circumstances and the times in which the series of books which constitute the Scriptures came into existence. This leads us to the first branch of theological science, namely, to BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGY, or BIBLICAL ANTIQUITIES. Biblical Archæology, usually confined within too narrow limits, is that part of theological science which tries to unravel the various circumstances and conditions which have exercised more or less influence upon the composition of the Scriptural books. Its object is, therefore, to treat of :

1. The nature of the country in which those books have originated; to this branch of inquiry belong Physical Geography and Natural History. By the latter we understand not only (a common mistake) a systematic survey of the natural productions, but also and chiefly an enumeration of the peculiar features of their origin, growth, continuance, cultivation, use, etc. It is, for instance, quite immaterial what place the date-palms or balsamshrubs occupy in the system-such investigations being of no importance for the understanding of the Bible, the writers of which have disregarded those points; while, on the other hand, the peculiaritics of the locality where the palm-tree stands, its external appearance at the different seasons of the year, its growth, fertility, use, etc.—in short, all that particularly strikes the sense of the beholder, have frequently exercised considerable influence on the inspired writers; and these sources of external impressions on the senses and mind of man, are to be particularly considered and noticed by Biblical Archæology.

2. The inhabitants of those countries; their peculiar character, manners, customs, way of living, and their intercourse with other nations.

3. The vicissitudes of their people,-consequently, the history of the Hebrews and Jews, down to that time when the last books of the Scriptures were written.

4. The politico-religious institutions, the civil and geographical order and division of the land and the people; and

5. The mental development of the Hebrews and Jews, the regulations founded on it, and the degree of progress which the arts and sciences had attained among them,

Biblical Archæology may be further divided into two classes-that of the Old Testament and that of the New Testament: the former may again be subdivided into the Hebrew and the Jewish archeology.

As soon as the foundation for Biblical researches is laid by the help of Biblical Archæology, the theologian then turns to the solution of the second main question in theology:-What is meant by the Scriptures? How and when have they arisen? In what form do they lie before us? The answer to all these questions is the object of BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION, or, more correctly, of the History of Holy Writ. It is divided into Introduction to the Old Testament and Introduction to the New Testament, It must render an account→→→

1. Of the origin of the individual books received into the sacred canon ; not omitting to notice at the same time the various views that have been entertained on that point by critics of all ages, as well as those particular opinions which are seemingly the more correct.

2. Of the origin of the collection of the books of Scripture as the repository of Christian knowledge, or of religion; constituting the History of the Canon.

8. Of the spread of the Scriptures by transcriptions, translations, and printing.

4. Of the vicissitudes and fate of the original text; forming the History of the Text; and—

5. Of the various motives which have led to various modes of understanding the Bible; being the History of Interpretation.

We next come to that important part of Theological Encyclopædia connected with the question-What precepts have been regarded as Christian doctrines from the introduction of Christianity to the present day?

The answer to this important question is given by DOCTRINE-HISTORY, which, in a less limited sense than that in which the term is usually taken, points out the peculiar doctrines which have from time to time been received as articles of Christian belief. But as a variety of opinions with regard to the essentials of the Christian religion has arisen, not only among the various and different sects as separate bodies, but likewise at sundry times among the members of even one and the same sect or party, Doctrine-History must necessarily include all the peculiar features of schismatic views, their origin and history, the causes of their rise and gradual development, as well as their connection with the Scriptures, from which they all claim to be derived, and by which they must be tried.

A principle that is given out by a Christian sect as an essentially Christian doctrine, becomes an article of creed, a dogma (dóyμa=ő dédoктαL).

A Dogma is understood to be the doctrine of a particular party or sect, although that party may agree with the other sects in respect of other doctrines of Christianity, and must necessarily agree with them in regard to the spirit and central point of the Christian religion. Such dogmas, or articles of creed, are the fruit of a certain way of thinking peculiar to the age in which they arise, and obtain clerical importance when received either into the system of Symbols or into the public liturgy. All symbols must therefore only be considered as belonging to both a certain party and a certain time, and are thus not to be ranked among the eternal and universal articles of faith. The exhibition of a finished system of doctrines lies beyond the range of Symbolik; it sets forth merely the

• Dogmen-geschichte, 'history of doctrines. We have no corresponding term in the English language, and therefore propose that of Doctrine-History.

most essential truths, the fundamental elements, leaving the farther scientific or systematic details to the sphere of Dogmatik. Dogmatik is therefore immediately linked to the doctrines established by a certain party of Christians. An universal Christian Dogmatik is not to be hoped for, so long as there are different parties among Christians. We should therefore have to range Symbol, Dogma, and Dogmatik together, under the comprehensive head of DoctrineHistory. Such history ought, however, not to be limited to actual dogmas alone, but ought likewise to embrace many of the more loose and unembodied doctrinal views and speculations; partly on account of the influence which they may have had upon the rise and reception of some embodied dogmas, and partly because history shows that some doctrinal views advanced but rejected in earlier times, have, perhaps after the lapse of some centuries, been reproduced, received, and sanctioned. A comparative survey of the various dogmas of the different sects or church parties is the object of Comparative Dogmatik; though it has hitherto limited its views chiefly to the dogmas of the principal sects alone.

It is greatly to be desired that the scope of Comparative Dogmatik should be so extended as to embrace the collection of those dogmas which have, from time to time, prevailed within the church of one and the same party—as, e. g., of the Roman Catholics, with special regard to the variety of opinions entertained by this church on some doctrinal points, from her foundation in the second century, in comparison with those held in the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries. This function of Doctrine-History has been too much confined to the established doctrines within one church-party alone; and this limitation is almost unavoidable with those sects which, like the Roman Catholics, look at all other sects as infidels,—a judgment surely as erroneous as it is partial and uncourteous.

CHRISTIAN MORALS is, properly speaking, only the practical part of Dogmatik, and was, indeed, formerly always exhibited only in its connection therewith. Its province is to show the influence which the Christian dogmas exercise upon the dispositions of the heart, or in what degree those dogmas may be brought into action upon the will of man. What, in our recent times, has often been called-especially on the part of some German Protestant theologians-dogmatics or doctrines of faith, without attaching to them any particular meaning of a sect or church-party, partakes mostly of a middle view between church dogmatik, Biblical theology, and religious philosophy, wavering between all, and belonging to none.

PATRISTICS and PATROLOGY† seem to lie beyond the circle by which we have defined the limits of theological science. For the notion attached to the term 'Fathers of the Church' is not universally acknowledged by all Christian sects, and least so among Protestants, who consider it a contradiction to the

* PATRISTICS, the literary character and history of the Fathers.
† PATROLOGY, the doctrinal and ethical systems founded on their writings.

principle by which the Scriptures are recognised as the only source of the knowledge of religious truth.

The immense mass of manifold and various tenets which have prevailed as Christian doctrines at different times and in different countries, ever since the introduction of Christianity, makes it evidently impossible to ascertain what is real Christian doctrine, and what is not, if we do not take the SCRIPTUREs as the only guide in this labyrinth. The science, therefore, which discloses to us the tenets of Holy Writ we call BIBLICAL EXEGESIS, or INTERPRETATION. It involves the difficult task of discovering the true meaning attached to the words by the writer. To be able to do this, a thorough knowledge of the language in which the author has written down his thoughts is indispensable; consequently, a profound knowledge of Hebrew for the Old Testament, and of Greek for the New Testament, is of the utmost necessity, and is one of the first requisites, in an expounder of the Bible. But as the Sacred Writings have greatly suffered from, and have been disfigured by the liberties of transcribers and emendators, it is needful to try to discover or restore the real words of the original text; and the science employed in this task is known by the name of BIBLICAL CRITICISM. By means of criticism and philological research the sense of the Biblical writings may be ascertained, grammatically or philologically. To this mode of exegesis or interpretation is given the name of Grammatical Exposition. But although it is most essential to correct interpretation of the Scriptures that the text should be grammatically considered, yet it is equally undeniable that philological exegesis is by itself insufficient to develope completely the meaning of the sacred writers in the words which they employ. To be able to do this completely and satisfactorily, it is necessary that the interpreter should possess the means of transporting himself into the times and into the spirit of the ages in which those writers lived; or, in other words, that he should be well acquainted with the historical conditions of those ages, and with the modes of thought which then prevailed; as well as with the circumstances affecting the particular position of the individual writer of every sacred book, and of the people whom he addressed. Biblical Archæology and Biblical Introduction are the proper instruments for the accomplishment of that object, which we call the Historical Interpretation of the Scriptures; the true and perfect Biblical Interpretation is thus comprised in the category of GRAMMATICO-HISTORICAL EXEGESIS,-a . term implying conditions which are hardly ever found in an equal degree of profundity in one and the same interpreter.

A more easy, partial, and objectionable species of interpretation is that called DOGMATICAL EXEGESIS, which does not limit itself to an independent inquiry into the meaning of the sacred writings, but attempts rather to determine the sense of the text by arbitrary dogmas. Equally objectionable, and still more arbitrary, is the process of the ALLEGORICAL mode of exposition, which tortures the Biblical sense into figurative meanings; and which rarely fails to evince the essential difference that exists between the mode of

thinking in the author and the interpreter, or between the ancient and modern times.

HERMENEUTICS establishes the laws by which the interpreter is to proceed in his labours. Its relation to Interpretation is that of theory to practice. The suggestions which have led to the formation of Biblical Hermeneutics were given chiefly by Dogmatical Exegesis.

The requisites of theology are, however, not confined to the mere endeavour to discover by means of correct exegesis the true meaning of Holy Writ, or of particular passages in the New Testament; but the object of theology as a science is also and chiefly to collect the various religious views and doctrines dispersed in the Scriptures, and to compare and unite them into an entire system; and this science, aided by exegesis, is called BIBLICAL THEOLOGY, which is the true corner-stone of Biblical Exegesis. The inquiries involved in it are rendered difficult and intricate by the fact that the Scriptures were composed by various authors, and at different, and often at very long intervals. Biblical Theology must in the first instance be divided into two parts, that of the Old Testament and that of the New Testament. But at the time of the rise of Christianity and the writing of the New Testament, the Jews had already formed a theology of their own, founded upon what may be called exegetical explanations of the religious views set forth in the Old Testament, and which, although not essentially wrong in its principles, was considerably at variance with historical truth. This system of Jewish theology represents the religious opinions which prevailed in the time of Christ, in consequence of the peculiar views which the Jews entertained of the Old Testament writings and of the revelations contained in them; and it therefore supplies an intermediate link which is often of more direct use to us for understanding the theology of the New Testament, than the theology of the Old Testament viewed in its purer and more simple results. Neither the Biblical theology of the Old Testament, nor the Jewish theology in general, can be of binding force upon Christians, except in so far as either may be borne out by the Biblical theology of the New Testament. The former bear about the same relation to the latter as Biblical archæology does to the exegesis of the New Testament.

If the essence of Christianity be made a foundation for farther philosophical speculations, we arrive then at CHRISTIAN RELIGIOUS-PHILOSOPHY, which embodies into its system some but by no means all the doctrines of Scripture.

There have always been individuals, ever since Christianity has existed, who have particularly employed themselves in diffusing, enlivening, animating, and defending the Christian faith; and in most instances the Church, as an independent community, has made the conservation of the Christian interests the particular obligation of some of her members. Thus has arisen a science for itself, directed towards the care and preservation of Christianity, and usually called PRACTICAL THEOLOGY. The province of this science is of a threefold character :-