and reigns. With a clear, calm
   faith, I see him in that state of glory; and I confidently expect, at
   no distant period, to see him face to face. We have, indeed, no absent
   friend whom we shall so surely meet. Let us then, my hearers, by
   imitation of his virtues, and obedience to his word, prepare ourselves
   to join him in those pure mansions, where he is surrounding himself
   with the good and pure of our race, and will communicate to them for
   ever his own spirit, power, and joy."

   From Dr. Channing's Discourse on "The Imitableness of Christ" (Works,
   vol. iv. p. 140):--

   "I believe Jesus Christ to be more than a human being. In truth, all
   Christians so believe him. Those who suppose him not to have existed
   before his birth do not regard him as a mere man, though so reproached.
   They always separate him by broad distinctions from other men. They
   consider him as enjoying a communion with God, and as having received
   gifts, endowments, aid, lights, from him, granted to no other; and as
   having exhibited a spotless purity, which is the highest distinction of
   heaven. All admit, and joyfully admit, that Jesus Christ, by his
   greatness and goodness, throws all other human attainments into
   obscurity."
     __________________________________________________________________

DAVID FREDERICK STRAUSS.

   From his Essay, "Vergängliches und Bleibendes im Christenthum," 1838
   (Freihafen, 3tes Heft, p. 47). On Strauss, and his Leben Jesu, compare
   p. 151 ff. "

   "If in Jesus the union of the self-consciousness with the consciousness
   of God has been real, and expressed not only in words, but actually
   revealed in all the conditions of his life, he represents within the
   religious sphere the highest point, beyond whom posterity can not go;
   yea, whom it can not even equal, inasmuch as every one who hereafter
   should climb the same bight, could only do it with the help of Jesus,
   who first attained it. As little as humanity will ever be without
   religion, as little will it be without Christ; for to have religion
   without Christ would be as absurd as to enjoy poetry without regard to
   Homer or Shakspeare. And this Christ, as far as he is inseparable from
   the highest style of religion, is historical, not mythical; is an
   individual, no mere symbol. To the historical person of Christ belongs
   all in his life that exhibits his religious perfection, his discourses,
   his moral action, and- his passion. . . . He remains the highest model
   of religion within the reach of our thought; and no perfect piety is
   possible without his presence in the heart."
     __________________________________________________________________

THEODORE PARKER.

   Born in Lexington, Mass., 1810; died in Florence, 1860.

   From "A Discourse of Matters pertaining to Religion." Third ed. Boston,
   1847, p. 275 ff.

   Theodore Parker adopted, with trifling exceptions, the mythical theory
   of Dr. Strauss on the gospel history. He speaks of "limitations of
   Jesus;" says that Jesus "shared the erroneous notions of the times
   respecting devils, possessions, and demonology in general;" that he
   "was mistaken in his interpretation of the Old Testament;" that he was
   an "enthusiast," at least to some extent,--all of which, however, he
   regards as mere trifles, not affecting in the least his moral and
   religious character. Then Jesus denounces his opponents in no measured
   terms; calls the Pharisees "hypocrites," and "children of the devil."
   "We can not tell how far the historians have added to the fierceness of
   this invective; but the general fact must probably remain, that he did
   not use courteous speech." But that, he thinks, considering the youth
   of the man, was a very venial error, to make the worst of it. This is
   what Parker calls "the negative side, or the limitations of Jesus." He
   then considers, p. 278 ff, the "positive side, or the excellences of
   Jesus." From this chapter we make the following extracts:--

   "In estimating the character of Jesus, it must be remembered that lie
   died at an age when man has not reached his fullest vigor. The great
   works of creative intellect, the maturest products of man, all the deep
   and settled plans of reforming the world, come from a period when
   experience gives a wider field as the basis of hope. Socrates was but
   an embryo sage till long after the age of Jesus: poems, and
   philosophies that live, come at a later date. Now, here we see a young
   man, but little more than thirty years old, with no advantage of
   position; the son and companion of rude people; born in a town whose
   inhabitants were wicked to a proverb; of a nation, above all others,
   distinguished for their superstition, for national pride, exaltation of
   themselves, and contempt for all others; in an age of singular
   corruption, when the substance of religion had faded out from the mind
   of its anointed ministers, and sin had spread wide among a people
   turbulent, oppressed, and down-trodden. A man ridiculed for his lack of
   knowledge, in this nation of forms, of hypocritical priests, and
   corrupt people, falls back on simple morality, simple religion; unites
   in himself the sublimest precepts and divinest practices, thus more
   than realizing the dream of prophets and sages; rises free from all
   prejudice of his age, nation, or sect; gives free range to the Spirit
   of God in his breast; sets aside the law, sacred and time-honored as it
   was, its forms, its sacrifice, its temple, and its priests; puts away
   the doctors of the law, subtle, learned, irrefragable, and pours out a
   doctrine beautiful as the light, sublime as heaven, and true as God.
   The philosophers, the poets, the prophets, the Rabbis,--he rises above
   them all. Yet Nazareth was no Athens, where philosophy breathed in the
   circumambient air: it had neither Porch nor Lyceum; not even a school
   of the prophets. There is God in the heart of this youth." (p. 278,
   279.)

   "That mightiest heart that ever beat, stirred by the Spirit of God, how
   it wrought in his bosom! What words of rebuke, of comfort, counsel,
   admonition, promise, hope, did he pour out! words that stir the soul as
   summer dews call up the faint and sickly grass. What profound
   instruction in his proverbs and discourses! what wisdom in his homely
   sayings, so rich with Jewish life! what deep divinity of soul in his
   prayers, his action, sympathy, resignation!" (p. 281.)

   "Try him as we try other teachers. They deliver their word; find a few
   waiting for the consolation, who accept the new tidings,- follow the
   new method, and soon go beyond their teacher, though less mighty minds
   than he. Such is the case with each founder of a school of philosophy,
   each sect in religion. Though humble men, we see what Socrates and
   Luther never saw. But eighteen centuries have passed since the tide of
   humanity rose so high in Jesus: what man, what sect, what church, has
   mastered his thought, comprehended his method, and so fully applied it
   to life? Let the world answer in its cry of anguish. Men have parted
   his raiment among them, cast lots for his seamless coat; but that
   spirit which toiled so manfully in a world of sin and death, which died
   and suffered and overcame the world,--is that found, possessed,
   understood? Nay, is it sought for and recommended by any of our
   churches?" (p. 287.)
     __________________________________________________________________

F. PECAUT.

   This modern French author, in a work entitled "Le Christ et la
   Conscience," Paris, 1859 (which I know only from reviews and extracts),
   assails the doctrine of the sinlessness of Christ, and tries to show
   that his answers to his mother (Luke ii. 49, and John ii. 4), the
   expulsion of the profane traffickers from the temple, the cursing of
   the unfruitful fig-tree, the destruction of the herd of swine at
   Gadara, his bitter invective against the Pharisees, and his apparent
   refusal of the epithet good, indicate certain moral defects or
   imperfections in his character. Notwithstanding this studied attempt to
   disprove the sinless perfection of Christ, he feels constrained to make
   the following remarkable concession (p. 245-247), as quoted in the
   Dutch work of Dr. van Oosterzee of Utrecht, on the "Person of
   Christ:"--

   "To what hight does the character of Jesus Christ rise above the most
   sublime and and yet ever imperfect types of antiquity! What man ever
   knew to offer a more manly resistance to evil? Who endured vexation and
   contradiction better than he? Where is such a development of moral
   power united with less severity? Was there ever one seen who made
   himself heard with such royal authority? And yet no one ever was so
   gentle, so humble and kind, as he. What cordial sympathy at the sight
   of misery, and the spiritual need of his brethren! and yet, even when
   his countenance is moistened by tears, it continues to shine in
   indestructible peace. In his spirit, he lives in the house of his
   heavenly Father. He never loses sight of the invisible world; and, at
   the same time, reveals a moral and practical sense possessed by no son
   of the dust. Which is more wonderful,--the nobility of his princely
   greatness spread over his person, or the inimitable simplicity which
   surrounds his whole appearance? Pascal had seen this heavenly form when
   describing it in a manner worthy of the object: Jesus Christ has been
   humble and patient; holy, holy, holy before God; terrible to devils;
   without any sin. In what great brilliancy and wonderful magnificence he
   appears to the eye of the spirit which is open to wisdom! To shine
   forth in all his princely splendor of his holiness, it was not
   necessary that he should appear as a king; and yet he came with all the
   splendor of his standing. He was the master of all, because he is
   really their brother. His moral life is wholly penetrated by God. He
   represents virtue to me under the form of love and obedience. In our
   part, we do more than esteem him: we offer him love."
     __________________________________________________________________

ERNEST RENAN.

   From the "Vie de Jésus, par E. Renan, membre de l'Institut." Septième
   édition. Paris, 1864. English translation by Charles Edwin Wilbour,
   translator of "Les Miserables." New York, 1864. (On Renan and his book,
   compare the preceding Essay, p. 176 ff.)

   "Jesus can not belong exclusively to those who call themselves his
   disciples. He is the common honor of all who bear a human heart. His
   glory consists not in being banished from history: we render him a
   truer worship by showing that all history is incomprehensible without
   him (l'histoire entière est incompréhensible sans lui)."

   Page 50. (French ed. p. xlviii. close of the Introduction.)

   "The capital event in the history of the world is the revolution by
   which the noblest portions of humanity passed from the ancient
   religions, comprised under the vague name of paganism, to a religion
   founded upon the divine unity, the trinity, the incarnation of the Son
   of God. This conversion required nearly a thousand years for its
   accomplishment. The new religion occupied at least three hundred years
   in its formation alone. But the origin of the revolution with which we
   have to do is an event which occurred during the reigns of Augustus and
   Tiberius. Then lived a superior person, who, by his bold initiative,
   and by the love which he inspired, created the object, and fixed the
   starting-point, of the future fate of humanity. (Alors vécut une
   personne supérieure qui, par son initiative hardie, et par l'amour
   qu'elle sut intspirer, créa l'objet et posa le point de depart de la
   foi future de l'humanité.")

   Page 51. (French ed. p. 1, beginning of chap. i.)

   "This confused medley of [Messianic Jewish] visions and dreams, this
   alternation of hopes and deceptions, these aspirations incessantly
   trampled down by a hateful reality, at length found their interpreter
   in the incomparable man to whom the universal conscience has decreed
   the title of Son of God, and that with justice; since he caused
   religion to take a step in advance, incomparably greater thllan any
   other in the past, and, probably, than any yet to come. (L'homme
   incomparable auquel la conscience universelle a décerné le titre de
   Fils de Dieu, et cela avec justice, puisqu'il a fait faire à la
   religion un pas auquel nul autre ne peut et probablement ne pourra
   jamais être comparé.")

   Page 64. (French ed. p. 13, close of chap. i.)

   "Were the men who have most loftily comprehended God,--Cakya-Mouni,
   Plato, St. Paul, St. Francis d'Assisi, and St. Augustine,--at some
   moments of his changeful life, deists or pantheists? Such a question
   has no meaning. The physical and metaphysical proofs of the existence
   of God to them would have had no interest. They felt the divine within
   themselves. In the first rank of this grand family of the true sons of
   God, we must place Jesus. Jesus has no visions; God does not speak to
   him from without; God is in him; he feels that he is with God, and he
   draws from his heart what he says of his Father. tie lives in the bosom
   of God by uninterrupted communication: lie dies not see him, but lie
   understands him without need of thunder and burning bush like Moses, of
   a revealing tempest like Job, of an oracle like the old Greek sages, of
   a familiar genius like Socrates, or of an angel Gabriel like Mohammed.
   The imagination and hallucination of a St. Theresa, for example, here
   go for nothing. The intoxication of the Soufi, proclaiming himself
   identical with God, is also an entirely different thing. Jesus never
   for a moment enounces the sacrilegious idea that he is God [?]. He
   believes that he is in direct communion with God: he believes himself
   the Son of God. The highest consciousness of God which ever existed in
   the breast of humanity was that of Jesus. (La plus haute conscience de
   Dieu qui ait existé au sein de l'humanité a été celle de Jésus.")

   Page 104. (French ed. p. 51, chap. iv.)

   "It is probable that, from the very first, he looked to God in the
   relation of a son to a father. This is his great act of originality: in
   this he is in no wise of his race. (En cela il n'est nullement de sa
   race.) Neither the Jew nor the Moslem has learned this delightful
   theology of love. The God of Jesus is not the hateful master who kills
   us when he pleases, damns us when he pleases, saves us when he pleases.
   The God of Jesus is our Father. We hear him when we listen to a low
   whisper within us, which says, Father.' The God of Jesus is not the
   partial despot, who has chosen Israel for his people, and protects it
   in the face of all and against all. He is the God of humanity."

   Page 106. (56, chap. v.)

   "It can not be denied, that the maxims borrowed [?] by Jesus from his
   predecessors produce, in the gospel, an effect totally different from
   that in the ancient law, in the Pirke Aboth, [31] or in the Talmud. It
   is not the ancient law, it is not the Talmud, which has conquered and
   changed the world. Little original in itself--if by that is meant that
   it can be recomposed almost entirely [?] with more ancient maxims,--the
   evangelical morality remains none the less the highest creation which
   has emanated from the human conscience, the most beautiful code of
   perfect life that any moralist has traced. (La plus haute création qui
   soit sortie de la conscience humaine, le plus beau code de la vie
   parfaite qu'aucun moraliste ait tracé.")

   Page 110. (p. 61, chap. v.)

   "The gospel has been the supreme remedy for the sorrows of common life;
   a perpetual sursum corda; a mighty distraction from the wretched cares
   of earth; a sweet appeal, like that of Jesus to the ear of Martha:
   Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things; but
   one thing is needful.' Thanks to Jesus, the most spiritless existence,
   that most absorbed in sad or humiliating duties, has had its glimpse of
   heaven! In our bustling civilization, the memory of the free life of
   Galilee has been like the perfume of another world; like a dew of
   Hermon,' which has prevented sterility and vulgarity from completely
   usurping the field of God."

   Page 175. (p. 127, chap. x.)

   "Christ, for the first time, gave utterance to the idea upon which
   shall rest the edifice of the everlasting religion. He founded the pure
   worship--of no age, of no clime--which shall be that of all lofty souls
   to the end of time. . . . If other planets have inhabitants endowed
   with reason and morality, their religion can not be different from that
   which Jesus proclaimed at Jacob's well. Man has not been able to abide
   by this worship [in spirit and in truth]: we attain the ideal only for
   a moment. The words of Jesus were a gleam in thick night: it has taken
   eighteen hundred years for the eyes of humanity (what do I say I of an
   infinitely small portion of humanity) to learn to abide by it. But the
   gleam shall become the full day; and, after passing through all the
   circles of error, humanity will return to these words, as to the
   immortal expression of its faith and its hopes. (L'humanité reviendra a
   ce mot-là [John iv. 23], comme d l'expression immortelle de sa foi et
   de ses espérances.")

   Page 215. (p. 168, chap. xiv.)

   "Repose now in thy glory, noble founder! Thy work is finished; thy
   divinity is established. Fear no more to see the edifice of thy labors
   fall by any fault. Henceforth, beyond the reach of frailty, thou shalt
   witness, from the hights of divine peace, the infinite results of thy
   acts. At the price of a few hours of suffering, which did not even
   reach thy grand soul, thou hast bought the most complete immortality.
   For thousands of years, the world will defend thee! Banner of our
   contests, thou shalt be the standard about which the hottest battle
   will be given. A thousand times more alive, a thousand times more
   beloved since thy death, than during thy passage here below, thou shalt
   become the corner-stone of humanity so entirely, that to tear thy name
   from this world would be to rend it to its foundations. Between thee
   and God there will be no longer any distinction. (Entre toi et Dieu on
   ne distinguera plus.) Complete conqueror of death, take possession of
   thy kingdom; whither shall follow thee, by the royal road which thou
   hast traced, ages of worshipers (des siècles d'adorateurs)."

   Page 351. (p. 303, close of chap. xxv.)

   "Whatever may be the surprises of the future, Jesus will never be
   surpassed. His worship will grow young without ceasing; his legend will
   call forth tears without end; his sufferings will melt the noblest
   hearts; all ages will proclaim, that, among the sons of men, there is
   none born greater than Jesus. (Quels que puissent être les phénomènes
   inattendus de l'avenir, Jésus ne sera pas surpassé. Son culte se
   rajeunira sans cesse; sa légende provoquera des larmes sans fin; ses
   souffrances attendriront les meilleurs coeurs: tous les siècles
   proclameront qu'entre les fils des hommes, il n'en est pas né de plus
   grand que Jésus.")

   Page 376. (p. 325, end of the xxviii. and last chap.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   [31] A collection of sentences and maxims of ancient Jewish rabbis.
     __________________________________________________________________

FRANCES POWER COBBE.

   From "Broken Lights: An Inquiry into the present Condition and future
   Prospects of Religious Faith." Boston, 1864. P. 150 ff.

   This is a spirited and interesting book, on the present aspect of
   religious controversy in England, by an English lady, admirer and
   follower of Theodore Parker. Miss Cobbe is disposed to attribute the
   supernatural portions of the gospel history, "if not to the invention,
   yet, at least, to the exaggerating homage, of adoring disciples;
   proceeding stage after stage to magnify the prophet into the Messiah,
   the Messiah into the Son of God, and the Son of God into the incarnate
   Logos,--himself a God" (p. 155). She speaks highly of Renan's "Life of
   Jesus," as transcending, "for power and skill, for vivid presentation
   of all the outward conditions of the life of Christ, all older books on
   the subject, heterodox or orthodox." But she justly objects, that after
   all, in his principal figure, Renan has failed, owing to his
   semi-pantheistic standpoint, which ignores the personality of God as
   our moral Lord, with whom our souls must have the actual and real
   transactions of repentance, forgiveness, regeneration. She intimates,
   that "the treatment of a subject essentially spiritual, from a merely
   moral and æsthetic point of view, must inevitably be a failure" (p.
   150). In many passages of the "Vie de Jésus," she remarks (pp. 150,
   151), "The intrusion of esthetic criticism into the profoundest
   penetralia of religion, is, in the last degree, painful, and surely
   must be held to betray a very slight sense of the sanctity of the ideas
   subjected to such criticism. That the story of the prodigal could be
   styled 'a délicieuse parabole,' and Christ's pity for the repentant
   Magdalenes be spoken of as a 'jalousie pour la gloire de son Père dans
   ces belles créatures,' seems almost to reveal the inability of the
   speaker to comprehend the divinest thing in Christ,--his treatment of
   sin." The question, therefore, still recurs: "What think ye of Christ?
   whose son is he? who and what was that great Prophet who trod the
   fields of Palestine nineteen centuries ago, and who has ever since been
   worshiped as a God by the foremost nations of the world?" Miss Cobbe
   then proceeds to give her own views of Christ from what she calls "the
   standpoint of Theism," which, however, differs very widely from the
   Theism of the Bible, and is only a new phase of Deism and Naturalism,
   enlivened and improved by modern philanthropy and religious
   sentimentalism. We select the more striking passages as testimonies of
   a misguided but noble and highly gifted soul, groping in the dark after
   the unknown Saviour.

   "The four Gospels have given us so living, if not so correct, an image,
   and that image has shone out so long in golden radiance before the
   dazzled eyes of Christendom, that to admit it may be partially
   erroneous is the utmost stretch of our philosophy. We still persist in
   arguing and debating as if it were absolutely perfect. Small marvel,
   truly, is it so, when even the confessed creations of the poet's
   genius--a Hamlet or a Lear--become to us real persons on whom we argue
   and debate. Who shall say how real is that ideal Christ whom all of us
   hold in our hearts, whom nearly all of us have worshiped on our knees?
   . . .

   "Of that noblest countenance which once smiled upon the plains of
   Palestine, we possess not, nor will mankind ever recover, any perfect
   and infallible picture, any sun-drawn photograph which might tell us,
   with unerring certainty, he was or lie was not as our hearts may
   conceive of him. Rather do we only look sorrowfully over the waves of
   time to behold reflected therein some such faint and wavering image as
   his face may have cast on the Lake of Galilee, as he leaned at eventide
   from the ship of his disciples over the waters, stirred and rippling
   before the breeze. Some features too often recur to leave us altogether
   mistaken concerning them, and the impression of the whole countenance
   is one 'full of grace and truth.' But of the details we can decide
   nothing, nor pretend to speak of them as clear or assured.

   "One thing, however, we may hold with approximate certainty; and that
   is, that all the highest doctrines, the purest moral precepts, the most
   profound spiritual revelations, recorded in the Gospels, were actually
   those of Christ himself. The originator of the Christian movement must
   have been the greatest soul of his time, as of all time. If he did not
   speak those words of wisdom, who could have recorded them for him? It
   would have taken a Jesus to forge a Jesus.' (Theodore Parker.) . . .

   "That in him who assuredly possessed the deepest spiritual experience,
   and reached the highest spiritual eminence of all the sons of men, his
   disciples should have embodied the spiritual history of all humanity,
   is not a matter of surprise. It may be that his life did pass through
   all the phases of the inner world. It may be that there was a day when
   the first sense of independent religion awoke in his yet childish
   heart, and he asked his parent, Wist ye not that I must be about my
   Father's business?' It may be there was a long period of lonely thought
   and ascetic practice upon those desolate, burning hills of the
   Quarantania, closing at last with the same fierce strife, with tempting
   passions and interests, which every strong soul has undergone, and
   every saint has ended with the same victorious word, Get thee behind
   me, Satan!' It may be there was an hour of transfiguration, when his
   soul became glorified in the full splendor of God's love, and the
   spirits of the holy dead seemed not more heavenly than his own. It may
   be there was a dread night in Gethsemane, when the first warfare of the
   temptation had to be won again wit harder strife, and deeper prayers,
   and fast-falling tears of blood, till it, too, closed in victory, still
   holier and more complete,--Not my will, but Thine, be done.' It may be
   there was one darkest moment of all, when, in the fainting agony of the
   cross, God hid his face, withdrew the conscious Presence which could
   make all torture endurable, and left him to that uttermost trial which
   wrung forth the cry (the bitterest which ever broke from human lips),
   My God, my God! why hast thou forsaken me?' It may be that the dread
   darkness of the passion passed away; and, as the end drew on, the
   Christ knew that his Father's work, begun so long ago in the temple,
   was accomplished, and that his Father's love should be his portion for
   ever; that not now Moses and Elias, but the poor crucified thief beside
   him, should that day be with him in Paradise; that he might pray for
   his cruel foes, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do,'
   and then look back over his whole life's task, and bow his head, and
   say, It is finished!'

   "It may be that all these things were absolutely true; that, in the
   life of Jesus, the great Allegory of Humanity was a real fact taking
   place under the sun. We can believe that so it was; or, if not, then
   that it had another and more spiritual reality in the souls of those
   millions who have ever since recognized it as bearing an eternal truth
   under the vail of holiest parable.

   "But, whether these or any other passages in the life of Jesus be or be
   not historically true, we yet possess a means of forming an estimate of
   his character independently of them. We may measure him by his shadow:
   nay, rather say by the light he has cast on the world.' We may judge
   what great results he effected by his words and his life. What was the
   world before his time? what has it been since? In these inquiries, we
   can not go very far wrong. The broad and general facts of the results
   of the Christian movement are clear enough, and do not depend on
   questions of authenticity or veracity of special books. Let us obtain
   the measure of the change introduced into the world by Christianity,
   and we shall, at the same time, obtain the best measure of the
   greatness of Christ. . . .

   "The greatness of the sovereign, the statesman, the economist, the
   commander, the metaphysician, the man of learning, the scientific
   discoverer, the poet, the historian, the artist,--not one of these
   forms of outward, and, as we might say, tangible greatness, belonged in
   any degree to Christ. It is altogether in the inward world that we must
   find the traces of his work, and take the measure of his altitude. But
   here we may greatly err also; for there are many different aspects in
   which the inward world may be regarded. A moral reformer is one thing,
   a spiritual regenerator another,--a very different one. Because the
   exalted spirituality of Christ included (as, alas! lesser spiritual
   eminence has not always done) a transcendentally pure morality, it has
   happened that those who have regarded him from the rationalist side,
   and sought to give him the peculiar human dignity he deserved, have
   commonly fixed their attention on his moral teachings, and have
   proclaimed him the supreme moral reformer of the world. He was so,
   indeed; but he was surely something more. . . .

   "If we admit the truth of all this, then it appears that the fact of
   regeneration must be admitted to be the most important of all the
   phenomena of the moral world. Nothing else can compare with it for
   influence on the whole life and character of man. In judging; then, of
   the greatness of such a religious teacher as Christ, this one most
   important fact must not be left out of sight. We must not pass over it,
   and inquire only of his ethics or his theology. We must ask, Had he
   influence in this matter also? Did he do aught toward aiding mankind to
   take that one greatest step,--from the unregenerate to the regenerate
   life?

   "Now, it would appear, that, if we actually estimate Christ by the
   influence he has had in the life of humanity, we shall find that it is
   precisely here that we come on the largest traces of his work. Taking
   the whole ancient world in comparison with the modern, of the heathen
   with the Christian, the general character of the two is absolutely
   analogous to that which in individuals we call unregenerate and
   regenerate. Of course, there were thousands of regenerated
   souls,--Hebrew, Greek, Indian,--of all nations and languages, before
   Christ. Of course, there are millions unregenerate now. But
   nevertheless, from this time onward, we trace through history a new
   spirit in the world,--a leaven working through the whole mass of souls.
   In the old world, all was complete after its kind: man fulfilled his
   own ideal, and did that which he aimed to do of beautiful, noble, and
   devoted. In the new world, nothing is complete, but all is straining
   upward after God and an unattainable perfection of holiness. The
   language of the old world, speaking to us through its art, its poetry,
   its philosophy, is all the same: It is well to create the beautiful, to
   discover the true, to live out the good and noble. I have created
   beauty, discovered truth, lived out the good and noble.' The language
   of the new world, coming to us through the thousand tongues of our
   multiform civilization, is one long cry of longing aspiration: Would
   that I could create the ineffable beauty! Would that I could discover
   the eternal and absolute truth! Would, oh, would it were possible to
   live out the good, the noble, and the holy!'

   "The old world grew from without, and was outwardly symmetric. The new
   one grows from within, and is not symmetric, nor ever will be; bearing
   in its heart the germ of an everlasting, unresting progress. The old
   world built its temples, hewed its statues, framed its philosophies,
   and wrote its glorious epics and dramas, so that nothing might evermore
   be added to them. The new world makes its art, its philosophy, its
   poetry, all imperfect, yet instinct with a living spirit beyond the
   old. To the Parthenon not a stone could be added from the hour of its
   completion. To Milan and Cologne, altar and chapel, statue and spire,
   will be added through the ages.

   "This great phenomenon of history surely points to some corresponding
   great event, whereby the revolution was accomplished. There must have
   been a moment when the old order stopped and the new began. Some action
   must have taken place upon the souls of men, which thenceforth started
   them in a different career, and opened the age of progressive life.
   When did this moment arrive? What was the primal act of the endless
   progress? By whom was that age opened?

   "Here we have really ground to go upon. There is no need to establish
   the authenticity or veracity of special books, or harmonize discordant
   narratives, to obtain an answer to our question. The whole voice of
   human history, unconsciously and without premeditation, bears its
   unmistakable testimony. The turning-point between the old world and the
   new was the beginning of the Christian movement. The action upon human
   nature, which started it on its new course, was the teaching and
   example of Christ. Christ was he who opened the age of endless
   progress.

   "The view, therefore, which seems to be the sole fittings one for our
   estimate of the character of Christ, is that which regards him as the
   great regenerator of humanity. His coming was, to the life of humanity,
   what regeneration is to the life of the individual. This is not a
   conclusion doubtfully deduced from questionable biographies, but a
   broad, plain inference from the universal history of our race. We may
   dispute all details; but the grand result is beyond criticism. The
   world has changed, and that change is historically traceable to Christ.
   The honor, then, which Christ demands of us, must be in proportion to
   our estimate of the value of such regeneration. He is not merely a
   moral reformer, inculcating pure ethics; not merely a religious
   reformer, clearing away old theological errors, and teaching higher
   ideas of God. These things he was; but he might, for all we can tell,
   have been them both as fully, and yet have failed to be what he has
   actually been to our race. He might have taught the world better ethics
   and better theology, and yet have failed to infuse into it that new
   life which has ever since coursed through its arteries and penetrated
   its minutest veins. What Christ has really done is beyond the kingdom
   of the intellect and its theologies; nay, even beyond the kingdom of
   the conscience, and its recognition of duty. His work has been in that
   of the heart. He has transformed the law into the gospel. He has
   changed the bondage of the alien for the liberty of the sons of God. He
   has glorified virtue into holiness, religion into piety, and duty into
   love. . . .

   "When the fullness of time had come, and the creeds of the world's
   childhood were worn out, and the restless question was on every lip,
   Who will show us any good?' when the whole heart of humanity was sick
   of its sin, and weary of its wickedness,--then God gave to one man, for
   mankind at large, that same blessed task he gives to many for a few.
   Christ, the elder brother of the human family, was the helper and (in
   the highest philosophic sense) the Saviour of humanity. . . .

   "The manner in which Christ achieved the regeneration of the world, who
   shall now decide? Was it only by his great, holy words; telling men
   that God was the Father of all,--of the just as of the unjust,--the
   forgiving Parent of the prodigal; the Shepherd who would follow the
   wanderer even unto the utmost verge of the wilderness of his
   wickedness, and bring him home at last with rejoicing? Was it thus, and
   by telling man that to love God and his neighbor fulfilled all the law
   and the prophets,--was it thus that Christ touched the heart of the
   world? Or was it by his life, so pure and holy, that men saw, as in a
   visible parable, what it meant to be God's beloved Son,--to be one with
   the Father, even as all men should be one with him? Was it thus that
   Christ awoke in human nature the unutterable yearning after such
   sonship and such unity with God? Or was it that words and life all
   found their crown and end in his martyr death,--that death which
   transformed for ever the world's ideal of glory, and made for all time
   the cross of agony and sacrifice the type of somewhat so far above all
   earthly power and joy, that men ceased to deem it human, and adored it
   as divine? Was it on that cross Christ won the regeneration of the
   world?

   "We know not: it concerns us not to know. One thing we must
   believe,--that he to whom was committed such a work, he to whom such a
   part was assigned in the drama of history by its great Author, must
   have been spiritually of transcendent excellence. Of ordinary genius,
   or powers of any kind, he may have had less or more; but of those
   hidden faculties by which the highest religious truths are reached, and
   of that fervent loyalty by which the soul is fitted to receive divine
   instruction,--of these Christ must have had a superabundant share.
   Strictly to define his spiritual rank, he must surely have been the man
   who best fulfilled all the conditions under which God grants his
   inspiration.

   "Such are the views of Christ and his work which would appear most
   consonant with a Theism which holds by the absolute unity of God, and
   the unchangeableness of his natural and spiritual laws, but which,
   nevertheless, admits all the great facts of the religious experience of
   mankind, and seeks for their legitimate explanation. It is precisely in
   the interests of such Theism that the views of Christ's character
   should be thus exalted; and he who deems to serve its cause by
   underrating him must surely be in error. God is best honored by the
   glad admission, that the man who has most deeply moved humanity was
   most fully inspired by his spirit. The regularity of his laws is best
   vindicated by the assertion, that it was not by any accidental
   synchronism of a corrupted and falling civilization, with the
   appearance of a specially gifted thaumaturgus, that the greatest moral
   revolution was accomplished, but rather by the providential mission, in
   the fullness of time, of that holiest soul whose fire was able to
   kindle in the hearts of man a flame which shall never be extinguished.
   The spiritual greatness of Christ is the necessary postulate for the
   whole rationalist theory of religion. Denying it, we leave the standing
   miracle of Christianity wholly unaccountable, or to be accounted for
   only on the exorbitant hypothesis of supernaturalism."

THE END.
     __________________________________________________________________
     __________________________________________________________________

                                    Indexes
     __________________________________________________________________

Index of Scripture References

   Judges

   [100]14:14

   Ruth

   [101]1:1-2

   2 Chronicles

   [102]11:16

   Nehemiah

   [103]11:25

   Psalms

   [104]22:2   [105]110:2

   Isaiah

   [106]53:1-12   [107]53:3   [108]63:3

   Jeremiah

   [109]21:5

   Daniel

   [110]7:13   [111]7:13

   Micah

   [112]5:1

   Matthew

   [113]2:1-11   [114]3:17   [115]4   [116]4   [117]4:17   [118]4:19
   [119]5:21   [120]5:22-24   [121]5:27-28   [122]5:44   [123]8:5-13
   [124]8:22   [125]9:6   [126]9:6   [127]9:9   [128]9:27   [129]11:27
   [130]11:27   [131]11:28   [132]12:1-8   [133]12:8   [134]12:23
   [135]13:54-56   [136]14:25   [137]14:25   [138]14:29   [139]14:33
   [140]15:22   [141]16:16   [142]16:16   [143]16:17   [144]16:19
   [145]17:5   [146]17:5   [147]18:11   [148]18:11   [149]19:4-9
   [150]19:17   [151]19:28   [152]20:27-28   [153]21:9   [154]21:37
   [155]22:41   [156]22:42   [157]24:30   [158]25:31   [159]25:31
   [160]26:63   [161]26:63   [162]26:63-65   [163]26:64   [164]26:64
   [165]27:3-4   [166]27:4   [167]27:11   [168]27:19   [169]27:19
   [170]27:19   [171]27:24   [172]27:24   [173]27:24-54   [174]27:43
   [175]27:46   [176]27:54   [177]28:18-20   [178]28:19   [179]28:19-20

   Mark

   [180]2:10   [181]2:14   [182]2:23-28   [183]2:28   [184]3:11
   [185]6:3   [186]7:37   [187]8:84   [188]10:21   [189]12:6
   [190]13:32   [191]14:62   [192]15:39

   Luke

   [193]1:33   [194]1:35   [195]1:35   [196]1:41-45   [197]1:46-55
   [198]1:47   [199]1:67-70   [200]1:80   [201]2:11   [202]2:40
   [203]2:40   [204]2:42   [205]2:49   [206]2:49   [207]2:49   [208]2:52
   [209]2:52   [210]2:52   [211]3:22   [212]4   [213]4:16   [214]5:1-9
   [215]5:20-24   [216]5:27   [217]7:37   [218]7:47-48   [219]9:23
   [220]9:35   [221]9:56   [222]9:58   [223]9:59   [224]10:22
   [225]10:30-37   [226]13:1-4   [227]17:4   [228]18:22   [229]19:10
   [230]19:10   [231]21:27   [232]21:36   [233]22:28   [234]22:30
   [235]22:43   [236]23:22-47   [237]23:47

   John

   [238]1:1   [239]1:1-14   [240]1:6   [241]1:18   [242]1:34   [243]1:43
   [244]1:48   [245]1:49   [246]1:51   [247]2:4   [248]3:13   [249]3:13
   [250]3:17   [251]3:36   [252]4:5   [253]4:7   [254]4:23   [255]4:26
   [256]4:34   [257]4:42   [258]5:16-18   [259]5:19-26   [260]5:22
   [261]5:23   [262]5:24   [263]5:25-27   [264]5:27   [265]5:30
   [266]5:34   [267]5:36   [268]5:39   [269]6:40   [270]6:47
   [271]6:50-58   [272]6:53   [273]6:69   [274]7:3-10   [275]7:15
   [276]8:3   [277]8:12   [278]8:24   [279]8:46   [280]8:57   [281]8:58
   [282]8:58   [283]9:3   [284]9:35-38   [285]10:9   [286]10:27
   [287]10:30   [288]10:30   [289]10:36   [290]10:38   [291]10:38
   [292]11:4   [293]11:25   [294]11:25   [295]11:27   [296]12:26
   [297]12:47   [298]14:6   [299]14:9   [300]14:11   [301]14:13
   [302]14:27   [303]16:33   [304]17:1   [305]17:3   [306]17:5
   [307]17:13   [308]17:22   [309]18:36   [310]18:37   [311]19:7
   [312]20:21   [313]20:28   [314]20:31

   Acts

   [315]3:14   [316]10:1   [317]18:3   [318]26:26

   Romans

   [319]7

   1 Corinthians

   [320]11:1   [321]15:6   [322]15:6

   2 Corinthians

   [323]4:4   [324]5:21

   Colossians

   [325]1:16

   1 Thessalonians

   [326]1:6

   Hebrews

   [327]1:2-3   [328]2:10-18   [329]4:15   [330]4:15   [331]4:15
   [332]5:7-9   [333]5:8   [334]5:8   [335]5:8-9   [336]7:26   [337]12:3

   1 Peter

   [338]1:19   [339]2:22   [340]3:18

   1 John

   [341]2:29   [342]3:5   [343]3:7   [344]5:13
     __________________________________________________________________

Index of Greek Words and Phrases

     * Christos outos elegeto: [345]1
     * ginesthai: [346]1
     * agape: [347]1
     * amen, amen: [348]1
     * egeneto: [349]1
     * elpis: [350]1
     * en tois tou patros mou dei: [351]1
     * epi: [352]1
     * epi ten thalassan: [353]1
     * epi tes thalasses: [354]1
     * epi tes thalasses tes Tiberiados: [355]1
     * esmen: [356]1
     * ephane gar autois triten echon hemeran zon.: [357]1
     * hetairai: [358]1
     * hen: [359]1
     * hemeis pepisteukamen kai egnokamen: [360]1
     * en: [361]1
     * Hemarton paradous haima athoon: [362]1
     * ho alethinos anthropos: [363]1
     * ho Christos outos en.: [364]1
     * Kata Christianon logoi: [365]1
     * Logos: [366]1
     * Oudeis popote Sokratous ouden asebes oude anosion oute p`attontos
       eiden, oute legontos ekousen: [367]1
     * Peri tes ek logion philosophias: [368]1
     * Tessara stoicheia malista kakratuntho peri theou, pistis, aletheia,
       eros: [369]1
     * Christos outos en: [370]1
     * genesthai: [371]1
     * dikaios: [372]1 [373]2
     * dikaios ekeinos: [374]1
     * dei: [375]1
     * eimi : [376]1
     * einai me: [377]1
     * einai: [378]1
     * theou huios: [379]1 [380]2
     * kaiper on huios, emathen aph' hon epathen ten hupakoen, kai
       teleiotheis egeneto, k. t. l.: [381]1
     * kalos panta pepoieke: [382]1
     * lego humin, prin Abraam genesthai ego eimi: [383]1
     * meden gar adikon doxan echeto tes megistes adikias: [384]1
     * moicheia: [385]1
     * ouden akoes axion.: [386]1
     * panther: [387]1
     * paradoxon ergon p9oietes.: [388]1
     * pepeirasmenon kata panta kath' homoioteta choris hamartias: [389]1
     * periepatesen epi ta hudata: [390]1
     * peripaton epi tes thalusses: [391]1
     * peripatein: [392]1
     * to gennomenon hagion: [393]1
     * to paidion euxanen kai ekrataiouto pneumati: [394]1
     * tous kullous kai tous tuphlous iasasthai, k9ai daimonontas
       ephorkizein.: [395]1
     * tois: [396]1
     * huios tou anthropou: [397]1 [398]2
     * huios tou Theou: [399]1
     * huios: [400]1
     __________________________________________________________________

Index of Latin Words and Phrases

     * à-priori: [401]1 [402]2
     * Corpus Doctrinæ: [403]1
     * Credat Judæus Apella: [404]1
     * Fides præcedit intellectum: [405]1
     * Intellectus præcedit fidem: [406]1
     * Loca talmudica, in quibus Jesu et discipulorum ejus fit mentio:
       [407]1
     * Mundus non factus est in tempore, sed cum tempore.: [408]1
     * NEBICULA est; transibit: [409]1
     * Neque enim quæro intelligere ut credam sed credo ut intelligam. Nam
       qui non crediderit, non experietur, et qui expertus non fuerit, non
       intelliget.: [410]1
     * Nitimur in vetitum semper cupimusque negata: [411]1
     * Omnes enim venit: [412]1
     * Quem: [413]1
     * Tela ignea Satanæ; hoc est arcani et horribiles Judæorum adversus
       Christurn Deum et christianam religionem anecdoti: [414]1
     * Video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor: [415]1
     * ad locum: [416]1
     * amicæ: [417]1
     * bene omnia fecit: [418]1
     * centurio supplicio præpositus: [419]1
     * corpus mortuum: [420]1
     * credidimus et cognovimus: [421]1
     * exactor mortis: [422]1
     * ignis fatuus: [423]1
     * immortalitas major: [424]1
     * immortalitas minor: [425]1
     * impeccabilitas major: [426]1
     * impeccabilitas minor: [427]1
     * lupa: [428]1
     * multitudo ingens: [429]1
     * non posse mori: [430]1
     * non posse peccare: [431]1
     * onus probandi: [432]1
     * penetralia: [433]1
     * petitio principii: [434]1
     * posse non mori: [435]1
     * posse non peccare: [436]1
     * rationalismus communis: [437]1
     * sanctissimum: [438]1
     * sub verbo : [439]1
     * sursum corda: [440]1
     * terra incognita: [441]1
     * testimonium animæ naturaliter Christianæ: [442]1
     * vice versâ: [443]1
     * vulgaris: [444]1
     __________________________________________________________________

Index of German Words and Phrases

     * "Du hast: [445]1
     * "Wer die Pfaffen aus der Kirche : [446]1
     * Bei den Griechen tritt das Laster der Pæderastie mit allen
       Symptomen einer grossen nationalen Krankheit, gleichsam eines
       ethischen Miasma auf; es zeigt sich als ein Gefühl, das stärker und
       heftiger wirkte, als die Weiberliebe bei anderen Volkern,
       massloser, leidenschaftlicher in seinen Ansbrüchen war. Rasende
       Eifersucht, unbedingte Hingebung, sinnliche Gluth, zärtliche
       Tändelei, nächtliches Weilen vor der Thüre des Geliebten, Alles,
       was zur Carricatur der natürlichen Geschlechtsliebe gehört, findet
       sich dabei. Auch die ernstesten Moralisten waren in der
       Beurtheilung des Verhältnisses höchst nachsichtig, sie behandelten
       die Sache häufig mehr mit leichtsinnigem Scherze, und duldeten die
       Schuldigen in ihrer Gesellschaft. In der gauzen Literatur der
       vorchristlichen Periode : [447]1
     * Christus war von allen andern Menschen unterschieden : [448]1
     * Da Abraham nicht präexistist hatte, sondern: [449]1
     * Denkgläubige: [450]1
     * Der Reinste unter den Mächtigen, der Mächtigste unter den Reinen,
       der mit seiner durchstochenen Hand Reiche aus der Angel, den Strom
       der Jahrhunderte aus dem Bette hob und noch fortgebietet den
       Zeiten.: [451]1
     * Es ist heute kein Wagniss mehr, zu sagen, dass Shakspeare in jener
       Zeit an Umfang vielfachen Wissens sehr wenige seines Gleichen
       gehabt habe.: [452]1
     * Hier hat sogar die Einmischung philosophischer Construction und
       bewusster Dichtung alle Wahrscheinlichkeit.: [453]1
     * Ich halte die Evangelien für durchaus ächt; denn est is in ihnen
       der Abglanz einer Hoheit wirksam, die von der Person Christi
       ausging und die so göttlicher Art, wie nur je auf Erden das
       Göttliche erschienen ist.: [454]1
     * Jesu Heiligkeit und Weisheit, durch die er unter den sündigen,
       viel-irrenden Menschen einzig dasteht, weiset . . . . auf einen
       übernatürlichen Ursprung seiner Person. Diese muss, um inmitten der
       Sünderwelt begreiflich zu sein, aus einer eigenthümlichen und
       wunderbar schöpferischen That Gottes abgeleitet, ja es muss in
       Christus . . . . von Gott aus betrachtet, eine Incarnation
       göttlicher Liebe, also göttlichen Wesens gesehen werden, was ihn
       als den Punkt erscheinen lässt, wo Gott und die Menschheit einzig
       und innigst geeinigt sind.: [455]1
     * Keine weder psychologische noch dialektische Analyse kann das
       innere Geheimniss des Actes erforschen, in welchem Gott seinen Sohn
       in ihm enthüllte: [456]1
     * Menschen, die sich selbst zu Gott machen, sind immer entweder
       Verrückte oder Bösewichter. Wer anders als wer selbst ein Frevler
       ist, wird es wagen Jesum in die eine oder die andere : [457]1
     * Schlussabhandlung: [458]1
     * So führt schon das Vollendet-Menschliche in Jesu, wenn wir es mit
       allem Uebrigen, was die Menschheit darbietet, vergleichen, zur
       Anerkennung des Göttlichen in ihm.: [459]1
     * Stift: [460]1
     * Ueber den Gott in : [461]1
     * das Wunder der Auferstehung, das allein die Zweifel der älteren
       Apostel zerstreuen konnte, welche den Glauben selbst in die ewige
       Nacht des Todes verstossen zu müssen schienen: [462]1
     * das grösste Wort, was je ein Sterblicher gesagt hat, die
       herrlichste Apotheose; keine Gottheit kann gewisser sein als die,
       welche so sich selbst verkündiget: [463]1
     * das schöne Ebenmaass aller Kräfte: [464]1
     * der zu denken glaubt und zu glauben denkt; es ist aber mit beidem
       gleich null: [465]1
     * dogmatische Voraussetzungslosigkeit: [466]1
     * für das deutsche Volk bearbeitet: [467]1
     * vollendete Gottesliebe dargestellt in reinster Humanität: [468]1
     * werden: [469]1
     __________________________________________________________________

Index of French Words and Phrases

     * "Je crois: [470]1
     * que quatre hommes d'accord: [471]1
     * 'jalousie pour la gloire de son Père dans ces belles créatures:
       [472]1
     * . . Quel aveuglemnent ou quelle mourvaise foi ne. . . .: [473]1
     * A ce miracle de sa volonté, comment ne pas reconnaître le Verbe
       créateur du monde.: [474]1
     * A merveilles, messieurs, à merveilles, je ne connais personne en
       France ni ailleurs, qui sache écrire et parler avec plus d'art et
       de talent. Cependant malgré tout le mal que nous avons dis, et sans
       doute avec beaucoup de raison, de ce diable de livre, j'ose vous
       défier, tout sant que vous êtes, de faire un recit qui soit aussi
       simple, mais en même temps aussi sublime, aussi touchant que le
       récit de la passion et de la mort de Jésus-Christ, qui produise le
       même effet, qui fasse une sensation aussi forte, aussi généralement
       ressentie, et dont l'influence soit encore la même après tant de
       siècles.: [475]1
     * Alors vécut une personne supérieure qui, par son initiative hardie,
       et par l'amour qu'elle sut intspirer, créa l'objet : [476]1
     * Appuyée sur la Bible, cette doctrine explique le mieux les
       traditions du monde; elle les éclaircit, et les autres dogmes s'y
       rapportent étroitement comme les anneaux scellés d'une même chaîne.
       L'existence du Christ d'un bout à l'autre est un tissu tout
       mystérieux, j'en conviens, mais ce mystère répond à des difficultés
       qui sont dans toutes les existences; rejetez-le, le monde est une
       énigme: acceptez-le, vous avez une admirable solution de l'histoire
       de l'homme.: [477]1
     * Aussi le plus grand miracle du Christ, sans contredit, c'est la
       règne de la charité.: [478]1
     * Avec tout cela, ce même Évangile est plein de choses incroyables,
       de choses qui répugnent à la raison, et qu'il est impossible à tout
       homme sensé de concevoir ni d'admettre. Que faire au milieu de
       tontes ces contradictions? Étre toujours modeste et circonspect,
       mon enfant; respecter en silence ce qu'on ne sauroit ni rejeter, ni
       comprendre, et s'humilier devant le grand Étre, qui seul sait la
       vérité.: [479]1
     * C'est qu'il n'avaient garde de se lancer contre un ecueil. C'est
       que dans un opération semblable, se faire aimer: [480]1
     * C'est un Jesus-Christ faux et impossible, fait de main d'homme, qui
       prétend à détrôner le Jesus-Christ réel et vivant, fils de Dieu.:
       [481]1
     * Cette apostrophe imprévue étonna tous les auditeurs, et fut suivie
       même d'un assez long silence.: [482]1
     * Comment donc un juif, dont l'existence historique est plus avéré
       que toutes celles des temps où il a vécu, lui seul, fils d'un
       charpentier, se donne-t-il tout d'abord pour Dieu même, pour l'être
       par excellence, pour le Créateur de tous les êtres. Il s'arroge
       toutes les sortes d'adorations. Il bâtit son culte de ses mains,
       non avec des pierres, mais avec des hommes. On s'extasie sur les
       conquêtes d'Alexandre! Eh bien! voici un conquérant qui confisque à
       son profit, qui unit, qui incorpore à lui-même, non pas une nation,
       mais l'espèce humaine. Quel miracle! l'âme humaine, avec toutes ses
       facultés, devient une annexe avec l'existence du Christ.: [483]1
     * Dans une de ces soirées du Baron d'Holbach où se reunissaient les
       plus célèbres incredules du siècle, on venait de se donner pleine
       carrière pour rélever le plus plaisamment du monde les prétendues
       absurdités, les bêtises, les inepties de tout genre dont
       fourmillent nos livres sacrés. Le philosophe Diderot, qui n'avait
       pas pris lui-même une mince part à la conversation, finit par
       l'arrêter tout à coup en disant:: [484]1
     * Dans une lettre à M. de . . ., datée de 1769, Rousseau revient
       encore sur ce parallèle établi par lui entre Jésus et Socrate; et
       ne supposant aucun caractère divin ni mission surnaturelle au sage
       hébreu, qu'il oppose de nouveau au sage grec, il présente sur les
       vue et la conduite du premier des considérations toutes nouvelles.
       Voyez la Correspondance: [485]1
     * En cela il n'est nullement de sa race.: [486]1
     * Encore un moment:--voilà mon sort et ce qui va m'arriver a
       moi-même--assassiné par l'oligarchie anglaise, je meurs avant le
       temps, et mon cadavre aussi va être rendu à la terre pour y devenir
       la pâture des vers.: [487]1
     * Enfin, et c'est mon dernier argument, il n'y a pas de Dieu dans le
       ciel, si un homme a pu concevoir et exécuter, avec un plein succès,
       le dessein gigantesque de dérober pour lui le culte suprême, en
       usurpant le nom de Dieu. Jésus est le seul qui l'ait osé, il est le
       seul qui ait dit clairement, affirmé imperturbablement lui-même de
       lui-même: Je suis Dieu: [488]1
     * Entre toi et Dieu on ne distinguera plus: [489]1
     * Et comment? par un prodige qui surpasse tout prodige. Il veut
       l'amour des hommes, c'est-à-dire, ce qu'il est le plus difficile au
       monde d'obtenir: ce qu'un sage demande vainement à quelques amis,
       un père à ses enfants, une épouse à son époux, un frère à son
       frère, en un mot, le coeur: c'est la ce qu'il vent pour lui, il
       l'exige absolument, et il y réussit tout de suite. J'en conclus sa
       divinité. Alexandre, César, Annibal, Louis XIV., avec tout leur
       génie, y ont échoué. Ils ont conquis le monde et il n'ont pu
       parvenir à avoir un ami. Je suis peut-être le seul, de nos jours,
       qui aime Annibal, César, Alexandre. Le grand Louis XIV., qui a jeté
       tant d'éclat sur la France et dans le monde, n'avait pas un ami
       dans tout son royaume, même dans sa famille. Il est vrai, nous
       aimons nos enfants: pourquoi? Nous obéissons à un instinct de la
       nature, à une volonté de Dieu, à une necessite que les bêtes
       elles-mêmes reconnaissent et remplissent; mais combien d'enfants
       qui restent insensibles à nos caresses, à tant de soins que nous
       leur prodiguons, combien d'enfants ingrats? Vos enfants, général
       Bertrand, vous aiment-ils? vous les aimez, et vous n'êtes pas sûr
       d'être payé de retour. Ni vos bienfaits, ni la nature, ne
       réussiront jamais à leur inspirer un amour tel que celui des
       chrétiens pour Dieu! Si vous veniez à mourir, vos enfants se
       souviendraient de vous en dépensant votre fortune, sans doute, mais
       vos petits enfants sauraient à peine si vous avez existé. Et vous
       êtes le général Bertrand! Et nous somiames dans une île, et vous
       n'avez d'autre distraction que la vue de votre famille.: [490]1
     * Ici la voix de l'Empereur prit un accent particulier d'ironique
       mélancolie et de profonde tristesse. "Oui, notre existence a brillé
       de tout l'éclat du diadême et de la souveraineté; et la votre,
       Bertrand, réfléchissait cet éclat comme le dôme des Invalides, doré
       par nous, réfléchit les rayons du soleil. Mais les revers sont
       venus, l'or peu à peu s'est effacé. La pluie du malheur et des
       outrages, dont on m'abreuve chaque jour, en emporte les dernières
       parcelles. Nous ne sommes plus que du plomb, général Bertrand, et
       bientôt je serai de la terre.: [491]1
     * Il est vrai que le Christ propose à notre foi une série de
       mystères. Il commande avec autorité d'y croire, sans donner
       d'autres raisons que cette parole épouvantable: Je suis Dieu:
       [492]1
     * Jésus, à se double point de vue, est sans égal; sa gloire reste
       entière et sera toujours renouvelée.: [493]1
     * J'ai passionne des multitudes qui mouraient pour moi. A Dieu ne
       plaise que je forme aucune comparaison entre l'enthousiasme des
       soldats et la charité chrétienne, qui sont aussi différents que
       leur cause.: [494]1
     * Jamais des auteurs juifs n'eussent trouvé ni ce ton, ni cette
       morale; et l'évangile a des caractères de vérité si grands, si
       frappans, si parfaitement inimitable, que l'inventeur en serait
       plus étonnant que le héros.: [495]1
     * Je vous avoue aussi que la majesté des Écritures m'étonne, la
       sainteté de l'Évangile parle à mon coeur.: [496]1
     * Je vous avoue aussi que la sainteté de l'Evangile est un argument
       qui parle à mon coeur, et auquel j'aurais même regret de trouver
       quelque bonne réponse. Voyez les livres. . . .: [497]1
     * L'Evangile possède une vertu secrète, je ne sais quoi d'efficace,
       une chaleur qui agit sur l'entendement et qui charme le coeur; on
       éprouve à le méditer, ce qu'on éprouve à contempler le ciel.
       L'Evangile n'est pas un livre, c'est un être vivant, avec une
       action, une puissance, qui envahit tout ce qui s'oppose à son
       extension. Le voici sur cette table, cc livre par excellence [et
       ici l'Empereur le toucha avec respect]; je ne me lasse pas de le
       lire, et tous les jours avec le même plaisir.: [498]1
     * L'homme incomparable auquel la conscience universelle a décerné le
       titre de Fils de Dieu, et cela avec justice, puisqu'il a fait faire
       à la religion un pas auquel nul autre ne peut et probablement ne
       pourra jamais être comparé.: [499]1
     * L'humanité reviendra a ce mot-là: [500]1
     * La légende était ainsi le fruit d'une grande conspiration toute
       spontanée et s'élaborait autour de lui de son vivant. Aucun grand
       événement de l'histoire ne s'est passé sans donner lieu à un cycle
       de fables, et Jésus n'eût pu, quand il l'eût voulu, couper court à
       ces créations populaires.: [501]1
     * La plus haute conscience de Dieu qui ait existé au sein de
       l'humanité a été celle de Jésus.: [502]1
     * La plus haute création qui soit sortie de la conscience humaine, le
       plus beau code de la vie parfaite qu'aucun moraliste ait tracé.:
       [503]1
     * Le Christ ne varie pas, il n'hésite jamais dans son enseignement,
       et la moindre affirmation de lui est marquée d'un cachet de
       simplicité et de profondeur qui captive l'ignorant et le savant,
       pour peu qu'ils y prêtent leur attention.: [504]1
     * Le Christ parle, et désormais le générations lui appartiennent par
       des liens plus étroits, plus intimes que ceux du sang; par une
       union plus sacrée, plus impérieuse que quelque union que ce soit.
       Il allume la flamme d'un amour qui fait mourir l'amour de soi, qui
       prévaut sur tout autre amour.: [505]1
     * Le christianisme a un avantage sur tous les philosophes et sur
       toutes les religions: les chrétiens ne se font pas illusion sur la
       nature des choses. On ne peut leur reprocher ni la subtilité ni le
       charlatanisme des idéologues, qui ont cru résoudre la grande énigme
       des questions théologiques, avec des vaines dissertations sur ces
       grands objets. Insensés, dont la folie ressemble à celle d'un petit
       enfant qui veut toucher le ciel avec sa main, ou qui demande la
       lune pour son jouet ou sa curiosité. Le christianisme dit avec
       simplicité: "Nul homme n'a vu Dieu, si ce n'est Dieu. Dieu a révelé
       ce qu'il était: sa révélation est un mystère que la raison ni
       l'esprit ne peuvent concevoir. Mais puisque Dieu a parlé, il faut y
       croire." Cela est d'un grand bon sens.: [506]1
     * Les fondateurs de religion n'ont pas même eu l'idée de cet amour
       mystique, qui est l'essence du christianisme, sous le beau nom de
       charité.: [507]1
     * Lui seul, il est parvenu à élever le coeur des hommnes jusqu'à
       l'invisible, jusqu'au sacrifice du temps: lui seul, en créant cette
       immolation, a crée un lien entre le ciel et la terre.: [508]1
     * Maintenant que je suis à Sainte-Hélène--maintenant que je suis seul
       et cloué sur ce roc, qui bataille et conquiert des empires pour
       moi? Où sont les courtisans de mon infortune? Pense-t-on à moi? Qui
       se remue pour moi en Europe? Qui m'est demeure fidèle, où sont mes
       amis? Oui, deux ou trois, que votre fidélité immortalise, vous
       partagez, vous consolez mon exil.: [509]1
     * Mais enfin, il fallait ma presence, l'électricité de mon regard,
       mon accent, une parole de moi; alors, j'allumais le feu sacré dans
       les coeurs. Certes je possède le secret de cette puissance magique
       qui enlève l'esprit, mais je ne saurais le communiquer à personne;
       aucun de mes généraux ne l'a reçu ou deviné de moi; je n'ai pas
       d'avantage le secret d'éterniser mon nom et mon amour dans les
       coeurs, et d'y opérer des prodiges sans les secours de la matière.:
       [510]1
     * Non seulement notre esprit est préoccupé, mais il est dominé par
       cette lecture, et jamais l'âme ne court risque de s'égarer avec ce
       livre.: [511]1
     * Nulle part on ne trouve cette série de belles idées, de belles
       maximes morales, qui défilent comme les bataillons de la milice
       céleste, et qui produisent dans notre âme le même sentiment que
       l'on éprouve à considérer l'étendue infinie du ciel resplendissant,
       par une belle nuit d'été, de tout l'éclat des astres.: [512]1
     * Oui, si la vie et la mort de Socrate sont d'un sage, la vie et la
       mort de Jesus sont d'un Dieu: [513]1
     * Oui, si la vie et la mort de Socrate sont d'un sage; la vie et la
       mort de Jésus sont d'un dieu!: [514]1
     * Quand Platon: [515]1
     * Que de jugements divers on se permet sur le grand Louis XIV.! A
       peine mort, le grand roi lui-même fut laissé seul, dans l'isolement
       de sa chambre à coucher de Versailles--négligé par ses courtisans
       et peut-être l'objet de la risée. Ce n'était plus leur maître!
       C'était un cadavre, un cercueil, une fosse, et l'horreur d'une
       imminente décomposition.: [516]1
     * Quelle preuve de la divinité du Christ! avec un empire aussi
       absolu, il n'a qu'un seul but, l'amélioration spirituelle des
       individus, la pureté de la conscience, l'union à ce qui est vrai,
       la sainteté de l'âme.: [517]1
     * Quels que puissent être les phénomènes inattendues de l'avenir,
       Jésus ne sera pas surpassé. Son culte se rajeunira sans cesse; sa
       légende provoquera des larmes sans fin; ses souffrances attendiront
       les meilleurs coeurs; tous les siècles proclameront qu'entre les
       fils des hommes, il n'en est pas né de plus grand que Jésus.:
       [518]1
     * Quels que puissent être les phénomènes inattendus de l'avenir,
       Jésus ne sera pas surpassé. Son culte se rajeunira sans cesse; sa
       légende provoquera des larmes sans fin; ses souffrances
       attendriront les meilleurs coeurs: tous les siècles proclameront
       qu'entre les fils des hommes, il n'en est pas né de plus grand que
       Jésus.: [519]1
     * Rien ne me frappe : [520]1
     * Sans doute il faut la foi pour cet article-là, qui est celui duquel
       dérive tous les autres articles. Mais le caractère de la divinité
       du Christ une fois admis, la doctrine chrétienne se présente avec
       la précision et la clarté de l'algèbre: il faut y admirer
       l'enchaînement et l'unité d'une science: [521]1
     * Son corps avait-il été enlevé, ou bien l'enthusiasme, toujours
       crédule fit-il éclore après coup l'ensemble de récits par lesquels
       on chercha à établir la foi à la resurrection? C'est ce que, faute
       de documents contradictories: [522]1
     * Telle est la destinée des grands hommes! Telle de César et
       d'Alexandre, et l'on nous oublie! et le nom d'un conquérant, comme
       celui d'un empereur, n'est plus qu'un thème de collége! Nos
       exploits tombent sous la férule d'un pédant qui nous insulte ou
       nous loue.: [523]1
     * Tous ceux qui croient sincèrement en lui ressentent cet amour
       admirable, surnaturel, supérieur; phenomène inexplicable,
       impossible à la raison, et aux forces de l'homme; feu sacré donné à
       la terre par ce nouveau Prométhée, dont le temps, ce grand
       destructeur, ne peut ni user la force ni limiter la durée. Moi,
       Napoléon, c'est ce que j'admire davantage, parce que j'y ai pensé
       souvent. Et c'est ce qui me prouve absolument la divinité du
       Chlrist!: [524]1
     * Une fois maître de notre esprit, l'Evangile fidèle nous aime. Dieu
       même est notre ami, notre père et vraiment notre Dieu. Une mère n'a
       pas plus de soin de l'enfant qu'elle allaite. L'âme séduite par la
       beauté de l'Evangile, no s'appartient plus. Dieu s'en empare
       tout-à-fait; il en dirige les pensées et toutes les facultés, elle
       est à lui.: [525]1
     * Voila la destinée très prochaine du grand Napoléon--Quel abîme
       entre ma misère profonde, et le règne éternel du Christ prêché,
       encensé, aimé, adoré, vivant dans tout l'univers--Est-ce là mourir?
       n'est-ce pas plutôt vivre? voilà la mort du Christ? voilà celle de
       Dieu.: [526]1
     * Voyez les livres des philosophes avec toute leur pompe; qu'ils sont
       petits près de celui-là! Se peut-il qu'un livre à la fois si
       sublime et si simple soit l'ouvrage des hommes? Se peut-il que
       celui dont il fait l'histoire ne soit qu'un homme lui-même?: [527]1
     * avec des femmes d'une conduite équivoque: [528]1
     * de ce diable de livre: [529]1
     * des siècles d'adorateurs: [530]1
     * eussent fabriqué ce livre, qiu'il ne l'est qu'un seul en ait fourni
       le sujet: [531]1
     * l'histoire entière est incompréhensible sans lui: [532]1
     * la morale évangélique n'en reste pa moins la plus haute création
       qui soit sortie de la conscience humaine, le plus beau code de la
       vie parfaite qu'aucun moraliste ait tracé: [533]1
     * le sentiment extrêmement délicat: [534]1
     * les jeunes filles qui auraient peut-être consenti à l'aimer?
       Maudit-il son âpre destinée, qui lui avait interdit les joies
       concédées à tous les autres? Regrettat-il sa trop haute nature, et,
       victime de sa grandeur, pleura-t-il de n'être pas resté un simple
       artisan de : [535]1
     * nous ignorerons à jamais. Disons cependant que la forte imagination
       de Marie de Magdala joua dans cette circonstance un rôle capital.
       Pouvoir divin de l'amour! moments sacrés où la passion d'une
       hallucinée donne au monde un Dieu resuscité!: [536]1
     * peint son juste imaginaire couvert de tout l'opprobre du crime et
       digne de tous les prix de la vertu, il peint trait pour trait Jésus
       Christ: la ressemblance est si frappante, que tous les pères l'ont
       sentée, et qu'il n'est pas possible de s'y tromper: [537]1
     * une sorte de jalousie pour toutes les belles créatures: [538]1
     __________________________________________________________________

Index of Pages of the Print Edition

   [539]1  [540]2  [541]3  [542]4  [543]5  [544]6  [545]7  [546]10
   [547]11  [548]12  [549]13  [550]14  [551]15  [552]16  [553]17  [554]18
   [555]19  [556]20  [557]21  [558]22  [559]23  [560]24  [561]25  [562]26
   [563]27  [564]28  [565]29  [566]30  [567]31  [568]32  [569]33  [570]34
   [571]35  [572]36  [573]37  [574]38  [575]39  [576]40  [577]41  [578]42
   [579]43  [580]44  [581]45  [582]46  [583]47  [584]48  [585]49  [586]50
   [587]51  [588]52  [589]53  [590]54  [591]55  [592]56  [593]57  [594]58
   [595]59  [596]60  [597]61  [598]62  [599]63  [600]64  [601]65  [602]66
   [603]67  [604]68  [605]69  [606]70  [607]71  [608]72  [609]73  [610]74
   [611]75  [612]76  [613]77  [614]78  [615]79  [616]80  [617]81  [618]82
   [619]83  [620]84  [621]85  [622]86  [623]87  [624]88  [625]89  [626]90
   [627]91  [628]92  [629]93  [630]94  [631]95  [632]96  [633]97  [634]98
   [635]99  [636]100  [637]101  [638]102  [639]103  [640]104  [641]105
   [642]106  [643]107  [644]108  [645]109  [646]110  [647]111  [648]112
   [649]113  [650]114  [651]115  [652]116  [653]117  [654]118  [655]119
   [656]120  [657]121  [658]122  [659]123  [660]124  [661]125  [662]126
   [663]127  [664]128  [665]129  [666]130  [667]131  [668]132  [669]133
   [670]134  [671]135  [672]136  [673]137  [674]138  [675]139  [676]140
   [677]141  [678]142  [679]143  [680]144  [681]145  [682]146  [683]147
   [684]148  [685]149  [686]150  [687]151  [688]152  [689]153  [690]154
   [691]155  [692]156  [693]157  [694]158  [695]159  [696]160  [697]161
   [698]162  [699]163  [700]164  [701]165  [702]166  [703]167  [704]168
   [705]169  [706]170  [707]171  [708]172  [709]173  [710]174  [711]175
   [712]176  [713]177  [714]178  [715]179  [716]180  [717]181  [718]182
   [719]183  [720]184  [721]185  [722]186  [723]187  [724]188  [725]189
   [726]190  [727]191  [728]192  [729]193  [730]194  [731]195  [732]196
   [733]197  [734]198  [735]199  [736]200  [737]201  [738]202  [739]203
   [740]204  [741]205  [742]206  [743]207  [744]208  [745]209  [746]210
   [747]211  [748]212  [749]213  [750]214  [751]215  [752]216  [753]217
   [754]218  [755]219  [756]220  [757]221  [758]222  [759]223  [760]224
   [761]225  [762]226  [763]227  [764]228  [765]229  [766]230  [767]231
   [768]232  [769]233  [770]234  [771]235  [772]236  [773]237  [774]238
   [775]239  [776]240  [777]241  [778]242  [779]243  [780]244  [781]245
   [782]246  [783]247  [784]248  [785]249  [786]250  [787]251  [788]252
   [789]253  [790]254  [791]255  [792]256  [793]257  [794]258  [795]259
   [796]260  [797]261  [798]262  [799]263  [800]264  [801]265  [802]266
   [803]267  [804]268  [805]269  [806]270  [807]271  [808]272  [809]273
   [810]274  [811]275  [812]276  [813]277  [814]278  [815]279  [816]280
   [817]281  [818]282  [819]283  [820]284  [821]285  [822]286  [823]287
   [824]288  [825]289  [826]290  [827]291  [828]292  [829]293  [830]294
   [831]295  [832]296  [833]297  [834]298  [835]299  [836]300  [837]301
   [838]302  [839]303  [840]304  [841]305  [842]306  [843]307  [844]308
   [845]309  [846]310  [847]311  [848]312  [849]313  [850]314  [851]315
   [852]316  [853]317  [854]318  [855]319  [856]320  [857]321  [858]322
   [859]323  [860]324  [861]325  [862]326  [863]327  [864]328  [865]329
   [866]330  [867]331  [868]332  [869]333  [870]334  [871]335  [872]336
   [873]337  [874]338  [875]339  [876]340  [877]341  [878]342  [879]343
   [880]344  [881]345  [882]346  [883]347  [884]348  [885]349  [886]350
   [887]351  [888]352  [889]353  [890]354  [891]355  [892]356  [893]357
   [894]358  [895]359  [896]360  [897]361  [898]362  [899]363  [900]364
   [901]365  [902]366  [903]367  [904]368  [905]369  [906]370  [907]371
   [908]372  [909]373  [910]374  [911]375
     __________________________________________________________________

            This document is from the Christian Classics Ethereal
               Library at Calvin College, http://www.ccel.org,
                   generated on demand from ThML source.

References

   1. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p1.1
   2. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p2.1
   3. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p3.1
   4. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note04
   5. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note05
   6. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note06
   7. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note07
   8. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note08
   9. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note09
  10. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note10
  11. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note11
  12. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note12
  13. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note13
  14. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note14
  15. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note15
  16. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note16
  17. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note17
  18. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note18
  19. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note19
  20. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note20
  21. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note21
  22. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note22
  23. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note23
  24. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note24
  25. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note25
  26. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note26
  27. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note27
  28. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note28
  29. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note29
  30. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note30
  31. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note31
  32. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note32
  33. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note33
  34. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note34
  35. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note35
  36. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note36
  37. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note37
  38. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note38
  39. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note39
  40. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note40
  41. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note41
  42. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note42
  43. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note43
  44. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note44
  45. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note45
  46. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note46
  47. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note47
  48. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note48
  49. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note49
  50. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note50
  51. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note51
  52. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note52
  53. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note53
  54. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note54
  55. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note55
  56. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note56
  57. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note57
  58. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note58
  59. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note59
  60. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note60
  61. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note61
  62. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note62
  63. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note63
  64. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note64
  65. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note65
  66. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note66
  67. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note67
  68. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note68
  69. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note69
  70. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note70
  71. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note71
  72. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note72
  73. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note73
  74. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note74
  75. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note75
  76. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note76
  77. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note77
  78. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note78
  79. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note79
  80. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note80
  81. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note81
  82. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note82
  83. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note83
  84. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note84
  85. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note85
  86. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note86
  87. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note87
  88. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note88
  89. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note89
  90. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note90
  91. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note91
  92. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note92
  93. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note93
  94. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note94
  95. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note95
  96. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note96
  97. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note97
  98. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note98
  99. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#note99
 100. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Judg&scrCh=14&scrV=14#iv.i-p3.1
 101. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Ruth&scrCh=1&scrV=1#iii.xiv-p9.2
 102. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=2Chr&scrCh=11&scrV=16#iii.xiv-p9.3
 103. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Neh&scrCh=11&scrV=25#iii.xiv-p9.4
 104. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=22&scrV=2#iii.xiv-p37.3
 105. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=110&scrV=2#iii.xiv-p66.22
 106. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Isa&scrCh=53&scrV=1#iii.ix-p2.2
 107. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Isa&scrCh=53&scrV=3#iii.ix-p4.1
 108. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Isa&scrCh=63&scrV=3#iii.ix-p6.1
 109. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Jer&scrCh=21&scrV=5#iii.xiv-p66.21
 110. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Dan&scrCh=7&scrV=13#iii.xi-p4.1
 111. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Dan&scrCh=7&scrV=13#iii.xiv-p62.5
 112. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mic&scrCh=5&scrV=1#iii.xiv-p9.5
 113. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=2&scrV=1#iii.xiv-p10.3
 114. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=3&scrV=17#iii.xiv-p57.2
 115. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=4&scrV=0#iii.xiv-p21.2
 116. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=4&scrV=0#iii.xiv-p24.6
 117. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=4&scrV=17#iii.iv-p16.1
 118. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=4&scrV=19#iii.xiv-p39.2
 119. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=5&scrV=21#iv.xiv-p8.1
 120. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=5&scrV=22#iii.xi-p9.1
 121. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=5&scrV=27#iii.xiv-p99.8
 122. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=5&scrV=44#iii.ix-p3.2
 123. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=8&scrV=5#iv.iii-p3.4
 124. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=8&scrV=22#iii.xiv-p39.2
 125. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=9&scrV=6#iii.xi-p4.4
 126. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=9&scrV=6#iii.xiv-p68.2
 127. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=9&scrV=9#iii.xiv-p39.2
 128. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=9&scrV=27#iii.xiv-p53.2
 129. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=11&scrV=27#iii.xiv-p55.2
 130. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=11&scrV=27#iii.xiv-p58.2
 131. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=11&scrV=28#iii.xi-p7.6
 132. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=12&scrV=1#iii.xiv-p40.2
 133. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=12&scrV=8#iii.xi-p4.6
 134. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=12&scrV=23#iii.xiv-p53.2
 135. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=13&scrV=54#iii.xiv-p17.2
 136. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=14&scrV=25#iii.xii.iv-p3.4
 137. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=14&scrV=25#iii.xiv-p79.4
 138. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=14&scrV=29#iii.xiv-p79.5
 139. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=14&scrV=33#iii.xiv-p60.3
 140. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=15&scrV=22#iii.xiv-p53.2
 141. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=16#iii.xiv-p56.2
 142. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=16#iii.xiv-p60.3
 143. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=17#iii.xiv-p54.2
 144. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=19#iii.xiv-p62.2
 145. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=17&scrV=5#iii.xiv-p57.4
 146. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=17&scrV=5#iv.xvi-p2.1
 147. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=18&scrV=11#iii.xi-p4.10
 148. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=18&scrV=11#iii.xiv-p64.2
 149. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=19&scrV=4#iii.xiv-p99.8
 150. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=19&scrV=17#iii.xiv-p29.5
 151. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=19&scrV=28#iii.xiv-p54.3
 152. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=20&scrV=27#iii.xi-p4.14
 153. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=21&scrV=9#iii.xiv-p53.2
 154. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=21&scrV=37#iii.xiv-p55.2
 155. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=22&scrV=41#iii.xiv-p53.2
 156. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=22&scrV=42#iii.xiv-p55.2
 157. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=24&scrV=30#iii.xiv-p54.3
 158. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=25&scrV=31#iii.xiv-p54.3
 159. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=25&scrV=31#iii.xiv-p63.3
 160. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=26&scrV=63#iii.xiv-p55.2
 161. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=26&scrV=63#iii.xiv-p60.3
 162. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=26&scrV=63#iii.xiv-p61.2
 163. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=26&scrV=64#iii.ix-p11.3
 164. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=26&scrV=64#iii.xiv-p54.3
 165. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=3#iv.iv-p0.3
 166. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=4#iii.xiv-p27.4
 167. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=11#iii.xiv-p62.2
 168. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=19#iii.ix-p11.2
 169. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=19#iii.xiv-p27.2
 170. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=19#iv.ii-p0.3
 171. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=24#iii.ix-p11.2
 172. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=24#iv.ii-p0.3
 173. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=24#iii.xiv-p27.2
 174. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=43#iii.xiv-p55.2
 175. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=46#iii.xiv-p37.2
 176. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=27&scrV=54#iv.iii-p0.3
 177. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=28&scrV=18#iii.xi-p9.5
 178. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=28&scrV=19#iii.xi-p12.9
 179. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=28&scrV=19#iii.xi-p9.1
 180. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=2&scrV=10#iii.xi-p4.5
 181. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=2&scrV=14#iii.xiv-p39.3
 182. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=2&scrV=23#iii.xiv-p40.3
 183. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=2&scrV=28#iii.xi-p4.7
 184. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=3&scrV=11#iii.xiv-p56.3
 185. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=6&scrV=3#iii.xiv-p17.3
 186. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=7&scrV=37#iii.xiv-p36.2
 187. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=8&scrV=84#iii.xiv-p39.3
 188. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=10&scrV=21#iii.xiv-p39.3
 189. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=12&scrV=6#iii.xiv-p55.3
 190. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=13&scrV=32#iii.xiv-p55.3
 191. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=14&scrV=62#iii.xiv-p55.3
 192. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=15&scrV=39#iv.iii-p0.4
 193. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=1&scrV=33#iii.xiv-p62.6
 194. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=1&scrV=35#iii.i-p4.2
 195. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=1&scrV=35#iii.xiv-p24.3
 196. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=1&scrV=41#iii.xiv-p8.2
 197. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=1&scrV=46#iii.xiv-p8.4
 198. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=1&scrV=47#iii.xiv-p64.5
 199. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=1&scrV=67#iii.xiv-p8.6
 200. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=1&scrV=80#iii.xiv-p11.4
 201. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=2&scrV=11#iii.xiv-p64.5
 202. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=2&scrV=40#iii.xiv-p11.2
 203. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=2&scrV=40#iii.xiv-p24.4
 204. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=2&scrV=42#iii.ii-p2.3
 205. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=2&scrV=49#iii.vi-p2.1
 206. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=2&scrV=49#iii.xiv-p13.2
 207. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=2&scrV=49#iv.xix-p1.1
 208. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=2&scrV=52#iii.i-p6.3
 209. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=2&scrV=52#iii.xiv-p11.5
 210. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=2&scrV=52#iii.xiv-p24.4
 211. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=3&scrV=22#iii.xiv-p57.3
 212. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=4&scrV=0#iii.xiv-p21.3
 213. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=4&scrV=16#iii.ii-p2.2
 214. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=5&scrV=1#iii.xiv-p40.4
 215. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=5&scrV=20#iii.xiv-p68.3
 216. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=5&scrV=27#iii.xiv-p39.4
 217. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=7&scrV=37#iii.xiv-p99.6
 218. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=7&scrV=47#iii.xiv-p68.3
 219. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=9&scrV=23#iii.xiv-p39.4
 220. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=9&scrV=35#iii.xiv-p57.5
 221. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=9&scrV=56#iii.xiv-p64.3
 222. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=9&scrV=58#iii.xi-p4.13
 223. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=9&scrV=59#iii.xiv-p39.4
 224. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=10&scrV=22#iii.xiv-p55.4
 225. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=10&scrV=30#iii.xiv-p42.3
 226. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=13&scrV=1#iii.vii-p6.4
 227. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=17&scrV=4#iii.ix-p3.1
 228. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=18&scrV=22#iii.xiv-p39.4
 229. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=19&scrV=10#iii.xi-p4.11
 230. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=19&scrV=10#iii.xiv-p64.3
 231. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=21&scrV=27#iii.xiv-p54.4
 232. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=21&scrV=36#iii.xiv-p54.4
 233. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=22&scrV=28#iii.xiv-p24.7
 234. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=22&scrV=30#iii.xiv-p62.3
 235. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=22&scrV=43#iii.ix-p11.4
 236. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=23&scrV=22#iii.xiv-p27.3
 237. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=23&scrV=47#iv.iii-p1.3
 238. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=1#iii.xiv-p66.10
 239. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=1#iii.xiv-p67.3
 240. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=6#iii.xiv-p66.12
 241. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=18#iii.xiv-p56.4
 242. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=34#iii.xiv-p56.4
 243. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=43#iii.xiv-p39.5
 244. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=48#iii.xiv-p16.3
 245. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=49#iii.xiv-p56.4
 246. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=51#iii.xi-p4.2
 247. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=2&scrV=4#iv.xix-p1.2
 248. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=13#iii.xi-p4.3
 249. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=13#iii.xi-p7.1
 250. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=17#iii.xiv-p64.4
 251. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=36#iii.xiv-p59.2
 252. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=5#iii.xiv-p42.2
 253. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=7#iii.xiv-p99.7
 254. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=23#iv.xx-p17.2
 255. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=26#iii.xiv-p60.2
 256. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=34#iii.vi-p2.2
 257. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=42#iii.xiv-p64.6
 258. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=16#iii.xiv-p40.5
 259. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=19#iii.xiv-p55.5
 260. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=22#iii.xiv-p63.2
 261. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=23#iii.xi-p12.4
 262. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=24#iii.xiv-p59.2
 263. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=25#iii.xiv-p63.2
 264. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=27#iii.xi-p4.12
 265. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=30#iii.vi-p2.3
 266. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=34#iii.xiv-p64.4
 267. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=36#iii.xiv-p60.2
 268. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=39#iii.xiv-p60.2
 269. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=40#iii.xiv-p59.2
 270. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=47#iii.xiv-p59.2
 271. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=50#iii.xiv-p59.2
 272. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=53#iii.xi-p4.8
 273. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=69#iii.xiv-p3.2
 274. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=7&scrV=3#iii.xiv-p45.2
 275. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=7&scrV=15#iii.ii-p3.1
 276. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=3#iii.xiv-p99.7
 277. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=12#iii.xi-p7.2
 278. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=24#iii.xi-p6.1
 279. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=46#iii.xiv-p28.2
 280. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=57#iii.xiv-p7.4
 281. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=58#iii.xiv-p66.2
 282. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=58#iii.xiv-p66.14
 283. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=9&scrV=3#iii.xiv-p41.2
 284. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=9&scrV=35#iii.xiv-p55.5
 285. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=10&scrV=9#iii.xiv-p64.4
 286. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=10&scrV=27#iii.xiv-p39.5
 287. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=10&scrV=30#iii.xi-p12.7
 288. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=10&scrV=30#iii.xiv-p69.2
 289. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=10&scrV=36#iii.xiv-p55.5
 290. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=10&scrV=38#ii.i-p4.2
 291. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=10&scrV=38#iii.xiv-p3.5
 292. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=11&scrV=4#iii.xiv-p55.5
 293. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=11&scrV=25#iii.xi-p7.4
 294. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=11&scrV=25#iii.xiv-p59.2
 295. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=11&scrV=27#iii.xiv-p56.4
 296. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=12&scrV=26#iii.xiv-p39.5
 297. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=12&scrV=47#iii.xiv-p64.4
 298. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=14&scrV=6#iii.xi-p7.3
 299. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=14&scrV=9#iii.xi-p12.6
 300. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=14&scrV=11#ii.i-p4.1
 301. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=14&scrV=13#iii.xiv-p55.5
 302. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=14&scrV=27#iii.ix-p10.1
 303. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=16&scrV=33#iii.ix-p10.3
 304. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=17&scrV=1#iii.xiv-p55.5
 305. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=17&scrV=3#iii.v-p6.2
 306. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=17&scrV=5#iii.xiv-p67.2
 307. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=17&scrV=13#iii.ix-p10.2
 308. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=17&scrV=22#iii.v-p6.2
 309. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=18&scrV=36#iii.xiv-p62.4
 310. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=18&scrV=37#iii.ix-p11.1
 311. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=19&scrV=7#iii.xiv-p55.5
 312. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=20&scrV=21#iii.xiv-p79.8
 313. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=20&scrV=28#iii.xi-p12.10
 314. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=20&scrV=31#iii.xiv-p56.4
 315. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=3&scrV=14#iii.xiv-p26.2
 316. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=10&scrV=1#iv.iii-p3.5
 317. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=18&scrV=3#iii.xiv-p17.4
 318. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=26&scrV=26#iii.xii.v.i-p21.1
 319. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=7&scrV=0#iii.iv-p14.1
 320. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=11&scrV=1#iii.xiv-p38.2
 321. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=15&scrV=6#iii.xii.v.i-p15.1
 322. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=15&scrV=6#iii.xii.v.i-p18.1
 323. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=4&scrV=4#iii.xiii-p1.3
 324. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=5&scrV=21#iii.xiv-p26.4
 325. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=1&scrV=16#iii.xiv-p67.4
 326. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1Thess&scrCh=1&scrV=6#iii.xiv-p38.3
 327. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=1&scrV=2#iii.xiv-p67.5
 328. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=2&scrV=10#iii.xiv-p11.6
 329. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=4&scrV=15#iii.xiv-p21.4
 330. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=4&scrV=15#iii.xiv-p24.8
 331. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=4&scrV=15#iii.xiv-p26.6
 332. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=5&scrV=7#iii.xiv-p24.9
 333. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=5&scrV=8#iii.xiv-p21.6
 334. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=5&scrV=8#iii.xiv-p24.5
 335. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=5&scrV=8#iii.xiv-p11.6
 336. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=7&scrV=26#iii.xiv-p26.6
 337. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=12&scrV=3#iii.ix-p4.2
 338. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=1&scrV=19#iii.xiv-p26.3
 339. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=2&scrV=22#iii.xiv-p26.3
 340. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=3&scrV=18#iii.xiv-p26.3
 341. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1John&scrCh=2&scrV=29#iii.xiv-p26.5
 342. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1John&scrCh=3&scrV=5#iii.xiv-p26.5
 343. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1John&scrCh=3&scrV=7#iii.xiv-p26.5
 344. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3?scrBook=1John&scrCh=5&scrV=13#iii.xiv-p3.6
 345. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.v-p11.2
 346. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.5
 347. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.x-p5.2
 348. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.3
 349. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.11
 350. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.x-p5.3
 351. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p13.3
 352. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p79.7
 353. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p79.3
 354. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iv-p3.3
 355. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p79.9
 356. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p69.4
 357. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.v-p4.1
 358. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p31.5
 359. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p69.3
 360. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p3.3
 361. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.8
 362. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.iv-p2.2
 363. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p52.3
 364. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.v-p3.1
 365. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.x-p3.1
 366. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.9
 367. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p26.9
 368. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.x-p4.1
 369. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.x-p5.1
 370. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.v-p11.1
 371. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.17
 372. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.ii-p3.3
 373. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.iii-p3.8
 374. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.ii-p3.2
 375. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p13.4
 376. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.18
 377. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p13.5
 378. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.7
 379. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.iii-p3.6
 380. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.iii-p3.9
 381. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p21.7
 382. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p36.3
 383. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.4
 384. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.ii-p3.4
 385. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vi-p5.3
 386. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xi-p5.1
 387. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vi-p5.1
 388. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.v-p2.1
 389. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p21.5
 390. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p79.6
 391. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p79.2
 392. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p79.10
 393. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p24.2
 394. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p11.3
 395. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xi-p6.1
 396. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p13.6
 397. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p51.6
 398. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p56.6
 399. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p56.5
 400. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.iii-p3.7
 401. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-p10.1
 402. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p29.4
 403. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vi-p1.3
 404. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-p15.2
 405. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p4.2
 406. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p5.2
 407. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vi-p4.2
 408. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p65.2
 409. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-p1.1
 410. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p4.3
 411. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-p13.1
 412. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p7.3
 413. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p31.3
 414. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vi-p7.1
 415. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-p11.1
 416. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p29.6
 417. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p31.6
 418. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p36.4
 419. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.iii-p3.2
 420. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v-p2.3
 421. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p3.4
 422. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.iii-p3.3
 423. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iv-p4.1
 424. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p23.5
 425. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p22.5
 426. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p23.3
 427. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p22.3
 428. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vi-p5.2
 429. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.viii-p2.1
 430. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p23.4
 431. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p23.2
 432. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-p11.1
 433. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-p2.2
 434. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-p8.1
 435. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p22.4
 436. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p22.2
 437. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p76.2
 438. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-p7.1
 439. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p51.5
 440. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p15.1
 441. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-p17.1
 442. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-p17.1
 443. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-p16.1
 444. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p76.3
 445. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p83.3
 446. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p83.2
 447. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p31.8
 448. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p30.3
 449. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.15
 450. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p76.4
 451. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p47.2
 452. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p18.3
 453. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p85.2
 454. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p88.3
 455. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p6.5
 456. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p86.3
 457. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p70.3
 458. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p103.2
 459. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p6.3
 460. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p81.4
 461. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p47.4
 462. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p86.4
 463. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p61.3
 464. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p43.6
 465. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p76.5
 466. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-p8.2
 467. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p83.1
 468. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p43.7
 469. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p66.6
 470. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.v-p11.3
 471. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-p10.1
 472. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-p2.3
 473. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-p7.1
 474. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p23.1
 475. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiii-p4.1
 476. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p4.1
 477. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p11.1
 478. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p26.1
 479. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-p11.2
 480. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p25.1
 481. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.i-p10.1
 482. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiii-p5.1
 483. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p20.1
 484. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiii-p3.1
 485. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-p11.1
 486. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p10.1
 487. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p35.1
 488. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p19.1
 489. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p19.1
 490. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p21.1
 491. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p32.1
 492. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p9.1
 493. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p34.4
 494. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p29.1
 495. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p87.3
 496. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-p3.1
 497. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-p4.1
 498. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p13.1
 499. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p6.1
 500. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p17.1
 501. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p94.2
 502. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p8.1
 503. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p13.1
 504. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p14.1
 505. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p22.1
 506. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p12.1
 507. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p24.1
 508. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p27.1
 509. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p31.1
 510. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p30.1
 511. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p16.1
 512. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p15.1
 513. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-p9.1
 514. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p46.3
 515. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p44.2
 516. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p34.1
 517. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p18.1
 518. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p48.2
 519. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p21.1
 520. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p43.11
 521. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p10.1
 522. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p98.2
 523. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p33.1
 524. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p28.1
 525. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p17.1
 526. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-p36.1
 527. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-p4.2
 528. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p99.4
 529. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiii-p7.1
 530. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p19.2
 531. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-p10.2
 532. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-p2.1
 533. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p34.3
 534. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p99.3
 535. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p99.2
 536. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p98.3
 537. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p44.3
 538. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-p99.5
 539. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#i-Page_1
 540. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#i-Page_2
 541. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#i-Page_3
 542. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.i-Page_4
 543. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.i-Page_5
 544. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.i-Page_6
 545. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.i-Page_7
 546. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iii-Page_10
 547. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iii-Page_11
 548. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iii-Page_12
 549. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iii-Page_13
 550. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iii-Page_14
 551. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iii-Page_15
 552. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iii-Page_16
 553. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iii-Page_17
 554. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iii-Page_18
 555. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iii-Page_19
 556. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iv-Page_20
 557. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iv-Page_21
 558. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iv-Page_22
 559. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#ii.iv-Page_23
 560. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_24
 561. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_25
 562. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_26
 563. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_27
 564. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_28
 565. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_29
 566. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_30
 567. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_31
 568. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_32
 569. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_33
 570. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.i-Page_34
 571. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ii-Page_35
 572. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ii-Page_36
 573. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ii-Page_37
 574. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ii-Page_38
 575. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ii-Page_39
 576. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ii-Page_40
 577. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ii-Page_41
 578. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ii-Page_42
 579. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iii-Page_43
 580. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iii-Page_44
 581. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iii-Page_45
 582. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iii-Page_46
 583. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iii-Page_47
 584. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iii-Page_48
 585. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iii-Page_49
 586. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iii-Page_50
 587. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iii-Page_51
 588. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_52
 589. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_53
 590. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_54
 591. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_55
 592. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_56
 593. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_57
 594. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_58
 595. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_59
 596. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_60
 597. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_61
 598. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_62
 599. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_63
 600. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_64
 601. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.iv-Page_65
 602. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.v-Page_66
 603. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.v-Page_67
 604. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.v-Page_68
 605. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.v-Page_69
 606. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.v-Page_70
 607. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.v-Page_71
 608. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.v-Page_72
 609. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vi-Page_73
 610. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vi-Page_74
 611. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vi-Page_75
 612. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vi-Page_76
 613. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vii-Page_77
 614. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vii-Page_78
 615. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vii-Page_79
 616. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vii-Page_80
 617. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vii-Page_81
 618. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vii-Page_82
 619. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vii-Page_83
 620. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.vii-Page_84
 621. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.viii-Page_85
 622. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.viii-Page_86
 623. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.viii-Page_87
 624. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.viii-Page_88
 625. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.viii-Page_89
 626. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.viii-Page_90
 627. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_91
 628. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_92
 629. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_93
 630. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_94
 631. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_95
 632. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_96
 633. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_97
 634. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_98
 635. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_99
 636. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_100
 637. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_101
 638. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_102
 639. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_103
 640. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.ix-Page_104
 641. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.x-Page_105
 642. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.x-Page_106
 643. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.x-Page_107
 644. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.x-Page_108
 645. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.x-Page_109
 646. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.x-Page_110
 647. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.x-Page_111
 648. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.x-Page_112
 649. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.x-Page_113
 650. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_114
 651. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_115
 652. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_116
 653. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_117
 654. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_118
 655. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_119
 656. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_120
 657. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_121
 658. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_122
 659. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_123
 660. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_124
 661. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_125
 662. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_126
 663. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_127
 664. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_128
 665. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xi-Page_129
 666. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii-Page_130
 667. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii-Page_131
 668. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.i-Page_132
 669. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.i-Page_133
 670. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.i-Page_134
 671. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.i-Page_135
 672. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.ii-Page_136
 673. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.ii-Page_137
 674. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.ii-Page_138
 675. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iii-Page_139
 676. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iii-Page_140
 677. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iii-Page_141
 678. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iii-Page_142
 679. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iii-Page_143
 680. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iv-Page_144
 681. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iv-Page_145
 682. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iv-Page_146
 683. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iv-Page_147
 684. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iv-Page_148
 685. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.iv-Page_149
 686. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v-Page_150
 687. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v-Page_151
 688. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_152
 689. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_153
 690. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_154
 691. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_155
 692. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_156
 693. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_157
 694. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_158
 695. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_159
 696. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_160
 697. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_161
 698. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_162
 699. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_163
 700. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_164
 701. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_165
 702. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_166
 703. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_167
 704. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_168
 705. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_169
 706. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_170
 707. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_171
 708. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_172
 709. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_173
 710. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_174
 711. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_175
 712. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.i-Page_176
 713. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_177
 714. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_178
 715. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_179
 716. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_180
 717. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_181
 718. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_182
 719. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_183
 720. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_184
 721. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_185
 722. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_186
 723. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xii.v.ii-Page_187
 724. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-Page_188
 725. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-Page_189
 726. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-Page_190
 727. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-Page_191
 728. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-Page_192
 729. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-Page_193
 730. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-Page_194
 731. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-Page_195
 732. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-Page_196
 733. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiii-Page_197
 734. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_198
 735. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_199
 736. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_200
 737. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_201
 738. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_202
 739. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_203
 740. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_204
 741. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_205
 742. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_206
 743. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_207
 744. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_208
 745. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_209
 746. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_210
 747. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_211
 748. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_212
 749. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_213
 750. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_214
 751. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_215
 752. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_216
 753. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_217
 754. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_218
 755. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_219
 756. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_220
 757. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_221
 758. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_222
 759. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_223
 760. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_224
 761. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_225
 762. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_226
 763. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_227
 764. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_228
 765. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_229
 766. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_230
 767. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_231
 768. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_232
 769. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_233
 770. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_234
 771. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_235
 772. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_236
 773. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_237
 774. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_238
 775. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_239
 776. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_240
 777. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_241
 778. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_242
 779. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_243
 780. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_244
 781. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_245
 782. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_246
 783. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xiv-Page_247
 784. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xv-Page_248
 785. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iii.xv-Page_249
 786. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv-Page_250
 787. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv-Page_251
 788. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.i-Page_252
 789. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.i-Page_253
 790. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.i-Page_254
 791. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.i-Page_255
 792. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.i-Page_256
 793. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.i-Page_257
 794. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.ii-Page_258
 795. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.ii-Page_259
 796. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.iii-Page_260
 797. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.iv-Page_261
 798. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.v-Page_262
 799. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.v-Page_263
 800. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.v-Page_264
 801. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.v-Page_265
 802. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vi-Page_266
 803. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vi-Page_267
 804. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vi-Page_268
 805. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vi-Page_269
 806. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.vii-Page_270
 807. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.viii-Page_271
 808. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.viii-Page_272
 809. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.ix-Page_273
 810. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.ix-Page_274
 811. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.ix-Page_275
 812. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.x-Page_276
 813. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.x-Page_277
 814. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.x-Page_278
 815. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xi-Page_279
 816. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xi-Page_280
 817. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xi-Page_281
 818. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xi-Page_282
 819. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xii-Page_283
 820. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiii-Page_284
 821. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiii-Page_285
 822. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiii-Page_286
 823. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_287
 824. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_288
 825. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_289
 826. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_290
 827. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_291
 828. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_292
 829. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_293
 830. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_294
 831. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_295
 832. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_296
 833. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xiv-Page_297
 834. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_298
 835. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_299
 836. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_300
 837. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_301
 838. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_302
 839. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_303
 840. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_304
 841. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_305
 842. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_306
 843. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_307
 844. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_308
 845. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_309
 846. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_310
 847. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_311
 848. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_312
 849. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_313
 850. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_314
 851. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_315
 852. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_316
 853. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_317
 854. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_318
 855. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_319
 856. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_320
 857. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_321
 858. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_322
 859. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_323
 860. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_324
 861. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_325
 862. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_326
 863. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_327
 864. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_328
 865. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_329
 866. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_330
 867. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_331
 868. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_332
 869. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_333
 870. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_334
 871. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_335
 872. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xv-Page_336
 873. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xvi-Page_337
 874. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xvi-Page_338
 875. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xvi-Page_339
 876. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xvi-Page_340
 877. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xvii-Page_341
 878. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xviii-Page_342
 879. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xviii-Page_343
 880. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xviii-Page_344
 881. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xviii-Page_345
 882. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xviii-Page_346
 883. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xix-Page_347
 884. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xix-Page_348
 885. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-Page_349
 886. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-Page_350
 887. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-Page_351
 888. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-Page_352
 889. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-Page_353
 890. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-Page_354
 891. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-Page_355
 892. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-Page_356
 893. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xx-Page_357
 894. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_358
 895. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_359
 896. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_360
 897. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_361
 898. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_362
 899. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_363
 900. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_364
 901. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_365
 902. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_366
 903. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_367
 904. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_368
 905. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_369
 906. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_370
 907. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_371
 908. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_372
 909. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_373
 910. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_374
 911. file:///ccel/s/schaff/person/cache/person.html3#iv.xxi-Page_375