history of the theological faculty at Erlangen, which owed its later conservative tendency and its flour-
ishing condition chiefly to Harless, but Professor for Lutheran orthodox theology in at Erlangen general. In 1836 he became ordinary
and professor, and as such lectured also Leipsic. on Christian ethics, theological ency-clopedia, and methodology. In 1836 he became preacher of the university. He declined calls to Rostock, Berlin, Dorpat, and Zurich. In 1840 he was appointed delegate of the chamber of states in Munich to defend the rights of the Lutheran Church against the violent measures of the ministry. Harless won great popularity by defending the interests of his church with ability and manliness, but the opposition party succeeded in removing him in 1845 to Baireuth as second councilor of the consistory. In the same year, however, he was appointed professor of theology in Leipsic, where his activity reached its highest development. In Saxony rationalism was still flourishing, but the brilliant personality of Harless and the earnestness and depth of his presentation of Evangelical truth soon conquered it, and his influence upon the students was not less powerful than in Erlangen. In Leipsic he lectured for the first time on dogmatics, and also developed into one of the most powerful and brilliant preachers of his time. Before the, end of two years he was appointed preacher at St.
Nicolai, in addition to his duties as professor.In 1850 he removed to Dresden as court preacher, reporting councilor in the ministry of public in-
struction, and vice-president of the President state consistory, but two years later of the was called by King Max II. to his
Bavarian native state of Bavaria as presidentConsistory. of the supreme consistory. Here the soil had been already prepared for the Lutheran confession. It was only Lohe and his adherents who opposed the existing condition of the State Church, and insisted upon an entire change, or, if this should be impossible, upon separation. Owing to the influence of Harless, however, who was a friend of Lohe from former days, the latter did not altogether separate himself from the State Church. Harless conquered the remaining opposition of rationalism in the congregations by his manly conduct and his personal spirit of reconciliation. A new hymn-book in the spirit of orthodox Lutheranism was soon introduced. The introduction of a new order of church service was more difficult. Here the question of private confession, which was confused with auricular confession, occasioned a new revolt of the opposition, but the organization of the State Church, firmly established under Harless, finally achieved the victory.
Harless now became the universally acknowledged leader and faithful mentor of the whole Lutheran Church, and his advice was eagerly sought in all quarters of the world. He presided for a bng time over the missionary board at Leipsic. During the later years he was almost blind from cataract.
His three most important works were written while professor at Erlangen, as his later public activity left him little time for literary work. They are: Commentar iiber den Brief Pauli an die Ephesier
HEARD, JOHN BICKFORD: Church of England; b. at Dublin, Ireland, Oct. 26, 1828. He was educated at Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge (B.A., 1852), and was ordained priest in 1852. He was vicar of Bilton, Yorkshire (1864-68), curate of St. Andrew's, Westminster (1878-80), rector of Woldingham, Surrey (1880-91), and vicar of Queen Charlton (1894-1904). He was also editor of the Religious Tract Society from 1866 to 1873, and Hulsean Lecturer in Cambridge in 1892. His theological standpoint is that of the German mediating school, and in his writings he has sought to develop a Christian psychology in support of theology and to lay stress on Pauline rather than on Augustinian concepts. He has written The History of the Extinction of Paganism in the Roman Empire (Cambridge, 1852); The Pastor and Parish (London, 1865); The Tripartite Nature of Man (Edinburgh, 1866); National Christianity; or, Caesarism and Clericalism (London, 1877); and Alexandrian and Carthaginian Theology Contrasted (Hulsean Lectures; Edinburgh, 1893).
HEART, BIBLICAL USAGE: The Hebrew lebh or lebhabh and the Greek kardia ("heart") are never used in the Bible of animals except in the passages Job xli. 24 and Dan. iv. 16, where the reference is psychological, not physiological. Deut. iv. 11 speaks of the heart of heaven, II Sam. xviii. 14 of the heart of an oak, Ex. xv. 8 and other passages of the heart of the sea, and Matt. xii. 40 of the heart of the earth, all designating the interior parts of the objects. In nearly all passages where the word occurs, however, it is used of man's heart, and generally in the psychological sense as the organ by which he feels, thinks, and wills. The terms lebh, lebhabh, kardia, which never mean "self," as does nephesh, are employed to express the ethical qualities which the Greeks ascribed to the soul.
As an organ of the body the heart is the seat of life, and is concerned in the receipt of impressions and the issuance of expressions of personal life. Strengthening and revival which come from the partaking of food bring strength and comfort to the heart (Gen. xviii. 5; Judges xix. 5, 8), and excess affects the heart unfavorably (Luke xxi. 34). Indeed, the heart is the center of personal life in all its relations (Prov. iv. 23); consequently, up to a certain limit, kardia, psyche, and pneuma, "spirit," may be used as synonyms, and the reception of joy, sorrow, emotion, alarm is ascribed to the heart (e.g., Prov. xii. 25) or to the soul (Gen. x11. 8). The unstable man is called dipsychos, "double-minded," and to him is given a double heart (Ecclus. i. 28). The heart is to be purified (James iv. 8), so is the soul (I Pet. i. 22), just as depression is ascribed to the soul in Pa. xlii. 5, and to the heart in Pa. lxii. 8. But each of these terms has its peculiarities of usage. Man is said to lose his soul, never his heart. Where the two are bound together in some action, especially if that be religious, as in the case of lovingGod, it is not a mere heaping together of synonyms, but the expression of action involving the entire personality. Nabal's heart is said to have died (I Sam. xxv. 37), though his actual death did not occur till ten days afterward (verse 38). So one may speak of the heart of the soul, but never of the soul of the heart, since the psyche is the subject of life while the kardia is only an organ.
The relations and distinctions between heart and spirit recall those between spirit and soul. The soul is what it is through the spirit which exists in it as the life-principle, so that within certain bounds each may stand for the other (see SOUL AND SPIRIT). Since the personal life is limited by the spirit and is mediated through the heart, the activities of the spirit are sought in the heart, and to it then may be ascribed the properties of the spirit, and spirit and heart may be paralleled (Ps. xxxiv. 18). While Acts xix. 21 ascribes purpose to the soul, II Cor. ix. 7 ascribes it to the heart. On the other hand, serving God in the spirit (Rom. i. 9) is not quite the same as serving him with the heart. Exchange between spirit and heart is excluded when the heart appears as the place of that activity of the spirit the result of which is conscience (I Sam. xxiv. 5). Heart and flesh are differentiated so that sin is ascribed to the heart, though both are united in Ezek. xliv. 7. Delitzach finds in Ps. xvi. 9 an Old Testament trichotomy, but really in the first clause heart and soul are united to express as strongly as possible the inner exultation. Heart is in distinction from soul the place where the whole personal life is concentrated, where is concealed the personal individual essence, and whence proceed the evidences of personal character in good or evil (Matt. xv. 8). With the heart man approaches God and Christ rests in him, possesses him, so that he lives and dwells in man (Eph. iii. 17; Gal. ii. 20). Similarly, estrangement from God is of the heart (Eph. iv. 18; Isa. i. 5). In like manner the individual character is expressed in terms of the heart in respect to purity, humility, uncircumcision, unrighteousness, and the like. God himself is called mighty in heart (Job xxxvi. 5), and he who seeks God and in faith relies upon him is called strong in heart (Ps. lxxviii. 8).
The heart is the treasury of good and evil (Matt. xii. 34-35); it is
the organ for the reception of
BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. Delitasoh, System der biblischen Psychologie, Leipsic, 1881, Eng tranal., Edinburgh, 1887; C. H. Zeller Kurze Seelenlshre, Calw, 1850; J. G. Krumm, De notionibus psychologies Paulinis, chap. iii., Giessen, 1858; J. T. Beck, Umriss der biblischen Seelenlshre, Stuttgart, 1871; idem Outlines of Biblical Psychology, pp 78-148, Edinburgh, 1877; G. F. Oehler, Theology of O. T., i. 221 eqq.. ii. 449, ib. 1874-75; B. Weiss, Biblical Theology of N. T., ib. 1882-83; E. Womer, Biblische Anthropologic, II., xi. 3, Stuttgart, 1887; K. Fischer, Biblischa Psychologie, Biologic und Padapogik, pp 20 sqq.. Goths, 1889; H. Schultz, O. T. Theology, ii. 248 sqq., London, 1892; W. Beyschlag, N. T. Theology, consult Index, Edinburgh, 1896; C. A. Briggs, in Semitic Studies in Memory of A. Kohut, pp. 94-105, London, 1897; T. Simon, Die Psychologie des Aposteis Paulus, pp. 24 sqq, Gottingen, 1897; G. Waller, Biblical View of the Soul, London, 1904; DB. ii. 317-318; EB, ii. 1981-82; JE, vi. 295-296; DCG i. 709-711; and the lexicons under the words cited in the text.
HEART OF JESUS, SOCIETY OF. See SACRED HEART OF JESUS, DEVOTION TO.
HEART OF MARY. See IMMACULATE HEART OF MARY.
HEATHENISM.
Terms Employed (§ 1).
Classification of Religions (§ 2).
The Deities of Polytheism (§ 3).
Development of Polytheism (§ 4).
Mythology and StanWorship (§ 5).
Animism Distinguished from Polytheism (1 6).
Shamanism and Fetishism (§ 7).
The Old Testament employs the word goyim ("peoples," "nations";
E. V. "Gentiles," "heathen," "nations") as a designation of all
peoples other than the chosen one, and uses it in a religious
sense. Other nations of antiquity had similar designations for peoples
of other faiths, but these had only ethnic or national significance,
such as the barbaroi of the Greeks, or the airya or
arya by which Indians and Iranians distinguished themselves
from others. A name for other peoples founded upon religious
differences alone is peculiar to the Jews. The usage of the Old
Testament passed over into the New Testament and into the Latin and
Gothic versions, where ethne, gentes, thiedos were employed to
designate the followers of false religions. In later Latin usage the
word paganus ("pagan") came to be applied to those who retained
the old faith as distinct from the Christian majority, though the
original sense of the word may have been simply "civilian" as opposed
to "military;" and it had later the meaning "rustic" or "countryman"
(cf. Gothic haithns). In Germany since the time of Luther the
term Heide ("heathen") has been much used to name all religions
except Judaism and Christianity. These two religions are historically
connected, and are regarded as the true religions or religions of
revelation. As a rule, Islam is now also admitted to the category of
religions of revelation, but is still regarded as false.
In the classification of religions another mark has been used to distinguish the three religions named from all others, namely monotheism. Yet it has to be noted that monotheism was developed in the Hebrew faith, and is a tendency in all polytheistic religions. In all polytheistic faiths there are elements which make for monotheism, and the same is true even of animistic religions. Indeed, in most religions there have been efforts made to discover unity in the midst of diversity and plurality, though these attempts have failed to gain the mastery, and where even small success has attended them it has been confined to narrow circles. Moreover, these attempts toward unity have developed not monotheism so much as pantheism. But religions may be classified as mono- theistic or non-monotheistic, and the term heathen is applied to the latter. The question has been raised whether, among the heathen religions, Buddhism is to be singled out as furnishing another category-atheistic religions, to which a negative answer is returned on the ground that neither in origin nor in development is Buddhism atheistic, though the true disciple is wholly independent of gods and need not worship them. Heathen religions are further distinguished by the character of their objects of worship into polytheistic and animistic. Polytheistic religions are those of the advanced peoples of culture, such as the. Semitic and Indo-Germanic races and other groups of the Old and the New World. Animistic religions are to be distinguished as they reveal fetishism, in which the spirits worshiped are closely connected with material objects; or shamanism, in which the spirits are elemental. In both religions there is worship of souls, and especially of the dead, whose souls are thought to have power for good and evil over the living. The boundary between soul and spirit can not be sharply drawn. Animistic religions lay stress upon magic, i.e., the power of making the spirits serve the will of man.
Most modern investigators of religions, excepting Roman Catholic
scholars, connect animism and polytheism as two stages of a
development; worship of souls and spirits precedes that of gods. The
lofty abstract idea of "god" is not a product of the lower culture
either in cult or language. First comes faith in spirits, then
polydemonism, then polytheism, and then, in Judaism, Christianity, and
Islam,
reproaches by the Old Catholics and by others, and unworthy motives were freely imputed. But there is no doubt that it was only the logical outcome of a life devoted to maintaining the unity of the Church, to which he felt bound to bring even this costly sacrifice. His remaining years were spent in untiring work in his diocese, to which he had restored peace by his decision. This left him little time for writing, though he succeeded in completing the revision of the first four volumes for the new edition of his great work, which was completed by the addition of two more volumes by Cardinal Hergenr6ther. He left behind him in WOrttemberg the memory of an unselfish, lovable personality, revered far beyond the bounds of his own Church.
(A. HEGLERt.) K. BOLL. BIBLIOGRAPHY: No complete biography has yet appeared.Consult A. Werfer, in Deutachlande Episkopat in Lebenebildern, iv. 2, W9rzburg, 1875; Funk, in TQS, laavi. 1 aqq. ; Deutachea Volkeblatt, 1893, nos. 127-129; and Gran Gott, vol. a., nos. 4-6. Other phases of Hefele's activities are discussed in: J. Friedrich, tieachichte des vatikaniechen %onzile, vol. i-iii., part 2, Bonn, 1877-97; H. Roth, Dr. K. J. von He/ele, 1894.