Chapter XXI: Part 21

411 Collins (1676-1729). His works were on _Immortality_ (1707, 8) in
the Dodwell controversy; _Freethinking_, 1713, refuted entirely by
Bentley in the _Phileleutherus Lipsiensis_. (See also Dr. Ibbot’s
Boyle Lectures, 1713, where the general subject is treated.) On
_Necessity_, 1715. The _Grounds of the Christian Religion_, 1724
(occasioned by Whiston’s work on Prophecy); answered by bishop
Chandler, Samuel Chandler, T. Sherlock, and Moses Lowman; _Scheme of
Literal Prophecy_, 1727, in answer to Chandler. See Leland, ch.
vii., and Lechler, 217-240. Henke’s _Kirchengeschichte_, vi. s. 29.

412 In the two works named below in the text.

413 E.g. that of Buckle in _History of Civilization_.

414 P. 71.

415 P. 5-27.

416 P. 32, &c.

417 P. 56.

418 P. 86.

419 P. 92.

420 P. 100, &c.

421 Part i. § 1-5.

422 Id. § 6, 7.

423 Id. 11.

424 Id. (8-10.)

425 Two other writers, Mandeville and Lyons, have been omitted;
Mandeville (_Fables of the Bees_, 1723), because his speculations
did not bear directly on religion; Lyons, because his work is not
important. In 1723 he published the _Infallibility of Human
Judgment_, in which he analysed the mind, and applied the results of
his analysis to the first principles of natural religion, and to
discredit the evidences and doctrines of revealed. It bears more
resemblance to Toland and Chubb than to any other writers, but is a
feeble work, interesting only as showing the prevalence of
psychological inquiries, and the tendency to examine psychologically
the subject of religion.

426 E.g. Some of those in Germany, see Lect. VI and VII.

427 In the _Moderator_, or _controversy between the author of the
Grounds, &c. and his reverend opponents_, 1727. (Woolston’s Works,
vol. v.)

428 Woolston, 1669-1733. His works are collected in five volumes, with a
life prefixed. His pamphlets on Miracles were refuted by bishops
Pierce, 1729, Gibson, and Smabroke, by Lardner, and by Sherlock in
the Trial of the Witnesses. On Woolston, see Leland (Let. 8),
Lechler (289-311), Henke, vi. 49.

429 Sydney Sussex.

_ 430 A Free Gift to the Clergy, or the Hireling Priests challenged_,
1722, (_Works_, vol. iii.).

431 See Memoir prefixed to his Works, pp. 5 and 22.

432 In Discourse iii.

433 Disc. i. Div. i.

434 Strauss (_Leb. Jes._ Introd. § 6) thinks that his bitterness
manifests that he did not.

435 Disc. iv, and _Defence_, sect. i.

436 Voltaire, _Œuvres Crit._ vol. xlvii. pp. 346-356.

437 Swift’s Poem on his Death, _Works_, vol. xiv. p. 359.

438 The latest Pastorals of Gibson are not only against Woolston, but
other deists also, such as Tindal.

439 His friends would have found money for the fine; but Woolston could
not find securities for his good behaviour if released.

440 Matthew Tindal, (1657-1733), a follow of All Souls’ college, wrote
in 1706 _The Rights of the Christian Church asserted_, probably
suggested by Spinoza’s writings, to show that the absolute
subjection of the church to the state was the only safeguard for
public happiness; and in 1730, _Christianity as old as the
Creation_, which was answered by Conybeare 1732, Leland 1733, and by
Waterland. The reply of the latter was attacked by Conyers
Middleton. On Tindal, see Lechler, 326-341; Leland, Lett. 9; Henke,
vi. 57.

441 Ch. i-vi.

442 Ch. iii.

443 Ch. iv.

444 Ch. v.

445 Ch. vi.

446 Ch. ix-xii.

447 Ch. xiii. p. 258 seq.

448 P. 272 seq.

449 Ch. xiv.

450 See the remarks in _Essays and Reviews_, 1860, p. 272.

451 Morgan died 1743. His chief work was the _Moral Philosopher_, 1737,
with two volumes more in reply to opponents. It was refuted by
Leland, and the controversy was carried forward in Tracts which are
described in Leland’s _Deists_, vol. i. Lett. 11 and 12. See also
Lechler, 370-390; Henke, vi. 70.

452 Vol. i. p. 86, 96. vol. ii. § 1.

453 P. 145 seq.

454 Vol. i.

455 Id. p. 272, &c. ii. § 6.

456 Id. § 7.

457 Id. § 10.

458 T. Chubb (1679-1747), of whom a brief memoir was published 1747. He
was the author of various tracts, of which a list is given in
Darling’s _Cyclopædia Bibliographica_, 1852. The account of Chubb’s
views given in the text is brief, partly because of their similarity
to others previously named, and partly because the author has been
able to see only very few of Chubb’s works. But they are explained
in Lechler, p. 343-356, and Leland, ch. 13. Chubb’s earlier writings
seem to be Socinian, his later deistical. His best known works are,
_A Discourse concerning Reason_, 1731; _the True Gospel of Jesus
Christ_, 1739; and _Posthumous Works_, 2 vols. 1748.

_ 459 Posthumous Works_, i. 287.

460 Id. i. 292.

461 Id. ii. sect. 6.

_ 462 Posthumous Works_, ii. 152.

463 Id. 177, &c.

464 Id. i. 22.

465 Another work was published anonymously in 1742, entitled
_Christianity not founded on Argument_, supposed to be written by
the younger Dodwell, son of the learned nonjuror. Its aim is to show
that Christianity never propagated itself by argument, but that the
evidence of it depends upon a personal illumination of each person
who believes it. The work was supposed to be a satire on
Christianity. If earnest, it marked the truth that emotional causes
are intertwined with intellectual in the formation of belief. See
Lechler, pp. 411-421; Leland, Lett. xi. The book of Jasher,
published in 1751, is a forgery, written probably by some deist
(Horne’s _Introduction_, vol. ii. part ii. p. 142. ed. 8).

466 He was imprisoned in the King’s Bench, and kept from starvation by
money from the benevolent archbishop Secker. He died in 1768. See
Lechler, pp. 313-22; Leland, ch. x.

467 Bolingbroke (1678-1751). See Schlosser’s _History of the Eighteenth
Century_, vol. i. ch. i. § 3 (transl.); Lechler, pp. 396-405;
Leland, ch. 22-34.

468 On Pouilly, see Sir C. Lewis, _Inquiry into the Credibility of Roman
History_, vol. i. ch. i. p. 5, note, Pouilly published in 1722 his
_Dissertation sur l’Incertitude et l’Histoire des quatre premiers
siècles de Rome_. (See _Mém. de l’Academ. des Inscr._, vol. ix.)
Beaufort followed out the same line of inquiry in 1738. The two
writers are considered to have laid the basis of the modern
historical criticism of ancient history.

469 They are chiefly, _A Letter on one of Tillotson’s Sermons_ in vol.
iii. of his works; the _Essays_, in vols. iii. and iv.; viz. Essay 1
on Human Knowledge, (2) on Philosophy, (3) on the rise of
Monotheism, (4) on Authority in Religion; and Fragments in vol. v.

470 Vol. iii. _Letter on Tillotson_, also _Letter to Pouilly_.

471 Vol. v. No. 57, 58.

472 Cfr. _Remusat’s Angleterre au 18__e__ Siècle_ i. 22, for remarks on
Bolingbroke’s influence on Pope. The following lines of Pope exactly
express Bolingbroke’s philosophy:

“The universal Cause
Acts not by partial, but by general laws,
And makes what happiness we justly call,
Subsist not in the good of one, but all.” (_Ep._ iv. 35.)

473 Instances are to be found in Leland, who discusses his opinions at
great length. The reader who compares Leland’s quotations with
Bolingbroke’s works will perhaps think that he has pressed their
meaning rather far; but further consideration will show that he has
correctly expressed Bolingbroke’s spirit and purpose.

474 Letter on _Tillotson_.

475 Ch. iv. 328.

476 Ch. iv. 227, 8.

477 Ch. iv. 405, 272.

478 The history of Apologetik passes through the same phases, and when
it devotes itself to the later forms, becomes of less general
interest, and is more simply literary; which illustrates the fact
that the later doubts are of a much less practical and more
recondite character than those hitherto named.

479 Hume (1711-1776). For his philosophy, see Tennemann, _Geschichte_,
xi. 425; Ritter, _Christliche Philosophie_, viii. b. 7. ch. ii.;
Cousin, _Histoire de la Philosophie Moderne_, _Leçon_ xi.; Morell,
_History of Philosophy_, i. 338; Lord Brougham’s _Preliminary
Discourse to Paley’s Natural Theology_, p. 248. For his religious
opinions, see Leland, _Lett._ 16-21; Lechler pp. 425-34. His views
on miracles were answered by Paley, Bp. John Douglas, Campbell, and
Chalmers.

480 Works, vol. iv. _Inquiry Concerning the Human Understanding_; Essay
xi. on Providence and Future Life; Essay x. on Miracles.

481 The miracles connected with the Abbé Paris were defended in _La
Verité des Miracles de M. Paris_, by C. de Montgéron, 1745. See
concerning them, C. Butler’s _Church of France_, (_Works_, v. pp.
135-142); Bp. John Douglas’s “Criterion by which the true miracles
contained in the New Testament may be distinguished from those of
Pagans and Papists;” Tholuck’s _Vermischte Schriften_, i. 183.

482 E.g. by Professor Powell, in _Essays and Reviews_.

483 This line of thought concerning the necessity of establishing the
antecedent probability of the fact, in order that the evidence may
be logically convincing, is adopted by two writers of very different
opinions, by Mr. Mansel (Essay in the _Aids to Faith_, § 18-23), and
Mr. J. S. Mill (_Logic_, vol. ii. b. iii. ch. 25. § 2). The
distinction between wonder and miracle is allowed by Dean Lyall
(_Propædia Prophetica_); and Mr. Penrose (_The use of Miracles in
proving a Revelation_). Cfr. also Doederlin’s _Instit. Theol.
Christ_, § 9, 10.

484 See _Aids to Faith_, Mansel’s Essay, § 22.

485 There follows hence another peculiarity in reference to miracles;
viz., that we require an interpreting mind to explain them. This is
the reason why so many thoughtful men believe that the outburst of
fire when Julian tried to rebuild the Jewish temple, and the wonder
of the thorn in the history of Port Royal, were nothing more than
natural wonders. If the final cause be considered to have been
sufficient in these cases to warrant divine interposition, at least
there was no interpreter to explain them, nor any revealed message
to be taught. It must be conceded that this trait is wanting in some
miracles recorded in scripture, but not in those which are wrought
to attest a revelation, those which we use in proof of a special
message from the unseen world. Werenfels (_Opusc. Theol._ 1718,
_Diss._ v.) has given tests for the discrimination of miracles which
are quoted by Van Mildert (Boyle Lect. II. p. 584).

486 Cfr. Dean Trench’s remarks on the apologetic value of miracles,
(_Notes on Miracles_, Introd. ch. vi). In the same work will be
found an excellent and interesting account of the various assaults
made on the argument from miracles. He classifies the assaults as
follows: (1) the Jewish, (2) the heathen (Celsus, &c.), (3) the
pantheistic (Spinoza), (4) the sceptical (Hume), (5) that which
regards miracles as such only subjectively (Schleiermacher), (6) the
rationalistic (Paulus), (7) the historico-critical (Woolston,
Strauss). With Dean Trench’s remarks. Compare also Pascal,
_Pensées_, part ii. art. 19. § 9; Lyall, _Prop. Proph._ p. 441; Dr.
Arnold’s _Lectures on Modern History_, pp. 133, 137.

487 E.g. Lessing, &c. Reimarus, &c. See Lect. VI.

488 Butler (1692-1752). The Analogy was published in 1736. The reader’s
attention is invited to the excellent edition of it by bishop
Fitzgerald (1st ed. 1849), and the able memoir and criticism which
precede. Mr. Bartlett has also written a memoir of Butler. Cfr. also
Blunt’s Essays, p. 490 seq.

489 For example, some of the physical proofs of immortality in part i.
ch. i. are weakened by the discoveries of physiology; and those in
favour of the miraculous character of creation, in part ii. ch. ii.
would be regarded as of small value by those who hold the hypothesis
either of the transmutation of species, or of their occurrence
according to a law of natural selection. Some things of a different
kind in Butler, which need correction, are pointed out in
Fitzgerald’s edition. See e.g. p. 184, note.

490 This is the objection taken by Tholuck (_Vermischt. Schrift._ p.
192, 3.) A somewhat similar objection is quoted by Fitzgerald from
Mackintosh, Introd. p. 49, upon both of which he offers criticisms.
A kindred objection has been stated (probably by Mr. Martineau) in
the _National Review_, No. 15. Jan. 1859, (pp. 211-214,) and another
by Miss S. Hennell in _the Sceptical Tendency of Butler’s Analogy_,
1857, in which she traces doubt in Butler’s life as well as
teaching. Others may be found stated and examined in bishop
Hampden’s _Philosophical Evidence of Christianity_, 1827. (pp.
229-291.)

491 This conjecture is given by Fitzgerald in the life prefixed to his
edition of the Analogy (p. 36), where also two passages are quoted,
one from Foster, and the other from Berkeley, which certain passages
of Butler resemble. It would be interesting to know whether the work
of Dr. Peter Browne on _Things Divine and Natural conceived of by
Analogy_, 1733, had come under Butler’s notice. Many similar
passages, as well as references to the sources of the difficulties
which Butler answers, are given in the notes to Fitzgerald’s
edition. Mr. Pattison also (_Essays and Reviews_, p. 286) has
expressed an opinion that Butler was much assisted by the works of
his predecessors. The probability is, that in all great works their
authors assimilate an amount of information current in the age, as
well as create new material. This was probably the case even in
works like Euclid’s Geometry and Aristotle’s Natural History and
Organum.

492 The value of Butler’s argument is fully discussed in the admirable
work on Butler by bishop Hampden before quoted, which is the best
existing commentary on the author: second to it are Chalmers’s
_Natural Religion_ and _Bridgwater Treatise_.

493 Hampden’s _Phil. Evid._ (131-228.)

494 The revival in the early part of the century was due to the agency
of Wesley and Whitfield outside the church; in the latter to those
of such men as Romaine, Newton, and ultimately Simeon, within it.

495 E.g., W. Law’s _Serious Call_, and _Christian Perfection_.

496 Viz., by means of the Moravians of Herrnhut, whose founder,
Zinzendorf, himself sprang from the pietist movement.

497 Zech. iv. 6.

498 The most effective sketch of the intellectual and social state of
France in the last century is given in Buckle’s _History of
Civilization_, vol. i.; especially in ch. 8, 11, 12, and 14. His
narrative only sets forth the dark side of the picture, and the
Christian reader frequently feels pained at some of his remarks; but
it is generally correct so far as it goes, and the references are
copious to the original sources which the author used. I have
therefore frequently rested content with quoting this work without
indicating further sources. An instructive account of the
centralization under Louis XIV is given in Sir J. Stephens’s
_Lectures on the History of France_, Lect. 21-23. The reign of Louis
XV is treated in De Tocqueville’s _Histoire Philosophie du Règne de
Louis XV_. A brief view of the history may be seen in the works of
the liberal Roman catholic, C. Butler, vol. v. on _Church of
France_.

499 The passages from Benoit’s _Histoire de l’Edict de Nantes_, vol. v.
p. 887 seq., and Quick’s _Synodicon_, i. p. 130 seq., respecting the
cruelties of the dragonnades, are quoted at length in Buckle, i. p.
624, note.

500 This occurred in the contest concerning the Gallican liberties, and
the dispute about the Bull Unigenitus. Concerning the former see C.
Butler’s _Church of France_ (Works, vol. v.) p. 34 seq., and Hase’s
_Church History_, § 424; and, on the latter, Butler ut sup. 188-249,
and Hase, § 420.

501 The nature of the literature of the reign of Louis XIV, and the
alteration of position of authors in the new reign, are explained in
Buckle, i. ch. 11 and 12.

502 1715-1723.

503 Literature really became a political power, and exercised a similar
influence to that of the modern newspaper press.

504 Professor Webb of Dublin, in his work, _The Intellectualism of
Locke_, has given evidence which establishes this point.

505 On Condillac see Cousin, _Cours de la Philosophie Morale_, leçon 3;
Renouvier, _Philosophie Moderne_, v. 2. § 4 Villemain, _Cours de
Literature_, ii. 20; Morell’s _History of Philosophy_, i. 148 seq.;
Lewes’ _History of Philosophy_.

506 It may prevent ambiguity to state that the term _materialism_, when
employed in these lectures, is not used in its modern popular sense
of mere animalism, the obedience to the lower side of human nature;
but in its technical sense, as the kind of philosophy which so
regards spirit to be a property of matter as to produce inferences
unfavourable to the belief in immortality or moral obligation.

507 On the scepticism of Montaigne (1532-1592) see Tennemann’s
_Geschichte der Philosophie_, ix. 443; Vinet’s _Essai de Philosophie
Morale_; Sainte-Beuve _Critiques et Portraits Littéraires_, vol.
iv.; Hallam’s _History of Literature_, ii. 29; Emerson’s
_Representative Men_; and R. W. Church in _Oxford Essays_, 1857.

508 On Charron (1541-1603) see Tennemann, Id. ix. 527. Sainte-Beuve, t.
xi.; Hallam, i. 570, ii. 362, 511; and the article in the _Biogr.
Univ._

509 On Bayle (1647-1706) see Tennemann, xi. 268 seq.; Renouvier, _Phil.
Mod._ iii. 3. § 6; Sainte-Beuve, iii. 392.

510 On Fontenelle (1657-1757) see Sainte-Beuve, iii. and the _Biogr.
Univ._ Another writer, Dolet (1509-1546), was also suspected, at an
earlier period, not only of scepticism but of atheism. See his Life,
by J. Boulmier, 1857.

511 On R. Simon see Lect. III. p. 83.

512 See Lechler’s _Gesch. des Eng. Deismus_, p. 445.

513 On the great eagerness for English literature in France at that
time, see the facts collected by Buckle, i. (658-670).

514 A list of those that are said to have been translated is given by
Lechler, Id. 446. On the comparison of English and French deism see
Henke’s _Kirchengeschichte_, vi. s. 131.

515 1726-1729. Cfr. Villemain, _Cours de Litt._ i. (168-177). A letter
of Fleury, quoted from Schlosser by Lechler (Id. 446), proves that
his fears were excited by the influence which English literature was
producing.

516 On this charge of attack about 1750 see Buckle, i. 716-718; and on
the origin of the attack on the church, and the causes why it
preceded that on the state, Id. 684 seq. Cfr. also De Tocqueville’s
_Louis XV_, t. ii. ch. 10.

517 Voltaire lived 1694-1778. The Life by Lord Brougham, in _Lives of
Men of Letters_, is not only very full of facts, but contains some
very able criticism, especially on the dramatic works of Voltaire.
More biographies have been given in this lecture than in others, in
accordance with the reasons explained in Lec. I. p. 33, because in
this period the infidel influence was the result of the teachers, as
much as of the ideas taught. See concerning Voltaire, Henke’s
_Kirchengesch._ vi. 166; Schlosser, _Hist. of Eighteenth Century_,
i. 2. § 1, iv. § 1. Bartholmess, _Hist. Crit. des Doctr. Relig. de
la Phil. Mod._ i. 211 seq.; Bungener’s _Voltaire_.

518 In 1726.

519 Sirven was condemned in 1762, on an unjust suspicion of causing his
daughter’s death, to prevent her becoming a protestant.

520 La Barre was a youth of seventeen, who, on the suspicion of having
injured a crucifix on the bridge of Abbeville, was condemned (1763)
to be tortured on the rack, to have his tongue cut out, and to be
put to death; which sentence was literally executed. See _Biographie
Universelle_, sub _Voltaire_, vol. xix. p. 484, and Brougham’s Life
of him (94-99).

521 The Calas were a family at Toulouse, the father of which was put to
death (1762) by catholic fanaticism. Voltaire investigated the facts
with care; and, by instituting legal proceedings at Paris, got the
sentence of the Toulouse court reversed, and all the reparation that
was possible made to the family. Money to defray the expenses was
sent to him from all the reformed parts of Europe. The English queen
(Charlotte) and the archbishop of Canterbury (Secker) headed the
English subscription list. The facts have lately been reinvestigated
by the accomplished A. Coquerel _fils._, _Jean Calas et sa Famille_,
1858. The narrative is told in the _Westminster Review_, No. 28, for
Oct. 1858. See also Henke’s _Kirchengeschichte_, vi. 298 seq.

On the tomb of Voltaire, now a cenotaph, in the vaults of the
Pantheon, is an inscription, “Il défendit Calas, Sirven, De la
Barre, et Montbailly.” Since the Pantheon has been converted into a
church, the side of the tomb which bears this inscription has been
concealed by a screen, so that visitors are only permitted to view
one of the other sides.

522 Carlyle’s _Miscellaneous Works_, vol. ii. It will be observed that
many of the following remarks are abbreviated from this source.

523 Carlyle, Id. p. 113.

524 i.e. the age of Louis XV. See Id. pp. 180-185.

525 On Voltaire’s power of ridicule, see Id. 120, 167; and on his power
of order, 163 seq.

526 Id. p. 161.

527 Id. p. 119.

528 The question of Voltaire’s blasphemy is treated by lord Brougham
(_Life_, p. 7).

529 The four volumes are xxxii-xxxv of the _Œuvres Complètes_, 8vo.
1785. Vol. xxxii contains the philosophical works, of which ch. 2,
6, 7, 9, of the _Traité de Metaphysique_, relate to religion; also
the _Profession de Foi des Théistes_; the _Homélies prononcées à
Londres_. Vol. xxxiii contains the _Examen de Milord Bolingbroke_;
and the _Epitre aux Romains_. Vol. xxxiv, _La Bible enfin
Expliquée_, where the notes contain Voltaire’s views fully. Vol.
xxiv, _Histoire de l’Etablissement du Christianisme_.

530 On the persecutions which fell on literary men, see Buckle, i.
(672-684.)

531 The proof of this assertion is clear in his _Traité de
Metaphysique_, c. 2. (_Œuvres_, vol. xxxii); in Letter iii of
Memmius to Cicero; in the _Profess. de Foi des Théistes_; and is
shown by the fact of his opposition to the Encyclopædists on the
ground of their atheism; which is confirmed by the inscription on
his tomb, “Il combattit les athées.” It is his blasphemous tone
which has, not unnaturally, given rise to the idea of his atheism.

532 “Ecrasez l’infame” are the words, the initials of which, signed at
the end of his letters to infidel friends, baffled the French
police. Buckle considers them to have been designed against the
French church, but offers no proof. It is to be feared that they
were rather intended against the Christian religion, if not against
the sacred person of our blessed Lord.

533 See his _Commentary_ (_Œuvres_, vol. xxxiv.), the _Homélies_ (vol.
xxxii,), and the _Histoire_ (vol. xxxiv.).

534 On the contrast of his historic tone to that of Bossuet, see Buckle,
i. 726, and Schlosser, _History of the Eighteenth Century_, (English
translation), vol. i. ch. iv. § 2. p. 273.

535 Compare Carlyle’s remarks _ut sup._ p. 175.

536 Id. 105.

537 On Frederick’s entertainment of these French refugees, see Henke,
_Kirchengesch_. vi. 180; Schlosser, vol. i. 2. § 3.

538 La Mettrie (1709-1751). His views are seen in the _Discours
Préliminaire_ to his _Hist. Nat. del âme_, and in the _L’homme
machiné_ (1748). See a criticism on him in Ph. Damiron’s _Memoires
pour servir à l’Histoire de Philosophie au 18__e__ siècle_ (vol. i.
pp. 1-49), reprinted from the Report of the _Académie des Sciences_;
also Henke, vi, 13.

539 De Prades (1720-1782). See Henke, vi. 201; also the article in the
_Biographie Universelle_.

540 D’Argens (1704-1771). See Damiron, Id. ii. 256-376.

541 On the old coteries of Rambouillet, &c., see Hallam’s _Hist. of
Literature_, iii. 137.

542 D’Alembert (1717-83). For particulars of his life, see Brougham’s
memoir in _Lives of Men of Letters_. For his philosophy, see
Damiron, ii. 1-114; Henke, vi. 218; Schlosser, i. 4. § 7. His
infidelity was known to friends, but not openly avowed.

543 Marmontel (1723-99). See Sainte-Beuve, _Portraits_, vol. iv.;
Schlosser, ii. 2. § 1.

544 Grimm, 1723-1807. See Sainte-Beuve, vol. vii. The _Correspondance
Litt. par le Baron Grimm et Diderot_ is the great source for the
knowledge of his character.

545 St. Lambert (1717-1803). See Damiron, ii. 144-256.

546 Abbé Raynal (1711-96). See Schlosser, ii. 2. § 1. Henke, vol. vi.
enumerates many more of the same class. Particulars of all are given
in the _Biographie Universelle_.

547 The following refer to places where the tendency and spirit of this
whole movement are described, as well as literary information
supplied. Henke, vi. 208, &c.; Bartholmess, i. 117-210; Lerminier’s
_Influence de la Phil. du 18__e__ siècle_ (1833); Morell’s _Hist. of
Phil._ i. 158, &c.; Maurice, _Mod. Phil._ p. 527-59; H. Martin’s
_Hist. de France_, vol. xv. and xvi. liv. 96, 99, 100, 101;
Renouvier, _Mod. Phil._ b. v. ch. 2. § 6-8; also Kuno Fischer’s
_Bacon_, p. 451, and the references above given to Schlosser and to
Damiron; Tennemann (_Manual_, § 378, &c.) also gives many literary
references.

548 Diderot (1713-84). His life and character have been sketched by
Carlyle, (_Misc. Works_, vol. iv.); also by Damiron, ii. (227-324);
St. Beuve, i. 355. Also see Villemain, _Tableau de la Litt. au
18__e__ siècle_, lec. xix. 20. His novels are the parent of the
impure novel of modern times. See Schlosser, i. 4. § 5, ii 2. § 1.

549 In the _Essai sur le Mérite et la Vertu_, pp. 73, 87, he allows
deism, the God of moral order. Similarly in the _Pensées Philos._ §
46, but it is the God of nature. But in the Dialogue with D’Alembert
he teaches atheism. On his theological views see Damiron, ii. 261
seq.

550 § 25, &c.

551 See Carlyle, _Misc. Works_, iv. 322.

552 Helvetius (1715-1771). See C. Remusat in _Rev. des Deux Mondes_,
Aug. 15, 1858. On the circle of Helvetius see Carlyle _ut sup._ 287
seq.; and on their atheism Buckle, i. 786 seq. Concerning Helvetius
himself see Ritter’s _Christliche Philos._ viii. b. ix. ch. 2;
Cousin’s _Hist. de Phil. Morale_, leçon 7; Schlosser, i. 4. § 6.

553 Viz., _De l’Esprit et de l’Homme_ (Œuvres compl. 1818, vol. i. and
ii.). Both treatises are excellently analysed in the table of
contents prefixed to the work. The allusions in the text here may be
thought to fail from their brevity in showing that Helvetius’s
opinions were a logical corollary from his principles; they cannot
at least give any notion of the great power of analysis exhibited by
him in expressing his own views.

554 In Discourse ii.

555 Id.

556 D’Holbach (1723-89). _The Système de la Nature_ bears the name of a
Mirabaud, secretary to the Academy. Some have thought it to be
written by Robinet, author of a similar work. (His works are
discussed in Damiron, ii, 480 seq.) Concerning the work see
Villemain, iii. leç. 38; Damiron, i. (93-177); Ritter, _Christ.
Philos._ viii. b. 9. ch. 3; Schlosser, i. 4. § 1. On D’Holbach’s
view of God see Damiron, Id. p. 155, &c.; Buckle, i. 787, note. The
_Système de la Nature_ is partly analysed and criticised in
Brougham’s _Discourse on Natural Theology_, pp. 232-47. It comprised
two volumes, and is followed by a volume containing three small
treatises relating to the natural principles of morals, and social
philosophy. The work was refuted by Bergier (1771).

557 Partie 1ere ch. iii. and iv.

558 Part ii. ch. vii.

559 Part ii. ch. xi.

560 Part i. ch. xiii.

561 Part ii. ch. i.

562 Id. ch. iv. and v.

563 Damiron discuses, in addition to the writers already named, two or
three others, viz., Naigeon, Sylv. Marechal, and De la Lande, whose
names are not introduced here into the text.

564 On Rousseau see Villemain ii. leçon (23-24); Brougham’s life of him
in _Men of Letters_; Bartholmess, i. 233-270; Henke, vi. 232,
especially p. 253, which refers to his theology; Schlosser, i. 4. §
4, and ii. § 2; St. Marc Girardin on the Emile in _Rev. des Deux
Mondes_, Dec. 1854; and an article, too favourably written, but full
of information, in the _Westminster Review_, Oct. 1859, which has
been of much use for this lecture.

565 The chief facts of Rousseau’s life are these:—Born 1712; came to
Paris, 1741; wrote _Sur les Sciences et les Arts_, 1750;
_L’inegalité parmi les hommes_, 1753; lived in the Paris coteries,
1754-60; wrote _Nouvelle Heloise_, 1760; _Le Contrat Social_, 1761,
and _Emile_; an exile in Switzerland 1762, where he wrote _Lettres
de la Montagne_; accompanied Hume to England 1776; wrote his
_Confessions_; returned to the Continent 1767; died 1770.

566 There are some good remarks on this theory in the article in the
_Westminster Review_ before quoted, the substance of which is to
show that Rousseau’s doctrine was false in its method and in its
tendencies. It marked the stage of inquiry, indicative of the last
part of the last century, when men, ignoring the teaching of
history, strove to solve problems by means of abstract speculations;
the attempt to study the origin of phenomena instead of the facts of
their progressive manifestation. The social contract is nothing but
the description of the collective development to which society
tends. The scheme was visionary: but, as a protest against unjust
monopolies which existed in that age, it woke up a response in
society (cfr. Mill on _Liberty_, p. 47-50); and in its tendency it
made Rousseau the precursor of the French revolution; but in
typifying that movement it represented only its transient aspect of
subversive energy, not its work of political reformation.

_ 567 Emile_, b. iv. (See _Œuvres_, vol. iv. p. 14-119, ed. Paris, 1823,
by Musset-Pathay.)

568 Id. p. 17-20.

569 Id. p. 22-30.

_ 570 Emile_, p. 33: “Si la matière mue me montre une volonté, la matière
mue, selon de certaines lois me montre une intelligence. C’est mon
second article de foi.”

571 P. 34, 36.

572 P. 40-49.

573 P. 50-53.

574 P. 57-75.

575 P. 83-86.

576 P. 75-119.

577 P. 86, &c.

578 P. 86.

_ 579 Emile_, pp. 105-107.

580 The comparison of the statements of the _Confessions_ with fragments
of Rousseau lately published, shows that many statements which they
contain in reference to other persons is false. The statement in the
text is made in deference to the opinion latterly stated (e.g. in
Heine’s _Allemagne_), that there is a general air of romance
pervading the work. If the statements in reference to himself are
untrue, the narrative is only a greater proof of the immorality of
the author. The supposition however seems groundless. The defender
of Rousseau, G. H. Morin (_Essai_, 1851), does not exculpate his
author by impeaching the historical truthfulness of the Confessions.

581 The high moral standard is not of course seen in the _Confessions_,
which show Rousseau to have been the incarnation of selfishness, and
much worse than most of the other unbelievers, but is exhibited in
the _Emile_. The fact that the author of the latter work could write
the former is a sad example of a man knowing, like the ancient
heathens, how to do good and doing it not.

582 Henke (vi. p. 267 seq.) draws out the comparison of Voltaire with
Rousseau in an excellent manner. Coleridge (_Friend_, vol. i.
165-186) has given a comparison of Voltaire with Erasmus, and of
Rousseau with Luther.

583 See Villemain, i. 14, 15., ii. 22; Schlosser, i. 2. § 2., 4. § 3,
and ii. 2. § 2.

584 See Buckle, i. (772-783).

585 Compare Macaulay’s remarks in reference to the Revolution, _Essays_
(ed. 8vo. 1843), ii. 215, &c.

586 For the causes of the revolution compare the statements of Alison,
_Hist. of Europe_, i. ch. ii. and iii., and Buckle, i. (836-850).

587 On the incipient hostility to religion in the National Assembly, see
Alison, vol. ii. ch. v. § 46, Id. § 32-35. On the full development
of it in the Convention, see Id. iv. ch. xiv. § (45-48).

588 Nov. 9.

589 Concerning this act of Robespierre, see Alison, iv. ch. xv. § 23,
24, 27.

590 On the state of religion under the Directory, see Alison, vol. v.
ch. xix. § 41, and vol. vi, ch. xxiv. § 19.

591 See M. Gregoire’s _Histoire de la Théophilanthropie_, forming part
of his _Histoire des Sectes Relig._, and the notice of it in the
_Quarterly Review_, No. 56. Also the references in Alison, vi. ch.
xxiv. § 19; Staüdlin, _Geschichte des Rationalismus und Supernat._
1826, (44-54.)

592 On the state under Napoleon, see Alison, viii. ch. xxxv. § 1, and
30-40.

593 April 11, 1802.

594 See Morell, _Hist, of Phil._ vol. i. ch. iv. § 2.

_ 595 Les Ruines ou Meditations sur les Revolutions des Empires_ (1791.)
A similar view of religion is taken in Dupuis, _Origine de tous les
Cultes_, 1795.

596 Ch. ii.

597 Ch. iii.

598 Ch. v.

599 Ch. vii-xii.

600 Ch. xv.

601 Ch. xix.

602 Ch. xx. &c.

603 Ch. xxii. p. 218.

604 P. 226.

605 P. 232.

606 P. 238.

607 P. 255.

608 P. 262.

609 P. 268.

610 P. 274.

611 P. 277.

612 P. 285.

613 P. 286.

614 P. 287.

615 P. 288.

616 Ch. xxiv. p. 320.

617 Such as the idea of the plurality of worlds suggested by Fontenelle.

618 The apologetic literature of this period of the French church is not
powerful. See Buckle, i. 692, note; and Alison, i. 2. § 62.

619 The influence on Germany will be seen in Lect. VI.

620 In Lect. IV.

621 Gibbon (1737-1794). See _Autobiography_ (Milman’s edition 1839), ch.
iii. p. 73, &c.

622 Cfr. some remarks (p. 27, 28,) in an instructive paper on Gibbon in
the _National Review_, No. 3, on the relation of his method and
style to his age.

623 Milman and Guizot.

624 The first of these is explained by Dr. Milman, Preface to edition of
Gibbon, p. 10, and the article in the _Quarterly Review_, No. 100.

625 Cfr. Mackintosh (_Life_, i. 244), quoted by Milman in his edition of
Gibbon, c. xv. first note.

626 The remarks which follow are partly taken from the above-named
article in the _National Review_ (pp. 33-36). Nearly the same thing
is said by Miss Hennell in the fifth Baillie Prize Essay on the
early Christian anticipation of the end of the world, 1860, a
treatise which in other respects is very objectionable.

627 Bp. Watson’s _Apology for Christianity_ was a reply to Gibbon, 1776.
Dean Milman’s notes to chapters xv. and xvi. of Gibbon are an
excellent comment and criticism.

628 Byron, _Childe Harold_, iii. 105-108.

629 Paine (1737-1809), published _Rights of Man_, 1790; _Age of Reason_,
1794. See the life by Cheetham, 1809, and Chalmers’s _Biographical
Dictionary_. Bp. Watson’s _Apology for the Bible_ was a reply to
Paine (1796).

630 Anacharsis Clootz.

631 The danger arising from republican clubs is described in Alison, iv.
ch. xvi. § 6; and in W. Hamilton Reed’s _Rise and Dissolution of
Infidel Societies in the Metropolis_, 1800. See also the Report of
the Committee of the House of Lords on them, 1801. The works of
Godwin on _Political Justice_, 1793, and of Mary Woolstencraft on
the _Rights of Women_, are generally adduced as illustrations of the
prevalence of French political principles at that time in England.

632 Part i. pp. 3-19, and part ii. pp. 8-83.

633 Part i. pp. 3, 4; 21-50; part ii. pp. 83-93.

634 P. 44.

635 Part ii. pp. 10-83.

636 Part i. pp. 37-44. This difficulty, first suggested by Fontenelle,
is met in the eloquent _Astronomical Discourses_ (1822) of Chalmers.
The controversy has been newly opened by the brilliant essay on the
_Plurality of Worlds_ (1853), supposed to be by Dr. Whewell, and
pursued by Dr. Brewster (_More Worlds than One_), Professor Baden
Powell (Essays on the _Order of Nature_), and by Professor H. S.
Smith in the _Oxford Essays_, 1855.

637 Page 20.

638 Part i. pp. 3, 4; p. 50.

639 Robert Owen (1771-1858). About the year 1800 he became known in
connexion with schemes of industrial reform at the Lanark mills; and
from 1813-19 conducted them as a social experiment to carry out his
views. He attempted also to spread his opinions in America. After
his return to England, by means of lectures and his work, _The New
Moral World_, he taught them in the manufacturing towns; and they
were widely spread about the time of the Chartist movement
(1839-41). His opinions may be learned from his _Essays on the
Formation of Character_ (1818), which explain his Lanark system; and
especially his _New Moral World_, published about 1839. His
religious opinions may be gathered from the _Debate on the Evidences
and on Society with A. Campbell_, 1839. His autobiography was
published in 1857, and a review of his philosophy by W. L. Sargeant,
1860. An article also related to him in the _Westminster Review_ for
Oct. 1860. See also Morell’s _History of Philosophy_, i. 386 seq.
Mr. R. Dale Owen, son of the above, published several deist tracts
in America, from about 1840-44.

640 It has been considered unnecessary to name three other unimportant
writers, Burgh, Farmer, a writer on the subject of Demoniacs, and
Carlisle, who was prosecuted in 1830.

641 Byron (1788-1824). The _Vision of Judgment_, written in 1821, has
been already referred to in Lecture III. as a vehicle for sceptical
banter. For a brief comparison between the scepticism of Byron and
Shelley, see remarks in the _Westminster Review_, April 1841, by Mr.
G. H. Lewes.

642 Bacon, _Nov. Org._ Aph. 52, 53.

643 Shelley (1792-1822). The materials are abundant for understanding
the character and works of Shelley, in biographies both friendly and
hostile. The second edition of the _Shelley Memorials_, by lady
Shelley, 1859, contains an essay on Christianity by him. Several
important articles in Reviews have been published in reference to
him, among which it is desirable to call attention to the one in the
_National Review_, No. 6, Oct. 1856, which contains a very
instructive analysis of his mental and moral character. It has been
used in the few remarks which follow.

644 The pamphlet appears to have been an anonymous statement of the
weakness of the argument for the existence of deity; negative rather
than positive. See the account of the transaction and its results in
T. J. Hogg’s _Life of Shelley_, 1858, vol. i. pp. (269-286).

645 E.g. in the _Ode to Liberty_ (§ 15 and 16), written in 1820.

646 In the _Adonais_, § 49-51. For Shelley’s own cremation and burial,
see the _Memorials_ by lady Shelley, p. 201.

647 This is well put in the Review above quoted, (p. 356).

648 The Reviewer thinks that the first stage was in tone like Lucretius,
i.e. Epicureanism. The second and third are described here in the
text. The Queen Mab (end of the first division) expressed the first
stage; the first speech of Ahasuerus in the Hellas is a specimen of
the second; and the Adonais (43 and 52) of the third.

649 This contrast however in the evidences, though true in a general
way, must not be pressed so as to imply an absolutely defined line
of chronological separation between the two classes of evidence.

650 Robert Boyle died in 1692, and founded the lecture by his last will.
The lectures commenced in the same year. Bampton’s were founded in
1751; but none delivered till 1780. Hulse died in 1790; but the
lectures did not commence till 1820. A list of the lectures
delivered in each series may be found in Darling’s _Cyclopædia
Bibliographica_.

651 The remarks on evidence in Nos. 73 and 84 of the _Tracts for the
Times_, and the tone assumed by the ultramontane writers of France,
are instances of the undervaluing evidences from the former causes.
The deist literature of the last century, and the writings of
Carlyle in the present, are instances of that which arises from the
latter.

652 I.e. they belong essentially to the protestant stand-point in
theology.

653 See above, p. 160. The view which Blunt took of the evidences is
given in his _Essays_, p. 133, reprinted from the _Quarterly
Review_, April 1828.

654 The controversy raised by the Tübingen school refers to the date of
books of the New Testament which testify to facts and doctrines.
Supposing this primary question settled in favour of our commonly
received view, then the further question follows concerning the
honesty and opportunity of information of the narrators; and it is
here that the arguments of Lyttleton, Lardner, and Paley, in the
last century, find their proper place. See below, Lect. VIII.

655 John iv. 37, 38, 36.

656 On Rationalism see Note 21 at the end of this volume.

657 The sources for the knowledge of this period are briefly stated in
the Preface to these lectures.

658 See p. 9, 99. Hundeshagen (_Der Deutsche Prot._ § 13) insists on the
prime importance of the spiritual element as the moving force in the
Reformation.

659 Melancthon and Camerarius, Calvin and Beza, represent the union of
learning with theology; the second Scaliger, the Stephenses,
Casaubon, and others, are instances of the great lay scholars.

660 The date of the former is 1577; of the latter 1618. These are named
as the events from which the theology in the Lutheran and
Calvinistic churches respectively became fixed. Buddeus (_Isagoge_,
p. 239) dates it rather from the confession of Ratisbon, 1601. On
this dogmatic period see _Der Deutsche Prot._ § 9; Hagenbach’s
_Dogmengesch._ § 216-18; Amand Saintes’ _Critical History of
Rationalism_ (transl.) ch. v. and vi; Pusey’s _Historical Inquiry_,
part i. pp. (1-52), part ii. ch. viii. and ix. (1830). It was this
period which produced the various books of Loci Communes Theologici.
The only exception to this scholastic spirit was Calixt. and the
school of Helmstadt, which in tone was like the school of Saumur,
(Cameron, Amyrauld, and Placæus,) or like Baxter, the controversies
connected with which prove the rule. On it see Schröckh,
_Christliche Kirchengeschichte seit der Reformation_ (1804), viii.
243 seq. On the theologians of this period see Weismann, _Introd. in
Memorabilia Eccles. Hist._ (1718), p. 919 seq.

661 This view of inspiration is stated in Quenstedt’s _Syst. Theol._,
and Calov’s _Syst. Theol._ i. 554 seq., about the end of the
seventeenth century. Dr. Pusey (part i. 140) refers to passages of
Semler’s _Lebens-Beschreibung_ illustrative of these opinions in the
German church of that period. On the similar controversy which
existed in the French protestant church see note above, p. 113. This
is only one instance among many of the close analogy which exists in
the development of thought between the reformed churches in
different lands.

662 These are the chief influences which the German writers enumerate.
See Tholuck ii. § 2-5, Kahnis, _History of German Protest_. (transl.
1856) i. 1.

663 On Leibnitz and his system see Tennemann, _Geschichte_ xi. 93 seq.;
Ritter’s _Christliche Phil._ viii. 47 seq.; Renouvier, _Phil. Mod._
(278-90); and especially Maine de Biran’s _Life of Leibnitz_ in the
_Biographie Universelle_. Also Morell’s _History of Philosophy_, i.
220, and H. Rogers’s _Essays_ (Essay on Leibnitz,) reprinted from
the _Edinburgh Review_, July 1846.

664 On these canons see Sir W. Hamilton’s _Lectures on Logic_, vol. i.
lect. vi.; Mansel’s _Prolegomena_, ch. vi.; and Mills’s _Logic_,
vol. ii. b. v. ch. iii. § 5.

665 Wolff, 1679-1754. Professor of Philosophy at Halle; in 1723
expelled; restored in 1741; Lange and Buddeus were his great
opponents (see Hagenbach’s _Dogmengesch._ § 274). His philosophy
consisted of an attempt to deduce _à priori_ a system of (1)
cosmology, (2) psychology, (3) natural theology. The latter relates
to God, His attributes in Himself and in creation. See some remarks
by Mr. Mansel on his scheme (art. _Metaphysic. Encycl. Brit._, 8vo.
ed. p. 603). On his philosophy see Ritter, _Christ. Phil._ vii. b.
x. ch. i.; Tennemann’s _Manual_, § (363-5); Morell, i. 228;
Rosenkrantz, _Gesch. der Kantischen Schule_, b. i. part iii. ch. i.
His religious opinions are found in the _Theol. Nat._ 1736, and
_Philos. Moralis_, 1750, and in his _Vernuenftige Gedanken von
Gott_. 1747 (p. 604). See on them Henke, _Kirchengesch._ viii. § 3;
Mangel’s _Bampton Lectures_, note 3. And on the effects of his
philosophy, and the state of theology in Germany at the time of its
influence, see Tholuck’s _Vermischte Schriften_, ii. § 2 and 1.

666 In 1723, in consequence of the petition from the pietist professors,
Frederick I, deposed Wolff. See Kahnis (Engl. Transl.) p. 114.

667 In reference to the introduction of Wolff’s philosophy, the
reference to Tholuck has been already given. See also Schröch’s
_Gesch._ viii. 26; Lechler, 448; Amand Saintes’ _Critical History of
Rationalism_, i. ch. ix.; Hagenbach’s _Dogmengesch._ § 274; Kahnis,
p. 110. Kahnis (115) names Baumgarten, Canz, and Toellner, as
Wolff’s pupils. Mosheim and the Walches were too exclusively
literary to be affected by the new philosophy. Canz of Tübingen was
the first to apply the system to doctrinal theology (1728). See
Pusey, part i. 116.

668 Locke’s philosophy in a distorted form was introduced by the French
philosophers who lived at the court of Frederick II.

669 On the introduction of English deism, see Tholuck, § 3. A few only
of the deist writings were translated, (e.g. Tindal by Schmidt in
1741,) but very many of the replies; which proves how much attention
they excited. See the list in Lechler, p. 447. Up to 1760 no fewer
than 106 answers had been written to Tindal alone. Kortholt, in his
work _De Tribus Impostoribus_, (viz. Herbert, Hobbes, Spinoza,)
1680, was the first to notice English deism. The appeal to reason in
these replies had the same effect as that noticed in the philosophy
of Wolff.

670 For Maupertuis see _Biographie Universelle_. The others have been
named in the notes to Lect. V.

671 See Tholuck, § 4 and 5. He considers that the French literature,
with the exception of Bayle, did not affect the Germans, on account
of its shallowness; but doubtless it did so indirectly.

672 This division does not essentially differ from the threefold one
adopted by Kahnis, into the illumination period, that of the
renovation, and of the church renovating itself.

673 We place the limit at 1810, because it is the date of the foundation
of the university of Berlin, which was the home of the reaction.

674 This date marks the spread of the Kantian philosophy, as will be
shown below.

675 There were thus three chief phases within the church; the dogmatic
at Leipsic, the critical at Göttingen, the pietistic eclecticism of
Semler at Halle. If to this we add the pietism which still reigned
at Tübingen, as seen in Pfaff, &c., we have the condition of the
four universities which were at that time the chief centres of
intellectual activity in Germany.

676 Lessing, along with Nicholai, conducted the _Allgemeine Deutsche
Bibliothek_ from 1765.

677 On the purpose and nature of these institutions, which arose at
Dessau about 1774, see Schlosser, i. 5, 3; ii. 3, 2; Kahnis, p. 47.
On Basedow (1724-1790), see Rose on _Rationalism_, p. 66, note
(second edition), and Schröch, viii. 52.

678 J. A. Ernesti (1707-1781), was author of _Inst. Interpret. Nov.
Test._ 1761 (translated by bishop Terrot). His chief labours were
the editions of several classical authors, among which the most
valuable was Cicero. See Schlosser, ii. 187; Kahnis, 120; Pusey,
132; Am. Saintes, part ii. ch. ii. The Rosenmüllers (the father, J.
G. Rosenmüller, on the New Testament; the son, E. F. Rosenmüller the
antiquarian on the Old,) manifest much the same spirit as Ernesti.

679 Joh. Dav. Michaelis (1716-1791). His chief works were, _Gruend-liche
Erklaerung des Mosaischen Rechts_, and the _Einleitung in die
Schrift, des Neuen Bundes_. The former handled the Hebrew
legislation in a free spirit. The latter work was translated by
bishop Marsh, and led to the controversy about the composition of
the Gospels, to which allusion will be made in the notes of Lecture
VII. See Kahnis, p. 121; Henke, viii. part ii. § 2. Jerusalem and
Spalding manifest the same spirit as Michaelis.

680 Semler (1725-1791), Professor at Halle. His _Lebens-beschreibung_,
published 1781, is the great source for studying his mental
development and the history of his times. His works are numerous,
consisting chiefly of Commentaries and Ecclesiastical History. He
was one of the first to open up the study of the history of doctrine
(_dogmengeschichte_). The works which exhibit his rationalism are
chiefly the _Frei Untersuchen des Canons_, 1711; _Versuch einer
freiern lehrart_, 1777; _Introduction to Baumgarten’s Dogmatik_;
_Institutiones ad Doctrinam Christianam liberaliter docendam_, 1774.
His character is discussed at length in Tholuck. § 6; Pusey, 138,
&c.; Schlosser, ii. 187; Am. Saintes, b. ii. ch. ii. and iii. On the
successors of the writers recently named, see Am. Saintes, b. ii,
ch. iv.

681 In the work on the Canon named in the last note.

682 See the historic sketch of interpretation given in Planck’s
_Introduction to Sacred Philology_, (English translation, 168-186).
Interesting information is supplied in Credner’s article
_Interpretation_ in Kitto’s _Biblical Encyclopædia_; J. J.
Conybeare’s _Bampton Lecture_ for 1824 on the _Secondary
Interpretation of Scripture_; Dr. S. Davidson’s _Sacred
Hermeneutics_ (5-7); and an article in the _North British Review_
for August 1855 on the Alexandrian school.

683 These tendencies must be considered only to express the average.
Thus the school of Antioch, of which Theodore of Mopsuestia is a
type, leaned to the grammatical mode; (see some remarks on it in
Neander’s _Church History_, vol. iv. _init._ Germ. ed.; vol. iii.
_fin._ Engl. Tr.) In the middle ages the Franciscans showed an
inclination to the mystical or allegorical; and the typical system
of the Miracle Plays and of the Biblia Pauperum illustrates the
allegorical spirit of those times.

684 The allegorical is seen in the school of Cocceius (1603-1669) in the
Dutch church. The dogmatic has been alluded to above.

685 The system is called variously, in works of Hermeneutics,
συγκατάβασις, condescensio, demissio, obsequium. It is developed in
Semler’s _Prolegomena_ to some of St. Paul’s Epistles; in the
_Vorbereitung zur Theol. Hermeneutik_, 1762; and in the _Apparatus
ad lib. Nov. Text. interpr._ 1767. Tholuck quotes many instances of
it in reference to him (ii. 61). Concerning the subject see Planck’s
_Introduction to Sacred Philology_, (E. T.) 152-168; Wegscheider,
_Inst. Theol._ § 25; Bretschneider, _Hist. Dogm. Auslegung des N.
T._ 1806. A list of foreign works in reference to it is given at the
end of the article _Accommodation_, in Kitto’s _Biblical
Encyclopædia_. For a criticism on it see J. J. Conybeare’s Bampton
Lecture for 1824. (Lect. VII.)

686 Mark x. 5.

687 E.g. by Kidder in his _Testimony of the Messias_, 1694; Nicholls,
_Conference with a Theist_, 1733; and by Sykes, in several works
from about 1720-40.

688 Dr. Pusey speaks (_Inquiry_, p. 139, n.) of two works by Semler on
Demons, (of which I have seen only the second, 1779,) the first
directed against the belief in the occurrence of possessions in the
present day; the second to show that some of the Greek words
descriptive of such phenomena in the New Testament need not
necessarily imply superhuman agency.

689 Because it seemed to involve the notion of dissimulation on the part
of the scripture writers, or even of the divine Being.

_ 690 Introd. ad Doctr. Christianam_, b. i. See Am. Saintes, p. 107.

691 E.g. The Wolfenbüttel Fragments. See Am. Saintes, p. 86, and
Niemeyer’s _Letzte Aeusserungen ueber religioese Gegenstaende zwei
Tage vor seinem Tode_, which he quotes.

692 His doctrinal views are seen in the _Lebens-beschreibung_, part ii.
p. 220, &c.

693 Lessing (1729-1781). In 1754 he joined Nicholai and Mendelssohn in
literary criticism; in 1757, in the _Bibliothek der Schönen
Wissenschaften_; and in 1765, in the _Allgem. Deutsche Biblioth._ An
account of his life and literary character may be seen in the
_Foreign Quarterly Review_ (No. 50) for 1840, and an able criticism
on him by C. Dollfus in the _Revue Germanique_ for 1860 (vol. ix.).
Consult also Menzel’s _Deutsch. Litt._ iii. 291, &c.; Metcalfe’s
work based on Vilmar, p. 400 seq. A separate study of his
theological opinions was made by C. Schwartz in 1854, entitled
_Lessing als Theolog_, especially c. iv.; see also Bartholmess, b.
ii. ch. ii.

694 Published in 1766.

695 H. S. Reimarus (1694-1768). See Schlosser, ii. 26, &c., and the
article _Reimarus_ in the Conversations Lexicon.

696 See Note 29 at the end of this volume.

697 The Fragments are here named according to the order of their
original publication; not that in which they are usually printed,
as, e.g. in the Berlin edition, 1835.

698 Compare Strauss’s description of them in his _Leben Jesu_, Introd. §
5. Lessing’s own object in their publication is expressed in the
concluding pages of his edition of them.

699 The chief opposition arose from Göze, a pastor of Hamburg, who
attacked Lessing even before the last and most obnoxious fragment
was published; but both Semler and Jerusalem also wrote against him.
See Boden’s _Lessing und Göze, Ein Beitrag zur Lit. und
Kirchengesch. des 18 Jahrh._ 1862; also the references given at the
end of Note 29 (p. 427); especially Hagenbach’s _Dogmengesch._ §
275, note.

700 See the note on p. 87.

_ 701 Die Erziehung des menschlichen Geschlechts_, lately partially
translated into English. It conveyed the thoughts suggested by the
perusal of some apologies for religion.

702 The theologians Steinbart and Teller represented a similar spirit.

703 On Edelmann, who died 1767, see Kahnis, p. 126; and on Bahrdt
(1741-92), Id. pp. 136-145; and Schlosser, ii. 211. The life of
Bahrdt is a sad subject for study. Kahnis (p. 125 seq.) enumerates
other deists, some of them earlier than those whom we are now
considering, e.g. Knuzen, Dippel (1673-1734).

704 See the reference above, p. 219.