Главная > Документ


Смотреть полностью

of state bishops. In 1909 there were 74 ministers and over 300,000 adherents. Healing is one of the characteristic features of the church. In 1890 the name of the movement was changed from " The New Life Society " to " The Newology Church," in 1907 to " The Newlife Church." It is propagated by leaders who, like the founder, travel, hold' meet­ings, and heal the sick and afflicted.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Newiifeiat Magazine and the books of John Fair New, of New York.

NEWCOMB, HARVEY: Congregational author and clergyman; b. at Thetford, Vt., Sept. 2, 1803; d. at Brooklyn, N. Y., Aug. 30, 1863. From 1818 to 1826 he taught school in western New York; from 1826 to 1831 he was editor of several journals, of which the last was The Christian Herald, Pittsburg. From the latter yeas, until 1840, he wrote Sunday­echool books, and from 1840 till his death he was Congregational minister in Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania. He is said to have writ­ten 178 volumes, moat of them for children. He was also the author of Manners and Customs of the North American Indians (Pittsburg, 1835), and A Cyclopedia of Missions (New York, 1854).

NEWCOMB, WILLIAM: Archbishop of Armagh; b. at Abingdon (6 m. s. of Oxford), Berkshire, Eng­land, Aug. 10, 1729; d. at Dublin Jan. 11, 1800. He was graduated from Oxford University (Hertford College, M.A., 1753; D.D., 1765); took holy orders, and was appointed bishop of Dromore, Ireland, 1766; transferred to Ossory, 1775, to Waterford and Lismore, 1779, and to the archbishopric of Armagh, 1795. He was possessed of large wealth, which he used in the dignified improvement of cathedral and palace at Armagh. His leisure was spent in Biblical study, the results of which appear in his Harmony of the Gospels (in Greek; Dublin, 1778, based upon Le Clerc, new eds., with Eng. tranal. of text, London, 1802 and 1827); An His­torical View of the English Biblical Translations; the Expediency of Revising, by Authority, ow present Translation, and the Means of Executing such a Re­vision, [with] a Lint of the various. Editions of the Bible and Parts thereof, in English, from the year 1526 to 1776 (Dublin, 1792). He published revised translations, with notes, of the twelve Minor Proph­ets (1785), Ezekiel (1788), and of the New Testa­ment (2 vols., printed 1796, but not published until 1809; taken as the basis of the Unitarian Version, London, 1808); also, Observations on our Lord's Conduct as a Divine Instructor (2 parts, Lon­don, 1782, new ed., Oxford, 18b3); and occasional sermons and charges.

Biaiaooawra:: A. Chalmers, General Biographical Didian­

ary, a:iii. 113‑114, London, 1815; DNB, xi. 32223.

NEWELL, HARRIET: American missionary; b. at Haverhill, Mass., Oct. 10, 1793; d. on the Isle de France (Mauritius) Nov. 30, 1812. She was a daughter of Moses Atwood and was married to Samuel Newell (q.v.) in 1812, and sailed with him for Calcutta the same year. Not being allowed to remain at Calcutta, they sailed for Mauritius. A daughter born on the journey died, sad was buried at sea. Rapid consumption soon set in, and car

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA New York Sabbath Committee Newman, Albert Henry

ried the mother off likewise. Mrs. Newell's early death, at the age of nineteen, aroused wide sym­pathy, and did more, by the interest it stimulated, for missions than, perhaps, a long life would have accomplished.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Memoirs were published by her husband, S. Newell, New York, 1831; and by L. Woods, Boston, 1814.

NEWELL, SAMUEL: American missionary; b. at Durham, Me., July 25, 1785; d. at Bombay, India, Mar. 30, 1821. He graduated at Harvard in 1807, and went to Andover Seminary in 1809. He was one of the four students who presented the petition which contributed so much to the forma­tion of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. In 1812 he married Harriet Atwood of Haverhill (see NEWELL, HAR=T); on Feb. 6 was ordained at Salem with Judson, Nott, Rice, and Gordon Hall, and on the 19th sailed with Judson for Calcutta. Not being permitted to dis­embark, he went to the Isle de France (Mauritius); and in Jan., 1814, he joined Hall and Nott at Bom­bay. He died of the cholera. He published The Conversion of the World, or the Claims of Six Hun­dred Millions (Andover, 1818), which aroused much interest; and Life and Writings of Mrs. Harriet Newell (New York, 1831).

NEWFOUNDLAND: An island of North Amer­ica; situated to the southeast of Labrador, between the Atlantic Ocean on the east and south and the Gulf of St. Lawrence on the west; forming a colony of Great Britain; area, 40,200 square miles; pop­ulation, estimated (1905) at 225,533, exclusive of Labrador. The island was discovered by John Cabot in 1497; formally taken possession of by Sir Humphrey Gilbert in 1583; settled, however, by the French, and ceded to the English in 1713. The population, concentrated in the southeastern part and mainly engaged in the fisheries, is ninety­eeven per cent native born, principally of English, Irish, and Scotch descent. In 1900 thirty‑four per cent of the people were Roman Catholics, thirty­three per cent belonged to the Church of England, and twenty‑seven per cent were Methodists. A Ro­man Catholic vicariate established in 1796, with seat at St. Johns, seems to have been discontinued in 1869. The interests of the Anglicans are cared for by a missionary bishop holding mission from the metropolitan see of Canterbury. The schools are wholly denominational; the school funds being proportioned according to the number of pupils of each denomination, and there are three superin­tendents of public instruction, one for each of the churches named. Education is not compulsory.

Brnuoansra:: J. Hatton and M. Harvey, Newfoundland,

its $iM. and Prospects. London, 1883; 11i. F. Howley,

Ecclesiastical Mist. of Newfoundland. Boston. 1888: J. Langtry, $ial. of the Church in Newfoundland, London, 1892; C. H. Mookridge, Biahopa of the Church of England in Newfoundland, ib. 1898; D. W. Prowae. A $iat. of Newfoundland, ib. 1900; F. E. Smith, The Story of New­foundland, ib. 1901.

NEWMAN, ALBERT HENRY: Baptist; b. about 10 m. n.w. of Edgefield Court House, S. C., Aug. 25, 1852. He was educated at Mercer Uni­versity, Macon, Ga. (A.B., 1871), Rochester Theo‑


logical Seminary (from which he was graduated in 1875), and the Southern Baptist Theological Semi­nary (1875‑76). He was acting professor of church history (1877,80) and Pettingill professor of church history (1880‑81) at Rochester Theological Semi­nary, and professor of church history in McMaster University, Toronto (1881‑1901). Since 1901 he has been professor of the same subject in the theo­logical seminary attached to Baylor University, Waco, Tex., which, as the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, became independent in 1908, and removed to Fort Worth, Tex., in 1910. In 1906 he was professor of church history in the Divinity School of the University of Chicago for the summer term. In theology he is a moderate conservative. He has written The Baptist Churches in the United States (New York, 1894); A History of Anti‑Pedo­baptism from the Rise of Pedobaptism to A.D. 1609 (Philadelphia, 1897); Manual of Church History (2 vols., 1900‑03); and A Century of Baptist Achieve­ment (1901). He also prepared a new translation, with annotations and an introductory essay on Manicheanism, of the anti‑Manichean treatises of Augustine for the fourth volume of the Nicene and Post‑Nicene Fathers (New York, 1887), translated A. Immer's Hermeneutik des Neuen Testaments (Wittenberg, 1873) under the title Hermeneutics of the New Testament (Andover, 1877), and edited Memoir of Daniel A. McGregor (Toronto, 1891).

NEWMAN, FRANCIS WILLIAM: Layman, brother of Cardinal Newman; b. in London June 27, 1805; d. at Weston‑super‑Mare (8 m. s.w. of Bristol), England, Oct. 4, 1897. He attended a private school at Ealing; studied at Worcester College, Oxford (B.A., 1826); was fellow of Balliol, 1826‑30, but resigned because unable conscientiously to sub­scribe to the Thirty‑nine Articles, which was then requisite before obtaining the master's degree; he lived and traveled in the East, 1830‑33; became classical tutor at Bristol College, 1834; and pro­fessor of Latin in Manchester New College (now Manchester College, Oxford), Manchester, 1840; and was professor of Latin in University College, London, 1846‑69. Originally he was a man of relig­ious tendencies, but gradually became a free‑thinker. He was a voluminous writer on linguistic, mathe­matical, historical, social, and political, as well as religious subjects. His most important theological works are History of the Hebrew Monarchy (London, 1847); Relation of Free Knowledge to Moral Senti­ment (1847); The Soul, its Sorrows and Aspirations (1849, 9th ed., 1882); Phases of Faith; Passages from my own Creed (1850); Catholic Union: Essays towards a Church of the Future as the Organization of Philanthropy (1854); Defective Morality of the New Testament (Ramsgate, 1867); Thoughts on a Free and Comprehensive Christianity (1868); Thoughts on the Existence of Evil (1872); Theism, Doctrinal and Practical (London, 1858), reissued as Hebrew The­ism: The Common Basis of Judaism, Christianity, and Mohammedism (1874); The Two Theism (1874); Life After Death (1886); and Miscellanies, of which vol. ii. consists of Essays, Tracts, Moral and Religious (1887).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Letters and Correspondence of J. H. New­man, ed. Anne Mosley, 2 vols., London, 1891; In Memo­riam, Emeritus Professor P. W. Newman, ib. 1897; I. (3. 6ievelung, Memoir and Letters of Francis y9. Newman, ib. 1909; DNB, Supplement iii. 221‑223.

NEWMAN, JOHN HENRY: English cardinal; b. in London Feb. 21, 1801; d. in Birmingham Aug. 11, 1890. He attended Trinity College, Oxford, 1816‑20 (B.A.), remaining there after obtaining his degree to do private tutoring, at the same time pre­paring himself to enter Oriel, the acknowledged center of Oxford intellectualism, and was elected fellow Apr. 12, 1822. He was ordained deacon June 13, 1824, and soon after became curate of St. Clement's Church, Oxford, preaching his first ser­mon at Warton, June 23, from P's. cxxiv. 23: " Man goeth to his work and to his labour until the even­ing "‑nineteen years later he preached his last sermon as an Anglican clergyman from the same text. In March, 1825, he was appointed vice‑prin­cipal of Alban Hall by Richard Whately, the prin­cipal (afterwards archbishop of Dublin), to whose influence Newman declared he owed more than to that of any other man during the formative period of his career. He became vicar of St. Mary's, the university church, in 1828, and in 1831‑32 he was one of the select university preachers, marking the close of his public activity at Oxford. In Dec., 1832, Newman and Richard Hurrell Froude visited southern Europe. While in Rome he collaborated with Fronde on the Lyra Apostolica. In June, 1833, while traveling in an orange‑boat from Palermo to Marseilles, the boat was becalmed for a whole week, during which time he wrote his most famous verses: " Lead, kindly light." On his arrival home in July of the same year Keble preached his assize sermon at St. Mary's on national apostasy, which Newman considered the start of the Oxford movement (see TRACTARIANIBM).

According to Dean Church " the Oxford move­ment was the direct result of the searchings of heart and the communings from 1826‑33 of Keble, Froude, and Newman. Keble gave the inspiration, Froude the impetus, and Newman did the work." The same author calls Newman's Ariana of the Fourth Century (1833) " a book, which for originality and subtlety of thought was something very unlike the usual theological writings of the day." With this publi­cation Newman's fame as an author was assured. Toward the close of the year 1835 Dr. Pussy joined the Oxford movement, becoming (in the eyes of the world at large) its official head. In 1836 Renn Dickson Hampden became regius professor of di­vinity at Oxford against considerable opposition, which was aroused by the liberalism of his Bampton lectures. Newman took a leading part in the con­troversy by his Elucidations of Dr. Hampden's The­ological Statements (Oxford, 1836), opening the eyes of many to the meaning of the movement and ma­king friends day by day. There followed a series of works in defense of Anglo‑Catholicism, the first, Lectures on the Prophetical O,4rce of the Church, Viewed relatively to Romaniam and Popular Protes­tantism (1837), occupying him for three years. In 1838 he published Lectures on Juatiftcation and his tract on Antichrist. These publications were largely


responsible for the formation of a school of opinion, which eventually came into collision with the nation and the nation's church. At about this time New­man became editor of the British Critic, which was used as the chief organ of Tractarianism, and at this time his influence was already wide. While the view of the Church of England set forth in his Pro­phetical Oftce of the Church (1837) is the recognized Anglican view, by 1839 he himself began to question its correctness, and his doubts were strengthened by Cardinal Wiseman's article on the "Anglican Claim " in the Dublin Review (1839).

During the years in which the Tractarian move­ment held sway, Newman wrote twenty‑four tracts. Tract 90 he wrote in 1841, the outcome of which was that the movement came under the ban, and Newman's position was no longer tenable. In July of the same year he relinquished the editorship of the British Critic to his brother‑in‑law, Thomas Moziey. The next year he withdrew from Oxford and went to Littlemore, passing three years in se­clusion; publishing in February, 1843, in the Con­servative Journal a retraction of his strictures upon the Church of Rome, and in September of the same year resigning the living of St. Mary's. During the writing of his Essay on the Development of Chris­tian Doctrine (1845), his doubts respecting the Roman Catholic Church gradually vanished, and he was received into that church on Oct. 9, 1845. This event was of far‑reaching importance to the Church of England, and brought about the end of the Oxford movement. Newman left Oxford on Feb. 23, 1846, to go to Oscott, and in October of the same year he went to Rome, where he was ordained priest, and received the doctorate. At the close of the following year he returned to England, com­missioned by Pius IX. to introduce the Oratory (see NERI, PHILIP, SAINT) into his mother country, which he established at Alcester Street, Birmingham; and later at Edgebaston. His Discourses to Mixed Congregation8 (1849) is a volume which reveals him at this time at the zenith of his attainments as a preacher. In this same year he assisted the Roman Catholic priests of Bilaton during an epidemic of cholera, himself taking the most dangerous posts. In 1851 he established the London Oratory, while in 1850 he had published his Lectures on Certain D6,­cutties felt by Anglicans in Submitting to the Catholic Church. In October, 1850, the Roman hierarchy of England (also called the Papal Aggression) was restored, producing a violent anti‑Catholic agitation. Newman's next work was his Lectures on the Present Position of Catholics in England (1851). In one of these he so forcibly and in such plain language as­sailed the depraved nature of an apostate monk named Achilli, used in the anti‑Roman agitation, that charges for libel were preferred against him. He pleaded " not guilty," and his charges were in the main proved by witnesses brought for the pur­pose from Italy, but the jury, under the influence of the charge by the magistrate, brought in a verdict against Newman, and he was fined £100 by Judge Coleridge on Jan. 23, 1853. In 1854 he went to Dublin, as rector of the Catholic University. The only apparent literary result of this experience was

his Idea of a University (1873). In 1858 he re‑

turned to Birmingham, where he proposed, but failed to carry through, the establishment of a branch house of the Oratory at Oxford. In 1859 he established at Edgebaston the school for the sons of well‑to‑do Roman Catholics. In reply to an adverse criticism (in fact a perverted statement) made by Charles Kingsley in 1864 Newman issued his Apologia pro Vita Sua, a work which has been regarded a triumphant vindication of his integrity and honesty of purpose throughout his life. In 1874 he answered an article written by Gladstone for the Contemporary Review and also Gladstone's Vatican Decrees, by his Letter to the Duke of Norfolk, in which he criticized severely the extreme state­ments of some Roman Catholics in relation to the matter at issue. In 1877 Newman was elected honorary fellow of Trinity College, Oxford, and in February, 1878, visited Oxford for the first time in thirty‑two years. Soon after Leo XIII. became pope, several leading English Roman Catholic laymen represented to him the great work which Newman had accomplished in England, as a result of which Newman was called to the sacred college. This honor was appreciated the more in that it was unex­pected and in that he was exempt from residence at the pontifical court. On May 12, 1879, he was formally created cardinal, with the title of St. George in Velabro. He paid one more visit to Trinity College, Oxford, and preached in St. Aloy­sius' Church. Thenceforth he made his residence at Edgebaston.

A full list of his books, tracts, and other writings is given in DNB, xl. 349‑350. An edition of his works is in 36 vols., London, 1868,81.

BIHmoaRAPHY: As sources use: His own Apologia pro vita sua, ut sup.; and Letters and Correspondence of J. H. Newman, ed. Anne Mosley, 2 vole., London, 1891. Very useful is the literature on TRACTARIANIBM, particu­larly R. W. Church's Oxford Movement. London, 1891. Biographies have been written by: R. H. Hutton, Lon­don, 1894; H. J. Jennings, ib., 1882; W. Lockhart, ib., 1891; W. J. H. Meynell, New York, 1891; E. A. Abbott, The Anglican Career of Cardinal Newman, 2 vols., London, 1892 (consult also his Philomythus, ib. 1891); W. Sanday, Enplands Debt to Newman, London, 1892; A. B. Donaldson, in Five Great Oxford Leaders, New York, 19W; A. R. Waller and (3. H. S. Barrow, Boston, 1902; A. Whyte, New York, 1902; W. Barry. New York, 1904; E. Cachod, Newman. Essai de biographic pwcholopique, Paris, 1905; J. A. Hutton, PilCrima in the Region of Faith, Cincinnati, 1908; W. J. Williams, Newman, Pascal, Loisy and the Catholic Church, London, 1906; W. P. Ward, Ten Personsat Studies, New York, 1908; A. Cecil, Six Oxford Thinkers, London, 1909. Consult also, H. P. Liddon, Life of E. B. Pusey, 3 vols., London, 1895; the Trial of O. G. Achilli vs. J. H. Newman, London. 1852; C. Sarolea, Cardinal Newman and His Influence on Re• lipious Life and Thought, New York, 1908.

NEWMAN, JOHN PHILIP: Methodist Episco­pal bishop; b. in New York Sept. 1, 1826; d. at Saratoga Springs, N. Y., July 5, 1899. He gradu­ated from Cazenovia Seminary, 1848; studied the­ology, and entered the ministry of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 1849; he filled appointments in the Oneida, Troy, and New York conferences, 1848‑64, with an interval of a year's travel (1860‑61) in the orient; he organized a Methodist Episcopal church in New Orleans, 1864; while there he estab­lished three annual conferences, two colleges, and a religious paper; he organized and became pastor



of the Metropolitan Methodist Episcopal Church,

Washington, 1869; he was chaplain of the United

States Senate, 1869‑74; inspector of United States

consulates in Asia 1874‑76; again pastor of the

Metropolitan Church, Washington, 1876‑79; of the

Central Church, New York, 1879‑82; of the Madi­

son Avenue Church, New York, 1882‑84; and a

third time pastor of the Metropolitan Church,

Washington, 1885‑88; and in 1888 was elected

bishop. He won high repute as a pulpit orator

and lecturer. He was three times elected to the

general conference of his denomination; and in 1881

went to England as delegate to the Method5st ecu­

menical council. He wrote: From Dan to Beer­

sheba, or the Land of Promise as it now Appears

(New York, 1864); The Thrones and Palaces o,/

Babylon and Nineveh, from the Persian Gulf to the

Mediterranean . . (1876); Christianity Trium­

phant; its Defensive and Aggressive Victories (1883);

Supremacy of Law (1890); and Conversations with

Christ (1900). He was also editor of the New Or­

leans Christian Advocate, 1866‑69.


land; b. at Blundellsands (5 m. n. of Liverpool),

Lancashire, May 24, 1871. He was educated at

Merton College, Oxford (B.A., 1894), and was or­

dered deacon in 1895 and ordained priest in 1896.

After being curate of Cannock from 1895 to 1897,

he was vice‑principal of King's College, London,

from 1897 to 1903. Since 1903 he has been pro­

fessor of pastoral theology in the same institution.

He has also been warden of King's College Hostel

and reader in the Temple Church since 1902, and

examining chaplain to the bishop of Lichfield since




Brother; b. at Plymouth 1805; d. at Tunbridge

Wells 1898. He was educated at the Plymouth

Grammar School, and at Exeter College, Oxford

(B.A., 1828), where he read privately with Francis

William Newman (q.v.), through whom he became

acquainted with John Nelson Darby (q.v.), whom

he induced to visit Plymouth. In the " Assembly "

of the Plymouth Brethren (q.v.), he labored for

seventeen years as a teacher, and contributed to

The Christian Witness many papers of value. Until

1845 Newton held sway in the Plymouth

" gathering," as it was called, but early displayed

divergence from Darby's teaching on ministry,

justification, the " secret rapture of the saints," etc.

Their different attitude on ministry and church gov­

ernment led to a rupture between them in 1845, when

Darby started another " meeting " in Plymouth.

Newton continued in the original company until

1847. But in the mean time notes of a lecture by

Newton on Christ's status as an Israelite, which he

seemed to treat in such a way as to impair the

Lord's personal sinless relations to God, coming into

Darby's hands, were used by his old associate effect­

ively against him, so that his remaining supporters

were gradually detached from him as heterodox,

with the exception of S. P. Tregelles, who was re­

lated to him by marriage. Newton left Plymouth

finally at the end of 1847 for residence in London and elsewhere. Thenceforth he ministered and worked in isolation, remaining a layman to the end of his life.

Of his works, which are numerous and well written, the chief are:

Thoughts on the Apocalypse (London, 1844, lest ed. 1904); Remarks on the Sufferings of the Lord Jesus (1847, in explana­tion of his views criticised by Darby); Ancient Truths Re­spelling the Deity and True Humanity of the Lord Jesus (1857, new ell., 1893); Aids to Prophetic Enquiry (1848; 1881); Prospects of the Ten Kingdoms of the Roman Empire (1849; new ell., 1873); Prophetic System of Elliott and Cumming Considered (1850); Doctrines of Popery Considered (1851; new ell., 1883); Occasional Papers on Scriptural Subjects (1851, 1856); Thoughts on Leviticua (1852); Europe and the East (1855; new ell., 1878); First and Second Chapters of the Epistle to the Romans Considered (1856; new ell., 1897); The Antichrist Future (1859; new ell., 1900); Gospel Truths (1861); Remarks on Mosaic Cosmogony (1864); Judgment of the Court of Arches in Case of Routand Williams (1866); Prophecy of the Lord Jesus as Contained in Matt. =iv., xav. (1879); Old Testament Saints not Excluded from the Church in Glory (1887); Babylon, its future History and Doom (1890). E. E. WHITFIELD.

BrHLIoaaAPBT: W. B. Neatby, History of the Plymouth

Brethren. London. 1902.

NEWTON, JOHN: Church of England; joint author with Cowper of the Olney Hymns; b. in London July 24, 1725; d. there Dec. 21, 1807. He was the son of a shipmaster in the Mediterranean service, with whom he sailed until 1742. In 1743 he was impressed into the English naval service, was made midshipman, deserted, was recaptured and reduced to the ranks, exchanged to a ship in the African station, became servant to a slave‑trader, and was rescued in 1748, being converted on the way home in a storm at sea. He continued to fol­low the sea till 1754, meanwhile studying Latin and the Bible. He was surveyor of tides at Liverpool, 1755‑0, where he heard Whitefield and Wesley, and studied Greek, Hebrew, and Syriac. In 1763 he was brought to the notice of Lord Dartmouth by Thomas Haweis, through whose influence he was made deacon and priest, 1764, and given the curacy of Olney. In 1767 Cowper settled there, and the result of their very close intimacy was the Olney Hymns (London, 1779 and often), which greatly influenced English hymnology. In 1780 he accepted the offer of the benefice of St. Mary Woolnoth with St. Mary Woolchurch, London, where he officiated till his death. Hardly less famous than the Hymns was his Authentic Narrative of Some . . . Particu­lars in the Life of John Newton (London, 1764, 9th. ell., 1799; an account of his early life). He wrote also, Sermons Preached in . . . Olney (1767); Omicron: Twenty‑six Letters on Religious Subjects (1774; subsequent editions, in which the number of the letters became forty‑one); Cardiphonia; or, the Utterance of the Heart in the Course of a real Correspondence (2 vols., 1781); Letters to a Wife (2 vols., 1793), and other works. A collected edition of his works was issued by his executors (6 vols., London, 1808; new ell., 12 vols., 1821). He was a strong support of the Evangelicals in the Church of England, and was a friend of the dissenting clergy as well as of the ministry of his own church. One of the questions much debated is whether the influ­ence of the sternly Calvinistic Newton on Cowper



was good. It is possible that this Calvinistic

trend gave Cowper's works a gloomy cast; on the

other hand, it may have been the tonic which he


BIHUOanAPBY: In an edition of Newton's Works, Edin­

burgh, 1827, is a life by R. Cecil; The Authentic Narra­

tive, ut sup., is of course a first‑hand source, while the

Letters and Cardiphomia contain much that is biograph­

ical. Consult Letters and Conversational Remarks, ed.

J. Campbell, London, 1808; DNB, xl. 395‑398; S. W.

Duffield, English Hymns, pp. 248‑255, New York, 1886;

Julian, Hymnology, pp. 803804; and the literature under

COWPER, wILLJAM, particularly the editions by Wright

of the Correspondence.

NEWTON, RICHARD: Protestant Episcopalian;

b. in Liverpool, England, July 25, 1813; d. in

Philadelphia May 25, 1887. He accompanied his

parents to America in 1823, and received his early

training in Philadelphia and in Wilmington, Del .;

he graduated from the University of Pennsylvania,

Philadelphia, 1836, and from the General Theologi­

cal Seminary, New York, 1839; was ordained, and

became rector of the Church of the Holy Trinity,

West Chester, Pa., 1839; was rector of St. Paul's

Church, Philadelphia, 1840‑62; of the Church of the

Epiphany, Philadelphia, 1862,81; and from 1882 of

the Church of the Covenant in the same city. He

was remarkably successful in his sermons for chil­

dren and young people, which have been most

widely translated.

He was the author of: The Wonder Case (6 volt., Bible

Wonders; Nature's Wonders; Leaves from the Tres of Life;

Rills from the Fountain of Life; Jewish Tabernacle; and

Giants and Wonderful Things, New York, 1856‑74); The

Jewel Case (6 vole., Best Things; Ring's Highway; Safe

Compass; Bible Blessings: Great Pilot: Bible Jewels: 1859­

1868); Illustrated Rambles in Bible Lands (Philadelphia,

1875); Rays from the Sun of Righteousness (New York,

1876); Life of Jesus Christ; for the Young (in 40 parts,

Philadelphia, 1877); The Ring in his Beauty (New York,

1878); Pebbles from the Brook: Sermons to Children (1879);

Pearls from the East: Stories and Incidents from Babble His­

tory (Philadelphia, 1881); Covenant Names and Privileges

(New York, 1882); Bible Promises: Sermons to Children

(1884); Bible Portrait Gallery (Philadelphia, 1885); Heroes

of the Reformation (1885); Bible Warnings: Sermons to

Children (New York, 1886); Bible Animals and the Les­

sons Taught by them (1888); Heath in the Wilderness: Ser­

mons to the People; to which is added the Story of his Life

and Ministry by W. W. N. (1888); Heroes of the Early

Church (Philadelphia, 1888); Pive Minute Talks for Young

People: or, the Way to Success (1891).


copalian, son of the preceding; b. at Philadelphia

Oct. 31, 1840. He entered the University of Penn­

sylvania in 1857 but left at the close of his sopho­

more year; then entered the Protestant Episcopal

Divinity School, Philadelphia, from which he was

graduated in 1863. He was ordered deacon in 1862

and was assistant at St. Paul's, Philadelphia (1862­

1863) and the Church of the Epiphany, Philadel­

phia (18634), and in charge of Trinity Church,

Sharon Springs, N. Y. (1864‑66), until his ordina­

tion to the priesthood in 1866. He was then rector

of St. Paul's, Philadelphia (1866‑69), and of All

Souls', New York City (1869‑1902). He belongs

to the Broad‑church party. His larger works are:

The Children's Church (New York, 1870); The

Morals of Taste (1873); Studies of Jesus (1880);

Womanhood (1880); Eight and Wrong Uses of the

Bible (1883); The Book of the Beginnings (1884);

Philistinism (1885); Social Studies (1886); Church and Creed (1891); Christian Science (1898); and Par8ifad (1904).

NEWTON, WILLIAM WILBERFORCE: Prot­estant Episcopalian, brother of the preceding; b. at Philadelphia, Nov. 4, 1843. He was graduated from the University of Pennsylvania (B.A., 1865) and the Protestant Episcopal Divinity School, Phil­adelphia (1868). He was assistant at the Church of the Epiphany, Philadelphia (1868‑70), rector of St. Paul's, Brookline, Mass. (1870‑75), Trinity, Newark, N. J. (1875‑77), St. Paul's, Boston, Mass. (1877‑81), and St. Stephen's, Pittsfield, Mass. (1881‑1900), chaplain of the English Church at Dinan, Brittany (1903‑04), and rector of the Church of the Ascension, Wakefield, R. I. (1905‑06). He was editor of The American Church Sunday School Magazine (1885‑1906). In theology he is a Broad Churchman. Among his publications special men­tion may be made of his Gate of the Temple: or, Prayers for Children (New York, 1875); six volumes of sermons for children (1877‑90); Essays of To‑day (Boston, 1879); The Voice of St. John (poems; New York, 1880) ; Priest and Man: or, Abelard and Heloisa (novel; Boston, 1883); Summer Sermons from a Berkshire Pulpit (Pittsfield, Mass., 1885); The Life of Dr. Muhlenberg (New York, 1890): A Run through Russia (Hartford, 1894); and Philip Mac Gregor (novel; 1895).

NIBHAZ: The name of one of the two deities

or idols mentioned in II Kings xvii. 31 as set up by

the Avvites (A. V. Avites), one of the foreign peo­

plea settled by Sargon in the territory of the northern

kingdom after the deportation of the Israelites.

The reading is questionable, both the Hebrew and

the Greek giving variants. Some Hebrew manu­

scripts read Nibhan (cf. the same reading in San­

hedrin 63b), while those which have the ordinary

reading point the word differently. Greek texts indi­

cate a goddess, and have the forms Eblazer, Eblai­

eaer. Abaazer. No deity corresponding to any of these

forms is known even in the cuneiform records, the

nearest suggestion that comes is from the Mandean,

in which there is mention of a demon Nebaz. The

passage in Sanhedrin (ut sup.) connects the word

with nbh, " to bark," and supposes the idol to have

had the form of a dog. But nothing is known of a

dog‑shaped idol in the region except the dog‑headed

Anubis of Egypt, and that seems out of the question

here. The reading Nibhan seems to have arisen

from a mistake in reading the last letter of the origi­

nal text. Nor is any light shed on the subject by

considering the people who set up the idol. Pos­

sibly the implied `Avvah of II Kings xvii. 31 is the

same as the ` Ivvah of II Kings xviii. 34, xix.13; Isa.

xxxvii. 13. But even then nothing is known of

such a place as a Syrian or Babylonian region or

city, and consequently there is no knowledge of

its deities. GEo. W. GILMoRE.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Selden, De dis Syria, London, 1617, Eng. transl., The Fabulous Gods Denounced in the Bible, Phila­delphia, 1881; C. Iken, Dissertatio de Nibchaz idelo Avmorum, Bremen, 1726; F. Munter, Die Religion der Babylonier, pp. 108‑110, Copenhagen, 1827; P. Scholz, G6itzendienst and Zauberwesen bei den alten Hebrdern, pp. 399 aqq., Regensburg, 1877; Schrader, RAT, p. 484; EB, iii. 3405‑3406; and the oonmentariea on the passage.



I. The First Council, 325 A.D. Character, Membership, and Problems U 1). The Procedure ($ 2). The Symbol ($ 3). Other Problems (5 4).

II. The Second Council, 787 A.D.

I. The First Council, 325 A.D.* The first Coun­cil of Nice is conspicuous as the starting point for the great doctrinal controversies of the Church in the fourth and fifth centuries. Here a union be­tween the ecclesiastical potency of the councils and the State was effected, vesting the deliberations of this body with imperial power. Earlier synods had been contented with protection against :. Charac‑ heretical doctrines; but the Council

ter, Mem‑ of Nice is characterized by the further bership, and step from a defensive position to posi‑

Problems. tive decisions and minutely elaborated

articles of faith. In the Arian con­

troversy lay a great obstacle to the realization of

Constantine's idea of a universal empire which was

to be attained by aid of uniformity of divine worship.

Accordingly for the summer of 325 the bishops of

all provinces were summoned to the first ecumenical

council at Nice in Bithynia, a place easily accessible

to the majority of the bishops, especially those of

Asia, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Greece, and Thrace.

The number of members can not be accurately

stated; Athanasius counted 318, Eusebius only 250.

As a matter of course, the oriental bishops formed the

preponderating number; the first rank being held

by the three archbishops Alexander of Alexandria,

Eustathius of Antioch, and Macarius of Jerusalem,

and by Eusebius of Nicomedia and Eusebius of Caesar

rea. A special prominence attached to this council

also because the persecutions had just ended, and

it was to be assumed that nearly all of the assembled

fathers had stood forth as witnesses of the faith.

The occident sent not more than five representa­

tives in equal distribution from the provinces,

Marcus of Calabria from Italy, Cecilian of Carthage

from Africa, Hosius of Cordova from Spain, Nicasius

of Dijon from Gaul, and Domnus of Stridon from

the province of the Danube. These ecclesiastical

dignitaries of course did not travel alone, but each

one with his suite, so that Eusebius speaks of an

almost innumerable host of accompanying priests,

deacons, and acolytes. Among the assistants it

was Athanasius, a young deacon and companion of

Bishop Alexander of Alexandria, who distinguished

himself as the " most vigorous fighter against the

Arians," and similarly Alexander of Constantinople,

a presbyter, as representative of his aged bishop.

The points to be discussed at the synod were: (1)

The Arian question, (2) the celebration of Easter,

(3) the Meletian schism, (4) the baptism of heretics,

and (5) the status of the lapsed in the persecution

under Licinius.

The council was formally opened May 20, in the central structure of the imperial palace, busying itself chiefly with preparatory discussions on the Arian question, in which Arius, with some adherents, especially Eusebius of Nicomedia, Theognis of Nice, and Maris of Chalcedon, seems to have been the leading spirit; regular sessions, however, began

only on the arrival of the emperor. After Pre­scribing the course of the negotiations he entrusted the mode of procedure to a committee

a. The appointed by himself, consisting in all

Procedure. probability of the most prominent

participants of that body. It is un­

doubtedly chiefly owing to this step on the part of

Constantine that the council, after being in session

for an entire month, promulgated on June 19 the


At first the Arians and the orthodox showed an un­

compromising front toward each other. The Arians

entrusted the representation of their interests to

Eusebius of Cfesarea (q.v.), whose scholarship and

flowery speech made a great impression upon the

emperor. His reading of the confession of the Arians

called forth a storm of resentment among the oppo­

nenta; two minorities vividly interested in contrary

opinions opposed each other, but between them

yawned indifference. In their behalf, as well as for

his own sake, Eusebius, after he had ceased to rep­

resent the Ariaas, appeared as a mediator; and in

asserting that the chief aim to be pursued should be

the establishment of the peace of the Church, he

at the same time agreed with his exalted protector.

He presented a new formula, the baptismal symbol

of his own congregation at Cwsarea, by means of

which the differing opinions might be reconciled.

The emperor, who pursued the purely political in­

tentions of a successful pacification, could desire

no more welcome proposition and immediately con­

firmed it by making it his own. in this way he

did not overpower the majority, but most probably

met its wishes; for if the orthodox had really been

able to count on a preponderating majority, even

the predilection of the emperor would not have

hindered them from setting up their own confession

in the manner of that proposed by Bishop Alexander

in his first circular letter. But far from daring

such an attempt, the majority (without resistance)

complied, asserting their rights only in the form of

amending clauses. While such modes of procedure

are more characteristic of minorities than of major­

ities, their use by the latter does not necessarily

debar victory, as indeed in this case it did not.

All propositions of the orthodox during the re­

mainder of the controversy having been accepted,

it is furthermore evident, first: that the Arians of

conviction were in the minority; second: that the

majority (or deciding body) did not possess, and

hence did not assert, convictions of a dogmatic na­

ture. These are, considered in a general way, the

presuppositions of the world‑important decisions of

the Council of Nice.

Examining the symbol in detail, it appears that it contained indeed decisions on the Son of God which might satisfy all members of the council. Even Arius found no reason to oppose it from his standpoint. But for the partisans of

3. The Bishop Alexander the definitions were

Symbol too vague; they rendered them more

concise, and if the Nicene Creed be

compared with its model, that of Cwsarea, it seems

to have originated in some omissions from the second

article which was the only one in question. To

these omissions corresponded three no less impor‑


tant additions: (1) to designate the Son "that is, of the essence of the Father" was added; (2) another addition reads " begotten, not made "; (3) the most important addition reads " of one substance with the Father." Of the third article only the words " and in the Holy Ghost " were left and then fol­lowed immediately the anathemas. Thus the neu­tral baptismal confession of the congregation of Caesarea, laid before the council by Eusebius, became the uncompromising anti‑Arian symbol of Nice, the text of which is preserved in a letter of Eusebius to his congregation, in Athanasius, and elsewhere. The symbol was finally accepted, although the anti­Arians or Homoousians were in the minority. The emperor was intent upon a decisive settlement of the question; at first he probably had no predilec­tion for either of the conceptions of the two con­tending parties, but perceiving that the original propositions of Eusebius, which supposedly fur­thered peace, effected the very opposite, he may involuntarily have considered whether he could not reach his aim more quickly by seeking an agreement with the anti‑Arians. Undoubtedly there were not wanting attempts at personal mediation, in the first place on the part of Bishop Hosius of Cordova (q.v.), one of the most decided Homoousians, and at the time of the council the confidant of the emperor in all affairs of the Church. He stands at the head of the lists of participants, and Athanasius ascribes to him the actual success of the symbol. But when it is considered that great men like Eustathius of Antioch, Alexander of Alexandria, Athanasius, and Mareellus of Ancyra belonged to the anti‑Arian party, it does not seem strange that the Homoou­sians, in spite of being in the minority, gained the final victory. Eusebius of Ciesarea, in spite of his sympathies for Arius, accepted the decisions of the council, subscribing even the condemnatory clauses against Arius. The number of persons of promi­nence among the opponents was not so considerable; for after the debates, extending over four weeks, there were only two adherents of Arius who remained steadfast, Theonas of Marmarica in Libya, and Se­cundus of Ptolemais; of the three others upon whom Arius might have counted, Maria of Chalcedon finally subscribed the whole symbol, Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nice at least its positive part, without the condemnatory clauses against Arius. The emperor now actually fulfilled his threat, according to which everybody who refused to sign had to face exile. Arius, Theonas, Secundus, Euse­bius of Nicomedia, and Theognis were excommuni­cated. The works of Arius were confiscated in order to be burnt. But it soon appeared that even force could not silence the disputes, and that under the pressure of such procedure the controversy on the equality of Christ with God assumed un­thought‑of dimensions; for the Council of Nice had done away with the indifference of the masses to theological distinctions.

After the settlement, on June 19, of the most im­portant subject of discussion, the question of Easter was brought up. According to Duehesne (Revue des questions historiques, xxviii. 37), who founds his con­clusions (1), on the conciliar letter to the Alexan­drians preserved in Theodoret, Hist. ecd., I., ix. 12;

Socrates, Hiet. eccl., I., ix. 12; (2), on the circular letter of Constantine to the bishops after the council, Eusebius, Mite Constantine, III., xviii. 19; Theodo­ret, Hist. eccl., I., x. 3 aqq.; (3), on Athanasius, De Synodo, v.; Epiat. ad Afros, ii.; the

4. Other oriental churches of Syria, Cilicia, and

Problems. Mesopotamia adhered to the Jewish

reckoning of the fourteenth of Nisan,

instead of basing the calculation for Easter on the

equinoctial occurrence after the model of Alexandria

and Rome. The council assumed the task of regu­

lating these differences in conformity with the usages

of the other churches, because the dependence of

some congregations on a Jewish peculiarity was

offensive. The Council of Nice, however, did not

declare the Alexandrine cycle of Easter as alone

canonical, but gave the bishop of Alexandria the

privilege of announcing annually the date of Easter

to the Roman curia. Although the synod undertook

the regulation of the dating of Easter, it contented

itself with communicating its decision to the differ­

ent dioceses, instead of establishing a canon; thus

inviting opposition even on this point in due season.

Then began the proceedings against the Meletian

schism, which, on account of the great popularity of

the movement, took an extremely mild development

and cost its founder only suspension from office, but

no degradation. Finally there fpllowed the pre­

scription of twenty canons or rules of discipline:

(1) prohibition of self‑castration; (2) establishment

of a minimum term for catechizing; (3) prohibition

of the presence in the house of a cleric of females who

might bring him under suspicion; (4) consecration

of a bishop in the presence of at least three provincial

bishops and confirmation by the metropolitan;

(5) provision for two provincial synods to be held

annually; (6) exceptional position granted to Alex­

andria and Rome as episcopal sees; (7) recognition

of the honorary rights of the see of Jerusalem; (8)

provision for agreement with the Novatians;

(9‑14) provision for mild procedure against the

lapsed during the persecution under Licinius; (15­

16) prohibition of the removal of priests; (17) pro­

hibition of usury among the clergy; (18) prece­

dence of bishops and presbyters over deacons in

taking the Eucharist; (19) declaration of the in­

validity of baptism by heretics; (20) attitude at

prayer on Pentecost.

On July 25, 325, the fathers of the council cele­brated the emperor's twentieth anniversary and then dispersed. In his valedictory address the emperor again informed his hearers how averse he was to. all dogmatic controversy, and in a circular letter he announced the accomplished unity of practise by the whole Church in the matter of the celebration of Easter. But the illusion of victory did not last, the emperor experiencing stroke after stroke of disappointment and misfortune. The continuation of the synod in 327 questioned every result achieved in 325. Arius as well as the friends punished with him and the Meletians regained nearly all rights which they had lost.


II. The Second Council, 787 A.D.: Although image‑worship had been finally abolished by the energetic measures of Constantine V., whose icono‑



elastic tendencies were shared by his son, Leo IV., after the latter's early death, his widow Irene, as regent for her son, began its restoration, moved thereto by personal inclination and political con­siderations (see IMAGES AND IMAGE WORSHIP, II.). When in 784 the imperial secretary Tarasius was appointed successor to the patriarch Paul, he ac­cepted on condition that the intereommunion with the other churches should be reestablished, that is, that the images should be restored. However, as a council claiming to be ecumenical had abolished image‑worship, another ecumenical council was necessary for its restoration. Pope Hadrian was invited to participate and gladly accepted. The invitation intended for the oriental patriarchs could not even be delivered to them. The Roman legates were an archbishop and an abbot, each named Peter.

In 786 the council met in the Church of the Apostles in Constantinople, but soldiers in collusion with the opposition entered the church and broke up the assembly. The government now resorted to a stratagem. Under the pretext of a campaign, the iconoclastic bodyguard was sent away from the capital, disarmed, and disbanded. The council was again summoned to meet, this time in Nice, since Constantinople was still distrusted, assembling Sept. 24, 787. It numbered about 350 members; 308 bishops or their representatives signed. Ta,rar sius presided, and seven sittings were held in Nice. Proof of the lawfulness of image‑worship was drawn from Ex. xxv.17 sqq.; Num. vii. 89; Heb. ix. 1 sqq.; Ezek. xli., and Gen. xxxi. 34, but especially from a series of passages of the Church Fathers; the authority of the latter was decisive. It was deter­mined that "As the sacred and life‑giving cross is everywhere set up as a symbol, so also should the images of Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, the holy angels, as well as those of the saints and other pious and holy men be embodied in the manufacture of sacred vessels, tapestries, vestments, etc., and exhibited on the walls of churches, in the homes, and in all conspicuous places, by the roadside and everywhere," to be revered by all who might see them. For the more they are contemplated, the more they move to fervent memory of their prototypes. There­fore, it is proper to accord to them a fervent and reverent adoration, not, however, the veritable worship which, according to our faith, belongs to the Divine Being alone‑for the honor accorded to the image passes over to its prototype, and whoever adores the image adores in it the reality of what is there represented.

The clear distinction between the adoration of­fered to God and that accorded to the images may well be looked upon as a result of the iconoclastic reform. The twenty‑two canons drawn up in Con­stantinople also served ecclesiastical reform. Care­ful maintenance of the ordinances of the earlier councils, knowledge of the Scriptures on the part of the clergy, and care for Christian conduct are required, and the desire for a renewal of ecclesiasti­cal life is awakened. The papal legates voiced their approval of the restoration of image‑worship in no uncertain terms, and the patriarch sent a full



account of the proceedings of the council to Ha­

drian, who caused the same to be translated, which

translation Anastasius later replaced with a better

one. For a treatment of the opposition view, see


BIHLAOoRAP87: I. The collection of sources which super sedee all others is Patrum Nicaaorum nomina . . . aoci­ata opera, ed. H. Gelser, H. Hilgeofeld. O. Cunts, ad­jecta ed tabula peopraphica, Leipaie, 1899. The canons are in the collections of Mansi and Labbe, and m Hefele, Concidienpeachichte, i. 378‑431. Eng. trawl. t. 282‑447. and Fr. tranal., vol. i., note the material on the Coptic fragments in this tranal., i. 1125‑1138, on various editions of the canons, pp. 1139‑1176, and on canon 8. pp. 1182­1202; an Erg. tranel. with voluminous discussion is in

J. Chrystal. Authoritative Christianity, vol. i., Jersey City, 1891. Consult: J. Kaye, Some Account of the Council of Nicaaa, London, 1853; B. H. Covvper Analeda Nicama, London, 1857; E. Revillout, Le Comas de Niche d'apna lea testes copies, 2 vols., Paris, 1880‑99; W. Bright, Notes on the Canons of as PirM Pour General Councils. London, 1892; C. A: Bernoulli, Daa Konsil von Nieda, Freiburg, 1896; J. J. Lias, The Nicene Creed, London, 1897, new ed., 1910; O. Braun, De sancta Nicama aynodo, Minter, 1898; Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 622‑832, and in gen­eral works on the church history of the period; Harnack, Dogma, vols. ii. iv. passim, and in general works on the history of doctrine; consult also the literature on the CON­aTANnNOPOLITAN CREED.

II. Hefele, ConcsZienpeachichte, iii. 441 eqq., Erg. tranal., v. 342‑‑400; C. W. F. Welch, Hiatorie der %etzereien, x.

419 eqq., 11 vols., Leipsie. 1762‑85; Schaff, Church His­tory, iv. 459‑463; literature under CAROLINE Booze: IMAGES AND IMAGE WORSHIP, II.




NICCOLLS, SAMUEL JACK: Presbyterian; b. at Greenfield Farm, Westmoreland Co., Pa., Aug. 3, 1838. He was graduated from Jefferson College (now Washington and Jefferson), Cannonsburg, Pa. (A.B., 1857), and Western Theological Seminary, Alleghany, Pa. (1860). He was then pastor of Falling Springs Presbyterian Church at Chambers­burg, Pa. (1860‑64), and since 1864 has been pastor of the Second Presbyterian Church, St. Louis, Mo. He was also chaplain of the 126th Pennsylvania Volunteers in 1863, and a member of the com­mittee on the revision of the Westminster Con­fession of Faith in 1890 and 1900. He is likewise president of the board of directors of McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, and has written The Eastern Question in Prophecy (St. Louis, 1878). He is evangelical in belief and holds the Reformed theology.


NICEPHORUS: Celebrated Byzantine writer and patriarch of Constantinople; b: in Constantinople c. 758; d. at the monastery Ton Agathou June 2, 829. Of a strictly orthodox family, which had suf­fered from the earlier iconoclasm, he nevertheless entered the service of the State, became cabinet secretary, and under Irene took part in the synod of 787 as imperial commissioner. He then withdrew to a cloister that he had founded on the Propontis, until he was appointed director of the largest home for the destitute in Constantinople. After.the death


of Tarasius, although still a laymin, he was chosen patriarch by the wish of the emperor (Easter, April 12, 806). The uncanonical choice met with opposition from the strictly clerical party of the Studites, and this opposition was intensified to an open break when Nicephorus, in other respects a very rigid moralist, showed himself compliant to the will of the emperor by reinstating the excom­municated priest Joseph. After the emperor's death (811), Nioephorus cooperated in the removal of Staurakios and in the elevation of the incapable Michael Rhangabe. With Emperor Leo the Arme­nian, who was raised to the throne by the army in 813, Nicephorus was at first on good terms. When, however, this emperor revived with ever‑increasing harshness the policy of the iconoclastic Isauriane, a conflict broke out, which led at the same time to a reconciliation of Nicephorus with the Studites. After vain theological disputes, in December, 814, there followed personal insults. Nicephorus at first replied to his removal from his office by ex­communication, but was at last obliged to yield to force, and was taken to one of the cloisters he had founded, Tou Agathou, and later to that called Tou hagiou Theodorou. From there he carried on a literary polemic for the cause of the image‑wor­shippers against the synod of 815; on the occasion of the change of sovereigns, in 820, he at least obtained the promise of toleration. He died revered as a confessor. His remains were solemnly brought back to Constantinople on Mar. 13, 847, and interred in the Church of the Apostles, where they were annually the object of imperial devotion.

Compared with Theodore of Studium, Nicephorus appears as a friend of conciliation, learned in patria­tics, more inclined to take the defensive than the offensive, and possessed of a comparatively chaste, simple style. He was mild in his ecclesiastical and monastical rules and non‑partizan in his historical treatment of the period from 610 to 769 (Historia ayntomoa, breviarium). His tables of universal history (Chronographikort syntomon), in passages extended and continued, were in great favor with the Byzantines, and were also circulated in the West in the Latin version of Anastasius. The principal works of Nicephorus are three writings referring to iconoclasm: Apoloogeticus minor, probably com­posed before 814, an explanatory work for laymen concerning the tradition and the first phase of the iconoclastic movement; Apologeticus major with the three Antirrhetici against Mamonas‑Conatantine Copronymus, a complete dogmatics of the belief in images, with an exhaustive discussion and refu­tation of all objections made in opposing writings, as well as those drawn from the works of the Fathers; the third of these larger works is a refutation of the iconoclastic synod of 815 (ed. Serruys, Paris, 1904). Nicephorus is lacking in originality and follows the path marked out by John of Damascus. His merit is the thoroughness with which he traced the liter­ary and traditional proofs, and his detailed refuta­tions are serviceable for the knowledge they afford of important texts adduced by his opponents and in part drawn from the older church literature.

E. voN DOB6cHt7TZ.

BrardoaHAPBr!: The " History •• was edited by D. Petaviue, Paris, 1616, by 1. Bakker in CBHB, Bonn, 1837, thence taken into MPG, c., beet ed. by C. de Boor, Leipsic, 1880; the Chronopraphikon was edited by J. Goar, Paris, 1852, by Dindorf for CSHB, Bonn, 1829, is in MPG, c., and ed. De Boor, Leipsic, 1880. An Rpistola ad Leonem lll. is in MPG. cii. 1037‑68. On the Vita by a pupil of Niceph­orus, Ignatius, in ASB, March, ii. 704‑726, MPG, c. 41­160. and in De Boor's ed., ut sup., pp. 139‑217, of. Von Dobscheta in Byzantinische Zeitsehrift, xviii (1909), 41‑105; a lecture on his exile by Theophanes is in MPG, c. 160‑188; the lives of Theodore the Studite and his correspondence are pertinent, in MPG, xcix. 113‑328, 988, 1005, 1173, 1317. Consult further: Krumbacher, peschichte, pp. 71 sqq., 349 eqq., 985‑966; Fabriciu&‑Hades, Brbiiolheca Ormea, vii. 603 sqq., Hamburg, 1801: G. Finlay. Hist. o) the Byzantine and Greek Empires, i. 113 aqq., London, 1854; J. Hergenr6ther, Photius, i. 261‑286, Regensburg, 1867; H. Gelzer, $estue Julius Africanus, ii. 1, pp. 384­388, Leipsic, 1885; T. Zahn, Gaachichte des neutedanest­iiehen Kamm, ii. 295, ib. 1891; C. Thomas, Theodore von 3tudion, pp. 67‑138, Oanabrffek, 1892; K. Holl, Enthusi­asmua and Bussgnualt, pp. 282, 319, Leipsic, 1898; BL. ix. 249‑259.

NICEPHORUS, CALLISTUS XANTHOPULUS: Church historian of the fourteenth century. Dur­ing the reigns of the PaleoIogues there were several writers of the name of Xanthopoulos. Two monks of Mount Athos, Callistus (patriarch 1397 A.D.) and Ignatius his brother, wrote a tmctate on ascetics, while Gabriel composed hymns for liturgical use. Theodore attended the Council of Florence (1439) as secretary. But the most celebrated of the name was Callistos or Callistou (i.e., " son of Callistos "), who grew up at Constantinople and was trained, as it seems, by the famous George of Cyprus (patriarch 1283‑89) in close relationship with Nicephorus Chumnos, Theodore Metochites, Maximos Planudes, and Michael Gabras, a coterie of classical students who, like the humanists of the fifteenth century, cultivated style and phraseology often at the ex­pense of sense. The Emperor Andronicus was their adored patron, since he supported Greek culture and orthodoxy against the Latins.

Except for a few homilies, prayers, hymns, and commentaries, poems, and epigrams, the authen­ticity of which needs further investigation, the name of Nicephorus is chiefly connected with his ecclesi­astical history in eighteen books, under the acrostic letters: Nikephorou Kalliatou (610 A.D.). Thiswork has been severely criticized by most Roman Catho­lic and Protestant writers, but has received high praise from the great T(lbingen master Baur. As de Boor has pointed out, the whole work is nothing but a modernization of an anonymous church his­tory of the tenth century. It is not valuable even for the reconstruction of its older sources (such as the Hint. eccl. of Eusebius), because the Byzantine author roughly paraphrases them. Some apocry­phal matter is all that possesses interest.

E. voN Dossc$t)Tz.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: His remains, including the "History;' a Catalogue impertttorum d patrwarcharunn Condantinopoli­tanorum, and a Carmen de exeidio Hierowlynaitano are in MPG, cxlv.‑cxlvii. Consult: Krumbaeher, Geschichte, pp. 291‑293; Fabricius‑Hades, BsOliotheca Grmca, vii. 437‑444, Hamburg, 1801; G. J. Vow, De historicia Gracia, pp. 367‑368, Leipsic, 1838; F. C. Baur, Die Epoehen der kimhliAen Geachichteachreibung, pp. 32 sqq., Tebingen, 1862; C. de Boor, in Z%(#, vi (1884), 478‑494; J. Bides and L. Parmentier, in Revue de l'instruction publique en Beige, xl (1897). 161‑178; Papadopoulos‑Herameus, in Bysantinische Ze0schrift, ai (1902), 38 sqq.

Niestas Aeominatus Nicholas I.


IWICETAS ACOliQNATUS: Byzantine historian and theologian; b. at Chonee (the ancient Colossee, whence he is often called Choniates); d. at Niceea after 1210. Rising to high offices of state, he was governor of the province of Philippopolis when Frederick Barbarossa marched through that dis­trict in 1189; but on the taking of Constantinople by the Latins in 1203 he fled with many others to Nicsea. The Historic Byzantina of Nicetas, in twenty‑one books, embraces the period from 1180 to 1205, and is noteworthy for reliability and good judgment. His theological studies found their culmination in his " Treasury of Orthodoxy." This begins with an account of Judaism and Hellen­iam, followed by a presentation of the chief doctrines of the Church. The fourth book begins the polemics against Simon Magus, and thus prepares the way for the ultimate consideration of many obscure heresies. The latter books are devoted to Islam, the Roman Catholics, and the dive news of opin­ion within the Greek Church. The work is, there­fore, an indispensable source for a knowledge of the heresies of the twelfth century, though only the first five books (in Latin translation) and a portion of the twentieth book have as yet been published (reprinted in MPG, !xxxi=.1101‑~11~44, cal. 9‑281).


BrswoasnPay: T. Uepensky wrote an account of Nioetae in Russian. St. Petersburg. 1874; Srummaeher, Geeehichte, pp. 91‑92, 281 eqq.; C. Neumann. ariwhiaeha Gesehichts­whreZer . . . in ID. Jahrhuaderf. pp. 103 eqq., Laipaic, iris.

NICETA3, DAVID: Bishop of Dadybra in Paphlagonia; d. 880. He was one of the most distinguished of the Byzantine panegyrists and de­voted himself particularly to the eulogy of the apos­tles. His productions have little historical basis, however; and his panegyrics on certain saints are equally valueless. His biography of the Patriarch Ignatius of Constantinople, on the other hand, is of distinct historical importance. His works, which also include lengthy comments on the poems of Gregory Naaianaen, are in MPG, iv. 682,842, xxxvill. 842‑846, cv. 15‑582. (PHILIPP MEYER.)

BmLIOGRAPHY: A. Mai, Patrum "ova brbliothaca, vi. 2, pp. 3‑8. 8 vols., Rome, 1852‑71; Fabriciue‑Harlee, Balio­t4aea Groca, vii. 747‑749, Hamburg. 1801; P. Meyer, in JPT, 1888, pp. 386 sqq.; Hrumbaeher, Geaehiehte, pp. 187, 879 et passim; B1lmrdiniscAm Zeitschrif4 1900, pp. 268 eqq.

RICETAS PECTORATM: Greek mystic and polemic author of the eleventh century. He was a monk at Studium and a pupil of Simeon the younger, from whom he received his mystical trend. Here belong a series of his writings, especially the three hundred " Chapters " (ed. Nicodemus Hagi­orites, in his Philokalia, Venice, 1782, and in MPG, cxx. 852‑1009). Nicetas likewise wrote a biog­raphy of Simeon, edited in Romaic, by Dionysios Zagoraios in his edition of Simeon the younger (1790; 1886), and also collected his teacher's works. He polemized both against the Roman Catholics in his " On Unleavened Bread and Sabbath Fasting and the Marriage of the Clergy " (ed. A. K. Demetra­copulos,in his Bibliatheca eccteaiaatfca, pp. 18 sqq., Leipsic, 1866), and against the Armenians and

Roman Catholics in " On Leavened and Unleavened Bread" (ed. J.. Hergenr6ther, in his Monuments Grarca adveraus Photium, pp. 139 sqq., Regensburg, 1869). Nicetas was the author of many other works, twenty‑seven of which are enumerated by, Deme­tracopulos (ut sup. pp. 5 aqq.).


Bmmooasmr: $. Hell, Rnthraiarnus und BuesoeuaU bed,n

pr;wAiwhen Mmch<um, pp. 3 eqq•, Leipsic, 1898. cf. P. Meyer, in GSA, 1898, No. 11, pp. 846 sqq•; Fabricius­Harles, Bibliatheeu Grmea, vii. 753 eqq.. Hamburg, 1801; A. Mai, Patrum nova bslliotheca, vi. 2; pp. 10‑13, 8 vole., Rome, 1852‑71; Cefier, Auteura sacrh, nii. 210, 217­220,249.

IMETAS OF REMESIANA: Missionary bishop of that city (the modern Turkish Ak and the Servian Bela Palauka, 180 m. n. of Saloniki), where he was born about 345; d. there about 420. The only direct sources concerning him are Gennadius's De vir. ill., xxii. and the twenty‑ninth epistle and seventeenth and twenty‑seventh carmen of Paulinus of Nola, whom Niceta visited in 398 and 402. The objects of his missionary activity were the Bead, Scythe, Geti, and Dacians, and his diocese accordingly extended to the Don in the north, Pontus in the east, the lEgean in the south, and the boundaries of Dal­matia and Myria in the west. Despite the vast extent of this diocese, the Gospel struck deep root there; monasteries and nunneries arose, the bar­barians learned to praise Christ in Latin, and to live in peace and purity. The importance of Nicetas as a missionary thus rests upon the fact that he seems to have been the first to devote his life to a systematic and successful evangelization of the mountain tribes of the Haemus. He derives his significance as an author, on the other hand, from his practical defense of the consubstantiality of the Son and the Holy Ghost, and from his zealous em­phasis upon the creed that he might protect the souls committed to him from all peril of heresy. As an adherent of the Nicene Creed, therefore, he opposed both Adana and Macedonians.

Gennadius ascribes to Nicetas six tractates for

the instruction of candidates for baptism. The

fifth of these, De eymbdo, is identical with the ex­

tant Bxpdanatio symbols (ed. C. P. Caspari, Kirchenr

historWhe Anecdota, pp. 341‑360, Christiania, 1883);

while the third, De fuse uniew majeetatia (also men­

tioned by Cassiodorus) corresponds to the two

treatises De ratiorte fides and De Spiruua Sancti

potentsa (ed., with tae De diverada appdlationibus

domino noatro Jesu Chnsto canvenwntibm, by A.

Mai, Nova colkctio, vii. 314‑332). The remaining

tractates mentioned by Gennadius are lost. The

Explanatio aymboli is remarkable as containing for

the first time the article of the communion of saints,

which, though doubtless existing far earlier, is

here introduced apparently to lead his diocese to

cling to the Catholic Church and to reject Arianism.

It has also been supposed, but without sufficient

reason, that Nicetas was the author of the Te Deum

and the two treatises De vigdim wnwytm Dei and De

paalmodiar bone. (E. HilmPEL.)

Bmwooa"ny: E. Hempel. Nicda, BischoJ con Remesiana,

Bonn, 1895 (of. F. Sattenbusch, in TLZ, 1896. pp. 297­

303); J. 8iekenberger, in R6,nixheQaartalacWJt, mi (1898),

b6‑84; A. E. Bum, Niceta oJRemeeiana. his Life and Wodcs,

181 'RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Nioetss Acomiaatas

Nicholas I.

Cambridge, 1905; Braids, in MPG, Iii. 875‑1134; F.

Kattenbusch, in Gimeener Uttioera&dtapsopmmm, 1892,

pp. 34‑52; T. Zahn, Dae apo"iscAe Symbolum, pp. 107­

130, Leimic, 1893; idem, in N%Z, 1896, pp. 93 sqq.;

Ci. Morin. in Reeae binMiWne, a (1894), part 2; DCB,

iv. 37.

NICHOLAS: The name of five popes.

Nicholas L: Pope 858‑567. He was a Roman

by birth, son of the defenaor Theodore, and was

connected with the Lateran basilica as a subdesoon

from the time of Sergius II. (844‑47), as a deacon

from that of Leo IV. (847‑55). His wisdom and

eloquence had long been noted, and under Benedict

III. he had exercised a great influence on the policy

of the Church. When Benedict died (Apr. 7, 858),

the Emperor Louis II. hastened to Rome to secure

the election of a candidate to his liking, and it is

possible that he was responsible for the choice of

Nicholas. Consecrated on Apr. 24, he soon won the

affection of the people, maintaining a monastic Sim­

plicity in his life and devoting himself to works of

charity, to well‑considered government, and to the

erection of new churches. His historical impor­

tance, however, lies in the facts that he established a

wholly new conception of the dignity and power of

the papacy and that he made this theory practically

felt throughout the West. Gelasius I., indeed, had

given a standard expression to the papal claims, as

they had developed in course of tame, in the famous

decretal Duo quippe, asserting that the pope, di­

vinely chosen ruler of the Church, was as such equal

in rank to the emperor and independent of him,

though in temporal matters his subject, as the em­

peror was of the Church in spiritual things. But

these claims had been of no effect in practise; it

was Nicholas who made them effective, and drew

their logical consequences. The pope, he asserted,

was the absolute ruler of the universal Church,

the bishops were his officers, and synods but in­

struments to express and register the papal will;

church law is not law except when approved by the

pope, who is the supreme judge, the personal repre­

sentative of Christ. These far‑reaching claims would

probably not have found acceptance if the most

powerful western church, that of the Frankish em­

pire, had not been prepared for them by the Pseudo­

Isidorian Decretals (q.v.). But these were not the

source from which Nicholas derived them; it was

not until after 864 that he even used this support

for them. And he goes even beyond the assertions

of the forged decretals, assuming not merely a prece­

dence of etiquette over all secular princes but the

power of commanding them as seems good to him.

It is not, then, surprising that he regards the em­

peror as the vassal of St. Peter, and the papal

unction, coronation, and confirmation as at least

equally essential with the validity of royal descent.

In a word, it is not too much to say that Nicholas

created the medieval papacy.

He was particularly fortunate in being able to

gratify his hierarchical ambition at the same time

that he took the part of a champion of oppressed

innocence. The first case in which this opportunity

was offered him occurred in 860; the innocent victim

was the patriarch Ignatius of Constantinople (q.v‑),

the unjust oppressors were the eastern Emperor


Bardas and his intruding candidate Photius (q.v.). Nicholas answered their appeal for support not by confirming the new patriarch but by sending an embassy to investigate the circumstances of his election, at the same time taking occasion to enforce a number of Roman claims in the East. The party of Photius won over the papal legates; with their assent a great council in Constantinople (May, 861) declared for Photius. Ignatius appealed directly to the pope, and thus gave him a new occasion to inter­fere in Eastern affairs. In a solemn encyclical to the Eastern patriarchs (May 8, 862) he warned them not to acknowledge Photius, and when this method proved ineffective, at a Roman synod in April, 863, " by virtue of the judgment of the Holy Ghost speak­ing through him," he deposed and excommunicated Photius.

A similar conflict on behalf of oppressed innocence and at the same time of the claims of Rome was that with John, archbishop of Ravenna. Leo IV. had already threatened this violent man and his brother with severe penalties for their ill‑treatment of papal subjects; and now the bishops of the tEmil­ia complained of illegal exactions and other mis­deeds on his part. Nicholas saw an opportunity to dispose forever of Ravenna's pretensions to inde­pendence; he summoned John three times to appear before him, and excommunicated him in default. John sought help in vain from the emperor, and was finally forced to make submission at a Lateran synod (Nov. 18, 861), renouncing the special preroga­tives of his see. Nicholas won a similar victory over the most powerful West‑Frankish metropolitan, Hinemar (q.v.) of Reims, and thus succeeded in making effective against the Greeks the support of the Frankish church, which now obeyed him as it had obeyed Charlemagne. In the matter of the matrimonial relations of Lothair he once more mas­terfully asserted his personality and his principles. The conflict here [which concerned the power to divorce a queen (on false charges) and to marry another woman] was complicated by the fact that it was not only between the Frankish and the Roman conceptions of the power of the papacy but between Frankish and Roman marriage laws; but Nich­olas had public opinion on his side, as contending for a sacred principle of morals. All his plans were on a large and impressive scale. He conducted the work of the Roman mission among the Bul­garians with such wisdom, as shown in the famous Responm ad conauua Bulgarorum, that he deserves a place as a missionary organiser by the side of Gregory the Great (see BULUARIATJB, CoxvFnmorr OF THE). In Moravia he did not give the first im­pulse to the mission, but by winning the support of Cyril and Methodius he secured the dominance of Roman instead of Greek Christianity. On the whole, he reached the goal at which he aimed. When he died (Nov. 13, 867) the pope, not the emperor, was recognized in the West as the head of Christendom. It should also be mentioned that Nicholas was an exception among the early popes for intellectual culture; he was not only a diligent student of the decretals of his predecessors but he knew the code of Justinian and had a respectable acquaintance with the Fathers. This wide reading

Nichol" a.‑Q. THE NEW SCHAFF‑HER' ZOGr 18'2

gave him a high idea of the infiueAoe of literature on church life; he was the first prince of the Church who took up seriously the question of establishing a clerical censorship of books. (H. B6Hmzg.)

BIBLIoaRAPHr: The Rpietola are to be found in MPL, exix. 789 eqq., caxuc. 1011‑18. Consult: E. DOmmler, Geschichte des oafrankiechen Reiehta, ii. 52‑217, Leipsic, 1887; H. TA‑ mer, Papet Nicholas 1. and die byzantini­eche Staatakirche seiner Zeit, Berlin, 1857; J. M. F. Fran­tin, Le Pape Nicolas 1. d is jeme roi Lothaire. Dijon, 1882; F. Racquain, La Papaut‑6 au moyen doe, Paris, 1881; J. lsngen, Geschichte der rnmischen %irche, iii. 1­113, Bonn, 1892; J. Roy, in i¢tudes d'hiatoire du moyen dge dedih a Gabriel Monod, pp. 95‑105, Paris, 1898; idem, Saint Nicholas 1., London, 1901; F. Gregorovius, Hist. of the City of Rome, iii. 120‑155, London, 1895; Creighton. Popes, i. 14‑15, ii. 330; Bower, Popes, ii. 229‑287; Mil­man, Latin Christianity, iii. 21‑58, 119; Platina, Popes, i. 227‑230; Mann, Popes, iii. 1‑148; Hauck. RD, ii. 533‑W7.

Nicholas IL: Pope 1058‑61. Immediately after the death of pope Stephen X. (Mar. 29, 1058) the aristocratic party at Rome proceeded to secure the succession in the person of a candidate of their choice; and on April 5 Bishop Giovanni of Velletri was officially enthroned as Benedict X. Realizing that this promotion might reproduce the conditions which had formerly necessitated the interference of Henry III., Hildebrand effected an understanding with Duke Godfrey, whereby Bishop Gerard of Florence was to supplant Benedict X., contrived to alienate a faction of the Romans from Benedict and win them for Gerard, and obtained the assent of the empress of Germany 0 the proposed election of Bishop Gerard. Accordingly, the cardinals, who had fled from Rome, were convened at Siena, and Bishop Gerard was elected pope in Dec., 1058. In Jan., 1059, Benedict X. was expelled from Rome, and on Jan. 24 Bishop Gerard was enthroned as Nicholas II.

Events having shown that the Normans were not to be driven from southern Italy by force, Nicholas II. cause to terms with them peaceably in Aug., 1058. He invested Duke Robert Guiscard with Apulia, Calabria, and Sicily; Prince Richard with Capua, receiving in turn their oaths of allegiance. Robert promised to observe loyalty to the pope, to support the Roman Church in the maintenance of its sov­ereign prerogatives and possessions, to assist Pope Nicholas in securely and honorably safeguarding the Roman papacy, and lastly, in the event of the death of Nicholas II. or. of his successors, to give heed to the admonition of the cardinals and render due aid in electing and installing a pope in keeping with the honor of St. Peter. In the terms of a sec­and oath, and in order to emphasize the relationship of vassal and lord, Robert promised to discharge an annual tribute of twelve denarii to the pope for every yoke of oxen. Thus the Normans obtained recognition of the fruits of their policy of conquest, and the right of expectancy to further territorial enlargements, while the pope gained such military support as made him independent alike of the West­ern and of the Eastern Empire. Thanks to the Normans' assistance Pope Benedict X. was reduced to capitulation at Galera in the autumn, and thus the factional nobility's papacy was annulled. This alliance with the Normans had its complement in an understanding with the Paterenes (q.v.) in north‑

ern Italy, the immediate result of which was the subjection of Milan to the papal see.

The effects of these alliances with the Normans and the Paterenes were manifest at the Lateran synod of Nicholas IT. in April, 1059. The synod could not profess to represent the Church at large, seeing that hardly any but, Italian ecclesiastics were present. Its most important enactment was the adoption of the celebrated law with reference to the papal election which instituted new canons of procedure regarding the occupancy of the papal see (cf. Mirbt, Quellen, 2d ed., no. 181, pp. 97 sqq.). This law contains the following provisos: (§ 1) That after a pope's de­cease, and first in order, the cardinal bishops shall assemble for the sake of advising in regard to who shall be the papal successor. In the next place, that when they have reached an agreement they shall convene the cardinal clerics and, conjointly with these, complete the election, whereupon the rest of the clergy and the people of Rome shall voice their assent in the way of conclusion. (§ 2) Cardinal bishops and cardinal clerics take the lead, in course of the election, being followed by the other participants. (§ 3) The candidate for the papal dignity is to be sought, first of all, among the Roman clergy; but if no suitable choice is here to be found, a candidate may then be selected elsewhere. (§ 5) Rome holds the first rank for place of election. In the supposable contingency that owing to the de­pravity of evil men, a pure and unadulterated election were out of the question there, the cardinal bishops shall have the right, in conjunction with the cardinal clerics and devout laymen, even though but few in number, to elect the pope at what place they deem proper. (§ 6) In the contingency that, after due election, some stress of war, or any ma­levolent onset whatsoever, prevents the elected pontiff from being enthroned in the apostolic see in accord with the traditional usage, nevertheless, being once elected, he shall possess plenary ecclesi­astical authority as pope. This clause is corrob­orated by the paragraph on royalty (§ 4): " Withal shall bounden honor and respect be observed to­ward our beloved son Henry, who is presently king, and of whom the hope is entertained that with God's help he may one day become emperor; even as we have already so granted him approbation as likewise to his successors, who have gained thin right (im­perial dignity) from this apostolic see." This law aimed first of all to legalize, by canonical process, the course pursued at the elevation of Nicholas II. It was at once the means, however, of permanently committing the papal elections to the sway of a new set of factors; and inasmuch as this purpose was also achieved, it marks a turning‑point in the history of pontifical elections.

At the synod of 1059 measures were enacted regarding celibacy, and a law was passed prohibiting lay investiture. At the same time Berengas of Tours retracted his doctrines on the Eucharist. At a new synod in the spring of 1060 a decree was framed against simonists, Benedict X. was solemnly divested of his dignities, and the new election law was ratified. Soon after this synod the cardinal priest Stephen went as papal legate to the German court to allay the disfavor prevalent in that quarter;


but, after waiting five days in vain for an audience, he was obliged to return to Rorr;e without having delivered the pope'.s message. This abrupt rejection was followed, perhaps not before the early part of 1061, by the German episcopate's adverse declara­tion respecting the Curia. The exact time and place of this transaction are unknown. Those German prelates then resolved not only to quash the pope's rulings altogether, but even to depose him; but neither political nor ecclesiastical consequences ensued. Nicholas II. died at Florence on July 19 or 27, 1061 (on the former date, cf. Muratori, Scrip torea, p. 944; for the alternative date, cf. MGH, Script., v (1844], 427). He was not an eminent pope, but his brief pontificate is distinguished by important and fruitful events. CARL Miller.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Diplomata, epistolm, decrda are in MPL, exiiii. 1301138; Jaffe, Regeata, i. 557‑566, ii. 750. Consult J. M. Watterich, Ponti4cum Romanorum vitro, i. 206 sqq., 738‑739, Leipsic, 1882; P. SchefferBoichorst, Die Neuordnunp der Papatwahl durch Nikolaus 11., Strasburg, 1879; H. Grauert, Doe Dekrd Nikolaus 11. von 1058, in Hietorischea Jahrbuch der G6rreapeadlsrhaft, 1880, pp. 798 eqq.; W. von Gieeebreaht, Geschichte der deutechen Kaiser­zeit, iii. 13 sqq., Leipeie, 1885; W. Martens, Die Besitz­unp des papsaichen Stuldes unter . . . Heinrich III. and IV., Freiburg, 1887; idem, Gregor VIL, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1894; G. Meyer von Knonau, Jahrbficher des deutachen Reichs unter Heinrich Ill. and IV., i. 91 sqq., 878 sqq., iii. 853 sqq., ib. 1890‑1900; C. Mirbt, Die Publiziatik im Zettaker Grepora VIL, ib. 1894; L. von Heinemann, Go­srhichte der Normannen in Unteritalien and Sicilian, i. 177 sqq., ib. 1894; F. Gregorovius, Hist. of the City of Rome, iv. 114‑125, London, 1898; A. Clavel, Le Pape Nicolaa 11., Paris, 1908; Schaff, Christian Church, v. 1, pp. 168 eqq.; Milman, Latin Christianity, iii. 298‑304; Platdna, Popes, i. 278‑280.

Nicholas III.: Pope 1277‑80. Giovanni Gaetani Orsini was a son of the Roman Senator Matteo Rubens. As early as 1244 he was promoted by Innocent IV. to the rank of cardinal deacon of St. Nicholas in carcere Tulliano. In 1262 Urban IV. appointed him inquisitor general, and in 1263 pro­tector of the Franciscan Order. He was elected pope Nov. 25, 1277, after the death of John XXI. He compelled Rudolph of Hapsburg to cede the pentapolis and the exarchate of Ravenna to the papal see, and Charles of Anjou, king of Sicily, to renounce the regency of Tuscany and the dignity of a Roman senator; and he promulgated the con­stitution Fundamenta militanlis, dated July 18, 1278, which thenceforth reserved the senatorial authority and other municipal offices to the citizens of Rome. Thereupon he was himself elected senator for life. He next sought to initiate an understanding between Charles of Anjou and Rudolph of Haps­burg; and he succeeded in bringing a peace to pass, whereby Charles obtained Provence and Forcalquier in fee from the German Empire. Nicholas is sup­posed to have pursued even still more extensive projects; and Ptolemmus of Lucca relates that he designed to cut up the German Empire into four states: Germany, Arelate or Arles, Tuscany, and Lombardy. On the other hand, he did not succeed in his efforts to restore union with the Greeks, or in his attempts to set a new crusade afoot. His manner of directing the internal affairs of the Church gave occasion for sharp reproaches. Dante con­signed him to hell, and accused him, not without

warrant, of both nepotism and avarice, and the

diversion of church funds to profane objects. He

made no decisive ruling in the contest between strict

and lax forces within the Franciscan Order; al­

though, in the decretal Exiit qui seminal (1279) he

considered the main issue as to how far the Minor­

ites might use the things of this world. Nicholas

III. died suddenly in his summer residence at Sori­

ano, on Aug. 22, 1280. CARL MIRBT.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are: The Rree, ed J. Gay, part i.. Paris, 1898; Mittheilunpen aua derv vatikanischen Archiv, ed. F. Kaltenbrunner, vols. i‑ii., Vienna, 1889­1894; J. F. Bbhmer, Repeats imperii vi., 1,278‑1313, Inns­bruck, 1898; A. Potthast, Repeats pontificum Roma­norum, vol. ii., Berlin, 1875. Consult: J. Ficker, Forach­unpen zur Rewha‑ and Rechtegeschichte Italians, vols ii. iv., Innsbruck, 1869‑74; F. Heller, Deutschland and Frankreich in ihren politischen Beziehunpen biz zum Tode Rudolfs van Hapsburg, pp. 72 sqq., Labeck, 1874; F. Wertseh, Die Heziehunpen Rudolfa von Hapsburg zur r6mi­when Kurie, Bochum, 1880; F. Gregorovius, Hilt. of the City of Rome, v. 478‑191, London, 1897; A. Huyekens, Kardinal Napoleon Orsini, Munich, 1902; A. Demela, Papal Nikolaus 111., ib. 1903; Der Kardinal J. G. Orsini (Papal Nikolaus 111.), 1.2,4‑77. Berlin; 1905; Bower, Popes, iii. 28‑28; Milman, Latin Christianity, vi. 138­142, 152; Platina, Popes, ii. 108‑111.

Nicholas IV.: Pope 1288‑92. Girolamo of As. coli, a scrivener's son, had been general of the Fran­ciscan Order from 1274 onward, when Nicholas III. in 1278 created him cardinal designate of St. Puden­tiana. In 1281 Martin IV. appointed him cardinal bishop of Praeneste, or Palestrina; and on Feb. 22, 1288 he was elected pope. His pontificate exhibits no mark of greatness. He sought to tack his course between the Roman aristocratic families of Orsini and Colonna. In vain did Rudolph of Hapsburg strive to move Nicholas to set some definite term for the imperial coronation; but Charles of Anjou ob­tained the crown of Naples and Sicily, after duly acknowledging himself a liegeman of the Church. After the fall of Ptolemais, in 1291, Nicholas quite fruitlessly endeavored to organize a general crusade. The fact that under the constitution dated July 18, 1289, he conceded to the cardinals one‑half of all revenues accruing to the see of Rome, and also allowed them to take part in the fiscal administra­tion, signified an appreciable strengthening of the college of cardinals at the expense of the papacy. Nicholas IV. died at Rome Apr. 4, 1292.


BIRwoaRAPHY: Sources are: Lea Repiatrea de Nicolas IV.,

ed. E. Langloie. Paris, 1886 sqq.; Mitthsilunpen sue den

vatikaniechen Archiv, ed. F. Haltenbrunner, vol. i.. Vienna,

1389; A. Potthast~ Repeats pontificum Romanorum, ii.

1826‑1915, Berlin, 1875; and the Vita by Bernard of

Guido, in Muratori, Scriptorea, iii. 1, pp. 812‑813. Con­

eult further: J. E. Kopp, Geschichte von der Wiederhers<d­

lung and derv Verfalt des heilipen r6mischen Reichea, ed.

Busson, ii. 3, pp. 288 sqq.. Berlin. 1871; R. RBhricht, Go­

schiehte des Kimigreichs Jerusalem, 1100‑1091, pp. 1003‑N.

1029, Innsbruck, 1898; F. Gregorovius, Hist. of the City of

Rome, v. 508‑515, 834, 855, 888, London, 1897; Bower,

Popes, iii. 37 l0; Milman, Latin Christianity, vi. 173‑179,

viii. 291; Platina, Popes, ii. 118‑122; Schaff, Christi

Church, v. 1, pp. 207. 287, 411‑412.

Nicholas V.: Antipope to John XXII. 1328‑30. Pietro Rainalducci of Cordova was one of the Mi­norites who took the side of Louis the Bavarian in his struggle with the pope. After his coronation Louis, in a public assembly, set Rainalducei on the

Nicholas V.

Nicholas of Xyra THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 184

papal throne May 12, 1328. But already on the 4th of August, after vainly seeking recognition from both princes and peoples, he was obliged to leave Rome with Luuis. On the return of the latter to Germany, Nicholas sought refuge in Pisa. In 1330 he craved mercy of John XXII., and made a con­fession of his sins; but this did not save him from spending the rest of his life in prison. He died Oct. 16, 1333. Nicholas took part in the contro­versy concerning the right of his order to own prop­erty in a work entitled De cmatroversia paupenatis Christi (in J. F. Boehmer, Fontes Rerum Germani­comet, iv. 517 aqq., Stuttgart, 1868).


BIHm0GRAPHY: Consult, besides the work of Boehmer named in the text: Hopp, ut sup. under Nicholas IV., vol. v., part 1, Lucerne. 1858; A. von Reumont, Ge­achichte der Stadt Rem., ii. 805 eqq., Berlin, 1887; 8. Ries­ler, Die litterariachen Wideraacher der PBpste our Z4 Lud­wig des Baiern, Leipsic, 1874; C. Maller, Der %ampf Lud­wipe des Baiern mit der r6mischen %urie, i. 192, Tilbingen, 1879; Eubel, Der Gegenpapat Nikolaus Y., in Hiatori­aehea Jahrbuch der GorreapeseUachaft, vol. xii., 1891; Bower, Popes, iii. 82,86; Milman, Latin Christianity, vii. 103­111; Creighton, Papacy, i. 47.

Nicholas V.: Pope 1447‑55. This humanist, Tommaso Parentucelli of Sargana, was made arch­bishop of Bologna in 1439 by Eugenius IV., who had noted his ability at the Council of Florence in 1439. After he had executed the difficult mission of snatching from the Germans at the Diet of Frank­fort all the advantages they had gained at the Coun­cil of Basel, the pope raised him to the rank of cardinal. He was therefore able to take part in the conclave at the death of Eugene in the same year, and was himself chosen. His pontificate is equally noteworthy from a political standpoint as from that of the encouragement of art and science. He con­cluded with the German King Frederic III. in 1448 the Aschaffenburg concordat, which accorded to the pope annats, reservations and the Menses Papal" (q.v.; also see CoxcoRDATS, III., 2). He put an sad to the schism and celebrated a magnificent jubilee in 1450. He was a man of such wide culture that ‑Nneas Sylvius said of him: " What he does not know is beyond the range of human knowledge." Besides his antiquarian studies he still found time and means to embellish Rome. He reerected its walls in 1451, began the extension of the Vatican Palace, the completion of which was prevented by his death, and founded the Vatican library. He was but little liked by the Romans, as is shown by a conspiracy of Stefano Porcaro against him and even against the existence of the papacy in Rome, which was fortunately discovered (Jan., 1453). The mental depression produced by this was intensified by the terrible news that Con_ stantinople had fallen into the hands of the Turks (1453). He ordered the preaching of a crusade but without success; all he could do was to join the League of Lodi (1454), founded for the defense of Christendom. He died Mar. 24, 1455.


BIBLIoa$APBY: A Vita by Manetti is in L. A. Muratori t sup. (under Nicholas IV.), iii. 2, pp. 907 eqq.; and one by Georgius was printed Rome, 1742. Consult: Schaff, Christian Church, v. 2, 1 49; Pastor, Popes, ii. 3‑313; A. von Reumonk Gewhickte der Stadt Rom, iii. 1, 110 aqq., Berlin, 1888; Dehio, Die Bauprojekts Nikolaus Y., in Re.

pertorium fur %unstwiaaenwhaft, vol. iii., 1880; Gibbon, Decline and FaU, chap. Ixviii.; E. Pears, Destruction of the German Empire and . . . the Capture of Constantinople by the Turks, London, 1903; Creighton. Papacy, ii. 385 sqq., iii. 97 sqq.; Bower, Popes, iii. 235‑238; Milman, Latin Christianity, viii. 90, 130, 488, 491; Platina. Popee. ii. 235‑250.



A medieval German satirical poet; b. apparently at Geithain (24 m. s.a.e. of Leipsic), Saxony; d., pre­sumably at Bibra (25 m. s.w. of Halle), after 1307. Trithemius, in his Scriptores eccleaiastici, mentions an Erfurt theologian and poet of the name, of whom he had seen a work entitled Occultua, who had left also a De cavendo malo and a volume of letters. Flacius, in his search for material against the papal system, came upon several manuscripts of the Occul­tus and gave some extracts. from them in his Catch logua testium veritalis. A little further information was given, from a manuscript at Helmatfidt, by Leyser in his Historia poetarum et poematum medii ovi (Halls, 1721); but no thorough knowledge of Nicholas's work was gained until 116fier published the entire poem (Sitzungsberichte der Wiener Akade­mie, xxxvii., 1861,163‑262), from an inferior manu­script at Prague, and Fischer produced a critical edition (Halls, 1870). From this it appeared that the two works mentioned by Trithem_ius were really the same, and that the author had called himself " Occultus," i.e., anonymous. Nothing is known of him except what can be gathered from his work. He seems to have studied at Padua, to have been four times in Rome, and then to have settled in Erfurt as a cleric, possibly a canon. A document of 1279 describes him as "custos ecclesim Byberacen­sis." His poems, in 2,441 leonine hexameters, seem to have been mainly composed between 1281 and 1283, and put together by himself, with notes, from 1305 to 1307. Flacius was misled by prejudice in including him among the precursors of the Reforma­tion; but Nicholas is a writer from whom much may be learned about the conditions prevailing in Germany, both in Church and State, at the end of the thirteenth century. (G. KAwERAu.)

Biswooimrar: There is a Germ. tranal. of the Carmen by RienAcker in the Year Book of the Royal Academy at Erfurt, new series, vii. 1‑101. Consult: O. Lorenz, Deutsehdanda GeachichtsqueUen in Mitlelalter, ii. 133 sqq., Berlin, 1887; F. R. Wegele, Friedrich der Freidipe, pp. 386‑389, Nbrdlingen, 1870; Potthast~ Wepweiser, p. 851.


NICHOLAS OF HEREFORD (NICHOLAS HER­FORD): Lollard, and collaborator with Wyclif in translating the English Bible; d. in the Carthusian monastery at St. Anne's, Coventry, after 1417. Of his early life little is known. He was a student of Queen's College, Oxford, where he was bursar 1374‑75, and took his doctorate in 1382. Here he in all probability came under the influence of John Wyclif, and by 1382 was already known and marked as an enemy by the friars. In that year he preached a sermon which, with his previous utterances, led to his suspension, along with that of Wyclif and Philip Repington, from the exer­cise of public functions. Nicholas was tried before


Nicholas V.

Nicholas of Xyra

the archbishop of Canterbury in a series of hear­ings at a provincial synod held at London, and, his answer being unsatisfactory, was excommu­nicated July 1, 1382. He went to Rome and ap­pealed to the pope, stating there his conclusions; but he was condemned by pope and cardinals and sentenced to life imprisonment. It is thought that only the favor of the pope for English scholars pre­vented the sentence of Nicholas to the stake. Nich­olas escaped from imprisonment during a popular uprising, probably in June, 1385, and returned to England. In 1386 a writ was issued for his appre­hension, but he was still at liberty Aug. 10, 1387. Later he was captured and imprisoned, and finally recanted. He was taken under royal protection Dec. 12, 13%, when he was made chancellor of Hereford Cathedral. This post he gave up between 1394 and 1399. In 1397 he became treasurer of Hereford, after 1410 also prebend of Pratum Minus, resigning both offices and retiring to the cloister at Coventry probably in 1417.

To Nicholas of Hereford is due the honor of being a collaborator with Wyclif in the work of tranda­ting the Bible into English, the Old Testament be­ing the part assigned to him. The original manu­script, with the first hand corrections interlined, is fortunately preserved in the Bodleian Library (no. 959 [3093]), and there is also a very early copy of this in the same place (MS. Douci, 369), made be­fore the corrections were inserted in the original, in which appear the words " explicit translacion Nich­olay Herford." Both manuscripts break off in the middle of Baruch iii. 20. This break is usually (and without doubt correctly) explained as resulting from the judicial process against Nicholas and the summons to appear before the synod at London which condemned him. The rest of the Old Testa­ment was by another hand, whose style differs from that of Nicholas. The latters translation is schol­arly, so far as his basal teat permitted, but stiffly literal and somewhat stilted, and therefore not so well adapted for popular use as the work of Wyclif on the New Testament. It was worked over and improved in the edition of John Purvey (q.v.). Besides this work there are extant his Condtusiones and his Responaio at the synod (both in the Paaci:­culi zizaniorum Magieln; Johannis Wydij, ed. W. W. Shirley, in Rolls Series, pp. 303 sqq., 319 aqq., London, 185$). Other works ascribed to him have perished, there having been numerous orders from the king that his writings be seized together with those of Wyclif.

BrnrjoaRAPBY: Fawkuti siwsior~ ed. Shirley, pp. a>iv.,

274, 289‑329, 816 517; J. Fox, Acts and Monuments, iii.

2!‑¢7, 187‑189, 279‑285, 808, ed. of London, 1855; G.

Lechler, John Wycliffe and his English Pr‑sons, pas­

sim, b. 1884; G. M. Trevelyan, England in the Ape of

Wtwii8, passim, ib. 1900; J. Gairdner, LoUardy and the

Rejorma&n in England, i. 21. 22, 24‑27, 59, ib. 1908;

DNB, xl. 418‑420; and the literature under BIBI,v Vaa­stoas, B, IV., Lorcssne, and W:cur, JOHN.

NICHOLAS OF METHONE: Bishop of that city (the modern Modon) in Messenia during the reign of Emperor Manuel I. Comnenus (1143‑80). There are no trustworthy data concerning his life, and he seems to have died before the synod of 1166. He developed a very extensive literary activity, but

only one of his writings was printed before the nine­teenth century, and some still await publication. They furnish an insight into the Greek theology of the twelfth century; chiefly polemic writings against the Latins, or dealing with subtle theological questions and apologetics. To the latter he devoted his Anaptuxia against Proclus, which, in spite of DrAseke's objection, is almost certainly genuine. Polemical works against the Latins deal largely with the procession of the Holy Spirit. Of treatises against the Latins still unpublished are to be men­tioned those on the wafer, the Sabbath fasts, and the primacy of the pope. One treatise, addressed to the Emperor Manuel, treats of the defense of the deposition of Patriarch Kosmas. During the last years of his life Nicholas discusses whether the Trinity or the Son only is the object to whom the sacrifice of the Eucharist is made. He also wrote against the Bogomiles (see Nacw MArnemerrs) and on the problem of predestination. His theology is not original, leaning principally upon Gregory Nasi­anaen and Peeudo‑Dionysius. God is for him the absolute and unconditioned cause, and in his doc­trine of the Trinity and his Christology he follows closely the church doctrine, as he does in his taeat­ment of salvation, not transgressing the limitations of'Greek theology. A thoroughgoing investigation of the theology of Nicholas is yet to be undertak n. (N. Boatwcmsca7

BrauooasanT: His tract on the Eucharist is prints/d in MPL, exxxv. b09‑514; two other tracts, ed. J. T. Boemel, were issued at Frankfort, 1825‑28; another on the pro­cession of the Holy Spirit appeared London, 1859; A. Demetrakopuloe edited two tracts, Leipsio, 1886‑88; and still another, ed. V. VaeWevekii, appeared St. Petersburg, 1888. Consult: Ullmann, in TB$, 1833, pp 701‑743; J. Dr&wke, in ZRG, a (1888), 405‑431, 586690, xviii (1897), 546‑571; idem, in TSH, l:viii (1895), 589‑819; Krumbaoher, GerAichte, pp. 85‑87, 128 (where further litemture is given).

NICHOLAS OF MYRA: Bishop, confessor, and saint; b. perhaps at Patera in Lycia; d. between 345 and 352. There is extant little authentic in­formation concerning him, though the extent to which he is venerated in both orient and oceident and the abundance of legends glorifying his memory, rivaling those which circle about St. George, make him one of the favorite saints of the populace. Legend declares that from infancy he fasted twice a week and worked miracles; that after a pilgrimage to Egypt and Palestine he became bishop of Myra in Lyeia and as such continued to perform miracles of mercy of various kinds, which persisted even after his death‑healing balsam is said to have flowed from his grave, not only soon after his death, but also again after his body had been removed from the orient to Bari in Apulia under Pope Victor III. in 1087. [St. Nicholas was, so to speak, the saint of the people‑of citizens, laborers, merchants; he was the protector of the weak, the poor, the cap­tive, of the young, especially of poor orphans. His kindness to children is supposed to be especially manifested at Christmas, when he rewards with gifts those whose conduct has been exemplary. He is most lavishly honored by the dedication to him of churches, those of St. Nicholas being far more numerous than of any other minor saint.] Hence,

Nicholas of Strasbura THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 166


in art St. Nicholas is represented with the anchor

as patron of sailors; or with three loaves of bread,

as patron of the bakers' gild; or with three chil­

dren who, praying, lift up their hands to heaven,

as protector and friend of the children; or finally

with three balls or purses (the sign of pawnbrokers),

as benefactor of the poor. He has been painted by

such famous artists as Cimabue, Andrea del Sarto,

and Titian. The day of his commemoration in the,

Roman Church is Dec. 6. For one of the celebrations

on his day see BOY‑BISHOP. (0. ZOCIMPRt.)

BiBraoaawrax: A considerable literature, dealing with early

editions of the sources and with later works more or lose

founded upon them is in Potthast, Wepweiser, pp. 1491­

1492. An early anonymous Vita is in L. Surius, Hia­

torias au vita sanctorum, vi. 795‑810, Venice, 1581; other

early material is collected in Analeda Bollandiana, ii

(1883), 143‑156, iv (1885), 169‑192. Later studies of

the life or legends are by E. Schnell. Raveneburg, 1886;

J. Laroche, Paris, 1893; Mrs. A. Jameson, Sacred and

Legendary Art, ii. 57‑71, Boston, 1893; J. Praxmarer,

Munster, 1894; DCB, iv. 4112.


two German ecclesiastics.

1. A Dominican; d. after 1329. For a time he

was lector in the Dominican monastery at Cologne

(ALKG, iv. 318). In 1325 he was commissioned

by Pope John XXII., to visit the Dominican mon­

asteries in the province of Teutonia and thus became

involved in the case against Eckhart (q.v.). But

he seems to have retained the favor of the pope, for

after Eckhart's condemnation he is still called

vicar (ALKG, iv. 317, note). He left in manuscript

a work De adventu Christi; but since Denifle has

shown that the first and third parts are almost ver­

batim reproductions of two treatises of the Domin­

ican John of Paris, it is hardly possible to use the

work for a characterization of Nicholas. There

remain only the thirteen sermons published by

Pfeiffer (pp. 261‑305), which were delivered in part

before Dominican nuns at Freiburg and the neigh­

boring Adelhausen; the hearers therefore were like

those of Eckhart. But there is a great difference

in the sermons. Nicholas has not the deeply mysti­

cal thoughts in which Eckhart moves as in his

element; but he insists upon spirituality and inner

truth of the religious life in general. He empha­

sizes true repentance and conversion which appro­

priates the merit of Christ‑a merit so exceeding

great that by it alone is the forgiveness of all guilt

given. Like Eckhart, he lays greater stress upon

the performance of duty and upon patient bearing

of the sufferings sent from God than upon specific

works of piety and penances. In the form of ques­

tion and answer, by examples and parables, in a

simple, clear style, he makes his ideas easily intel­

ligible. In popularity he surpasses Eckhart, though

he falls short of him in beauty of language.

2. A Carthusian (Nicolaus Kemph de Argentina);

b. at Strasburg 1397; d. at Gaming (65 m. w.a.w.

of Vienna), Lower Austria, 1497. He studied the­

ology at Vienna under Dinkelabilhl and had also

Henry of Langenstein (q.v.) as teacher. In 1440 he

entered the monastery at Gaming and joined the

Carthusiana. For many years he was prior in differ­

ent monasteries, but retired in 1490 to Gaming. Of

his writings, of which Pez mentions thirty‑six, the

few which have been printed include a Dialogus de recto studiorum fine ac ordine (in Pez, iv. 257‑192; for the most part trahslated into German by Rosier, pp. 280‑348), a Trsctatua de disere4ione (Pez, ix. 379­532), and an Expoeitio mystics in canticum cartti­corum (xi‑xii.). Nicholas belongs to the mystic theologians of the fifteenth century. He speaks very highly of Jean Gerson, and like him exhorts to earnest study of the Bible (with a recommenda­tion of Nicholas of Lyra). On the whole he follows the tendencies of the more famous and learned Dionysius (see DloNyslus Tam CARZHus1AN), who was endowed also with a wider and freer penetration. S. M. DEuTscHt.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: On 1 consult: g. Schmidt, Johanna Tauler, pp. 5‑6, Hamburg, 1841; F. Pfeiffer, Deutsche Afydiker des viersehnten Jahrhunderts, i. pp. xxii‑xxv., Leipsic, 1845; W. Prager, Geschichte der deutachea My" im Mit­telalter, ii. 67‑89, Leipsie, 1881; Denifie, in Zoitechri)t far deutsches Alterthum, mx (1885), 259 sqq.; idem, Der Plapiator Nikolaus won Strasaburg, in Archie Jar Liferatur and Kirchenpeschichte des Miudaltere, iv (1888), 312‑329.

On 2 consult: The biographical notices in B. Pes, Bs3­liothxa aspetica, preface to vols. iv. and xi., 12 vols., Re­geneburg, 1723‑40; N. Paulus. Der Karthdussr Nikolaus van Strambury and seine Schrift De recto studiorwm fine ac ordine, in Der Katholik, ii (1891), 346 sqq.; A. RSsler, Der Karthduser Nikolaus Kemph, pp. 281 aqq., Freiburg, 1894.

NICHOLAS, WILLIAM: Irish Methodist; b. at WeaPord (82 m. s. of Dublin), County Wexford, Dec. 22, 1838. He was educated at Trinity College, Dublin (B.A., 1879), held numerous pastorates in his denomination in Dublin and Belfast from 1861 to 1895, when he was made president and theologi­cal professor in the Methodist College, Belfast, both of which positions he still retains. He is a member of the London Council of the Evangelical Alliance and of the Senate of the Royal University of Ireland. In theology he is a broad evangelical, and has writ­ten Sermons on Jesus the Christ (Dublin, 1883); The Case Against Home Rule (1886); Newman and Ritah alism (London, 1889); and Christianity and Social­ism (1893; Fernley Lecture).

NICHOLS, WILLIAM FORD: Protestant Epis­copal bishop of California; b. at Lloyd, N. Y., June 9, 1849. He was educated at Trinity College, Hartford, Conn. (A.B.,1870), and Berkeley Divinity School from which he was graduated in 1873. He was ordered deacon in 1873 and priested in 1874. He was curate of Holy Trinity, Middletown, Conn. (1873‑75), rector of St. James's, West Hartford, Conn. (1875‑76), Grace, Newington, Conn. (1876­1877), Christ Church, Hartford, Conn. (1877‑.87), and St. James's, Philadelphia (1887‑90), private secre­tary to Bishop Williams of Connecticut (1871‑76), professor of church history in Berkeley Divinity School (188587), and assistant secr6tary of the House of Bishops (1886). After having declined to be bishop coadjutor of Ohio in 1888, he was con­secrated bishop coadjutor of California in 1890, and three years later became bishop of the diocese.

BIBwooEA.P87: W. S. Perry, The Episcopate in America, p. 323, New York, 1895.

NICHOLSON, ISAAC LEA: Protestant Episco­pal bishop of Milwaukee; b. at Baltimore, Md., Jan. 18, 1844; d. at Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 29, 1906.

187 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Nicholas of stratburs


He was graduated from Dartmouth College (A.B.,

1869) and Virginia Theological Seminary (1871),

being ordered deacon in the same year and priested

in 1872. He was curate of St. Thomas's, Hanover,

N. H. (1871‑72) and of St. Paul's, Baltimore (1872­

1875), and rector of the Church of the Ascension,

Westminster, Md. (1875‑79), and of St: Mark's,

Philadelphia (1879‑91). In 1891 he was conse­

crated bishop of Milwaukee, after having declined

the proffered see of Indiana in 1883.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. S. Perry, The Episcopate in America,

p. 335, New York, 1895.


Episcopal; b. in Green County, Miss., Jan. 8, 1822;

d. at Philadelphia, Pa., June 7, 1901. He gradu­

ated from La Grange College, Ala., 1840; became

pastor of the Poydras Street Methodist Episco­

pal Church, New Orleans, La., 1842; entered the

Protestant Episcopal Church, and became rector

of St. John's, Cincinnati, O., 1849; of St. Paul's,

Boston, 1859; of Trinity Church, Newark, N. J.,

1872; he then entered the Reformed Episcopal

Church, and took charge of the Second Reformed

Episcopal Church, Philadelphia, 1874. In 1876

he was consecrated bishop, and later was chosen

dean of the Reformed Episcopal Theological Semi­

nary of Philadelphia. He wrote, besides numerous

tracts on doctrinal subjects, The Bearing of Prophecy

on Inspiration in The Inspired Word, ed. A. T.

Pierson (New York, 1888).




B, I., 7.


in the monastery of Dionysius on Mount Athos;

b. on the Island of Naxos 1748; d. at Mount Athos,

in the monastery of the Skourteeans above Karyes,

1809. His life passed quietly, except that he was

involved in the Kolywa controversy which in the

second half of the eighteenth century arose over

the question whether the memorial celebrations

for the dead should take place on Satilrday according

to the opinion of the old orthodox or on Sunday.

Nicodemus adhered to the orthodox tendency, had

to suffer for it, but was finally justified. His im­

portance lies in his extensive literary work. He

was not a creative spirit, but reproduced old Greek

orthodoxy, putting it in the garb of popular Greek

and thus making it the common possession of his

church. His principal departments are hagiogra­

phy, asceticism, mysticism, liturgics, canon law,

and practical exegesis. Among his works on hagi­

ography is to be mentioned especially: " Ritual

for the Twelve Months of the Year" (3 vols.,

Venice, 1819; 12 vole., Constantinople, 1841 sqq.;

3 vols., Zakynthos, 1868), a rich source for

the study of the worship of saints in the

Greek Church. Other works are: " The New

Martyrology " (ib., 1799) ; " The New Choice "

(Venice, 1803). He also edited " A Collection

of the Divine Utterances and the Inspired

Doctrines of the Holy Fathers " (Venice, 1782),

a work of Paulos, the founder of the monastery

of Euergetis. In the sphere of aseeticism and mysticism he published: " Love of Beauty of the Holy Ascetics " (Venice, 1782); " The Invisible Battle " (Venice, 1796); " Spiritual Exercises " (Venice, 1800); " Handbook of Directions " (Vi­enna, 1801); " The Excellence of Christians " (Venice, 1803). For the use of the Church in the narrower sense he published a " Book of Confes­sion " (1794, 7th ed., 1854) which is still used. But he achieved his highest fame by the compila­tion of the corpus of Greek canon law, " Rudder of the Intellectual Ship of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church " (Leipsic, 1800 and later editions). In the sphere of exegesis he wrote an interesting commentary on the Catholic Epistles (Venice, 1819) and translated Euthymius Zygabe­nus' commentary on the Psalms into popular Greek (Constantinople, 1819‑21). (PHILIPP MEYER.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A sketch d' his life is prefixed to the " Rit­ual," ut sup. Consult further: R. Nicolai, Gewhichts der ueupriechiechen Litteratur, Leipsic, 1876; L. Petit, in Ethos dorsent, 1899, pp. 321 sqq.; A. D. $yriakos, Ge­whOda der orsentaliwhen Kirrhen, p. 155, Leilsie, 1902.

NICOL, THOMAS: Church of Scotland; b. at Castleton of Kincardine, parish of Fordoun, Kin­cardineshire, Oct. 21, 1846. He was educated at the universities of Aberdeen (M.A., 1868), Edin­burgh (B.D., 1871), and Titbingen (1871), after which he was minister at Kells, Kirkcudbrightshire (1873‑79), and Tolbooth Parish, Edinburgh (1879­1899). Since 1899 he has been professor of divinity and Biblical criticism in the University of Aberdeen. He was also editor of the Church of Scotland Mission Record from 1886 to 1900, Croall lecturer in 1897­1898, and Baird lecturer in 1907, and has been con­vener of the Church of Scotland Jewish Mission Committee since 1896. In addition to translating J. T. Beck's Pastorallehren des Neuen Testament,@ (Giiteraloh,1880) in collaboration with J. A. M'Cly­mont (Pastoral Theology of the New Testament, Edinburgh, 1885), and editing the Church of Scotland Sabbath School Teachers' Book (1890), he has written Recent Explorations in Bible Lards (1892); Recent Archa;ology and the Bible (Croall lectures; 1898); The Present Position taped Prospects of Biblical Science (1899); and The Pour Gospels in the Earliest Church History (1908).

NICOLAI, nf're6‑lair, PHMIPP: German Lu­theran theologian and hymn‑writer; b. at Menger­inghausen (12 m. n. of Waldeck) Aug. 10, 1556; d. at Hamburg Oct. 26, 1608. In 1575 he visited the University of Erfurt, and subsequently Wittenberg. In the year 1583 he was called as Evangelical preacher to his father's former field of labor at Herdecke, Westphalia; in 1587 to Nieder‑Wild­ungen, and almost immediately to Alt‑Wiidungen, where he was court preacher to the Lutheran count­ess of Waldeck, and tutor to her son. Here he be­came involved in the conflict with encroaching Calvinism, which he opposed with his pen. In 1596 he accepted a call as preacher at Unna, Westphalia, where the Lutherans, after a long struggle with the Calvinists, had gained the supremacy. Here he wrote that notorious book: Kurzer Bericht von der Calvinisten Gott and ihrer Religion (1598). The evil reports about his manner of life, scattered abroad by




the Calvinists, and the retaliation which he brought upon himself by'hie unrestrained polemics (followed by deaths in his family during a severe epidemic), reduced him to such a state of distress that he post­poned all disputations, and occupied all his time in prayer and meditation, concerning eternal life and the estate of faithful souls in the )ieavenly paradise. The fruit ofr these meditations was his Preuden­spwgd des ewigen Lebena, das iat, grtlndlwJw Be­schreaung des herrlichen Wesens (Frankfort, 1599). Three spiritual hymns form an appendix to the first edition of PreudensPiegd.

Hardly had the epidemic passed, before renewed controversial attacks came forth from the Cal­vinists, prompting Nicolai to complement his Frettdenspiegel with Spiegd des blown Geidea, der rich in der Calvriniaten Bachern regt (Frankfort, 1599). When forty‑four years of age he married the widow of a pastor at Dortmund. He now resolved to avoid all polemics for a season, and occupied himself with a somewhat extensive dogmatic work on the " Mystical Temple of God." In the year 1601 he was elected chief pastor at St. Catherine's Church, Hamburg, where his writings, especially the Freude»apiepd, had gained him friends. He preached every Sunday and Thursday to a well­filled church, exercising alike by his words and by his personal acts a devout influence upon his congre­gation, his colleagues, and all the city. He was revered and praised in wide circles as " another Chryeostom," a godly man and faithful shepherd of souls, a talented writer, and a pillar of the Lutheran Church. He felt especially called upon to preserve and confirm among the Hamburg preachers the peace and confessional unity of the Church, the pure Evangelical doctrine, as grounded hl divine Scripture, and witnessed and repeated in the Book of Concord of 1580 and its Apology. A counterpart to his Preudenapiegd was the Theoria vita amerna; (1606) written the year before, during an epidemic at Hamburg. A posthumous work was the polemic De Amichrtdo Romano (Rostock, 1609).

Nicolai is known mainly by four spiritual hymns, produced in 15": (1) " Mag ich Unglaek nicht widerstan," a partizan hymn against the Calvinists; (2), " So wiinsch ich nun sin guts Nacht," on Ps. xlii.; (3) " Wie schrin leucht' uns der Morgenstern," on Pa. xlv. (Eng. tranel. by several persons, includ­ing Miss Catherine Winkworth, " 0 Morning Starl how fair and bright "); (4) " Wachet suf I ruft uns die Stimme," on Matt. xxv. (in Eng. by the same translator, " Wake, awake; for night is flying "). Of these four hymns especially the two latter belong to the gems of the Evangelical hymn treasury. Both mark the beginning of a new period of lyric subjec­tiveaess, by their ardent reflection and loving ten­derness, which are outwardly facilitated by their poetic and musical rhythm.,. There is also a rich coloring reflecting the supernatural, such as is still foreign to hymns of the Reformation era. Although circulating widely, and adopted by church hymnals, they were not supplied with melodies equal in sub­limity and favor until the appearance of the Meio­deyert&aaWbuch, by J. and H. Pratorius, Sehneider­mann, and Decker (Hamburg, 1604). The three‑

hundredth anniversary of his death was celebrated throughout northwestern Germany Oct. 26, 1908. VICTOR SCHULTZE.

Brsuoassrar: NiooWs works were edited by Dedeken. 6 vole., Hamburg. 1811‑17. Lives have been written by

V. Schultze, Mengerinabsusen. 1908; L.' Gwrtae, Belle.

1859: R. Rocholl, Berlin, 1860: and a.Eckart, Qlaok‑

stadt. 1909. Consult further: H. H. Wendt. Vorkawpen

labor Phaipp Nicdai, Hambur& 1859; 8. W. Duffield, NeoUA avnp., pp. 228‑227, New York, 1886; V. Schultze,

Watdeckisdw Reformatioaapewhichte. Leipsio, 1903;Julian.

HymwolooU, pp. .

11ICOLAITAIIS: A sect mentioned in the Apoc­alypse of John which had adherents in some of the churches of Asia Minor. The community of Ephe‑

sus is praised on account of its oppo­Censured by sition to them (ii 6), while the

St. John. community of Pergamos is blamed

(ii. 14‑15) because it suffered such people in its midst. The latter community is re­proached with the sin into which the Israelites were once led by Balsam, namely, that of unehastity and of the partaking of meat offered to idols, and also with adopting such teachings (ii. 15, 24). The same sect is certainly alluded to in the address to the " Angel " of the community of Thyatira: " I have a few things against thee, because thou suffer­eat that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols " (ii. 20). Since according to the better reading the teat does not give " the wife " but " thy wife " (of. Zahn), the reference is not to the wife of any one of the community (Holtzmann, Weiz­sacker, Bousset, etc.), and still less to the priestess of the Chaldean sibyl Tambethe, in Thyatira (Scharer and Vblter). It would seem more plausi­ble to understand by " angel," the bishop, and to suppose that his wife was accused (Zahn and others); but that she should be leading such an immoral life in Thyatim without restraint is incredible in view of the praise awarded to the angel of the community. It is much more probable that in these words the weakness of King Ahaz toward his idolatrous wife Jezebel is compared with the weakness of the gov­ernment of the community toward the Nicolaitans, and that Jezebel is only regarded as‑a type of the sect. While the Nicolaitans encountered energetic resistance in Ephesus and gained few adherents in Pergamos, in Thyatira they exercised a wide‑spread influence. It is probable that their leaders laid claim there to the possession of prophetic inspiration (ii. 20) and to a knowledge of " the depths of Satan " (ii. 24). This probably signifies a dualistic con­ception, by which evil is referred to the powers of the under‑world, thus doing away with human guilt. It is these leaders of the sect, not Jewish teachers (Zahn), disciples of John (Eichhora), or Judaizers (Ewald, Gebhardt), who are the false apostles mentioned in the address to the church at Ephesus (ii. 2).

The picture thus derived of the Nicolaitans strongly resembles that of the antinomian libertin­ism in Corinth, as shown in the epistles to the Corin­thians. It may be inferred therefore that the former also had its origin in the Gentile Christianity of Paul. However, what was merely a tendency in



Corinth, became here a sect led by agitators. In Corinth also the evil custom prevailed of eating meat sacrificed to idols (I Cor. viii.) and unchastity

(I Cor. v. 1 sqq.), in connection with Relation the claim of possessing superior knowl­to Paul. edge (I Cor. iv. 6 sqq., v. 2, viii. 1, xv. 12 sqq.). But in Ephesus, from the simple extenuation of these sins by an appeal to Paul's doctrine of freedom in Christ, there arose a teaching combined with dualistic speculations. Thereupon the spiritual pride of the libertines in­creased to such an extent that their leaders claimed prophetic gifts (ii. 20) and apostolic rank (ii. 2). Nevertheless, the view is unfounded that the Apoc­alypse of John combats in these passages the apostle Paul and his helpers (Baur, Schwegler, Holtzmann, Hilgenfeld, etc.); for Paul was no longer living, while all the statements in question refer to a con­temporary condition, and the helpers of Paul laid no claim to apostolic rank. Besides this, these very airs are just as sternly condemned by Paul as they are in the Apocalypse; for example, unchastity (I Cor. v. 1 sqq., vi. 12 sqq.), as well as the eating of meat sacrificed to idols (x. 18 sqq.). Paul also refers here to the warning example of Israel's cor­ruption by Balsam (I Cor. x. 8), and in general he peremptorily disposed of the libertinistic tendency (II Cor. vi. 14 sqq., xii. 20, xiii. 10). Another un­tenable view is that which finds the Montanists in the false apostles, the Balaamites, and the prophet­ess Jezebel (Rev. ii. 2‑14), while the Nicolaitans who differ from these signify Gnostics like the Ophites (Vtilter). The reproach of unchastity and of eating meat sacrificed to idols is in too great discord with the ascetic morality of the Montanists; and nothing indicates Gnostics of the second century. Equally groundless is the conjecture that the pas­sages mentioning the Nicolaitans were a later interpolation (V61ter).

What the Church Fathers have to say about the Nicolaitans rather opposes the contention that they

first originated in the second century, Patristic or indeed that, apart from the Nicolai­Data. tans of the Apocalypse, there was any

sect of that name in the second century (Neander and others). That the Nicolaitans are not mentioned until the time of Irenaeus does not signify that they originated or reappeared during the interval. It is true that in every list of heretics the Nicolaitans are named after Basilides and Sa­tornilus; but the order in the lists of heretics is in no wise chronological (cf. Lipsius, Quellen der dlteren Kdzergeachichte, pp. 28, 35, 47), and the comparative agreement of these lists is explained by their com­mon dependence upon Irenmus. The latter, how­ever, expressly says (Hter., III., xi. 1) that the Nicolaitans, " long before " Cerinthus, held a simi­lar doctrine and that John wrote his Gospel against both. This shows that he placed the Nicolaitans in apostolic times, and his ranking them after Basilides and Cerinthus is only because of the similarity of their doctrines to those of these heretics. What he relates of the Nicolaitans, however, is almost ex­clusively derived from the Apocalypse. It is still clearer that everything Tertullian says of them comes from the Apocalypse. His remark (Her.,

xxxiii.) that in his time there were also Nicolaitans, only of another kind, called the heresy of Gaius, ex­pressly excludes the idea that there was any con­temporary sect of this name. The statements of Hippolytus are founded on those of Irenams. In all the patristic data concerning the Nicolaitans the only statements to be regarded as based on histori­cal tradition independent of the Apocalypse are the assertion of Irenaeus that their teacher was Nicolaos, one of the seven deacons of the primitive commun­ity (Hter., I,, xxvi. 3), and the statement, probably earlier than Hippolytus, that this Nicolaos had been led into grievous errors through jealousy of his wife. It is possible that this last statement may be mythical, and that even the first is only based on conjecture; since, however, it is assumed in the Apocalypse that the name Nicolaitan was known to its readers, it is at least probable that this name is not derived as a symbolical designation from that of Balsam (" lord " or " conqueror of the people "; Vitringa and Hengstenberg), but from the name of the leader of the sect.

In the Middle Ages violations of the rule of cel­ibacy were often designated by the name of the

Nicolaitan sect, borrowed from the

The Apocalypse, but there is absolutely no

Bohemian connection between the Nicolaitans of

Sect. the Apocalypse and a sect of the same

name which arose in Bohemia in the

fourteenth century and maintained itself there as

well as in Moravia until the seventeenth century.

This sect derived its name from the Bohemian peas­

ant Nicklas of Wlasenic (d. 1455), who was imitated

by his followers in his rejection of ecclesiastical

authority and his claim to an immediate and new

revelation. F. SIEFFERT.

BIBLIOGEAPHY: The reader should consult the commen­taries on the Apocalypse (see under JOHN Tea Arosmra); and the works on the history of the Apostolic Age, e.g., those by C. von WeissAcker, 2 vols., London, 189495, and A. C. McGiffert, pp. 625‑626, New York, 1897. Con­sult further: C. W. F. Walch, Historae der %dzereien, i. 167 sqq., Leipsic 1762 E. Burton, Heresies of the Apos­tolic Ape, Oxford, 1829; J. H. Blunt, Dictionary of Sects and Heresies, pp. 371‑373, Philadelphia, 1874; D. V61­ter, Bnt&ehunp des Apokalypse, pp. 10 sqq., Freiburg, 1882; E. Sch0rer, in Theolopiache Abhandlunp C. Von Weizaklcer zu 70. Geburtgtag peuriidnd, pp. 38 sqq., ib. 1892; Seesemann, in TS%, Levi (1893), 47 aqq.; F. Vigouroux, Dictsonnaare de la Bible, fasc. xxviii., cola. 1616‑18, Paris, 1906; DB, iii. 547‑548; BB, iii. 3410­3412.


NICOLAS, MICHEL: French Protestant; b. at Nimes May 22, 1810; d. at Montauban July 28, 1886. After studying theology at Geneva (1827‑32) and in Germany (1832‑34), he was assistant pastor for a short time in Bordeaux. He was then pastor in Metz from 1835 to 1838, and in 1839 was appointed professor of philosophy at Montauban, a position which he retained until his death. After 1860 he turned from philosophy to theology, especially to introduction and church history. Together with Reuss, Colani, and A. R6ville, Nicolas sought to revise the bases of Christian belief with the assist­ance of historical criticism, and to consider Chris­tianity as a historical magnitude from the standpoint of evolution. In 1861 he published, in the first

Nioolaus Cabasilas


volume of his Etudes critiques sur la Bible, four essays on the Old Testament in the Graf‑Wellhausen spirit, following this in 1863 with a similar series of studies on the New Testament. He had already published a number of translations and independent works on philosophy, and a literary history of his native city and its vicinity, as well as his Histoire des doctrines religieuses des Juifs pendant Us deux sibclea antt;rieures a l'bre chrttienne (1860); and in his Les Evangiles apocryphes (1865) and Le Symbols des ap6tres (1867) his historical and critical studies found their culmination. His last book was his Histoire de l'ancienne acad6mie de Montauban (1598­1669) et du Puylaurens (16611‑1686) (1885). He was likewise a close student of Huguenot history, his manuscript collections on this theme filling ten stout volumes; but he is chiefly noteworthy as one of the pioneers in introducing German methods and results to French Protestantism.


BIBLIOGRAPHY: A life was written by E. Rabaud, Paris, 1888; and a sketch by E. Stapler is in the Ptvdaa de th6­olopie et d'histoire published by the Protestant faculty of

theology at Paris at the tercentenary of the institution, Paris, 1901.



NICOLE, PIERRE: Port Royalist; b. at Char­tres Oct. 13, 1625; d. at Port Royal Nov. 16, 1695. After receiving from his father a thorough prelimi­nary education, he studied philosophy at the College d'Harcourt and then devoted himself to theology. His intention of continuing his studies at the Sor­bonne was frustrated by his connections with Port Royal, where he soon became one of the most im­portant teachers. Here he collaborated on the productions of that school, frequently gathered ma­terial for other books (as for the " Provincial Let­ters " of Pascal), and became intimately associated with Antoine Arnaud and especially with Pascal (q.v.). He accompanied Arnaud in all his wander­ings until at last, weary of his unsettled life, he be­sought the archbishop of Paris for permission to return. He thus brought upon himself the bitter reproaches of the Port Royalists, against whom he sought to defend himself in letters and in an " Apol­ogy." In 1676 he endeavored to secure priest's orders, but the bishop of Chartres refused to admit him.

Nicole was a prolific writer. With Arnaud he prepared the famous LWiqw de Port‑Royal (Paris, 1659), and also, under the pseudonym of Wendrock, made a Latin translation of Pascal's Provincialm (Cologne, 1658). In La Perptstu4k de la foi de l't!glise catholique touehant l'eucharistie, or La Petite Perpduiitk (1664), he endeavored to clear Port Royal of the charge of Calvinism, and this work wag followed by Perp6tuit de la foi de b'gglise catholique sur l'eucharistie, or Grande Perp6tuit (3 vols., 1669‑76). Apparently in imitation of the " Provincial Letters," he wrote ten Lettres sur l'hsrtssee imaginaire, or Les Imaginaires (1664), and eight letters entitled Les Yisionaires (1665‑66)‑both published with his Trait de la foi humaine (Cologne, 1704). His Essais de morale (14 vola., 1671 sqq.) enjoyed among some



of his contemporaries, such as Madame de S6vign6, an admiration which they no longer elicit. In his polemics against Calvinism Nicole exceeded all other Jansenists in bitterness, as is evinced by his Prt!­juges Ugitimes contre le calvinisme (1671), Prt!tenddus reform& convaincus de schisms (1684), and Unit de l'6glise (1687). He likewise prepared a series of edifying and instructive works, among which may be mentioned: Trait sur l'oraison, or Trait de la prikre (1679); Instructions thdologiques sur les socre­ments (1700); Instructions thdologiques et morales sur Is symbols (1706); Instructions thhologiques et morales sur l'araison dominieale, la‑ salutation angt;­lique, la saints messe et les autres pribres de l'eglise (1706), and Instructions thEologiques et morales sur la decalogue (1709). Nicole was neither a deep thinker nor a great character. He was rather a man of vast learning and humanistic spirit, diffident and very averse to controversy. (C. PFENDER.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: His life, by Gouiet, is in the last volume of the Eamis de morale, ut sup. Consult further: J. Be­agigne, Hiet. de l'abbaye de Port‑Royal, vol. v., Cologne, 1752; C. Clgmencet, Hist. pfirale de Port‑Royal, Amster­dam, 1765‑67; C. A. Saints‑Beuve, Port‑Royal, vols. iii.­iv., Paris, 1840‑59; Lichtenberger, ESN, ix. 634‑637.

NICOLL, SIR WILLIAM ROBERTSON: Free Church of Scotland; b. at Lumsden (30 m. n.w. of Aberdeen), Aberdeenshire, Oct. 10, 1851. He was educated at the University of Aberdeen (M.A.,1870) and the Free Church College, Aberdeen, after which he was minister at Dufftown, Banffshire (1874‑77), and Kelso, Roxburghshire (1877‑85). In 1880 he became the editor of The Household Library of Expo­sition, and in 1885 of The Expositor, while since 1886 he has edited The Foreign Biblical Library, The The­ological Educator, The Expositor's Bible, The Exposi­tor's Greek Testament, The British Weekly, The Bookman, Woman at Home, The British Monthly, and other publications and series. In 1909 he was made a knight. Among his numerous publications special mention may be made of his Calls to Christ (Lon­don, 1877); Songs of Rest (2 series, Edinburgh and London, 1879‑85); The Incarnate Saviour (Edin­burgh, 1881); The Lamb of God (1883); Key of the Grave (London, 1893); Ten‑Minute Sermons (1894); Literary Anecdotes of the Nineteenth Century (in col­laboration with T. J. Wise; 2 vols., 1895‑96); The Return to the Cross (1897); The Church's One Foun­dation: Christ and Recent Criticism (1901); Garden of Nuts: Mystical Expositions with an Essay on Christian Mysticism (1905); Lamp of Sacrifice (1906, sermons); Ian Maclaren: Life of the Rev. John Watson (1908); and My Father: an Aberdeenshire Minister, 181,2‑91 (1908).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. F. Stoddart, W. Robertson NicoU, Editor and Preacher, London, 1903.

NIEBERGALL, ni"ber‑gdl, FRIEDRICH KARL: German Protestant; b. at Kirn (40 m. s.w. of Wies­baden) Mar. 20, 1866. He was educated at the universities of Tiibingen, Berlin, and Bonn from 1884 to 1887 (Th. Lie., Giessen, 1902), and after being a pastor in his native city became, in 1903, privat‑docent for practical theology, religious psy­chology, and ethnology at the University of Heidel­berg; and in 1908 extraordinary professor of prac­tical theology at Heidelberg. His works include:

171 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Nioolans oabasilas


Die Gott in Christus (Tiibingen, 1899); Absolutheit

des Christentums (1900); Ein Pfad zur Geurissheit

(1900); Wie predigen wir den modernen Menschen?

(2 parts, 1902‑06); Die pauliniwhe Erlasungslehre

in Konfrmandenunterricht (1903); Die Kasualrede

(Gdttingen, 1905); Hilligenlei and moderne Theologie

(Tiibingen, 1906); Welches ist die beste Religiont

(1906); Praktische Auslegung des Evangeliums

Markus (1907); Was ist uns heute die Bibel (1907);

Mut and Trost furs geistliche Amt (1907); Prak­

tische Auslegung des Neuen Testaments (2 vols.,

1907‑09); Die Bedeutung der Religionspsychologie

fur die Praxis in Kirche and Schule (1909); and

Jesus in Unterricht (1910). He is editor of Prak­

tisch‑theologische Harutbabliothek, to which he also



German church historian; b. at Oberwinkel, near

Waldenburg (12 m. n.w. of Chemnitz), Saxony, Aug.

9, 1797; d. at Berlin Aug. 13, 1865. He studied

theology at Leipsic, where he became successively

privat‑docent (1826), extraordinary professor (1829),

and ordinary professor (1838). His Philoaophice

Hermesii Bonnensis novarum rerun in theologies

exordii explicatio et existimatio (Leipsic, 1838‑39), on

account of its thoroughness took front rank among

the wealth of literature on George Hermes (q.v.).

He was interested, not only in church history, but

also in the history of philosophy, and his lectures

on church history were pervaded by his philosophi­

cal spirit. After the death of Professor Illgen (1844)

Niedner became president of the historical‑theologi­

cal society founded by the former, and took over also

the editorship of the Zeitschrft fur die historische

Theologie. In 1846 he published his chief work,

the text‑book Geschwhte der christlwhen Kirche

(Leipsic, 1846, 2d ed., Berlin, 1866), a work wide in

scope, and embodying the results of a most thorough­

going investigation into the stupendous amount of

material, but written in a scholastic and ponder­

ous style (cf. Baur, Die EPochen der kircNichen

Geschichtsschreibung, pp. 244 sqq.). His speech

at the festival held on the three‑hundredth anni­

versary of the death of Luther gave expression to

his free position towards the Reformation. It

was published under the title Vorlesung zur akade­

mischen Geddchtnisfeier (Leipsie, 1846). The last

work published during his Leipsic career was his

De subststentia rye defcp A6yp spud Philonem tributes

(1848‑49). In 1850 he resigned his professorship,

and settled in Wittenberg; and in 1859 he was

called to the chair of theology at the University of

Berlin, where he remained until his death. While

in Wittenberg he published in the Zeitachrift fur

historische Theologie two valuable treatises, en­

titled respectively Das Recht der Dogmen in Chris­

tentum in geschichtlicher Be!rachtung (1851, part iv.),

and Richtungen and Aufgaben der Dogmatik in geg­

w4rtiger Zeit (1852, part iv.), the latter being a criti­

cal review of the dogmatic writings by J. P. Lange

and Martensen. (P. M. TzsCHIRNEat.)


nish church historian; b. at Aalborg, Denmark,

Oct. 30, 1846; d. at Aarhus Mar. 24, 1907. He

received his education at the University of Copen­hagen (B.A., 1863; candidate in theology, 1870); taught privately till 1873; was in that year made catechist at Our Savior's Church, Copenhagen; and became professor of church history in the University of Copenhagen, 1877, where he taught till 1900, when he resigned to become bishop of Aarhus. He was prolific in the field of church history, and may be regarded as the greatest in that field produced by Scandinavian countries. His leading works are: Romerkirken i det 19. Hundredaar, part i., Pave­d6mmet (1876, 2d ed., 1895‑98; Germ. tranal., 2d ed., Goths, 1880; Eng. transl., History of the Papacy in the XIX. Century, 2 vols., London, 1906); part ii., Det indre Liv (1881; Germ. transl., Carlsruhe, 1882); Statskirke og Frikirke (1883), treating con­ditions in Scotland and Switzerland; Haandbog i Kirkens Historie (2 vols., 1885‑92); Ledetraad i Kir­kena Historie (2 vols., 1887); Kirkehistorie (2 vols., 1900‑08). In 1896 he began to issue and edit Kir­keleksikon for Norden; and was one of the editors of Dansk Kirketidende 1873,82. He stood high in the councils of his church, where his advice was constantly sought, and he was one of the judges at the competitions for professorships in church his­tory at the universities of Lund (1893), Christiania (1897), and Upsala (1898). The language of Niel­sen, always plastic in writing, and convincing in delivery, combined with great stores of learning, made his influence deep‑felt and far‑reaching. His historical methods were genetic and scientific.

JoaN O. 1WaZrt.

NIEMEYER, nf'mai‑er, AUGUST HERMAAN: Professor, chancellor of the university, and director of the Francke institutions in Halle; b. at Halle Sept. 1, 1754; d. there July 7, 1828. He was educated at the Paedagogium of his native city, and after gradu­ation taught at the German and Latin schools on the Francke foundation. In 1777 he began to lec­ture at the university on Homer, the Greek tragedi­ans, and Horace. In 1779 he was appointed professor extraordinary of theology and inspector of the theological seminary, in 1784 ordinary pro­fessor and inspector of the Peedagogium, in 1785 he became assistant director of the Francke insti­tutions and in 1799 a director. In 1792 he was appointed councilor of the consistory and in 1703 prorector of the university. In 1806 Napoleon abolished the University of Halle, and Niemeyer was sent to Paris as hostage. After an exile of six months he was allowed to return, but in the mean time Halle had been separated from Prussia and attached to the kingdom of Westphalia. Ding Jerome restored the university and appointed Nie­meyer its chancellor and perpetual rector (1808). On account of Niemeyer's attachment to the Prus­sian cause the university was again abolished in 1813. On the reorganization of the institution under Prussian government in 1815, Niemeyer laid down his office as rector, but as chancellor retained the superintendence of the external administration. It is owing to his talents and ability that the insti­tutions founded by Franeke continued to prosper. In pedagogics he stood forth for the principle of humanity, and his theological standpoint was that



of an honest rationalism of the earlier type. The

chief stress of his activity lay in practical theology.

Of his works may be mentioned Charakteristik der

Bibel (5 vols., Halle, 1775‑82), an attempt to de­

pict more distinctly the traits of Biblical charac­

ters. The first volume contained the characters of

the New Testament, the others those of the Old

Testament. The Bible served him mainly as mater­

ial for the knowledge of humanity, and he applied

to its characters purely scientific tests. Other theo­

logical works are Homiletik, Pastoralanweisung and

Liturgie (1790); Popultire and praktische Theologie,

oder Materialien des chrisdichen Volksunterrichts

(1792); Briefe an christliche Religionalehrer (2 parts,

1796‑99); Lehrbuch fur die oberen Religionsklassen

in Gelehrtenschulen (1801, 15th ed., 1827). His

Gesangbueh far hdhere Schulen and Erziehungsan­

stdten (1785) contains many of his own songs. Of

a devotional character is his Beschdfftigungen der

Andacht and des Nachdenkens fur Jiinglinge (1787).

But of the greatest importance and of permanent

scientific value is his Grundsdtw der Erziehung and

des Unterrichts (2 vols., 1799, 8th ed., 1827), the

first systematic representation of pedagogics on

German soil, (EDGAR HENNEC1iE.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Jacobs and J. G. Gruber, A. H. Nie­meyer, Zur Brinneruny, Halle, 1831; W. Schrader, Ge­sehichte der Priedriche‑Univeraitata zu Hake, 2 vols., ib. 1894; W. Fries, Die Prankeachen Stiftungen in Arem zweiten Tahrhundert, ib. 1898; F. Bosse, Der Garnison­prediger and Schuldirektor P. A. Junker . . . in semen Beziehungen zu . . . A. H. Nieriieyer, Brunswick, 1901.

NIEMEYER, HERMANN AGATHOR : Son and successor of the preceding; b. at Halle Jan. 5, 1802; d. there Dec. 6, 1851. He studied theology at Halle and GSttingen; in 1826 he became professor of the­ology in Jena, in 1829 at Halle, where he was called as director of the Francke institutions. He shared his father's theological opinions and, like him, was more eminent as a pedagogue than as a theologian. His principal work is Colledio confessionum in wxleaiis refmmatis publicatarum (Leipsie, 1840).


BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. Fries, Die Prankeschen Stiftungen in

Arem zweiten Jahrhundert, pp. 130 sqq., Halls, 1898;

A. Sehdrmaon, Zur Geschichte der Buchhandlung des

Waisenhauses, pp. 223 sqq., 247 sqq., ib. 1898; ADB,

mil. 682‑87.

NIETZSCHE, FRIEDRICH WILHELM: Ger­man philosopher; b. at RBcken (18 m. s.w. of Leip­sic) Oct. 15, 1844; d. in Weimar (53 m. s.w. of Leipsic) Aug. 25, 1900. His preparatory educa­tion was received at Pforta, and his advanced at the universities of Bonn and Leipsic; he evinced an early maturity, and before passing his examina­tions he was appointed extraordinary professor of classical philology at Basel on recommendation of Friedrich Wilhelm Ritschl, becoming ordinary pro­fessor in 1870, and resigning in 1879. He had, meanwhile, in 1876, been attacked by a disease which affected eye and brain, and obtained leave of absence. In search of health he lived for a num­ber of years in various places‑in Venice, in Swit­zerland, Turin, Genoa, and Nizza, going to a sani­tarium in Jena, and finally (1888) being pronounced hopelessly insane, remaining thereafter in the care of his devoted sister at Weimar. He was a pro‑



lific writer, and his works are exerting an influence on modern thinking in religion and philosophy which seems rather out of proportion to their real and permanent value. The nature of his illness, as well as the fact that he was broken in health at a compasatively early age, prevented his philosophy taking the systematic form which a longer and sounder condition of health would doubtless have brought about. Nietzsche was a protestant against the established order of things, no less against the faith and morals of Christianity than against the idea of the supremacy of the State. His philosophy is that of an individualist, anarchist, and anti­democrat. His doctrine of the " superman " in. volved the. right of the highly endowed to with­draw all rights from the mass in order that, even by treading upon the ordinary populace, he might develop his own personality and put into execu­tion the " will to power." The aphoristic brilliance, vigor, and uncompromising thoroughness with which he pushed his logic to its utmost conclusions have compelled a larger notice of his work than under ordinary circumstances would be conceded to a thinker of his school. It brought him into re­volt from his teachers and those whom he once acknowledged as his masters‑‑such as Strauss, Schopenhauer, and Wagner.

His principal writings axe: Die Geburt der Trage­die Gus dem Geiste der Musik (Leipsie, 1872); Unr witgemUae Betrachtungen (4 parts, 1873x76) ; Menschliches, Allzumensehliches. Ein Buch fur freie Geister (3 parts, Chemnitz, 1878‑80); Morgent rothe. Gedanken caber moralische Vorurteile (1881); Die fr6hliche Wiasenschaft (1882); Also aprach Zarathustra (4 parts, Chemnitz and Leipsic, 1883­1891); Jenseits von Gut and Bdse. Vorapiel zu einer Philosophic der Zukueft (Leipsie, 1886); Zur Ge­nealogie der Moral (1887); Der Pall Wagner (1888); Gbtwndammerung, oder Wie man mit derv Hammer philosaphiert (1889). An edition of his Werke is in two parts (8 vols., Leipsic, 1895; 7 vols., 1901‑04), which contains important works and fragments not published separately; and there are three vols. of j his Briefe (Berlin and Leipsic, 1900‑05). An Eng. tranal. of his Works has been appearing, to be com­plete in 11 vols. (London and New York, 1896­1909). Besides this edition, a number of his works have been translated separately, some of them a number of times: The Case against Wagner (Lon­don, 1899); Thus Spake Zarathustra: a Book for all or none (London and New York, 1901, and often); Dawn of Day (1903); Beyond Good and Evil. Pre­lude to a Philosophy of the Future (1907); Human, all too Human: Book for Pree Spirits (Chicago, 1908, London, 1909); The Birth of Tragedy or Hellenism and Pessimism (1909); The Will to Power: an attempted Transvaluation of all Valves (2 vols., London, 1909) ; Thoughts out of Season (1909).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The authoritative biography is by his sis‑

ter, Elisabeth Furster‑Nietssche, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1895­

1904. Consult further: Grace N. Dolson, Philosophy of

Friedrich Nietzsche, New York, 1901; T. Common, Nietz‑

sche as Critic, Philosopher, Pod and Prophet: Choice Se­

lections from his Works, London, 1901, New York, 1908;

H. L. Meneken, Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche, Bos­

ton, 1908; idem, The Gist of Nidsaehe, ib. 1910; C. A.



Bernoulli. Franc Oserbwk and Frsedrich Nietzsche. Mine Freundechaft. Jena. 1908; J. M. Kennedy, The Quintes­sence of Nietzsche, London, 1909; M. A. MOgge, Fried­rich NidsxAe: his Life and Work, London and New York, 1909; A. R. Omge, Nietzsche in Ouffins and Aphorism New York. 1910.


NIGHTINGALE, FLORENCE: Philanthropist and pioneer in the care of the wounded on the field of battle; b. at Florence, Italy, May 15, 1820; d. at London Aug. 13, 1910. She was the daugh­ter of William Edward Nightingale of. Embley Park, Hampshire, England, and in early youth she mani­fested a love of nature and a tendency to the care of the suffering. During her first season in tows, after her presentation, she employed her time in visiting hospitals and like institutions for the purpose of learning the methods used, and neat made a .tour on the continent to examine conditions there. She took a course of training at the Dea­coness Institution at Kaiserswerth, and then at Paris studied the nursing system of the sisters of St. Vincent de Paul. At home she reorganized the Governesses' Sanatorium in Harley Street, Lon­don. In 1854 England received reports of the ter­rible conditions in the Crimea, where the hospital service was comparatively worthless. Miss Night­ingale both volunteered and was invited to proceed thither, and started with a staff of nurses on Oct. 24, reaching Scutari Nov. 4, just after the battle of Balaclava. There her enlightened and self‑sacri­ficing labors, in which she spared herself not at all, had the result of reducing the death‑rate from forty to two per cent. Although she was herself attacked by fever, she remained at her post, returning only when the British forces evacuated Turkey. She modestly avoided the national reception which was prepared in her honor and returned quietly to her home, but with health greatly affected by her experiences and labors. In recognition of her serv­ices £50,000 was raised by popular subscription, and with this she founded the Nightingale home for the training of nurses at St. Thomas's and King's College Hospitals. She continued to do work in the direction of reform of sanitary conditions in the army, anticipating in many respects the most recent prescriptions in respect to asepsis and anti­sepsis, especially emphasising the duty d cleanli­ness. She was continually consulted on matters germane to the health of patients in hospitals and of inmates of institutions of various sorts, and led also in movements to improve the con­dition of the poor by better sanitation in their homes.

Besides papers read before societies on the sub­jects in which she was interested' she published Notes on Matters A$ediny the Health, Effictoney, and Hospital Administration of the British Army (London, 1858); Notes on Hospitata (1859); Notes on Nursing: what it is, and what it is not (1860, latest ed., 1909; a book the effects of which can not be estimated); Notm on Nursing for the Labour­ing Classes (1881); Observations on the Sanitary State of the Army in India (18&3); Hots People may line and not die in India (1864); Introdudory Notes on Lying‑in Institutions (1871); Life or Death

in India (1874); and Health Teaching in Towns and visages (1894).

BiDwoaaAm7: Sarah A. Tooley, Life of Florence Nightin­gale, 5th ad., London, 1908; C. Shrimpton, La Guerre de Variant. L'Armmtess anplaiw d Hiss Niphdinpale, Paris, 1884; Mme. Marie Monod, Les Hdrolnes de 7a eha»th . . . Miss Florence Nightingale, ib. 1873; E. F. Pollard, Flor­ence Nightingale, London, 1891; W. J. Wintle and F. Witte, Florence Niphtinpate and.F. E. WiUard, ib. 1908; M. A. Nutting and L. L. Dock, A Hid. of Nursing, chaps. iii.‑vi.. New York, 1907; Mrs. L. E. H. Richards, Fier. save Niphtiapale, the Anpd of the Crimea, ib. 1909.

NIKEL, JOHANNES SIMON: German Roman Catholic; b. at Sohrau (105 m. s.e. of Bredau) Oct. 18, 1883. He was educated at the universities of Breslau (1881‑84) and WVmburg (1884‑58; Th.D., 1888), and was ordained to the priesthood in 1888. After being a curate at Rosenberg and KBnigshatte, Upper Silesia (1886‑90), he was teacher of religion and professor at the gymnasiums in Leobschats, Neisse, and Breslau t1111897, when he was appointed associate professor of Old‑Testament exegesis at the University of Bredau, and full professor there in 1900. Besides briefer papers and his contributions to the Vienna Monumenta Judo", he has written: Die Lehre des Allen Teaamentea fiber die Cherubim and Seraphim (Breslau, 1890); Die &eidniechen Kuuurv6lker dea Altertuma and ihre Stellung zu fremden Religionen (Leobschfits, 1891); Die soziale GesetWebung des deutachen ReiAea im verfhnenen Jahrzeknt (MUnster, 1892); 8ozialpolitik and aoaiade Bewegungen in Aitertum (Paderborn,1892); Der Mo­notheimnua larads in der roorexiliachen Zait (Neisse, 1893); Altgemeine Kulturgexhidte (Paderborn, 1895); Herodot and die KeilacW(forachung (1896); Die Wiederheratellung des jadiachen Gemeintveaena each dam babyloniwAen Exil (Freiburg, 1900); Die Reichageaetze fiber die Kranken‑, Unfall‑ and Inva­lidenversicherung (1901); Genesis and XeacJr(ft­forwAung (1903); Zur veratandigung fiber " Bibd and Babel " (Breslau, 1903); and Daa Alts Testament and die nerglekhende Rdfgionacoiaacnsdtaft (Vienna, 1906). He is the editor of Altiedamentliche Ab­handlungen (Minster, 1908 sqq.), and associate editor of Biblische Zeifragen (1908 eqq.), to the latter contributing: Alto and neuo Angrife auf daa Alts Testament (1908); Der. Uraprung dw altieata­mentliehen Gottealaubens (1908); Die Glaubend­wfirdigkeit do Allen Tedamenta im Lkhte tier In­apirationalahre (1908); Do# Alto Testament im Lichte dea allwia"iwAe Porachungen, I. Die bibliacho UMewUchte; II. Mows and aein Work (1909). NIKOLAUs VON (DEN) FLUE. See non. NIKON, nt'ken: Russian patriarch; b. in a vil­lage of the present government o' Nijni‑Novgorod, 1605; d. Aug. 17, 1681. The Russian church had rendered powerful assistance to the rise of the grand duke of Moscow, and the metropolitan of Moscow was no less prepared to offer spiritual support; but conditions changed when the father of the youthful Czar Michael Romanov, after his deliverance froth Polish captivity in 1619, was chosen patriarch. Nikon, the third of his successors, obtained for the leader of the Russian church a substantial inde­pendence. His patriarchate marks the only epoch in the history of the Russian church in which a rivalry between the spiritual and secular power



existed. In the Jeltovodsky monastery, to which he had fled from a malevolent stepmother, he became familiar with the service of the church. From his twentieth year he had been married and had served as priest, first in a village, then in Moscow. After ten years of matrimony, when death had deprived him of his children, he induced his wife to enter a convent while he himself became monk on an island of the White Sea. Owing to disagreements with his abbot he soon removed to another monas­tery of which he became abbot in 1643. During a visit to Moscow he made such a deep impression upon the young Czar Alexis, that in 1646 he was appointed archimandrite of the monastery of Nowosspassky in Moscow. In 1649, through the favor of the czar, he was advanced to the position of metropolitan of Novgorod, a position second only to that of the patriarch. In 1652 he became patriarch. He re­tained his office only six years actually (nominally fourteen years), during which he exercised a deep influence upon the history of the Russian church: namely, by effecting the union of the Minor Rus­sian, the White Russian, and the Greater Russian Churches; by improving the liturgical books and the order of worship; and by promoting the Union of Brest, 1596, between the West Russian domain and Poland. Nikon convened numerous synods to con­sider formal ritual and practise. In view of the value of forma of worship as mediators of divine life, every change of form in what had been transmitted from the Fathers appeared as a menace to Chris­tianity. Thus there arose the duty of removing every innovation by an energetic reform. In 1654 Nikon called a synod to take notice of numerous innovations and to revise the ritual on the basis of a return to the prescribed forms contained in the old Greek and Slavic books. Pictures painted after the Latin or " Frankish " manner were defaced and broken, so that Nikon was reproached as an icono­clast. He amended the church canon so as to pro­mote his official independence and induced the czar to relinquish the right to appoint abbots and bishops and the privilege of appeal. He established and owned three great and rich monasteries. His influ­ence with the czar was so great that he was called to be his official representative in the absence of that ruler. In fact, he was feared more than the czar himself, but by his severity and arrogance he made many opponents. Nobody, however, dared to attack him openly. It was Nikon himself who brought about his overthrow. He ignored the fact that he owed his power after all to the czar only and to his favor. The martial success of the czar had in the course of time increased his conscious­ness of power, and the effort to counteract the in­fluence of the patriarch was made by others about the throne. Because of an apparent insult of the czar Nikon resigned his office in 1658 and retired to the monastery of the Resurrection, but the czar did not call him back as he had expected. All his efforts to secure a personal interview were in vain. After the synod of 1660 the question of the election of a new patriarch was discussed. In spite of the most violent opposition of Nikon and his appeal to the pope he was deprived of his office and exiled to the monastery of Therapontius by the White Sea.



In 1675 he was removed to the monastery of

Cyrillus. Under Czar Theodore he was allowed to

return to his own monastery, but on the way thither

he died. (N. BONWET$CII.)

Bisraoaasrar: J. V. Bacmeister. BeytrBge zur Lebenage­

achichte lea Patriarchen Nikon, Riga, 1788; W. Palmer,

The Patriarch and the Tear, vole. i.‑iii., 8 vole., London,

1871‑78; Philaret, GeachichEe der Kirche Ruealanda, ii. 22

eqq., 119 eqq., Frankfort, 1872; Makarij, Geachichle der'

ruaaiechen Kirche, xi. 182 eqq., and vol. ail., 8t. Peters­

burg; 18823; A. H. Hors, Eighteen Centuries of the

Orthodox Greek Church, pp. 563 eqq., New York, 1899; R.

$eeberg, Aue Religion and GeachichEe. P. 332. Leipeic,1908.

MILES, WILLIAM WOODRUFF: Protestant Episcopalian bishop of New Hampshire; b. at Hatley, P. (a., May 24, 1832. He was educated at Trinity College, Hartford, Conn. (A.B., 1857; tutor 1857‑58) and at the Berkeley Divinity School, Mid­dletown, Conn., from which he was graduated in 1861. He was ordered deacon in 1861 and advanced to the priesthood in 1862. He was rector of St. Philip's, Wiscasaet, Me. (1861‑64), professor of Latin in Trinity College (1864‑70), and rector of St. John's, Warehouse Point, Conn. (1868‑70). In 1870 he was consecrated bishop of New Hampshire. He is a member of the board of managers of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church. He was likewise a member of the committee for revising the Prayer Book and marginal readings in the Bible, and in 18667 was editor of The Churchman.

BIHLIOaRAPHY: W. 6. Perry, The Episcopate in America,

p. 205, New York, 1895.

1QILUS: The name borne by a number of East­ern monks and ecclesiastics.

1. ftilus of Sinai: A pupil and friend of Chrysos­tom, d. about 430. The Greek menologittm asserts that he came of a noble family, reached high civil offices, even that of exarch, and made a brilliant

I marriage, but gave up all his advantages to lead the life of an anchorite on Mount Sinai with his son Theodulus, while his wife and another child entered an Egyptian convent. He was a prolific author. His extant works (MPG, Lyxix. 81‑1280) include numerous letters and shorter compositions, and twelve or fourteen longer treatises deeding either with the Christian life in general or with special ascetic relations and duties. To the former class belong the Peristerid ad Agathium, a treatise on the pursuit of virtue and the avoidance of vice, and the Tractatus de orations, the most important of this group; the Tractatus de octo spiritibus rnalitice, probably a free adaptation of the similar work of Evagriua Ponticua; Tractatus ad Ettlogium de Wits qua oPPosita aunt virtutibus, probably spurious; De octo aritiosis cogi­tationibua, regarded as a compilation by a later imitator of Nilus; Capita xxuii de diversia malignia cogitationibus; and a homily on Luke xxi. 36. The works pertaining to the monastic life are seven narratives of the killing of some monks of Sinai by the barbarians and the carrying off of his son; a eulogy of the Nitrian hermit Albianus; a eulogy of the ascetic life as the only true continuation of prim­itive Christianity; a letter of instruction and warn­ing to Magna, a deaconess of Ancyra; and De monachorutn lorcestartt%a, a comparison of the hermit and the cenobite, to the advantage of the former.


The collection of his letters edited by P. Poussin (Paris, 1657) contains 355, that published by Leo Allatius (Rome, 1668) contains 1,061, including brief notes or scraps, but probably not many of them are authentic in their present form. Two series of short ethical and ascetic sentences (MPG, lxxix. 123942) are also probably not of his immediate composition. The writings of Nilus in general give an edifying picture of the monasticism of his day. But with all his veneration for the monastic life, he recognized its dangers, warning his disciples against pride and idleness and against the injurious conse­quences of exaggerated asceticism. He puts his wisdom very frequently in the form of proverbs whose rhythm and epigrammatic form are reminis­cent of those of the Old Testament. Their content is a remarkable combination of echoes from classical literature and philosophy with Christian ideas and ascetic principles. The latter he does not hesitate to refer directly to the institution of Christ. The Christian " philosopher " must be free from the ties of affection, earthly cares, and the hindrances of the body. The renunciation of worldly goods and sen­sual desires sets the soul free for direct communion with God and mystical incorporation with Christ. The very height of these ideals makes the contrast all the more striking when he descends to actual conditions, admitting in practise the power of na­ture, repelling those who are not called to the ascetic life, rebuking the idle vagabonds who wander from place to place, alleviating extreme rigors by salutary counsels, and calling to his aid the force of habit which will ultimately supply a new nature in the place of the old. The letters, assuming that the greater part of them are genuine, show by the vari­ety of the unknown persons to whom they are ad­dressed (men and women, clergy and laity, abbots and monks) how many links still bound a venerated anchorite to the world he had quitted.

2. Nilus of Rossano: A monk of the tenth century; b. (of Greek parents) at Rossano in Calabria, 910. He is also known as Nilus of Gaeta or of Grottaferrata from his later residences. He is said to have lived under the rule of St. Basil in various monasteries of central and southern Italy‑for a time in that of St. Alexius at Rome and at Monte Cassino, then principally in the hermitage of Valleluce near Gaeta and near Frascati, where he founded and became the first abbot of the monastery of Grottaferrata. He died Dec. 27, 1005, after a long life of strenuous protest against the corruptions of the time. He was much sought for as a spiritual adviser, and enjoyed the reputation of marked sanctity, attested by the gift of miracles and of prophecy. His name is held in special honor by the monks of St. Basil who still inhabit the same spot; the chapel dedicated to him contains frescoes by Domenichino of scenes in his life, and a representation of him in an altar‑piece by Annibale Carracci.

3. Nilus the Archimandrite (surnamed Doxopa­trius): Notary to the patriarch of Constantinople, protoproedrus syncellorum, and nomophylax of the Eastern Empire; lived about the middle of the twelfth century. He spent some time in Sicily during the reign of Roger, at whose request he wrote (e. 1143) his Syntagma de quinque patriarchalibas

thronis (ed. S. le Moyne, in Varies Sacra, vol. i., Ley­den, 1685; also in MPG, cxxxii.), a remarkable historical treatment of the origin and development of the five patriarchates, entirely in the Eastern or anti‑Roman interest.

4. Nilus Damylas: An abbot in Crete at the be­ginning of the fifteenth century and one of the later Byzantine controversialists against Rome. He left a Typike paradosis (not yet published), a rule for a convent of nuns founded by him; and a testament dated 1417 (ed. S. P. Lambros, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 1895, pp. 585 sqq.), which contains an interesting list of Byzantine writings.

Mention may be made of Nilus, archbishop of Rhodes (d. after 1379), a dogmatic and hagiographic author, and of Nilus, patriarch of Constantinople 1379‑87 (cf. Krumbaeher, Geschichte, pp. 109, 174). For Nilus Kabasilas see KABAsmAs, NiLus.

(O. Z6CSLEnt.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: On 1. The results of early editing of the Opera are collected in MPG, vol. lxxix. Consult: Tille­mont, Mkmoirea, xiv. 189‑218; Ceillier, Auteurs sacra, iv. 435, viii. 205‑231; J. Fessler, Institutiones patrologio;, ed. B. Jungmann, ii. 2, pp. 108‑126, Innsbruck, 1892; J. Kunze, Marcus Eremita, pp. 129 sqq., Leipsic, 1895; 0. ZSckler, Bxbliache and kirchenhrostorische Studien, iii. 28‑34, iv. 43‑48, Munich, 1893; Neander, Christian Church, vol. ii. passim.

2. An early Vita is in ASB, Sept., vii. 283‑343, and in

excerpts in MPG, iv. 616‑618. Consult: G. Minasi, San

Nilo di Calabria, Naples, 1892; Krumbacher, Geschichte,

pp. 195, 198; Neander, Christian Church, iii. 420‑424 et


NIMBUS: A symbol used by Christian artists

from the fourth century to distinguish representa­

tions of the persons of the Trinity, Biblical and

saintly personages, and sometimes em­

Origin. perors, kings, and other magnates. It

Early consists of a circular or rectangular

History. illuminated space surrounding the head

of the figure, with sometimes a number

of lighter stripes or rays going out from the head.

This usage has its precedent in several non‑Christian

religions‑Brahmanism, Buddhism, Slavic paganism,

and especially the religions of Greece and Rome.

The choice of the attribute is somewhat surprising in

view of the descriptions of divine and angelic appari­

tions in the Bible and the apocryphal and patristic

literature. God and the angels appear to man there,

it is true, amidst light, but also amidst clouds, fire,

and lightning (Gen. xv. 17; Ex. iii. 2, xiii. 21, xix.

16, 18; Num. ix. 15, xiv. 14, etc.). In the narrative

of the transfiguration of Christ, the radiance of his

countenance and the glory in which Moses and Elijah

appeared are emphasized (Matt. xvn. 1; Mark ix.

2; Luke ix. 28); but neither in the New Testament

nor in extra‑canonical literature is there any indi­

cation of a phenomenon analogous to the nimbus.

In direct reference to passages like those cited above,

primitive Christian and early medieval art depicted

God (or the hand of God) amidst clouds at the sacri­

fice of Isaac and the giving of the law, and in flames

at the burning bush, Christ with an aureole and

later a mandorla, angels amidst clouds, etc. But

at the same time the figures of God and Christ or

their emblems, the angels, etc., appeared with even

greater frequency with the nimbus, entirely without

reference to any scriptural or patristic expressions.



Since pre‑Christian art had been accustomed to

depict not only gods and heroes but emperors and

their families with the nimbus, the question arises

from which usage the Christian artists borrowed their

own. Without entering into a detailed discussion,

it may be observed not only that if the nimbus was

borrowed from the usage in regard to gods, it would

be difficult to explain why it did not become preva­

lent before the fourth century, and also why the

corona of rays, frequently used for Zeus, Serapis,

Dionysius, Apollo, etc., was not adopted. When,

on the other hand, it is known that the nimbus, from

Constantine on, became one of the most usual tokens

of imperial rank (not only for the emperors them­

selves but f.)r the members of their families), both

difficulties are removed by the adoption of the latter

theory. Support is added to this conclusion by the

fact that in the hundreds of sarcophagus‑reliefs origi­

nating in Rome and Italy the nimbus is scarcely ever

used even in the fifth century, while in the smaller

number found at Ravenna, done under Byzantine in­

fluence, it occurs comparatively often. The same

evidence is afforded by the paintings in the Roman

catacombs, which represent Christ with the nimbus

where he appears as teacher or lawgiver. The figure

of Christ in the apse of Santa Pudenziana at Rome

reminds the beholder at once of that of Constantius

TT. in the chronograph of 354; both figures are seated

majestically on a throne covered by a large cushion,

and both wear the nimbus‑the only difference

being in the clothing, the gesture of the right hand,

and the object held in the left, a book with Christ

and a scepter with the emperor. Evidently the

nimbus was merely a token of rank.

If the mosaics of the glorified Christ in the two

niches at Santa Costanza in Rome are to be con­

sidered as old as the others existing

Chronolog‑ in the former mausoleum, they are the

ical Devel‑ oldest examples of the use of the nim­

opment bus; but as this is justly disputed, the

first place in proved antiquity must be

assigned to the enthroned Christ with his symbol the

lamb at Santa Pudenziana in Rome, belonging to

the last decade of the fourth century. Christ has

a circular golden nimbus with a border of green, the

lamb one of blue. The nimbus is found even earlier

for Christ in pictures in the catacombs, one of which

(Garrueci, lxvii. 1), not earlier than the pontificate

of Damasus, shows a simple circular nimbus; and

the same kind, of a bluish hue, is found on the heads

of Peter and Paul, who appear thus for the first

time in mosaic in the triumphal arch of San Paolo

fuori le Mura, probably belonging to the time of

Leo the Great (Garruaci, cexxxvii.). The mosaics

in the nave of Santa Maria Maggiore, which De

Rossi and others place in the pontificate of Liberiub,

are especially significant; here for the first time ap­

pears the circular golden nimbus for God, a white

one with green border for the three guests of Abra­

ham (Gen. xviii. 2), and a green one for " the captain

of the Lord's host " (Josh. v. 13), which last picture

places the nimbus for angels in the fourth century.

Angels similarly adorned appear several times in

the arch . of San Paolo, dating from Sixtus III.

Mary with the nimbus, oddly enough, does not ap­

pear in any designs which can be certainly dated in

the fourth century. The symbols of the four evan­gelists seem to have been finally introduced into Christian art toward the end of this century, and at Santa Pudenziana the evangelists appear still with­out the nimbus; at San Paolo Mark and John have it, and in several cases only the emblem of Matthew is thus distinguished, presumably as a mark of special dignity. The extension of the nimbus to personages not yet mentioned does not occur till the fifth century. It is found in the case of John the Baptist in the baptistery, and possibly in that of Laurence in the tomb of Galls Placidia, at Ravenna, and thereafter with increasing frequency. When early western art came to an end, with the close of the sixth century at Rome and a hundred years later in the provinces, the use of the nimbus was wide‑spread, but not governed by any fixed rules; and thus the Middle Ages revived it, to use it more extensively than ever. In Renaissance art is found a certain aversion to the use of this adjunct.

As to form, the earliest Christian examples do not differ essentially from the Greek and Roman; but a characteristic innovation is introduced when

the head of Christ, or of his symbol the Form and lamb, is found with the nimbus con‑

Variations. taining the monogrammatic form t or

f (see JEsus CH=sT, MONOGRAM op),

sometimes flanked by A and V, or with a cross.

The cross became more and more usual, for the

Father and the Holy Spirit as well. It must be

remembered, however, that the use of the monogram

and cross preceded the nimbus in the order of time,

and are found in a few very early instances placed

above the head. Different parts of the world show

their own preferences in this matter. In the Roman

and Italian sarcophagi both the plain and the cruci­

form nimbus are wanting; those of Gaul show the

plain nimbus, but not the monogram or cross; those

of Ravenna, on the other hand, frequently use the

monogram and the A and O. The cross gradually

became preferred over the monogram, and in the

Middle Ages was the usual distinguishing mark of

Christ. The monogram, however, is the older form,

possibly belonging to the end of the fourth century,

while the cruciform nimbus was an invention of the

fifth; and not before the sixth is a rectangular

nimbus found, in the majority o' cases denoting

that the person was still alive at the time of the

representation. In Italy and Greece, and later in

Germany, God the Father was designated in the less

ancient art by a triangular nimbus with rays pro­

ceeding from it; and instances occur in Italy of the

hexagonal form as an attribute of the cardinal vir­

tues. In the Middle Ages Christian art developed

a form of the nimbus which somewhat resembles the

pre‑Christian corona of rays. The beams of light

proceeding from the head of the figure form a sort

of sun or sometimes, especially in the case of Christ,

a cross. To this form the way led through the kind

of nimbus found in Gothic carvings, in which the

effect of the disc‑shaped frame is heightened by the

introduction of rays, so that it was a simple matter

to omit the frame altogether. Renaissance art

either reduced the nimbus to a faint radiance sur­

rounding the head, or dropped it altogether.

(Nmorsus Mttrsan.)


BIBLaoa8AP87: L. Stephani, in M4rnoirea de racaddmis den sciences de St. P&erabourp, 6th ser., ix. 361‑500, 1859; F. C. C. Munter, Sinnbi(der and Kunatvoratdlunpen der alien Christen, ii. 20 eqq., Altona, 1825; C. C. F. Siegel , Chr"ich‑kirrhtidra Alterfhumer, i. 438‑437, iii. 301 sqq., 4 vols., Leipsic, 1838‑38; A. N. Didron, Iconographic rhrNienne, pp. 4 aqq•, Paris, 1843, Eng. tranel., i. 22 sqq., London, 1849; J. A. Martigny, Didionnaire des antkrdtde chnfiennea, pp. 436 x.37, Paris, 1865; F. X. Krum, Beai­Eucykiopadie der chrisUicAen Alterhamer, ii. 498 eqq•, Freiburg, 1886; Mrs. A. Jameson, Sacred and Legendary Art, i. 27‑28. Hostom, 1893; DCA, ii. 1398‑1402; BL, v. 1628‑31.

AWE% EDICT OF. Events Leading to the Edict (g 1). Religious Policy Underlying the, Edict (§ 2). Anti‑Protestant Campaign, 1661‑79 (1 3). Increasing Harshness, 1679‑84 (¢ 4). The Dragonnades (1 5). Bmults to Protestantism and Frames U 6).

The Edict of Nantes (q.v.) was a compromise made by Henry TV. of France between the estab­lished Roman Catholic religion and the confession of the Protestant minority of his subjects, protect­ing the latter, as the weaker body, by :. Events guaranties. Their most valuable pro­Leading tection, however, lay in their loyalty to the Edict. to the crown, and in its impartial atti­tude toward the conflicting parties. If the sovereign once took a decided stand on the Roman Catholic side, or if the Protestants assumed a hostile position toward it, the maintenance of the compromise and the continued existence of Protes­tantism would be at once imperiled. As long as Henry TV. lived, there was little danger of either. He continued in the path of reconciliation, and re­newed the sanction of " cities of safety" to the Reformed for another four years from Aug. 1, 1605. But his death in 1610 completely altered the situa­tion. From this moment deliberate attempts were made to undermine the edict, to limit its operation or effect its revocation. Above or below the sur­face, this conflict went on for seventy‑five years. Immediately after Henry's death all the differences which had been latent in the relation of the two parties to each other and of the Protestants to the government became visible. The Protestants justly distrusted the bigoted queen‑regent and her like­minded son Louis XIII.; and although the Edict of Nantes was solemnly confirmed on May 22, 1610, open violations of its provisions soon occurred. It was not until in 1620, when Warn was incorporated with the kingdom and Roman Catholicism was forced on the people of the little mountain state, that they took up arms (1621). The conflict then begun was of a different character from the earlier wars of religion. By no means the whole of French Prot­estantism took part in it; there was no commanding personality like that of Coligny or Henry of Na­varre, and discord prevailed among the nobles of the party. German Protestantism, fighting for its own existence, could send no help, and that which came from England was badly planned and ineffect­ive. The unhappy decisions of the assembly of La Rochelle, organizing the Protestant party on the model of the States‑General of the Netherlands (May 10, 1621), gave the government an excuse for treating the Reformed as flagrant rebels. The war, carried on with great severity, was partially favora­VIIL‑12

ble to the Huguenots in 1621 and 1622, thanks to the heroic defense of Montauban and Montpellier, but the rising of 1625 and the campaigns between that date and 1628 ended unfavorably with the surrender of La Rochelle. The peace of Alais (June 28, 1629), followed by the Edict of Nimes, (July, 1629), was at once the termination of overt hostili­ties and the beginning of a new epoch in the history of French Protestantism.

The Edict of Nimes guaranteed to the vanquished a full pardon for their rebellion, and confirmed that of Nantes in all that concerned freedom of con­science, free exercise of religion, personal security,

and civil rights; but it abolished the s. Religious material guaranties for the preserva­Policy tion of these rights. By its terms the Underlying Huguenots ceased to be a political

the Edict. party in the state, and were reduced to

a position of dependence on the king's grace. The payments made by Henry IV. and for a time by Louis XIII. to the Protestant minis­ters were stopped; and the edict emphasized the definite expectation entertained of the reunion of the seceders with the Roman Catholic Church. This continued to be the goal of French ecclesiasti­cal policy, and all means were tried in the effort to attain it. Richelieu was too clear‑sighted, at a time when France was just setting out on her career as a world power, to comply with the demand of Rome that he should suppress heresy by force through the simple revocation of the Edict of Nantes, thus rendering desperate a numerous, intelligent, and well‑to‑do section of the population. He preferred a gradual policy. From the time (Mar. 6, 1631) when the exercise of the Reformed religion was pro­hibited in Rioux (Saintonge), scarcely a year passed without some locality being deprived of Evangelical worship. In 1633 half the Protestant colleges were transferred to the Roman Catholics; in Metz the Protestants were forbidden (1635) to erect one; in Dijon they were commanded to decorate their houses for the feasts of the Church; the parliament of Bordeaux forbade Reformed parents to compel the attendance of their children at their own worship (1636). After the death of Richelieu and during the rest of the minority of Louis XIV. the same policy was continued, though to a less marked ex­tent, the government fearing that the Huguenots might take the side of the Fronde. But they re­mained so loyal that Louis XIV. himself was com­pelled to acknowledge the fact in a decree of May 21, 1652, which granted them some alleviations. The period from 1649 to 1656 was the happiest that they enjoyed. In the latter year persecution began again. In 1659 the holding of a national synod was permitted, with the express declaration that it was to be the last. This ordinance, depriving the Prot­estants as it did of their supreme court in both doctrine and discipline, was the beginning of the systematic policy of repression of Louis XIV. From the outset of his reign he had the firm intent of annihilating Protestantism in his kingdom; all as­surances respecting the validity and maintenance of the Edict of Nantes were mere formalities. He felt that he was on this point in sympathy with the majority of his Roman Catholic subjects; he was





supported by his devoted officials, to whom the king's word wvs law; and the anti‑Protestant incli­nation of king and people was fostered by the clergy.

Only a brief sketch can be given of the policy of gradual encroachment on the rights of the Reformed Church. The first blow was struck at the permis‑

sion of public worship, which a com­a. Anti‑ mission was appointed (Apr. 15, 1661) Protestant to investigate throughout the kingdom. Campaign, In 1663140 churches were closed, forty­:66:‑7g. one in 1664, and sixteen in 1666, and so on year by year, often on the most absurd and arbitrary pretexts, while the erection of new ones was strictly forbidden. Many schools were also closed, or limited to elementary instruc­tion; the higher school at Mmes was placed in the hands of the Jesuits and the theological faculty suppressed. Every possible facility was offered for conversions to the Roman Catholic faith; the age at which children might declare their convention was fixed at twelve for girls and fourteen for boys. In towns with a preponderating Protestant popula­tion the officials were drawn equally from both religions, but Protestants were never allowed to preside. They were allowed to attend baptisms and weddings only in limited numbers; when they were dying, the priest might come in unbidden to ascertain if they were determined to die in their faith; in places where there was no Evangelical pub­lic worship, they could be buried only at daybreak or nightfall, and then only with a limited number of attendants.

Toward 1680 the position of the Protestants grew markedly worse. The Peace of Nimeguen (1679) had set Louis XIV. free from foreign dangers; and the change which about the same time came over

his life in the direction of religious 4. Increas‑ strictness tended to make him more ing Harsh‑ anxious to carry out what he believed nesa, x679‑ to be his duty. The Protestant quers­:694. Lion had become the most important

problem of internal administration, and the king's mood, now that he stood at the height of his power and regarded the defection of his sub­jects from his faith as a personal injury, tended more and more toward a forcible solution. This tendency was encouraged by the pitiless and violent Louvois and his father the chancellor Le Tellier, as well as by the king's confessor, P6re La Chaise. The closing of churches went on with increasing frequency; ordinance after ordinance excluded the Huguenots from a still greater number of public functions. In 1681 the age for the voluntary con­version of children was lowered to seven years. A fever of zeal for the conversion of the Protestants seized the. country; the upper classes especially vied with each other in attempting to reclaim their kinsfolk and subordinates; hosts of missionaries preached up and down the land, and houses for the reception and support of converts of both sexes were founded everywhere. Deeds of violence against the Huguenots, too, increased in number. Churches were destroyed and their Bibles burned. Early in 1681, at the suggestion of the intendant Marillac, Louvois began to apply in Poitou the method of quartering soldiers principally upon the

Protestants, who might escape the burden altogether for two years by conversion to the State Church. This method was abandoned, nearly nine months later, when emigration had begun to assume alarm­ing proportions and notice had been taken of it in the English Parliament; but meanwhile the Re­formed religion had been almost annihilated in the province. Throughout the country, however, the majority of the Huguenots displayed an admirable constancy, in the face alike of violence and seductive invitations such as those given by the national as­sembly of the clergy in July, 1682. The end was not far off; in the summer of 1683 the two religions came to blows in the C6vennes, the Vivarais, and Dauphin6, and the government put down rebellion without mercy.

As early as August, 1684, the revocation of the Edict of Nantes was definitely contemplated in government circles, and by the next January the keener‑sighted Protestants had begun

5. The to familiarize themselves with the idea.

Dragon‑ Foucault, intendant of B6arn, set the

nades. ball rolling when by royal authority he

closed the twenty churches of his

province without more ado, drove out the pastors,

and asked for troops to support the missionaries

(Apr. 18, 1685). This was the beginning of the

general dragonmdes, which struck terror into the

hearts of all the Reformed; sixteen thousand had

made their submission by the middle of July, and

in August B6arn, the former bulwark of Protestan­

tism, could number only three or four hundred pro­

fessors of the Evangelical faith. On July 7 the

method of conversion by military force was extended

to the districts of Bordeaux and Montauban; and

thence it spread throughout France. Conversions

en masse were witnessed on a scale hitherto unprece­

dented‑it took only a week to change the faith of

Montauban, and Montpellier was converted by

Baville with sixteen companies inside of twenty­

four hours. By the autumn Protestantism as an

organized religious body had been destroyed; noth­

ing remained but a handful of individuals or scat­

tered families. The time had come for the final

blow. If there were practically no Protestants left

in France, the Edict of Nantes had lost its raison

d'Nre and might as well be revoked. The theolo­

gians assembled in the king's presence declared its

revocation a religious duty, the procureur‑gdn6ral of

the parliament of Paris pronounced the revocation

legally unobjectionable. Le Tellier drew up the

draft of the new decree, which Louis read and

altered in certain points on Oct. 15, signing it at

Fontainebleau a day or two later. It was registered

in parliament on the 22d, thus attaining full force.

According to its terms, the edicts of April and May,

1598, and July, 1629, were declared null and void;

all "temples" of the so‑called Reformed religion were

to be at once destroyed, and Evangelical worship

was prohibited, even in private houses; all recal­

citrant pastors were to leave the kingdom inside of a

fortnight; Evangelical schools were entirely sup­

pressed; children were ordered to be baptized ac­

cording to the Roman Catholic rite; and emigration

was forbidden under severe penalties. This momen­

tous step was applauded by the whole of Roman



Catholic France, even by the finer spirits, such as F6nelon, Massillon, La Fontaine, La Bruyare, and Mme. de S6vign6, while the pope applauded it in a special brief of Nov. 13. Its awful consequences were visible long after.

While Louis XIV. and his cohorts of the Roman Catholic Church succeeded in annihilating the Prot­estant Church as a recognized ecclesiastical body, and while the blood of Protestants flowed like water, nevertheless thousands of Protestants 6. Results remained faithful, steadfastly worship­to Protes‑ ing (even if under cover) according to tantism and the dictates of conscience. Despite all

France. the persecution, harassings, persistent

and malignant oppression, importuni­

ties and tortures to which all Protestants, no matter

where found, were subjected, the fanatical followers

of the Roman Church did not succeed in destroying

Protestantism itself. Nor did they succeed in anni­

hilating all the witnesses of the Protestant faith, as

is fully attested by the lives and doings of such

men as Brousson, Court, and Rabaut (see COURT,

ANTo1NE; RABAUT, PAUL). When in 1787 Louis

XVI. issued his edict of toleration, the number of

Protestants in the kingdom, estimated in 1660 at

1,600,000 to 1,700,000, was not more than 600,000;

and their influence on the national life had been lost.

The general level of French piety was lowered by

the proportion of lives of compulsory hypocrisy en­

tailed by forced conversions; French theology, with

the annihilation of an opposition, lost its seriousness

and depth, and the place of the great divines of

Louis XIV.'s reign was taken by the courtly abb6s of

the regency. Even more obvious was the loss to

the nation at large by the emigration (estimated at

over 300,000 between 1680 and 1700) of so great a

number of intelligent and industrious subjects;

French commerce and manufacture received a blow

from which they have never wholly recovered.

Taking also into account the political sequels, such

as the suppression of Roman Catholicism in England

by the revolution and the placing of William of

Orange in a position to make head against France,

the year 1685 may safely be called the turning‑point

in the fortunes of Louis XIV., which began to decline

from that time. (THEoDOR ScHoTTt.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Consult the literature under HUGUENOTS; NANTES, Enrcr or, particularly Baird's Huguenots and the Revocation o,/ the Edict of Names. The chief work is Still, E. Benoit Hist. de ridit de Names, vols. i.‑iii., Delft, 1893‑95. Consult further: C. C. de Rulhichre, Eclair ciasomenta hiatoriquea our les causes de la rhoocation de r6dit de Nantes, vol. i., Paris, 1788; G. von Polena, (ie­whichte des franzfischen Calvinismue, vols. iv.‑v., Gotha, 1884‑89; E. $tahelin. Der Uebertritt Heinrirha IV .... Sur romisch‑katWiaehen Kirche, Basel, 1885; F. Sander, Die Hupuenotten and due Rdikt von Names, Breslau, 1885; T. Schott, Die Aufhebung dea Ediktes von Nantes, Halls, 1885. A resumb of the material educed by the Bicen­tennial of the Edict of Nantes is given in Bulletin de la aocibtb de rhistoire du protestantiam fransaia, 1885, pp. 585 .qq., 809 sqq., 1888, 182 sqq.; C. Tylor, The Hugue­nots in the Seventeenth Century, London, 1892; J. Lemoine, M&mmoirea des Wquea do France our la conduits 3 tenir h "gard des ROOM", Paris, 1902; Documents and read­ings illustrating the period are given in Reich, Documents, pp. 349‑388; Robinnon, European Hidory, pp. 288 sqq.

RIMROD: According to Genesis, a son of Cush, a mighty hunter, and a founder of kingdoms. All

known of Nimrod is contained in the verses Gen. x. 8‑12. It is clear that the recital falls into two parts: verses 8, 10‑12, describe Nimrod as the founder of two great kingdoms (verse 11 should read " Out of that land he went forth to Asahur "); verse 9 declares that he was a mighty hunter. The pas­sage therefore probably contains two traditions and shows the hand of an editor, since verse 9 would naturally find its place at the end. While it would be incorrect to attribute the foundation of both a Babylonian and an Assyrian kingdom to any such single personality as Nimrod, it is quite possible that the principal cities of Assyria were established by Babylonian colonists (see Assy‑guA, VI., 3, § 1). The earliest Babylonian and Assyrian cities are correctly named by the writer. After Babylon, Erech (the modern Warka) occupies the first place (see BABY­Loms, IV., § 5); here Ishtar was worshiped from ancient times, and it is the scene of the Gilgamesh epic (see BABYLONIA, VIII., 3 § 2). Accad follows, probably Agade, (Akkad), the birth‑place of Sargon I. (see BABYLONIA, IV., § 11), although Accad commonly signifies Northern Babylonia. Calneh is perhaps Nippur (see BABYLoNIA, IV., § 11; cf. H. Hilprecht, Excavations in Bible Lands, pp. 410 aqq., Philadelphia, 1903). In Assyria, after Nineveh, Rehoboth‑it (A. V. " the city Rehoboth ") is named, probably meaning " open city." Calah, southeast of Nineveh (see AS­sYRu, IV., § 3), was for a long time the residence of the Assyrian kings. Resen can not easily be iden­tified and the addition, " the same is a great city," is somewhat obscure (see AssYRIA, IV., § 4). The fact that Asahur, the oldest Assyrian city, is, not mentioned, shows that the passage is not very early. Who was this founder of the cities of the Babylonian empire? The Biblical writer seems to have derived the name from marad, " to rebel "; the founding of the Babylonian empire is combined with the build­ing of the Tower of Babel as a revolt against God's supremacy. Association of Nimrod with the Gil­gamesh of Babylonian legend is doubtful; another hypothesis connects him with the national god of Babylonia, Marduk (J. Wellhausen, Composition des Hexateuchs, p. 308, Berlin, 1889). An Egyptian or Ethiopian origin based on Nimrod's descent from Cush is unlikely and the better reference is to an Asiatic Cush connected with the Kosahites or Kas­shites who settled in Babylonia about 1700 and ruled the land until the twelfth or eleventh century B.c. (see CusH, CusHrms).

Nimrod as a hunter was probably an independent figure. Hunting‑scenes are often depicted in Baby­lonian sculptures, both in connection with historical and with mythological personages. This would be significant if it were possible to identify Nimrod with Gilgamesh, for the latter is represented as a great hunter. Gen. vi. 1‑4 speaks of " giants . . . men of renown " (see GiANTs); the similarity of the expression makes it likely that the writer of Gen. x. 9 regarded Nimrod as one of these giants. In this way might be explained the term " before the Lord," as these beings sprang from a divine race and stood nearer to God. Nimrod might be, and indeed was, compared with the Greek hunter Orion who drove

the Pleiades before him. (R. KirmL.)



BIHLiaaHAPBY: J. Grivel, in TSBA iii (1874), 136 eqq.; P. Haupt, Nimrodepoa, m Asayriolopiaehe Bsbliothek, III., ii., Leipsic, 1891; A. Jeremias, IzdubarNimrod, ib., 1891; T. G. Pinches, The O. T. in the Light, of the . .

Records . . . of Assyria and Babylonia, pp. 127‑131, London, 1902; DB, iii. 552‑553; EB, iii. 3417‑19;' JE, ix. 309‑311; the Inter commentaries on the passage; and the literature under NOAH.

NINCCg, CARL WILHELM THEODOR: Ger­man philanthropist; b. at Sta,ffel near Limburg (20 m. e. of Coblenz) May 28, 1834; d. at Hamburg Sept. 17, 1887. He studied at Halls, Erlangen, and Herborn. In 1858 he was chaplain at Westerburg where he created a revival of religious interest that extended to the surrounding neighborhood. In 1865 he was called to Friicht. There he promoted a tract society which he had previously organized at Westerburg and which now became a department of the Evangelical Association of Nassau. Ninck became manager and secretary of this tract society of Nassau, a position he held until 1873. He acted as hospital and field chaplain during the wars of 1866 and 1870‑71. For his services in the latter war, especially around Metz and Strasburg, he received the Iron Cross. In 1873 he went to Hamburg to take charge of the Anacharkapelle in St. Michael's parish, established in 1860 for home mission work. Wilhelm Baur had served there from 1865 to 1871 when he was called as court preacher to Berlin. Ninek's,great organizing talent and tireless energy found full scope in this field. Impelled from within by an ardent Christian devotion and Evangelical enthusiasm, there was scarcely an interest in domes­tic missions in which he was not active. He founded the Parish Sisters for the purpose of looking after the poor and sick of the congregation and built a home for them called Bethlehem. This was followed by a series of institutions erected on the heights of Anschar, near Eppendorf, one for morally endan­gered girls; the Louisenhof, for girls who had gone astray for the first time; a home for retired deacon­esses; and other like institutions. He published the Nachbar, a religious journal, which attained a circulation of 100,000 copies. He also published the Kindetfreund in which he developed a special talent for interesting young people. In 1884 he undertook a journey to Palestine and afterward wrote Auf Ublisc)ten Pfaden (Hamburg, 1885).


BrsrcoosAPHT: Lives have been written by T. Rottebohm, Hamburg, 1888; F. Cunts, Herborn, 1890; and F. W. H. Koopmann, in Bilder aua den chriatlichen LiebesthUttipkeit in Hamburg, p• 85, Berlin (1899P).

NINEVEH. See AssyRIA, III. and IV.

NIIYIAft, nin'i‑an (NINIAS), SAINT: The first missionary and monastic bishop of North Britain. Bede relates, as common report in his time, that Ninian was a Briton, received his theological train­ing at Rome, and was consecrated bishop; he estab­lished himself near the present Whithorn, in Wigtownahire, on the northern shore of the Solway Firth, and built there a atone church, dedicated to St. Martin of Tours, from which the place was called Ad Candidam Casam; after a successful work among the Picts south of the Grampians, he died and was buried in his church. His life by Ailred, abbot of Rievaulx in Yorkshire (1143‑66), adds little to our

knowledge, but the statement that Ninian heard of the death of St. Martin while building his church may be authentic, and if so fixes the date of Ninian's mission at about 400. It may also be true that Mar­tin furnished masons to build the church. Nothing is said about a monastery founded by Ninian, but a century later Candida Casa, under the name of Rosnat or the Great Monastery, was a famous training‑school of the monastic life and in the fourteenth century it was a favorite resort of


BrswooaAPHY: Bede, Hiat. eccl., iii. 4; Life by AOred in Lives of St. Ninian and St. Kentipern, ed. A. P. Forbes, Edinburgh, 1874; A. P. Forbes, Kallendars o,/ Scottish Saints, pp. 421‑425, ib. 1872; J. H. Newman, Lives or the English Saints, London, 1845; J. ,MacKinnon, Ninian and sin Eirfluaa auf die Ausbreitunpdea Chrilenthuma in Nord‑Britannien, Heidelberg, 1891; idem, Culture in Early Scotland, book ii., chap. iii„ London, 1892; DNB, all. 68‑69; DCB, iv. 45‑46.


German Protestant; b. at Emmerich (60 m. w. of Munster) Sept. 15, 1838. He was educated at the universities of Halle (1856‑58), Bonn (1858‑60; Ph. D., 1860), Amsterdam, and Leyden (1860), after which he traveled in the East (1861‑63). He became privat‑docent at the University of Heidelberg in 1865; associate professor there in 1867; full pro­fessor at Bern in 1871; and professor of church history at Jena 1884‑1907, retiring as emeritus in 1907. Theologically he belongs to the liberal school.

Among his numerous writings, special mention may be made of his Handbuch den neuesten Kirchenpeschicke sell den Redauration yon 181.¢ (Elberfeld, 1807, 3d ed., 5 vole., 1901‑06; Eng. tranal. in part, The Papacy in the 19th Cen­tury, New York, 1900); Der Jesuiten‑Orden van seiner Wisder­herddlunp bis zur Ge®enwarE (Mannheim, 1867); Aus Gdh­semane (sermons; Elberfeld, 1867); Christian Carl Josiaa, Freiherr lion Bunsen (3 vole., Leipeie, 1868‑71); Welche Wage fahren nach Romf (Heidelberg, 1869); Bin Blick lion Worms, aufJeruaalem (Mannheim, 1869); XpyptenaStellunp in den Religion and Kultur (Hamburg, 1869); Stille Stunden, Aphoriamen aua Richard Roam Nachiaas (Wittenberg, 1872); Die allkatlwliacho Kirche lea Erzbiatuma Utrecht (Heidelberg, 1872); Richard Rothe, sin chrisaichea Lebene­bild (2 vols., 1873‑74); Ursprunp, Umfang, Uemmnisae and Auadchten den allkatMischen Beroegunp (Berlin, 1873); Die pegenwdrtipe Wiedeabelebunp des Hezenglaubena (1875); Die Gldchniase Jesu lion den waehaenden Saat, room proaeen Abendmahl and roam sterbenden Weizenkorn (Bern, 1877); Die romisch‑kathdisahe Kirehe im K&nipreich den Nieder• lands (Leipsie, 1877); Religion and Kirchenpolitik Pried­ricU lea Groasen (Berlin, 1879); Die Theorie den Trennuny lion Kirehe and Staat peschiehtlich beleuchtd (Bern, 1881); Zur peschuhttichen Wrlrdipuny den Religion Jeeu (10 parts, 1884‑93); Die ThOmmelxhen Religionaprozesae (2 vols., Halle, 1888); Tapebuch des Peter lion den Heyden, S. J. (Barmen, 1889); Die jesuitischen Schriftddler den Gegen­wart in Deutschland (Leipaic, 1895); Daa Entwicklunpapanp lea Lebena Jesu (Hamburg, 1895); Die internationelle Seite lea pdpdlichen Politik (Leipsie, 1895); Kleine Schriften zur inneren Gewhiehte lea Katholiziemua (2 parts, Jena, 1898­1899); Dan deutsche Chriduelied lea neunzehnten Jahr hunderte (Leipsie, 1902); and Bischof lion Anger, die Ber­liner Pol" and die eaanoelisehe Mission (Berlin, 1905). He has edited, among other works, Berner Beitra®e zur Ge­achichte den Schweiz (Bern, 1884); the fifth edition of K. R. Hageabach's Kirchenpeschichte (3 vols., Leipsic, 188587); R. Rothe's Gesammelte Roden and AuJsatze (Elberfeld, 1885); H. lion Boyen's Erinnerunpen aua meinem Leben (2 vole., Leipsie, 1889); and A. lion Theiner'e Einfuhrung den er zwunpenen Ehdoaipkeit bei den christlichen Geistlichen and ihre Folpen (Barmen, 1891‑98).






NISROCH, nis'rec: The name of a deity in whose

temple (or perhaps the name of the temple itself),

according to II Kings xix. 37 and its parallel Isa.

xxavii. 38, Sennacherib was slain (see AssyRIA, VI.,

3, J 12). The difficulties raised by the passage are

three in number: the identity of the deity or the

temple, the form of the name, and the place of the

occurrence. The Biblical passages distinctly assert

that NisrochwasSennacherib's god; it would there­

fore be expected that the deity's name would be

found in the Assyrian texts. But no such deity is

known in Assyria, or Babylonia, the nearest approach

to the form being the name of the god Nuaku (see

Assyxln, VII., § 6), which in the early alphabet in

the form Nuauk might easily be misread for Nisrok,

the form which the name takes in both passages of

the Hebrew. In considering the form it is to be

noted that the Greek versions in various manu­

scripts read Eedrach, Eathrach, Eaorach, Aamch,

Aearach, Aearak, and Naaarach; the Syriac and

Vulgate follow the Hebrew and read, the former

nsuwk and nark, the latter Nesroch. The clear indi­

cation of all the Greek forms except one (which may

have resulted from a late correction from the He­

brew) , is that‑ the reading before the translators

lacked the initial N. But the variety of the forms

given in the Greek indicates also a great uncertainty

of reading in the original which does not promise a

ready solution. Most of these forms point to a

consonantal base composed of sr$, `srh, ark, or `ark, in

which the last letter creates great difficulty.

Attempts have been made to derive the word

from the name of the. god Asshur (see AssyxIA, I.),

and in this one count is that such a derivation might

suggest the reappearance of the original N which was

assimilated to the following sh, though this is very

unlikely. It has been supposed that to the form

Asshur was added Aku, a Sumerian mane for the

moon‑god. Against this it is to be urged that such

a compound as Asshur‑Aku is otherwise unknown;

that the form Eriaku is not a parallel, this form being

equal to the Semitic Ebed‑Aku, " servant of Aku,"

and not a compound name; moreover, by the time

of Senna,cherib Asshur as a deity had assumed a

majesty so great that composition with another

deity, and, above all, a moon‑deity, is hardly think­

able. The fact that the moon‑god's name Sin is a

component in the name of Sennacherib (Pinches,

in DB, iii. 555) is hardly pertinent. An explanation

has also been attempted by deriving the name so

as to mean " the eagle god " from a root represented

by the Arabic Naer and Assyrian Nashru, " eagle,

hawk." But no such deity has thus far been dis­

covered in Assyrian environment. The Koran

(Surah lxxi.; Palmer's transl., Am. ed., p. 303, cf.

preface, p. xii) knows of an idol Naar worshiped by

antediluvian Arabs, while the word figures on a

South Arabian inscription (ZDMG, xxix. 600 eqq.,

1875, and liii. 100, 1899). But neither of these

provides for the Hebrew ending ‑ok or for the Greek

‑ach or ‑ak.

Cheyne proposes to read Marduk for the Hebrew

Niarok (Isaiah, in SBOT, p. 114, 1899), a suggestion

favored in Schrader, KAT, p. 396. This solution is a possibility, for although the two forms differ in the square character, in the forms in use before the square character came in the two words might easily be mistaken. But the difficulty here is that the Biblical narration clearly implies that Sennach­erib met his death in Nineveh, while it is open to serious question whether Marduk ever had a temple or chapel in Nineveh. If it be assumed that the Hebrew writer either did not mean to imply Nineveh as the place of death, or that he left the matter open, Babylon is the likely place of the occurrence if Nisroch be a mistaken reading for Marduk. There is some probability that Sennacherib's return from his Egyptian expedition shortly before his death was in part due to a new rebellion in his Babylonian realm, and an inscription cited by Winckler (in Schrader, KA T, p. 85) seems to support this loca­tion of the event, which implies that Sennacherib's grandson Asshurbanipal took revenge in Babylon. But the entire construction is exceedingly prob­lematic.

But one other proposal merits consideration. The Greek forms generally are not very remote from the name of the temple in the city of Asshur, which reads F shara. The guttural at the end of the Greek forms might easily have arisen through a misunder­standing of the pronunciation of the final syllable of the Assyrian name. GEo. W. GiLnloRn.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Selden, De die Eyrie, ii. 10, Amsterdam, 1680; L. Kulenkamp, De NierocA idolo, Bremen, 1747; F. C. Movers, Religion and Go4heiten der Phbnisier, Bonn, 1841; P. Scholz, G6tzendienst and Zauberweaen bei den alien Hebr4em, pp. 391‑393, Regensburg, 1877; J. Mein­hold, Die JesafaeradNunp, pp. 72‑73, Gbttingen, 1898; DB, W. 555‑MO; EB, iii. 3424‑25.

RITSCHMARN, nich'mdn, DAVID: Pioneer mis­sionary and first bishop of the Unitas Fratrum; b. at Zauchtenthal (125 m. n.e. of Vienna), Moravia, Dec. 27, 1696; d. at Bethlehem, Pa., Oct. 8, 1772. In consequence of severe persecutions, he fled from his native country to Herrnhut (1727), and became a leader in the evangelistic work of the Moravians. Accompanied by Leonard Dober, he set out afoot for Copenhagen on Aug. 21, 1732, which day con­stitutes the anniversary of the beginning of Mora­vian missions. From Copenhagen they sailed to St. Thomas, where they arrived on Dec. 13, and began to preach the Gospel to the negro slaves. Nitachmann returned to Europe in the following year, and on Mar. 13, 1735, was consecrated to the episcopacy by Bishop Daniel Ernst Jablonsky at Berlin. Soon after, the new bishop led a body of Moravians to Georgia. John and Charles Wesley were on board the vessel which bore these immigrants across the Atlantic, and were much impressed by the piety and earnest simplicity of the Brethren. In the course of his life Nitschmann undertook many jour­neys on land and on sea in the interests of his church and for the spread of the kingdom of God. He labored in Germany, Livonia, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, in Great Britain, and in Georgia, North Carolina, New York, and Pennsylvania.

BamoaHSPHr: E. de Schweinita, Pathers o! the American Moravian Church, Bethlehem, 1881; J. Taylor Hamilton, A Hid. of the . . . Moravian Church, chaps. iii.‑si., lb., 1900.




THOLD: Son of the following; German Protes­

ant theologian; b. at Bonn Feb. 19, 1832; d. at

Kiel Dec. 21, 1898. He studied at the Fried­

rich‑Wilhelms‑Gymnasium in Berlin and at the uni­

versities of Berlin, Halle, and Bonn, being influenced

finally by the work of Ritschl. After passing his

theological examination, he taught for a yeas and

a half, became a licentiate in 1858, the subject of

his thesis being Qucestionzs Raimundance, dealing

with natural theology. In 1859 he became privat­

docent at Berlin and was called as professor of sys­

tematic theology to Giessen in 1868 and in 1872 to

Kiel, where he remained until his death. In his

literary activity Nitzsch was occupied chiefly with

works on the history of dogma. His System des

Bodhius and die ohm zugeschriebenen theologischen

Sehrafte‑n. Eine kritiache Untersuchung (Berlin, 1860)

characterizes the system of Bo#thius as eclectic

and as a link between scholasticism and ancient

philosophy, but as not in harmony with Christianity.

Later works were Augustinus Lehre vom Wunder

(1865) in which he treated Augustine's apologetics;

and the mature fruit of his researches in the history

of dogma, Cmcndriss der christliehen Dogmenge­

schichte; girder Teal: Die patristische Periode (Berlin,

1870). The unchangeable result of the development

of dogma Nitzsch finds in the thesis that Jesus of

Nazareth is the Messiah and as such has. provided for

the salvation of the world. Thus the historical

character of the kingdom of God is established once

for all, the connection with Old‑Testament revelation

is ensured, and Jesus is proclaimed as the absolute

principle of salvation and revelation. In the de­

partment of dogmatics Nitzsch wrote Lehrbuch der

evangelischen Dogmatik (1889‑92) in which, as well

as in contributions to theological journals, he

took the part of the so‑called mediating theology,

and so came into touch with Ritschl and Lipsius.

(A. T1Tlus.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: O. Baumgarten, in Deutwh‑evanpelizehe

B1Ytter, xxiv. 118‑133.


tant, one of the most distinguished representatives,

in the nineteenth century, of the mediating theology;

b. at Boma (16 m. s.s.e of Leipsic), Saxony, Sept. 21,

1787; d. in Berlin Aug. 21, 1868. His theological

training was secured at Wittenberg, where his

father, Karl Ludwig Nitzsch (q.v.), was professor;

and he became docent in 1810 with the dissertation,

De testamentis duodeaim patriarcharum, and in 1811

was ordained as assistant pastor of the Schlosskirche.

In 1817 he was appointed professor in the recently

founded seminary at Wittenberg, and in 1822 ac­

cepted a call to the University of Bonn. In 1829

he, published his System der christlichen Lehre (6th

ed., Bonn, 1851; Eng. transl., Edinburgh, 1849).

This work defined his position toward rationalism,

supernaturalism, and Schleiermacher. He said him­

self that he had " learned more from his father,

Daub, and Schleiermacher than from any other

teachers, but had been obliged to draw back from

them all more or less." He differed from Schleier­

macher in the doctrine of God's relation to the world,

the divine attributes, etc., and also substituted for

Schleiermacher's " Christian consciousness " the

Word of God itself. Notwithstanding these differ­ences, however, he was willing to be placed at the side of Twesten as the principal representative of Schleiermacher's theology; and he was never tired of magnifying that theologian's services in making a sharp distinction between metaphysics and the­ology. In this period, Nitzsch wrote his able reply to M6hler's work on symbolies (Eire protestantiache Beantwortung der Symbolik M6hlers, Hamburg, 1835) and made valuable and frequent contributions to the TSK, under the editorial care of Ullmann and Umbreit. Most of these dissertations appeared, after the author's death, under the title Gesammelte Abhandlungen (2 vols., Gotha, 1870). During the Bonn period (1822‑47) Nitzsch also acted as uni­versity preacher, ahd took a very active part in ecclesiastical affairs, such as the revision of the Liturgy, and the measures looking to the union of the Lutheran and Reformed communions. In the interest of the union he wrote, among other things, Urkundenbuch der evangelischen Union (Bonn, 1853) and Wurdigung der von Dr. Kahnis gegen die evangel­ische Union and deren theologische Vertreter gerichteten Angrife (Berlin, 1854).

Nitzsch was called in 1847 to the University of

Berlin, where he continued to labor as professor till

his death. He was also honored with a seat in the

highest ecclesiastical council (Oberconsistorium,

changed in 1852 to the Oberkirchenrath), and was

elected a representative to parliament in 1849. In

1854 he was appointed provost of the Nikolaikirche.

The most important literary work of the Berlin

period, and of his entire life, was his Praktische The­

ologie (3 vols., Bonn, 1847‑67; 2d ed., 1859‑68).

The first book treats of the theory of church life; the

second, of the practise at the present time. Besides

these various works, volumes of sermons also ap­

peared from his pen, a complete revised edition at

Bonn in 1867. (F. NITZSCH j'.)

BIHLIo6RAPH7: W. Beyechlag, Karl rmmanud Nitzach,

eine Lfchtgedalt der neueren deutxh‑evanpelwhen Kirchen‑

geachkMe, Berlin, 1872.

NITZSCH, KARL LUDWIG: German Protes­tant; b. at Wittenberg Aug. 6, 1751; d. there Dec. 5, 1831. He studied theology at Wittenberg (1770­1775), and, after acting as private tutor for several years at Brandis near Leipsic, became pastor at Beucha in 1781, pastor and superintendent at Borna in 1785, and cathedral superintendent and consistorial assessor at Zeitz in 1788. In 1790 he became pastor and professor of theology at Wit­tenberg. Proceeding from Kant, Nitzsch sought to mediate between rationalism and supernaturalism. Revelation, he held, is not the divine communication of a supernatural content foreign to the human spirit, but the promulgation of a divine content which is inherent in man in a latent manner, but suppressed by sensuality and egoism. While he did not deny the supernatural factor of revelation like the rationalists, he was no less oppo9ed to the supernaturalists in regarding the essence of Christian revelation as moral and rational. A revelation that reveals anything not to be grasped by reason is for him no revelation at all. He attributed the char­acter of revelation also to the old covenant, though he considered it only a revelatio nomothetica as op‑


posed to, but preparatory to, the reveWio didactica

of the New Testament. His principal treatises

were collected in two volumes, De revelations religi­

onis externs eademque publics proluewnes academiew

(Leipsic, 1808) and De discrimine revelationis imper­

atori,o: et didacticce prolusiones academic& (2 parts,

Wittenberg, 1830). A short summary off his doo­

trinal system, as he taught it in his lectures, is given

in his treatises, Ueber das Heil der Welt (1817);

Ueber das Heil der Kirche (1821); and Ueber dos Heid

der Theologie (1830). (F. NrrzscHt.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: E. A. D. Hoppe, Denkmal des verewipten Dr. C. L. Nitzsch, Halls, 1832; J. C. H. yon Zobel, Das Leben and Wirken der Pastoren and Superintendenten in der . . . Stadt Bornut, pp. 65‑72, Borna, 1849.

N0: A name used for the Egyptian city Thebes in Jer. xlvi. 25; Ezek. xxx. 14‑16; and Nahum iii. 8, where the Hebrew text has No‑Amon, i.e., " No of Amon," the great deity of Thebes (see AMON). The later Greek name (Diospolis) is used by the Septuagint in the passage from Ezekiel. No is a corruption of the Egyptian nwt, " the. city, capital," found also in the cuneiform inscriptions in the form Ni‑i' as a name of Thebes. The true Egyptian name was Weset. Thebes was insignificant during the Old Kingdom (third millennium B. c.), but rose in importance in the Middle Kingdom (after 2000 B.C.), and under the eighteenth dynasty became the capi­tal of Egypt and so remained for centuries. Not until the royal residence was removed to Lower Egypt in the seventh century B.C. did it begin to decline. Under the Ptolemies it took part in several revolts and was repeatedly besieged. It was com­pletely destroyed by Cornelius Gallus, first prefect of Egypt under Augustus. Strabo found on its site in 24 B.C. only isolated villages (Geog., xvii., i. 46). The ruins of Thebes lie on the eastern bank of thA Nile near the present Luxor and Karnak, and in­clude the remains of the great temple of Amon; the most magnificent and imposing of the sacred edifices of the Egyptians; on the west bank is the great necropolis of Thebes. (G. STEINDORFF.)

BIHmoaHAPHY: Among guide‑books the best are: Baede­ker's Egypt (revised by G. Steindorff), Leipsic, 1907; E. A. W. Budge. Cook's Handbook for Egypt and the Soudan, London, 1905; Macmillan's Guide to Egypt and the Sudan, ib., 1905; Murray's Handbook for Egypt and the Sudan, ib., 1907; A. E. P. Weigall, A Guide to the Antiquities of Upper Egypt., ib., 1910. Consult the commentaries on the three passages cited; works on the history and antiquity of Egypt; A. H. Sayce, The Egypt of as Hebrews and Her Woke, London, 1902.


Character of Noah's Age (§ 1). The Interwoven Hebrew Flood Story (¢ 2). Its Significance and Consequences (1 3). Babylonian and Hebrew Accounts Compared (§ 4). A New Tablet (§ 5). The Narrative in B.elation to History (§ 5).

Noah, with whose name the memory of the deluge is connected (cf. Ira. liv. 9), was, according to Gen. v. 28 sqq., the son of Lamech, and was the tenth and last of the lineage of Seth. The name means "rest," but Gen. v. 29 connects it with the root ndham, " to comfort." The Biblical recital indicates that Noah lived in a period of moral degeneracy which can be estimated through the so‑called command­ments of Noah (Gen. ix.), which imply a reign o'

bloodshed and reckless disregard of life. Sexual

conditions also must have degenerated to a degree

menacing the very integrity of human nature ‑this

is the meaning of the enigmatic passage

:. Charac‑ Gen. vi. 1 aqq. Hence came the Lord's

ter of decision to root out the human race.

Noah's Age. The limitation of man's life to 120

years merely signifies a respite of that

duration until the flood. According to vii. 11, the

flood began in Noah's six‑hundredth year, therefore

the revelation must have been made in his four­

hundred and eightieth year; this was, according to

the Hebrew chronology, 1,656 years after the crea­

tion of man. The Septuagint makes it 2,242 and the

Samaritan version 1,307.

The account of the flood (Gen. vi. 9, ix. 17) is com­bined from two different recitals, as is seen in the repetition of the account of Noah's entry into the ark (vii. 7‑9 and 13‑16a). The first account, marked by the use of the divine name

2. The Yahweh, tells of God's command to

Interwoven Noah to enter the ark with his family,

Hebrew and to take with him seven of each Flood Story. kind of clean animals, three pairs and one for sacrifice, and one pair of each kind of unclean animals, since in seven days a forty­days' rain would be sent to destroy all life on the face of the earth. Noah obeys this command (vii. 1‑5). After seven days the flood begins (verses 7‑10), and lasts forty days and forty nights (verse 12). God shuts Noah in the ark (verse l6b), which is borne on the water for forty days (verse 17). After all living things outside the ark are destroyed (verses 22, 23), the rain ceases (viii. 2b, 3a). Noah sends forth the raven which does not return; then he sends a dove, which comes back, since it does not find a resting‑place; seven days later he sends an­other dove, which returns with an olive‑branch; at the end of another seven days he liberates a third dove, which does not return (viii. 6‑12). Upon this, Noah uncovers the ark and sees that the earth is dry (13b); he builds an altar and makes a burnt­offering to God of the clean beasts and birds. God accepts this sacrifice and covenants that, in view of man's inborn evil, no such visitation shall again take place. This account is interwoven with an­other, wherein the divine name Elohim is used. Here is the command to build the ark and to place in it one pair of each kind of animals with the nec­essary provisions, so as to save them from the coming destruction (vi. 9‑22). In Noah's six hundredth year on the seventeenth day of the second month, on which day Noah entered the ark, " were all the fountains of the great deep broken up and the win­dows of heaven were opened " (Gen. vii. 11). The water rises until the one hundred and fiftieth day and reaches a height of fifteen cubits above the highest mountains, so that all life perishes (vii. 6, 11, 13‑16a, 17‑21, 23b‑24). The waters then sub­side and, on the seventeenth day of the seventh month, the ark rested on Mount Ararat. On the first of the tenth .month, the peaks of the hills are seen; on the first of the first month of the second year, the water has left the earth, and on the twenty­seventh day of the second month, the earth is dry and Noah is commanded to leave the ark (viii. 1, 2a,


3b‑5, 13a, 14‑18). The account closes with the divine blessing (ix. 1); the conferring of lordship over the animal kingdom‑but with the command to abstain from blood (ix. 2‑4); the granting of power over the lives of those who kill their fellow men (ix. 5 sqq.) and with the promise that the deluge shall not be repeated (ix. 8‑17). The two accounts are in essential agreement. The command to take three pairs of each kind of clean animals and but one of the unclean, may be merely a more exact statement, and the words (vii. 9) " they went in two and two unto Noah in the ark " may signify that there were male and female of each kind (cf. vii. 16). The distinction of clean and unclean is older than the Mosaic law and is found among non‑Hebrew peoples (see DIETARY LAWS of THE HEBREWS, §2). it is also doubtful whether the duration of the flood is differently stated; Noah can scarcely have sent forth the dove immediately at the end of the forty days' rain, since this account also states that the earth was completely covered; therefore, the flood must have lasted longer than sixty‑one days (forty of rain and twenty‑one of expectancy). According to the Elohistic account, the flood must have begun on the seventeenth day of the month Iyyar and ended on the twenty‑seventh of the same month, in the following year.

The fundamental truth of this Biblical story is that beneath the present humanity another lies buried, which by its moral perversity, called upon itself a divine judgment; the deluge was universal,

not in the sense that it covered all the 3. Its Sit‑ earth's surface, but in the sense that

nificance it affected all mankind. Its extent,

and Con‑ therefore, is limited to that part of the

sequences. earth inhabited by man. The Biblical

narrator thinks of Western Asia and perhaps of the Mediterranean countries: he knew nothing of the rest of the world or of mountains loftier than Ararat. Such an immense structure as the ark, 300 cubits long, 50 broad, and 30 high, must have required as long a time for its construction as is mentioned in Gen. vi. 3, especially as Noah had so few helpers. The conduct of animals under the influence of terrifying natural phenomena indicates how it was possible to bring them together in the ark. It is noteworthy that in the Jehovistic nar­rative appears for the first time an altar and a burnt­offering. The altar is an elevation raised up toward God, and the object of the burnt‑offering is that the smoke should bear the sacrifice aloft. The visible signs of the divine presence which appear in Gen. ii, and iii. 24 have vanished and the earth is no longer God's dwelling‑place. What the Elohistic accounts tell of God's words to Noah, teaches the relation of the new humanity to the world about it. The rainbow is the promise that no such catastrophe shall recur. The Jews find in Gen. ix. 1 sqq. what are called the seven commandments of Noah, namely (1) to refrain from idolatry, (2) from blas­phemy, (3) from murder, (4) from adultery and, (5) from theft, (6) to practise righteousness, and (7) to eat no flesh with blood.

Of the various deluge legends found in all parts of the world, the most interesting, because of its stri­king resemblance to the Biblical recital, is the Baby‑

Ionian legend in cuneiform writing, known since 1872 (see CREATION, BABYLONIAN ACCOUNTS). The account forms the eleventh canto of a great

Babylonian epic the hero of which is 4. Baby‑ Gilgamesh, to whom his ancestor Sit­lonian and napishtim, the Babylonian Noah, com­Hebrew municates the history of the deluge and Accounts of his miraculous preservation. It compared. begins with the decision of the gods to punish mankind. The god Ea reveals the coming deluge to the hero in a dream and com­mands him to build a ship and rescue himself and his family therein. He obeys, builds the vessel, loads it with silver, gold and " seeds of life " of all kinds, takes in all his family and retainers, as well as the cattle and beasts of the field, and then closes the door of the vessel, on a sign agreed upon with the divinity. Now begins the deluge, so violent that the very gods are terrified. The storm lasts six days and six nights; on the seventh day, there is a respite‑the Ship Steers toward the land of Nisir and is stranded on a mountain there. On the seventh day after this, the hero sends forth a dove, which, however, returns; a Swallow also comes back, but a raven remains outside. Thereupon, he lets (all) go to the four winds, erects an altar on the top of the mountain and offers a sacrifice, the odor of which is greedily inhaled by the gods. Only the god Bel is wrathful that his intention to destroy all mankind has been frustrated; he is, however, paci­fied by Ea. Upon this, Bel enters the ship, blesses Sitnapishtim and his wife and declares that both, from this time, shall be reckoned among the gods, and that Sitnapishtim shall live afar off at the mouth of the stream. " Thither they bore me," says Sitnapishtim, " and in a far‑off place at the mouth of the river, they set me down." This recital closely resembles that of the Bible both in the Elohistic and in the Jehovistic version. In the Babylonian tale, however, the ethical idea is not prominent, while the Biblical account is distinguished by its sternly moral quality. The cuneiform recital is also narrowly Babylonian in its geography, while the Biblical account treats of localities outside of Israel. The land of Nisir in the Babylonian recital may be sought farther south in the region east of the Tigris, beyond the lower Zab. How can the similarities of the two accounts be explained? The hypothesis that both the Biblical versions were first written during the Exile with a knowledge of the Babylonian legend, is untenable. For the Jehovistic writing is unquestionably pre‑exilic and even if the priest codex which contains the Elohistic account was edited during the Exile, it must be conceded that its pictures of primitive times are not invented, but drawn from older sources. The hypothesis must also be rejected that the account was transmitted to Palestine about the middle of the second millennium H.c. With all their resemblances, the two accounts differ fundamentally, both in Spirit and substance, and it should therefore be assumed that they repre­sent two independent traditions of the same event ‑the Biblical recital having been brought into Palestine by the Hebrews in their migration from the East.

[Prof. Hermann Vollrat Hilprecht of the Univer‑


sity of Pennsylvania has communicated what he regards as a new version of the Babylonian deluge story (Babylonian Expedition of the University of Pennsylvania, series D., vol. v., fasc.

5. A Hew 1: The Earliest Version of the Baby‑

Tablet. Ionian Deluge Story and the Temple

Library of Nippur, Philadelphia, 1910).

The text is on a tablet of unbaked clay, is 211 inches

long and 21 inches wide, is by Dr. Hilprecht dated

between 2137 and 2005 B.C., and was found in what

he calls " Tablet Hill " at Nippur. The writing on

one side is entirely lost, on the other there are re­

mains of fourteen lines, no one of which, however,

is complete. Provisional restoration and, upon

that basis, translation of the text is furnished by

the discoverer as given below, also by Prof. Fritz

Hommel of Munich. As thus made out, the frag­

ment is in closer accord with the Biblical account

(Gen. vi‑viii.) than anything thus far known from

Babylonian sources. The question of date, and of

the restoration and translations proposed are not

settled, there being a disposition among Assyriolo­

gists to regard the conclusions reached as at least

subject to revision.

Hilprecht's translation is as follows:

1 . thee,

2 [the confines of heaven and earth] I will loosen,

3 [a deluge I will make, and] it shall sweep away all men together;

4 [but seek thou life before the deluge eometh forth;

5 [for over all living beings], as many as there are, I will bring overthrow, destruction, annihilation.

B . . . . build a great ship and

7 . . . .total height shall be its structure.

8 . , , . it shall be a houseboat carrying what has been saved of life.

9 . . . . with a strong deck cover (it).

10 . . ..[The ship] which thou abaft make,

11 . . . . [into it bring the beast of the field, the bird of the heavens,

12 . . . . [and the creeping things, two of everything] instead of a number,

13 . .. .and the family .... 14 ....and(?)....

Hommel's rendering is as follows:

2 [The springs of the deep] will I open,

3 (A flood will I send], which will affect all mankind at once.

4 [But seek thou deliverance], before the flood break, forth,

5 [for over all living beings], however many they are, will I bring annihilation, destruction, and ruin.

6 [Take wood and pitch] and build a large ehipl

7 [ ....cubits] be its complete height.

8 . . . . a houseboat shall it be, containing those who pre­serve their life.

9 . . . . with a strong roofing cover it. 10 [....the ship] which thou makest, 11 [take into it ....] the animals of the field, the birds of the sir

12 [and the reptiles, two of each] instead of their (whole) number,

13 . . . . and the family of the ....

a. w. a.]

The Jehovistie passage, ix. 18‑27, reports that Noah planted a vineyard (ix. 20) after the flood; wine is a product of the ground as changed by the waters. Overcome by indulgence in this unknown beverage, he is derided by his son Ham; the other sons show filial piety. This difference in the beha­vior of his sons determines the curse and the bless­ing that Noah pronounces: what Ham has done to his father Ham's younger son Canaan will do to him. The blessing bestowed on Shem takes

the form of thanks to Yahweh, Shem's god, for

the gift of such a son. The use of this divine

name signifies that the descendants of Shem will

stand in a peculiarly intimate relay

6. The tion to Yahweh. After the words " God

Narrative shall enlarge Japheth," a correspond­

in Relation ing distinction for Shem should be ex­

to History. pected and God is best taken as the

subject of the following verb, giving

the reading: " God shall dwell in the tents of

Shem "‑Japheth's blessing gives him the wide

earth for his domain, but if he wish to see how God

comes to man, he must look toward Shem. This

distinction presupposes a separation of races, and

Gen. xi. explains how this came to pass. History

fulfilled the words of the patriarch: Canaan was

rooted out by Israel; the Persians, Macedonians, and

Romans of Japheth's race conquered the Pheni­

cians of Canaan's progeny and the Egyptians, while

the Semitic races either shared the same fate or,

like the Africans of to‑day, groan under the yoke

of slavery. Another view regards these verses as

containing a personification of the races of a later

time, as a vaticinium ex eventu; in this case, however,

it would be difficult to understand why the hatred

of the Israelites against Canaanites should find an

expression in a recital of Ham's misbehavior. Ac­

cording to the Masoretic text, the flood occurred in

the year of the world 1656. This chronology is dis­

puted. Where the Bible counts 4000 years from the

creation to the time of Christ, Assyriologists and

Egyptologists believe they can show that, about

the beginning of the fourth millennium B.C., a devel­

oped civilization existed in Egypt and Babylonia.

In the Biblical narrative, but 365 years intervene

between the deluge and Abraham's migration to

Canaan, a period insufficient to explain the growth

of complicated conditions. It is therefore asserted

that this period must be extended. But difficulties

intervene. The genealogies and figures are defi­

nitely ordered. May not some arbitrary system

have been employed? Since 2666 years are said to

have elapsed from the creation to the Exodus and

this figure is two‑thirds of 4000, the number 1656

has been regarded as originating in a system wherein

4000 years are supposed to elapse before the coming

of the Messiah. In this connection it may be noted

that in Matt. i., a like number of names are given

for each of the three periods into which the geneal­

ogy is divided. It has also been conjectured that

the long lives of the patriarchs signify epochs of

antediluvian history, designated . by their chief

representatives. See TIME, BIBLICAL RECKONING


Ezek. xiv. 14 names Daniel and Job with Noah

as just men in the midst of a perverse generation.

The New Testament alludes to Noah and the flood

(Matt. xxiv. 37 sqq.; I Peter iii. 20; II Peter ii. 5,

iii. 6; Heb. xi. 7). Noah appears here as an " heir

of the righteousness which is by faith " who saves

his family from destruction and is therefore a

"preacher of righteousness." (W. VoLCgt.)

BIBL7oQHAPHY: Above all should be consulted the latest commentaries on Genesis; much of the literature under the articles ASSYRIA; BABYWMA; CaaAnonr, BABYLO‑

mAN AccouNms; and Nnmoa contain discussions per­tinent to part of the text. The recent extended 4LaCVa‑



sion in Germany over Bibd and Babel is rich in material

on both sides. Oonsult further: T. Nbldeke, in Im Neuen

Reiche, 1872, pp. 247‑259; K. Budde, Die bsblisehe Ur­

peachichte, Giessen, 1883; E. 50m, Die sintluth, Leipsic,

1883; R. Andres, Die Plutsagen, Brunswick, 1891; H. E.

Ryle, Early Narratives of Genesis, London, 1892 '(a'very

useful book, with which should be used A. R. Gordon,

below); J. Prestwich, On Certain Phenomena Belonging

to the Close of the Last Geological Period, and on their Bear­

inp upon the Tradition of the Plood, ib. 1895; T. Pfeil, Be­

merkunpen sum btblischen FluAberioht, pp. 10 sqq., Dorpat,

1895; L. Duparc, Le Ddupe biblique, Paris, 1898; M. Jastrow,

Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, pp. 493‑508, Boston,

1898; idem, in ZA, 1899, pp. 288‑301; H. G. Mitchell,

The World before Abraham, pp. 84‑90, 194‑227, Boston,

1901; P. Carus, in The Monist, July, 1901; G. F. Wright,

in BibliSacra, April‑July, 1901; idem, in McClure`

Magazine, Aug., Sept., 1901; H. Zimmem, Biblische and

babylonische Urgeachichte, pp. 32 eqq., Leipsic, 1903;

Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, fase. xxviii., eols. 1661‑67; A.

Jeremias, Doe A. T. in Lichte des alter Orients, Leipsie,

1906; P. Jensen, Das Gilgameshepos in der Weltliteratur,

vol. i., Strasburg, 1906; A. R. Gordon, The Early irad~

tions of Genesis, Edinburgh, 1907 (profound and scholarly;

contains transls. of Berosus and Babylonian documents);

Expository Times, May, 1910, pp. 364‑369; Schrader, pp.

545 eqq.; DB, ii. 18‑23; BB, i. 1055‑88; JE, v. 410‑415.


dinal archbishop of Paris, second son of the Duke

de Noailles; b. at the castle of Teisi6res, near Auril­

lac (269 m. s. of Paris), May 27, 1651; d. at Paris

May 4, 1729. He was early destined for an ecclesi­

astical career. After holding the rich abbey of

Aubrac, he became bishop of Cahors in 1679 and of

CH5lons in 1680, while in 1695 he was promoted to

the archbishqprie of Paris. On the outbreak of the

Quietistic controversy he acted as mediator between

Bossuet and FAnilon. In 1700, on Louis XIV.'s

nomination, he was made a cardinal. While bishop

of Ch&lons he had sanctioned the RUfexiom morales

with which Quesnel accompanied his edition of the

New Testament in 1693; and this afterward em­

barrassed him, all the more when in 1696, by the con­

demnation of the Exposition de la foi, a Jansenistic

treatise of the Abbd de Barcos, he seemed to take

an opposite ground. When pressure was put upon

him to revoke his approval of the Refexions morales

he hesitated a long time. Finally he joined the

bishops who protested against the bull Unigenitus

(q.v.) and encouraged open opposition to it in his

diocese. For a good while he was the leader of the

party friendly to the Jansenists, but weakened later,

agreed to a compromise in 1720, and on Oct. 11,

1728, submitted unreservedly to the Unigenuua,

dying a broken man a few months later. See


(K. KLt?PPELt.)

BIHLaOGRAPHY: J. B. Denis, MJmoims anecdotes de la tour

d du cleroh de France. London, 1712; A True Account of

All that has Passed between the Court of Rome and Cardinal

de Noailles in Relation to the Constitution (Unipenitm), ib.

1828; Anecdotes ou mhmoiree secret@ our la constitution

Unipenitus, Utrecht, 1730; L. F. de Bausset, Hid. de

Fhndon, Paris, 1808, Eng. trsnsl., 2 vols., London, 1810;

A. schill, Die Constitution Unipenitus, Freiburg, 1876;

Reich, Documents, pp. 386 eqq.; %L, it. 406!14.

NOBLE, SAMUEL: Swedenborgian; b. in Lon­

don Mar. 4,1779; d. there Aug. 27, 1853. In 1810

he was one of the founders of the London society

for publishing the works of Swedenborg, and, in 1812,

of The Intellectual Repository and Nets Jerusalem

Magazine, being its chief editor and contributor. In

1820 he left his profession of engraving to enter the

Swedenborgian ministry in London. He issued two noticeable original books, issued as lectures: Plenary Inspiration of the Scriptures Asserted (London, 1825); and An Appeal in Behalf of the Doctrines of the Eternal World and State, and of the Doctrines . . . held by the Body of Christians . . . (1826); a trans­lation of Swedenborg's Heaven and Hell; and other works expository of Swedenborgian doctrine.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Memoir by W. Bruce axed to the 3d and later editions of the ApveA DNB, x1i., 84‑85.

NOCELLA, no‑chel'a, CARLO: Cardinal; b. at Rome Nov. 26, 1826; d. there July 22, 1908. He was educated at the Roman Seminary, where he taught until 1866, after which he was sub‑secre­tary of briefs until 1884. He was then appointed prothonotary and was secretary of briefs to persons of royal ranks until 1892, and after being consistorial secretary for seven years (1892‑99), was consecrated titular patriarch of Constantinople. In 1903 he was created cardinal priest of San Calisto.


NOEL, BAPTIST WRIOTHESLEY: English Baptist, brother of the first earl of Gainsborough; b. at Leightmount, Scotland, July 16, 1798; d. at Stanmore (11 m. n.w. of St. Paul's, London) Jan. 19, 1873. He studied at Trinity College, Cambridge (M.A., 1821); began the study of law, but changed his intention, took orders, and became minister of St. John's Chapel, Bedford Row, London. There he manifested an interest in home and foreign mis­sions, in elementary education, in the welfare of the poor as affected by the Corn Laws, and in the Evan­gelical Alliance (q.v.). The issue of the Gorham Case (q.v.), together with his Evangelicalism, caused him to change his ecclesiastical affiliations, and he was rebaptized by immersion, Aug. 9, 1849. He be­came minister of John Street Chapel the following September, remaining there till his retirement in 1868. His publications were numerous, some of them controversial, some notes of travel, and nu­merous sermons and lectures. Among them may be noted: A Plea for the Poor (London, 1841; on the Corn Laws); Doctrine of the Word of God respecting Union among Christians (1844); Essay on the Union of Church and State (1848); The Messiah (1848; five sermons); Notes of a Tour in Switzerland (1848); Essay on Christian Baptism (1849); and Notes of a Tour in the Valleys of Piedmont (1855). He was also a writer of hymns‑" We give ourselves to thee " is by him‑and compiled A Selection of Psalms and Hymns for Congregational and Social Worship (1838), and Hymns about Jesus (1868).

BrsuooRSPax: DNB, x1i. 81‑90; Julian, Hymnology, p. 809.

NOELDEKE, nel'de‑ke, THEODOR: German Orientalist; b. at Harburg (6 m. s. of Hamburg), Prussia, Mar. 2, 1836. He studied at the universi­ties of G6ttingen, Vienna, Leyden, and Berlin, be­came privat‑docent at Gdttingen in 1861, associate professor of theology at Kiel in 1864, and full pro­fessor in 1868. From 1872 until his retirement in 1906 he was professor of Semitic philology at the University of Strasburg. He is one of the most dis­tinguished of living Semitic scholars, and has written:



Geschichts des Qordns (Gottingen, 1860); Dab Leben

Muhammed's (Hanover, 1863); Beatrdge zur KenAt­

nib der Poesie der alten Araber (1864); Grammatik

der neusyrischen sprache am Urrnia‑See and in

Kurdistan. (Leipsie, 1868); Die Alttestamentliche

Literatur (1868); Untersuchungen zur Kritik des Alten

Testaments (Kiel, 1869); Manddische Grammatik

(Halle, 1874) ; Kurzgefasste syrische Grammatik (Leip­

sie, 1880); Aufs&w zur persischen Geschichte (1887);

Die semitischen Sprachen (1887); Orientalische

Skizzen (Berlin, 1892; Eng. transl., Sketches from

Eastern History, London, 1892); Das altiranisehe

Nationalepos (Strasburg, 1896); Zur Grammatik des

klassischen Arabisch (Vienna, 1896); and Beitrdye

zur semitisehen Sprachwissenschaf t (Strasburg, 1904).

He has likewise edited a portion of the " Annals "

of al‑Tabari and translated a part of his writings

under the title GescAiichte der Perser and Araber zur

Zeit der Sasaniden (Leyden, 1879), and has also

edited and translated the Arabic poems of 'Urva ibn

Alvard (Gottingen, 1863); Deledus veterum carmi‑

num arabicorum (in collaboration with A. Miller;

Berlin, 1890); and the five Mu'allaqat (3 parts, Vienna, 1899‑1901).

BIHwOGRAP$Y: Orientaliache Studien. Theodor Nzmeke zum 7'0. Geburtdag gemidmet . . . , ed. C. Bezold, 2 vols., Giessen, 1906 (a Festgruss).


NOESGEN, nos'gen, KARL FRIEDRICH: Ger­man Lutheran; b. at Halberstadt (28 m. s.e. of Magdeburg) Mar. 31, 1835. He studied at the uni­versities of Halle and Berlin (1854‑57), after which he was vicar at Schloppe, West Prussia (1859‑61), prison‑chaplain at Graudenz, West Prussia (1861­73), and pastor at Klein Furra, Saxony (1873‑83). Since 1883 he has been professor of New‑Testament exegesis at the University of Rostock. He has been a member of the committee for theological exami­nations in Mecklenburg‑Schwerin since 1888, a mem­ber of the higher ecclesiastical court of Mecklen­burg‑Strelitz since 1893, and a consistorial counselor since 1901. In theology he is an orthodox Luther­an. He has written: Christus der Menschen‑and Gottessohn (Gotha, 1869); Kommentar caber die APos­telgeschichte (Leipsic, 1882); Die Evangelien reach Matthaus, Markus and Lukas in H. Strack and O. ZBekler's Kurzgefasster Kommentar xum Neuen Tastamente (Munich, 1886); Geschichte der neutesta­mentliehen Ofenbarung (2 vols., 1891‑93); Die Genugsamkeit and Vielwitigkeit des neuteatament­lichenKanona (Gatersloh,1896); Symbolik odercon­fessiOnzlle Principieralehre (1897); Die Auasagendes Neuerc Testaments caber den Pentateuch (Berlin, 1898; Eng. transl., The New Testament arid the Pentateuch, London, 1902); Geschichte der Lehre vom heiligen Geist (Gatersloh, 1899); Der schriftbeweis far die evangeliwhe Rechtfertigungslehre (Halle, 1901); Das Eigenartage des Christentum ale Religion (1902); Dal Wesen and Wirken des heiligen Geistes (2 vols., Ber­lin, 1905‑07); and Die Liebe, tin unmitlelbares Moment des christlichen Seelenlebens, Fine biUi8ch­kheologische Erdrterung (Schwerin, 1906).

NOESSELT, niis'selt, JOHANN AUGUST: Ger­man theologian; b. at Halle May 2, 1734; d. there

March 11, 1807. He studied at the University of Halle, where he became privat‑docent in 1757, ex­traordinary professor in 1760, and full professor of theology in 1764. He published: Yertheidigung der Wahrheat and G6ttlichkeit der christlichen Religion (Halle, 1766; 3d ed., 1783); and Anweisung zur Bildung angehender Theologen (2 vols., 1785).

BIBIJOGSAPHY: A biography was written by A. H. Nie‑

meyer, 2vart®, Halle, 1809.

NOETUS. See MoNAxcH2AN1sM, V., 3.

NOLASCO, no"18s"c8', SAINT PETER: Founder of the Order of Mercy (in full, " of our Lady of Mercy for the Redemption of Captives "); b. at Le Mas des Saintes Puelles, near Caste1naudery in Languedoc, 1189; d. at Valencia Dec. 24, 1256. He early showed an inclination to a strict asoetic life, but for a time followed the knightly career to which his noble birth seemed to have destined him, following Simon de Montfort in his campaigns against the Albigenses and their supporter Peter II. of Aragon. After the great victory of Muret (1213), in which Peter fell and his son James was taken prisoner, Count Simon entrusted him with the guardianship of the young prince. In Barcelona, where he spent some time in the execution of this duty, he saw and heard much of the sufferings of Christian captives in the hands of the Moors in North Africa and Spain. He de­cided to found an order for their deliverance; and a vision of the Virgin which appeared on the same night to him, to his confessor Raymond of Pena­forte, and to the young King James, seemed a sure sign of the divine favor. On Aug. 10, 1228, Peter and the associates whom he had secured took the three usual monastic vows, and a fourth pledging them to give up not only all their property but if necessary their own liberty for the redemption of Christian captives in the hands of the infidels. The order was originally more knightly than monastic; it was in a sense a revival of a congregation which had existed in Catalonia since 1192 for the care of the sick and prisoners. The seven knights and six priests who were the first to take the vows were joined by thirteen more knights from Peter's home in the south of France. King James gave them as a dwelling a portion of the royal palace at Barcelona with the adjoining chapel of St. Eulalia, until in 1232 a large convent, also dedicated to St. Eulalia, patroness of Barcelona, was erected for them. The papal confirmation was secured in 1230 from Greg­ory IX., and repeated in 1235, with the addition of the rule of St. Augustine to the original constitution. The first general chapter was held at Barcelona in 1237. Though it was then laid down that the priestly members should be in the majority, the process of changing it from a knightly to a monastic order was not completed until the election in 1317 of the first priestly general, Raymond Albert. The original habit was white, bearing the arms of Aragon, with a white scapular; inside the house the priests were distinguished by an additional hood. The discipline of the order was one of military strict­ness, including frequent flagellation.

The new order grew in membership, possessions, and influence. ‑Instead of sending money, the plan was soon adopted of despatching members to Moor



ish territory who should seek out oppressed Chris­

tians. The founder, with one companion; undertook

the first mission. of this kind, liberating as many as

four hundred captives in Valencia and Granada.

His chief assistant was Raymond Nonatua, who,

after suffering grievous tortures in Algiers and win­

ning the name of a miracle‑worker and seer, was

made a cardinal by Gregory IX., but died on his way

to Rome in 1240. Peter now made a journey to

Africa, but returned after many perils to Spain,

where, as well as in Southern France, he labored

for some time to build up the order. In 1249 age

and infirmity determined him to resign the general­

ship. He was canonized by Urban VIII. in 1628.

The order continued to possess considerable impor­

tance in Spain until it lost the greater part of its

possessions there in the revolution of 1820. It had

a large membership also in Southern France, Italy,

Sicily; and Spanish America. At present it is di­

vided into four European and six American

provinces, with about 450 members. The general

has resided in Rome since the revolutionary move­

ment drove him from Madrid in 1835. A female

branch established by Antonio Belaaco in 1568 is

now almost extinct. A third order was founded at

Barcelona in 1265, but never attained much impor­

tance. An attempt was made about 1600 to estab­

lish a reformed or diacalced branch after the analogy

of the Carmelites and Franciscans; Gregory XV.

confirmed it as a separate congregation in 1621, and

before long it numbered twenty houses. In 1725

Benedict XIII. formally recognized the whole order

as belonging to the class of mendicant orders and

entitled to all their indults and privileges.

(O. Z6cliLExt.)

BIHL70aaAPHY: Lives of Nolaeco are found in ASB, Jan.,

ii. 981‑990; by Estevan de los Morales, Valladolid, 1829;

in the Hidoire liWraire de la France, xix. 5‑‑9; in P. B.

Gams, Airchengeachichte von Spanien, iii. 1, pp. 238‑239;

and in %L, ix. 1927. Literature on the order is given in

M. Gmelin, Die Lineratur zur Geschicke der Olden B. Trini­

tatia . , Carlsruhe, 1870; Gari y Siumell, Bibliotheca

Mercedaria, Barcelona, 1875; and by Heimbucher, Orden

and Konpreyationen. ii. 212‑218. Consult also: H. de

Grammont, in Revue hiatorique, vols. xxv.‑xxvii.; C. A.

Il;neller, in BEimmen aus Maria‑LaacA, 1272 sqq., 357 sqq.;

$L, u. 1927 sqq.

ROMINAALISM. See ScaolesTlclsm.

IYOMINATIO REGIA: The right of the sover­

eign to nominate to an ecclesiastical position. As

early as the fifth century (the Merovingian period)

the Frankish kings exerted a potent influence in the

filling of the episcopal seats, while under the Caro­

lingians and German emperors this developed into

a veritable right of nomination, so that only in a few

bishoprics were the ancient electoral rights of the

clergy and people preserved, and this solely by

special imperial privileges. It was not until the

concordat of Worms, in 1122, which ended the dis­

pute regarding Investiture (q.v.), that the ancient

electoral rights of the German bishoprics were re­

established, the emperor merely retaining the privi­

lege of being present at the election and of accord­

ing to the elected bishop the investiture, before his

consecration. Contrary to this rule, however, the

popes, who in the mean time had attained a decisive

influence in the filling of the episcopal seats, granted

to many princes the right to nominate the bishops in their own lands, partly by means of concordats and partly by special irfdult (concession). At present this so‑called nominatio regea exists (with few ex­ceptions) in Austria, Bavaria, and (until the recent separation of Church and State) also in France, as well as in the Roman Catholic states of Central and South America. It, like the election by the cathe­dral chapter, constitutes merely a presentation, al­though it involves a consideration of the requisite canonical qualifications, and the nominee acquires the right to administer the episcopal jurisdiction only through the papal confirmation, which in this case is called insWutio canonica. E. SEHLINa.

NOMINATION, RIGHT OF ALTERNATIVE (Jua variandi). The right of a lay Roman Catholic patron in Germany and Austria to bring forward another candidate for nomination by the properly authorized superior ecclesiastic, within the legal limit of time following a prior nomination. The ecclesiastical patron is not permitted to exercise this right, and only in a case where he has unwit­tingly nominated an improper person is he allowed a fresh nomination. The superior ecclesiastic has the privilege of selecting from among the candidates the one that he shall consider the most suitable (so­called cumulative alternative).

It is questioned whether the patron has the right

of multiple nomination. The common law does not

contain any decision thereupon. It does not inter­

fere with ecclesiastical interests; on the contrary,

it favors them, inasmuch as it allows the bishop a

greater number of persons to choose from, and hence

the canoniata are in favor of multiple alternation,

rather than against it. E. SEHLING.

NOMOCANONS: The name given in the Eastern Church to ecclesiastical rules. Nomoi, on the other hand, designates secular and especially imperial laws. The Greek canons were at first arranged chronologic­ally, in special collections, but were later disposed systematically for practical convenience, under fifty titles, among others by Johannes Scholasticus. The secular regulations and rules were also assembled in various collections, partly official and partly private, especially in the codex of Justinian, the collection of Novellm, later in the Badlicans. With the great number of imperial regulations, the neces­sity soon became apparent of making a special col­lection of those concerning ecclesiastical matters. Soon after the death of Justinian a systematical arrangement and combination was begun of both canons and those nomos which concerned ecclesias­tical affairs and the name Nomocanon was used for this collection. Not long after the death of John nnea Scholasticus, such a collection was made from his codification in fifty chapters, from the above‑men­tioned selection of Noveldce in eighty‑seven chapters, and from other sources, and this was later elaborated, augmented, and perfected. Of much greater im­p6rtance and diffusion was another nomocanon of fourteen titles, which was for a long time ascribed to the patriarch Photius. The original collection belongs to the seventh century. In 883, the work was com­pleted, but not by Photius, to whom it was ascribed in accordance with a statement of Baisamon. At





the great Synod of Constantinople 920, it was de­clared binding for the whole church. In the eleventh century, this nomocanon was again revised and augmented. The most important commentary on the nomocanon was composed by Theodore Bal­samon, between 1169 and 1177. Although this nomocanon stood in high regard and was spread far and wide, the necessity was soon felt for a more convenient arrangement of the contents; the Syn­tagma, by Mattheus Blastares, in 1335, answered this requirement, and it may be counted among the nomocanons, although it does not bear that name. It consists of 303 titles which are arranged alpha­betically, according to the substantives of their rubrics; as a rule first come the canonical regulations and after these the nomoi; however, under some titles, there are only kanones, under others, only nomoi. This work (printed in W. Beveridge, Syn­odicon, vol. ii., part ii., Oxford, 1672) has been widely circulated in the orient and was, with the nomocanon of fourteen titles, the general handbook of the c1hrgy. The large number of manuscripts, even of recent times, proves that both works pre­served their reputation among the Greeks even under the Turkish rule. Another nomocanon was much in use according to numerous existing copies; this was compiled in 1561 by Manuel Malaxos, a notary of Thebes.

In the Russian Church there is in use, even down to modern times, a frequently published collection, employed also in the secular courts and bearing the name Kormitshaia Kniga, " Book for the Steers­man "; among other regulations it contains also a nomocanon of fourteen titles. The first compi­lation of this collection is to be referred to the labors of the Servian Archbishop Sava, of the beginning of the thirteenth century. From Servia the collection went to Bulgaria, and thence to Russia at the re­quest of the Metropolitan Cyril II., where it was recognized as an official collection in a synod held at Wladimir in 1274. In 1630 it appeared for the first time in print.

Besides the Kormitahaia, use was made in the Servian Church of the alphabetical Syntagma of Blastares, and this is employed also in Bulgaria. In Russia, in the nineteenth century, a further collec­tion was formed known as the Kniga pravil; this was used in connection with the Kormitshaia, and in Servia, in addition to the latter, a private edition is used, the Zbomik (Zara, 1884; 2d ed., Neusatz, 1886), which contains also the nomocanon of fourteen titles.

In Moldavia as well as in Wallachia, these old collections were formerly in general use, especially the Syntagma of Blastaxes, until, in the first part of the seventeenth century, the Moldavians formed their own canonical codification in their own lan­guage. The first of these (1632) is a translation of the nomocanon of Manuel Malaxos. Another codification appeared in 1652, and is called Pmroida cea mare or Indreptarea lef. This collection, of which Peter Dobra, 1772, made a Latin translation, constituted the official collection of the Greco­Oriental Rumanian Church.

Besides the above‑mentioned work, there are many collections under the names Nomocartonea,

Kanonaria, Nomima, which contain canons only, and not, as do the above, both canonical and secular rules. To the former belong, among others, the No­mocanon Doxopatris and the collection of Nicodemus and Agapius (1793) called Pedalion, " The Rudder," which at the present time forms the collection in official use in the Oriental Church. (E. SEHLINa.)

BIaw0GRAP87: J. B. Pitra, Juris eecleaiaat" Grmeoruea Aistoria d monuments, ii. 368 aqq., 418 eqq., 2 vols., Rome, 1884‑88; G. Voellus and H. Justel, BZlio0eca juria eanonici ederia, ii. 803‑680, Paris, 1081; C. E. Zachari& Hiatorim iurie Grmco‑Romani delineatio, Heidelberg, 1839; J. Hergenrother in Archiv far katholiechea Kimhenreckt. new series, xvii (1870), 208 sqq.; N. Muss, Daa Kirchua­recht der morpenldndiachen KircU p. 173, Zara, 1897.


§§ 4‑5.

NON‑CONFFORMISTS: A term applied to the 2,000 clergymen who, in 1662, after the Restoration, left the Church of England rather than submit to the Act of Uniformity (q.v.) which required assent to the Book of Common Prayer. Later it came to apply to the Protestant dissenters and in general to those who at any period in English history, since the establishment of Protestantism, have refused to conform to the doctrines and practises of the estab­lished Church. In the place of Puritanism before the Restoration now came, after the Restoration, political non‑conformity, which has its seat princi­pally among the middle or lower‑middle classes, the yeomanry of former times. The Act of Uniformity was followed by other repressive measures: in 1664, the Conventicle Act (q.v.) declaring it unlawful to be present at any religious meeting not conducted according to the usages of the Church of England where more than five persons in addition to the family were assembled; in 1665, the Five‑Mile Act (q.v.) intended to banish the ministers from their friends; and, in 1673, the Test Act (q.v.), incapaci­tating every person from holding any public office who had not publicly taken the sacrament of the Lord's Supper according to the usages of the Church of England.

In an effort to unite the opposition to the estab­lished Church, the Roman Catholic King James II. suspended, by a Declaration of Liberty of Conscience in 1687, the execution of all penal laws in ecclesias­tical matters and all tests and oaths. As a result ministers were released from jails and restored. The Toleration Act of 1689, under William III., secured to Protestant dissenters a legal existence together with freedom of worship and government under the con. dition of Self‑support. This act did not repeal the

penal statutes, which were, however, no longer en. forced. The benefits conferred by it were much curtailed by the Occasional Communion Act, at the accession of Queen Anne, which excluded from civil office those non‑conformists who had qualified under the Test Act (q.v.); and by the Schism Bill, which restricted the work of education to certificated churchmen. These restrictions were removed under George III., and the Test Act was repealed in 1743. The non‑conformists have since enjoyed religious liberty, but the agitation has continued, having for its end ecclesiastical diseatablishment. In 1836, the dissenters were allowed marriage by their own ministers and rites, and the tithes were commuted

Non‑conformists THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 190

North African Church

into rent charges, though in the latter form they are

yet a source of bitter offense. Registration of births,

deaths, and marriages was transferred from Church

to State and a charter given to the free University

of London, imposing no religious tests. Along edu­

cational lines, the great universities were thrown

open to young non‑conformists in 1871, and a system

of state schools established which rendered noncon­

formists independent of the established Church for

primary education; and their latest agitation was

the unsuccessful Education Bill in 1906, providing

for optional religious education in all state schools.

In 1880 non‑conformists secured the enactment of

the Burial Laws Amendment by virtue of which

dissenting ministers may conduct funerals in church­

yards and in the consecrated parts of cemeteries,

but the customary fees must still be paid to the

clergy of the established Church. Though divided

by distinctions of sect, yet as a compact, aggressive

body, they hold the balance of power, outnumber

the adherents of the Church of England, and stand

as the representatives of liberality in doctrine as

well as in polity. The chief organization through

which non‑conformity is to work cooperatively for

the promotion of dissenters' rights and religious

liberty are the " General Body of Protestant Min­

isters of the Three Denominations " (Presbyterian,

Independent, and Baptist) constituted in 1727 and

still meeting annually; the "Liberation Society";

and the " Free Church Council." See LIBERTY,


BIHLIomAPRY: The literature under CONGREOATIONAUM;

PBRTTAN9; and LIBERTY, RErawous, is pertinent; A. S.

Dyer, Sketches of English Nonconformity, London, 1881;

T. Price, Hist. of Protestant Nonconformity in England, 2

vols., London, 1836‑38; J. A. James, Protestant Noncon­

formity, ib., 1849; T. Coleman, The 2,000 Confessors of

1862, ib., 1860; idem, The English Confessors after the

Reformation to the Days of the Commonwealth, ib., 1862;

R. Vaughan, English Nonconformity, ib., 1862; T. Rees,

Protestant Nonconformity in Wales, ib., 1883; J. Ham­

mond, English Nonconformity, ib., 1893; C. S. Horse, Non­

conformity in as 19th Century, ib., 1905.

NON‑JURORS: The name originally applied to

those members of the Church of England who re­

fused the oath of allegiance to William and Mary

in 1689, on the ground that they were bound by

their oaths to James II. Their .number included

the archbishop of Canterbury, and the bishops of

Bath and Wells, Chichester, Ely, Gloucester, Nor­

wich, Peterborough, and Worcester, and about 400

of the clergy. Five bishops were deprived of their

sees in 1691, having died in the mean time. The

name came to apply to the separate organization

which was formed, congregations belonging to

which continued to exist until the death of the last

bishop, Boothe, in 1805, though the importance of

the movement ceased with the death of Bishop

Hickes in 1715. The separation introduced many

changes from the usages of the established Church.

A book of Devotions for Primitive Catholics was

compiled upon the basis of the Book of Common

Prayer, but differing quite widely from it.

BiDwooRAPHY: T. Lathbury, Hilt. of the Nonjurors, Lon­

don, 1862; J. Cosin, The Names of the . . . Non§urors

their Places of Abode; the Parishes where their Lands

lay, . . , ed. E. E. Eetcourt and J. 0. Payne, London,

1885; Mien A, Strickland, Lives of the Seven Bishops

Imprisoned in 1888, London, 1866; W. H. Hutton, The English Church (162'5‑1714), chap. mii., London, 1903; J. H. Overton, The Nonjurors, Their Lives, Principles and Writi a, ib., 1902; and the literature under KEN, TROMAB; LAW,WIr.LIAM; SANCROFT, WIr.IJAM.

HON‑RESIDENCE: The term applied to the absenteeism of a cleric from his sphere of duty, while he enjoys the emoluments though his duties are per­formed by a deputy or substitute. In an early period the cause of non‑residence seems to have been the pursuit of ambitious schemes or of personal in­terests; afterward the usual cause was plurality of offices in the same person's possession. The matter was dealt with in synods and councils from Sardica (344) to Trent (1545‑63). The older legislation sought to suppress the evil by limiting the term dur­ing which a bishop was allowed to be absent from his see. The Council of Trent adopted amore effect­ive measure, forfeiture of revenues. In the Church of England, non‑residence caused by plurality of offices was at times very frequent. The legisla­tion in 1 and 2 Viet., cap. 106, treats the question in a way similar to that of the Council of Trent.

NONE: The service for the ninth hour in the

Breviary (q.v.), recited normally at 3 P.m.., though

frequently earlier, even before the community mass

in monastic houses during Lent. Its structure is the

same as. that of Teree and Sext (qq.v.).

NONNA: Wife of Gregory Nazianzen. See GREGORY NAZIANZEN.

NONNOS, nu'nos, OF PANOPOLIS: A Greek poet of Upper Egypt who flourished c. 400. He is mentioned by Agathias (Hist., iv. 23; ed. B. G. Niebuhr in CSHB, p. 257, Bonn, 1828) as the author of the Dionysiaka and by Eudocia in the Viola­rium (ed. J. Flach, p. 514, no. 725, Leipsic, 1880) as the author of an epic " Paraphrase of the Gospel of John." Both of these works have been preserved. It has been suggested by Draseke that the two poems were not by the same author, but the similarity of style and the prosody seem to support the traditional view. The date of Nonnos is uncertain, but the style of his poems points to the beginning of the fifth century. A Nonnos is mentioned as the father of Sosena of Synesius (Epist., x1iii., p. 181 of Paris ed.,1631) which would place him in the same period. He seems to have been converted to Christianity after writing the Dionysiaka which contains heathen ideas. The Paraphrase shows a decline in imagina­tive power and prosodic strictness. It has not come down entire, a lacuna of some fifty verses occurring in all known manuscripts. The surviving work consists of about 3,750 hexameters, divided in the printed editions into twenty‑one chapters to cor­respond with the chapter divisions of the Gospel. The poet follows the course of the Gospel sentence by sentence, so that it is often easy to tell what words of the original he has preserved in his ren­dering. He supplements the simple account of the Evangelist with fancies of his own, not always in the best taste.

The first printed edition of Nonnos is an Aldine of the year 1501. It may be found in the university library at Leipsic and at Vienna. The Aldine text was copied in numerous editions. The edition by


Secerius (Hagenau, 1527) is prefaced with a letter by Melanchthon to the Abbot Friedrich of St. Aegidien at Nuremberg commending the " very learned poems of Nonnos on John's Gospel in place of many a prolix commentary." The latest and best edition is that of A. Scheindler (Leipsic, 1881). Of especial value is the " Paraphrase " toward the re­construction of the text of the Johannine Gospel. Hermann K6chly, foremost in the use of the Para, phrase for textual criticism, is of the opinion that Nonnos had a briefer text of the Gospel than those now critically studied by Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Buttmann‑and is inclined to regard that as the original (Opuscula philologica, vol. i., Opuscula Latina, ed. G. Kinkel, pp. 421‑426, Leipsic, 1881). Scheindler, in the main, accepted Kbcbly's views, though not in all details. Lately Friedrich Blass (in his edition of John's Gospel, Leipsic,1902) and Ralph Janssen have gone into the subject. Blass is of the opinion that the text which N onnos used agreed in many points with codex Syrus Sinaiticus, with codex D., the Latin witnesses, and with Chrys­ostom. Janssen has issued Das Johannea‑Evange­lium, nach der Paraphrase des Nonnos Panopoli­tanus mit einem auafuhrlichen kritisclaen Apparat (Leipsic, 1903), which is an attempt to reproduce the original text of the Fourth Gospel from Nonnos. Both Blass and Janssen agree upon the fact of a shorter original text of the Gospel, having obtained additional evidence unknown to Kbchly.

(CART. BxaTmuu.)

BmrsoGSSrar: Fabricius‑Hades, Biblioaew Grarca, viii. 601‑612, Hamburg, 1802; A. Pauly, Real‑EncyklopAdie der klassischan AZtertumauviasenwAafden, v. e92 sqq., Btutb Bart, 1848; G. Bernhardy, Grundrise der pr;wAiechen LWeratur. ii. 1, PP. 45, 374 eqq., 393‑394, Rae, 1867; Krumbaeher, GmhWde, pp. 10, 655.

ROPH, nef: A city of Egypt, mentioned by several prophets (Isa. xix. 13; Jer. ii. 16, xliv. 1, xlvi.14,19; Ezek. xxx. 13, 16) of the eighth to the sixth centu­ries. It is in the Septuagint correctly identified with Memphis. The name is a corruption from the Egyptian name of the town Men‑nufer, Menfer, (CopticMenfe, in thecuneiform inscriptions, Memps). The ruins of Noph at Memphis are located on the western bank of the Nile, somewhat south of Cairo, in the neighborhood of the village$ Mitrahine and BedraschAn. Here are also the ruins of the chief temple of Noph which was consecrated to the local god Ptah. According to tradition, the town was founded by the first historical king, Menes, and was influential under the old kingdom (third millen­nium B.C.). Even at the time of Augustus, Memphis was yet a large and populous town, but seems to have lost its importance in the Byzantine period and to have decayed completely after the foundation of Cairo under the Arabic rule. (G. SmnmRah.)

BIBLIOanA,PBY: C. R. Lepeiue, DenkmeW au, I'pypten, ii. 1, 6 parts, Berlin, 1849‑59; W. Smith, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Goopmphy, ii. 324‑326, London, 1878

(gives history); A. Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, ib.,1894.


NORRIS, JOHN: English clergyman, usually mentioned in connection with the Cambridge Plar tonists (q‑v.); b. at Collingbourne‑Kingston (14 m.


North =can Chnroh

n.e. of Salisbury), Wiltshire, 1657; d. at Bemerton (2 m. w.n.w. of Salisbury), Wiltshire, 1711. He was educated at Winchester School and Exeter Col­lege, Oxford (B.A., 1680), and was later appointed a fellow of All Souls' (M.A., 1684). From 1692 until his death he was rector of Bemerton, the parish earlier held by George Herbert. Though an Oxford man, and thus, one might suppose, under the do­minion of Aristotle, he early devoted himself to the study of Plato, and kept up a correspondence with More on metaphysical problems. In fact, it was he who handed on the tradition of idealism to Berkeley in the next generation. As a Platonist, he was nat­urally in opposition to the method of Locke, with whom he found himself in conflict also as the prin­cipal English disciple of Malebranche. His Essay towards the Theory of an Ideal and Intelligible World (2 vols., London, 1701‑04), represents this side of his teaching, though his most popular work was the Miscellanies (Oxford, 1687), poems, essays, letters, etc.

BmLIoa8AP8r: Consult, besides the literature under Csn­rsarnGz PI,ATOmeT9, A. i Wood, Athena Ozonienees, ed.

P. Bliw iv. b83‑b88, London, 1820; Julian, HymnoWy, p. 810; DNB, z1i. 132‑134.


Region and Population U 1).

Entrance and Growth of Christianity (5 2). Organisation of Christianity (f 3).

Sohisnu, Doctrines, and Persecutions (f 4).

Final Conflicts with Heathenism; Fall under Islam (¢ 5).

Grouped with the Mediterranean countries by

reason of its position, boundary, and peculiarity of

population, North Africa became the theater of a

political, religious, and economic development which

quite early brought this country into

i. Region relations with the Roman Empire, and,

and Pop‑ in turn, with the Roman church.

ulation. Bounded north and west by the Medi­

terranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean;

south and east by the Sahara and the Libyan Desert;

separated from the rest of Africa, the region com­

prising modern Morocco, Algeria, Tunis, and Tripoli

appears like a land by itself. Hence it was called

Lesser Africa, while among the Arabs it bore the

designation Djezirat el Maghreb, " Island of the

West." The term Atlantide points to the Atlas

range and its bearings upon the structure of the

country and the character of its soil. On the west,

this range ultimately subsides into the plain of the

Bagradas, chief stream of North Africa; thus also

affording the principal channel of entrance for ex­

ternal civilizations. The population shows three

component elements: the Berbers, a term commonly

applied to the native races; the phenician invasion,

which spread especially over the coast regions, found­

ing also many small town‑communities within the

country; and the Roman colonization, as to the

brilliant results of which more than one African

Pompeii affords knowledge.

Christianity mud hAve reached Africa in the first century; in Tertullian's time the

were already quite numerous. In the way of en­trance gates, besides Carthage, other coast towns were also available, and expansion or propagation in the interior was facilitated by the military roads,

North Airioan Chnroh THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 192

North, Frank Mason

penetrating the entire district. Possibly Roman

soldiers and officials were largely the pioneers of

Christianity, a suggestion favored by the strong

military element in the church language of Africa.

Though Tertullian names but four towns besides

Carthage with Christian congregations (Hadrume­

tum, Thysdrus, Lambasis, headquarters of the

third legion, and Uthina), there were Christians

by that time also in Mauretania. But

a. Entrance the Christian element must have

and Growth grown very considerably from that

of Chris‑ period until 249, seeing that Cyprian

tianity. (Epast., lxxiii. 3) speaks of " so many

thousand heretics." With reference to

the source, every indication points to Rome. North

Africa furnished a peculiarly productive soil for

Christianity. Under the expansion of the great

landed Roman estates, the sometime free cultivators

lapsed more and more into the condition of bond­

men; thus forming, together with the slaves, the

great body among whom the Gospel found willing

acceptance, from whom also those hordes were sub­

sequently recruited, who, as wandering monastics,

made common cause with the Donatists. The relig­

ious elements already on the ground were opposed

by Christianity. Tertullian and Cyprian discounte­

nanced the veneration accorded to the Berber

princes. Still greater danger came f rom the Punic re­

ligion, stained as it was by bloody human sacrifices

and immoral rites. In relation to the Punic relig­

ion, again, there manifested itself the great adaPta­

bility of Roman paganism: Phenician Baal becomes

Roman Saturn; Astarte (Tanit) became " The Great

Goddess," " Celestial Diana,". " Great Goddess Vir­

gin Celestial." The Punic language maintained it­

self long beside the Latin; but the Bible was trans­

lated into neither the Punic nor the Berber tongue.

Indeed, by using the Latin language Christianity

rendered the Romans an important auxiliary service

in colonization.

The gradual spread of Christianity over North

Africa, advancing from Africa Proconsularis across

Numidia, was closely attended with the formation of

numerous congregations; and just as

3. Organ‑ their political connection lay with

ization of Rome, so did their ecclesiastical organi­

Christianity. zation reflect the like influence. Six

provinces were formed in the reign of

Diocletian; Proconsularis (Zeugitana), Byzacium

(Byzacena), Numidia, Tripolis, Mauretania Sitifensis,

and Mauretania Cmsareensis, and with these the con­

temporary church provinces coincided. At the head

of each stood the primate, a rank held by the eld­

est bishop of the province, who bore the designation

senex, except in Proconsularis, where the primate was

constantly associated with Carthage, the metropoli­

tan see. The Christians endured many troubles from

the Arian Vandals, at Carthage and in the Proconsu­

laris, who sequestrated churches and possessions.

Another factor of influence on the state of the church

was the spread of the Moors, who during the Vandal

period recaptured a large part of the earlier Roman

possessions. The number of congregations under

direct episcopal control was considerable. Of such

there were, in Augustine's time, at least 500, al­

though the installation of bishops in the country

districts and smaller towns was forbidden. The great number of bishops has been explained by the Africans' municipal bent and by the many rural towns. On the large landed estates, besides, even the separate " castles " sometimes had bishops of their own. It is possible also that, owing to the conflict between Catholics and Donatists, in many places rival bishops were set up. Where there was no bishop, the congregation was led by a presbyter, assisted by a deacon. For better ecclesiastical cure, Carthage came to be divided into segions, after the precedent of Rome. THe organization and scope of episcopal power involve the adjunct of that eccle­siastical " penitentiary " which began with Ter­tullian and reached its termination under Cyprian. As defender of the primitive Christian theory of morality, and as Montanist, Tertullian opposed the innovation that was introduced at Rome by Calix­tus, whereby sins of lewdness, previously classed with idolatry and murder as mortal sins, were reck­oned with pardonable sins. In Cyprian there arose for the North African Church a bishop who, on the one hand, compatibly with Rome, both terminated the influence of the remaining clergy and of the congregation, as " reinforcing " the bishop's, but on the other hand stoutly and successfully guarded, in. opposition to Rome, the independence of the African Church, and himself became practically, if not le­gally, the primate of the Church in North Africa. This was owing alike to his towering personality, and to the importance accruing to the bishop of the capital of the country. Contributing to this end were the general synods, which were held over and above the provincial synods, the latter embracing either single, or several collective, provinces. Peculiar to the Church of North Africa are the seniores plebis (" elders of the people "), who may be regarded as a sort of congregational leaders. They are distin­guished, on the one side, from clerics; but, on the other side, they are designated as ecclesiastici vera, " men of the Church."

The tranquil development of church affairs was disturbed by many divisions and sects, which found a favorable soil in North Africa. The Montanists (see MONTANISM) and Manicheans (q.v.) won to their cause the two principal theologians of

4. Schism, the country, the Montanists gaining Doctrines, Cyprian, and the Manicheans, for a time, and Per‑ Augustine. It was Donatism, how­secutions. ever, which inflicted the deepest wounds upon the African Church, and the Donatist movement not only produced a Nu­midian national Church, but also spread over the other provinces. For more than a century after the year 312, this great schism divided the North African Church into two camps, at times of nearly equal strength. The significance of the North African Church in relation to the development of Christian doctrine is best ascertained from the writings of Tertullian, on whom Cyprian depends, and from St. Augustine's works. There were also such active apologists as Arnobius and Lactantius. Some in­sight into the moral status is afforded by Tertullian (De spectaculis; De peenitentia, and De pudicitia) and Cyprian (Ad Donatum; De habitu virginurn); as also by St. Augustine's " Confessions." A val‑


uable contribution as to the status of cloisters in the several provincial churches is furnished by the " Life " of Fulgentius of Ruspe (q.v.). The toler­ance accorded by the Roman government to foreign religions advantaged the Christians of North Africa until the edict of Emperor Marcus Aurelius, in 177, produced the first victims of persecution in the case of Namphamo and companions; while not long afterward (180), the Scilitan martyrs succumbed to the same doom. Of particular note, again, was the martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas (see PER­PETuA), in the time of Septimius Severna. The operations of the Decian persecution are known through Cyprian's De lapsis, and through the history of the penance dispute (see LAPsI); while of the final persecution under Diocletian there are reminders in the allusion in an inscription to the "days of offering " [of sacrifice to pagan gods]. After con­clusion of peace between the Roman government and the Christian Church, an enhanced zeal for building set in on all sides, as is shown by the many ruins of ecclesiastical edifices.

Christianity and paganism now began to change parts. From the year 341, the laws against heathen worship were multiplied. The temples were closed

and their assets called in. A decree of s. Final the year 399 forbids the destruction of Conflicts those temples that were no longer used

with for the worship of idols. A council at

Heathen‑ Carthage in the year 401 resolves that

ism; Fall the emperors shall extirpate idolatry,

under Islam. and demolish, or cause to be demolished,

such temples as possess no artistic value. Altars and images of the gods were depos­ited in museums. A number of these, with the in­scription Translata de aordentibus locis, " removed from ignominious places," are now in the museum at Ctesarea in Mauretania. In the towns, paganism still derived a temporary support from certain mu­nicipal offices with associated priestly functions; yet these, tOO,were gradually divested of their priestly coloring. After Tertullian, the controversial antago­nism of heathenism, as also of the Christian sects, was especially espoused by Augustine. But North Africa never became a thoroughly Christian country. This was prevented by the native tribes, which were con­tinually making new incursions and threatening the civilized power of the country. When, once more, the Byzantine dominion undertook a final Christian propaganda, there was a vast territory at hand for the purpose. Yet with all the conquests achieved by Christianity in North Africa, heathenism was not completely extirpated, and survived not only the Roman and Vandal periods, but also the Byzan­tine era, only to collapse in a common fate with Christianity before Islam; which effected the con­quest of the country in the years 647‑717, together with the annihilation of the North African Church.

(A. ScawARZE.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: As sources, besides the works of the Church Fathers indicated in the text, consult: Codex canonum eccieaim Africanaed. H. Justel, Paris, 1814 Notiria dip­nitatum, ed. E. B5clang, 3 parts, Bonn 1839‑40. Con­sult further: O. MJltaer, GescAichte der CarMoper, 2 vol., Berlin, 1872‑9g. J. Lloyd, The North A jrican church, London. 1880; C. J. T1ssot, Ophie compare de Za province romaine d'Afrique, 2 vols., Paris, 1884‑88; A. C. VIII.‑13


North African Church North, Frank Mason

Pallu de Lessen, Lea Fastes de la Numidie, ib. 1888; idem,

Fades des provinces africanes, 2 vols., ib. 1898; G. Bois­

sier, La Fin du papanisme, 2 vols., ib. 1891; idem,

L'Afrique romaine, ib., 1895; R. Cagnat, L Armhe romaine

d'Afrique et l'occupation militaire de l'AJrique sons Us

empereurs, ib. 1892; A. Sehwarze, Untereuchungen ilber

die 4ussere Entwickelunp der afrikaneschen Ksrche. Gbt­

tingen, 1892; A. Toulotte, Gfraphie de l'Afrique ehri­

tisnne, 4 vols., Paris, 1892‑94; E. Le Blant, Lea Pero&

cutiona d les martyrs aux premiers de notre &e, ib.

1893; P. Monveaux, Irtude sir la litt6rature latine d'AJ­

rfque, ib.1894; C. Diehl, L'Afrique byzantine. Histowe

de la domination byzantine en Afrrque, ib. 1896; P. Allard.

Le Christianisme et 1'empire romasn de Nirm h Ph€odose,

ib., 1897; F. Ferrere, La Situation religieum de 1 Afrique

romaine depuis la fin du iv. sikie jusqu h 4‑9, ib. 1897;

L. R. Holme, The Extinction of the Christian Churches in

North Africa, London, 1898; A. Schulten, Das rbmiwhe

Afrika, Leipsic, 1899; F. Wieland, Esn Ausfiug ins aU­

chriatliche Afrika, Vienna, 1900; L. Schmidt, Oeschichte

der Wandalen, Leipsie, 1901; P. Monceaux, Histosre lit,

tiraire de l'Afrique ehrhtsenne, 2 vols., Paris, 1901‑02; A.

Graham, Roman Africa. An Outline of the History of the

Roman Occupation of North Africa, London, 1902; A.

Harnaek, Die Miaeian and die Ausbreitunp des Christi

tume in den eraten 3 Jahrhunderten, 2d ed., Leipsic, 1908,

Eng. transl., The Expansion of Christianity, 2 vols., London,

1908; H. Leclercq, L'Afrique chr&ienne, 2 vols., Paris,

1904. Much of the literature under AooosnrrE; Crp•

wArr; DONATieM; and TEBTULLIAN is pertinent.


NORTH, BROWNLOW: Evangelist of the Free Church of Scotland; b. at Chelsea (a suburb of Lon­don) Jan. 6, 1810; d. at Tullichewan Castle (15 m. n.w. of Glasgow) Nov. 9, 1875. He was a grandson of Brownlow North, bishop of Winchester, and a grandnephew of Lord North. He studied at Eaton, and at Magdalen College, Oxford, and graduated from the university in 1842, with a view to holy orders, but was refused ordination. He had no settled occupation, and the most of his time was spent on the estates of relatives in Scotland. He was careless of religious duties, and known as a seeker of pleasure, until Nov., 1854, when, as he was visiting at Dallas Moors, Scotland, his whole spirit­ual nature underwent a radical change. For months he read nothing but the Bible, meanwhile conduct­ing religious meetings. His success as an evangelist was rapid, and during later years he visited every important town in Scotland and some places in Eng­land. In 1859 the Free Church of Scotland formally recognized him as an evangelist. He took part in the great revivals of Ireland in 1859 and Scotland in 1860.

BIBLIOaaAPR7: g. Moody Stuart Bmwnlow North, Records and Reeoamiona, London, 1879.

NORTH, FRANK MASON: Methodist Episoo­palian; b. in New York City Mar. 3,1850. He was educated at Wesleyan University, Middletown, Conn. (A.B. 1872), after which he held pastorates at Florida, N. Y. (1873‑74), Amenia, N. Y. (1874­1877), Cold Spring, N. Y. (1877‑78), Church of the

$aviour, New York city (1879‑81), White plm, N. Y. (1882‑‑83), Calvary Church, New York City (1884‑86), and Middletown, Conn. (1887‑91). Since 1892 he has been corresponding secretary of the New

York City Church Extension and Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and also editor

of The Christian City. He is noted for an extended activity in the direction of church federation and in



the work of the Evangelical Alliance, as well as in

philanthropic enterprises.

NORTON, ANDREWS: American Unitarian;

b. at Hingham, Mass., Dec. 31,1786; d. at Newport,

R. I., Sept. 18, 1853. He passed in 1801 from the

Derby Academy at Hingham to Harvard, where he

was graduated in 1804. He then studied theology

and preached for a short time during 1809 at Augusta,

Me.; in Oct., 1809, he became tutor in Bowdoin Col­

lege, and in 1811 tutor of mathematics at Harvard

for a few months. Theology in New England was

then in a very excited condition. In 1812 he pub­

lished The General Repository, a liberal theological

journal. It was too scholarly and perhaps too bold

for the public and lived only two years. In 1813 he

became librarian of Harvard College and lecturer on

Biblical criticism and hermeneutics. In 1814 he

published the writings of his deceased friend, Charles

Eliot. When the Harvard Divinity School was

founded in 1819 Norton was elected professor of

Biblical literature; he filled that chair until 1830

and took an active part in all university matters.

After giving up the professorship he occupied

himself without rest in literary and theological re­

searches. In 1833 he issued A Statement of Reasons

for not Believing the Doctrine of Trinitarians Con­

cerning the Nature of God and the Person of Christ

(Cambridge, 11th ed., 1876). In 1833 and 1834,

with his friend Charles Folsom, he edited The Select

Journal of Foreign Periodical Literature. In 1819 he

had begun his most important work, The Evidences

of the Genuineness of the Gospels (3 vols., Boston,

1837‑44; 2d ed., 1846; summary in one volume,

1867). Norton published also several addresses, in­

cluding a Discourse on the Latest Form of Infidelity

(Cambridge, 1839), a refutation of Strauss's views,

many valuable articles in the North American Re­

view, the Christian Eraminer, and the Christian

Disciple, and several hymns of no mean merit. He

collected a few of his shorter writings in Tracts Con­

cerning Christianity (Cambridge, 1852). C. E. Nor­

ton edited his unfinished Internal Evidences of the

Genuineness of the Gospels (Boston, 1855).

Although he was one of the leaders of the liberal

school of theology, he was opposed to the name

" Unitarian" and to the founding of the " Unita­

rian Association." His book upon the genuineness

of the Gospels is the chief work upon that subject in

the nineteenth century in the English language, but

the theological position of its author was largely a

bar to its acceptance in several orthodox circles. He

attacked Strauss with vigor as a Judas. He was

with his whole heart and in all relations of life a

Christian, and he devoted himself to the most un­

wearying study of the Scriptures, but by no means

lost sight of other interests. He did much to open

the treasures of foreign literatures to his country­

men. CASPAR RzNfa GREaoRy.

B:sraoaa"ar: J. H. Allen, in American Church Hidmy

Series, x. 207‑209, New York, 1894.

NORTON, JOHN: Puritan and Pilgrim divine; b­

at Bishop Stratford (11 m. n. e. of Hertford), Hert­

fordshire, England, May 9,1606; d. at Boston, Mass.,

Apr. 5, 1663. He was educated at Cambridge (B.

A., 1627); became tutor in the grammar‑school at

Stratford, and curate; his dislike for ceremonies led

him to embrace Puritanism, and in 1635 he emi­grated to America, preaching thereafter at Plym­outh, and at Ipswich after 1636. He was appointed to write an answer to the questions on church government of William Appolonius of Middleberg, Holland, which resulted in his Reaponzio ad totam quoationum syllogen (London, 1648). He was in­fluential in the Cambridge Synod of 1646 which drew up the Cambridge Platform. In 1652, on the death of John Cotton, he was called to Boston, but not installed till 1656. He was a violent opponent of the Quakers, and by appointment of the Massar chusetta council wrote against them his Heart of New England Rent at the Blasphemies of the Present Generation (" Cambridge in New England," 1659). He was also directed by the Geneial Court of Massa­chusetts to refute William Pynchon's Meritorious Price of our Redemption (1650), which resulted in his Discussion of That Great Point in Divinity, the Su, fer­ing8 of Christ (1653). Besides the works already named, he wrote: A Brief . . .Treatise containing the Doctrine of Godlinesse (London, 1647); The Ortho­dox Evangelical (1654); Abel Being Dead Yet Speak­eth, or the Life and Death of Mr. John Cotton (1658; reprinted, with memoir, New York, 1842) ; a Brief Catechism Containing the Doctrine of Godliness ("Cambridge, New England," 1660, new ed.,1666); and the posthumously published Three Choice and Profitable Sermons (" Cambridge, New England," 1664). Hid unpublished manuscript, Body of Divi­nity, is in the loping of the Massachusetts His­torical Society.

BIHLIOaaAPHY: A. W. Maclure, in Limes o) the Chief Fathers of New England, ii. 175‑248, Boston, 1870; J. B. Felt, Eccl. Hilt. of New England, vol. i., passim, Boston, 1855; W. B. Sprague, Annals of Was American Pulpit, i. 54‑59, New York, 1859; W. Walker, Creeds and Platform" of Conprevationalisni, New York, 1893; idem, in American Church History Series, iii. 174, 177, 218; F. H. Foster. Genetic Hid. of the New England Theology, Chicago. 1907; DNB, xli. 214‑215.


NORWAY: The northernmost country of

Europe (capital Christiania), bounded on the north

by the Arctic Ocean, on the east by Sweden, on the

south by the Skager Rack, and on the west by the

North Sea and the Atlantic Ocean; area, 124,129

square miles; population (1900) 2,239,880. After

the futile attempts of King Hakon the

Early Good (d. 961) to introduce Christianity

Christian into Norway, the two Kings Olav

Conversion. Tryggvesson (995‑1000) and Olav

Haraldson, surnamed the Holy (1015­

1030), finally succeeded in establishing the new

religion. Prior to this, Norway was under the con­

trol of the Vikings (or bands of warriors, who would

invade neighboring countries, plundering and burn­

ing or otherwise destroying what they could not

carry away), who held sway for 200 years. It was

while on these crusades into the different adjacent

countries that these Viking bands came in touch

with Christianity, the leaders just mentioned being

baptised, the first in England, the second in Nor­

mandy. Both of them set themselves the task of

Christianizing their mother country, to which end

they brought back with them bishops and priests

from England who preached to the people, exhorting


them to embrace Christianity, while the kings sup­ported the preachers by using force wherever oppo­sition showed itself against the new movement. Among these bishops, who thus became the real founders of the new faith, the Anglo‑Saxon Sigurd, who accompanied Olav Tryggvesson, has been named by some historians the " Apostle of Norway," while his nephew, Grimkjell, figured as missionary bishop under Olav the Holy, rendering his king efficient service in establishing the new faith after the pattern of the Anglo‑Saxon Church. While engaged in battle against his own rebellious people, King Olav Haraldson fell near Stikklestad (July 29,1030); and there resulted a thoroughgoing change in the minds of the people. Within a short time, the people came to regard the fallen king as a great saint, at whose grave mighty miracles were supposed to occur, and whose self‑sacrifice immortalized itself with a glori­ous halo.

Of the history of the Church of Norway in the middle ages, little more is worthy of mention than that it was identical with that of the other Eu‑

ropean countries of that time; the Church most important event of this period

History being that Norway, like Jutland, lost

in the its independence, becoming in 1536 a Middle province of Denmark. Thus it became

Ages and self‑evident, that when Denmark de‑

the Refor‑ cided in the same year to introduce the mation. Reformation, this applied also to Nor‑

way; although the people themselves

were but little prepared for such a thoroughgoing

spiritual revolution, the old order was abolished.

The last Roman Catholic archbishop had to flee

before the Danish authorities. Such bishops as re­

mained were unfrocked, monasteries were destroyed,

and the vested lands together with all other property

of the bishoprics and monasteries were confiscated.

Only the priests were allowed to remain to preach

after their accustomed manner, until such time as

Protestant ministers could be educated to replace

them. The real work of evangelizing the country

was left in the hands of Protestant officialdom, called

superintendents at first, and later bishops, whose

duty it was to establish the new church discipline

and provide the congregations with Evangelical pas.

tors. In every diocesan city a seminary was estab­

lished for the education of ministers where theology

and humanism were taught in the conciliatory.spirit

of Melanchthon. Among the bishops of the time of

the Reformation were several very thorough men:

such as Torbj6ren Olafs6n Bratt of Drontheim, who

studied two years at Wittenberg and for a time was

a membP.r of Luther's household; Geble Pederson

of Bergen, a fine and pious figure and prominent

schoolman; Jens Nilssn of 0810, a thorough dis­

ciplinarian and humanist; and Jorgen Erichson of

Stavanger, the most prominent personality identi­

fied with the Protestantism of the sixteenth cent..,,.

The latter, an imperious but sane advocate of church

order, earned for himself the title "Norway's

Luther," by his strong, clear, ardent, Evangelical

sermons. At the close of the Reformation cen­

tury, the organization of the Protestant Church

was fby ully established Every parish way pmsid





every pulpit Lutheran doctrine was proclaimed. In spite of this, the people, with but few happy ex­ceptions, were but little imbued with the spirit of the Gospel until Pietism relieved the period of stow growth under orthodoxy.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church is the official or State Church of Norway, acknowledged as such in the constitution. While separation from the State Church is tolerated, it is obligatory upon all whose position bears any relation to the State

The Church to be members of the same; Evangelical such are the king and his ministers, Lutheran theological professors in the univerai‑

Organiza‑ ties, religious teachers in the public

tion and schools, ministers, bishops, and the

Statistics. like. Otherwise, any one is at liberty to separate from the established church without any material sacrifice; but all members of the State Church are required to have their children baptized and instructed in its con­fession of faith. The Norwegian parliament (Stor­thing) makes all the laws of the church. The king is the highest ecclesiastical potentate, who operates i through his council or the minister of public wor­ship and instruction. These also administer with constitutional accountability the properties of the church, which amount to 30,000,000 crowns (x,040,000). According to the last census (1900), 2,187,200 of the entire population were amounted members of the State Church; there were 10,286 Methodists, 5,674 Baptists, 1,969 Roman Catholics under a vicar apostolic, 501 Mormons, 175 Quakers, and 642 Jews. For administration of the State Church, the country is divided into six chapters or bishoprics, whose administrators are appointed by the king. The ministerium of each chapter has the right of representation. Each bishopric is again subdivided into provost districts whose heads are called provosts, and who are elected by the clergy, but appointed by the king. The provost is an inter mediary between the bishop and the clergy, but is at the same time pastor of a congregation. All appointments in the individual congregations are made by the king. Besides a chief pastor in the larger congregations, there are resident chaplains. All incomes are fixed by the act of 1897. The bishop of Christiania is prim= inter pares and receives the highest salary. There is a rule without exception that no one can be appointed in the State Church without an official examination in theOlogy at the University of Norway. The children who belong to the State Church receive their religious instruc­tion in the public schools, which are entirely inde­pendent of the Church. The bishop has oversight of the training of religious teachers, the proper ad­ministration of the affairs of the parishes by the pastors, and the spiritual progress of the congrega_ tions; and he is required to visit in person each parish once in three yeas; tie n

e~sary traveling expenoft b68 paid by the exchequer. In every diocese there is an affieW who ~th the bishop d,recta

all material interests. Norway also takes a lively interest in home and foreign ions, whose aamin‑

istration is in the hands of private societies not con‑

trolled hasy the The principal missionary

tied minister, and from I ciet

quarters in St, vanger, and supports




missionaries in Zululand, China, and, principally, Madagascar. It has about 80 workers in the field, while its schools are attended by 48,000 children, and itx churches number 62,000 communicants.

(A. C. BANG.).

BIBMORIRAPHY: K. Maurer, Die Bekehrunp dea mrwmi­when Stammea sum Chridenthum, 2 vole., Munich, 1858; J. B. Pratt, Letters on the Scandinavian Churches, London, 1885; P. Zom, Stoat and Kirrhe in Norwegen, Munich, 1875; L. Dane, Nordena Helpener, Christi ania, 1881; A. C. Bang, UdeW am den norake Kirkea Hiatorie efter Reformationen, Christiania, 1883; idem. Udaipt over den norake %irkea Hiatorie under Katholiciamen, ib. 1887; idem. Kirkehiatoriake Smaaetykker, ib. 1890; idem, Den norake %irkea Hiatorie, 1666‑1600, ib. 1895; idem, Den Norake Kirkea Geistliphad i Rejormationa‑Aarhundredd 1666‑1800, ib.1897; H. Boyeson, The Story of Norway, Lon­don, 1888; G. F. Maclear, Apostles of Mediaeval Europe, pp. 172‑200, ib.,1888; F. Nippold, Handbuchder Neueaten Kirch­enpeschichte, ii. 431 eqq., Berlin, 1901; L. H. S. Dietrich­son, Omrida of den kirkelige %unatarkvologi, Christiania, 1902; T. W. Willson. Hint. of the Church and State in Nor­way, 10th‑16th Century, London, 1903; H. G. Heggtveit, Den Norake Kirk" i del nittende Aarhundrede, Christiania, 1905; W. S. Monroe, In Viking Land: Norway, its Peo­ples, its Fjords, and its Field#, London, 1908; J. V. Kvam, Den norske Kirke, Diakoper efter Reformationen. Chrie­tianis, 1910; Schaff, Christian Church, v. 1, p. 881.

NORWICH: Capital of Norfolk, England, and, since 1091, the seat of a bishop. It is situated on the Wensum, and has a population of 111,728 (1901). The cathedral, prevailingly Norman, was begun in 1096 by Herbert Losinga, who transferred thither the bishopric from Thetford. After a fire in the thir­teenth century it was rebuilt, and additions were made till the fifteenth century. The bishopric was founded at Dunwich, 630, the bishopric of Elmham was founded in 673, which latter seems after c. 850 to have superseded Dunwich, while the seat was located at Thetford in 1070, and was transferred as above to Norwich.

BmLIOGHAPHY: Historical Handbook to Norwich Cathedral, London, 1890; W. Lefroy, Norwich Cathedral, ib., 1897; C. H. B. Quennell, The Cathedral Church of Norwich, ib. 1898.

ROTES OF THE CHURCH: A term employed to embrace certain fundamental characteristics of the Church to which appeal may be made either in controversy or teaching. Some of those earliest asserted are: the antiquity of the Church and its priority to heretical communities (Tertullian, Hmr., xii., xx.); the unity of the teachings of the Church and apostolic succession (Irenmus, Hcer., passim); ecumenical consent, the name Catholic, and the continued existence of the Church from the times of the apostles (Augustine and Jerome, passim). Bellarmine increased the number of the notes of the Church to fifteen, including such points as the con­tinuance of miracles and prophecy and the unhappy end of those opposed to the Church. Luther as­signed to this category the true and uncorrupted preaching of the Gospel, baptism, the Lord's Sup­per, the keys, a legitimate ministry, and service in the vernacular (De eccteaim nods, Opera, ed. 1550, vii. 147). Calvin (" Institutes," IV., i.10) gives only truth of doctrine and correct administration of the sacraments. The Anglican view, while not alto­gether concordant as set forth by different divines, acknowledges as notes antiquity, continuous dura­tion through the ages, apostolic succession in the

bishopric, interunion of members and their union with Christ, and sanctity of doctrine. Perhaps the moat fundamental and acknowledged are those of the Niceno‑Constantinopolitan Creed‑" One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic."

B:atcoaserar: J. Taylor, Dissuasive from Popery. Part ii., London, 18878; R. Field, Of the Church, IL, i. 5, new

ad., ib., 1847; W. Palmer, Treatise on the Church of Christ,

i. 17‑21, ib., 1838.

POTgER, net'ker: The name borne by several monks of St. Gall.

1. ftotker Balbulus: Librarian and guest‑mas­ter at St. Gall, and for a time master of the school; b. c. 840; d. at St. Gall Apr. 6, 912. He is thought to have been the teacher and adviser mentioned in the " Book of Forma " of Solomon III., bishop of Constants, and in this case would be also the author of the Notatio on Biblical expositors. He certainly compiled the martyrology which bears his name; but his fame rests chiefly on the sequences com­posed by him. The impressive antiphon Media vita (translated in the burial service of the Anglican Prayer‑book) was incorrectly ascribed to him in the later Middle Ages. Recent investigation, on the other hand, has confirmed the old theory that he was the author of the remarkable book on Charle­magne attributed to " a monk of St. Gall " for which the impulse was given by a visit of the Emperor Charles III. to the abbey in 883; and he also made a continuation of the chronicle of Erchambert. Modern discoveries have notably enlarged the circle of his known works, and incited a recent German writer, Von Winterfeld, to claim for him the title of the greatest poet of the Middle Ages. He was considered a saint as early as the eleventh century, but his formal canonization did not take place until 1513.

2. ftotker Metlicus (Piperis Granum) : Cellarer and guest‑master at St. Gall; d. Nov. 12, 975. He was summoned to the court of Otto I. to exercise his medical skill, and left a considerable name also as a painter, a poet, and a teacher. Otto I. and II. on their visit to the abbey in 972 showed him great honor, and he seems to have acted as a notary for Otto T. at the court at Quedlinburg in drawing up the deed of immunity for the abbey.

3. Nephew of the above; became abbot of St. Gall in 971 on the resignation of Purchard T., and di d Dec. 15, 975.

4. Provost of St. Gall, employed as imperial chap­lain in Italy in 969, and bishop of Liege from 972 until his death Apr. 10, 1008. He held an important place in the politics of his time, especially in Lor­raine under Otto III. and Henry IT.


6. Notker Labeo: Later known as Teutonicue from his services as a translator; b. about 950 of a noble German family; d. at St. Gall June 29, 1022. He entered the abbey of St. Gall as a boy. Here, as his works and the testimony of his contempora­ries amply show, he acquired a remarkably good edu­cation, and ultimately became head of the abbey school, retaining this post until his death. His life was unmarked by external excitement, and there­fore all the more diligently devoted to his literary labors. Of these an account is given by his pupil




Eekehard IV. in his Tiber benMictionum, and by himself in a letter addressed to Bishop Hugo of Sitten (998‑1017). From Eckehard it appears that Notker translated into German the book of Job and the Psalms and the Moralia of Gregory the Great. According to his own letter, in order to facilitate the exposition of the sacred writings, he undertook " a thing well‑nigh unheard‑of," the translation of Latin works into German. First he tried his hand with two works of Boethius, De consolatione philosophim and De sancta trinitate; then he turned to poetry, and rendered the Disticha of Cato, Vergll's " Bucol­ics " and Terence's Andria. Next followed some prose works in the province of the liberal arts, the Nuptice philologim et Mercurii of Mareianus Capella, the De categories and De interpretatione of Aristotle, and the Principda arithmeticw (a work now un­known). Then he returned to the Scriptures, first translating the whole Psalter with comments from Augustine and going on to Job, which, according to Eckehard, he finished on the day of his death (see BIBLE VERBIOw8, B, VII., § 1). Of these there are now extant Boethius's De conaolatione, the Marcianus Capella, the Aristotle, and the Psalter, to which last are appended the Scriptural canticles, the Lord's Prayer, and the Apostles' and Athanasian Creeds. There are also extant several small original Latin works of Notker's, including one on rhetoric and a short treatise De partibus logictE, and two short German works usually classed together under the title De musaca. His work as a translator is marked by a thorough understanding of his task and a re­markable success in finding the right German words for the most difficult abstract expressions.

(G. Holz.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: On 1. The Vita by Eckehard with com­mentary is in ASB, April, i. 578‑598, with the Proceasm canonizationia, pp. 598‑804; G. Meyer von Knonau, in Mittheilungen der antiquariachen Gessellachaft in Zurich, six. 4 (1877); E. Diimmler, in Forachunpen zur deutarhen Geschichte, xxv. 197‑220, Gbttingen, 1885; Wattenbach, DGQ, i (1885), 59. 254‑257, ii. 479, i (1893), 60, 187, 272

274, 395, ii. 509; Z. Schwalm and P. von Winterfeld, in NA, xxvu. 740 sqq. On 2. P. Piper, Die Schriften Notkers and seiner Schule, Freiburg, 1882; J. Kelle, Geschichte der deutachen Litteratur, i. 232 sqq., Berlin, 1892; R. Kdgel, Geechichte der dewschen LitUeratur, i. 2, pp. 598 aqq., Stras­burg, 1897.

NOTT, ELIPHALET: American clergyman and educator; b. at Ashford, Conn., June 25, 1773; d. at Schenectady, N. Y., Jan. 29, 1866. His parents, who were farmers, died while he was still a boy. He studied the languages and mathematics, and taught school. He entered Brown University in 1790, and was licensed to preach in 1795. He was pastor and teacher at Cherry Valley, N. Y., in 1796‑97, and pas­tor of the First Presbyterian Church, Albany, N. Y., in 1798‑1804. In 1804 he was elected to the presi­dency of Union College, an office which he filled for more than sixty‑two years, with eminent dignity and ability. When he entered upon his duties, the institu­tion had only fourteen students and was in great pe­cuniary straits. Under his management it became one of the strongest literary institutions in the coun­try. He paid much attention to natural science, es­pecially to the laws of beat; and obtained about thir­ty patents for inventions in that department, one of which was the first stove for burning anthracite coal.

As an educator he was practical, unconventional, and greatly beloved. On the platform, he advocated temperance, opposed slavery, and always. figured as an earnest exponent of civil and religious liberty. He was original, scholarly, and impressive as a preacher and is considered one of the greatest pulpit orators of his time. His eulogy on the death of Alexander Hamilton, delivered at Albany, July 29, 1804, remains a classic. He published Councils to Young Men (New York, 1810); Lectures on Temper­ance (Albany, 1847); and the Resurrection of Chrid (New York, 1872).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. van Sautvoord and T. Lewis, Memoir of Eliphald Nott, New York, 1878.


HOURSE, EDWARD EVERETT: Congrega­tionalist; b. at Bayfield, Wis., Dec. 24, 1863. He was educated at Macalester College, St. Paul (1886­1887), Lake Forest College (1884‑86, 1887‑88; B.A., 1888), Hartford Theological Seminary (grad., 1891; fellow, 1893‑94), and the University of Jena (1894­1895), and was ordained by the presbytery of Chip­pewa, Wis., in 1893. From 1895 to 1898 he was pastor of the Second Congregational Church, Berlin, Conn.; since 1898 he has been connected with Hart­ford Theological Seminary, as instructor (1898‑90), associate professor of Biblical theology (1900‑05), and professor of Biblical history and theology (since 1905). He has likewise been a lecturer at Mount Holyoke College since 1901 and at the Hartford School of Religious Pedagogy since 1904. In the­ology he is a liberal conservative. Besides con­tributing articles on New‑Testament topics to the New International Eneyclopoedia (New York, 1902­1906), and in addition to his activity as associate editor of A Standard Dictionary of the Bible (1909), he has written Genesis arid thPReligioua Development of Israel (Hartford, 1906).


I. The Sources of Knowledge.

The Works of Novatian (¢ 1).

Contemporary and Later Notices (§ 2).

II. Novatian and the Schism.

Events Leading to the Schism (¢ 1).

Novatian s Person and Position (¢ 2),

Cornelius and Novatian Be Rival Bishops (1 3).

Success of the Catholic Party (1 4).

III. The Theoretical Basis of the Schism.

Catholic Position as to the Lapsed (§ 1).

The Novatian Position (¢ 2).

Criticism of These Positions (§ 3).

IV. Later History.

The most notable ecclesiastical formation of the third century, apart from Manicheism, which rests on a non‑Christian basis, is that of Novatian­ism. Unlike the later Donatism, it i8 connected

with the development of the Catholic theology not only by its primary doctrinal assumptions but also through its ecumenical diffusion from Spain to Syria in the centuries from the third to the fifth. The name " Novatian met" thus insufficiently des­ignates it from the name of one of its principal leaders‑founder he can scarcely be called‑with‑

out connoting its principles, its expansion, and its importance. Its history is that of a schism in the territory of Catholicism, turning upon the question


of the authority, extent, and result of the Church's power of the keys. So far as is known, it never developed any peculiar heretical system, but re­mained distinguished from the recognized Chris­tianity on this one point alone, thus affording a phe­nomenon almost unique in the history of Western Christendom, although the Jansenist Church offers a parallel to a certain extent.

1. Sources of Knowledge: Jerome (De vir. sT1., lxx.) enumerates seven works of Novatian: De paacha, De aabbato, De circumciaione, De aamrdote, De ora­tions (not ordinatione, as sometimes read), De cibis judaicis, De inatantin, De Attalo, " and many others, besides a large work on the Trinity, a :. The sort of epitome of the work of Tertul‑

Works of lian, attributed by many ignorant

Novatian. people to Cyprian." Of these works

none are extant except De cibis judaicia,

written in the form of a letter and preserved under the

name of Tertullian, and De trinitate. Novatian's

authorship of the last‑named was denied in the

fourth century, by those who were unwilling to give

the credit to a heretic, while for analogous reasons the

Macedonians of Constantinople, who appealed to a

passage in it, ascribed it to Cyprian. Rufinus

thought it was written by Tertullian; but Jerome is

probably right. It is evidently the production of a

Roman Christian, formed in the school of Ireneeus

and Tertullian, at a time when the Marcionites were

still dangerous, when Monarchian views had been

fully developed, and when Sabellius had already

been cast out. Its authenticity is still further

demonstrated by a comparison with his letters dis­

cussed below. The De ciia judaicis (and therefore

also the De sabbato and De circumcisions) must have

been written after the schism; but no allusion to it

is to be found in the De trinitate, to which Novatian

probably owed the reputation as a theologian which

he enjoyed before he adopted a schismatic attitude.

In it, with clear logic and in excellent style, he devel­

ops a popular philosophy on the nature of God and

confesses the true Godhead and manhood of Christ

in opposition to the Marcionites and Monarchians.

His Christology is that of Tertullian, though coming

a stage nearer to the Nicene by the assertion that the

Father is always the Father. The work has no little

historical importance; the security of its precise

dogmatic formulae allowed the Latins to meet the

Greeks on equal terms in the Christological contro­

versy. The two letters of Novatian which he ad­

dressed to the Church of Carthage, during the var

cancy of the see, at the request of the Roman clergy

(preserved among Cyprian's letters, xxx. and xxxvi.),

short as they are, give testimony both to his ability

as a writer and to his theological position. Jerome

speaks of a collection of his letters, which may have

included all the small treatises named above, as

well as the epistles addressed by him to the bishops

of various churches after his own elevation to the

episcopate. In recent times critical study has as­

signed to Novatian with great probability the

pseudo‑Cyprianie treatises De spectaculie, De bono

pudieitio;, Quod idols dii non aint, De laude martyrii,

and AdverBUS Judceos. The two first named were

written after the schism; the author is at the time

separated from his flock, as Novatian was when he

wrote De cibie judaicis; he is a bishop; his flock is no clearly distinguished local community but a special association which considers itself marked by unusual sanctity. De laude martyrii, on the other hand, was written before the schism, at the begin­ning of the Decian persecution. The date of the Adversua Judaos can not be determined. An at­tempt has been made, though with doubtful success, to enroll among Novatian's writings the twenty pseudo‑Origenistic treatises discovered by Batiffol and published Paris, 1900; the most that can safely be said is that their author made frequent use of Novatian's work, as he did also of that of Tertullian and Origen.

The most valuable source for the origin of the schism is the colledtion of Cypfian's letters, espe­cially those of Cyprian himself and Cor‑

s. Con‑ nelius (Epiat., xliv., xlv., xlix., Iii.‑lv.,

temporary fix.,, lx., lxviii., lxix., lxxiii.), together and Later with the Roman collection of letters,

Notices. dating from the middle of the third

century, used by Eumbius, and another

of which he made some use, the Epistolte Dionyaii

Alerandrini. Another important contemporary

authority is the pseudo‑Cyprianic Ad Novadanum,

which probably belongs to Pope Sixtus II. and dates

from 257‑258. In the use of these early documents it

must be borne in mind that scarcely anything has

come down from the opposite camp, and that the

official correspondence of ecclesiastics had already

begun to assume the diplomatic adroitness of state­

ment and the ornate rhetoric of the contemporaneous

secular diplomacy. The wide spread of the Novatian

community in the East stirred the orthodox

bishops from the beginning of the fourth century to

s ,vigorous polemic. Eusebius of Emesa wrote a

special treatise against them, now lost, and Athanar

sins, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Jerome, and Chrys­

ostom took notice of them. Eusebius (Hist. ecd.,

VI., xlii.‑VII., viii.) is of value. Socrates paid so

much attention to the spread of their churches in the

East that he was suspected of a secret sympathy

with their views, and he undoubtedly had personal

relations with some of them. Sozomen adds little,

but Isidore of Pelusium deals with them in two let­

ters (cxcxmcviii.‑ix.). Even as late as the close of

the sixth century, Eulogius, patriarch of Alexandria,

the friend of Gregory the Great, found it necessary

to combat their views in an extended treatise. The

sect is mentioned in a number of imperial decrees of

the fourth and fifth centuries. In the West the

schism decayed sooner than in the East, and there

is little original polemical material. The author of

the pseudo‑Augustinian treatise Contra Novatianum,

a contemporary of Damasus, is evidence for a tem­

porary though short progress of the sect in Rome.

Some personal knowledge is shown by Pacianus of

Barcelona in his letters directed against the Nova­

tian Sympronianus, author of an exposition of the

schismatic doctrine. There are a few mattered no­

tices in Hilary, Ambrose, Rufinus, the Catalogue

Liberianus, the letters of Innocent I., Celestine L,

and Leo I., and in Vincent of Lerins; and Augustine

has several noteworthy references to the sect. But

a glance over the whole Western literature shows

that from the middle of the fourth century there


was little certain knowledge of the origin of the schism or of the personal history of Novatian.

II. Novatian and the Schism: Up to about 220 the penalty for idolatry, adultery and fornication, and murder was definitive excommunication, any hope of restoration being left to the mercy of God

in the next world.* The strictness of :. Events this rule was first broken through in Leading regard to sins of the flesh by the special to the powers conceded to the confessors, and Schism. then by a decree of Pope Calixtus recog­nizing the possibility of restoration in the case of these sins, which gave rise to the schism of Hippolytus. As this schism was extinct by 250, it seems reasonable to suppose that the successors of Calixtus were more severe than he. There was no such mitigation so early in the case of apostasy (see LAPSED); and the question was not a specially practical one between 220 and 250. Roman and Carthaginian documents of the years following the latter date render it probable that there was a differ­ence of opinion at Rome in the pontificate of Fabian as to the treatment of grievous sinners, but not sharp enough to lead to a schism. The Decian persecution made so many apostates, however, that a continuance of the earlier severe treatment of the lapsed seemed a sweeping cruelty, and might threaten the very existence of some churches. The growth of dogmatic teaching as to the indispensa­bility of union with the Church and of priestly sac­raments had its effect in the almost universal establishment, about 250, of the rule that penitent lapai might be absolved when in danger of death. This, however, did not suffice to remove the diffi­culties; but before further measures could be taken, a decided opposition arose which once more called in question the propriety of the milder practise.

From the scanty and partially unreliable accounts of Novatian's life which are extant, the attempt must be made to sift out some facts. He seems to have received clinical baptism in a severe illness,

without subsequent confirmation, at a s. Nova‑ time when the validity of such baptism tian's Per‑ was not universally recognized. He son and was nevertheless later ordained priest Position. by the Roman bishop (probably Fa­bian), apparently in the face of a protest from all the clergy and many laymen. The fact of his ordination, as well as the evidence of his enemies, goes to show that he enjoyed a great reputation not only for learning and eloquence but also for virtue. His opponent Cornelius accuses him, indeed, of shut­ting himself up in his house at the outbreak of the persecution and refusing the appeals of the deacons to come to the help of his brethren; but the story is incredible in the form in which it is told, and may have grown out of the singular fact that he was passed over (perhaps as a learned man,, a " philoso­pher ") when other Roman presbyters were arrested. After the death of Fabian early in the persecution,

This statement seems stronger than the !seta warrant. The rise of Montanism with its rigorous disciplinary rules presupposes much laxity m many of the churches in Asia Minor and elsewhere. There in in the New Testament no evidence that perpetual excommunication wan the inevitable

penalty of the sins named. A. a. x.

there was a vacancy of almost fifteen months in the see, during which the administration was in the hands of the college of presbyters, assisted by the deacons, although the confessors had great influence. For the period of the vacancy there is valuable in­formation in the letters in Gyprian's collection, especially viii., sxx., xxxvi., of which the two latter are certainly from Novatian's hand. In the eighth, the Roman clergy give an account of their practise, distinctly expressing an exception to be made in favor of such of the lapsed as are in danger of death; and in reply Cyprian now for the first time accepts this principle. The remainder are to be kept under the discipline and observation of the Church, that the way to recovery may remain open by a valiant confession of their faith on a renewal of the perse­cution. In the thirtieth letter, which gives a clearer idea of Novatian's character than all the accounts of him by others, the practise adopted by Cyprian is expressly approved, and with all the severity called for against the libeliatici the possibility of the restor­ation of the lapai is not distinctly excluded. Their case is to be dealt with by a great council to be held after the restoration of tranquillity, until which time they are to do fitting penance. This middle course has been decided upon by the Roman clergy in con­sultation with some neighboring bishops and others present in Rome; but no definite innovation in prac­tise is to be introduced before the election of a new bishop. The same attitude, not radically opposed to innovations, is displayed in the thirty‑sixth letter, also written by Novatian in the name of the clergy of Rome, supporting Cyprian in his conflict with the lax presbyters and confessors. The letters ex­changed by Cyprian at this time with the Roman confessors Moses, Maximus, and others, exhibit the same spirit of harmony both between Carthage and Rome and in Rome itself. Thus up to the end of the winter of 250‑25L there is no trace of the approach of a schism in Rome.

In March, 257, after the cessation of the persecu­tion, the Roman presbyter Cornelius was elected bishop by the majority, apparently ac­3. Cornelius cording to the rules and in the presence and of sixteen bishops, though it is said

Novatian against his will. But the minority, in‑

ae Rival chiding several presbyters (according

Bishops to Eusebius, five, with some of the

moat respected confessors), refused to

accept the choice, set up Novatian as their bishop,

and had him consecrated by three Italian bishops.

It is noteworthy that at the beginning of the strug­

gle no theoretical ground seems to have been alleged

for the opposition, which centered around the person­

ality of Cornelius. Novatian was undoubtedly the

most prominent of the Roman clergy and the natural

candidate; Cornelius does not seem to have been

specially distinguished, and his conduct in the perse­

Qution was apparently not free from suspicion; if

the charge that Cornelius had been a libellaticus was

untrue, he had undoubtedly maintained communion

with certain bishops who had offered sacrifice. In

the whole correspondence between Cornelius and

Cyprian (Epiat., xliv.‑!iii.) there is no mention of a

theoretical difference with Novatian; and the letter

from Dionysius of Alexandria to Novatian shows


that the latter did not regard a reconciliation with the majority as hopeless, but rather that he had been forced into an attitude of opposition. All goes to show that an accommodation as to theory might have been reached but for the irreconcilable an­tagonism of the two dominant personalities.

It was fortunate for the cause of Cornelius that in the same spring of 251 Cyprian found it necessary, on account of the declared schism of Felicissimus, to yield so far as to admit the possibility

4. Success of the restoration of the lapsed, which

of the settled the question which side he

Catholic should take in the Roman controversy,

Party. though his support of Cornelius was

not hearty. A few African bishops

were even more cautious, but the great majority took

the side of Cornelius at a synod in Rome attended

(according to Eusebius) by sixty bishops. This

gathering excommunicated Novatian and pro­

claimed the "medicine of penance" for all the

lapsed. Novatian attempted by encyclical letters

and personal embassies to win support for his cause

and to discredit Cornelius. In Carthage Cyprian

did not even allow the envoys a public hearing; but

in the East they had a less discouraging reception

from Fabius of Antioch and a number of synods.

In May a large synod was held at Carthage, at which

Cyprian and his followers secured the adoption of a

via media (cf. EPist., Iv.). Absolute right to restora­

tion was still conceded only to the dying among the

lapsed; but it was admitted that the long and

thorough penance laid upon them might dispose the

divine mercy to forgiveness and make it possible for

them to attain an earthly reconciliation. A more

important advance was the sharp distinction be­

tween libelWiei, and sacrificati, allowing absolution

before death to the former, and thus approaching

fairly close to the position of the Roman synod under

Cornelius. In the same spring a zealous leader of

the schismatical party at Carthage, Novatus, came

to Rome and threw himself into the cause of Nova

tian; Cyprian even makes him responsible for the

schism, but this is surely an exaggeration. The

close alliance between Cornelius and Cyprian thus

gained a further motive. Before the end of 251

Cornelius was able to announce to his African brother

that the glorious confessors Maximus and his asso­

ciates had returned to the unity of the Church

(Moses had already died in prison). This was a

severe blow to the cause of Novatian; but he did not

give up the fight. Cornelius notifies Cyprian (EPist.,

1.) that a second embassy is on its way to Carthage,

including Novatus. They succeeded in establishing

a schismatic community there, as bishop of which

another Maximus was chosen. The Catholic party

issued victorious from its conflicts with both its

antagonists, but only at the cost of considerable

concessions. In EPist. lvi. Cyprian declares him­

self personally ready to receive the lapsed after three

years' penance, but refers the actual decision to a

provincial synod. This, which met in May, 253, de­

cided (under the pressure of another imminent per­

secution, that of Gallus) to grant restoration at once

to all the penitent lapsi. The persecution did not

amount to much, after all; but it was used to give a

good many the opportunity to justify their restora‑

tion by confession in the face of it, and to give Cor­nelius, on account of his banishment, the influential position of a confessor. Nothing more is heard of Novatian himself in the official correspondence. Throughout the decade 250‑260 a number of bishops still refused to agree to the laxer practise, and some of them (e.g. Marcianus of Arles) supported Nova tian without leaving the Church. In the East the death of Fabius of Antioch was timely for the Catho­lic cause. In the largely attended synod of Antioch, where some bishops strongly favored the strict practise and recognized Novatian as a bishop, the milder view prevailed; and by the end of 253 most, if not all, of the eastern churches had returned to unity‑though the danger of schism extended through Egypt, Armenia, Pontus, Bithynia, Cilicia, Cappadocia, Syria, and Arabia, as far as Mesopo­tamia. In Rome it appears that Stephen had taken a somewhat severer attitude, in order to win back the schismatics; ‑he was still refusing absolution to the most extreme cases of apostasy, allowing the offenders to continue doing penance with no definite promise of restoration. His successor Sixtus, how­ever, granted them reconciliation in 257, calling forth a new and violent attack from Novatian and his party, to which he replied in his treatise Ad Novatianum.

III. The Theoretical Basis of the Schism: At the

beginning of the controversy (250‑251) there was

no question of the case of death nor of the saerificati,

still less of the effect of due penance. Both parties

agreed that apostasy did not necessarily involve

eternal damnation, but that even a sacrificatus

might win the divine pardon. The con‑

y. Catholic flict thus narrows down to a question Position as to the justifiable extent and efficacy

as to the of the Church's power of the keys.

Lapsed Cyprian furnished the theory for the

dominant party, although it was car­

ried to its full extent only in the West, and even

there not until after Augustine. For a time men

were content with the general statements that schism

was to be avoided at all hazards; that Scripture

enjoined charity and mercy; that the Church ought

not to abandon the lapsi to the world and to heresy

and schism; that the admission of succor in danger

of death had its logical consequences, since many

who were supposed to.be dying recovered; that the

Church, by allowing the lapsed to reinstate them­

selves through confession of the faith, showed that

it regarded them as not wholly dead members. It

was further alleged that it was unjust to require

penance without holding out the possibility of ab­

solution. Against the charge of laxity, appeal was

made to the rigid investigation of individual cases,

to the distinction between the treatment of libel­

latici and sacrificati, to the long period of penance,

to the refusal of absolution to those who waited for

the approach of death to begin it. These motives,

however, are not for Cyprian the decisive ones. He

places the greatest emphasis upon the doctrine that

salvation is only for those who die in communion

with the Church, and that thus they must be lost

who are finally and forever excluded from it. If

the Church has the power of binding in the last in­

stance, while its absolution is only a condition sine


qua non of salvation, but does not certainly involve the final judgment of God, the attempt to separate the wheat and tares on earth must be an invasion of the divine prerogatives. The Church is no longer the fellowship of the saints and the elect, but the indispensable institution from which that fellow­ship proceeds. Its indispensability consists in the sacraments which it dispenses, including absolu­tion, which, however, do not guarantee salvation. As a moral institution also it is indispensable, since all the virtues gain value in God's sight only in and through it. The performance of these functions presupposes an organization and is attached to the priesthood, as summed up in the episcopate, which in its unity guarantees the authenticity of the Church.

When, on the other hand, Novatian and his party asserted that it was both the right and the duty of the Church to cut off grievous sinners z. The finally (though apparently Novatian

Novatian himself did not push this to the ex‑

Position. treme), when they denied that it had

the power of absolving those guilty of

idolatry and left them to the immediate judgment

of God, it was evident that his conception of the

Church, its absolution, and its priesthood was, or in

course of time became, entirely different from that

of his opponents. His thesis that God alone can

forgive sins does not empty the conception of the

Church of all significance, but assures the strictly

religious meaning of it, restricting the extension of

the Church in favor of its intensive force. If the

Church, as the community of the baptized who have

received God's pardon, is really the communion ot

saints and of salvation, it can not tolerate the un­

holy among its members without losing its charac­

ter. A good idea of Novatian's attitude is to be

obtained from the pseudo‑Augustinian treatise

Qumstiones veteris et novi testamenti, although there

may be a few traces of later development in it.

The Church is the body of Christ, and must be kept

holy as he is holy. Through baptism, in which all

sins are forgiven, each individual becomes a mem­

ber of Christ, and all together compose the body.

For all sins after baptism there is penance and for­

giveness in the Church, except for idolatry (and

possibly fornication); for these, as in the strict

sense sins against God, there is no forgiveness on

earth. Apostasy is the sin against the Holy Ghost,

received by the Christian in baptism and lost by

this sin, since there is only one baptism. The Church

can not take back those who have thus sinned

against God; logically, it has no power to forgive

such a sin. It is bound to preach and these sinners

to practise penance, as to the duty of which there

is no limitation in Scripture. The abstract possi­

bility exists that God will forgive these sinners,

since all things are possible with him; but nothing

can be certainly predicated as to this. The Catho­

lic Church, by restoring those who have fallen into

idolatry (and fornication) completely destroys the

constitution of the Church; since all make up the

one body, the holy are contaminated by the evil,

and the body perishes. Though it may retain the

correct traditio and professio, its members have lost

their hold on salvation and their right to the Chris‑

tian name, which belongs only to a pure Church and is thus found only among the followers of Novatian.

The historical judgment of Novatian's movement will depend on the point of view, whether it is that of primitive antiquity or of the require­3. Criticism ments of the time. Unquestionably

of these the schismatics preserved valuable

Positions. relics of ancient tradition. The idea

that the Church is a fellowship of

saints and of certain salvation is primitive, although

its representatives in the third century did not draw

the full consequences of it. But they refused to

identify the constitutional attributes of the Church

with the religious, or confuse actuality with possi­

bility; they maintained the old conception of bap­

tism as a gift and an unconditional obligation. It

was, however, both unjust and unmerciful to in­

flict severer penalties on the libellatici than on other

grievous sinners. The boast of being a community

of saints was one which at that time could not be

made without gross self‑deception or the rending

asunder of the Christendom of the day. The only

means of purification which the Novatianists em­

ployed was at the time quite inadequate to reform

the Church. Since their doctrine and every‑day life

did not differ essentially from those of the Church,

their penitential discipline is seen to be an archaic

survival of doubtful benefit, and their rejection of

the Catholic sacraments (in the practise of rebap­

tism) revolutionary. Aside from unedifying personal

conflicts, the bishops carried through the great

change of attitude with wisdom, caution, and rela­

tive strictness. It was best for the Christendom of

c. 250 that the Church should be regarded as an in­

stitution to train souls for eternal happiness, sup­

plied with means of grace and practical penalties,

and that the distinction between repentance and

ecclesiastical penance should be abandoned. There

was need of a line of action based on the circum­

stances of the moment, and of a close adherence to

the bishops as pillars of the Church. It was not the

least important result of the crises provoked by the

Decian persecution that they forced the bishops of

the various national churches to stand together and

finally placed full jurisdiction in their hands. Noth­

ing before or after contributed so much as these

crises to the establishment of the imperial Church

of later days.*

IV. Later History: For the western Church the controversy was not ended by the exclusion of the party of Novatian. The primitive survivals still to be found in Cyprian, which may be summed up in the formula that the requirements made by the Novatianists of all Christians were to be applied to the clergy, were the cause, in consequence of the persecution of Diocletian, of a terrible disturbance in Africa‑the Donatist schism (see DONATIsM). In Rome, also, there was a renewal of conflict over penitential discipline, of which unfortunately little is known (see ), and the Lueiferian

* There is room for difference of opinion as to whether the line of development indicated in the closing sentences of the paragraph above was really " best." and whether the more rigorous discipline of the Novatianiets would not have

been better. A. a. N.



schism here (see LuCMR OF CALARIS AND TM LucnmRISNs), as well as that of Meletius (see ME­LETIus OF ANTIOCH AND THE MELETIAN SCHISM) in the East. The Novatian organization was consoli­dated in the two generations after Decius, and re­ceived many additions from Montanist communi­ties. Apart from the primary question of discipline, the principal differentia, at least in Phrygia (where Montanist influence was strong), was the prohibi­tion of second marriages. In the fourth and fifth centuries there were communities of " Cathari " in every province bf the Empire, especially in the East. At the beginning of the fifth there were a number of Novatian churches in Rome, with a bishop; they did not fuse with the Donatists, but were usually regarded by the Catholics as on the same plane. In the time of Cyril they had a number of churches in Alexandria under a bishop (Theopemptus); in Con­atantinople the list of their bishops is preserved from 325 to 439. The first of this series, Acesius, was present at the Council of Nicaea on Constantine's summons, and accepted its decisions; the constant adherence of all the members of the sect to the homo­onion shows the influence of Novatian's work De trinitate. The council adopted a conciliatory atti­tude toward them, treating them as schismatics but not as heretics, and acknowledging the validity of their baptisms and ordinations. Constantine allowed them to retain their churches and ceme­teries; but ten years later he changed his policy, placed them on the same plane as the Marcionites and Valentianians, forbade their public worship, took their churches from them, and ordered the destruction of their books. They suffered severely in the persecution of the orthodox by Constantius, which drew them closer to the Nicene Catholics. Julian's policy was to their advantage, but under Valens they were again united in suffering with the Catholics, and in the provinces the persecution lasted until the accession of Theodosius, who took them under his protection. In Constantinople they remained unmolested until the middle of the fifth century. In Rome, Honorius included them in his edict of 412 against heretics, and at Alexandria Cyril closed their churches and expelled their bishop. Innocent I. was the first pope to take strong meas­ures against them, followed by Celestine I.,. who suppressed their public worship. In the East, how­ever, their organization maintained its existence as late as the seventh century. (A. HARNACg.)

BIHI,ZOGRAPHy: The sources wee indicated in the text. The beet edition of the opera of Novatian is by J. Jackson, London, 1728, cf. MPL, iii.; a recent ed. of the De trini­tage is by W. Y. Tausset, Cambridge, 1909; Eng. travel., with introduction, of De trinitate and De c0ia Judaicia in ANF, v. 81180; and a new travel. of the De trinitatn was published New York, 1909. The discussions of the literature ascribed to Novatian are indicated in Hauck­Hersog, RE, xiv. 223‑225. Consult further: Harnack, Litteratur, i. 852, fi. 2 pp. 81‑62 et passim (very full); idem, Dogma, i. v., consult index; C. W. F. Walch, His­toric der Kdaereien, ii. 185‑288, 11 vols., Leipsie, 178285; H. Gr6goire, Hilt. des seetes relioieuses, 5 vols., Paris, 1828; R. A. Lipeius, Die Quellen der 81testen Ketaergeschichte, Leipsie, 1875; A. Hilgenfeld, Die Ketzergexhichte des f7r chrsdenthume, 2 vole., Leipsic, 188488; C. T. Cruttwr11, Litemry Hiat. Of Early Christianity, 2 vols., London,1893; Wehofer, in Ephemeris Salonitana, 1894, pp. 13 sqq.; Quarry, in Hermatheno, x (1897), 38 eqq.; O. Barden­hewer, oeschichte der allkirchlichen LOWatur, ii. 559 eqq.,



Freiburg, 1903; Neander, Chrislian Church, f. 237‑248; $ohaff, Chrigian Church, ii. 198‑197, 570, 849853; and in general the works on the church history and doctrinal history of the period.

NOWACg, n8"vdc', WILHELM GUSTAV HER­MANN: German Lutheran; b. at Berlin Mar. 3, 1850. He was educated at the University of Ber­lin (Ph.D., Halle, 1872; Th. Lie., Berlin, 1873), and became privat‑docent there in 1875, and extraor­dinary professor in 1880. He was also supply at St. Gertrud's, Berlin (1876‑77), and pastor at the orphan asylum at Rummelsburg, an eastern suburb of Ber­lin (1877‑81). Since 1881 he has been professor of Old‑Testament exegesis and Hebrew at the Uni­versity of Strasburg. He is also a canon of St. Thomas, Strasburg, a member of the supreme con­sistory, and an overseer of the Protestant gymna­sium at Strasburg, as well as a member of the Deutsche Morgenlhndische Gesellschaft and of the Strasburg Wissenschaftliche Gesellschaft. In the­ology he is an adherent of the historical critical school. He has written: Die BedeWung des Hieron­ymua fur die alttestamentliche Textkrttik (G6ttingen, 1875); Die aseyrisc)‑babyloniachen Keilinschriften and daa AIM Testament (Berlin, 1878); Der Pro­phet Hosea erkldrt (1880); Die 8ozialen Problems in Israel ursd deren Bedeutung fur die religibse F,nt­tsriekelung diesea Volke8 (Strasburg, 1892); Hebrd­isscAe Arehdologie (2 vols., Freiburg, 1894); Die Zukunftahq$nungen 1sraels in der astyrischen Zeit (Tubingen, 1902); and Texlausgabe der kleineren Propheten in Kittel's Bible (1906). He has pre­pared the second edition of E. Bertheau and F. Hitzig's commentaries on Proverbs and Eccle­siastes for the Kurzgefaastee ezegetiachm Handbluh zum Allen Testament (Leipsic, 1883); the third edition of H. Hupfeld's commentary on the Psalms (2 vols., Gotha, 1888); and Amos and Hosea for Religionsgeachichtliche Volkabilcher (Til­bingen, 1908). Since 1892 he has been the editor­in‑chief of the Handkommentar zum Alters Testament, to which he has contributed the volumes on the Minor Prophets (G6ttingen, 1897; 2d ed., 1903), Judges and Ruth (1900), and Samuel (1902).

NOWELL nS'el (VOWEL, NOEL), ALEXAN­DER: Dean of St. Paul's and preacher of the Elizabethan period; b. at Read Hall, Whalley (37 m. n.e. of Liverpool), County of Lancaster, 1507 or 1508; d. at London Feb. 13, 1601 or 1602. He was educated at Middleton, near, Manchester, and at Brasenose College, Oxford, which he entered at thirteen. He was the " chamber‑fellow " of Foxe the martyrologist, and was made bachelor of arts in 1536 and master in 1540. In 1543 he was appointed master of Westminster School, London, he being the second incumbent of that position; was licensed to preach in 1550, and in 1551 received a stall at Westminster. He adopted the principles of the Reformation, and, at the accession of Mary, fled to the continent, where he tarried at Strasburg and Frankfort, in intimate intercourse with the exiles, who subsequently became eminent under Eliza­beth. Returning to England at Elizabeth's acces­sion, he was made archdeacon of Middlesex; and canon of Canterbury in 1560; and was appointed one of the commissioners to visit several of the dio‑



ceses; and dean of St. Paul's. It was during his in­

cumbency, on June 4, 1561, that the spire of the

cathedral was burned. Nowell was regarded as one

of the first scholars in the realm, and took a prom­

inent part in all ecclesiastical matters. In 1563 he

was chosen prolocutor of the lower house of the

convocation of Canterbury, and presided over those

sessions which revised and settled the Articles of

Religion. In 1565 he had a controversy with Thomas

Dorman, who attacked John Jewel's Apology. His

services were in great demand on all public occa­

sions and he was chosen to make the first public

announcement from the pulpit of the destruction

of the Armada before the lord‑mayor, aldermen,

and others. Nowell is the author of one or more

catechisms, which were " approved and allowed "

by the clergy of convocation. In 1563 The Cate­

chism was presented to the upper, and a Catechis­

mua pueromm to the lower, house of convocation.

Whether these were identical, or two different cate­

chisms (and in this case both written by Nowell),

it is difficult to determine. R. Churton holds to the

latter view. In 1571 a catechism by Nowell was

printed in Latin; it was appointed to be read at

Oxford in 1578 and studied at Cambridge in 1589.

This was called The Large Catechism followed by

Nowell with The Middle Catechism and The Short

Catechism. The translation of the large catechism

was published by Thomas Norton (Brasenose Col­

lege, Oxford, 1750; latest ed., G. E. Corrie, with an

appendix containing sermon of Nowell preached

before Parliament, 1563, London, 1853). It is,

therefore, probable that Nowell was the author of

the first part of the catechism now in use in the

Church of England, published in 1549. It was pre­

scribed by Archbishop Parker of Canterbury to be

taught; and it heads a list of books for the extirpar

tion of heresy which the University of Oxford pre­

scribed in 1579.

BIHIJOa8APHY: R. Churton, The Life of A. Nowell, Oxford.

1809; J. Strype Annals of the Reformation, new ed, ib.

1824; idem. Ecclesiastical Memorials, vole. ii.‑iii., London,

1721; DNB, xli. 243‑250, where copious references to lit­

erature are found.

NOYES, neiz, GEORGE RAPALL: Unitarian;

b. at Newburyport, Mass., Mar. 6, 1798; d. at Cam­

bridge, Mass., June 3, 1868. He was graduated at

Harvard College, 1818, studied theology there, and

was licensed in 1822. He was pastor at Brookfield

and Petersham, Mass., and from 1840 till his death

Hancock professor of Hebrew and oriental lan­

guages and Dexter lecturer on Biblical literature in

Harvard University. He was a fine scholar, espe­

cially in sacred philolpgy, and published original

translations, with notes: of Job (Cambridge, 1827);

Psalms (Boston, 1831); Prophets (3 vols., 1833­

1837); Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles. (1846);

the New Testament (from Tischendorf's text, 7th

and 8th editions, 1868).



NUELSEN, JOHN LOUIS: Methodist Episco­

pal bishop; b. at Zurich, Switzerland, Jan. 19, 1867;

came to the United States in 1886 and graduated

at Drew Theological Seminary, 1890; became pas­

tor of a German Methodist Episcopal Church in

Sedalia, Mo., 1890; professor of ancient languages, St. Paul's College, Mo.; 1890; professor of exeget­ical theology, Central Wesleyan Seminary, 1894, and of the same in the Nast Theological Seminary, Berea, O., 1899, was elected bishop May 19, 1908. Since 1897 he has edited the Deutsch‑amerikanische Zeitschrlft fur Theologie and Kirche (Beret, O.); and has written, Die Bedeutung des Evangeliums Jo­hannes fur die christliche Lehre (Berlin, 1903); Das Leben Jest& in Wortlaut der vier Evangelien (New York, 1904); John Wesley, ausgewdhhe PredigUn (1905); Luther, the Leader (1906); and Kurzge­fasete Geschichte des Methodiamus (1907).

PUERNBERGER, norn‑bir'ger, AUGUSTIN: German Roman Catholic; b. at Habelachwerdt (60 m. s.s.w. of Breslau) Jan. 6, 1854; d. at Breslau Apr. 20, 1910. He was educated at the universities of Breslau and Prague, and was ordained to the priesthood in 1879. He was then curate of the Anima at Rome till 1881, after which he was a gymnasial teacher at Neisse and Breslau until 1884. He became privat‑docent at the University of Bres­lau in 1892, associate professor of church history in 1894, and professor of the history of dogma, patris­tics, and the history of ecclesiastical organization in 1901. He wrote: Aus der literarischen Hinter­lassenschaft des helligen Bonifatius and des heiligen Burchardua (Neisse, 1888); Ueber sine ungedruckte Kanonensammlung aus dem achten Jahrhundert (Mainz, 1890); De Sandi Bonsfatii Gerncanice apos­toli vitis codicum manuseriptorum ope denuo edendis (Breslau, 1892); Vita Sancti Bonifatii audore Wil­libaldo (1895); Die Namen Vynfreth‑Bonifatius (1896); Zur Kirchengeschichte des neunzehitten Jahr­hunderta (3 vols., 1897‑1900); Die r6misehe Synods vom Jahr 71,3 (Mainz, 1898); Neue Dokumente zur Geschichte des Pater A. Faulhabers (1900); Das Epitaph des Pater A. Faulhabera (Habelsehwerdt, 1902); and Zum zweihundertjdhrigen Bestehen der katholisch‑theologischen Fakultdt Breslau (Breslau, 1904).


NUMBERS, SACRED: The numbers and com­

putations, as well as the few technical expressions,

found in the Bible show familiarity with the four

basal operations of arithmetic and an elementary

knowledge of fractions. Hebrew words like aaphar,

" count," mispar, " number," palcadh, " enroll,"

manah, " determine numerically,"

Hebrew minyan, " number," rosh, " sum,"

Knowledge gars`, " subtract," ha'odeph, " the

of Com‑ remainder," are examples of evidences

putation. of this knowledge. Instances of addi­

tion are found in Num. i., xxvi.; of

subtraction in Gen. xviii. 28 sqq.; of multiplication

in Lev. xxv. 8; Num. vii. 88; of division, Num.

xxxi. 26 aqq. More complicated operations are in­

dicated in Lev. xxv. 50 sqq., xxvii. 18, 23. Frac­

tions like one‑third, one‑fourth, one‑fifth, one‑sixth,

one‑, two‑, and three‑tenths occur, while in Zech.

xiii. 8 two‑thirds, in Gen. xlvii. 24 four‑fifths, and

Neh. xi. 1 nine‑tenths are found. A decimal sys­

tem is implied in the powers of ten so frequently

used or implied. The employment of the letters of



the alphabet as numbers was known in times be­

fore the Ptolemies, and among the Jews it is proved

by Maccabean coins. In earlier times the Hebrews

used the system of the Babylonians, which was em­

ployed also by Assyrians and in the West, even in

Egypt, and extended eastward into India. From

the foregoing it follows that the derivation, at­

tempted by many exegetes, of critically suspected

numbers from written numbers indicated by letters

is to be accepted with the greatest caution, since such

changes could have arisen only in a period after the

text was fixed. Corrections of numbers like those

of the Chronicler, looking to the systematic sub­

stitution of lower numbers, is useless, since those

numbers axe in the texture of the Chronicler's work.

Among diverse peoples certain numbers were

employed in such a way that the question is raised

whether originally a symbolic meaning was not in­

herent. This question is raised in interest when

there is noted the frequent employment of a num­

ber in connection with sacred things. From the

notice of the last fact, the inference has been drawn

that under all much‑used numbers a

Symbolism symbolical meaning lay hidden; to

of Numbers this supposition strength was given by

in General. the early endeavor in Jewish circles to

give a significance to words through

the numerical value of the component letters (as

when the 318 of Gen. xiv. 14 is connected with

Eliezer, or the eighty‑five priests of I Sam. xxii. 18

is connected with the Hebrew for " priests," or the

603,000 Hebrews of Num. i. 46 is brought into rela­

tions with the Hebrew for " Children of Israel ").

This method of exegesis received strength from the

idea taken over from Greek philosophy, that num­

bers and numerical relations are fundamental in

the universe, and there arose not only a Jewish but

a Christian Cabala (see CABALA), followers of which

yet exist. Although the disciples of the cabalistic

school differ from each other so much in methods

and results, while they attempt to obtain access to

" deeper meanings," new arbitrary arrangements

are continually " discovered " to which significance

is given. K. C. W. F. Bihr gave an impulse to this

sort of research in his Symbolik des mosaiwhen

Cultus (2 vols., Heidelberg, 1837‑39), followed

by Kurtz (in TSK, 1844, pp. 315 sqq.), Kliefoth

(in Theologische Zeitschrift, 1862, pp. 1 aqq., 341

aqq., 509 aqq.), and Kliefoth's pupil L&mmert, who

yet could not agree with his master. Are there,

then, in the Bible numbers used unmistakably in a

symbolical sense? If so, they must have been in­

telligible not only to the author, but to the reader.

At least the numbers seven, twelve, ten, and three

are used symbolically in the Bible. This use is

based upon two standards, arithmetical and his­

torical. The former is the general ground which

has led diverse nations to use these numbers in the

same symbolical manner. Natural facts have

strengthened the usage, as when seven is related to

the moon's periods and twelve to the ratio of the

moon's course to the sun's. Three had significance

as the simplest group of units, seven as a double

group with a central point, twelve as four times the

group of three and also as the first number divisible

by four numbers, ten as the basis of decimals.

These qualities explain the wide use of these num­bers as sacred. While all cases can not be explained on the ground of derivation from Babylonia, the wide influence of that region upon culture and re­ligion in the pre‑Christian world, especially upon the Old Testament and thus upon the New Testa­ment and consequently later upon Christian peoples, is now fully recognized, and this is in some cases traced backward to the early pre‑Semitic civiliza­tion of Babylonia. It seems probable that the em­phasis upon certain numbers originated in the re­ligious field, and that thence the symbolic signifi­cance spread to other domains. Especially is this true of the number seven, the word for which in Sumerian the Semitic Babylonians translated by a word meaning " coihpleteness." The coincidence of this number with natural phenomena, as the length of a moon's phase, would emphasize the number's supposed qualities (see WEEg). Further, the em­ployment of sacred numbers in the Old Testament shows more or less consciousness of an original idea of this sort; sometimes, however, this employment is secondary in its reference. The use of these num­bers in sacred connections influenced their employ­ment in other relations. To the relations of sacred import were added also historical relations; some­times the latter are first in mind.

Some numbers usually convey certain definite ideas. Thus three recalls deity, four the world or mankind, five half of completion, ten full comple‑

tion, twelve the people of God. If it Seven, be asserted that three has significance

Three, for the Christian doctrine of the Trin‑

and Four. ity, that four recalls the quarters of

the earth or the winds, and so on, this may be granted; but if it be claimed that, whenever these and like numbers appear with a semblance of significance, a concealed and mystical reference to the assumed symbolical meaning is present, this is a cabalistic eisegesis against which protest is a press­ing duty. On seven see SEVEN, THE SACRED Nunt­BER. To the evidence there furnished may be added Zech. iii. 9, iv. 10, where the seven eyes connote di­vine omniscience and forethought, and iv. 2 aqq., where the seven lamps symbolize the divine ful­ness of light. Similar ideas of completeness are in­volved ,in Isa. xxx. 26; Dan. iii. 19; Deut. xxviii. 7, 25. Seven‑day periods are frequent (see WEE%). Multiples of seven are numerous: twice seven, Lev. xii. 5; thrice fourteen, Matt. i. 17; ten times seven, Dent. x. 22; Ex. xxiv. 1; Num. xi. 16, 24; Luke x. 1; Gen. 1. 3; Dan. ix. 2; eleven times seven, Judges vii. 14; Ezra viii. 35; and seven multiplied by multiples of ten is of common occurrence. Next to seven three occurs often, and seems to derive its significance from its arithmetical qualities as some­thing absolute‑the beginning, middle, and end. In this Babylonian conceptions seem to meet and greet Roman and Greek ideas. But that the number three in the old Testament has significance for the doctrine of the Trinity must be rejected. Gen. xviii. 2 aqq. speaks not of an appearance of Yahweh in triple form, but of his theophany accompanied by two companions. The threefold blessing of Num. vi. 24 aqq. and the trisagion of Isa. vi. 3 are merely a kind of superlative. A support for the doctrine


of the Trinity used to be found in the ethnic triads; but it is to be remembered that the great triads of Babylonia and Egypt came out of a threefold divi­sion of the universe, with which the doctrine of the Trinity has nothing to do. To what the conspicu­ous prominence of the number three is due will probably remain a basis of debate. ExAmples of its use are: II Cor. xii. 2, the third heaven; Exod. iii. 14, the threefold feast; Dan. vi. 10, three daily seasons of prayer; Gen. xl. 10 sqq., three‑day period; three‑month period, Exod. ii. 2; triple salutation, I Sam. xx. 41. In many other relations three appears; of. Judges vii. 16; Dent. xix. 7; Josh. xviii. 4; Job. ii. 11; T John v. 7. Multiples of three are to be noted, as in the ten times three of the month, the thirty shekels of. Exod. xxi. 32; in the 300 of Gen. xlv. 22 and other passages; in the 3,000 of I Mace. (fre­quently); in the 3,600 of II Chron. ii. 1; and in the 30,000 so often appearing, as in Josh. viii. 3. The relations of the number four to the universe at large appear often; cf. Gen. ii. 10; Jer. xlix. 36; Dan. vii. 2, viii. 8; Zech. ii., vi. 1 sqq.; Ezek. i. 5 sqq.; Rev. iv. 6, vii. 1; Ezek. xiv. 21; Judges xi 40. Multiples of four figure largely: so forty, Gen. xxv. 20; Josh. xiv. 7; Ex. xvi. 35, expressing a generation; Acts xiii. 21, vii. 30; Judges iv. 3 (where twenty is the half of forty); Gen. vii. 4 sqq. Forty days is a very common period of time in the Old Testament; Jonah iii. 4; Acts i. 3. Indeed, forty to other computations, as where it is combined with twelve to indicate a certain period (I Kings vi. 1; upon which the commentaries should be consulted, giving hints as to variations of this computation). So 400 appears as a round number: Gen. xv. 13; Judges xxi. 12, often; 4,000 is also known, I Sam. iv. 2; Matt. xv. 38; Acts xxi: 38; 40,000 occurs in Judges v. 8; II Sam. x. 18; and 400,000 in Judges xx. 2, 17.

The number five appears as the half of ten; cf. I Kings vii. 39, 49; Matt. xxv. 2; also as a round number, I Sam. xvii. 40, xxi. 3; Isa. xix. 18; I Cor.

xiv. 19. Five also is of importance The Num‑ in penalties and the like, as in Ex. bers Five xxii. 1; Num. iii. 47, xviii. 16; the to Twelve. same idea is found in Gen. xliii. 34,

xlv. 22; one‑fifth also makes its ap­pearance in legislative directions, as in Lev. v. 16, xxii. 14, and often; while multiples of five appear in the regulations of Lev. xxvii. respecting the vow; cf. fifteen in Hos. iii. 2. Multiples of five are em­ployed: in measures, Gen. vi. 15; Ezek. xl. 15; in compensation, Dent. xxii. 29; frequently in mat­ters regarding population or the army (e.g., Ex. xviii. 21; Dent. i. 15); periods of fifty days or years are to be noted (Lev. xxiii. 16, xxv. 10‑11), in this case the motive is seven times seven plus one. Higher multiples used are 500, 5,000, and 500,000. The number six is seldom employed as symbolical. The six years of Ex. xxi. 2 correspond to the six work‑days of the week (Ex. xx. 9); the six steps of Solomon's throne are related to the twelve lions (I Kings x. 19); further instances are the six wings of the seraphim (Isa. vi. 2); the reed of six cubits (Ezek. xl. 5); cf. also one‑sixth in

Ezek. xlv. 13. Multiples of six are 60, 600, 6,000,

and 600,000. The number eight occurs generally as the next number to seven, as in the case of cir­cumcision (Gen. xvii. 12), in offerings (Ex. xxii. 29 sqq.; Num. vi. 10), and in feasts (Lev. xxiii. 36). Nine, as the square of three, might be expected fre­quently, but is rare, and generally signifies ten minus one (Neh. xi. 1; Luke xvii. 17), occurring as ninety‑nine (100 minus one; Matt. xviii. 12). Round numbers in multiples of nine are 900 and 9,000. The number ten is naturally of frequent occurrence: as a basal measure for the Temple (I Kings vi. 3), as the number of the command­ments, as denoting the number of vessels, etc., in the Temple (I Kings vii. 27‑38); in the ritual fre­quently (e.g., Ex. xii. 3), including the tenth (see TrrHEs). The use of the powers of ten is of course common. Thus 100 as a round number and as a multiplier is used (Eccles. vi. 3; Gen. xxvi. 12; Matt. xiii. 8); so 1,000 (Ex. xx. 6; Matt. xiii. 8); and 10,000 (Judges iv. 6 sqq.; i Sam. xv. 4; Matt. xviii. 24); as well as 100,000 (I Kings xx. 29); and such passages as Dan. vii. 10; Rev. v. 11 show the use of this number to suggest large ideas. Other uses are shown in Lev. xxvi. 26; Neh. v. 11; Lev. xxvi. 8; Judges xx. 10, etc., in which various pro­portions that involve the number are employed. In Matt. xx. 6 sqq. the number eleven is used sym­bolically. The common use of the number twelve is somewhat remarkable, whether that is influenced by its being the product of three and four or the sum of five and seven or the number of the months and the zodiacal signs‑certainly of the last there are no signs among the Hebrews, where the use most general refers to the number of tribes. Nat­urally the multiples of twelve appear also in rela­tion to the tribes; 12,000 (Num. xxxi. 5), 24,000 (Num. xxv. 9), 144,000 (Rev. vii. 4). There is room for question whether the number seventy (ut sup.) is a round number for seventy‑two; this is familiar through the use of that term for the trans­lators (six times twelve) of the Old Testament into Greek. One usage worthy of notice here is poetic, in which a lower and a higher number axe con­joined for rhetorical heightening of effect (Isa. xvii. 6; Amos. i. 3 sqq.; Micah v. 5; Prov. xxx. 15 sqq., notable; Ecal. xi. 2). On the mystical numbers in Dan. viii. 14, xii. 11; Rev. xiii. 18‑19 consult the commentaries. (E. KAuTzscHt.)

BIBLtoaRAPH7: Isidore of Seville, De numeris, in MPL, lxxxi.; K. C. W. F. Bhhr,.$ymbolik des mosaischen Cullus, i. 119‑208, Heidelberg, 1837; C. Auber, Hid. et Mario du symbolisne relipieux, i. 97‑155, Paris, 1870; R. Hirzel, in Abhandlunpen der aachaiachen Gesellachaft der Wissenschaften (1885), 1 sqq.; S. Kraus, in ZATW, xia. 1 (1899). 1 sqq•, and part 2, pp. 38 sqq.; H. Gunkel, Zum relipionapeschiehtlichen Verddndnis des N. T., pp. 43‑44, 81, GSttingen, 1903; W. H. Roscher, in Abhand­lungen der adchsixhen Geaellachaft der Wissenachaften, xxi. 4 (1903), xxiv. 1 (1904), nevi. 1 (1907), xxvu. 4 (1909); A. Jeremias, Daa A. T. ins Liehle des alter Orients, pp. 58 sqq., Leipsic, 1908; E. Mahler, in ZDMG, lx (1908), 834 eqq.; B. Stade, in ZATW, xxvi (1906), 124 sqq.; E. K3nig, in ZDMG, lxi (1907), 474 sqq.; Schrader, BAT, ii. 614 sqq.; E. W. Hopkins, Oriental Studies of the Oriental Club of Philadelphia, pp. 141 sqq.; H. G. Wood, Ideal Metrology in Nature, Art, Religion, and History, Dorchester, Mase., 1908; Vigour­oux, Dictimnaire, faeo. xxviii. columns 1877‑97; DB, iii. 580‑567; EB, iii. 3434‑3439; JE, ix. 348‑350; the literature under CABALA and the commentaries on the Biblical passages.




NUN: A word applied in modern English to the members of cloistered female religious orders. In late and medieval Latin the cognate form is found in both masculine and feminine forms (nonnus and nonna), explained by Forcellini as applied to elders in token of respect. In this sense the modern Ital­ian retains the words nonno and nonnafor "grand­father " and " grandmother." Jerome coordinates the terms caata et nonna, Amobius aanctus et nonr nun. The word nonnus in this sense was used in monastic phraseology, as in the Rule of St. Bene­dict, chap. 1xiii., which forbids the monks to call each other simply by their names, requiring the prefix of frater from the elder to the younger and nonnus from the younger to the elder. This usage has long been obsolete, while the feminine form has passed into the vernacular of several modern lan­guages in the sense given at the beginning of this article. See MoNAsTIcisM. (A. HAUCK.)



NUREMBERG, RELIGIOUS PEACE OF: A temporary settlement of the difficulties between the Roman Catholic and Protestant states of the empire, agreed upon at Nuremberg in 1532. The dangerous position in which the Protestants had been left by the decisions of the Diet of Augsburg (Nov. 19, 1530) forced them to renew their efforts to form an alliance for mutual protection. The jurists succeeded in persuading Luther and the elector that if the emperor did not keep his oath to them they were justified in taking measures for self‑defense; and soon after Christmas, 1530, the Schmalkald League cause into existence (see PHILIP THE MAGNANIMOUS). By the expiration of the time of grace allowed to the Protestants (Apr. 15, 1531) their position had notably improved; afid the Turks were threatening to attack not mere­ly Hungary but the Austrian crown‑lands. Ferdi­nand advised his brother the emperor to come to some compromise with the Protestants so as to win their support against this danger. The league was attaining an unexpected degree of solidarity, and the Roman Catholic states were disquieted by rumors of warlike preparations on their part. Clement VII. himself was considering the possi­bility, if there were no other means of warding off the peril of the Turks on one side and of a general council on the other, of conceding to the Protes­tants the marriage of the clergy and communion in both kinds.

The first step toward agreement was taken when the emperor ordained (July 8, 1531), in a decree not immediately published, that the action of the Reichakammergericht in the cases before it growing out of the decision of the Diet of Augsburg should be suspended until the next diet. Further nego­tiations throughout the autumn of 1531 came to nothing. The Protestant leaders decided not to appear at the Diet of Regensburg (Apr., 1532) but to meet simultaneously at Schweinfurt and begin then a serious effort to reach an agreement. The negotiations progressed very slowly, the Leaguers


clinging to the advantage they had gained, and Ferdinand so convinced of his ultimate success that his representatives scarcely ventured to com­municate to him the proposals of the other side. When the diet met, the Roman Catholic states, turning a deaf ear to the Protestant demands, called for the execution of the Augsburg Recess and its maintenance until the assembling of a council. The emperor saw nothing to do but to act without them and make peace at all costs; and Luther on his side strongly urged the securing of essentials by the abandonment of opposition on such points as the dispute over the validity of Ferdinand's election. The sultan was now actually carrying his threats into ex­ecution, and some of the Protestant states were moved by patriotism and fear of the reproach that they were standing idly by to witness the destruction of Christendom into mobilizing for the emperor's support.

After tedious negotiations, an agreement was reached on July 23, and the Peace of Nuremberg was promulgated on Aug. 3. The emperor, in his own name, guaranteed to the Evangelicals the maintenance of the statue quo until the meeting of a council, or, if this should not take place within a year, until the next diet. It was not an absolute guaranty of the quashing of the suits before the Reichskammergericht, but a private " assurance " on the part of the emperor, which was still further weakened by the requirement that a formal appli­cation should be made in each case. In a word, it was rather a truce than a peace; but it signified, after all, a considerable victory for the Evangel­icals. The Augsburg Recess, on which the Roman party in the diet had so strongly insisted, was an­nulled; the legal status of the Protestant churches was assured at least for the time; and Luther was right in his contention that it secured quite suf­ficient advantages even for those who should in future become Protestants, although they were not expressly included in its operations. Under its pro­tection, the Reformation made great progress in the next few years, and it remained a useful point of departure for later negotiations. (T. KoLDE.)

BIHLIoo8AY87: F. von Besold, Geachichte der deutaehen Re­formation, P. 841, Berlin. 1890; H. Baumgarten, Ge­schichte Karle V., iii. 638 sqq., Stuttgart, 1892; 0. winckel­mann, Der echmalkaldiache Bund 1630‑38 and der NUrn­berper Relipionefriede, Strasburg, 1892; J. Fieker, in ZRG, 3tii. 582 aqq.; J. Janssen, Hiat. of the German People, v. 326 sqq., St. Louis, Mo., 1903; Cambridge Modern His­tory, ii. 218, 221, 232, London and New York, 1904.

NYSTROEM, JOHAN ERIK: General Baptist; b. at Stockholm Sept. 8, 1842. He was graduated at the University of Upsala, 1866; was teacher of languages in the New Elementary School of Stock­holm, 1867; in Greek and Hebrew in the Baptist Seminary there, 1867‑72; secretary of the Swedish Evangelical Alliance, 1872‑78; and missionary to the Jews at Beirut, Syria, 1878‑81. In 1872 he traveled in aid of the Baptist building‑fund, through Germany; England, and Scotland; and in 1885 was elected a member of the Swedish parliament for three years. He is the translator of B. E. Nicholl's Help to the Reading of the Bible (1866); and of Merle d'Aubignt3's History of the Reformation to the Time



of Calvin (1874‑77) and is the author (in Swedish)

of " Bible Dictionary " (1868) and " Library of Bib­

lical Antiquities" (1874).

ftYVALL, DAVID: Lutheran; b. at Vall, in

the parish of Karlskoga, Varmland, Sweden, Jan.

19, 1863. He was educated at the gymnasium of

Gafle, the University of Upsala (188284), and the

Carolingian Medical Institute, Stockholm (1884­

1885). Leaving Sweden for the United States, he

was instructor in a private school in Minneapolis,

Minn. (1886,87), pastor of the Swedish Evangelical

mission church, Sioux City, Ia. (1887,88), instruc­

tor in the Swedish department of the Chicago Theo­

logical Seminary (1888‑90), instructor and princi­

pal of a private school in Minneapolis and assistant

editor of the weekly Veckobladet (1890‑91), presi‑

OATES, TITUS: The inventor of the famous

Popish Plot; b. at Oakham (9 m. s.e. of Melton

Mowbray) about 1649; d. at London July 12 or 13,

1705. The son of a Baptist clergyman, he studied

at Merchant Taylors' school and at Cambridge, took

orders in the Church of England; was a chaplain in

the navy; and entered the Roman Catholic Church

with the pretense, it is claimed, of obtaining the

secrets of the Jesuits; he tarried for some time in

the Jesuit houses of Valladolid and St. Omer. He

was expelled from these institutions for miscon­

duct; but, while he was an inmate, he had heard

of a meeting of Jesuits held in London; and " on

his expulsion," as John Richard Green says, " this

single fact widened in his fertile brain into a plot for

the subversion of Protestantism and the death of the

king." About this time (1678) there was a good deal

of suppressed anxiety among the Protestants of Eng­

land in view of the machinations and activity of

the Roman Catholics, and the well‑known sym­

pathy with them of Charles II., and especially of the

duke of York, heir to the throne. Oates took ad­

vantage of this state of the public mind, and claimed

to have evidence of a huge Popish Plot for the ex­

tirpation of Protestantism. He had the matter

brought to the notice of the king, who probably

smiled at it; and made public affidavit to the al­

leged facts before Sir Edmondsbury Godfrey, jus­

tice of the peace, deposing to a narrative consisting

of forty‑three articles, soon after increased to eighty­

one, the majority of which were palpably invented.

The excitement over the revelations was intense.

Lord Shaftesbury, who had just been released from

prison, for political reasons fell in with the popular

feeling, and exclaimed, " Let the treasurer cry as

loud as he pleases against Popery, T will cry a note

louder." The popular agitation was increased to

frenzy by the murder of Godfrey, which was con­

strued into an attempt to stifle the plot. The two

houses of Parliament instituted an investigation of

the matter and concurred in the opinion that a plot

existed. Five peers, including Arundel and Bel‑

dent of the same school when enlarged and taken under the control of the Swedish Evangelical Mis­sion Covenant (1891‑94), and president of the North Park College, Chicago (the new Covenant school), and instructor in New Testament, Swedish, and other subjects in the same institution (1894‑1905). Since 1905 he has been president of Walden College, Mo­Pherson, Kan. He has also been secretary of the Swedish Evangelical Mission Covenant (1896‑1903). In theology he is an orthodox Lutheran. He has written: Ver8i och Saga (Minneapolis, Minn., 1890), poems; Minneablad (Chicago, 1892), six addresses to the young; Med8ols (1898), three patriotic ad­dresses to the young; Silken Gulls Rike (1901), ad­dresses to the young; Skogadrillar (1901), poems; and My Busine8a (McPherson, Kan., 1905), eight addresses to the young:

lasys, were sent to the Tower. Patrols guarded the streets; chains were drawn across them, and the houses supplied with arms. Parliament at the end of the year (1678) passed a bill excluding Roman Catholics from both houses, which was left unre­pealed for a century and a half. The excitement was beginning to subside, when one Bedloe, stimu­lated by the reward which had been offered, ap­peared on the scene, and again aroused the national frenzy to its former intensity by more circumstan­tial and irritating revelations than those of Oaten. He swore to a plot for the landing of an army and the massacre of the Protestants. Oates had been treated like a hero, and assigned rooms at White­hall, with a pension of 1,200 pounds. But a revul­sion of public feeling took place after the execution of Stafford in 1680; and the duke of York, whom he had severely accused, secured a verdict for defamation of character, in 1684. Oates was condemned to pay a fine of 100,000 pounds, and sent to prison. On the accession of the duke to the throne in 1685, Oates was tried and convicted of perjury and was sentenced to be put in the pillory annually, be whipped from Oldgate to Newgate, and from thence to Tyburn, to pay a heavy fine, to be stripped of his canonical habits, and to be imprisoned for life. Taken back again to prison, he recovered from the exceedingly severe whipping. After the accession of William and Mary, the conviction of Oates was declared to have been illegal (1689), and he was not only pardoned, but granted an annual pension of five pounds a week, which was suspended at the instance of Queen Mary in 1693, but restored and increased, in 1698, to 300 pounds per annum.

BIBLIoaBAPBY: The beat modern book is J. Pollock, The Popish Plot, London, 1903. Consult further: The Dis­covery of the Popish Plot, London, 1679; T. Knox, The Tryat of T. Knox and J. Lane for a Conspiracy to Defame . Dr. Oaten, ib. 1680; C. M. Clode, Titus Oaten and the Merchant Taylora Company, ib. 1890. A large literature of contemporaneous writers is indicated in the British Museum Catalogue under " Oates, Titus."



I. Hebrew Usage. New‑Testament Teaching (4 1). Judgment in Swearing (¢ 2).

Two Forms of swearing (; 1). Protestant Position (§ 2). Justice in the Object ($ 3).

Methods of Attestation (1 2). III. In Canon Law. Customary Formulae (§ 4).

II. In the Church. The General Conditions (4 1). .

The oath is an asseveration, an appeal to some­

thing held sacred, in support of the truthfulness of

a statement or of sincerity in making a promise or

vow. Arising out of the relationship between God

and man, its bin:i;ng force is not due to any legal

ordinance, but to the same circumstances as those

out of which religion itself springs. Its use is, in

general, the discovery of truth in the administra­

tion of justice and the ensuring of the fulfilment of

moral obligations. For the ethnic and primitive

background, see ORDEAL.

I. Hebrew Usage: Apart from its use in legal


the oath was frequent among the Hebrews. Swear­

ing by Yahweh was not at all irreligious (Dent. vi.

13,x. 20); Yahweh himself swears by his life (Gen.

xxii. 16). But swearing by other gods was idolatry

(Jer. v. 7, xii. 16; Amos viii. 14), and false‑swear­

ing is abuse of the name of God (Exod. xx. 7; of.

Matt. v. 33).

Oaths were of two kinds. One confirmed a dec­

laration: " as Yahweh liveth " (Judg. viii. 19), or

" Yahweh is witness betwixt me and thee " (Gen.

xxxi. 50). The sense in which these forms of swear­

ing were used is shown by the oft‑re­

:. Two curring phrase: " God do so and more

Forms of also " (I Sam. xiv. 44); it was a con­

Swearing. ditional imprecation. Connected with

this custom of swearing by Yahweh is

the other one of swearing by the life of the king or

of the addressed person, " as thy soul liveth "

(I Sam. 1. 26). By this the addressed person is

placed beside Yahweh or put in Yahweh's place as

witness and avenger; cf. the cases where one swears

at the same time by the life of God and by that of

a man (e.g., I Sam. xx. 3). In the other form of

swearing, he who interrogates " adjures " the inter­

rogated in such a manner that he pronounces a

conditional curse, hence the phrase " to lay an

oath upon one " " to cause him to swear " (I Kings

viii. 31); or " to make one swear " " to take an

oath of one " (Ezek. xvii. 13). The interrogated

then makes his declaration under this conditional

curse, he accepts the oath (cf. Matt. xxvi: 63). The

fear of later Judaism to pronounce the name of

Yahweh on the one hand, and the prevailing cus­

tom of using the oath in every‑day affairs on the

other hand (Eccles. xxiii. 9 sqq.), brought it about

that, in place of the name of God, something sane­

tified to him, or something that stood in relation

to him, was employed. At the time of Christ it

was customary to swear by heaven, by the angels,

by the earth, by Jerusalem, by the temple and its

vessels, by the altar, by the sacrifice, and by one's

head (Matt. v. 34 sqq., xxiii. 16‑22; Jas. v. 12;

Joseph‑, War, II., xvi. 4). Pharisaic casuistry

regarded these oaths not as binding as an oath by

God himself, and differentiated among oaths ac­

cording to the degree of sanctity of the adjured ob‑

jects (cf. Matt. xxiii. 16 sqq. and the commentators on that passage).

As to the external forms, the Hebrew terms for swearing point to the original employment of seven sacred things. The sanctity of the number seven is very ancient and wide‑spread (see NUMBERS, SACRED; SEVEN, TAE SACRED NUM‑

a. Methods BER). Herodotus (iii. 8) tells that the

of Attes‑ Arabs ‑in making covenants sprinkled

tation. seven stones with the blood of those

making the covenant (see also Homer,

Iliad, xix. 243). Comparing Gen. xxi. 31 with Gen.

xv. 10 and Jer. xxxiv.18, it appears that in solemnly

attested promises the attestation was a sacrifice

consisting of seven animals (see Smith, Rel. of Seen.,

pp. 480 sqq.). Another ancient custom is less in­

telligible. In the history of the patriarchs (Gen.

xxiv. 2, x1vii. 29) it is told that he that swore put

the hand under the thigh (the seat of generative

power) of him that demanded the oath. It is Possi­

ble that by this was conveyed the idea that the

oath concerned also the descendants (see Dillmann

on the passage), and also that there is here a re­

mainder from phallic worship in which the genital

organs were a symbol of deity. The practise was

probably derived from the Canaanites and its sig­

nificance lost in historical times (see Holzinger on

Gen. xxiv. 2). The simplest ceremony of swearing

is the uplifting of the right hand or of both hands

to heaven (Gen. xiv. 22), a ceremony which in his­

torical time was very general, so that from it a des­

ignation for " swearing " is taken: " to lift the

hand " is as much as " to swear " (Ex. vi. 8; Num.

xiv. 30). In later Judaism it was customary to

touch the Tefillin (" phylacteries ") when taking

the oath. I. BENZINQER.

II. In the Church: The appeal made in the oath is usually to the Divine Being as the holy and righteous, who demands truthfulness and condemns and punishes lying. As God, by whom men swear, is the Almighty in whose power men are, so men declare by, oath that their statements are made with a full consciousness of what God is and

:. New‑ demands, fully aware that in case of an

Testament untruth they come under the judg‑

Teaching. ment of this God, that they even in­

voke it. Men swear thus (Heb. vi. 16)

by God as their superior and ruler. The importance

of the oath can be inferred from its simplest form

like " T swear by God," or " God is my witness,"

" God knows it " (Rom. i. 9; Phil. i. 8; Gal. i. 20;

T Thess. ii. 5; TT Cor. i. 23) ; Paul calls upon God by

his soul (IT Cor. i. 23), which is known to God and

places itself under his judgment. James (v. 12) de­

clares against the use of the oath, and a similar pro­

hibition is given in the words of Jesus (Matt. v.

33‑37). The passage has been differently interpre­

ted; but it can be construed only in one way with­

out destroying its logical articulation. Over against


the commandment of the old dispensation not to swear falsely, Jesus places the commandment of the new dispensation not to swear at all. As swearing falsely is prohibited in the Old Testament because the name of God is thereby profaned (Lev. xix. 12), the hallowing of God's name (Matt. vi. 9) is to be extended, according to Jesus' intention, to entire abstinence from the use of the oath. And when, in his enumeration of the various formulas of oaths, Jesus omits the direct appeal to God, he could do so without being misunderstood, partly because his condemnation of all the usual indirect formulas in­volved a still severer condemnation of the dirt one; partlybecause the latter was very little used among the Jews on account of their reluctance to pronounce the name of God. This reluctance is also the reason why a tender and candid Christian con­science shrinks from using the name of God in ma­king its statements. If, however, the passage quoted be interpreted as a definite prohibition of swearing, it comes into conflict with other New‑Testament passages. The words of Paul (referred to above) have certainly the character of the oath. And when Jesus condescended to answer the question of the high priest (Matt. xxvi. 63), though it was counted in the formulas employed when oaths were taken in the courts, he allowed his own words to assume the same character; moreover, the passage Heb. vi. 16 could never have been written if swearing had been absolutely prohibited among the first Chris­tians. This contradiction is to be solved in the same way as the contradictions between the pro­hibitions of the Sermon on the Mount‑not to be angry, not to revile. Only when issuing from the lower egotistical affections and impulses of human nature are anger, reproach, and swearing forbidden, that is to say, under circumstances which, for in­stance, would make an oath profane swearing. It is quite otherwise when the same act is performed for the sake of high ethical interests, as, for instance, when the civil authorities demand an oath in order to reach the truth and to make justice safe.

It was in this way that the doctrine of the New Testament concerning oaths was conceived by the Reformers and the large Protestant communities (cf. Augsburg Confession, xvi.; Luther's Larger Catechism; Geneva Catechism; Heidelberg Cate­chism; Thirty‑nine articles of the An‑

z. Protes‑ glican Church). The canon law of the tant Roman Church, following Jerome, de‑

Position. ‑ands that the oath be taken in accord­ance with Jer. iv. 2 (Vulgate): "in truth. in judgment, and in righteousness "; the same is found also in the Anglican articles. Mod­ern Protestant ethicists, while in the main agreeing with the confession of the Church, differ somewhat in that they regard the oath partly as an evil neces­sary on account of the moral condition of the hu­man race; partly‑and in this case the oath is justi­fied‑as an expression of devout sentiment; they refer the words in the Sermon on the Mount mainly to " frivolous formulas of swearing." On the whole it must be acknowledged that swearing, whatever be the circumstances and conditions, " cometh of evil " (Matt. v. 37). It presupposes a distrust which rules human society and a lack of conscien­VIII.‑14

tiousness in Christendom. A really Christian moral­

ity ruling the community everywhere would make

the oath superfluous and give place to the simple

" yea, yea " and " nay, nay " (cf. on this point

especially the works on ethics by Wuttke, Palmer,

Schmidt, Luthardt, Kiibel). Considering the holi­

ness and justice of God, the form of an oath

should be as simple as possible. The mere invoca­

tion of God as witness should be sufficient, all else

should be prohibited; a form like " so help me God

to my everlasting salvation" is objectionable (see

Wuttke). Objectionable also are all oaths at­

tached to promises, because they express more than

was intended by the swearer. The claim that the

oath which a Christian takes should always fully

express faith in God as revealed in Christ, is un­

founded. That atheists should neither be forced

nor allowed to swear is a matter of course, a con­

clusion which is founded on the nature and object of

the oath. (J. K6sTruNt.)

III. In Canon Law: The subject receives treat­ment in canon law principally in Decretum Gratiani, causa XXIL; in the collection of decretals of Greg­ory IX., II., xxiv.; the Zriber Sextus; the Clemen­tines; and the decretal of Innocent III., c. xxvi., X., de jurejurando.

Only by way of intimation, it is true, but still plainly enough, the canon law defines an oath as an asseveration with at least silent appeal to God as the omniscient witness not only to the

z. The words and works but to the thoughts General and intents of man. The canon law

Conditions. also distinguishes between the right and the wrong uses of the oath, follow­ing the Vulgate of Jerome on Jer. iv. 2, which reads: " And thou shalt swear: The Lord lives t In truth, judgment, and in justice "; it demands that the oath shall have these three " attendants," viz., truth (in the mind), judgment (in swearing), and justice (in the object). By the first it means the sincerity of the intention in the case of the assertive oath to speak the truth, in the case of the promissory oath to fulfil the promise. By the second it means the proper understanding of what an oath is. By the third, justice in the object, it means that it is an oath which the swearer can rightfully take. All of which is in harmony with the teaching of innocent III.: " Thou art able to swear without wrongdoing if thy oath has these three accompaniments of which the prophet [Jeremiah] speaks when he says: 'Thou shalt swear the Lord liveth, in truth and judgment and justice."' It is correct but not directly derived from the canon law to say that the object of the oath and the purpose of its use should be conso­nant with the divine character. The development of the general legal doctrine of the oath must then proceed along these lines.

The correct consequences from the first condition, pudicium in. yurante (" the judgment in swearing "), involve notice of the following hindrances or dis­qualifications to taking oaths: (1) the person is under age. The canon law only expressly forbids that any one who is not of the age of reason should be forced to take an oath (XXII., v. 14), but in practise this has rightly been construed as forbid­ding such an oath under all circumstances. Later




laws have extended the term of responsibility in oath‑taking. The German law puts it at sixteen. (2) The person taking the oath is to be of sound

mind and sober. The canon law is 2. judg‑ very explicit on this point: only one

ment is who is jejunus, " fasting," can prop‑

Swearing. erly take a solemn oath (XXII., v. 16),

consequently such an oath was, as a rule, taken only before noon. (3) That the person have not committed perjury. The condition of judicium in jurante logically obliges that the oath must not be taken by those who are without any knowledge of God. Of practical importance is it to know whether the person is only pretending to be an atheist in order to avoid being put under oath ‑as frequently happens‑but even where the per­son is self‑deceived into thinking that he is an atheist or only shams atheism there is a manifest impropriety in administering the oath as it borders on blasphemy to compel a person who professes to be an atheist to call upon God as his witness that he is speaking the truth.

From the second condition, justitis in objecto, " the justice in the object," the canon law omitted

to deduce the right consequences. Yet 3. Justice the canon law compels by legislation in the such oaths as are intended to establish Object. the plea of nullity only in case it af‑

fords protection to the oath‑taker, as a wife in giving consent to the transfer of title to her dower, or a daughter renouncing her inheritance; indeed Boniface VIII. would compel the secular judges to treat as valid what according to the com­mon law was null because it had been sworn to. The glossator Martinus induced the Emperor Fred­erick I. to rule according to this principle that an oath not otherwise invalid could not be nullified by a person taking it who nevertheless had no right to take it (Authentica " Sacraments puberum " on L. 2 C. adv. vend.; cf. F. C. von Savigny, Geschichte des R6mischen Rechts im Mittelslter, iv. 162‑170, Hei­delberg, 1834‑51). It is plainly a desecration of the oath that the canon law made a tool of it to vitiate rather than to promote worthy purposes in­tended by the civil law. And it thereby, aside from the injury often done indirectly to a third party, gives occasion to a very frequent misuse of the oath, whereby from the religious standpoint it can be al­lowed only when later legislation withdraws entirely from the promissory oath its legal efficacy and makes it only of accessory importance, even as it has ac­cording to Roman law. But this is to deprive it of all legal obligation, whereas the proper object of the oath was to increase this obligation. From the definition of an oath as a promise given to God the canon law draws the inference that in respect to every promissory oath the Church as the organ of ecclesiastical jurisdiction was to decide: (1) Whether the oath was binding, and here first of all comes in the interpretation of the oath, for if it should turn out that the oath was intended to effect a sinful purpose then it was not only not binding but it was perjury and as such must be punished by church penalties; and (2) in case it is binding, at least toward God, it was for the spiritual judges to de­cide whether it should be carried out or whether the


Church acting in the place of God should release the person from his oath (relaxio juramenti or abso­lutio a juramento in the Evangelical sense). The connection in which this theory of relaxio juramenti stands with the fundamentally false mediating posi­tion between God and the individual which the Roman Church on all occasions arrogates to itself is easy to understand, and it is no less easy to per­ceive that it must have as its consequence that the pope has the right to release from the oath of alle­giance whenever, in his judgment, the magisterial rights have been forfeited. But on the Protestant side there should be just as little doubt that the theory and its consequences are to be rejected as absolutely worthless, as if forsooth the competency of the Church to decide matters of right depended on the binding power of an oath. It is a lament­able confusion of ideas that formerly the relaxio juramenti was counted among the episcopal rights of the sovereign (cf. J. H. B6hmer, Jus ecclesiasticum Protestantium, 5 vols., Halle, 1720‑63). All that the Church can properly do in relation to oaths is to appeal to the conscience, according to the Word of God. The decision of troubles arising from legal matters the Church can only leave to the courts whether such matters be sworn to or not, and the courts on their part can not enforce obligations which are without standing in the civil law. Here should be clearly brought out that the efficacy which the canon law gives to the promissory oath as dis­tinguished from what it has in civil law is to be contrasted with the importance which in truth at­taches to it when the parties to the oath do not stand on equal footing to the law so that contracts between them involve moral and not legal duties and claims. Here of course the community of ob­jective religion supplants the community of objec­tive rights. Before any international law could be recognized there was an impulse of the deepest and truest quality for contracts between peoples who were strangers to one another, and between indi­viduals of such nations, which contracts were sealed with oaths so that they might have the greatest possible force.

From tile demand for veritas in mente, " truth in the mind," flows first of all the inadmissibility and inefficacy of mental reservation in the case of oaths; and further that an oath which had been extorted or which rested on vital error had the importance of a true, proof‑bringing and binding oath, although canon law does not unconditionally concede this point respecting the promissory oath.

In respect to its form the idea is excluded that an oath is an appeal to any other than God. Nothing further is necessary to express this intention to call God to witness than the use of the words " T swear."

In order to surround the oath‑taking with due solemnity, as where it is given in courts and in pub­lic offices, certain formulas have come into use, which partly rest upon the idea that bodily con­tact with an object considered by the swearer to be sacred, as a copy of the Gospels or a reliquary, has a tendency to excite a stronger religious feeling. So arose the formula of the solemn " bodily " oath: " So help me God and his holy Gospel" (or " Word "), with the addition in some formulas,



" and all saints." But inasmuch as the addition just mentioned was rejected by Protestants, section 107 of the Imperial Recess of 1555 ordered that in the imperial courts it should be

4. Cus‑ dropped and Roman Catholics and tomary Protestants alike be sworn on their Formulas. calling upon God and the Holy Gospel merely. There is an old custom which excepts the clergy, later at least bishops, from touch­ing the Gospels. These laid their hands on their breasts when taking an oath, just as in former days German women did when swearing. In still later times the so‑called " bodily oath " was taken not by touching any sacred object but by raising two or three fingers or by touching the judge's staff, or by merely raising the hand. Finally, it is proper to remark here that solemn oaths should be adminis­tered only in apartments suitably furnished and in as orderly associations as possible. It is true that it has been urged that the greater care sur­rounding the administration of the oaths, so often now missing, should be taken the more the sad in­crease of perjury is noticed. Yet one should not be blind to the fact that the carrying‑out of these de­sires would encounter great, indeed, almost insur­mountable difficulties, particularly in this that the execution of the best legal and magisterial arrange­ments depends on the capacity and willingness of the persons charged with carrying them out. And such considerations make the diminution of the number of oaths as much as possible very desirable, and recent legislation has this object. But it is an error to think that for these considerations an oath should not be administered when the matter in dis­pute is " trifling." This is to make the amount of money involved the criterion of the importance of the matter, and to overlook the ideal of the law which strives to do justice entirely irrespective of the pecuniary value of the point involved.

(E. G.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: For general, historical and illustrative ma‑

terial consult: R. Hirzel, Der Eid, sin Beitrag zu seiner Gewhichts, Leipsie, 1902; W. Lockhart, On Oaths, Edin­burgh, 1882; F. Friedmann, Ueber die Sehuurgerrtchte, Berlin, 1886• J. Lafforgue, Du serment en droit remain, Toulouse, 1888• L. Ott, Beitrape zur Kenatniss des prie­chischen Eides, Leipsie, 1896; C. Ford. On Oaths, London, 1903 (a standard legal authority).

On I. consult: J. Happel, Der Eid im A. T., Leipsic, 1873; Smith, Rel. oJSem., pp. 164.qq., 461‑462; Nowaek, ArchdoWie, ii. 262 eqq.; DB, iii. 575‑577; EB, iii. 3451­3454; and the works on 0. T. theology. On II., consult for the N. T.: DCG ii. 254‑256; and the works on N. T. theology, as well as DB and EB ut sup. For usage in the Church see III. below, and consult: M. D. Conway, The Oath and its Ethics, London, 1881; G. Freudenstein, RecUsbelehrunp in Schwurgerichts‑Verfahren von Frank­retch, England and Deutschland, Minden, 1883; I. M. Capes. in Portnightly Review, v (1866). On III. consult: C. F. Staudlin, Geschichte der Vorsteaunpen and Lehren room Eide, G6ttingen, 1824; K. F. Gdschel, Der,Eid nach Principe, Begriffe and Gebrauche, Berlin 1837; F. G. L. Strippelmann, Der Gerichtwid, Cassel, 1855. A valuable literature is indicated m Richardson, Encyclopaedia, p. 785.

OBADIAH, d"ba‑dai'8: Author of the book which occupies the fourth place among the Minor Prophets. The name means " worshiper of Yah­weh." His book contains no allusion either to his descent, his birth‑place, or his fortunes; not even the name of his father is given. That he was a

Judean is an inference from the contents of his prophecy.

Regarding the date of his writing there is great divergence of opinion: some interpreters consider it the earliest prophetic book in the Old Testament while others place it among the latest. Hofmann, Delitzsch, Keil, Nagelsbach, Vaihinger, and Orelli believe that Obadiah prophesied under Joram (851­844); Jitger, Caspari, Havernik, and Hengstenberg refer him to the time of Jeroboam II. and Uzziah (c. 750), while many earlier and later exegetes, in agreement with Aben Ezra and Luther, find in this prophesy a distinct allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadrezzar and see in Obadiah a contemporary of Jeremiah (c. 580).

The latest criticism questions the unity of the book and considers that it consists of an original writing (verses 1‑9) inspired by the revolt of the Edomites under Joram, which was later expanded by the addition of vs. 10‑21, written after the de­struction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, although there may be traces of the original writing in verses 15‑21. It is according to this view uncertain whether the name Obadiah refers to the original or the later writer. This theory is based on the fact that in Jeremiah's oracle against Edom there are a series of most remarkable resemblances between Jeremiah and Obadiah (Ob. 1=Jer. xlix. 14; Ob. 2=Jer. xlix. 15; Ob. 3a=Jer. xlix. 16a; Ob. 4=Jer. xlix. 16b; Ob. 5=Jer. xlix. 9; Ob. 6=Jer. xlix. 10a; Ob. 8=Jer. xlix. 7; Ob. 9a‑Jer. xlix. 22b), a fact which indicates that Jeremiah was familiar with and imitated Obadiah's prophesy, not vice versa. The conclusion that, as Jeremiah's allusions are only to the first nine verses, he knew nothing of verses 10‑21, does not follow, since Jeremiah had no in­ducement to use such passages as Ob. 17 and 19­21 in a prophesy against Edom. However, the principal argument is derived from the supposed allusion to the destruction of the Judean nation by the Chaldeans. But both the passages in question say nothing of the destruction of Jersualem; they speak only of its capture and pillage, of wild orgies of the victors on the sacred mountain, of the carry­ing‑off of the prisoners and of the conquered Judean army, and of misfortune and suffering. Moreover, a clearer designation of the Chaldeans would be ex­pected. The enemies of Jerusalem are vaguely and generally named, while Edom's malicious participa­tion in the attack upon Israel is emphasized. Fi­nally, there is no trace of the deportation of the people to Babylonia. The " captivity of Jerusa­lem which is in Sepharad " (verse 20) probably signifies that a portion of the Judeans came into the hands of the Phenicians and were sold to the Lyd­ians in Asia Minor. Sparda is mentioned in the in­scriptions of Darius (cf. F. Spiegel, Die altpersiachen Keilinschriften, pp. 4, 46, 54, Leipsic, 1881) in con­nection with Yauna (cf. Javan, isa. lxvi. 19; Ezek. xxvii. 13), and this may mean Sardis, which is Svarda in the native language. Joel iii. 6 accuses the Phenicians of delivering Judeans to the Yewtz­rtim (A. V. " Grecians "). Verse 10 treats of an attack upon Jerusalem as a past happening, and probably refers to what is narrated in II Chron. xxi. 16, 17, which says that Arabs and Philistines


advanced against Joram, king of Judah, and car­ried off prisoners and a great booty. This event is alluded to by Joel (iii. 6) and Amos (i. 6, 9) when they reproach the Philistines with having sold Ju­dean prisoners to Edom and Javan.

If this view be accepted there is no reason to

doubt the unity of the writing. The visions fall

easily into three sections. The first, 1‑9, contains

the announcement to the Edomites of the divine

judgment; the second (verses 10‑16) describes the

crime that caused this judgment; the third (verses

17‑24) recounts the restoration of down‑trodden

Israel who shall possess both his own land and that

of his enemies and shall regain the lost members of

his race who have been dragged away to captivity.

The words " as the Lord hath said," Joel ii. 32

(expressly referring to Ob. 17), clearly shows which

was the earlier prophet. If, then, Joel belongs to

the time of Joash, Obadiah's activity must be placed

in the reign of Joram.* Thus Obadiah appears to

be the oldest prophet whose writings are preserved

in the canon; his position among the other minor

prophets proves nothing against this, since the

order is not governed by chronological considera­

tions. (W. VOLCKt.)

Bisuoonwrar: The best commentary for the English reader is by G. A. Smith, The Book of the T,velve, in Rx­positoi s Commentary, ii. 183 sqq., London, 1898. Other treatments are found in the commentaries on the Minor Prophets of H. Ewald, Eng. transl., ii. 277 aqq., 5 vols., London, 1878‑81; C. F. Keil, Edinburgh, 1888; F. W. Farrar, pp. 175 sqq., London, 1890; C. yon Orelli, New York, 1893; J. Wellhausen, Berlin, 1898; K. Msrti, in %urzer Handkommcn<ar sum A. T., Tobingen, 1904; and E. B. Pusey, new ed., vol. iii., London, 1908. Other com­mentaries are by C. P. Caspari. Leipaic, 1842; W. Seydel, ib. 1889; F. Hitsig, ib. 1881; T. T. Perowne, in Cam­bridge Bible, Cambridge, 1889; P. J. Bachmann, Halle, 1892; N. Peters, Paderbom, 1892; W. Nowack, in Hand­kommentar sum A. T., Gbttingen, 1897; and J. Fischer, Regensburg, 1909. Questions of introduction are dis­cussed in the works on Biblical Introduction (q.v.); is the prefaces to most of the commentaries; by Vaihinger, in Archiv fair urissenschafUiche Erforeehuap des A. T., i (1887), 488 sqq.; G. A. Peckham, An Introduction to the Study of Obadiah, Chicago, 1910; in DB, iii. 577‑580; EB, iii. 3455‑e2; and JB, ix. 369‑370.



I. In Ethics and Religion.

II. In Ecclesiastical Usage.

I. In Ethics and Religion: Ethically obedience is the subordination of one's own will to that of another. By the very fact of his dependence on God, man's behavior must be one of obedience toward God; from the very beginning, sin, according to Scripture, is disobedience. Blessing or cursing, in the destinies of God's people, is made conditional upon obedience to God's command (Dent. xxviii.). The fundamental virtue of the Old‑Testament heroes from Abraham to Nehemiah is obedience (cf. I Sam. xv. 22). The work of Christ in the New Testament is above all a discharge of obedience (Phil. ii. 8), defined by orthodox dogmatists as obedieWia activa et passiroa. Hence, too, the Christian's behavior must consist of obedience (Rom. i. 5, v. 19; I Pet. i. 22). God can require

* Many modern critics place Joel in the Greek, age (Driver, Introduction, chap. vi., § 2),

us to accept the message of salvation obediently. Ethically regarded, faith is obedience, unbelief is dis­obedience. Christian ethics distinguishes between servile and free obedience. The latter is harmony of the heart and will with the divine command in love. Its prototype is the perfect subordination of the son to the father, which we realize in the imitation of Jesus under perfect submission to the Father's will.

In the relations between man and man, obedi­ence is required of children, servants, and subjects, with due consideration, however, of the will of God (Acts v. 29). The morality of children is essen­tially the discharge of obedience (cf. the example of Jesus, Luke ii. 49). This educates man to become a moral personality, and fits him for the right use of freedom. The requirements proper to the Old Testament have been embodied by the New Testa­ment in the " house tables " (Eph. v. 22 aqq.; Col. iii. 18 sqq.; I Pet. ii. 13 sqq.) of Christian conduct, wherein a subordination of the wife is required analogous to the subordination of the congregation to Christ its head. The service of servants is in this respect lightened, in that they are permitted to account themselves as servants of Christ. Alle­giance to the State carries with it the obligation to render obedience to the ethical order (law and right) enforced by the State. In case of conflict between God's requirement and that of society, the Christian must suffer, in the last resort, as a diso­bedient subject.

Obedience is a signal means for the development

of power. Every kind of social organization, every

kind of discipline, rests on obedience. Hence, too,

the discharge of obedience plays so great a part not

only in military service, but also in the Roman

Catholic orders. ARNOLD R$EGG.

II. In Ecclesiastical Usage: In Roman Catholic church law obedience is the submission which is due from those in lower grades to their superiors. The or­ganization of the Church rests upon the correlation of authority and obedience. Before the Reformation the idea of obedience developed from that of feudal­ism. All Christendom stood in the attitude of obe­dience toward the pope, as vice‑regent of Christ upon earth. In consequence of the Reformation a large part of the Latin church fell from its former allegiance. Within the Church the bishop com­manded the obedience of all the clergy of the dio­cese, even of the exempt (see ExEMPnON). In early times at their consecration the bishops swore obedience to the metropolitan, but after the pope reserved for himself the right of consecration, to him alone was the oath sworn. The formula, which is very ancient and taken from a real oath of alle­giance, is prescribed by an injunction of Pius IV. issued Nov. 13, 1564, which rune as follows: " I acknowledge the holy .catholic and apostolic Ro­man Church, the mother and mistress of all churches, and I promise and swear true Obedience to the bishop of Rome, the successor of St. Peter, the chief of the apostles, and the vicar of Christ." From this vow of obedience toward the pope, to which must be added the creed, should be carefully dis­tinguished the oath of obedience to the bishop, which was sworn to at the consecration to the priest‑


hood. A special oath of obedience on the part of

the lower orders of the Church toward the bishop

is met with only occasionally through force of cus­

tom or local regulations. The regulars also swear

obedience to their superiors, and in their case the

oath means complete submission to the superiors,

relinquishing all private desires. The order of the

Jesuits and the related orders and congregations

exact an oath which is quite peculiar to themselves.


BrarrodxApsty: On obedience in the ethical sense consult the principal works cited under ETaroe. For the Tdesi­aetical usage consult: G. Phillips, Rirchenrecht, if. 171 sqq., Regensburg, 1857; %L, ix. 583‑586; and in general the treatises on Roman Catholic ecclesiastical law.

OBEDIENCE OF CHRIST: A conception some­times employed in treating the doctrine of the Atonement (q.v.). This obedience to the will of the Father is represented as active, referring to the works of Christ; or as passive, referring to f­fering (of. W. G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, ii. 430, New York, 1889; C. Hodge, Systematic Theol­ogy, iii. 143, ib. 1872).

OBER‑AMMERGAU, 5"ber‑8m'mer‑gau: A vil­lage of 1,200 inhabitants in Upper Bavaria, forty­sixx miles southwest of Munich, and in the valley of the Ammer. The principal industry is wood‑carving. The fame of the village is due entirely to the Passion Play, which is given there every ten years in dis­charge of a vow made under the following circum­stances:

" In the year 1633 there raged in the neighborhood of Ammerthel (' valley of the Ammer') a deadly plague, which threatened to depopulate the districts infected. The Am­merthalers took every precaution to protect their valley from the dread contagion, but without avail. A native of Ammerthal, who worked. during the summer m Eschelohe [an infected place] as a day‑laborer, evaded the quarantine, and entered the valley by a secret path, in order to celebrate among his family an annual church festival. He carried the infection with him, and on the second day after his arrival he was a corpse. In three weeks eighty‑four of the small community were carried off; and the mourning and terri­fied survivors, despairing of human succor, made their sup­plication to God, and registered a solemn vow, that if he heard their cry, and removed the plague, they would repre­sent every ten years, ' for thankful remembrance and edify­ing contemplation, and by the help of the Almighty, the sufferings of Jesus, the Savior of the world.' The prayer was heard; 'for not a single person died of the plague after the vow was made, though many were infected with it' In the following year the first fulfilment of the vow was made, and the second in 1644, and so on decennially until 1674. It was then thought better to divide the representations decennially. Accordingly, the next representation was in 1680; and it has been acted regularly every ten years from that date downward " (M. MacColl, Ober‑Ammergau Pae­aion Play, pp. viii., 42‑43, London, 1880).

The present Passion Play is very different from the rude performance once given. Down to 1830 it was always acted in the churchyard. It is now given upon a stage, in a building built especially for it, which seats 4,500. The performance is in­troduced, and accompanied at intervals by music, and is, on the whole, one of the most elaborate theatrical representations in existence. Every dweller in Ober‑Ammergau is liable to be called upon to play; and the preparatory drilling con­sumes much time in the years next preceding the decennial performance. The credit of the present play is due to Ottma,r Weis (d. 1843), a monk of the

Ettal monastery in the neighborhood, and subse­quently pastor, to his pupil Anton A. Daisenberg, and to Rochus Dedler (b. 1779, d. 1822), who for the last twenty years of his life was the schoolmaster at Ober‑Ammergau. The present play is modelled upon the Greek drama, and therefore the chorus is an integral part of it. It comprehends the events of our Lord's life from Palm Sunday to Easter. The text is mainly Scriptural; every word attrib­uted to our Lord or to his disciples, friends and foes, during the week referred to, being interwoven in the play. The principal players are persons of local consequence and of high character; and the villagers themselves and the peasants around re­gard the Passion Play as a solemn religious rite. It is therefore fitly introduced by the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, which is administered to the players and to the majority of the intending spec­tators very early on the day of the play. The act­ing, considering the limited education of the play­ers, is marvelously realistic. Of late years much money has been spent upon costumes, sceneries, and stage properties. The number of players is said to be about 600, but this includes many children. The tableaux rivant8, which are illustrations of the historical allusions in the chorus, are particularly fine, being revelations respecting the possibilities in tableaux. The performances last from eight to five, with an intermission of an hour and a half. They are given on Sundays and Fridays, and in some weeks on Mondays, from the middle of May to the end of September.

The Ober‑Ammergau Passion Play has been suf­fered to pursue a nearly untroubled course. Per­mission to give it, which has always been readily granted, has to be obtained from the king of Ba­varia. In 1780 it was the only passion play allowed in Bavaria, and in 1810 it triumphed over even ecclesiastical opposition. The profits, which are, of course, very large, since the throng of visitors numbers thousands, are religiously devoted to charitable purposes after the payment of a small sum to the players. The charges of admission are very moderate, ranging from one to eight marks (twenty‑five cents to two dollars). Altogether the Passion Play is a curious, and in its way a unique, relic of the piety of the Middle Ages.

BarroonAPSr: Translations of the text are: The Passion Play Translated. London, 1890; The Passion Play of Ober‑Ammemau, ib. 1900. Consult: H. Rommel, Do Paaaieapden roan Oberammergau. Brugge, 1881; J. A. Daisenberger, Text des OberammMauer Paaaionapielea, Munich, 1890; F. W. Farrar, The Passion Play, London, 1890; g. Trautmann, Oberammergau uud seine Paaeions­epiel, Bamberg, 1890; F. Feldigl, Ober‑Ammergau and seine Paaaionapiel in Vervanpenheit and Gegemoart, Par­tenbrchen, 1900; W. T. Stead, The Story, that Trans­Jonned the World. Passion Play at Ober‑Ammerpau, London, 1891; Lady I. Burton, The Passion‑Play at Ober‑Ammergau, ib. 1900; H. Diemer, Oberammergau und seine Paasionaspiele, Munich, 1900; J. Brauskopf, A Rabbi's Impressions of the Oberammergau Passion Play, Philadelphia, 1901; A. G. Hay, OberAmmergau and its Great Passion Drama of 1800, London, 1902; E. H. Day, Ober‑Ammergau and the Passion Play; a practical and historical Handbook, Milwaukee, 1910; J. H. Short, Oberammergau, New York, 1910.

OBERLIN, 8'ber‑lin, JEAN FREDERIC: Lu­theran philanthropist; b. at Strasburg Aug. 31, 1740; d. at Waldersbach (29 m. s.w. of Strasburg)



June 2, 1826. Brought up in a pious home, at fif­teen he began the study of theology, in which he took his bachelor's degree at the University of Strasburg in 1758. Until 1767 he supported him­self by teaching, when he was appointed pastor at Waldersbach, the principal pariah in the rough mountainous district of Steinthal (Fr., Ban‑de‑la, Roche), on the boundary between Alsace and Lor­raine. Oberlin entered upon his labors with energy and self‑denial, in the face of great difficulties, ari­sing from the poverty and ignorance of the popu­lation, and from the criticisms of his predecessor. His first care was to provide for the spread of edu­cation, erecting schools in Walderabach and other villages, and making one of the earliest attempts at the training and instruction of very small chil­dren. The construction of roads and bridges, the encouragement of a better system of agriculture, the teaching of trades, and the establishment of stores, loan associations, savings‑banks, and agricul­tural societies with the awarding of prizes marked his efforts for promoting the good of the com­munity. Even the smallest economic reform as­sumed for him the character of a Christian work. The establishment of factories through his influ­ence not only provided a means of livelihood for the people, but soon doubled their numbers. But these activities did not make him neglect the more directly spiritual work. He was a preacher of the greatest earnestness and simplicity, and indefati­gable in visiting the scattered members of his flock. In 1781 he founded, on an impulse ret,zived from the life of Zinzendorf, a Soci6tk chr6tienne, the mem­bers of which pledged themselves to strive for per­fect sanctification and to exercise mutual oversight and discipline, but two years later he found it best to disband the association. It is not surprising, in view of his remarkable courage and enterprise, that he should at times have gone into ill‑advised ven­tures; but he was never accused of narrowness or sectarian prejudice. He invited Roman Catholics and Calvinists to his communion, and was pleased to call himself Catholic‑Evangelical pastor. He greeted the outbreak of the French Revolution with enthusiasm. The declaration of the rights of man seemed to his imagination the beginning of the king­dom of God on earth, and in republican virtues and fraternity he saw the truest earthly realization of the spirit of Christianity. On July 14, 1790, he assem­bled all his people around an " altar of the father­land " on an open hill‑top to celebrate a patriotic festival. On Aug. 5, 1792, he held a special service in honor of the volunteers for the war with Austria, among whom was his eldest son. By order of the committee of safety, on Nov. 23, 1793, he made his profession of faith, declaring that he approved wholly of the abolition of empty ceremonies and unfruitful dogmas and that he recognized no other task than that of making his fellow citizens en­lightened, worthy men and good patriots. Even the reign of terror could not shake his belief in the republic. When the National Assembly prohibited public worship and ecclesiastical rites, he changed his services into club‑meetings, opened by singing, followed by the catechizing of the younger mem­bers on the rights of man and the duties of citizens,

an address and a prayer. The women and children then left the church, various members of the club rose in their turn to deliver discourses, and the most recent political events were discussed. The com­munion he celebrated from time to time in his own house with his family and guests, after the ordinary meal in the manner of the agape. In spite of his submission to the revolutionary laws, he awakened the suspicion of the authorities, and on July 28, 1794, was summoned to Schlettatadt and impris­oned, after rough treatment from the mob. A few days later Robespierre fell and the time of trial was over.

His services were now widely recognized. The National Assembly itself thanked him formally for his services to education, and the imperial author­ities showed him many favors. When the allied armies entered France, Czar Alexander issued a special letter of protection for him and his flock. In 1818 he received the gold medal of the Royal Agricultural Society, and a yeas later the cross of the Legion of Honor. His reputation as a faithful witness to the Gospel now won him influence far and wide, and all those who were dissatisfied with the prevalent rationalism brought into the Church by the Revolution looked hopefully toward his leadership. The evening of his life, clouded though it was by the famine of 1816‑17 and the death of a promising son, was calm and peaceful, leaving the memory of a man who combined in a remarkable degree the most varied endeavors to promote the general welfare of humanity with deep mystical devotion, and bore testimony to the power of the love of Christ at a time when it was growing cold in many hearts. His work for the education of small children was imitated first in Scotland and then elsewhere. His name is preserved in America by the town and college of Oberlin, O., founded by two former missionaries in 1832 under the inspiration of his biography. (K. HAC%ENSUHMIDT.)

BIHMOGHAPHY: Among the very numerous biographies which have been written may be mentioned those by: Mme. Felicie (Tourette), Strasburg, 1824; H. Legrand, ib. 1826; S. Atkins, London, 1829; E. Stober. Strasburg, 1831; L. Spaah, ib. 1866; F. Bernard, Paris, 1867; F. W. Bodemann, Stuttgart, 1879; Josephine E. Butler, London, 1882; Mme. G. Deemoulin, Paris, 1884; Mme. E. RBrich, ib. 1890; G. H. von Schubert, Nuremberg, 1890; C. Laen­hard, Montauban. 1896; O. Stein, Halle, 1899; K. Hacken­eehmidt, Straseburg, 1902; and Four Great Philanthropiav Lord Shaftesbury, George Peabody, John Howard, J. F. Oberlin, London, 1896.

OBLATES: A monastic term applied to children bound over to a monastery, to be brought up as monks. The Benedictine Rule (chap. lix.) prescribes that if any noble offers his son to a monastery, if the boy is a minor he shall be offered with a peti­tion, the accompanying gift and his hand being wrapped in the altar‑cloth. The origin of the in­stitution is obscure, but it is certainly much older than the Benedictine Rule. The provisions in the longer rule ascribed to St. Basil do not correspond to later usage; but Jerome and Salvian are ac­quainted with it. It was first completely aban­doned by the mendicant orders. (A. HAucg.)

OBLATIONS: In early times the faithful pre­sented at the assembly for common worship gifts



in kind. From these were taken the elements of

bread and wine required for use in the holy com­

munion. Other gifts were distributed according to

need. Justin Martyr (q.v.) in his description of the

Sunday worship of Christians says, " When our

prayer is ended, bread is brought and wine and

water, and the president offers both prayers and

thankagivings, according to his ability, and the

people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distri­

bution to each and a reception of what has been

blessed, and to those who are absent a portion is

sent by the deacons; and they who are well‑to‑do,

and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is

collected is deposited with the president, who sue­

cors the orphans and widows, and those who through

sickness or any other cause are in want " (Apol.,

f. 67; Eng. trand. in ANF, i. 186). A general term

for such offerings was " oblations." In process of

time, and as gifts of money were gradually sub­

stituted for offerings in kind, the word came to be

used in a more restricted sense: (1) for the bread

and wine, before or after consecration; (2) for any

gifts besides money, or perhaps for gifts of money

for religious purposes (and particularly for the sup­

port of the clergy) other than alms for the poor.

There is some debate as to the exact force of the

word in connection with alms, in the Prayer for the

Church in the existing Anglican Prayer Book and

in the preceding rubric of the American Book (cf.

The Journal of Theological Studies, f. 321). The

formal presentation of gifts of bread and wine,

though not used for the sacrament, at Milan is a

survival of the old custom of offerings in kind, as

is perhaps the use of pain beni, " blessed bread," in

some parts of France and Switzerland. According

to the rule of the first English Prayer Book (1549)

the bread and wine for the communion were to be

paid for by the parishioners in turn, instead of

themselves providing the elements. They are now

provided at the charge of the parish. The presen­

tation of alms at the time of the eucharist had be­

come almost extinct in the West‑not entirely, as

the " mass‑penny " testifies‑when it was revived

in the first English Prayer Book. It is fitting that

along with prayers, alms (in the widest sense)

should go up before God. In the great central act

of worship mankind offers him in the elements of

bread and wine and in money representatives of

the gifts which he has bestowed, as an acknowledg­

ment that all things come of him, and in order that

they may be used for the accomplishment of his

purposes. Of these natural gifts the bread and wine

thus offered in acknowledgment of God's sover­

eignty are blessed by him for higher purposes, and

returned to the givers as the means whereby they

receive the spiritual food of the Lord's body and

blood for the strengthening and refreshing of the

soul. A. C. A. HALL.

B:auooxAFHx: Bingbam, Oripinea, V.. iv. 1‑3. VIII., vi. 22, XII., ii.‑iv.; F. Berlendis. De oblationibw. Vice, 1743 (Italian ad., 1736); L. Duchesne, Christian Worship: its Origin and Evolution. pp. 84. 173. 204, etc. Lon­don, 1904; J. H. Blunt, Annotated Book of Common Prayer, passim (consult Index). New York, 1908; %L, iz.828‑830.





1. Life.

II. Works. Philosophical and Theological Writings (¢ 1). Works on Church and State (§ 2).

III. Occam's Position. His Nominalism (§ 1). Doctrine of the Church and Criticism (§ 2). Doctrine of God, Salvation and Sin (1 3). Doctrine of Christ and the Sacraments (§ 4). Church and State (¢ 5).

IV. Survey of Occam's Position.

L Life: William of Occam, the Franciscan schoolman, nominalist, and " doctor invinciWis," was born at Occam (whence he took his name; 22 m. s.w. of St. Paul's, London) c. 1280; d. in Mu­nich Apr. 10, 1349 (1347 ? 1350 7). Of his early life little is certainly known. From the scanty data, it may be gathered that he entered the Franciscan order at an early age, took his bachelor's degree at Oxford, and his master's at Paris, where he taught from a date between 1315 and 1320. The tradition that he was a pupil of Duns Scotus is probably cor­rect. That he returned to England and taught at Oxford is an assumption for which there is no evi­dence; in any case it is with Paris that his princi­pal teaching activity is connected; his doctrines had taken such hold there by 1339 that the philo­sophical faculty felt obliged to issue a warning against them. By that time he himself had left Paris; the great controversy on the question of poverty which so deeply agitated his order deter­mined the later course of his life. He threw all his strength into the defense of the ideal of absolute poverty. But it was not long before their common ground of opposition to the pope drew the extreme Franciscans together with the Emperor Louis the Bavarian, the opponent of John XXII. At the chapter of the order in Perugia, Occam and Bona­gratia were the chief supporters of the general, Michael of Cessna, in his strict views, and after­ward the former spent some time in the dioceses of Ferrara and Bologna, urging the absolute poverty of Christ and the apostles as a necessary ideal. In December, 1323, he was summoned with some others to appear before the pope at Avignon, and was im­prisoned there for over four years. On May 25, 1328, together with Michael of Cesena and Bona­gratia, he made his escape and fled to Italy. De­posed and excommunicated, they made common cause with the emperor, who was then in Italy. In 1329 a general chapter held in Paris deposed Michael of Cessna from his office, and two years later he and his adherents were expelled from the order. Occam became one of the emperor's principal ad­visers and literary defenders. The political ideas which he had already represented in Paris were now developed and adapted to the circumstances of the time. In stepping outside the range of pure theology, he never forgot that he was a theologian; that John XXII. was a heretic and no true pope, that the poverty of Christ and the apostles was sn


article of faith, were as much a part of his fixed belief as that the State and the rights of the em­peror were independent of pope and Church. After the unfortunate issue of Louis' visit to Rome, the Franciscans followed him to Munich (Feb., 1330) and took up their abode in a neighboring house of the order, where most of the political writings of Occam were composed. In 1342 Michael of Cesena died, transmitting the seal of the order and his claims to its headship to Oocam. The death of Louis (Oct. 11, 1347) and of some of the Munich group, the reconciliation of others and of the new Emperor Charles IV. with the papacy, left Occam increasingly alone, until the time came when he was the only one of the old leaders left. He was once more cited in 1349 before the papal tribunal, but the negotiations came to naught with his re­fusal to admit that Louis was a heretic and schis­matic. Clement VT. demanded that the order should take action. A chapter held in Whitsun­tide, 1349, asserted that but few brothers remained who had supported Michael of Cesena and Louis; that " William the Englishman," who was promi­nent among these, had sent back the seal of the order to the general, and that he and the others, while they could not conveniently appear in Rome, petitioned for release from their excommunica­tion. The pope offered to grant this request (June 8, 1349) on condition of their subscribing a formula which was somewhat leas stringent than that which had been usual since John XXIT. Trithemius, Wadding, and others assert that Occam signed this and was absolved; but there is no documentary evidence to this effect, and Jacobus de Marchia says expressly that the three principal leaders " re­mained excommunicated heretics." This is more probably the case, whether Occam remained inflex­ible or death intervened too soon to allow his ac­ceptance of the terms of peace. The date of his death is uncertain; he was undoubtedly alive In the spring of 1349, and thus the date giyen on his monument (of later construction) in the former Franciscan chapel at Munich‑Apr. 10, 1347‑can not be right. The day and month may be accepted; the year will be either 1350, or more probably 1349, which would account for the double tradition as to the fact, on the theory that he had announced his readiness to make submission, but died before it could be accomplished.

TI. Works: There is no complete edition of the works of Occam, which is a token of the disfavor into which he fell by his rebellious attitude, although

the numerous manuscripts and early

x. Philo‑ printed editions testify to the interest

sophical which was felt in his writings. Under and Theo‑ the head of philosophical works may logical be named the Expoaitio aurea et ad‑

Writings. modum Wilts super totem artem vete‑

rem, which in the form of commen‑

taries on Aristotle and Porphyry, contains Ocaam's logic, epistemology, and metaphysic; Summa logicea; Queestiones in onto pros phyaieorum; Sumr mince in libroa phyaicorecm; and two or three works still unprinted, mentioned by Little. The principal theological work is Qua et deciaionea in qua­tuor libros aententiarum; the first book is much

fuller than the other three and is frequently found in manuscripts independent of them, thus making it likely that Occam published it separately in the first place, during his teaching life at Oxford or Paris, and later did the other three on a smaller scale, perhaps from mere notes of lectures. Other theological treatises are the Centiloquium theolog­icum, " embracing almost the whole of speculative theology under one hundred conclusions," which gives a piquant collection of instances of what ra­tional theology might consider possible; Quodlibeto septem, dealing with the principal problems of phi­losophy and theology, based probably on the dis­putations with which he began his Paris teaching; De' aacramento altaria and De corPore Christi, two parts of one work, which was used to supply theo­retical support for Luther's eucharistic doctrine; De pra;deatinatione et futuris contingentibua.

The Opus nonaginta dierum, so called from the time spent in its composition (probably in 1330, certainly before 1333), is a defense of the doctrine of

poverty as the true perfection, in an‑

x. Works ewer to the bull Quia vir reprotncs of

on Church John XXIT. The Tractatua de dog­i sad State. matibus Johannia %Xll. Papce (1333)

controverts the pope's assertion that

the saints will not see the beatific vision until after

the day of judgment; Epiatola ad fratrea minorea in

caPitulo aped Aaaiaium congregates (1334) is of

special interest from the light which it throws upon

its author's character; Olouaculum adveraua errorea

Johannis %X11. was written shortly after John's

death, early in 1335; the Compendium errorum

Johannie X%11. papce, written under Benedict XII.,

and Defenaorium contra Johan nem XXII., written

under Clement VT. (though not certainly by Oo­

cam), take a similar line. The TraeEatua oatendens

good Benedictus papa X11. nonnulloa Johannia

%%11. horeaes amplexua eat et defendit, arising out

of the political situation of the latter half of 1337,

rebukes the pope as a heretic and an enemy of the

emperor and the king of England, and proves that

Louis has the right to take up arms against him.

Ode quaitionea super potesfate et dignitata Papali.

(latter half of 1339) answers various questions ap­

parently submitted by Louis as to points in con­

troversy between the temporal and spiritual powers.

The largest and most important general discussion

of the theoretical questions at issue is the Dialogue

inter magiatrum et diaciputum de imperatorum et

pontificum luOtestate, written between 1341 and 1343.

Tn its present form the work is far from complete;

it was intended to be a thorough investigation of

the whole controversy between the empire and the

papacy, and at the same time to show conclusively

that John XXIT. was a heretic, in opposing whom

both Louis and the extreme Franciscans were abun­

dantly justified. The first division deals with the

distinction between Catholic and heretical doctrine,

proves that popes may be and have been heretical,

admitting the same possibility of error in general

councils, and contends that princes and laymen

may and should, when spiritual tribunals fail, sit

in judgment on a heretical pope. The second part

is incomplete, and of the nine treatises promised

for the third, only two seem to have been written.


those dealing with the power of the pope and clergy and with the authority and rights of the emperor. External reasons probably determined the publi­cation of the work in its incomplete form, and the impulse to take it up again was lacking later. Wadding names a number of other works as Occam's but it is impossible in the present state of knowledge to determine whether they exist, and if so whether they are genuine or perhaps parts of those already known.

III. Occam's Position: A complete critical edi­tion of Occam is much to be desired. He was not only one of the most wide‑awake scholars of the Middle Ages but a personality of striking consistency and boldness. His life was a tragedy; he was not able to procure the triumph of his most cherished ideals‑he was bereft of one friend after another, and the vacillating policy of the emperor was little consolation to him. And yet the lonely friar was one of the mighty forces of his time. His histor­ical importance rests on three achievements in par­ticular; he carried the banner of nominalism to victory in the philosophy of his age; he encouraged the critical spirit in regard to traditional dogma, and taught men how to use it as a counterpoise to ecclesiastical positivism; and he struck out a new line of thought as to the relations of temporal and spiritual authority of Church and State.

The great revival of philosophical and theological study which the thirteenth century witnessed was conditioned by the influence of Aristotle. The the­ory of the universe propounded by the r. His Stagirite had to be reconciled with the

Nominal‑ traditional PlatonicAugustinian real‑

ism. ism. This Thomas Aquinas undertook

to do, following Aristotle as closely as

possible. Duns Scotus, on the other hand, at­

tempted to maintain the ancient realism, while sup­

porting it by modern or Aristotelian methods. In­

terests and tendencies, however, came up in his

work which drove his disciples away from his posi­

tion. The growth of empirical research and psy­

chological analysis on one side, together with the

new activity of the reason in the epistemological

field, and on the other the recognition of the fact

that the specific and the particular was the end of

nature, led to results widely divergent from those

of Scotus. Here was Occam's work ready to his

hand. He was the leader of the nominalists, the

founder of the "modern" school. Science has to

do, he maintains, only with propositions, not with

things as such, since the object of science is not

what is but what is known. Things, too, are al­

ways singular, while science has to do with general

concepts, which as such exist only in the human

mind. Scotus had deduced the objective existence

of universals from the concepts originated under

the operation of the objects. Occam, on the other

hand, asserts that " no universal is a substance

existing outside of the mind," and proves it by a

variety of keen logical reasons. He rejects even

the milder forms of philosophic universalism, such

as the theory that the universal is something in

particulars which is distinguished from them not

rediter but only formaliter. In fine, he considers

the universal without qualification as an " inten‑

tion " of the mind, a symbol representing conven­tionally several objects. In respect of the theory of cognition, where Duns Scotus had placed be­tween the perceiving subject and the object per­ceived a " sensible species " and an " intelligible species," Occam considers these as superfluous ma­chinery. Objects call forth sense‑impressions in us, which are transmuted by the active intellect into mental images; these are thus a product of the intellect, not species which flow from the object into the inteUedus powibilis. The reality of these images is thus, in the modern use of the terms, not objective but subjective. This is true not merely of the " terms of first intention " formed directly from sense‑impression, but also of the " terms of second intention," i.e., the abstract terms which take note of common attributes, or universals. These latter correspond to a tendency of the human mind, which can not perceive individuals without at the same time attempting to form a general concept. A white object simultaneously suggests abstract whiteness; an extended, related, enduring object forces the conception of extension, relation, dura­tion. The result of this line of reasoning is the ab­solute subjectivity of all concepts and universals and the limitation of knowledge to the mind and its concepts‑although these are real entities be­cause of their subjective existence in the mind, re­producing the actual according to the constitution of the mind. Thus Occam is really the pioneer of modern epistemology. The mysterious universals with their species in the sense of objective realities are abolished. Objects work upon the senses of men, and out of these operations the active intel­lect frames its concepts, including the so‑called universals, which, while they are in themselves subjective, yet correspond to objective realities. By the statement that science has nothing to do directly with things, but only with concepts of them, the theory of knowledge assumes vital im­port for the progress of science, and a new method of scientific cognition is made available. Of course this increases the difficulty of the task of theology; but Occam was essentially of a critical and nega­tive temperament, of great critical acumen but (especially in the religious province) by no means equally great in constructive ability. He had not the broad general conception of religion which guided his master Scotus through all his perilous attempts to criticize the old evidences and bring up new ones; where he shows its power at all, it is usually sim­ply borrowed from Scotus.

According to his attitude toward the dogmas of the Church, it appears that " authority, reason, and experience " are the sources of religious knowl­edge. A scientific proof of dogma is

a. Doctrine impossible. This he shows by the of the method of evolving a number of prop‑

Church and ositiona which on ecclesiastical princi­Criticism. plea ought to be possible, but actually contradict the doctrine of the Church. The instances are frequently rather startling; but it would be quite misleading to understand them in the sense of anti‑ecclesiastical unbelief or frivo­lous skepticism. Occam's purpose is to show that reason is useless as a foundation of ecclesiastical


dogma. The infidel can " attain all the knowledge, whether simple or complex, which the believer can have "; the difference is in the possession of faith. The act of belief depends on the files infuses, and proceeds from the cooperation of this with the fides acquisita derived from instruction, Bible‑reading, and intelligent meditation on various truths. The­ology is not thus in the strict sense a science; it is not a form of natural metaphysical cognition, but a special mode of cognition effected by the opera­tion of the infused "habit" of faith. In the ap­plication of these principles to the faith of the church of his day, Occam accepts and even en­hances the ecclesiastical positivism of Scotus. The faith of the Church must be accepted in toto, either explicitly or implicitly. Reason may question the doctrines or ordinances of the Church, but the Christian as a Christian accepts them. The more critical activity awoke, the more need there was for this counterbalancing thought. The legal con­ception of the Church finds expression here; he who wishes to belong to it must subject himself to its laws, whether or not he is personally convinced of their justice. Here again there is need of the miraculous fides infusa; but this is itself an article of faith which is learned only by authority, not " by reason, by experience, or by logic." So it comes back to the point that a man must accept the teachings of the Church because he wishes to belong to it. The authority of the Church's teach­ing was essentially based, for Occam, on that of the Bible. This in itself was nothing new, as all the scholastics (following Augustine) had regarded church doctrine as the formulated expression of Scriptural truth. The novelty here is that Occam is driven by the party conflicts of his day into ac­knowledging that the authorities of the day may diverge from Scriptural teaching, and thus he comes to a more consciously strict application of the prin­ciple of Scriptural infallibility. Popes and councils may err, but the written word is sure. " A Chris­tian is not bound to believe, as necessary to salva­tion, anything which is neither contained in the Bible nor may be plainly and of necessity inferred from what is contained there." It is true that he does not realize how far this principle might lead ‑how far it was one day going to lead Luther; nor does he seem disposed to apply it except where the necessities of his own position, as in the con­troversy on poverty, forced him to it. In practise, throughout his whole dogmatic system, the author­ity of the Fathers and of the Roman Catholic Church stands out as coequal with that of the Scripture, and in fact has the last word; the doctrine of tran­substantiation, which is not expressly taught in Scripture, is unquestioningly accepted on that au­thority. In spite of this, a special place must be given him in the history of the principle of Scrip­tural faith.

Space forbids more thmn a cursory glance at the individual doctrines held by him; but this is less to be regretted since his strength lies in the critical rather than the positive, in which he is generally influenced by Scotus. In regard to the nature and attributes of God, he applies a critical solvent to the principal proof given for his existence by

Scotus, showing that the reality of God as the infinitus intensive can as little be demonstratod from efcientia, causalitas, eminentia, as from the

divine knowledge of the infinite or from 3. Doctrine the simplicity of his nature. Never‑

of God, theless he considers the recognition of Salvation God to proceed from the idea of

and Sin. causality, if not by strict syllogistic

deduction, yet " by authority and rea­son." And in the same sort of way the infinity of God is confirmed. As to his unbounded power and absolute will, Occam distinguishes potentia absoluta and potentia ordinata, the two being, how­ever, only different modes of considering a power which is essentially one; in practise it is always ordinata, the absolute power being merely the hypothetical possibility of God's doing anything whatever which does not involve a contradiction in terms. The absolute freedom of God is the characteristic trait in the theology of Occam. The entire scheme of salvation planned by the voluntas ordinata is based on no inner necessity, but is determined by the fact that it pleased God, as a matter of fact, to do thus and no other­wise. The distinction of the two aspects of the di­vine power comes in here; the merits of the saints, e.g., are accepted as valid only because it pleases God to accept them‑but since it has pleased God to establish this system, merit is absolutely neces­sary. God and his grace do all, yet only in such a way that the cooperation of man is required. The freedom of the human will can not be, strictly speaking, demonstrated, but is recognized as true by experience. Sin consists in the violation of the will of God. By it, however, no " real " change takes place in the soul. Sin consists in individual acts; it does not take away freedom nor weaken the soul, but simply destroys the future good, the reward, ordained by God for those who do his will. Since there is no fundamental connection between sin and punishment, God could by his absolute power forgive sin and infuse grace even without repentance. In the same connection appears the relation of original sin to original righteousness. The latter is " an absolute something superadded to man as he is in a state of nature "; the former is " a certain lack of the righteousness which he ought to have." Thus original sin is the result of the divine ordinance; God wills to consider the offender against his law as unworthy of acceptance, together with all his posterity. This explains his view of the immaculate conception of Mary. As a member of the human race, she would have been in the first instant of her conception a debtor to original righteousness; but it is not inconceivable that God should have chosen to renounce the exac­tion of that righteousness from her and refused to impute its absence as a fault. By a subtle train of reasoning he concludes that she was not even for an instant in original sin.

In his Christology, Occam holds firmly to the hypostatic union, while distinguishing sharply be­tween the two natures. As with Duns Scotus, so here the union consists in a " relation," the human nature being assumed by the divine. The special result of Christ's work is to be seen in the inatitu‑


tion and operation of the sacraments. The operation is described in a manner usual in Franciscan theology; grace does not reside in them, but they are signs that God, in accordance with ;. Doctrine his institution, will accompany their of Christ administration with his grace. Grace and the is taken in a twofold sense, an infused Sacraments. quality of the mind by which man is enabled to act according to God's will, and divine acceptation, " the gratuitous will of God." Following Scotus again, Occam is con­scious of strong objections to the doctrine of the necessity of an infused " habit " of grace; and it is quite clear that the retention of it in his system is due merely to submission to authority. Under the head of the sacraments, his fullest treatment is given to the Eucharist, where he follows the con­substantiation theory which after Scotus was be­coming common. Neither Scripture nor reason contradicts the possibility of the substance of bread, not merely the accidents, remaining together with the substance of the body of Christ; nor is tran­substantiation taught in Scripture. He goes at con­siderable length into the question of the possibility of the presence of Christ in the sacrament. For him as a nominalist, quantity is a thing which has no existence in itself, but only the rea quanta. Now quantity can increase or diminish, and thus a thing may be without quantity, like a mathematical point; this is the manner in which the body of Christ exists in the sacrament of the altar. In this way he comes to agree with Thomas Aquinas, that the body of Christ is present " after the manner of substance, not after that of quantity " (Summa, III., Ixxvi. 1); the criticism of Duns Scotus, that a substance without attributes is unthinkable, is avoided by the assertion that quantity is not an essential property of substance. While to some extent he prepared the way for Luther's teaching on the Lord's Supper, the difference between his doctrine of ubiquity and Luther's must not be over­looked. As to the sacrament of penance, like most of the later scholastics, Occam lays most stress on the absolution. Since, as shown above, sin effects no " real " change in the soul, its destruction con­sists in the non‑imputation of guilt. This might have been brought about, had God so willed, by an internal act of repentance on the part of a sinner having proper dispositions. Sin being an act of the will, the detestation of it by the same will is the appropriate means for its destruction, and in fact necessary, contrary to the view of Scotus that God gives his grace to the sinner through the sacrament without either attrition or contrition. But the essence of the sacrament, according to Occam, lies in the deliverance of the sinner from the guilt of sin by God through the agency of the priest.

In the important questions as to the external organization of the Church and its relation to the State, two principal motives guided Occam to his conclusions. Accusing John XXIL of 5. Church attempting to subjugate or destroy the and State. empire and to prove erroneous and illicit the thorough‑going poverty of the Franciscans, he met him by attempting on the one hand to make a sharp distinction between the

Church and the world, and on the other by show­ing the limitations and errors of the official ecclesi­astical authorities. Like Marsilius of Padua, he contends that the papal power extends only to spiritual things. The apostles were subject to the secular authorities of their time and were far from claiming any temporal jurisdiction. Even the ne­cessity of the papacy may be called in question; and if so, much less is there any necessary depend­ence of the emperor on the pope. The choice of the electors makes an emperor, who needs no papal confirmation. The relation of pope and emperor is discussed not only from the standpoint of the historic civil law, but from that of natural law as well. The idea of natural law had come down from the ancients to both canonists and civilians, as a criterion of the justice of positive enactments; the popes had employed it often enough against civil rulers, and now it was turned against themselves. The trouble with this criterion, however, was that it was too elastic; it could be stretched to include the most revolutionary conclusions in both Church and State. Occam undoubtedly believed in the logical validity of his critical statements; but a complete overturning of the ecclesiastical organism was as far from his temperament as the creation of a new system of Scriptural theology. He never strove for anything more than a certain ameliora­tion of existing conditions within the circle of the system, and his most reasonable demands went to pieces on the positivism of the nominalist. He was anything but timid; but he went on criticizing and constructing, and then doubting once more both his critical and his constructive work.

TV. Survey of Occam's Position: The foregoing review of Occam's theological and constitutional opinions shows how on the one hand the newer criti­cism of traditional doctrines and ordinances was becoming ever more minute and more difficult to deal with, and on the other the ecclesiastical post­tivism was hardening into more inflexible formulas. In Occam's hands theology became increasingly skeptical, negative, and unfruitful. He really dug the grave of scholasticism, which perished of the accumulation of dialectical subtlety and negation. The further it got away from active church life, the more dreary and unprofitable did its speculations appear, until an imperative demand arose for a theology that should be practical and alive, Augus­tinian and Scriptural. But nominalism won an ex­ternal victory. Occam's doctrine remained the " modern " theology up to the time of Luther. The " last of the scholastics," Gabriel Biel (q.v.), had nothing better to offer his disciples than a Codleo­torium ex Occamo; and after Gregory of Rimini had combined Occam's nominalism with the Augustin­ian teaching on sin and grace, the name of the Eng­lish friar stood high with those who looked for a " modern " scientific theology. Luther calls him " my dear master," and proclaims with pride " I am of the Occamist faction." As a philosopher, he won a decided victory; even over his greater teacher Scotus, and became the pioneer of modern epis­temology; as a theologian he enforced the critical method of Scotus on generations to follow; and as a constitutionalist he furnished a leaven in his



ideas on Church and State and on the supreme authority of Scripture which was destined to work mightily on a later age. Both on the negative and on the positive side, he stands in a direct relation to the greatest event of the succeeding age, the

Reformation. It has been shown above that he was no forerunner of Luther as a Reformer; but he was one of the factors without which the Refor­mation would have been impossible.


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources for a life are: John of Viktring, in J. F. Bbhmer, Pontes rerum Germanimrum, vol. i., Stutt­gart, 1843; John of Winterthur, Chronica, ed. G. von Wyss, in Archiv far aehwaizeriaehe Geachichte, vol. xi. Zurich, 1856; N. Glassberger, Chronicon, in Analecta Franciacana, vol. ii., Quaraechf. 1887; L. Wadding, An­nales Minorum, ed. Fonseca, vole. vii. viii., Rome, 1733; H. Denifle, Chartularium Universitatia Partaienaia, vol. ii., part i., Paris, 1890. Consult: P. Feret, La Pacult8 de th6dopie de Paris au moyen dpe, pp 339 sqq. Paris, 1896; W. L. G. F. v. Eberstein, Natnrliehe Theolopse der 3eholaatiker. Leipsic, 1803; K. Prantl, Oeachichte der Lopik im Abendlande, iii. 327‑420, Leipsie. 1867; S. Riesler. Die literarischen Widersacher der PBpete cur Zeit Lvdwips lee Baiern, Leipsie, 1874; J. E. Erdmann, Oeschichde der PhrZosophie, i. 423‑434, Berlin. 1878. Eng. tranal. vol. i., London, 1893; C. Mikller, Der Kampf Ludwips lea Baiern mit der r6misehen Curie. 2 vols., Tubingen, 1879‑80; B. Haurtisu, Hiatoire de is philoaophie acolastique, ii. 2, pp. 356‑130, Paris, 1880; A. G. Little, Grey Priara of Oxford, pp. 225‑234, Oxford, 1892; M. de Wulf, Hia­toire de la philosophic acolastique, pp. 349‑364, Louvain, 1900; G. Hoffmann, Die Lehre der fdes implicita, pp. 153 eqq., Leipsie, 1903: F. Kropatacheck, in Bear4pe zur PSrderunp chridlicher Thedapie, iv. i.. Gutersloh, 1900; Schaff, Christian Church, v. 1, pp. 691, 719, and 2, pp. 188 aqq. et passim: DNB, xli. 357‑362; ADB, xaiv. 122 sqq.; Harnack Dogma Vol. vi. passim; and, in general, works on the history of the period and of philosophy.



OCCOM (OCCUM), SAMSON: Converted Indian, and Presbyterian missionary among the Indiana; b. at Mohegan, New London County, Conn., about 1723; d. at New Stockbridge, N. Y., July 14, 1792. Converted to Christianity and expressing the de­sire to become a religious teacher in his tribe, he attended the Indian school of Eleazer Wheelock at Lebanon for four years. In 1748 he taught at New London, but soon went to Montauk, L. I., where he was first teacher and then preacher to the Indians for ten years. Ordained in 1759, he went two years latei on a mission to the Oneidas, and, in 1766, to England with Nathaniel Wheelock to procure funds for Moor's Indian charity school. While there, he preached between 300 and 400 sermons and ob­tained more than £100,000 of which George III. subscribed £200. This school, later transferred to New Hampshire, became the nucleus that de­veloped into Dartmouth College. In 1786 he re­moved to Oneida, N. Y., and resided with the Stockbridge Indiana. He was the author of several hymns, the best known of which is " Awaked by Sinai's awful sound." His account of the Montauk Indians of Long Island (1761) is reprinted in the Massachusetts Historical Society's Collections, x. 106‑111.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. de L. Love, Samson Occotn and the In­diana of New England, Boston, 1900; W. B. Sprague. Annals of the American Pulpit, iii. 192‑195; New York, 1858; E. H. Gillett, HIM. of as Presbyterian Church, i.


181. 38s, 388. Philadelphia. 1884: C. A. Briggs, American

Presbyterianism, pp. 324325. New York, 1885.

OCHIlYO, 3‑kf'‑no; BERNARDINO: Italian Re­former; b. at Sierra in 1487; d. at Austerlitz (12 m. e.s.e. of Brunn) in 1564. [Isis father's name was Domenico Tommasini, and Ochino took his name from the street (Oca) on which his father dwelt.] Persuaded by Savanarola's call to repentance, and believing that the surest road to salvation was by way of fasting, repetition of prayers, continence, vigils, and the like, Ochino first turned to the Francis­can Observants and afterward to the Capuchins, as the most austere order in which to realize his pur­pose. Convinced, in consequence of his inner ex­perience, that the certainty of salvation is not to be earned by one's own performances; he relin­quished past relations, and fled from Italy in 1542, after he had twice been elected vicar‑general of his order. At Naples, through the Spanish nobleman Juan de Vald6s iq.v.), he was approached by the combined religious views of the mystics and the Reformation. He there became firmly convinced of the voidness of ecclesiastical mediations for salva­tion; and in the company about Vald6s, which com­prised Pietro Martire Vermigli (q.v.), Marcantonio Flaminio, Pietro Carnesecahi, Mario Galeota, be­sides highly endowed women, such as Vittoria Co­lonna, Costanza d'Avalos, and the Duchess Giulia Gonzaga, he applied himself to the purely Biblical doctrine of salvation. Thus there arose an irrecon­cilable conflict between his convictions and the de­mands of his office; and this came to au open climax in the spring of 1542, when Oehino, at Venice, intervened from the pulpit in behalf of a friend who had been treated unjustly by the In­quisition. The papal nuncio forbade him to preach; then he was summoned to Rome, where the In­quisition (q.v.) had just been reorganized. On his way to Rome his adversaries' intentions dawned upon him, and instead of death or prison, he chose voluntary exile. First he found refuge at Geneva, where he proclaimed the word of God from 1542­1544, to the local Italians, some of whom were like­wise religious refugees. Then, caned to Augsburg, by way of Basel, he found himself again compelled to flight, when the imperial troops forced the city to surrender (1547). The emperor demanded him

', to be delivered up, but the council suffered him to escape by night. By way of Zurich he returned to Basel, followed by his family from Geneva; sad from Basel, in November, 1547, in response to Cranmer's invitation, he continued as far as Eng­land, where, under Edward VI., a very favorable tide had set in for Protestantism. During the years of his exile Ochino reached his .countrymen with his pen. A series of religious tracts, an open letter to the council of his native city, answers to the attacks of Roman Catholic writers, besides works of edification and an exposition of the epis­tle to the Romans, had been published previously. There now appeared a caustic tract against the papacy, Tragedy or Dialogue of the Uniuate Usurped Prwmacie of the Bishop of Rome (London, 1549, re­print, 1899). This, dedicated to the young king, presents the argument that the papacy owes its existence to none but the devil himself. With the


reaction under Queen Mary, 1553, Ochino left Eng­

land and went to Zurich as pastor of some Evan­

gelical refugees who had fled from Locarno. Even­

tually, however, from Zurich, too, he was expelled

by a narrow zeal, which charged that he sanctioned

polygamy and assailed the Trinity. This was a

hard accusation, and not without formal occasion,

yet substantially refuted not only by his " Apol­

ogy " of the year 1563, but still more by the whole

course of his life. Ochino sought final refuge in

Poland; yet thence he was expelled by the edict

of Aug. 7, 1564, against foreign heretics. And so

from Poland he wandered over to Moravia, where,

at Slackov (Austerlitz) he was to lay down his

weary life. Looking back, he says, " I had much

to endure, but this no apostle and disciple of

Christ is spared. However, that I was enabled to

endure all is proof that the Lord manifested his

power in me." K. BENRATH.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: There is no collected edition of his works. Some of his sermons were frequently translated into Eng­lish, London, 1550, 1580, as was his Dialopo dd Purpatoria, ib. 1857. Consult: K. Benrath, Bernardino Ochino, Brunswick, 1892, Eng. tranal. of earlier ed., London, 1878; C. Carmichel Baron, Easai our B. Ochino, Paris, 1855; T. McCrie, Progress and Suppression of the Refor­mation in Italy, Philadelphia, 1858; G. Bucbaensohuts, Nude sur la vie et lea asuvrea de B. Oehino, Strasburg, 1871; Vigouroux, Dictionnagre, faac. xxviii., ool. 1733; DNB, xli. 350 sqq.

OCTAVE: A term in Roman Catholic liturgies denoting the celebration throughout an entire week of certain great festivals, and also the eighth day, or conclusion of the festival, which has a higher rank than the others. Like the festivals them­selves , the octaves differ in dignity. Those of Eas­ter and Pentecost are of such high rank that‑neither the celebration of saints' days nor votive masses are permitted within them; those of Christmas and Corpus Christi allow the observance of saints' days but not of votive masses; other octaves permit both. Each day of the octave has part of the serv­ice proper to itself, while the eighth approximates more closely to that of the feast. The original in­stitution of octaves is of historical interest as show­ing the inclination of the early Church to perpetuate the liturgical institutions of Israel, according to which the Passover was celebrated for seven days (or eight, including the day of preparation), the first and last being of special importance, while the Feast of Tabernacles lasted for eight.

(E. BANxEt.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, few. xxviu., cots. 1735‑37.



ODILO: Fifth Abbot of Cluny. See CLuNY, ABBEY AND CONGREGATION OF, § 3.

ODLAND, od'18nd, SIGURD VILHELM: Nor­wegian theologian; b. at Bergen, Norway, Dec. 5, 1857. He was graduated at the University of Christiania (B.A., 1875; candidate in theology, 1879; Th.D., 1879); was appointed professor of theology there (1894), his special field being New­Testament exegesis and isagogics. He achieved celebrity by his opposition to the liberal theology

which in recent years has exerted marked influence in Norway. His prominence in this respect became marked in the " professor controversy " which reached its culmination in the appointment (1906) of Johannes Ording (q.v.) to the chair of systematic theology in the university vacated by Petersen. When the appointment was made, Odland carried out his declared intention of resigning if a member of the faculty was permitted to teach anticonfes­sional doctrine. With the help of clergy and laity he was able to create a new faculty, confessional as well as scientific in type, independent of the university.

Odland has always been interested in practical church work, because in 1885 a member of the board of directors of Lutheretiftelsen, and its president after it had become the " Norwegian Lutheran Society for Home Missions." In 1893 he was an editor of Luth. Ugeskrift, and since 1900 of Luthersk Kirketidende. He was also a member of the com­mittee for the revision of the Norwegian transla­tion of the New Testament (1896‑1905). Among his works may be mentioned: Kristofer Janaon og det Nye Testaments (1886); Kridofer Janson 0M aolaagn og eroangelierm (1894), directed against the only Norwegian Unitarian preacher of any fame in America; JakoN Brev, indledd og fml4ket (1889); Apoddateea Begre& og Oprindelse (1897).


ODO (ODA): Archbishop of Canterbury; d. at Canterbury June 2, 959. He was possibly the son of a Dane in the army of Inguar (Ivar) which con­quered the north of England in 867, and in early life embraced Christianity against the will of his father. He was adopted by the Saxon noble Xthel­helm, who had him baptized and educated; he showed such aptitude that he was early admitted to the priesthood. He secured the favor of King tEthelstan, who had him made bishop of Ramsbury in 927, and also employed him in a diplomatic mis­sion. In 942 King Edmund offered to make him arch­bishop, but he declined on the ground that he was not a monk, and that the see should be held by a mem­ber of an order. He was induced to take the cowl, after which he was elevated to the see. He imme­diately occupied himself in the repair of the cathe­dral, the condition of which was almost ruinous. His occupation of the see was marked by strenu­ous efforts for the upbuilding of morals and care for the discipline of the cloisters. He was incessant in laboring for the betterment of treatment of the lower classes by nobles and the rich, for the per­formance of their duties by the clergy, and for ob­servance by monks of the rules of the orders. He was especially interested in preventing marriages regarded as unlawful, especially of nuns and of near of kin; and he made it his duty to see that material provision was made for the benefit of the wife in case she were left a widow. He inspired Frithegode to write the metrical '° Life of Wilfrid," for which he furnished the prose preface. He left behind him a reputation as a holy man of great in­fluence, the protector of the weak, and, in the pur­suit of this aim, regarded not at all the rank of those concerned.





BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Vita, attributed to 0sbem, really by Eadmer, is, with comment, in ASB, July, ii. 83‑73; ASM, v. 288‑296; H. Wharton, Anglia sacra, ii. 78‑87, London, 1691; J. Langebek, Script. Per. Danicarum, ii. 401‑411, 9 vols., Copenhagen, 1772‑1878; Historians of the Church of York, ed. J. Rains, in Rolls Series, i. 399‑475, London, 1879; and MPL, cxxaiii. 931‑944. Consult T. D. HarAy, Descriptive Catalogue of Materials Relat%ng to the Hist. of Great Britain and Ireland, in Rolls Series, no. 26, i. 2, p. 566, nos. 1148‑51, London, 1862; T. Wright, Biographia Britannica literaria, i. 428‑433, ib. 1842; T. Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, vol. i., 1860; DNB, ali. 421‑423, where references am made to scatter­ing notices.

ODO: Second abbot of Cluny. See CLUNY, AB­BEY AND CONGREGATION OF, § 2.

OECOLAMPADIUS, ec'o‑lam‑p5'di‑us, AND


Life of (Ecolampadius till 1522 (§ 1). Beginnings of the Reformation in Basel (§ 2). Early Work of CEcolampadius There ($ 3). Final Success in 1529 (§ 4). Controversy over the Lord's Supper (§ 5). Closing Work of (Ecolampadius (i fi).

Johannes (Ecolampadius (Johann Heussgen,

Hussgen, Hauschein, in the South German dialect

equivalent to " candlestick," whence the grecized

form of his name) was born at Weinaberg (25 m.

n. of Stuttgart), in the Palatinate, 1482; d. at

Basel Nov. 24, 1531. He began his studies in

Heilbronn and continued them in

r. Life Bologna, wnere he devoted himself to

of (Ecolam‑ jurisprudence. But his aversion to

padius law induced him to leave Bologna

till 1522. and study theology at Heidelberg

(1499), where he occupied himself

with the study of Thomas Aquinas, of the mys­

tics, such as Richard of St. Victor, and of later

theologians like Gerson. His inherent mysticism

was thus intensified, and he remained a pious and

loyal Romanist. In 1503 he took his bachelor's

degree and soon afterward became tutor of the

younger sons of the Elector Philip the Upright in

Heidelberg. But the life of the court displeased

him and he longed to return to the study of theol­

ogy. The facts of his life from 1503 to 1512 are

still veiled in obscurity. It is known only that he

departed from the court of the elector and accepted

a prebend at Weinsberg. A prebend was estab­

lished there by the council Apr. 8, 1510, confirmed

by the bishop June 9, meanwhile (Ecolampadius

had been presented, Apr. 3, by Duke Ulrich (Bl&­

ter fur wiirttembergische %irchengeschichte, 1895,

p. 40). The same year he was in Stuttgart to hear

Reuchlin and published at Freiburg some sermons

which he had preached in Weinsberg. Then he

went to Tiibingen, where he became intimate with

Melanchthon. In 1514 he seems to have returned

to Heidelberg, where he associated with Brenz and

Capito. In 1515 he was called to Basel as preacher

by Bishop Christoph of Utenheim, where he met

Eras‑us and assisted him in the publication of his

Greek New Testament. They formed an intimate

friendship, and Erasmus exercised a considerable

influence upon the young preacher. In 1516 (Eco­

lampadius lectured at the University of Basel on

Obadiah, Ephesians, and the " Sentences " of Lom­

bard. But after a short time he returned to Weins­

berg to attend to his prebend and at the same time

pursued private studies at Heidelberg. In 1518 he was again in Basel assisting Erasmus in the second edition of his New Testament. At this time he pursued the study of Greek grammar and of Jerome's translation of the Bible, lecturing at the same time at the university. In December, 1518, he received a call as preacher to the principal church in Augsburg, where the first events of the Refor­mation had made a deep impression upon the citi­zens. (Ecolampadius found himself greatly op­pressed by these excitements and would have liked to return to his studies; but he remained loyal to his position, especially after it had become clear to him that Luther spoke the truth. Luther's ser­mons on the Ten Commandments and his theses decided (Ecolampadius to adopt fhe new teachings. But in 1520 he suddenly startled his friends by en­tering the monastery of Altenmiinster near Augs­burg, in which action he was following out his nat­ural leaning toward mysticism and his deep‑rooted sympathy with the ideals of monastic life. In a treatise of 1515 he had exalted those who from love of perfection renounce marriage and in Basel had given offense to his humanistic friends by his predilection for the mysterious elements in the Roman cult and for the ascetic life. But on enter­ing the monastery, he reserved to himself the right to live according to the word of God and to leave if he found it necessary. In fact, his dissatisfaction with the old conditions increased. In his sermon on the Lord's Supper he gave up the doctrine of transubstantiation; the sacrifice of the mass was for him only a memorial, not a repetition of the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross; he also defended the administration of the Lord's Supper in both kinds; while the institution of confession he tried to save by its transformation in the Evangelical sense. His treatises and sermons became continually more Evangelical, and he openly expressed his admiration for Luther. He left the monastery in 1522 and ac­cepted in April from Franz von Sickingen (q.v.) the position of chaplain at the castle of Ebernburg. There he took his first step as a Reformer by reading mass in German and preaching on week‑days in the same language, affirming that the Church must be reformed on the basis of the Word of God. But he did not feel at ease in Ebernburg and in November, 1522, gladly accepted an invitation of Cratander to come to Basel, where the work of his life was awaiting him.

(Ecolampadius was not the originator of the Reformation in Basel. On his arrival at Basel the fundamental basis of the old order had already been shaken. But it was his special merit that by his powerful and impressive sermons, by

2. Begin‑ his moderation and considerateness,

nings of the and especially by his spiritual clear­Reformation ness and determination the reforms,

in BaseL tory movement of Basel, which at this

time was strongly intermingled with

political motives, was transformed into a religious

movement. When Basel joined the Swiss federa­

tion (1501), the example of the Swiss democracies

induced the citizens to change their political con­

ditions. So far the city had been ruled exclusively

by the nobility. After their democratic reforms,



the citizens shook off the secular power of the bishop, and after these political changes there was no ob­stacle to the free development of the Reformation. Capito was the first who was active for the cause in Basel, beginning with the overthrow of the order of pericopes. Unfortunately he left Basel in 1519, but he left results. In Wilhelm RSubli, preacher at St. Alban's, there appeared a Reformer of a differ­ent type, who in 1521 began to preach against the mass, purgatory, worship of saints, .and other abuses of the Roman Church, and with success to hold be­fore the people Christ crucified. On Corpus Christi he ordered a Bible to be carried before the proces­sion, with the inscription, " The Bible, that is true holiness, everything else is dead men's bones." Thereupon the priests accused him before the bish­op, who, because of the excitement, referred the matter to the council, while the populace vehe­mently demanded the acquittal of the preacher. The council in great alarm yielded, but, owing to the intrigues of the clergy, Rbubli was banished in 1522, though not till he had inflamed the souls of the people and opened their hearts to the Evangel­ical truth. After him, the sermons of Johann L(It­hard of the Franciscan monastery and of wolff Wissenburg, preacher at the hospital, exercised a lasting influence. Hence, when (Ecolampadius came to Basel, he found it already the center of an Evangelical movement from which proceeded a great mass of literature.

In (oolampadius the movement received a leader. He was at first without a position, but toward the end of 1522 he became unsalaried vicar to Antonius Zanker, preacher at St.

3. Early Martin's. In 1523 the council made

Work of him and Konrad Pellican (q.v.) leo‑

Mcolam‑ turers on Holy Scripture at the uni­padius veraity; but the anti‑Evangelical uni­There. versity did not recognize them, and they were compelled to lecture out­side of the academic halls. The university had be­come more and more the stronghold of the old re­ligion and even Erasmus was cold and indifferent. But clergy and laity thronged to hear the lectures of Meolampadius. Luther was greatly elated over his success, but at this time (Ecolampadius came into terms of friendship with Zwingh, who was much nearer to him than Luther, and the natural consequence was his dependence upon Zwingli. At the end of 1522 the university made an effort to end the crisis, and a debate was proposed which did not eventuate. At the instigation of zwingli a disputation was held in Zurich which greatly furthered the cause of the Reformed in the whole of Switzerland. CEcolampadius felt so strengthened that he, too, in 1523 drew up four theses for a pub­lic disputation and defended them in the presence of large crowds. His first sermons so swayed the people that, soon after he entered his position, va­rious ceremonies were omitted, priests married, and the people with the clergy split into two sharply opposed parties. The majority of the town clergy attacked C;aolampadius violently, but the ooun­cil took a favorable attitude. In 1523 it issued its first reformatory mandate, " the first document of the supremacy of the State over the Church in

Basel," which ordered the free preaching of the Gospel, but did not involve express assent to the Reformation. In 1524 a disputation took pleas, dealing with the marriage of priests, which was publicly defended by Stephen Star, a secular priest, who had married. (Ecolampadius took part, but held that celibacy had advantages in that an un­married priest could better devote himself to his duties. The Reformed again won the victory. About the same time another disputation took place at the instigation of Farel, who had reached Basel as a fugitive. This disputation was also op­posed by the university, and its success added new strength to the Evangelical party. (Ecolampadius now became preacher at St. Martin's. The German language was used in baptism, the Lord's Supper was administered in both kinds, and all unprofit­able ceremonies were abolished. In 1526 German church song was introduced. In 1525 the Catholic estates of Switzerland made an energetic effort to suppress the Reformation by sending messengers to Basel to invoke the aid of the city against the Reformation in Zurich, but the councilors refused, appealing to their relations with the federation. Thus peace was secured for several years, and the Swiss Reformation was saved. But the rebellion of the peasants inspired the defenders of the old faith with new hopes. Protests were raised against the radical reforms of d;colampadius, even from the side of the Reformed, and the council, alarmed by these protests, asked the opinion of Erasmus. The latter advised them to refer the matter to the pope. The rebellious peasants had occupied the Sundgau, Alsace, Breiagau, the Black Forest, and a part of the canton of Basel, and marched before the very doors of Basel. Thanks to the unanimous attitude of its population, the city was saved, and a treaty was made with the peasants. Roman Catholics held the reformation of (Ecolampadius chargeable for these events, and he was made re­sponsible for the radicalism of the Anabaptists who greatly embarrassed the political‑ecclesiastical movement in Basel.

In the beginning, (Ecolampadius like Zwingli had many points of contact with them, especially as many of them had been zealous and able adherents of the Reformation. He tried to deal with them in a friendly way. For a time he went

4. Final even so far as to consider the baptism

Success of children an open question, but after

in 1529. a private disputation with the Ana­

baptiate at his residence in Aug., 1525,

he advocated the traditional doctrine. The con­

troversy on the doctrine of the Lord's Supper also

penetrated to Basel. Originally (Ecolampadius

agreed with Carlstadt (q.v.) on this doctrine, in­

curring thereby the displeasure not only of the

Romaniata, but also of the council. The works of

Carlstadt were forbidden, and dissensions arose

among the clergy so that Zwingli had to admonish

them to live in concord. For the defense of his

standpoint (Ecolampadius published in Aug., 1525,

his treatise De qenuina verbm°um Domini " hoc eat

corpus meum " . . . expoaitio. This moderate

treatise led to no agreement, but rather sharpened

the contrast, and the literary dispute assumed a

Mcolsmpadius (Economus



violent character. (Ecolampadius called Luther the Saxon idol. A commission consisting of Eras­mus, B5z (Ursus), Cantiuncula, and Amerbach, in­stituted by the council to examine the book of O;colampadius, rejected it, while the volume aroused opposition outside of Basel. (Ecolampadius re­mained firm in spite of continual attacks by the newly elected Bishop Marius and of gains by the Roman party in the Swiss federation. The Catho­lic estates of Switzerland aimed a blow at the Re­formed by the announcement of a disputation to be held at Baden, a few miles from Basel. It had been prepared in such a way that the victory of the Catholics seemed secure. Zwingli was not present, and Haller of Bern did not speak con­vincingly, and all seemed to depend upon iEcolam­padius who was in daily communication with Zwingli. At the end of the disputation ten voted for (Ecolampadius and eighty‑two for Eck. But the victory of the Romanists was only apparent, and their hopes of suppressing the Reformation were not fulfilled; the Council of Basel did not give up the established reforms, and even made further changes, decreeing in 1527 that partici­pation in the mass should be left to each in­dividual. But the impatient populace had no sym­pathy with the slow procedure of the council and demanded the formal introduction of the Reforma­tion. Its introduction in Bern in 1528 greatly ex­cited the Basel population, and on Good Friday and Easter Monday they invaded the churches and des­troyed the pictures. The culprits were imprisoned, but the people peremptorily demanded their re­lease. The council ordered the removal of the pic­tures, but the friends of the Reformation were not satisfied with this action; they wished a uniform regulation of all religious affairs. At Christmas, 1528, there occurred a new insurrection of the citi­zens. The Roman Catholics armed themselves, and the Reformed also prepared for defense. (Ecolampar dius dreaded the outbreak of a civil war and asked Zwingli to mediate. Ambassadors went from Zu­rich, Bern, Schaffhausen, Miihlhausen, and Stras­burg in order to settle the disputes and hinder the shedding of blood. The Roman Catholics sent also their envoys. The ambassadors of Zurich and Bern proposed a disputation to take place on Whitsunday, 1529. This proposition was unanimously adopted at a convention of over 3,000 citizens on Jan. 6, 1529. But when the council, contrary to its former attitude, continued to place obstacles in the way of the Reformation, a general uprising of the people occurred in February, 1529. They vehemently demanded the removal of the Roman­ist members of the council and of their friends among the clergy. The council at first hesitated, but when the threatening attitude of the people increased, it complied with their demands. On the next day the populace stormed the churches and monasteries and destroyed the pictures. Under the pressure of these events the council ordered the removal of all pictures and the abolition of the mass. Erasmus, Glareanus, Bar, and many citizens left the city. On Feb. 14, 1529, the first Evangelical church service was held in the cathedral and thus the Refor­mation at Basel was at last firmly established.

Simon Grynmus and Sebastian Munster were called to the university. (Ecolampadius was chosen antistes of the clergy and first preacher of the cathe­dral and in 1531 resumed his lectures. But his chief activity consisted in the regulation of church and school affairs. With his cooperation there appeared on Apr. 1, 1529, the new church order, the consti­tution of the Reformed Church of Basel.

The reformatory movement of Basel was fortu­nately completed before the crisis in the fierce struggles concerning the Lord's Supper. In con­formity with his treatise of 1525 (Ecolampadius stood for the so‑called tropical interpretation, with the single modification that he did not g. Contro‑ look for the trope in the copula eat like

versy over Zwingli, but in the term corpus, which the Lord's he explained as figura corporis, " the Supper. figure or sign of my body "; and he rejected the assumption of a corporeal participation on the basis of John vi. He was se­verely attacked for his symbolical conception by Luther, Brenz, and Pirkheimer. Luther wrote against him and Zwingh his polemical treatise, Dass die Worte Christi . . . noch festWhen, wider die Schwarmgeister (1527), in which both are desig­nated as irretrievably lost and accused of the sin against the Holy Ghost. The vehement invectives and irritation of spirit between the adversaries seemed to leave little hope of harmony. But the Colloquy of Marburg in Oct., 1529, showed that there was a great and general desire for peace. (Ecolampadius especially showed himself obliging and reconcilable. He had zealously aided Butzer's efforts for union, and he manifested the same spirit in the negotiations at Marburg. While an agree­ment seemed likely on all other points, Luther was irreconcilable on the doctrine of the Lord's Supper. Zwingli and (Ecolampadius made many concessions; they even conceded that for the believers Christ is ,really present and consumed in the Lord's Supper, but they could not consent to Luther's additional sentence that he is eaten with the mouth and pres­ent in his body. The colloquy of Marburg did not end the eucharistic controversies. Luther continued his literary assaults. But still (Ecolampadius did not give up hope of a final union. On Sept. 4, 1530, there took place a conference between Capito, Zwingli, and Megander at Zurich for the purpose of drawing up a confession in which they attempted a still closer approach to the Lutheran doctrine. The new formula of union emphasized the real and sacramental presence in the Lord's Supper " for the pure spirit, but not united in the bread or with the bread." Under the pressure of the hostile atti­tude of the emperor Luther showed himself at last willing to enter an alliance with the Swiss, but this time it was Zwingli who opposed the union . on the basis of the new formula which seemed to him too vague and ambiguous; and he was not willing to curtail the truth at the price of political union. Once more, in 1531, (Ecolampadius made an effort at reconciliation by advocating the joining of the Schmalkald League and the acceptation of the Tetrapolitana, but Bern and Zurich refused. Thus all sincere efforts for union on the part of (Ecolam­padius were without success; only the bond with



the theologians of Strasburg had become closer. The chief merit of GJcolampadius in these contro­versies lies in the fact that as a theologian he de­fended bravely and with good reasons the doctrine of Zwingli. It was reserved for Calvin to accom­plish the union not so much of the disputing parties as of the two essential factors in both theories.

After the disputation of Baden (1526) G;colam­padius stood alongside of Zwingli as a leader of the Evangelicals in Switzerland and was entrusted with the leadership of their ecclesiastical affairs. In 1531 he introduced the new Reformed church order in Ulm. In the mean time his fame had spread

abroad. The oppressed Waldenses of 6. Closing France sent their ambassadors to con­Work of fer with him. His opinion was asked CE‑ concerning the divorce of Henry VIII.

padius. Negotiations with the Anabaptists and

Antitrinitarians embittered the last

years of his life, and under his grave responsibilities

his health broke down at a comparatively early age.

The proper relation between State and Church be­

came a burning question for the new Church since

it had been reproached by the Anabaptists on ac­

count of lack of discipline. Deviating from Zwingli's

theory of state supervision, (Ecolampadius intro­

duced the ecclesiastical ban with the execution of

which he charged the clergy and subsequently a

special board consisting of members of the council

and of clergymen. He tried to introduce this in­

stitution in all Reformed churches at a convention

in Aarau (1530), but Bern and Strasburg as well as

Zwingli were decidedly opposed to it. The intro­

duction of the measure in Basel aroused popular

opposition, but (Ecolampadius did not desist from

his plan. Its rigorous execution and the inconsid­

erate procedure against men of different opinions

occasioned many a bitter comment. Tradition re­

gards G;colampadius as the most lenient among the

Swiss Reformers. This impression was probably

called forth by his efforts for union, but in reality

he was firm, his rigor at times bordering on intol­

erance. It must not be forgotten, however, that

the time of the Reformation needed sternness of

character to hold with firm grip the results achieved

and to subject the liberated people to the discipline

of the Gospel so that the Reformation might not

degenerate into a revolution. In this respect (Eco­

lampadius manifested no mediating attitude.


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Among the sources to be noted are: Joan­nis (Ecolampadii d Huld. Zwinglii Epidola, Basel, 1536 (contains Capito's biography); Wurditena Bader chronik, eel. R. Hots, Basel, 1883; Bader CAroniken von Hyff and Carpentarieu, eel. W. Vischer and A. Stem, Leipaic, 1872; EpiaWas dodorum virorum (eel. T. BiblianderP), n.p.

1548 (contains the Vitas by S. Grynseus and W. Capito immediately after the preface). Modern accounts of the life and writings are by: S. Hess, Zurich, 1791; J. J. Herzog, 2 vole., Basel, 1843; $. R. Hagfbach, Elber feld, 1859 (treats also O. Myconius); an anonymous J. tEColampadin8, Reformator won Bald, Basel, 1883; cf. Beza, ICOneB, in the transl. of C. G. McCrie, pp. 107‑111, London, 1906; A. Burckhard, in Bilder aua der Gewhichte Bawds, vol. iii., Basel, 1879; Fehleisen, Weinaberg, 1882; T. Burckhardt‑Biedermann, in Theuldpiwhe Zeitechrift aua der Schweitz, x (1893). Further illustrative matter will be found in W. Viseher, Geschiehte der Universitbt Basel, Basel, 1860; A. L. Herminjard, Correspondance des rhformatears, 9 vols., Paris, 1878‑97; M. Usteri, in


TS%, Ivi (1883), 155‑174; T. Burckhardt‑Biedermann, Bonifatiua Amerbach and die Reformation, Basel, 1898; W. Walker, The Reformation, New York, 1900; Cam­bridge Modern Histom, vol. ii. passim, ib. 1904; Schaff. Christian Church, vol. vu. passim; and in general, works on the history of the Reformation in Switzerland.

CECONOMUS, ec"o‑no'mos, CONSTANTINUS: Prominent Greek theologian; b. (according to some authorities) at Tcharitchena (60 m. s.w. of Salonika) Sept. 8, 1780; d. in Athens Mar. 20, 1857. He was educated at first by his father, who was Econome (vicar‑general) of the diocese of Elasson in Thessaly, and then at Ampelacia by Zeses Cabras, a physician who had studied at Jeri& He was ordained at an early age, and succeeded his father as econome of Masson. There he published his first literary work, a short defense of his Bishop Joannicius. Having taken part in an unsuccessful rising against All Pasha, he was obliged to become a fugitive, and, after taking refuge in a monastery under the protection of the Patriarch Gregory V., obtained from him a position in the well‑known high school at Smyrna. There he worked with masked success under Constantinus Cumas, later author of the great historical work Historiai t6n anthr6pinbn praxean (Vienna, 1838), and acquired considerable fame as a preacher. A permanent memorial of his activity there is preserved in what may be called his most important theological work, the Catecchgais, a orthodoxoa didaskalid tee christiarh ik6s pisteos, printed in Vienna. It is a recasting of the catechism of Platon, but so thoroughly recast as to be substantially an independent work. A .striking characteristic of it is the way in which the author gives expression, as far as is possible to an " orthodox " theologian, to the Pauline interpre­tation of the Gospel. The great opposition of sin and grace dominates him and leads to remarkably helpful conclusions.

His stay in Smyrna was unfortunately cut short by the jealousy of the friends and supporters of the Evangelical school in Smyrna. He was summoned to Constantinople as chief econome of the patri­archal see, and had a wide field of usefulness as a preacher in the center of " orthodox " Christianity. But once more his work was interrupted, this time by the outbreak of the Greek war for freedom. He escaped to Odessa, where he delivered a notable funeral sermon over the body of his patron the Patriarch Gregory, who had fallen a victim to the fury of the Turks (published with five other Ora­tions under the title of Logoi ekkU#iaWikoi, Berlin, 1833).

His fame as preacher, orator in the cause of Chris­tian freedom, and scholar attracted the notice of the czar, who summoned him to St. Petersburg. There he had leisure to complete his great philo­logical works, Dokimion pert: pleaieatat& aWgeneias tfa Slabono‑Rdaaikea 91688& pros tan Hellfikin (3 vole., St. Petersburg, 1828) and Peri tas gnuiaa prophoraa tea hellfnikf gldaafs (1830), and increased his renown as a preacher. The Patriarch Constan­tius renewed his former appointment as chief econome, and he was made an assessor of the clerical academy in St. Petersburg, a member of the Royal Academy of Science, and a corresponding member of the Berlin Academy of Science. Partly, perhaps,




as a consequence of his worldly success, a change

was noticed in his attitude which exposed him to

the charge of having abandoned his former ideals

of Evangelical truth, scholarly impartiality, and

devotion to his native land. The liberal and noble

principles of his earlier life still appear, it is true,

in the Schedion ekklesiastik9a akadisrnias which he

published in 1828; but two years later he sent a

Psephisma synodikon to the ecumenical patriarch

which became the basis of the tomos directed against

the independence of the Greek Church by the Synod

of 1850. In 1834, on an income provided by the

czar, he settled down in Nauplia to a life of learned

leisure, exposed, on the part of some of his country­

men, to the suspicion of being an agent of the patri­

arch and of Russia. Intercourse with the West

since the middle of the eighteenth century had

brought a new current into Greek church life, which

showed itself especially in the spirit of historical

criticism represented by such men as Corais and

Theoklitos Pharmakides (q. v.). OJconomus put him­

self at the head of an opposition to this movement,

and was the real moving spirit in a periodical es­

tablished in 1835 under the title of He euangelike

salpinx ("The Gospel Trumpet"), which blew sharp

blasts against " modernism." The same tendency

appeared in his own works of this later period. The

controversy as to the authenticity of the Apostolic

Canons, on which the " orthodox " system was

based, led him to write Peri ton trian hieratikon tee

ekkliisias bathmon epistolinmia diatribe (Nauplia,

1835). Another apparently unimportant contro­

versy grew out of the question whether the Zacharias

of Matt. xxiii. 35 was the father of the Baptist;

it involved, however, the question of the authority

of the apocryphal gospels, and easily led to a dis­

cussion of the justification for the cultus of the

virgin. Of wider interest was the campaign which

he undertook against translations of the Bible into

modern Greek, with a corresponding overestimite

of the value of the Septuagint; his principal work

on this subject was the Pert, t&n d hernwneuton tea

palaiaa thetas graph‑'ea (4 vols., Athens, 1834 sqq.).

Besides the Bible versions that came from England,

the " Trumpet " attacked also the foreign schools

in Greece, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, and

secured the imprisonment of Theophilus Kalres

(q. v.), the head of a flourishing school at Andros,

who was teaching a thoroughly rationalistic form

of Christianity. The principal work in which

O;conomus set forth the conflicts of the latter half of

his life is the Triakontaeteris ekkleaiastikg, covering

the period from 1821 to 1852, amine of information

on the history of the Greek Church in the period, al­

though not entirely completed. A number of other

interesting works, some of a valuable scholarly

character without controversial bearing, are

collected in the Sozomena ekklfiastika syngrammata

published by his son Sophocles (3 vols., Athens,

1564‑67). (PHILIPP MEYER.)

&sLtooRSrar: G. F. Hertzberg, Geachichte Griechenlanda, vole. iii. iv., Gotha, 1878‑79; TSK, xiv (1841), 7‑53, C. Tischeadorf, in appendix to Augaburper Alloemes.ne Ze9ung, Apr . 10, 1857; R. Nieolai, Gewhichte der neu­priechiechen ~it~ratur. Leipeic, 1878; A. D. Kyriakos. Geschichte der orientalischen Kirchen, ed. E. Raueeh, ib. 1902. Other literature, in Greek. is given in Hauck­8ersog. RE, xiv.299.


O;CUMENIUS, ec'9‑mee'nf‑us: The supposed author of a commentary in the form of a catena on the Acts, the epistles of St. Paul (including He­brews), and the Catholic epistles, together with a brief exposition of the Apocalypse. According to a tenth‑ or eleventh‑century manuscript, he was bishop of Tricca in Thessaly; he seems to have flourished about the end of the tenth century the commentary on the Apocalypse is closely dependent, even to verbal agreement for a large part, on the much older one of Andrew of Caesarea, while the manuscript authority for those on the other books goes back about half a century beyond the lifetime of Theophylact, w)to expounded the same books. The commentary on Revelation seems really not to

belong to 0;'cumenius. As to the relation between him and Theophylact (q.v.), the close similarity of the treatment of the Catholic epistles still allows those which bear the name of CCCUmenius to be designated as the older, while the text of those on the Pauline epistles differs more decidedly, and the differences offer puzzling problems. (Ecumenius sometimes but not invariably gives the names of

his sources, among whom Photius is the most fre­quently used. The whole question is complicated by the fact that the name of O;cumenius appears among these sources, as well as by the wide vari­ance in the manuscripts, many of which differ from the printed text of both OJcumenius and Theophy­lact. In fact, the riddles connected with the former's name can not be solved until further investigation

has been made of the whole field of Catenae (q.v.,

§ 7) (O. ZOC%LER t.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The works named were edited in Greek by Donatus, Verona, 1532; in Latin by J. Hentenius. Ant­werp, 1545; in Greek and Latin by F. Morel, 2 vole.. Paris. 1831; the Catena on the Apocalypse by J. A. Cramer, Oxford, 1840; of. MPG, cxviii.‑exix. Consult: Fabricius‑Harles, Bibliotheca Grceca, viii. 892‑898, Ham­burg, 1802; KL, ix. 708‑711; F. Overbeck, m ZWT, vii (1884). 192‑201; J. Hergenr5ther, Photiue, iii. 70 eqq., Regensburg, 1889; Krumbacher, Geschichte, pp. 131‑133; Vigoutoux, Didiannaire, fast. xxviii., col. 1747.

OEDER, il'der, GEORG LUDWIG: Protestant ex­egete and Biblical critic; b. at Schopfloch near Din­kelsbiihl (56 m. n.e. of Stuttgart) Jan. 28, 1694; d. at Feuchtwangen (6 m. n. of Dinkelsbiihl) Apr. 24, 1760. He received his education at Jena, ta­king his degree of master in theology in 1714; be­came the assistant of his father, who was pastor at Schopfloch; was later professor at the gymnasium at Heilbronn, whence he passed to the Ansbach gymnasium in a similar capacity, becoming direc­tor in 1730; in 1737 he reentered the ministry as pastor at Feuchtwangen. His writings are very numerous, deal mostly with the Scriptures, and are semi‑rationalistic in tone, anticipating in some respects the work of later advanced criticism. Among his works mention may be made of Dislru­tatio de legs sub Christi adventum cessante (Jena, 1715); DisPvzatio de BiLeamo veniam eundi non obtinente ad Num. xxii. ,!'0 (1715), these two re­edited in Obaervationes sacrte ad varies sagas diffi­ciliora Scripturca aacrce Iota (1715‑16); Syntagma observationum aacrarum (Anabach, 1729; a collec‑



tion of short papers); Programma de pane angelorum ad Psalm. xxxviii. 26 (1731); De Scopo Evangelii Johannis (Leipsiet 1732); Conjecturarum de dif­cilioribus Sacrte Scripturtr locis centuria (1733); Disputatio de raptu non Pauli apostoli, sed alterius cujusdam in paradisum . . . ad 11 Cor. xii. i, 9 (1737); and above all, his Freie Untersuehung fiber einiye Biicher des Alten Testaments (ed. G. I. L. Vogel, 1771), which created a great sensation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Grosses Uniaeraallezikon, xxv. 539‑543, Leipsic, 1740; J. D. Michaelis, Orienrnliache and exepedi­ache Bibliothek, ii. 44, iii. 1‑58, vi. 24‑154, 35 parts, Frank­fort, 1771‑91; E. F. K. Rosenmaller, Handbuch fair die Literatur der biblischen Kritik and Bxegese, i. 109‑111, GSttingen, 1797; ADB, xciv. 147; Vigourouz, Diction­naire, fasc, axviu., cols. 1747‑48.

OEHLER, fr'‑ler, GUST" FRIEDRICH VON: German Lutheran theologian; b. at Ebingen (43 m. s.s.e. of Stuttgart), Wurttemberg, June 10, 1812; d. at Tubingen Feb. 19, 1872. He early showed a remarkable aptitude for languages, and pursued his studies at Tilbingen under Schmid and Steudel, and later at Berlin under the orientalists Bopp, Petermann, and Schott. In 1834 he became a teacher in the missionary institute at Basel, and in 1837 went to Tilbingen as repetent. During this period he edited, by request of the family, Steudel's theological lectures on the Old Testament,(Berlin, 1840). In 1840 he was made professor at the sem­inary and pastor at Sch6nthal in W iirttemberg. Here he published in 1845 Prolegomena zur Theo­logie des Alten Testaments, and the same year received calls to Marburg and Breslau, and accepted the latter. At Breslau, Oehler took sides against the union of the Lutheran and Reformed Churches, then being agitated, and declared himself in favor of confessional Lutheranism. In 1846 he refused a call to Rostock, but in 1852 returned to Tiibingen to fill the position of ephorus (director of the sem­inaryY, lately made vacant by Wilhelm Hoffmann's transition to Berlin, and as professor of Old‑Testa­ment theology at the university.

At Tiibingen, as at Breslau, Oehler developed a wonderful industry and a most conscientious per­formance of the duties of his professorship. He lec­tured on the theology of the Old Testament, on Isaiah, Job, the Psalms, Messianic prophecy, the Minor Prophets, the Epistle to the Hebrews, and Christian symbolics. Oehler's lectures were largely attended, like those of his colleagues, Baur and Beck. They were successful in laying bare the rich con­tents of the Old Testament, and were intended to counteract the antipathy to the Old Testament, which was due largely to Schleiermacher. He laid his foundations in exact philological investigations. His conception of the Old Testament was that of a progressive and growing revelation toward the stand­ard of the New Testament. The Old Testament was to him a record of revelation, in which the plan of God was realized in part, the New Testament form­ing the consummation. He adopted some of the results of modern criticism, and acknowledged the existence of several different hands in the composi­tion of the Pentateuch, and two authors for Isaiah.

Oehler was not a prolific author. He was never sufficiently satisfied with his work to publish much. Most important were his articles, forty in number,

written for the first edition of the Herzog Realency­klopddie. His Gesammelte Seminarmden (Tiibingen, 1872), and his Theologie des Alten Testaments (2 vols., 1873‑74; Eng. tranal., Edinburgh, 1874‑75, New York, 1883) were edited by his son. The lat­ter work was long considered the best in its depart­ment, but is now superseded by later works, such as those of Schultz and Dillmann. His Lehrbuch der Symbolik (1876) was prepared for print by Johann Delitzsch.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Worte der Brinnerunp an Gustav PrWrieh von Oehler, Tilbingen, 1872; Joseph Knapp, Oustaro Pried­rich Oehler, sin Lebenabild, Tabingen, 1876.

OESTERLEY, WILLIAM OSCAR EMIL: Church of England; b. at Calcutta July 13, 1866. He received his education at Brighton College and at Jesus College, Cambridge (B.A., 1889; M.A., 1893; B.D., 1902; D.D., 1908); became curate at Houghton‑le‑Spring, Durham, 1891, and at St. Botolph, Colchester, 1895; secretary of Parochial Missions to the Jews at Home and Abroad, 1897; secretary and sub‑warden of the Society of Sacred Study, London, 1908; warden of the International Society of the Apocrypha, 1908; and examiner in the Hebrew and Greek Testaments for the Univer­sity of London, 1909. He is the author of St. Francis of Assisi: Lessons from a noble Life, in six Addresses (London, 1901); Walks in Jewry (1901); Studies in the Greek and Latin Versions of Amos (1902); Old Latin Texts of the Minor Prophets (Oxford, 1904); Codex Taurinensis (Y) (1906); The Religion and Worship of the Synagogue (London, 1907); The Evolution of the Messianic Idea (1908); Our Bible Text (1909); The Doctrine of the Last Things; Jew­ish and Christian (1909); The Jewish Doctrine of Mediation (1910); The Psalms in the Jewish Church (1910);' and contributed Philemon and James to the Expositor's Greek Testament (1910), and Eceie­siastieus to the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Col­leges (1910); and has been editor of Church and Synagogue since 1897.

OETINGER, ff'ting‑er, FRIEDRICH CHRIS­TOPH: Theologian and theosophist of Wiirttem­berg; b. in G6ppingen May 6, 1702; d. in Murr­hardt Feb. 10, 1782. His is the most characteristic figure in the ecclesiastical history of Wiirttemberg during the eighteenth century. After five years' study in the University of Tilbingen (1722‑27) and a year of travel (1729‑30), he was private teacher in Ttlbingen (1731‑38), with an interval devoted to another journey (1733‑37), during which time he came into close contact with the Moravians and Zinzendorf, later, however, breaking with them. He was pastor in three places: Hirsau, near Calw, 1738‑43, Schnaitheim, 1743‑46, and Walddorf, 1746‑52; dean in Weinaberg, 1752‑59, and Herren­berg, 1759‑66; while at the close of his active career he was prelate in Murrhardt (1766,82). In his choice of a profession, his aim to be in the immedi­ate service of God decided him in favor of theology and against jurisprudence. At the university, the theology and theosophy of Jacob Bahme (q.v.) gained with him the ascendency over the rational­istic philosophy of Christian Wolff (q. v.); at the same time he was also a student of the Biblical scholar Johapn Albrecht Bengel (q. v.). The study of



the natural sciences constituted a fourth element of

Oetinger's intellectual life. All this formed the

foundation of his later philosophy which found

succinct expression in his Theologia ex idea vine

deducts (Frankfort, 1765), his onlf systematic work.

In his pastoral work he came face to face with

the low standard of the religious life of his people,

which stimulated him to a systematic regulation of

his activities as pastor, catechist, and guardian of

souls (cf. his Etwas Ganzea vom Evangelio, Tilbingen,

1739; on Ira. xl. Ixvi.), disclosing new and popular,

yet thorough, methods for the exposition of the

Gospels and the instruction of youth. In his third

pastorate at Walddorf he displayed a comprehen­

sive activity both pastoral and literary. Here he

devoted his whole energy to the investigation and

fostering of the general sense of truth. Besides

two important works on this theme (Inquisitio in

sensum communem, Heilbronn, 1753; Sittenlehre

Salomons, Tiibingen, 1758), he wrote here the sys­

tematic work noted above and found time to pur­

sue the study of chemistry. In Weinaberg his homi­

letic activity became especially pronounced, as is

shown by his Reden nsch dem allgemeinen Wahr­

heitsgefiihl (Heerbrand, 1759). To his great regret

his successful activity provoked an often unworthy

opposition. His Bibliach‑emblemetisehm WGrter­

buch (Frankfort, 1778), still valuable, belongs to

this period. The zenith of his literary activity was

reached in Herrenberg, stimulated by his researches

in natural science and the prophecies of Sweden­

borg, though he was later repelled by Swedenborg's

rationalistic tendencies. The remainder of his liter­

ary work in Herrenberg is devoted to problems

of the higher philosophy, of theosophy, and of

prophecy. During his incumbency at Murrhardt he

allowed himself scarcely any repose. Besides several

volumes of sermons, there is an aftermath of shorter

writings from this period. It was characteristic

that he closed his literary career with the Versttch

einer Auflosung der 17'7 Fragen aus Jacob Bohme,

a proof that the disciple had remained faithful to

his master. Only in his last years did the pen fall

from his hand. His imposing figure, in the fulness

of manhood and the dignity of old age, is surrounded

by a multitude of legends, the historical value of

which can not yet be determined; yet they possess

a special significance, because they serve to show

how far his religious personality towered above that

of his contemporaries.

The permanent effects of Oetinger's activity are

shown by the fruits of his endeavors in the field of

speculative theology and theosophy; Schelling,

Rothe, Auberlen, Hamburger have all learned from

him, the two latter taking up the thread where he

dropped it. Oetinger lives on in the circles of Piet­

ism by dint of his powerful sermons as well among

the cultured as among simple peasants, who love

to nourish themselves with the strong meat of his

doctrine. His Werke were edited by K. C. E.

Ehmann, 11 vols., Stuttgart, 1858‑63.


BIBLIoaHAP87: Of first importance is Oetinger's Selbst­

biopraphie, ed. J. Hamberger, Stuttgart, 1849; and next

is J. Herzog, F. C. Odinger: Lebens‑ and Charakterbild,

1902. Consult further: C. A. Auberlen, Die Theosophia

F. C. Odingers, TObingen, 1847; K. C. E. Ehmann, F. C. Oetingers Leben and Briefs, Tilbingen, 1884; F. Reiff, Bengel and seine Schule, Heidelberg, 1882; O. von Wuch­ter, Bengel and Oetinger, Giitersloh, 1886; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, faao. xxviii., cots. 1753‑54.

OETTLI, Irt'li, SAMUEL: German Lutheran; b. at St. Gall (40 m. n.e. of Zurich) July 29, 1846. He was educated at the universities of Basel, Got­tingen, and Zurich (1866‑70), and was a Swiss pas­tor (1870‑78). He was then appointed professor of the Old Testament at the University of Bern, where he remained until 1895, when he accepted his present position of professor of the same subject at the University of Greifswald. He has written commentaries on the historic and poetic hagiographa (in collaboration with W. Volck.and J. Meinhold) for H. Strack and O. Z6ckler's Kurzgefaaster ‑Komr mentar zu den heiligen Schriften lea Allen and Neuen Testaments (2 vols., N6rdlingen, 1888‑89); Ideal and Leben (a collection of Biblical essays, Gotha, 1895); Das Kbnigaideal lea Allen Testaments (Greifawald, 1899); Amos and Hosea, zwei Zeugen gegen die Anwendung der Evolutionatheorie auf die Religion laraels (Giitersloh, 1901); Wir haben ge­glaubt and erkannt (a collection of sermons; 1902); Der Kampf um Babel and Bibel (Leipsie, 1902); Dar Geaetz Hamurabu and die Thora Israels (1903); Gewhichte Ieraels bie zu Alexander dem Groswn (Calw, 1805); Die Autorittit lea Allen Testamentes far den Christen (Gross‑Liehterfelde, 1906); Das 1,60 jdhrige Jubildum der Universitdt Greifswald (Greifawald, 1906); and Die revidierte Lutherbibel (1908).


OFFERTORY. A term strictly used not of the ceremony of collecting and presenting the alms and Oblations (q.v.) of the people, nor of the offerings themselves; it properly stands for the sentence or sentences said or sung at the time of collecting and presenting the oblations. The custom of singing a psalm at this point in the service is as old as the time of St. Augustine (Retractationea, ii. 11). In the Latin mass these sentences (greatly abbrevi­ated from the earlier use) vary with the day or sea­son, and bear the distinct character of praise or prayer. In the English Prayer Book the sentences are hortatory concerning the duty of almsgiving; in the American Prayer Book others have been added to these, of a more eucharistic character, ap­propriate to the presentation of the offerings.

The word " offertory " is sometimes used, and

seems to be so employed in the Prayer Book, for

that part of the service which has to do with the

presenting of the offerings. This has been per­

formed, at different times and in different places,

with greater or less solemnity; the clergy and the

people coming forward to present their offerings,

or these being gathered from them by appointed

officers. The oblation by the priest at the holy table

of the bread and wine to be used for the sacrament,

is a distinct feature of Eastern and Western liturgies.

See OBL&T1oN. A. C. A. HALL.

BIHLIOa6APHT: J. H. Blunt. Annotated Book of Corn‑mon prayer, pp. 377, 379, 399, New York, 1908; L. Ducheene, Christian Worship: Its Origin and Evolution, p. 174, London, 1904.




OFFICIAL: A term in canon law denoting an

alternate in matters of jurisdiction. Thus the arch­

deacons, from the sixth century down, were the

chief deputies of the bishops with relation to the

potestas jurisdictionis, but after the twelfth century

the archdeacons' encroachments were opposed by

a line of synods; and even the bishops sought to

restrict the undue power of the archdeacons by the

institution of special officials, " extra‑diocesan,"

and " principal officials " or " vicars‑general." The

two last terms were often used Synonymously, and

are still so used in all Italian districts, in Hungary,

Dalmatia, and the East. In other instances, the

two terms were differentiated, a special substitute,

the " official," being appointed for the episcopal

jurisdiction; another, the vicar‑general, for the

episcopal administration, as is still the case in

Belgium, Spain, England, Africa, and in most

German dioceses. When by action of the Council

of Trent the archdeacons had been deprived of

jurisdiction in matrimonial and criminal matters,

the extra‑diocesan officials became fewer, so that,

as a rule, jurisdiction and administration are con­

solidated in the hands of the vicar‑general. Under

this officer's presidency, there properly exists the

general vicariate, or ordinariate, also termed con­

sistory; but where the actual jurisdiction, particu­

larly in affairs of matrimony, is exercised by a

special deputy of the bishop, he is assisted by a

special collegiate tribunal, the so‑called " ofiicial­

ate," or consistorium. E: SEALING.

0'GORMAN, THOMAS: Roman Catholic bishop of Sioux Falls, S. Dak.; b. in Boston, Mass., May 1, 1843. He was educated in Chicago and St. Paul (1850‑53), and studied in France (1853‑65). He was rector at Rochester, Minn. (1867‑78); a mem­ber of the Congregation of St. Paul the Apostle, New York City (1878‑•82); rector at Faribault, Minn. (1882,85); first president of the College of St. Thomas, Merriam Park, St. Paul, and professor of dogmatic theology until 1890. He was professor of modern church history in the Catholic Univer­sity of America, Washington, D. C. (1890‑96), and was consecrated bishop of Sioux Falls (1896). In 1902 he was a member of the delegation sent to Rome by the president of the United States to con­fer with the Vatican on certain problems presented by the American occupation of the Philippines. He has written A History of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States (New York, 1897).

O'HARA, HENRY STEWART: Church of Ire­land, bishop of Cashel, Emly, Waterford, and Lis­more; b. at Coleraaine (28 m. n.e. of Londonderry), County Londonderry, Ireland, Sept. 6, 1843. He was educated at Trinity College, Dublin (B.A., 1865), and was ordered deacon in 1867 and ordained priest in 1868. He was curate of Ballyrashane, County Antrim (1867‑68) and of Kildollagh, County Londonderry (1868‑69), after which he was rector of Coleraine (1869‑92), examining chaplain to the bishop of Down (1892‑94), vicar of Belfast (1894‑

1899), and dean of St. Anne's Cathedral, Belfast (1899‑1900), as well ‑as canon of St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin, and chancellor of Connor Cathedral (1897‑1899). In 1900 he was con­secrated bishop of Cashel, Emly, Waterford, and Lismore.


OINTMENT: A spicy preparation employed for personal and religious purposes. While the inven­tion of ointment is ascribed by Pliny to the Per­sians, India, Egypt, and Greece were in possession of it in far earlier times. This substance served in antiquity as medicine, as a cosmetic, and in wor­ship. All three uses are referred to in the Bible. The Old Testament uses for the term " to anoint " dishen (Ps. xxiii. 5), " to rub with fat," also suk, " to pour ointment over one " (exclusively of cos­metics) and finally maaH5, originally a technical term for anointing an object with oil, but applied exclusively to the use of ointment in worship. As a noun only shemen, " oil," is used in the Hebrew; in the Aramaic of Ezra Resale occurs; the Septua­gint and the New Testament use daion.

For ointment, especially perfumed ointment, myron is generally used in the New Testament. The Old Testament does not distinguish between " oil " and " ointment "; shemen is used for both. The oil used for ointment was extracted from olives, nard, and myrrh. The expensive perfumed oint­ments in liquid form were preserved sealed in costly alabaster flasks to keep them pure and protect them from fermentation. A " horn " (Hebr. keren) or vial (Hebr. pak) served as the vessel of anointing (I Sam. x. 1, xvi. 1; T Kings i. 39; II Kings ix. 1 sqq.). The preparation of ointments was a spe­cial trade (Ex. xxx. 25, 35, xxxvii. 29; Neh. iii. 8), and the oil was mixed with foreign, often very ex­pensive, drugs.

The first man mentioned in the Bible as having prepared ointment for uses of worship is Bezaleel (Ex. xxxi. 2 sqq.). In the principal passage (Ex. xxx.) are mentioned as constituents of the holy ointment, myrrh, cinnamon, calamus (rhizoma calami), cassia, and olive‑oil. It was used on the Tabernacle and its utensils and furnishings (Ex. xxx. 26‑28). The holy oil was kept in the holy place (I Kings i. 39), according to the Talmud be­side the ark of the covenant and the vessel with manna. According to Ex. xxx. anointing as an act of worship was performed only by the high priest. " To anoint', seems to be often a metaphorical designation for entrusting somebody with an office, as in the anointing of prophets (I Kings nix. 16; cf. Isa. 1xi. 1). In the New Testament the term is often used for the reception of the Holy Spirit (Acts iv. 27, x. 38; II Cor. i. 21 Sqq.). In this sense Christ as the high priest is the especially anointed one. For the use of oil in the Christian Church see BAPTISM, III., 1, § 4, 2, §§ 1‑2; CHRISM; ExTREME UNCTION; SACRAMENTAL8. (R. ZEHNPFUND.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. B. Tristrsm. Natural Hilt. of the Bible,

p. 485, London, 1887; W. Dymock, Pharmoeopraphia

Indica, ii. 233‑238, London, 1891; Bensinger, Amhaodwie,

pp. 85‑86, 131, 254, 358, 365, 372; DB, iii. 590‑594;

EB, iii. 3471‑72; JE, i. 611‑613, ix. 391‑392; DCG, ii.

227, 265.



O'gELLY, JAMES: Methodist clergyman; b. probably in southern Virginia c. 1757; d. there Oct. 16, 1826. Little is known of his early life. In 1778 he was admitted into the itinerant Method­ist ministry and labored with great success in south­ern Virginia; and in 1784 was ordained as elder. He antagonized Francis Asbury, and at the first general conference of the Methodist Church ‑at Baltimore in 1792 offered a resolution to the effect that " after the bishop appoints the preachers at conference to their several circuits, if any one think himself injured by the appointment, he shall have liberty to appeal to the conference and state his ob­jections; and if the conference approve his objec­tions, the bishop shall appoint him to another cir­cuit." The resolution was rejected, and subse­quently O'Kelly withdrew (see Methodists, IV., 1, J 4) and with his followers formed a new body entitled "The Republican Methodists," a popular term borrowed from the political agitation of the time, and immediately put into effect by leveling all ministers to the same grade. In 1801 the name was changed to " The Christian Church," in con­sequence of which it suffered two divisions, and although numbering at one time several thousand, it so declined that at the time of O'Kelly's death only a remnant remained. He was also an active opponent of slavery from press and pulpit and was charged with denying distinct personality in the Trinity, affirming that " God was Father from eternity, Redeemer in time, and Sanctifier for­evermore."

Biswoa6APHT: J. M. Buckley, in American Chinch His­tory Series, v. 283‑288 et passim, New York, 1896; A. Stevens, Kid. of the M. E. Church in U. 3. A., iii. 16‑37, ib. 1864; J. Lednum, Hiat. of tke Rim of MMm in America, chap. xxiii., Philadelphia, 1859; Bennett, Me­morials of Mdhmism in Virginia. chap. iz.. Richmond, 1871; J. A. Faulkner, The Mdhodide, pp. 161‑162, ib.

1903; and, in general, literature under MmTaomsxs.

OLAF, SAINT: King of Norway 1015‑‑30. See NoswAy.


I. in Germany. Origin (¢ 1). Faith and Practise (4 2).

II. In Other European Countries. III. In the United States. The Independent (Polish) Catholic Church (4 1). National Catholic Church (1 2). IV. Statistics and the Congresses.

L In Germany: The Old Catholic Church owes its origin to certain Roman Catholics who refused to accept the decree of the Vatican Council of 1870 (q.v.) affirming the infallibility of the pope when speaking ex cathedra. The decree had been fiercely debated and opposed by a consider‑

s. Origin. able minority of the bishops present

at the council, their arguments being

based upon the early history of the Church and its

fundamental faith and usages as declared by the

ecumenical councils. A further charge made by the

minority was that freedom of discussion had not

prevailed at the council and that final action was

forced. Of this minority only a few, however, per­

sisted in the logical course indicated by their posi­

tion. The organization of the opposition after the

issuance of the decree was made at a meeting at

Nuremberg, Aug. 27, 1870, of professors from Bonn, Breslau, Bmunsberg, Munich, Munster, Prague, W 9rzburg, and other places, who, under the leader­ship of Johann Josef Ignaz von D6llinger (q.v.), declared against the decree. A gathering of lay­men at KOnigswinter in September of the same year resolved that: " Considering that the council . . . did not deliberate in perfect freedom, . . . the un­dersigned Catholics [1,359 in number] . . do not recognize the decrees concerning the absolute power of the pope and his infallibility as the decision of an ecumenical council, but rather reject them as innovations in direct contradiction to the uniform faith of the Church." Of the dissenting minority spoken of above Bishop Hefele was the last to sub­mit (April, 1871). Ecclesiastical pressure was brought upon the dissenting professors, and those who continued in opposition were excommunicated. The necessity was seen for an organization to pro­tect the scattered clergy who adhered to the posi­tion of the minority, and a congress was held at Munich Sept. 22‑24, 1871, with Prof. J. F. von Schulte of Bonn presiding, at which the conclusions of the preceding gatherings mentioned were en­dorsed, the direction the movement should take was decided, and measures were taken for the cure of souls. The organization of congregations in vari­ous places followed. The second congress was held at Cologn‑ Sept. 20, 1872, provision was made for the election of a bishop, who was chosen on June 4, 1873, the choice falling on Joseph Hubert Rein­kens (q.v.), professor of theology at Breslau, who received consecration at Rotterdam from the Jan­senist Bishop Heycamp of Deventer, his recogni­tion by the king of Prussia following on Sept. 17 of the same year, and by other German princes a little later. At this congress provision was made for the government of the church by a synodical board of clerical and lay members. The third congress was held at Constance in Sept., 1873. Thereafter the congresses were regularly held, but their function was limited to general discussions for the general good, provision for the specific care of the church being committed to the synod which was or­ganized.

The first synod was held at Bonn, 1874, and suc­cessive synods shaped the polity and life of the church. The possibility of union with the Protes‑

tant Church was not overlooked. A

a. Faith catechism and a manual of instruction and were issued, recognizing only those

Practise. doctrines which were deemed apostolic.

Auricular confession was made volun­tary, and absolution was regarded as a ceremonial declaration made by the priest as a servant of Jesus Christ. Christ, " the son of God in the sense that he is of the same essence with the Father," is the head of the church, which latter is defined as the invisible body including all who have part in salva­tion through faith in Christ. The Apostles' Creed is employed in all services except the mass, where the Nicene Creed is used. Attempts were made to do away with abuses arising from penance, fasts and festivals, the celibacy of priests, and various matters financial, while the use of the German Ian­guage has been so extended as to cover the entire


service. A board of clerics and laymen has been made an organ of church direction, with the bishop as president and a layman as vice‑president. The synod is the representative body, constituted of the bishop, president ex ofecio, the board just named, and the priests and deputies of the congregation; its powers are legislative, judicial, disciplinary, and administrative. Pastors and assistant pastors are chosen by the congregations (since 1878), with episcopal approval, except in the case of benefices. Trial for lighter offenses is before the bishop or bishop and board, for more serious cases of offense before a synodal court, with procedure based upon the German code. For parish purposes a church board exists, composed of the pastor and a body of councilors chosen for three years by the congrega­tion. Candidates are ordained by the bishop after examination, which is preceded by the regular course in the universities. Various funds exist for supporting the work of the church.

II. In Other European Countries: The priests who in Switzerland refused the Vatican decrees adopted a constitution for " The Christian Catholic Church of Switzerland " similar to that of the Old Catholics of Germany. The first synod was held at Olten in June, 1875, and Eduard Herzog (q.v.), professor of Catholic theology at Bern, was elected bishop in June, 1876. The general course of devel­opment was similar to that in Germany; commu­nion in both kinds was made optional, and regula­tions for the festivals and observances were adopted. In Austria earlier efforts to organize Old Catholics were opposed by the upper house of parliament and the government. In 1875 governmental opposi­tion was withdrawn, and in 1876 a meeting of delegates was held at Vienna, and legal recogni­tion was given to the Old Catholic Church Oct. 18, 1877. At a provisional synod at Vienna in July, 1879, the reforms of the church in Germany and Switzerland were accepted. The first regular synod was held in June, 1880, when five priests and a num­ber of laymen attended. At the twentieth synod in Vienna in 1900 sixty members were present, and there were reported 16,885 members, and other de­tails of a remarkable growth were presented. In Italy the movement showed less vigor than in the other countries named above, and it was not till 1875 that delegates from a number of congrega­tions met at Naples and elected Luigi Proto Giurlo bishop of the National Catholic Church. In France an active interest was taken by Charles Jean Marie Augustin Hyacinth Loyson (q.v.) and the Abb6 Michaud, and a congregation was formed in Paris in 1878 to which the ministrations of bishops of Holland, Switzerland, and England were given at various times. A temporary bishop was chosen in 1888 in the person of Henry Laseelles Jenner. In Russia several communities of Bohemians attached themselves to the Old Catholic movement, obtained recognition, and also support from the State for three priests. In 1880 permission was gained for a conference to frame a constitution for permanent organization. A number of prelates of the Ortho­dox Church have shown sympathy with the move­ment and have attended the international con­gresses. The organization of the Old Catholic

Church in England was not perfected till 1908, when A. N. Mathew was elected bishop, secured the recognition of the Old Catholic Church of Holland, and was consecrated at Utrecht Apr. 28, 1908, hav­ing in his diocese seventeen priests.

IIL In the United States: The discontent over the Vatican decrees in the United States was some­what slower in taking organized form. Joseph RenS Villatte, a priest of French Canadian ancestry, who had sustained various relations in con‑

:. The In‑ nection with various Protestant socie‑

dependent ties for mission work among foreign (Polish) populations in Wisconsin, had received

Catholic ordination from Bishop Herzog of the

Church. Swiss Christian Catholic Church (ut

sup.) and also received episcopal con­

secration in 1892 from Archbishop Alvarez of India,

Ceylon, and Goa. But the right of Alvarez to per­

form episcopal acts was under question, and the

consecration of Villatte was not recognized by tha

Old Catholic bishops of Europe or by the Protes­

tant Episcopalian bishops in the United Statea.

Hence the attempts made by Villatte to found an

Old Catholic Church in the United States had no

permanent result. More successful has been the

work among the Polish immigrants to this country,

people of this nationality coming here with a lively

dissatisfaction with the course of the Roman Catho­

lic Church in their own land. Many of them had no

ecclesiastical relations at all, and a movement was

begun by Anthony Koslowaki (d. Jan. 14, 1907), a

Pole of Italian education, who became rector of a

Polish congregation in Chicago in 1893. The next

year he withdrew from the Roman Catholic com­

munion and became a leader in the reform move­

ment, was elected a bishop, and received consecra­

tion from the Old Catholic bishop of Switzerland

at Bern, Switzerland, in 1897, founding the Inde­

pendent (Polish) Catholic Church. The growth of

the organization was remarkable; congregations

were established in Chicago, Baltimore, Philadel­

phia, Cleveland, Buffalo, Jersey City, Fall River,

Mass., and Wilkesbarre, Pa.; and in 1902 it re­

ported 22 priests, 10 sisters, 26 congregations, 80,000

adherents, 26 schools with 3,000 attendants, 26

Sunday‑schools, and 31 buildings. It had, besides,

an educational institution with grammar and high

school and industrial departments in Chicago, and

connected with it a hospital and dispensary and a

home for the aged. Overtures were made in 1902

to the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United

States for recognition and intercommunion on the

basis of the Lambeth " Quadrilateral " (see LAM­


yond referring the matter to a committee no definite

action has been taken. In the overtures the object

of the organization was stated as the wish to serve

those who can not intelligently take part in worship

Conducted in the English tongue, and allegiance

was pledged to the Old Catholic Synod of Europe

until such time as the church shall be received by

the Protestant Episcopal Church as an affiliated


The disposition to separate from the Roman Catholic Church illustrated by the formation of the Polish organization just described manifested itself

Old Gatholios Olearins


also among Bohemians and others of Slavic race in America. A number of independent congregations nucleated in several cities. It was felt that these should be united under episcopal ad‑

s. National ministration, and as the Independent Catholic (Polish) Catholic Church desired to re‑

Church. strict its work to Poles, a separate or­

ganization seemed necessary. The ad­

vice of the Old Catholic bishops of Utrecht and

Switzerland was asked, and in consequence of their

advice, taking into account the largeness of the

country and the possibility of three or four Old

Catholic dioceses, the National Catholic Church was

organized, with Jan F. Tichy as episcopal adminis­

trator (appointed by the bishop of Utrecht). This

Church " is formed upon the same basis as the

mother Church in Switzerland," this including the­

oretical as well as practical matters. Its attitude

is avowedly friendly toward the Polish organization

and to the Protestant Episcopal Church. It de­

rives its apostolic succession from the Church in

Holland. It reported in 1906 9 churches and 11

missions in the United States and Canada, 7 priests,

and about 15,000 members. It is incorporated in

Ohio, and has a cathedral and other buildings in

Cleveland with property valued at about $20,000.

Bulletin 103 of the United States Census (Relig­

ious Bodies) gives the Polish National Church in

America 24 priests, 24 ministers, 15,473 commu­

nicants, and church property valued at $494,700.

IV. Statistics and the Congresses: In 1900 there were reported 57 active clergy and 13,079 commu­nicants in Germany; approximately 40 parishes in Switzerland; 24 parishes and 16,885 members in Austria; and 21 parishes in Holland, where it pos­sessed also the Amerafoort theological seminary; a few churches existed in Italy, the movement was represented in France, and attempts had been made in Portugal and Spain. In 1904 the German states of Prussia, Bavaria, Baden, and Hesse had 65 clergy, 11,201 communicants, and 1,946 children receiving instruction in the schools. In 1878 the Old Catho­lics of Europe began holding their synods (for business) and their general congresses (for discus­sion) in different years. Congresses have been held at Cologne 1891, Lucerne 1892, Rotterdam 1894, Vienna 1897, and Bonn 1902. At these meetings representatives have at different times been present from the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States, the Russian Church, the Petite Itglise of France, the Church of England. The sub­jects for discussion have taken a wide range, inclu­ding the matter of internatioaal churches and the establishment of an international theological faculty, the dissemination of Old Catholic literature, the propaganda among the Slavic populations, the for­mation of societies for religious, educational, and social objects, practical matters such as the estab­lishment of a fund for the support of priests join­ing the movement until they can be settled at work, and the Z08 von Rom movement (q.v.).


BrettoassrsT: J. F. von Schulte, Die Stellunp der Cm,

eilien, Pdpde and Bischafe, Prague, 1871; idem, Der

Altkotholisismua, Oewhichge seine, Entwicketung . . . in

Deutschland, Giessen, 1887; J. L. Whittle, Catholicism and

9,s Vatican. With a Narrative of the Old Catholic Congress at

Munich, London, 1872; C. J. Loyson. CatholicReJorm. Lon­don 1874; [J. B. MullingerJ, The New Reformation: Narrative of the Old Catholic Movement, London, 1875; E. Friedberg, Sammlung der Aktenatucke sum ereten vatikaniachen Con­ch, Tubingen, 1872; idetn, Aktenat73eke der altkatholiaehen Betoagunp, ib. 1878; F. Meyriek, The Old Catholic Move­ment, London, 1877; Sammlung der kirchZichen and sWot­Zichen VoraehriJten far die altJcatholiachen %irehenpemern­achaft. Bonn. 1878; w. Beyechlag. Dar AltkathoZszeamus, Halls, 1883; idem, in AJT, vol. ii.. 1898; J. Rieke, Der Altkatholiziamua in Baden, Heidelberg, 1883; A. M. E. Search, The Story of the Old Catholic and Kindred Move­ments, London, 1883; F. Rotert, BischoJ Reronkena and seine Helfer, Leipeie. 1888; The Old Catholic Reform, in Modern Church History Papers, nos. 1‑7. London, 1889; L. K. Goats, Die oeachichtZiche Stellunp and Aufpabe den deutechen AZtkatholiziamua. Leipeic, 1898; E. Herzog, Beitrltge zur Vorpeachichte der chriatkaWaoliachen Hirehe der Schweiz, Bern, 1898; idem, spline callwlique nationals, Paris, 1900; F. Nippold, Die AnJanye der chriatkaEho­liachen Bewepunp in der Schweiz and der Loa‑roon‑Rom Bewepunp in Oeaterreieh, Bern, 1901; C. C. Grafton, Auto­biography of the Bishop of Fond du Lac, Milwaukee. 1910; the official journal is Amtlichee altkatholiachea %irchenblaa, Bonn. 1878 sqq.






English Lollard; b. probably in the manor of Almo­lay (13 m. n.w. of Hereford) about 1378; d. a mar­tyr at London Dec. 14, 1417. He married for his

third wife, in 1408, Joanne, the grand‑daughter of Baron Cobham and, by right of his wife's title, eat in the House of Lords. He approved himself a valiant soldier in the service of King Henry IV. in Burgundy and Wales, and was a personal friend of the prince, who became, in 1413, King Henry V. Herefordshire, and especially that part in which Almeley lay, was a hotbed of Lollardy. The first that is known of his connection with the Lol­larda was his effort to reform the clergy and to dif­fuse Wyclif's writings. Upon the discovery of Lol­lard treats in his possession, he was summoned by the king (1413) and, his obstinacy defeating a con­ciliation, he further refused to heed three citations to appear before the archbishop's court at Lead's Castle, and was excommunicated. Arrested by royal writ and thrown into the Tower, he was tried by the archbishop's court at St. Paul's, Sept. 23,

declared a heretic, and handed over to the secular arm with a respite of forty days to recant. Henry's chaplain wrote, in 1418, that Oldcastle was released on the promise to recant and abide by the judgment of the convention which was to meet the following November; but one William Fisher, a parchment­maker, was hanged in 1416, on the charge of ar‑

ranging his escape, which is said to have been effected on or before Oct. 19. The proposed meet­ing of 20,000 armed Lollards in the field of St. Giles

in Jan., 1414, shows that an uprising in his behalf and against the king was imminent; and Oldcastle escaped apprehension for four years, dunyg moat of which time he was concealed. A rewar~ 1,000 marks was placed on his head and he was formally



declared an outlaw, but he steadfastly refused to renounce his convictions. His hiding‑place, how­ever, was finally discovered and he was taken by the lord of Powis, at Welshpool, across the Welsh border, after a desperate encounter in which Old­castle was seriously wounded. Carried to London, he was summarily condemned as an outlaw, traitor, and heretic, Dec. 14, 1417. On the same day he was drawn on a hurdle from the Tower to St. Giles' field, hanged, and burnt hanging. Shakespeare seems to have elaborated the character into his Fal­ataff, the boon companion of the wild prince. On the whole, Oldcastle bears the record of a brave, upright, noble‑hearted, though obstinate knight. See LOLLARDS, § 7.

BIHLrooRAPHY: The official record of the trial by Archbishop Arundel is in the Faaciauli zizaniorum, ed. W. W. Shirley, in Rolls Series, No. 5, 1858; this forms the basis of J. Bale's Brefe Chronyde concernye she Examinacyon and Death of ., . Syr John Oldeeastell, ad. H. Christmas for the Parker Society, London, 1849, and of Foxe's account to his Acts and Monuments. More recent lives are based on this material. Consult: W. Gilpin, Life of Wyclife, . (and) John Oldeaatle, in Select Biography, Vol. ii., London, 1821; T. Gaspey, Life and Times of the Good Lord Cobham, 2 vols., ib. 1843; A. M. Brown, The Leader of the Lollards, his Times and Trials, ib. 1848; C. E. Mau riee, Lives of English Popular Leaders, Vol. ii., ib. 1875; J. Gairdner, Lollardy and the Reformation in England, i. 69‑97, ib. 1908; Schaff, Christian Church, v. 1, pp. 354­355; DNB, x1ii. 86‑93. Much of the literature under WYcLiP, JOHN, is pertinent, particularly the work of G. Lechler.

OLDENBURG: Grand‑duchy consisting, for ecclesiastical purposes, of the duchy of Oldenburg and the principalities of Lubeck and Birkenfeld; situated in the northwestern part of the German Empire, bordering on the North Sea; area, 2,479 square miles; population, 544,713 (1905). Lubeck was the seat of a bishopric, founded in 946 and ceasing in 1523. The Evangelical Lutheran Church prevails in the duchy of Oldenburg, there being only one Reformed congregation. The Reformation arrived with the appointment by Count Johann XVI., in 1573, of Hermann Hamelmann as super­intendent, who introduced the Lutheran organiza­tion. During the Danish epoch (1667‑73) Olden­burg remained Lutheran, and with the reign of the Holstein‑Gottorp house came a rationalism, the in­fluence of which is traceable in the hymn‑book of 1791. There followed in 1849 a new church con­stitution more liberal in confession and separating Church from State. It assigned the most impor­tant functions of government to the congregations and a synod; so that upon an appeal by the con­servatives to the general council in 1852 the result was that the house of deputies of Oldenburg granted a new constitution which went into effect in 1853. This rests upon the basis of the Scriptures and the Augsburg Confession and makes the grand‑duke the ruling head of the Church subject to the limits pre­scribed by the constitution. In the principality of Liibeck the Lutheran Church likewise prevails under the control of the civil government, the first ecclesiastic of Eutin being titled church counselor of the government. In Birkenfeld the twelve Lu­theran and the two Reformed congregations ac­cepted the plan of union toward the end of the fourth decade of the last century and in 1875 the

Evangelical body secured a synodical constitution. The total number of professing Evangelicals in the duchy of Oldenburg and the principality of Lu­beck, in 1905, was 442,400 and of Roman Catholics 98,518, while belonging to other Christian faiths are 1,547, and of Jews 2,029. (A. voN BROECKER.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: N. J. E. Nielsen, Zur Statiatik der olden­burgiachen eoang.luth. Kirche, Oldenburg, 1881; W.

Hayen, Oldenburgiaches Kirchenrecht, ib. 1888; L. Sehanen‑

burg, Hundert Jahre Oldenburgiacher Kirchengeschichte,

1675‑1887, 4 vols., ib. 1894‑1903; E. Illigena, Geschichte

der laeckischen Kirche 1630‑1888, Paderborn, 1896;

G. Sello, Alt‑Oldenburg, Oldenburg, 1903; J. Schneider,

Kirchliches Jahrbuch (an annual).

OLEARIUS, o"lr3‑tl'ri‑us: The name of a family of German theologians and preachers.

1. Johannes Olearius L: The founder of the family; b. at Wesel (32 m. n.w. of Dusseldorf) Sept. 17, 1546; d. at Halle Jan. 26, 1623. He attended the gymnasium at Diisseldorf; studied at Marburg and Jena; went to Konigsberg in 1573 as rector of the gymnasium; was proposed for a chair in He­brew at Kbnigsberg but went to Helmstedt where he obtained a professorship in 1578. In 1581 he accepted a call as chief pastor of the Church of Our Lady and superintendent at Halle, where, for more than four decades, he labored worthily. He took charge of Hebrew instruction at the municipal Latin school, and delivered lectures to candidates for the spiritual office. An earnest representative of pure Lutheranism, he subscribed the Halle clergy's dec­laration provided in 1579 by Martin Chemnitz on the basis of the Formula of Concord. In 1594, he prepared a preface to the " Protocol or Acts of the Colloquy at Hertzberg." As commissary he took part in the general visitation of the archdiocese of Magdeburg in 1583.

2. Gottfried Olearius: Son of the preceding; b. at Halle Jan. 1, 1605; d. at the same place Feb. 20, 1685. He studied at Jena in 1622 and afterward at Wittenberg, where he received the master's de­gree in 1625, and was appointed assistant in the philosophical faculty in 1629. In 1630, he became pastor at St. Ulrich's Church, Halle. Occupying himself with homiletics he published the follow­ing: Ides: dispoaitionum Biblicarum (1581), a five­volume work containing outlines of sermons for every chapter of the Bible; Annotationes Biblicce theoreticopmcticce (Halls, 1677); and Aphorismi hmniletici (Leipsic, 1658). Especially devoted to astronomy and botany he left a collection of speci­mens that was materially increased by his son and grandson.

3. Johannes Olearius H.: Brother of Gottfried; b. at Halle Sept. 17, 1611; d. at Weissenfels (11 m. s. of Merseburg) Apr. 14, 1684. He entered the University of Wittenberg in 1629, obtained the master's degree in 1632, and became assistant in the philosophical faculty in 1637. After being su­perintendent at Querfurt six years, he was called as court preacher and father confessor to Halle in 1643. Subsequently, he became chief court preacher and in 1664 general superintendent of the Weissen­fels district. Though devoted to Lutheranism, he showed an intelligent appreciation of Pietism and was in active communication with Spener. He was a strong advocate of the school system, from the



pulpit and in administration as well as in his tract, Bedenken and Conailium. His Christian culture books, such as on " Spiritual Meditation," " School of Patience," " School of Prayer," " School of Dy­ing," and " Wonderful Goodness of God," were widely read. His contributions to young theo­logians found ready acceptance, as also the Methodus atudii theologici (Halls, 1664); Oratorio sacra (Halls, 1665); and his Biblical expositions (Leip­sic, 167881). In his hymn‑book, Geistdiche Singekund (1671) he included 240 of his own hymns.

4. Johann Gottfried Olearius: Son of Gottfried; b. at Halle Sept. 25, 1635; d. at Arnatadt (10 m. s. of Erfurt) May 21, 1711. After 1658 he was his father's colleague at Halle; and after 1688, pastor, superintendent, and assessor and ephorus of the gymnasium at Arnstadt. Some of his church hymns have been preserved, as "Komm du wertes L6se­geld." Poetiwhe Erstlinge appeared in 1664; and Geistliche Singelust in 1697. Some of his prose wri­tings were, EhrenreUung gegen Johann ScheXer, Lutheromastigem; and Abacus Palrologicus (1673), reissued by his son Johann Gottlieb as Bibliotheca scriptorum eeclmiastieorum (1711). Specimen. florae Halen$is and Geiatliche HysurinthrBetrachtungen (Leipsic, 1665) were the fruit of his botanical studies.

5. Johann Christof Olearius: Son of Johann Gottfried; b. at Halle Sept. 17, 1668; d. at Arn­atadt (10 m. s. of Erfurt) Mar. 31, 1747. He was chief pastor, superintendent, and ephorus of the lyceum at Arnatadt in Thuringia and was cele­brated for his versatile knowledge of history. After 1721, he was collaborator in the continuous collec­tion of old and new theological matters. He was principally noted in hymnology, producing Entwatrf einer Liederbibliothek (Amstadt, 1702); Evangeli­acher Liederschatz (Jena, 1705); Jubilierende Lieder­freuste and Nachrichten von den. dltesten lutherischen Gesangb4ehern (1717); and Evangelische Lieder­annales fiber 100 Gesdnge (1721). The church hymn " Ach Gott vom Himmel sieh darein " was directed against the Pietists. He occupied himself with the history of his Thuringian home, and with numis­matics in which he was aided by a large library, a rich cabinet of coins, and a valuable collection of copper plates. The natural history collection of his grandfather was substantially increased.

8. Johannes Olearius IIL: Second son of Gott­fried; b. at Halls May 5, 1639; d. at Leipsic Aug. 8, 1713. He qualified as lecturer in the philosoph­ical faculty at Leipsic, 1663; occupied the chair of Greek and Latin, 1667; became professor of theol­ogy, 1677; and later ephorus of the beneficiary students and canonicus at Zeitz. At the outbreak of the Pietistic disputes, he patronized its adher­ents. He openly opposed Carpzov in his attack upon them, and approved the refutation prefaced by Spener of that abusive document, Imago pietismi. In his lectures he emphasized a practical Christian­ity and a godly life; and his view that holiness was an essential qualification of a theologian and that the unregenerate could have no more than a literal and historical perception of olivine things, brought him into conflict with Lbacher and Wernadorf. Of

exegetical character are the Hermeneutics. sacra; Exercitationes philologicte ad epistolas dominicales (Leipsic, 1674); and De stylo Novi. Testamenti (1678). In polemics, he issued, Synopsis contro­versiarum cum Pontificiis, Calvinistis, Socianistis, sqq. (1698); in ethics, Introductio ad theologiam moralem et casuisticam; and in practical theology, Consilia theologica.

7. Gottfried Olearius: Son of Johannes III.; b. at Leipsic July 23, 1672; d. there Nov. 10, 1715. He entered the university of his native town at an early age and became master in his twentieth year. After visiting Dutch and English universities, he returned to Leipdc in 1699 as professor of Latin and Greek, and after 1701 became professor of theology and doctor. Examples of his exegetical and dogmatic works are, Obeervationes in. Evan­gelium Matthoi (1713); and Jesus der wahre Mes­sias (1714). Much learning and painstaking indus­try were lavished on Philosdratorum quo supersunt omnia (1709); on Stanleji historia philosophise (Leipsic, 1702); and on the translation of John Locke's treatise on education. After his death ap­peared Collegium pastorale (Leipsic, 1718).

8. Johann Christian Olearius: Son of Johannes II.; b. at Halle June 22, 1646; d. there Dec. 9, 1699. He studied at Jena, Leipsic, Kiel, and Strasburg, and in Holland, and at an early age was made chief pastor and superintendent at Querfurt. In 1681, he was called as pastor to St. Maurice Church, Halle, and in 1685 as chief pastor of the Church of Our Lady and superintendent. Later he was a con­sistorial councilor in the Magdeburg consistory at Halle. He showed prudence and moderation in the disputes between the town clergy and the pro­fessors of the university and supported the efforts of the electoral commission constituted under Chan­cellor V. L. Seckendorf. In his preaching he was orthodox. Of his church hymns, one is famous: " O Gott, du weisst es, wie ich sinne."

9. Adam Oleviius: Son of Johannes II.; b. at Ascheraleben (7) (33 m. s.s.w. of Magdeburg) Aug. 1603; d. at Gottorp (a part of Sleswick, 86 m. n.n.w. of Hamburg) Feb. 22, 1671. He became master at Leipsic in 1627 and later professor. He was also associate rector at St. Nicholas school, 1630‑33; and took part in the embassy directed by Duke Frederick III. of Sleswick‑Holstein­Gottorp to Grand Duke Michael Feodorewich and the shah of Persia. His published account of this expedition gained great recognition. He continued as " mathematician and antiquary " at the court of his patron and his successors and arranged the Arabic, Persian, and Turkish manuscripts that he had brought from the East. In 1665, he published a Kirchenbuch, the first liturgy in High German in Sleswick‑Holstein. He advocated raising the efficiency of the schools. GEORG MtTLLER.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. G. Leuckfeld, Hiatoria Hesshuaiana, ii.

234‑248, Quedlinburg, 1716; J. B. Liebler, Hgmnopoio­

graphia Oleriana, Naumburg, 1727; Vollet4ndige Register

fiber die andern Zehen Jahr der Un.chuldigen Nachrichten

1711‑t0, Leipsic, 1728; M. Ranfft, Leben and Schriften

derer atichsischen Doctoren der Theologie, ii. 809,892, Lair.

sic, 1742; J. C. von Dreyhaupt, Beschreibung des Saal­

krei8as, i. 1007 eqq., Halls, 1749; C. G. JSeher, Allge­

meines Gelehrten‑Lexicon, iii. 1050‑57, Leipsie, 1751;

H. W. Rotermund, Allgemeinea Gelehrtan‑Lexicon, Fort‑



adzunp, v. 1041‑64, Leipeic, 1784; Ersch and Gruber, Encyklop8die, III. sect., 3. part, pp. 3714; ADD, xxiv. 289‑284; Julian, Hymnology, pp. 888‑887.

OLEVIANUUS, o‑16"vf‑a'nvs(OLEVIAN), BAR:

German Reformer; b. at Treves Aug.19,1536; d. at Herborn (32 m. n.e. of Nassau) Mar 15,1587. Pass­ing rapidly through the schools of his native city, he visited Paris for wider education as early as 1550. He went later to Orldans and Bourges to study law, where he attached himself to the Reformed congregations, thriving here in secret. While in the act of saving the young Duke Hermann Ludwig of the Palatinate from drowning, he himself was rescued by a servant. Believing this to be an act of divine providence, he now studied the Holy Scriptures with great fervor, while continuing at the same time his legal studies and acquiring in 1557 his doctorate in civil law. Visiting Zurich and Geneva in 1557, he received such encouragement from Farel and Calvin that in June, 1559, he re­turned to Treves, resolved to complete his studies for the preaching of the Gospel. There, at his own request, Olevianus was engaged by the council as teacher of philosophy in the university, where he started to lecture in Latin; and on Aug. 10, 1559, he preached his first sermon in the German lan­guage and bore earnest witness for the Evangelical truth. Owing to numerous protests, the council decided to forbid his sermons in the said depart­ment, but the town church of St. James was sub­mitted to his acceptance. Beginning with Aug. 20, unmolested by the councilors of Elector Johann VI., who happened to be absent at the Imperial Diet at Augsburg, Olevianus assembled a daily in­creasing Evangelical congregation. In its name Burgomaster Johann Steuss acknowledged his ad­herence to the Augsburg Confession no later than Aug. 21, and desired religious freedom under terms of the Religious Peace of Augsburg (q.v.). Steuss held himself to be thoroughly justified in this de­mand, by reason of the ancient liberties of the city of Treves; whereas the governor of the city de­clared it subject to the archbishop, and on Sept. 14 renewed the interdiction against preaching. Yet even now, by request of his followers, Olevianus fearlessly continued his sermons, and on Sept. 23, in the person of Superintendent Cunemann Flins­bach (1527‑71), who had been despatched to him from Zweibriicken by Duke Wolfgang, he still re­ceived a welcome support in his labors. Mean­while, on Sept. 16, Elector Johann himself had re­turned to Treves from Augsburg for the purpose of suppressing the Evangelical preaching. But when even those of Roman proclivities encountered him with undisguised mistrust, he departed again from the city, Sept. 28, and sought to bring it to submission by force. Calling the nobility and the peasantry to arms, he invested the city and cut off all its supplies. In this way the elector finally in­duced the alarmed Roman Catholic members of the council to accede to his demand so far as to arrest, on Oct. 11, Olevianus and Flinsbach, together with Steuss and eight aldermen, and four Evangelical citizens. On Oct. 25, the archbishop marched victoriously into Treves with 120 troopers and 600 infantry, to resume control. On Nov. 15,

he had the prisoners indicted on capital charges, as though guilty of high treason. It was only when Elector Frederick III. of the Palatinate, and five other Evangelical princes in an embassy to Treves vigorously interceded for the prisoners, that Elector Johann dropped the accusation and liberated the prisoners, Dec. 19, upon payment of 3,000 florins, and after exacting a solemn oath to keep the peace without vengeance. They and all other Protestants were expelled from the city. The Jesuits were called thither, in June, 1560, to insure Roman sentiment. Olevianus was released after ten weeks' impris­onment. By invitation of the Palatine elector's envoy he went to Heidelberg, and Jan., 1560, he found a suitable sphere of activity as director of the " College of Wisdom " now converted into a theological seminary. In the following year he be­came professor of dogmatics at the university. He soon exchanged his position for the more congenial office of pastor of a city church. As member of the church council he exercised considerable influence upon the reconstruction of the church r6gime along Reformed lines. The final revision of the Heidel­berg Catechism (q.v.) may probably be referred to him. At the Maulbronn Conference in Apr., 1564 (see MAULBRONN), he capably represented the Re­formed position. At the colloquy with Lutheran theologians at Amberg, in Nov. and Dec., 1564, Olevianus proved less successful. The Upper Palat­inate could not be induced to adopt Calvinism. Olevianus took prominent part in the Rhenish Palat­inate church organization of Nov. 15, 1563; and in the institution of presbyteries and church disci­pline according to the electoral edict of July 15, 1570. Unfortunately Olevianus also subscribed to the judgment of the Heidelberg theologians who advocated the enforcement of the death penalty against blasphemers in the so‑called Arian affair; and thus made himself a partner in guilt in the exe­cution of Johannes Silvanus, Dec. 23, 1572 (see FRIEDRIOH III.); thereby showing that he, too, had not yet overcome the Old‑Testament spirit still dominant with many sterling theologians in that age. When the Lutheran Elector Ludwig Ii. ac­ceded to power, Olevianus was deposed from his offices, Novi 17, 1576. In Mar., 1577, he accepted a call to Berleburg, as tutor to the sons of Count Ludwig of Wittgenstein, where he also cooperated powerfully in the reorganization of church affairs in the spirit of Calvinism. In 1584 he was called as pastor and teacher in the new academy at Herborn; but, after several months' illness, he died Mar. 15, 1587.

Olevianus undoubtedly was one of the most im­portant Reformed theologians of his time. A pop­ular preacher and eminent catechist, a clear thinker and energetic character, he was at the same time a sincere, devout, humble Christian.


BIBLIOGRAPHY: A short sketch of Olevian'e life by Johann Piecator is prefixed to the formeroe Gnadenb,and Gotten, Herborn. 1590. Consult further K. Sudhoff, C. Olevianus and Z. Ursinus, Elberfeld, 1857; J. H. Wyttenbach, Ver. such einer Geechichte non Trier, iii. 32‑57, Treves, 1817; J. Marx, Caspar olevian, Mains, 1846; F. W. Cuno, DIU­ter der Brdanerung an Dr. $aepar Olevianus. Barmen, 1887; J. Ney, Die Reformation in Triar 1668, Halls, 1906­1907.


OLGA, SAINT: Russian grand‑duchess. She came of a poor family, but became the wife of Grand Duke Igor of Kief, and governed the coun­try with great success during the minority of her son.Sviatoslav. In 952 she went to Constantinople, embraced Christianity, and was baptized by the Patriarch Theophilaktes, assuming the name of Helena in honor of the mother of Constantine. After her return to Kief, she is said to have labored for Christianity, though without any palpable effect. Her day of commemoration is July 11 (new style, 21).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. E. Castremonte, Hist. de rintroduction du Chriatianiame our le continent Rusee, et la vie de S. Olga, Paris, 1879.

OLIER, 5'qy@', JEAN JACQUES: Founder of

the Seminary of Saint‑Sulpice in Paris and a leader

in the spiritual life of France in the seventeenth

century; b. in Paris Sept. 20, 1608; d. there Apr.

2, 1657. He studied theology at the Sorbonne and

attended the discourses of St. Vincent de Paul at

Saint‑Lazare on the duties of the clerical state. His

intercourse with Vincent determined the direction

of his life, and gave him the mystical tendency visi­

ble in his writings. Deciding to devote himself to

the education of the clergy, he began his work at

Vaugirard in Jan., 1642. The next year he became

curd of Saint‑Sulpice, and erected a new church

and a seminary. His activity in the cure of souls

was widely renowned; he founded associations for

the care of the sick, the poor, and orphans. In 1652

he resigned his parochial charge in order to devote

himself exclusively to the work of the seminary.

He was able before long to provide for the estab­

lishment of similar institutions in various cities of

France, and even as far away as Montreal, and es­

tablished the Congregation of Saint‑Sulpice to in­

sure the perpetuation of his work. Among his works,

few in number and principally of a devotional char­

acter, should be mentioned his Cat6chisme chretien

pour la vie inttmieure (Louvain, 1686). The Sem­

inary was later detached from the parish of the

same name, and had a number of strong directors

who trained an excellent class of priests. F€nelon

spent five years here. (C. PFENDER.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: His (Euvres complAtes were published by Migne in Paris, 1857. Biographies are by Magot,Pans, 1818; De Bretonvilliers, 2 vols., Paris, 1841; E. H. Thompson, London, 1861 (based on a work by the AbbS Faillon); an anonymous Vie appeared in Lille, 1861; the subject is treated in F. J. Holawarth, Handbficher fair das prieaterliche Leben, vol. v., Leipsic, 1860. Consult further: H. J. Icard, Doctrine de M. Olier, Paris, 1889; idem, Ex­plication de quelques passages de M6moires de M. Olier, ib. 1892.

OLIN, STEPHEN: Methodist divine; b. at Leicester, Vt., Mar. 2, 1797; d. at Middletown, Conn., Aug. 16, 1851. He was graduated from Middlebury College in 1820; entered the ministry of the Methodist Episcopal Church; and, after several appointments, was professor of English lit­erature in the University of Georgia, 1827‑34; presi­dent of Randolph Macon College, Virginia, 1834­1837; and president of Wesleyan University, Middletown, Conn., from 1842 till his death. From 1837 to 1841 he traveled in Europe, Egypt, and Palestine, the fruits of which journey were, Travels

in Egypt, Arabia Petrwa, and the Holy Land (New York, 1843); and Greece and the Golden Horn (New York, 1854). His Works, consisting of sermons, sketches, lectures, and addresses, appeared (2 vols., New York, 1852).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Life and Letters of Stephen Olin, 2 vols.,

New York, 1853 (ed. his wife).


OLIVERS, THOMAS: Wesleyan preacher and hymn‑writer; b. at Tregynon, in Montgomeryshire, Wales, in 1725; d. at London Mar., 1799. Illiterate and profligate as a youth, he was converted under Whitefield's preaching, became in 1753 one of Wes­ley's most active preachers, and was his supervisor of the press in 1775‑88, doing much work in the Calvinistic‑Arminian controversy. He wrote A De­scriptive and Plaintive Elegy on the Death of the Late Reverend John Wesley (London, 1791); and in 1791 four hymns, whereof " The God of Abraham praise " (Nottingham, n.d.) is generally allowed to be one of the noblest odes in the language.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A biographical sketch by J. Kirk is in an edition of Olivers' Hymns and an Elegy, London, 1888; and an autobiography is in T. Jackson's Lives of Early Methodist Preachers, vol. f., ib. 1837; cf. DNB, xlii. 158; Julian, Hymnology, p. 887; S. W. Duffield, English Hymns, pp. 520‑521, New York, 1838.

OLIVES, MOUNT OF, OLIVET: A mountain range east of Jerusalem, the modern Jabal al‑Tur. For the topography and description see JERUSA­LEM, T.

Olivet is first mentioned in the Bible in connec­tion with David's flight from Absalom (II Sam. xv. 30). It was the scene of the worship of Chemosh and Molech (qq.v.), set up by Solomon (I Kings xi. 7), destroyed by Josiah (II Kings xxiii. 13, 14); thence, also, the people, by order of Ezra, got the branches for the feast of tabernacles (Neh. viii. 15). The allusions to it in the New Testament are more numerous. It is thus described by P. Schaff (Through Bible Lands, p. 272, New York, 1878): " It is very prominent in the closing scenes of our Savior's min­istry. In Bethany, on the eastern slope of Olivet, he had his most intimate friends‑Lazarus, Martha, and Mary‑and performed his last and greatest miracle. (Luke x. 38‑12; John xi.). From Mount Olivet he made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Luke xix. 29‑38). Here he spent the nights inter­vening between the entry and his passion, and re­turned every morning to teach in the temple (Luke xxi. 37). Descending from this mountain, he wept over the ungrateful city, and foretold her fearful doom (Luke xix. 41‑44; cf. ver. 37). To it he re­paired on the night of his betrayal (John xviii. 1); from it he ascended to heaven to take possession of his throne (Luke xxiv. 50; Acts 1.12). " Gethsem­ane was upon the hither slope of Olivet; and so upon the same mountain pressed the feet of Jesus when in the depths of his humiliation and in the heights of his triumph."

Tradition wrongly puts the ascension upon the so‑called " Mount, of Ascension "; indeed, our Lord's footstep is shown in the Mohammedan mosque which now covers the spot. There Helena, the mother of Constantine, built (325) a basilica; and


other churches and convents were built there by crusaders. The Patriarch Modestus, in the begin­ning of the seventh century, built there a rotunda, open in the middle, because tradition said that the place of the ascension must not be covered by a roof. This building was several times destroyed and rebuilt. The present Chapel of the Ascension is octagonal, and was rebuilt after the earthquake of 1834. On the spot traditionally pointed out, stands to‑day a Mohammedan mosque, around whose court " are ranged the altars of various Christian churches."

BIBLIOGRAPHY: T. Tobler, Die Siloahquelte and der Oelberp, St Gall, 185?; P. Schaff, ut sup.; J. Mislin, Lea Saints Lieua, ii. 468‑479, 3 vols., Paris, 1851‑57; Li6vin de Hanlme, Guide‑Indieateur de to terre‑saints, i. 335‑363, 3d ed., ib. 1887; K. Baedeker, Palestine and Syria, pp. 72 79, Leipeic, etc., 1906; Vigouroux, Dirtionnairs, fasc. xxix., cols. 1779‑1793; and the literature under JERQaA­LzII; and PALBsnNE.


ROBERT: French Biblical scholar; b. at Noyon in

Picardy (67 m. n.n.w. of Paris) in 1506 (?); d. at

Ferrara (20 m. n.n.e. of Bologna) in 1538. He was a

cousin of John Calvin, both having the same birth­

place. He studied law, first at the University of

Paris and later at Orlgans, where he was converted

to Protestantism. In turn he brought Calvin to

adopt the Evangelical doctrines, probably at Paris.

Being suspected of Lutheran heresy, he fled to

Strasburg in 1528, where he was welcomed by the

Reformers of that free city, Butzer and Capito, who

encouraged him to make a thorough study of Hebrew

and Greek in order to be able to translate the Holy

Scriptures. In 1531 he removed to Geneva and

then to NeUChiAtel, where he worked as a school­

master. In the last‑named city he became ac­

quainted with the Waldenses and went to their

Synod of Chamforans, in Sept., 1552, which en­

trusted him with a French translation of the Bible.

In May, 1536 or 1537, he returned to Geneva, where

he was appointed teacher at the new gymnasium.

After Mar., 1538, Olivdtan paid a visit to Ren6e

of France (q.v.), duchess of Ferrara, in Italy; then

traveled farther in that country and disappeared at

the end of the year. His principal works are: La

Bible, qui e8t toule la Sainde ‑Ocriture, era laquelle sont

contenus le Vieil Testament et le Nouveau, translates en

frangoi8, le vied de lebrieu, et le nouveau du grec,

NeuehAtel, 1535; Les Psalmes de David trandama

d'6brdeu en frangais (Lyons, 1537); Instruction des

enfants (1537). G. BONET‑MAURY.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Correspottdanee des RiJormateurs, ii. 132, iii. 290, v. 228, 280, Geneva, 1878; E. Reuse, in Revue de ehbolopie, Jan., June, 1851, Jan., 1852; A. Lefranc, La Jeunesse de Calvin, Paris, 1888; O. Douen, in Revue de th&lopieetphilosophie,1889• E.Doumergue,ViedeCalvin, vol. i., Lausanne, 1901; W. Walker, John Calvin, 1W6; Lich­tenberger, ESR, ix. 186 ; Vigouroux, Didionnaire, ii. 2363.

OLIVI, o"li"v?', PIERRE (JEAN): A Francis­can enthusiast of the thirteenth century; b. at S6rignan in Languedoc in 1248 (1249?); d. at Narbonne Mar. 14 1298. At fourteen he entered the Franciscan order at Bdziers, and later studied theology in Paris. His rigorist conception of the vow of poverty, coupled with a tendency to apoo­alyptic enthusiasm, exposed him to numerous at­tacks, and he was brought before the superiors of

his order three times on a charge of erroneous teaching, but usually managed to justify himself. His defense before the chapter held at Montpellier in 1287 was so successful that he was given an im­portant position in the house of Santa Croce, from which he afterward went to a still more influential one at Montpellier. Before his death he gathered his brethren around him and gave them a solemn charge on the strict observance of the vow of pov­erty, which was circulated as his testament. The conflict which had been kept within bounds in his lifetime broke out after his death. Against his fol­lowers, known as " Spirituals " or " Olivists," who were pressing for his canonization on the ground of alleged miracles at his tomb, Clement V. pronounced in the dogmatic decree Fidei catholicw fundamento promulgated at the general council of Vienne in 1312, which condemned three propositions of Olivi's, while it contained no injurious expressions against his person or the greater part of his writings (see FRANCI6, SAINT, Oh Assisi, III., §§ 4‑5). John XXII. proceeded more strongly against the party, expelling the Spirituals of Narbonne and Bdziers from their houses and sanctioning an inquisitorial process against Olivi's principal writings, which re­sulted (Feb. 8, 1326) in the condemnation of his work on the Apocalypse and the discouragement of the further circulation of the others. These in­cluded a collection of Quwstiortes as a commentary on the " Sentences " of Peter Lombard, and trea­tises De sacramentis, De virtutibus et vaii8, De quan­titate, De perlegendis philosophorum libris; exeget­ical works on Genesis, Job, the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, and Ezekiel; writings on questions relating to his order, Quo?8tiones de evange­lira perfectione, a treatise on the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas concerning poverty, another on the abdi­cation of Celestine V., and an Ezpositio super regu­lam fratrum minorum; and apparently a number of mystical‑ascetic works, such as the Tractatus de gradibua amoria mentioned by Sbaragha. His gen­eral position seems to be one of dependence on the mysticism of Bonaventura and opposition to the philosophy of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas. The most zealous and accomplished advocate of Olivi's teaching was Ubertino of Casale (q.v.).

(O. ZdcsLERt.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: All earlier work is superseded by the arti­cle by F. Ehrle, in AL%G, iii (1887), 409‑552. Consult also: P. Feret, La Facultg de thholopie de Paris et sea doc­teurs, ii. 9486, Paris, 1894; %L, ix. 828‑834; H. Hurter, Nomenclador literariua, iv. 321‑326, Innsbruck, 1899.

OLMSTED, em'sted or vm'sted, CHARLES SAN­FORD: Protestant Episcopal bishop of Colorado; b. at Olmstedville, N. Y., Feb. 8, 1853; educated at St. Stephen's College, Annandale, N. Y. (B.A., 1873), and the General Theological Seminary, from which he was graduated in 1876. He was ordered deacon in 1876 and priested in 1877. He was minister at Morley, N. Y. (1876,84); rector of Christ Church, Cooperstown, N. Y. (1884‑96), and of St. Asaph's, Bala, Pa. (1896‑1902), and in 1902 was consecrated bishop of Colorado. In 1902 he delivered the Rein­eker lectures on the discipline of perfection, and has written December Muaing8 (poems, Philadel­phia, 1898) and Essay on Mediteval Poets (Denver,


1904), besides contributing to the Church Club Lec­tures (New York, 1895).

OLMSTED, em'sted or vm'ated, CHARLES TYLER: Protestant Episcopal bishop of Central New York; b. at Cohoes, N. Y., Apr. 28, 1842; educated at Trinity College, Hartford, Conn. (A.B., 1865), and pursued his theological studies at St. Stephen's College, Annandale, N. Y. He was or­dered deacon in 1867 and priested in the following year, and was professor of mathematics at St. Stephen's College (1866‑68). He was assistant in Trinity parish, New York City (1868‑84); rector of Grace Church, Utica, N. Y. (1884‑99); vicar of St. Agues' Chapel, New York (1899‑1902). In 1902 he was consecrated bishop coadjutor of Central New York, and on the death of Bishop F. D. Huntington in 1904, succeeded him as bishop of the diocese.

OLSHAUSEN, 81s"hau'zen, HERMANN: New­Testament exegete; b. at Oldeslohe (24 m. n.e. of Hamburg), in Holstein, Aug. 21, 1796; d. at Er­langen Sept. 4, 1839. He studied at the universi­ties of Kiel and Berlin, and at the festival of the Reformation in 1817 he gained the prize for his Melanchthons Charakteriatik aua aeinen Briefen dar­geatellt (Berlin, 1818). In 1820 he became privat­docent at Berlin, in 1821 extraordinary professor, and 1827, ordinary professor at Konigsberg. He suffered from a feeble constitution and, in the hope of benefiting his health, accepted a call to Erlangen in 1834. He prepared the way for his commentary in a work on the historical proofs of the genuine­ness of the Gospels in the first two centuries (Die Aechtheit der vier kanoniachen Evangelien, K6nigs­berg, 1823, Eng. trand., Andover, 1838). He stated his exegetical principles in two works, Ein Wort fiber tieferen Schrift8inn (Konigsberg, 1824), and Die Wiache Schriftauslegung (Hamburg, 1825), de­fending the allegorical and typical methods, but without opposing the grammatical and historicbl. His ideas were most fully expressed in his commen­tary on the New Testament (vols. i.‑iv., extending as far as the epistles to the Thessalonians, by Ols­hausen himself, Konigsberg, 1830‑40; completed in three additional volumes and revised by Ebrard and Weisinger, 1837‑62; Eng. tmnsl., 10 vola., Edinburgh, 1847‑60; 6 vols., New York, 1856‑58).

BxatsoonePur: A biography by his widow is in Allpemeinee Reper~rium fgr theolopiache Litteratur, 1840, faec. vii., pp. 91‑94. Consult further: P. Schaff, Germany: its Universities, Theology and Religion, pp. 295‑300, Phila­delphia, 1857; Berliner allgemeine %irchensaitung, 1839, no. 76; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, faec. xxix., cola. 1793­1795; ADB, xxiv. 323‑328.

OLSHAUSEN, JUSTUS: Orientalist; b. at Ho­henfelde, Holstein, May 9, 1800; d. at Berlin Dec. 28, 1882. He received an excellent education, first from his father and further in the schools of Glifek­atadt and Eutin. Olshausen was so thoroughly pre­pared that in the autumn of 1816 he was able to enter the University of Kiel. Here he zealously continued the study of Hebrew which he had begun in 1814 under his father's tutelage, and although primarily occupied with theology, he soon com­bined the study of other oriental languages with that of Hebrew. He passed the winter semester of 1819‑20 at the University of Berlin, where, besides

other work, he prosecuted his Arabic studies with the equally ambitious August Tholuck. In Oct., 1820, Olshausen, by the aid of a royal Danish sti­pend, was enabled to go to Paris where he remained until Apr., 1823, and attended the lectures of Syl­vestre de Sacy, the celebrated professor of Arabic and Persian. He enjoyed the society of an inspiring circle of friends and also made the acquaintance of Alexander von Humboldt. On Nov. 4, 1823, soon after his return from Paris, Olshausen's well‑founded reputation, both for unusual linguistic ability and for sterling character, procured him the position of extraordinary professor of oriental languages at the University of Kiel. In 1830, he became ordinary professor and continued in the university until 1848. Because of the confidence reposed in him by his col­leagues, he was chosen four times as rector and dis­played great talents as an administrator. In the interest of his studies he went sometimes to Copen­hagen as well as to Paris, where he stayed from the autumn of 1826 until Jan., 1828. These were the only interruptions of his sojourn in Kiel until the restless year of 1848 brought politics disturbingly into his tranquil scholarly life.

The overthrow of the Danish rule made Olshausen, who was then curator of the university, vice‑presi­dent of the convention of these provinces. When, however, in 1852, the Danish government reestab­lished its authority, Olshausen lost his offices and gained a settled position only by entering the serv­ice of the Prussian government, thanks to the influ­ence of Alexander von Humboldt. From Koniga­berg, where he had become ordinary professor of oriental languages and chief librarian, he accepted, in 1858, a call to Berlin as ministerial councilor, and until 1874 superintended the Prussian univer­sities. After celebrating the semi‑centenary of his official life, Olahausen'a continued devotion to his oriental studies procured for him a happy retire­ment after an active career.

Of his works which do not immediately concern theology, those regarding the study of the cunei­form inscriptions may be briefly mentioned: Die PehleurirLegenden auf den Miinzen der letzten Sa­eaniden, auf den 4ltesten Mtlazen arabucher Chalifen, auf den M1lnxen der Ispehbed'a von Taberista and auf indo‑peraiaehen Munzen des datlichen Iran (Copenhagen, 1843). Already in his first work, published in 1826, the Emendationen xum aiten Testament, Olshausen, through Gen. x. and Isa. xxiii., had been led to conclusions concerning Baby­lon and the Chaldeana, which were later substan­tiated by Assyriology, and his sound judgment as expressed in his treatise entitled: Prufung des Characters der in der assyrischen %eilinachriften enthaltenen semitiechen Sprache was fully confirmed by later researches. Not less important was the service rendered by Olshausen to this branch of study through his successful efforts for the transfer of Eberhard Schrader (q.v.) to Berlin in 1875. Since 1826 Olshausen, by his many and continuous contributions to the textual criticism of the Old Testament, has, as Schrader rightly says, " opened a new path for exegetical and critical research." His theory that most of the mistakes in the text were to be sought in the consonants and not in the


vowels still deserves serious consideration. His most widely known work in the direction of textual criticism, executed in a masterly style, is the sec­ond edition of the Commentary on Job by Hirzel, revised by Olshausen (Leipsic, 1852). Still more important, however, is his individual exegetical work on the Psalms (Leipsic, 1853). His greatest effort is without doubt his excellent Lehrbuch der hebrtiischen Sprache (Brunswick, 1861), which contains, in the first book, the phonetics, and from page 170 the paradigms. Unfortunately the third book, to be devoted to the syntax, has not appeared. Sachau calls this grammar a book that marks an epoch in the history of oriental philology, and Noldeke terms it a very commendable work, al­though Olshausen in this book has carried to an extreme his view that Arabic represented very closely the primitive Semitic language.


BiELIoaRAPBY: E. Schrader, GedBChtniarede auJ Juatus Ole­hamen, in the Mitteilungen of the Royal Prussian Acad­emy, Berlin, 1883; ADB, xxiv. 328‑330; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, fasc. xxix., col. 1795.

OLSSON, OLAF: Swedish Lutheran; b. at Karlskoga (130 m. w. of Stockholm), Vermland, Sweden, Mar. 31, 1841; d. at Rock Island, Ill., May 12, 1900. He studied at the universities of Stockholm and Upsala; then at the Missionary Institute at Leipsic, 1859‑60; graduated from the University of Upsala, 1861; and from the theolog­ical department of the same university, 1863; was ordained for the Lutheran ministry, 1863; was pastor first at Persberg, Sweden, then at Sunnemo, till 1868, when he came to America; was pastor of Swedish Lutheran congregations in Lindsborg, Kan., 1869‑76; professor of historical theology and catechetics in Augustana Theological Seminary, Rock Island, 111., 1877‑$8; pastor at Woodhull, Ill., 1890; professor and president of Augustana College and Seminary from 1891. He was editor of various Swedish papers and periodicals, and author of many tracts in Swedish. He wrote in Swedish " At the Cross " (Rock Island, 18787); " Reminis­cences of Travel" (18807); and "The Christian Hope " (Chicago, 18877).

OLTRAMARE, of"tra‑md'r6, MARC JEAN HUGUES: Pastor and exegete; b. at Geneva Dec. 27, 1813; d. there Feb. 23, 1891. He was de­scended from an Italian family that had fled to Geneva in the dixteenth century for the sake of religious freedom. He studied at the college and the University of Geneva and later at Berlin, where he was a pupil of Neander. When he returned to Geneva, he became one'bf the most popular pastors of the city, a strong opponent of the errors of the Roman Catholic Church and of the disestablish­ment of the national church and against the adop­tion of the Confession of Faith as the doctrinal basis of the Church. In 1854, he was appointed professor of New‑Testament exegesis in the Acad­emy (after 1876 the University) of Geneva. The translation of the New Testament (Geneva and Paris, 1872), edited by the Compagnie des pasteurs de GenAVe, is his most important work. His render­ing of John i. 1, La Parole dtait dieu, was very sharply criticized by the orthodox on account of the small d.





In 1881‑82, he issued a commentary on the epis­

tle to the Romans (Paris, 188182), and in 1891­

1892 a commentary on the epistles to the Colos­

sians, the Ephesians, and Philemon. A remarkable

expounder of the Scriptures, he was a thorough

scholar and introduced German methods of ex­

position into French theological literature. As a

critic he was rather conservative; he favored the

authenticity of the Fourth Gospel, the Acts of the

Apostles, and the Pastoral Epistles. He devoted

his life to the study of the thoughts and work of St.

Paul and was one of the most prominent represen­

tatives of the Church of Geneva in ~the nineteenth

century. EUGANE Caolsy.

BiBmoonamr: F. Chaponnibre, H. Oltramare, Geneva,

1891; Vigouroux, Dictaonnaire, fasc. xxix., cola. 1795­

1796. There is a biographical notice by A. Bouvier in

vol. ii. of his commentary to the Colossians, etc.. ut sup.

O'MEARA, o‑mVra, THOMAS ROBERT:. Cana­dian Anglican; b. at Georgetown, Ont., Oct.16,1864. He was educated at the University of Toronto and Wycliffe College, Toronto (B.A., 1885); was curate of St. Philip's, Toronto (1887‑88); dean of Wycliffe College (1888,89), assistant curate of Holy Trinity, Toronto (1889‑1903). Since 1904 he has been rector of the same church, and since 1903 has also been professor of practical theology and principal of Wycliffe College. He is president of the Church of England Deaconess and Missionary Training House, Toronto, and a canon of St. Alban's Cathedral, Toronto. In theology he is conservative as regards the Bible and theological problems, and is in sym­pathy with the Protestant and Evangelical wings of the Church of England.


OMRI: Sixth king of Israel, successor of Elah (and Zimri), and founder of a new dynasty. His dates according to the old chronology were 926­915, according to Schrader 900‑875, according to Kamphausen 890‑879. The sources of information concerning him are I Kings xvi., the Moabite Stone (q.v.), lines 4,8, and the Assyrian inscriptions. The data afforded by the first‑named are meager, but from I Kings xvi. 15‑22 it is clear that he owed his elevation to the throne to a military revolution. It is not impossible that he was of humble, and even Arab, origin. His possession of the throne was not undisputed, his rival being Tibni the son of Ginath (assisted, according to the Septuagint, by his brother Joram), doubtless of Israelitic descent. It would also seem that the faction of Tibni was at first vic­torious, and that he reigned four years. If, then, Omri reigned twelve years (I Kings xvi..23), he held undisputed possession of the throne only eight years. After reigning at Tirzah for the six years

following the revolution he transferred the capital

of Israel to Samaria (I Kings xvi. 24), a site harfy

less beautiful than Tirzah, and far superior strateg­

ically. Though the author of I Kings refers for the

complete history of Omri to " the book of the chron­

icles of the kings of Israel " (x‑vi. 27), it is clear

from I Kings xx. 34, that he fought unsuccessfully against the Syrians, for whom he had been obliged to open bazaars in Samaria. Against Moab Omri


was more successful, for it is clear from the Moab­ite Stone of Mesha (q.v.) that Omri occupied the land of Medeba " during his days and half the days of his son, forty years."

In the Assyrian inscriptions Omri, though not

directly mentioned, is often implied, since the king­

dom of Israel is frequently termed " the house of

Omri," to which even Jehu is made by Shalmane­

ser to belong. This phrase clearly shows that Israel

first came within the ken of Assyria during the

reign of Omri. Although it is not known that Omri

came into direct contact with the Assyrians, it seems

probable that the marriage of his son Ahab (who

came into hostile relations with Assyria) with the

Tyrian princess Jezebel was due to political meas­

ures of his father's connected with the growing

Assyrian peril. The failure rightly to estimate the

power of Assyria, and the attempt to oppose it by

a Phenician alliance, were destined to cost Omri's

dynasty dear, for its overthrow by Jehu was doubt­

less inspired by, and effected under the protection

of, Assyria. (R. KrrTEL.)

BiBuoaRAPBY: Consult the pertinent sections of the litera­ture given under AHAB; IBa1AEL, Hwroar OF; and MOAH­rrz SToNz; also the articles in the Bible dictionaries, es­pecially DB, iii. 820‑621.

ON: A city of ancient Egypt and capital of a

district, called by the Greeks Heliopolis. Its in­

significant ruins are located at the village MaVari­

yah, about six miles northeast of Cairo. The local

deities are the hawk‑headed sun‑god, R6‑Harmachis

(whence the Greek name of the city) and the hu­

man‑headed Atum manifested in the sacred black

bull Mnevis. Amenemhet I., first king of the twelfth

dynasty, rebuilt an ancient temple to these deities

in front of which his successor Sesostris I. erected

two obelisks of which one yet stands. The priests

of On were far‑famed for the religious Egyptian

literature that they produced and were celebrated

even in the time of the Greeks for their wisdom.

Joseph's wife was Asenath, the daughter of Potiph­

erah, priest of On (Gen. xli. 45, 50, xlvi. 20) and

On was one of the most important cities of Egypt

(Ezek. xxx. 17). (G. STEINDOBrr.)

BIBIiodaAmY: J. H. Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt, 4 vols., New York, 1908‑07; idem, HiR. of Egypt, ib. 1905; idem, Hist. o) the Ancient Epyptiam, ib. 1908.

ONCKEft, enk'en, JOHANN GERHARD: Found­er of the Baptist congregations in Germany; b. at Varel (35 m. n.w. of Bremen) Jan. 26, 1800; d. at Zurich Jan. 2, 1884. After his father had fled from under the yoke of the French to England, the boy was educated in the house of his grandmother, but received very little instruction, and owing to the prevailing, rationalism only scanty religious im­pressions. In 1814 he became the apprentice of a Scotch merchant, and remained nine years in Scot­land and England. He came in contact mainly with the independent congregations, was mightily in­fluenced by the rich Christian life of Great Britain, and became familiar with the various works of charity and the flourishing work of the Sunday­schools. After his conversion, he returned to Ham­burg in 1823, in the service of the Continental So­ciety, for the purpose of evangelizing. Together

with Pastor Rautenberg he rented a large hall and

preached to constantly increasing crowds of peo­

ple; and perceiving the desolate condition of school­

children in the poorer parts of Hamburg, he founded

a Sunday‑school society, like those of England,

whence he derived the funds, and on Jan. 9, 1825,

the first Sunday‑school was opened. The move­

ment spread also to Bremen, where similar institu­

tions were founded. Soon after his arrival he be­

came a member and secretary of the Lower Saxon

Tract Society, organized a temperance union, and,

in 1823, became agent of the Edinburgh Bible So­

ciety. In the minds of Oncken and big little band

of disciples, there arose doubts concerning the bap­

tism of infants, and in 1834 he, together with his

wife and five othef persons, were immersed by the

Baptist Barnas Sears. In this way the first Bap­

tist congregation on the European continent was

founded. Taunted as an " Anabaptist," and losing

his former support and his connection with the

tract society, he was taken up in 1835 by the Amer­

ican Baptist Missionary Society through the recom­

mendation of Sears. The congregation grew to the

number of sixty‑eight members in 1836, among

whom Julius K6bner was one of the most prom­

inent. Through the distribution of religious litera­

ture and his travels, his views on baptism became

widely known; so that in 1837 a small congregation

was founded in Berlin, under the leadership of

Gottfried Wilhelm Lehmann. The same year, be­

cause of a public disturbance, Oncken was impris­

oned four weeks at Hamburg and his followers were

scattered; but the refugees became propagandists

wherever they went. Thus new congregations re­

sulted; namely, in Stuttgart and Oldenburg, 1838,

and the first Baptist congregation in Denmark,

1839‑40, so the way was open for the expansion of

the society in Sweden. In 1849, at a general con­

ference at Hamburg, there were fifty‑six delegates,

representing thirty‑seven Baptist congregations,

with over 2,000 members, and here Oncken effected

the organization of the United Congregations of

Baptized Christians in Germany and Denmark,

after the order of the Independents. Oncken now

traveled throughout England and America, and

carried his journeys even as far as Russia, collect­

ing a building‑fund for a central chapel at Ham­

burg. This chapel was enlarged and rebuilt in 1867.

When the quarter‑centennial was celebrated in 1859,

the original seven had increased to 1,288 members.

The latter part of Oneken's life was overshadowed

by a controversy over church polity. In contrast

with that of the Independents and Baptists in Eng­

land and America, Oncken was intent upon a closer

union of the German congregations, but in spite of

all his efforts in this direction he could not stem the

tide of decentralization. His following was threat­

ened with division for a while, but at last a separa­

tion was averted, when Oncken yielded to the op­

position. (G. GIEsELBUSCH.)

BIBLzooRAPHT: T. Dupree, Leben and Wirken von J. G. Oncken, Cassel, 1900; J. Lehmann, Geschichte der deutschen Baptist^ 2 vole., Hamburg and Cassel, 1896‑1900; (3. Ecke, Die evanpelixhen Laadeskirchen Deutachlande irw i9. Jahrhundat, pp. 109‑110, Berlin, 1904; J. H. Cooke, John Gerhard Onukem His Life and Work, Load. 1908.


ONDERDONg~ HENRY USTICK: Protestant Episcopal bishop; b. at New York Mar. 16, 1789; d. at Philadelphia ‑Dec. 6, 1858. He graduated at Columbia College, 1805; studied medicine in Lon­don; with V. Mott, edited The New York Medical Journal; was ordained 1815; ministered at Canan­daigua, N. Y., 1816‑20; was rector of St. Ann's, Brooklyn, 1820‑27; became assistant bishop of Pennsylvania, 1827, and bishop 1836; was sus­pended 1844 and restored 1856. He published Episcopacy Examined and Re‑examined (1835). He was active in assisting the appointed compilers of the 212 hymns which, from 1827 to 1871, were usually bound with the Prayer Book and employed in the Protestant Episcopal Church, rewriting sev­eral hymns, and contributing ten entirely his own. Of these, " The Spirit in our hearts " is the best known.

BIHLjoaaAPBY: W. S. Perry, The Episcopate in America. p. 49, New York, 1895; S. W. Duffield, English Hymns. pp. 541‑542, ib. 1886; Julian, Hymnolopy, pp. 869‑W0.




ONKELOS, enk'e‑lea: Jewish teacher of the first century, to whom the principal Targum is awrl'bed (see BIBLE VER61oNs, A, V., j 2). Tradition makes of him a proselyte, and to his father is given the name Kalonymus or Kalonikos. He is also called a disciple of Gamaliel, the teacher of Paul. Many scholars are of the opinion that Onkelos and Aquila, the maker of a Greek version of the Old Testament (see BIBLE VEBBIONs, A, I., 2, § 1), are one and the same person. The Greek forms of the name (Anke­los, Ankulion) might give rise equally to Aquila and Onkelos. The identification is further sup­ported by the reading Aquila in Toaefta, Demai vi. 13, Yeruahalmi, Demai 25x. In Jewish tradition both Aquila and Onkelos are known as proselytes.

BImIOGRAPn?: M. Friedmann. Onkelos and Akylas. Vienna. 1896; JB. ii. 3637, is. 405, iii. 58‑59; DCB, 1. 150‑151; DB, iv. 865; Vigouroua. Didionnaire, faeo. :ma., cola. 1819‑20.

OORT, bet, HENRICUS: Dutch Orientalist; b.

at Eemnes (3 m. n.n.e. of Utrecht) Dec. 27, 1836.

He studied theology at Leyden; was successively

pastor of the Reformed Church at Zandpoort 1860,

at Harlingen 1867; professor of oriental literature

at the Atheneum, Amsterdam, 1873; and pro­

fessor of Hebrew and Jewish antiquities at Leyden,

1875‑1907. He is the author of: De dienat der

Badlim im Israel (Leyden, 1864; Eng. transl.,

The Worship of Baalim in Israel, by J. W. Colenso,

London, 1865); Het menschenofer in Israel (Haar­

lem, 1865); De Bijbel moor jonge lieden, in eollabo.

ration with Hooykaas (Harlingen, 's Gravenhage,

1871‑78; Eng. transl., The Bible for young people,

P. H. Wicksteed, London, 1873‑79; reprinted, The

Bible for Learners, Boston, 1878‑99); Evangelic en

Talmud uit hat oogpunt der zedelijkheid roorgeleken

(Leyden, 1881; Eng. transl. in Modern Review,

London, July, Oet., 1883); Atlas moor BijbelwAe en y

geachiedenea (1884)Wnd Textua Hebraici emendationea (1900).



Dutch Protestant preacher and theologian; b. at Rotterdam Apr. 1, 1817; d. at Wiesbaden (5 m. n.n.w. of Mainz) July 29, 1882. He was educated at the University of Utrecht (1835‑39), and then held pastorates at Eemnes‑Binnen (1841‑43), Alk­maar (1843‑44), and Rotterdam (1844‑62), attain­ing great fame as a pulpit orator. Early in 1863 he was appointed professor of practical theology at Utrecht, with which institution he was variously connected till the end of his life. Of his sermons some 270 were printed in more than twelve vol­umes (1846‑70), including Mozes (Rotterdam, 1859; Eng. transl., Moses: a Biblical Study, Edinburgh, 1876). He likewise published De Heidelbergsche Catechismua in fifty‑two lectures (1869), and issued many individual sermons which were widely cir­culated. In these sermons Van Oosterzee laid his entire stress (in somewhat rhetorical fashion) on the preaching of the Gospel, the proclamation of Christ according to the Scriptures, and the an­nouncing of salvation; but regarded the pulpit least of all the place from which to t:ansaend the Gospel into the regions of dogmatic speculation. His avowed aim as a preacher was rather to edify than instruct. Holding himself aloof from the radical, naturalistic, and purely ethical tendencies, remain­ing neutral toward negative criticism, and in Chris­tology maintaining a distinctly supernaturalistic position, he was pleased to call himself " Evangel­ical, or Christian Orthodox." With all his activity as a preacher, Van Oosterzee devoted himself zeal­ously to theological science. This phase of his ac­tivity he began with the first article, Yerhandeling over den tegenwoordigen toestand der Apologetiek, in the newly founded Jaarboeken voor wetersachappe­lijke theologie, followed the next year by his treatise " On the Value of the Acts of the Apostles " (1846). To this same period belongs his Leven van Jesus (1846‑51), followed by Chriatelogie (Rotterdam, 1855‑61; Eng. transl., The Image of Christ as Pre­sented in Scripture, London, 1874) and by his com­mentaries on Luke (Bielefeld and Leipsic, 1859), the pastoral epistles and Philemon (1861), and James (in collaboration with J. P. Lange, 1862) for J. P. Lange's Bibelwerk.

After his professorial appointment at Utrecht in 1863, Van Oosterzee wrote his brief Theologie des Nieuwen Verbonds (Utrecht, 1867; Eng. transl., Theology of the New Testament, New York, 1893), which was followed by the larger ChriaWijke dog­matiek (2 parts, 1870‑72; Eng. trand., Christian Dogmatics, 2 vols., New York, 1876). The best of his academic works, however, was his praktiwhe theologie (2 parts, Utrecht, 1877‑78; Eng tranal., New York, 1879), in which he considered homiletics, liturgies, catechetics, pastoral theology, missions, and even apologetics. In 1877, with the passage of the law forbidding the theological faculty to lecture on Biblical, dogmatic, and practical theology, Van 0osterzee was compelled, against his will, to teach the philosophy of religion, New‑Testament intro­duction, and the history Of Christian dogma, in which he gave instruction until his death. His memoirs appeared posthumously under the title Uit mijn levensboek, voor mijne wrienden (Utrecht,

1883), and collections of his minor writings were

published later in two groups comprising: Redevoe­

ringen, verhandelingen en verspreide geschraften

(Rotterdam, 1857); Varia. Verspreide geschriften

(1861); Christelijk‑litterairische opstellen (Amster­

dam, 1877); Christelijk‑historische opatellen (1878);

and Chrisdelijk‑kerkelijke opstellen (1879). Mention

should also be made of his popular devotional

book, Het jaar des heils: Lxvenawoorden voor

iederen dag (1874; Eng. transl., Year of Salvation:

Words of Life for every Day, New York, 1875),

and of the posthumous collection of his poems,

entitled Uit de dichterlijke nalatenschap (Amster­

dam, 1884). (S. D. vAar VEEN.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Besides the autobiography ut sup., con­sult: The sketch by A. W. Bronsfeld in Mannen van Beteekenis, Haarlem, 1882; idem, Ben theologisoh klaver­blad, Rotterdam, 1897; by Evans, in the Catholic Presby­terian, 1882; J. J. Doedes, in Utrechtsche Studenten‑Al­rnanak, 1883.

OPHIR: A district described in the table of na­tions (Gen. x. 29) as Joktanite, or South Arabian, although its precise location is unknown. It is of peculiar interest as the terminus of the trading voyages of Solomon, and is thus brought into con­tact with valuable articles of commerce of the an­cient East. According to I Kings ix. 26‑28, Solo­mon built at Ezion‑geber (on the Edomitic shore of the Red Sea) ships which brought 420 talents of gold from Ophir (of. II Chron. viii. 17‑18). Ac­cording to I Kings x. 11‑12, the ships of Hiram brought Solomon not only gold, but also almug trees and precious stones. The Ophir of these passages was taken by Josephus (Ant. VIII., vi. 4, vii, 1) to be India; while Eusebius (Prwparatio evangelica, IX., xex. 4; Eng. transl., Preparation for the Gospel, i. 476, 2 vols., Oxford, 1903), quoting Eupolemus (160‑150 B.c.), states that David built ships in the Arabian city Aelan and sent miners to the island of Urphe (Uphre) in the Red Sea, whence gold was brought to Judea. The frequent transcription of Ophir by the Septuagint Sophir, Souphir, connoted, as is clear from Coptic vocabulary, a part of India; and it has been compared with the Supara of Ptolemy and the Uppara of Arrian, a place in the vicin­ity of the modern Goa. The Urphe (Uphre) of Eupolemus corresponds, in all probability, to the Ophir of the Old Testament, especially as it points to an Arabian locality.

Those who have depended on the Old Testa­ment, especially on Gen. x. 29, have sought Ophir in Southern Arabia. Sprenger located it in 'Asir between Hajaz and Yemen (19‑17° n. tat.), since Greek and Arab writers mention gold mines and river gold on the west coast of Arabia. Herzfeld sought Ophir on the southern coast in the Himyaritic territory, south of the Sabeans (cf. Gen. x. 28‑29), who are said by Ptolemy to have been an inland people. Although, according to Agatharchides, the Arabians considered gold worth only ono‑third as much as copper and half as much as iron, the servants of Solomon can scarcely have gained their 420 talents by trade, but more probably mined in the highlands in the land of the Aliheans and Casandrians. Glaser


regards Ophir as the western coast of the Persian Sea as far south as the promontory Ras Musandum. The geographer al‑Hamdani (about 940 A.D.) lo­cated the most of the gold mines in the north­eastern part of inner Arabia around the Jabal Yamamah. Here he places the land of Havilah, " where there is gold " (Gen. ii. 11), taking Ophir as the corresponding coast land to the Persian gulf. Between the peninsula of l3:atar and the Ras Musandum he locates the harbor of Ommana, which is mentioned as a place of export for gold. Glaser likewise compares the peculiar form‑names Apira, Apir, which were applied to the west and northeast shores of the Persian Gulf. The evidence seems, on the whole, to be in favor of the localization of Ophir on the' eastern coast of Arabia.

Lassen and Ritter sought to locate Ophir in India near the delta of the Indus and the Gulf of Cambay, partly because of the Sanskrit name Abhira as applied to a pastoral people. This view, however, has little in its favor, especially as the inhabitants of Syria first became acquainted with India through the Persians and Greeks. The same criticism applies to Von Baer's attempt to locate Ophir in the peninsula of Malacca, where the dis­tance forms a fatal objection to the theory. In recent years there has been a revival of the hypothesis that Ophir was situated on the east coast of South Africa. In 1871 Mauch discovered remarkable ruins on the Mountain of Furs, or Afura which, according to Portuguese documents of the sixteenth century, were attributed by the natives to the Queen of Sheba or to Solomon. These ruins are situated at Zimbabye, in a district formerly inhabited by the Malotse, west of the Portuguese station of Sofala or Sofara. The re­semblance of the name Fura or Afura to Ophir is too slight to be accepted without further evi­dence; and the name Sofala, though compared with the Sophir of the Septuagint, is really cognate with the Hebrew Shefelah, " lowland." The gold fields at the headwaters of the Nile were known at a very early date, but the first uncertain records of gold fields in South Africa do not antedate Ptolemy (2d cent. A.D.). Even had knowledge of their exist­ence spread to Syria about 1000 B.c., it would still be incredible that the workmen of Hiram and Solo­mon would have mined at the distance of forty German miles from the coast. (H. GUTHE.)

BIHLIOORAPBY: A. K. Keane, The Gold of Ophir, London, 1901; C. Lassen, Indiache Altertumakunde, i. 538 eqq., 651 sqq., ii. 553 eqq., Bonn, 1844‑83; A. Sprenger. Die alts Geopraphie Arabiens, p. 57, Bern, 1875; idem, in ZDMG, xliv (1890), 515‑518; L. Herzfeld, Handelage­achiehte der Juden, pp. 18‑38, Brunswick, 1879; K. E. von Baer, Reden, iii.112‑180, St. Petersburg, 1880; J. Lieblein, Handal and Schifahrt auf dem rothen Meer, pp. 142 sqq., Leipaic, 1886; E. Glaser, Skizze der Geschichte and Geo­graphie Arabiens, ii. 345‑354, 357‑383, Berlin, 1890; idem, in ZDMG, xliv (1890), 721; K. Peters, Dos goldene Ophir, Munich, 1895; idem, I= Goldlande des Alterthuma.

I 'b. 1902; idem, Ophir nach den neuesten Forachungen,

Berlin, 1908; J. Kennedy, in Journal of the Royal Asiatic

Society, pp.241‑288,1898; G.Oppert TharshiahundOphir,

Berlin, 1903; DB, iii. 82828; EB, iii. 3513‑15; JE,

ix. 408‑407; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, xxix. 1829‑33; the

commentaries on Gen. x.; and the literature under TAs1.n




Name and Classification (§ 1). The Naassenian Hymn (1 2). Cosmic Views (1 3). Man, Revelation, and Redemption (1 4). The Mysteries (1 5).

Ophites (Ophians) is the accepted detignation, in the literature of ecclesiastical history, of a group of Gnostic sects (see GNosTICIsM). A common characteristic of these sects, however, i. Rams can not be determined. Mention of and Clas‑ the serpent, from which they derive sification. their name, does not occur in the doc­trine of some of them; nor, where it does occur, has it the same relative prominence. Ophites, then, is a mere collective term for those Gnostic sects that do not attach themselves to some head of a school particularly, or to persons endowed with special prophetic or philosophical gifts. Individual men did indeed emerge from that great stream of the syncretistic movement, which, in so far as it also attracted Christianity in its Gnos­tic guises, came to be of danger to the Christian congregations. Such men were Satornilus, Basil­ides, Valentinus, who developed independent philo­sophic views and established schools. But along­side of these courses the broad main stream of all those sectarian developments which flourished on the tradition deposited in pseudepigraphic litera­ture, in turn variously transformed the same. It is these sects that we term Ophites. In the na­ture of the case, they are generally more entangled in pagan superstition, and acquire more of the character of mystery associations than of philo­sophic schools. Yet even in this regard it is not possible to draw a sharp line of distinction between them and the other sects. 'It is customary to sepa­rate the sects according to their cosmologies and cosmogonies; as a second differentiating mark may be named the mysteries. It is not known, how­ever, how much disagreement was allowed or what agreement was required on these points between members of the same sect as necessitated by its unity. Furthermore, if the defective knowledge and the still more defective reports of the Church Fathers be taken into account, the conclusion follows that definite lines can not be drawn between the individ­ual sects. In view of this, the separate sects are to be enumerated and their common theology briefly sum­marized. (1) The so‑called Gnostici Barbelo of Ire­naeus (Hwr., i. 29; Eng. transl. in ANF, i. 353‑354), whose source exists in the Apocryphum Johannis, a Coptic translation not yet published. (2) The Oph­ites of Irenaeus (H&er., i. 30; Eng. transl. ut sup., pp. 354‑358, cf. Epiphanius, Her., xxxvii.). (3) The closely allied Ophians of Origen, who were known by Celsus. Origen declares the sect in his time to have become practically extinct. Celsus and Origen were acquainted with the graphic representation of the world by this sect, the so‑called " Diagram of the ophites." (4) The Naasseni, described by Hippolytus. For the Naassenian Hymn, see below, § 2. (5) The Perat‑, described by Hippolytus. Euphrates, a teacher of this met, surnamed b3, Origen (according to Hippolytus) Peranam.

Justin the Gnostic (q.v.). (7) The Sethites, de‑)



scribed by Hippolytus. (8) Another sect, styled Sethites, is described in Epiphanius, Her., xxxix. (9) A branch of this sect were the Archontics of Epiphanius, Hour., xl. They were represented in Palestine by Peter, an anchorite, and his disciple Eutactus transplanted them to Armenia. These men were contemporaries of Epiphanius. (10) Identical, perhaps, with (9) above, are the Gnostic opponents of Plotinus (Porphyry, Vita Plotini, xvi.). (11) The Severians, of Epiphanius, Hmr., xlv. (12) Closely allied with the foregoing were the sects which produced the Pidis‑Sophia and the first of the Coptic‑Gnostic works issued by Schmidt. (13) The Cainites of Ireneeus (Hmr., i. 31; Eng. transl. in ANF, i. 358) and Epiphanius, Hmr., xxxviu. (14) The Nicolaitans, opposed in Rev. ii. at Ephe­sus, Pergamos, and Thyatira. They are mentioned by Irenaeus (Hoc., i. 26; Eng. tranal. in ANF, i. 352) and Clement of Alexandria (Stromata, iii. 4). (15) Antitactes. (16) Prodicians: this and the last­named were antinomian sects mentioned only by Clement (Stromata, iii. 4). (17) The faction de­scribed in Epiphanius, Hmr., xxvi., under the various designations of Gnostics, Phibionites, Batbelites, Borborians, Stmtiotics, Coddians. Epiphanius encountered them in Egypt during his youth, and effected their expulsion from a certain town.

Undoubtedly, the most ancient document of Ophitio Gnosticism is the Naassenian Hymn. It expresses most simply and forcibly the

z. The fundamental ideas not only of the Naassenian Ophites, but also of Gnostics gener‑

Hymn. ally. The following is Harnack's para­

phrase (SBA, 1902, pp. 542 sqq.)

" The generating principle of the universe, the first in order, was ' reason '; but the second principle was the first­born's emitted ' chaos'; and the third principle was re­ceived by the soul, which descends from both. Therefore, fashioned like a trembling deer, the soul wrests herself free from the grip of death (strengthening itself by such ex­ertions). Now she wins them astery and sees the light; now plunged into wo, she weeps; again, in the depths of evil, the unhappy one becomes ensnared in a maze. Then spake Jesus: ' Behold. O Father 1 this being, pursued by ills, roams astray upon earth, far from thy breath. It seeks to escape bitter chaos, and knows not whither to find escape. Therefore, send me, 0 Father, with the seals in my hand will I descend: all eons will I traverse, all mysteries reveal, and show the forms of the gods. I will deliver the secret of the holy way, and call it Gnosis.' "

Here, then, reason and chaos, the intelligent and the material world, stand opposed; and between them is the human soul, belonging to both spheres, yet striving toward the higher and the spiritual. The soul is unable to ascend by its own power; therefore, a heavenly being, concordant with the will of the supreme principle, descends into the hu­man world and redeems the soul by showing it the way through the spheres which sunder it from the world divine. These primary conceptions are then variously amplified among the several sects. It is not mere thirst for knowledge that impels the Gnostics to speculr'te on these matters, but essen­tially a concern of salvation; because the Gnostic's salvation depends on the posson of the Gnosis respecting these things.

Like Gnosis at large, the Ophites teach the exist‑

ence of a Supreme Being, standing infinitely high above the visible world; qualified as purely spiritual,



the primal basis of all things, the starting‑point of

the cosmic process. His names are, Father of

the Universe, First Man, the " Unoreated," the

Unspeakable,"the " Unapproachable

Cosmic God." He is self‑evolving, and thus

Views. becomes the source of all being. The

first products of this spontaneous evo­

lution still belong to the purely spiritual spheres.

The Ophitic theology tends to separate this supreme

God into an ever‑increasing number of separate

entities. In the aforesaid Hymn, only the Son is

mentioned beside the Father; but a tetrad occurs

among the Ophites of Irena;us and the Naasse­

nians; an entire decad among the Gnostici Barbelo;

while the Coptic writings disclose a countless host

of higher beings. The Supreme Being's mode of

evolution is set forth, now as a generative, again as

a psychologic process; and frequently the two ideas

are combined. Some heathen mythology lies obvi­

ously at the root of the matter; which accounts

also for their syzygial views; for, in part at least,

the Ophites aimed to interpret the ancient myths

as psychologic processes, though but half success­

fully and with little consequence. Over against the'

Supreme Being stands chaos, the material princi­

ple. Yet there is not here a sharp dualism. In the

Hymn, the phrase "the firstborn's emitted chaos"

implies that it is derived from a higher being. In

only very few instances is chaos an evil power, an

active principle. It is not the existence of chaos

which contradicts perfection; but rather the mix­

ture of luminous parts with material elements.

This mixture, in a word, is the great calamity, the

loss that must be retrieved through redemption.

How did this mixture come to pass? The Hymn

designates the soul, the principle of this compound,

as the common product of mind and chaos. Such

is also the theory of the Peratee and Sethites, men­

tioned by Hippolytus. These mots most nearly

approach the dualistic scheme, yet the latter is not

distinctly defined. In Justin, also, dualism is di­


Among the Ophites of Irenaeus the origin of the

mixed world is most completely represented. When

the Father and the Son begat Christ from the Holy

Ghost, the Spirit, or prima femina, could not com­

prehend the fulness of their infusive light; and there

thus resulted from the overflow and effervescence

of the luminous attributes of the first mawuli, out

of the first femina, a second birth. This was the

Sophia, or Prunicos; also termed Sinistra: a bi­

sexual being. This Wisdom no longer belonged to

the sphere of incorruption; but became thence­

forth the instrument of the cosmic process. Prunicos

ascends once more to the elements; and as these

cleave to her there arises the mixed world. Pru­

nicos now spans the sky (the firmament of fixed

stars) with her body, and begets the seven Archons;

which are the planetary spirits, Ialdabaoth, Iao,

Sabaoth, Adoneus, Elogus, Horeus, Astaphzeus.

These archons have no longer a knowledge of the

world above; and they continue the downward

generating process. First, the come into

being; next, begotten from matter by laldabaoth

in anger, came the Nus serpentiformia, or "mind in

the serpent's form," and the powers of evil; lastly,

human beings. Considerably more complex is the universe of divine spheres and the human world in Pistis‑Sophia. So also in the other Coptic writings, the intermediate realm is peopled with a numerous progeny‑

The Ophitic dilemma is, how man, who so evi­dently belongs to the material world, and is a crew ture of material forces, at the same time bears about

in himself an affinity to the higher 4. Man, world. The solution is, that the crear

Revelation, tion of man was itself a beginning of

and Re‑ his redemption, or a separation of the

demption. improperly mixed. Now men are by

no means all alike. The Ophites, in common with other Gnostics, are determinists. And Hippolytus most expressly accentuates the doctrine of human classification among the Naa&­senians, who discriminate the " intellectual or an­gelic," the "spiritual," and the "terrestrial" as three churches distinguished from one another. Piatis‑Sophia deals with a whole multitude of classes of men. Together with many other factors, the constellation predominant at birth determines to what class a man should belong. Astral religion influences the cosmic philosophy of these sects con­siderably. A comparative knowledge of God is ac­corded even to paganism. The Naasseni allegorize all possible pagan myths, ideas, and mystic prac­tises, finding everywhere hidden suggestions of the highest truths. Homer is employed like the Old Testament. Justin knows of an attempt to reveal the redemptive Gnosis to the pagans. The usual view is that the heathen, seduced by subordinated spirits, then worshiped these as their gods. The Ophites in common with all other Gnostics share the opinion that the God of the Jews is only the demiurge, who pretended to the people of Israel to be the Most High God. Consistent with this atti­tude toward Israel's religion, there is a singular criticism of Biblical history. The Pemtae, Cainites, and Borborians took sides with all those characters whom the Old Testament sets forth as miscreants, and turned them into servants of the true God and light‑giving foes of the demiurge. Other sects only present a variation of the Biblical version of the episode of Paradise. The serpent ministered to the beneficent powers, and brought to men the Gnosis of the Supreme God and of the demiurge's inferior­ity. Here, too, the serpent may properly be treated. As an evil spirit, this animal is encountered among sundry sects. But Irenieus, even in his time, ob­serves that the serpent is variously represented; and, according to his testimony, some identify Sophia her­seK with the serpent. Again, it occupies an equivocal position, at once an evil being and the redeemer and bearer of the Gnosis that is necessary to salva­tion. In fact, there is mention even of serpent worship. The problem of redemption is to release from their false conjunction with matter the at­tributes of the divine realm of light. This conjunc­tion exists principally in men, at least among the spiritual ones; but it likewise appears in the Sophia in so far as she plays a part in the sphere of ideas of the sects. There is translated into the world above, not only what was derived from the Sophia, but man's person itself; only the material admix‑



Aphitss optatus

ture is stripped away. Redemption proper consists partly in the weakening of the mundane powers, partly in the revelation of knowledge that endows its possessor with mastery over those mundane powers. The bearer of salvation is invariably a being from the higher world, the Soter, or Christ; and he stands, in every instance, more or less closely allied with the personality of Jesus. Hence the Ophites did not efface the character of Christian ity as a historic, redemptive religion; but the Savior of sinners they changed into some heavenly being who brings knowledge to men concerning the divine sphere, and thus elevates them. The union of this heavenly being with the man Jesus is con­ceived in various ways. In some quarters it is sup­posed to take place at his birth; in others, at the age of twelve; and again, at his baptism. How­ever, the matter is no such great problem for the Ophites as it came to be for the theology of the Church; because, in the case at hand, the divine incarnation is not at all the great decisive fact for salvation, but redemption rather consists princi­pally in the revelation of the redemptive Gnosis. Neither does any salutary significance attach itself to events in the life of Christ; such as his death and resurrection. At best, these occurrences are susceptible of a symbolic interpretation. Nor, in­deed, is there any question of an atonement; this is unnecessary for the reason that, under the very determinism of the Gnosis, there can be no ques­tion of guilt in the premises. The innocent subject involved in matter must be set free by being brought into touch with the spiritual, which result is effected through the Gnosis, or the revelation of the higher world and redemptive rites.

In the first place, the work of redemption simply brought to souls the possibility of entering the

realm of light; whereas the realisation g. The of this entrance is still menaced by all

Mysteries. sorts of difficulties. The soul must be

purified of unclean elements by means

of prescribed ceremonies, and must learn the magic

formulas by whose aid it can protect itself against

the wiles of the archons. These ideas appear as the

more popular embodiments of the Gnosis in most

of the Ophite sects. They are also practically the

most important, being sect‑producing. In the Cop­

tic documents, the number of these rites multiplied

incredibly. This expansion was promoted by peni­

tential discipline, in that against recurrent sins after

participation in the expiatory sacraments new

mysteries had to be devised. As may well be un­

derstood, this artificial sacramentaliam neutralizes

all moral interest. The believer's trust rests alto­

gether in the mysteries. Through these it is that

the soul attains to that estate in which no hostile

powers can further molest it. Such ceremonial

sanctities occur also among some earlier Ophitic

sects. But we naturally learn very little on the

subject from the treatises on heresy, because

these sacraments are secret and are not communi­

cated to the uninitiated. So early as in the Naaa‑.

senian Hymn, Jesus is represented assaying: °' I

will descend with the seals in my hand," with some

obvious implication evidently of such mystic rites.

The mysteries furthermore consist in showing the

forms of the gods, and in yielding up the secret of the holy way, as it is phrased in the Hymn. This holy way is the one which the spiritual soul must follow when liberated from the body, in order to gain entrance into the divine sphere. The gods are the archons, who design to barricade this way. Ac­cordingly, the soul must be exactly acquainted with the successive series of these beings, and know what to say to each and every one of them for an effec­tual countersign. Sometimes, as in the Coptic docu­ments, these consist of mere senseless conglomera­tions of sounds such as are found in the papyri of ancient magic. Here then, religion has sunk to the lowest grade of sorcery. The conquest of obstacles on the way to the world beyond finds a place also in the apocryphal accounts of the apostles; notably, in the apostles' prayers before their death. These apocryphal Acts are not Assignable to any definite sect; they are products of a vulgar type of Gnosis. But they are still free from magic art; and God is entreated simply for help against adverse powers. Morality is neglected where men's whole concern is preempted by redemptive magic. The sects are both of a libertine cast committing the most abominable excesses, and ascetic. The history of the Ophitic sects is one of continuous degeneration; so that, eventually, the Church in general overcame them easily. See GNosTICnam, § 2, for reference to arti­cles which illumine the subject.


BI19moaR,m87: The sources as indicated in the text are Ixen®us, Her., i. 29‑31; Hippolytus, Har., v.; Clement of Alexandria, Shvmata, iii. 4; Origen, Contra Cehmm, vi. 24‑35; Epiphanius, Hosr., azv.‑avi., vii.‑xl., xlv.; and the Piatia‑Bophia‑for editions see under Gnosticism, and the trance. by G. R. S. Mead, London, 1896. Of first importance is the literature given under GNosrccism, and useful material will be found also in the literature under MANDMANS; MANIOHNANa. Consult further: A. Fuld­ner, De OphifiB, Rinteln, 1834; $. R. HSstlin, in TAeo­lopiaches Jahrbuch, 1854,. R. A. Li~uA i.n WdZgenPell

ZWT, 1882, pp. 400 sqq.,

pp. 410 sqq.; J. N. Gruber. Die Ophiten, WVrsburg, 1864; A. Hoenig, Die Ophiten, Berlin, 1889; A. Harnaek, in TU, vii. 2 (1892); W. Ans, in TU, xv (1897), 1‑32; R. Liechtenhan, Die O$enbarunp in Gtwahciamus, Gbttingen, 1901; idem, in ZWT, 1901, pp. 236 sqq.; idem, in ZNTW, 1902, pp. 222 eqq.; C. Schmidt, in TU, ax. 4 (1901); E. C. H. Peithmann, Biopraphia an*ua, ser. iv., parts 1‑3, Bitterfeld, 1903; E. H. Schmitt, Die Gnosis, vol. i., Jena, 1903; E. Preusehen, Zwei GnostIwAo Hymnm, Giessen, 1904; DCB, iv. 8089.

OPTATUS: Bishop of Mileve in ,,midi,, author of a well‑known work entitled De achiamate Dona. tiatarum adverm Parmenianum. Auguatine, in his work against Parmenianus, calls him " the Bishop of Mileve of venerable memory," and Fulgentiua places him by the side of Augustine and Ambrose as a defender of the Catholic faith. Apart from his book nothing is known of his life. According to Jerome the work was written in the reigns of Valen­tinian and Valens (364‑375); the fact that Opta­tua refers to the persecution of Maximian as hav­ing occurred sixty years before allows us to date it about 368. It is true that he speaks (ii. 3) of Siri‑

cius as bishop of Rome, which he was not until 384; but these words were considered an interpolation even by earlier scholars, The fact appears to be that the work was originally in six books, and was known by Jerome in this form; the seventh is an



independent addition, which was possibly written by Optatus himself in 384, when he may have re­vised the entire work. It is an answer from the Catholic side to the lost Donatist treatise of Par­menianus and is one of the most important sources for the history of the controversy.

The work is written in a conciliatory tone, and even when the author has allowed himself to bring grave charges in detail against his opponents, he checks himself by the recollection that they are his Christian brothers. He adheres throughout to the fundamental distinction between heretics and schis­matics; the former are " deserters or falsifiers of the creed," and thus no Christians, while the Dona, tists are rebellious Christians. The heretics have no true baptism, no power of the keys, no proper worship; but the Donatists, although outside of the Catholic Church, " have derived true sacraments from the common source." Thus he goes much further than in the latter days of the Novatian con­troversy Cyprian had been willing to go, who had denied the legitimacy of both the faith and the sac­raments of the schismatics, placing them practically on a level with heretics. Yet Optatus goes on to say that the possession of these gifts by the schis­matics is a fruitless one; they are only a " quasi­church." The distinguishing marks of the true Church are, first, the possession of the sacraments‑­and here he is far from clear, if not self‑contradic­tory; and, secondly, catholicity in extension, while the Donatists exist only in Africa, outside of a small colony in Rome. In both these points he prepared the way for Augustine's doctrine of the Church, and it is this that constitutes his impor­tance in the history of dogma. Again, he takes a distinct step in advance of Cyprian in his doctrine of the sanctity of the sacraments, summed up in the proposition that " the sacraments are holy in themselves, not through the sanctity of men." This assertion of the objectivity of the sacraments was of fundamental importance for the development of western doctrine. Another part of the argument shows that the Cyprianic ideal view of the unity of the episcopate as summed up and represented in the Chair of Peter was still accepted and unsuspect­ingly fostered in Africa. Where Parmenianus enumerates six " gifts " of the Church (essential portions of its endowment), Optatus admits only five: cathedra, the ecumenical unity; angelus, the legitimate local bishop; apiritu8; fons, a true bap­tism; and sigillum, the orthodox creed of the Trin­ity. In opposition to the Donatists, who denied the authority of the State over their ecclesiastical actions, he put forth the proposition which was afterward taken so ill, " The State is not in the Church, but the Church in the State, that is in the Roman Empire." The seventh book shows an even more conciliatory attitude than the others; the conception of the unity of the Church is still more sharply emphasized in it. (A. HARNACg.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The editio princepa was by J. Cocblieus,

Mains, 1549; a corrected ed. was by Baudouin, Paris,

1562, 1589; the edition upon which later editions were

founded was by Dupin, Paris, 1562, or Antwerp, 1569,

reproduced m MPL, xi.; the newest ed. is by C. Ziwsa,

in CSEL, xxvi., Vienna, 1893. Consult C. Ziwsa, Bei­

traps su Optatus Milevitanus, Eranoa Vindobonensia, pp.

168‑178, Vienna 1893; Ceillier, Auteurs aacris, v. 107­149• Harnack, Dogma, ii. 93, iii. 80, 223, v., passim; DOB, iv. 90‑03; KL,,ix. 932‑934.

OPTIMISM: Philosophically the theory that the universe is the best possible and existence is essentially good. The term is modern; yet as a mood and a disposition optimism is as old as hu­man life. As a distinct theory it was proposed about the same time by Lord Shaftesbury, Archbishop King, and Leibnitz. Shaftesbury first expounded it in his Inquiry concerning Virtue, written in 1692 and surreptitiously published in 1699; King in his De origins mali (1702); and Leibnitz in his Theo­dic6e (1710). It had occurred independently to Leibnitz; but before he published on the subject he had read what Shaftesbury and King had writ­ten. Pope's Essay on Man (1732‑34) advocated the doctrine in verse; Voltaire in Candide (1759) ridiculed it. According to Leibnitz " there was an infinity of possible ways of creating the world, ac­cording to the different designs which God might form, and each possible world depends upon con­ditions of certain principal designs or ends of God proper to itself." From this infinite number of pos­sible worlds God chose to bring into existence the present system of things. And since God is a being not only of infinite power but of infinite wisdom and goodness, under the law of sufficient reason the present world must be the best possible. The op­timism here presented rests upon an assumption concerning the nature of God and his purpose in the creation, and interprets particular experiences and events in the light of the world‑view. The theory of optimism has also been presented induct­ively, with the aim of showing that good or hap­piness preponderates over pain and evil in human life, and that the animal consciousness is far less susceptible to pain than has been commonly sup­posed. Moreover, experiences which, regarded separately, appear wholly evil, when brought into instrumental relations with ethical ends are seen to be indispensable to virtue or the good. Opti­mism has furnished a key to a difficult problem which haunted New England Theology (q.v.) from 1750 onwards, viz., the relation of sin to the divine good­ness and government, or the wisdom of God in the permission of sin. The general principle was that sin is a necessary means of the greatest good. Ac­cording to Joseph Bellamy (q.v.) sin was a means through which God's glory was manifested and the good of the universe promoted; a doctrine drawn from Leibnitz, grounded on the assumption of the divine nature alone (Works, Vol. ii., Boston, 1850). Samuel Hopkins (q.v.), reasoning from the same premises, taught that sin, even the most odious and abominable, was necessary for the glory of God and the good of the creature; and God can so order things that any number of men shall become sin­ful when it is most for his glory and the general good (Works, i. 140, 220, Boston, 1852). Stephen West (q.v.) maintained the desirability of sinners and moral evil existing, that God might exercise and manifest his mercy and also his hatred of sin (Moral Agency, p. 204, New Haven, 1772). Leon­ard Woods (q.v.) declared that in every instance in which sin occurred God preferred it to holiness.


N. W. Taylor (q.v.) denied that sin was the neces­

sary means to the greatest good, but held that this

world contained the greatest good possible to God

(Moral Government, ii. 276, New York, 1859).

L. F. Steams (q.v.) asserted that God intended to

permit a certain amount of sin in his world for the

sake of a greater good (Present Day Tf'teology, p.

244, New York, 1893). The ultimate questions thus

raised concerning sin and evil persist in other forms

and associated with other interests, as in a general

attitude toward life (Goeihe, Emerson, and Steven­

son), and in the implications of evolution (J. Le

Conte, Evolution and its Relation to Religious

Thought, New York, 1888), of the idealistic philoso­

phy (J. Royce, The World and the Individual, New

York, 1899‑1901), and of the Fatherhood of God

(G. A. Gordon, Immortality and the New Theodicy,

Boston, 1897). C. A. BECKWITH.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. H. Achterfoldt, Optimismus and Pes8imia­mua. Bonn, 1855; W. Gass, Optimismus and Pessimismus, Berlin, 1876; L. B. Hellenbach, Eine Philosophie des gesunden Mensehenverstandes, Vienna, 1876; F. Bowen, Modern Philosophy, New York, 1877; J. Duboe, Der Optimismus als Weltanschauung, Bonn, 1881; L. Stephen, Hist. of English Thought in the 18th Century, 2 vols., New York, 1881; G. Morandi, Ottimirmo a pessimiemo, Milan, 1891; H. Lorm, Der grundlose Optimismus, Dresden, 1897; G. H. Palmer, The Glory of the Imperfect, New York, 1898; H. Bole, La Philosophic de 1'homme heureux, Paris, 1899; the literature under PESsuusm and such works on the history of philosophy as those of J. E. Erdmann, London, 1894‑96, A. Weber, ib. 1896, and F. Ueberweg, Berlin, 1901‑03.

OPTION: The obtaining through the choice of the acquirer himself of a church‑living that has be. come vacant. Besides, in the chapters (in which, at least in Germany, in consequence of the strictly regulated manner of the canonicate, this right is ob­solete to‑day) there is found an option in the college

of cardinals. E. SEHLINQ.

OPUS OPERANTIS, OPUS OPERATU>II ("Work of the doer, work wrought "): Two phrases much employed in discussions on the sacraments and rep­resenting quite closely respectively the Protestant and the Roman Catholic views. The first phrase sums up concisely the belief that the effect of the sacrament depends upon the spiritual disposition of the participant. The second emphasizes the nec­essary and inherent grace which flows (one may say) automatically from sacramental administration (" from the thing done"). The first regards the sacraments as instruments which act as aids to the mind and enable it to make immediate approach to God and so to receive the grace flowing from the sacraments. The second makes of the sacraments immediate instruments through which God works and without which he does not work. The view of the Roman Catholic Church was authoritatively expressed in the Council of Trent (session VII., canons vi.‑vii.).

The conception of sacraments and the like work­ing ex opere operato is not confined to Christian the. ology. It is a part of Brahmanic and Hindu be­lief that, e.g., the sacrifice operates automatically, and that whatever is said or done by the officiant during the ceremony has inevitably its appropriate effect independent of the disposition or intention of the beneficiary (who's altogether passive) or even

of the celebrant, whose chance word or act, even, is irrevocable.


Dutch theologian; b, at Rotterdam Apr, 20, 1821;

d. at Osterbeek Aug. 22, 1892. Educated at the

high school at Leyden, he became professor of phi­

losophy at the University of Utrecht at the age of

twenty‑four. Jurisprudence was his specialty, but

he distinguished himself also in oriental and clas­

sical literature, art, and philosophy; but it is espe­

cially for his apologetics, reconciling the conflicting

relation of science with religion, that he is men­

tioned here. Coming to Leyden as a young enthu­

siast over the Reformed confession, he passed under

the influence of the heterodoxy of the Groningen

theology on the infallibility of the Scriptures, and

was soon cast into violent controversy, as indicated

by his Antwoord aan Isaac Da Costa, ter wederleg­

girtg van het "is: Rekenschap van. gevoetens (1843).

With the revival of apologetics, Opzoomer distin­

guished the actual from the ideal in Christianity;

for the former, he demanded historical proof and

attached himself to the Tiibingen School (q.v.); for

the latter he demanded none but rational grounds.

He heartily recommended the system and method

of K. Krause, and drew upon himself the charge

of arch‑heretic and pantheist. De leer van God bij

Schelling, Hegel, en Krause was an effort to estab­

lish the Christian faith on the basis of philosophy.

Soon he aroused greater antagonism by turning

from speculation to the experience, philosophy, and

inductive logic of John Stuart Mill as a method not

only for thought but also for ethics, because of the

certain results of natural science. The fruit of this

investigation resulted in De ttvijfel des aids, de weg­

vrijzer der tockomst (1850); De taeg der wetenachap

(Utrecht, 1851); Her wezert der kennis (Amsterdam,

1863); Wetenschap en WijabegeerEe (1857); Geschie­

denes der Wijsbegeerte (1860) and Ben nieutve kri­

tiek der tvijsbegeerEe (1871). He was accused of be­

ing a preacher of sensualism and of a coarse‑minded

morality (Her teeken des tijds, 1858); but unjustly,

because he gave empiricism a new application by

supplementing sensual perception as the only source

of natural science, with an independent subjective

spiritual perception. He endeavored to construct

a theory of the universe possessing scientific cer­

tainty, out of immediate experience and certain

laic, for the materials of which he distinguished

the sensual, esthetic, and moral sensations as mutu­

ually independent, to which he added a fourth,

namely, " the religious sensation " (De waar)tezd

en bare kenbronnzn,1859). Opzoomer's position now y gamed adherents; his lecture‑room became

theaged; and, by his profound thought, clear

presentation, and brilliant rhetoric, he became the

leader of the liberals and one of the founders of

modern theology in his own land. He also under­took to popularize philosophy among the laity (Cartesius, 1861), and also science (Natzturkennia en

Nahsxcrpoezie, 1858).

The fundamental presupposition of Opaoomer's

original religious philosophy was the verity of re­ligion and the impossibility to thought of an essen­tial contradiction between religion and science.


At first he asserted a monism in which he identified faith and reason. He presupposed a supersensual consciousness and, through an acute analysis of the same, thought to rise to a consciousness of the ab­solute. The existence of God, ethical freedom, consciousness of sin, and immortality, he evolved from the conception of infinite being. Anthro­pomorphism and miracles he rejected by resolving the antithesis of deism and pantheism, transcend­ence and immanence, the natural and the super­natural, in the realization that the finite is wholly conditioned upon the infinite. Ethics is thus only an emanation of religious faith (Het ueden der deugd, 1848; De tmucht der godadienet). However, with the revolution of his philosophical position, he dis­missed the identity of faith with science. Faith pronounced the dictum that God reigns; Science answered the question how he reigns. Religion was adaptable to all scientific theories, and the attacks of science were due to the adherence of religion to an antiquated hypothesis. The postulate of em­piricism was the law of causation, in scientific knowledge as well as historical reality, the appli­cation of which was imperative upon Biblical nar­rative. He excluded miracles from the spiritual as well as the material, and in the name of religion banished free will. In the expulsion of the unscien­tific from religion he saw the latter not only left unimpaired but he saw also the reconciliation of faith and science and the advent of another Refor­mation (De geedt der nieutoe richting, 1862; De goda­dienst, 1864). He invited an unlimited criticism in the Church. He presided over the first assembly of the Netherland Protestant Union organized against the conservative confessional reactionaries at the exclusion, in 1857, of religious instruction from the state schools. He dreamed of the Church of the future as based on piety alone and embracing all Christians. The most dangerous foe he recog­nized in skepticism, which he exposed as untenable and unreasonable, and further set forth how nearly philosophical religion borders on scientific certainty, if only the methods of science are employed, seeing that science for itself dares to conclude upon the reality of existence from no other source than per­ception. Mathematics and poetry he regarded as worthy elements of both the scientific and relig­ious systems. A material science he deplored, and in a one‑sided scientific .evolution he feared pessi­mistic gloom and menace to culture. Only the harmonious union of science and religion would satisfy all the demands of life, and therefore to him philosophy remained the sovereign science which was able to reconcile man with himself.


BIHLIOGRAPHT: J. P. Trottet, in Revue ehrEtianne, 1890, pp.

340 eqq ; J. H. Seholten, Twee brsefen over hot material­iame, Amsterdam, 1880; idem, Hat krwwh Standpunkt San C. W. Opaoomer, ib. 1880; F. A. van Harteen. Hot empiricisme van Mr. C. W. Opsomner, zait‑Bommel, 1885; idem, Inteidinp tot de wijsbegeerte, Haarlem, 1885; A. Pierson, in De Oils, Mar., 1893; Van der Wyck, in Zeitachrift Jar Philosophic and phazosophiache xri<ik, evi (1895),1‑19.

ORANGE, SYNODS OF: Two synods held at Orange in the south of France. The first took place on Nov. 8, 441, under the presidency of Hilary of

Arles (q.v.), Eucherius of Lyons also being present. Seventeen bishops attended the meeting. Thirty canons were passed, dealing with unction, the Per­mission of penance, the right of asylum; recom­mending caution to bishops in the ordination of foreign clergy, the consecration of churches out­side of their own jurisdictions, and other matters; imposing limitations on the administration of eccle­siastical rites to those who were in any way defect­ive, either in body or mind; and emphasizing the duty of celibacy for those belonging to the clerical state, especially deacons and widows, with express reference to canon viii. of the synod of Turin (401). The exact interpretation of some of them (ii., iii., xvu.) is doubtful. Canon iv. is in conflict with a decretal of Pope Shicius; and ii. and xviii. betray an inclination to resist the introduction of Roman customs. These canons were confirmed at Arles about 443 (see ARLES, SYNODS OF). On July 3, 529, another synod took place at Orange, which in the mean time had passed under Burgundian and then Ostrogothic rule. This meeting, for which occasion was given by the consecration of a church built by the governor of Gallia Narbonensis, was attended by fourteen bishops under the presidency of Cams rius of Arles. Its decrees, which have a certain importance in the history of Augustinianism, re­ceived the papal sanction. (E. HENNECHE.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Canons of the Second Council of Orange. A.D. 818, London, 1882; Hefele, Conailienpeachichte, ii. 291‑295, 724 sqq., Eng. transl., iii. 159‑184, iv. 152 sqq.; J. Sirmond, Concilia antiqua Galtim, i. 70 eqq., 215 sqq., Paris, 1829.


ORATORIO. See SACRED MUSIC, 11., 2, if 5, 6.

ORATORY: Name of a place of prayer. When, in the early Church, parochial churches were estab­lished, celebration of the sacraments and public worship, with certain exceptions, came to be con­fined to these; and sanctuaries in connection with private homes and corporate institutions, which were frequently memorials and martyries, were limited to private prayer and were called oratories. " People's oratory " was also a name .applied to the

nave of a church. Later the term chapel came into use and applies to adjunct sanctuaries of private houses, court‑houses, colleges, monasteries, or churches.

BIRIaoaRAPHT: Bingham, Oripinea, VIII., v. 2; H. D. M.

Spenoe, White Robe o) Churches, p. 2, New York, 1900.

ORATORY OF THE DIVINE LOVE: (Orato­rium divini amoria) : The name of a circle of re­formers at Rome in the Sixteenth century. Among analogies to Protestantism in Italy, Ranke (Popes, i. 101 sqq.) accords first place to this institution. It was an attempt to effect a reform within the Ro‑

man Catholic Church, but without such a separa­tion as Luther brought on. Only so far does the analogy obtain as that pious men at Rome (about

1520), such as Giberti (q.v.) , Sadoleto, Giovanni Pietro Ca,raffa (see PAUL IV., Pope), and others, availed themselves of such means as the Church afforded for the purification of church life; namely, sedulous participation in the divine office and the


sacrament, pilgrimages, fasting, almsgiving, and the like. But they do not strike to the heart of the Ref­ormation movement, and issue with little result of a permanent character. The participants remained loyal members of the Roman Catholic Church. They assembled, some fifty or sixty in number, at Trastevere, in the Church of St. Dorothea. A similar society existed at Verona, in the circle of Bishop Giberti. The Roman Oratory appears to have reached its termination during the assault and plundering of the city, in 1527; but an Archicon­frate»xitas Divini Amoria, transferred from St. Dorothea to St. Andrew, in 1750, is yet in existence. The significance of the Oratory rests not upon its direct results, which were slight, but rather on the fact that the experience of one of its individual members, Gwtano of Thiene, furnished the vital impulse for‑ the founding of a separate order (see


BISITOoHAPHT: The chief ‑source is A. Caracciolo, Vita

Pauli IV., p 182, Cologne, 1812. Consult further: Miss

Tucker, in the English Hietpracad Review, xviii. 6, pp. 27,

66; K. Benrath, Bernard Ochino, p. 58, Brunswick, 1892.



Definition and Character (§ 1). The Fire Test (5 2). Water (§ 3). Other Ordeals (¢ 4). Among Primitive Peoples (§ 5). In Non‑Christian Codes (§ 6). In the Old Testament ($ 7). In Christianity (1 8). Official Ecclesiastical Position (1 9).

The ordeal is a form of trial to determine guilt or

innocence, in which trial superhuman intelligence

is supposed to control the operation and to guide

to right results. The word is Anglo‑Saxon (ordel

or ordal, " judgment "), and it occurs in cognate

form in Old Saxon, Old Friesic, Dutch,

:. Defini‑ Old High German; Germ. Urtheil; the

tion and phrase used for the idea in German

Character. well brings out its distinctive charac­

ter‑‑Goes‑UrtW, " judgment of

God." The essence of the ordeal is an appeal to

deity to give a decision in a doubtful case; it as­

sumes that God will bring innocence to light, if

need be even by a miracle. It arose in an evident

desire to do justice, and in a recognition of the

fallibility of human knowledge and discernment.

These same human faculties are, of course, the cause

of the prevalence and continuance of what science

shows to have been a superstition. It is to be noted

that the fatal consequetlces which so often attended

the test were not derived from a punitive intent,

since punishment was never the essential element.

The process had its roots in the animistic stage of

religious development, in which the belief was held

that the innumerable spirits thought to exist were

interested in and affected the lot of human beings.

It persists in the barbaric stage, often leaving only

relies in a higher stratum of practise, but it fre.

quently recurs as a relic in advanced civilizations.

It has affiliations with magic, since many of the

means used to forecast or influence the future were

employed in the ordeal. The Oath (q.v.) common in

judicial processes in Christian lands is a distinct relic of the ordeal; its essential character being the ap­peal to deity either symbolically by the raising of the hand or the kissing of the Book or verbally in the formula " So help me, Godl " The principal ordeals employ fire, water, earth, or a combination of these substances or forces with others, and also employ many other means which have a symbolic or magical force.

In the case of fire, very persistent is the method of walking with bared feet over burning coals, or between fires fiercely burning. Not infrequent is the putting of the hand into the fire, or the leaping into or through the flames. But much more usual is the use of hot iron, very frequently

s. The in the shape of plowshares (seven or

Fire Test. nine or ten or twelve‑sacred numbers)

heated to redness, the subject either

walking blindfold‑when chance directs the issue

‑or treading on each one, the decision then de­

pending upon the degree of injury inflicted. Fully

as common is the carrying in the hand (sometimes

after the latter has passed through a ceremonial

which may or may not lessen the susceptibility to

damage by heat) of a heated iron, sometimes of

nondescript shape, or it might be a plowshare,

or a ball of fixed or of undetermined weight, a

stated distance and either casting it down or placing

it in a definite spot or receptacle. In rare cases the

iron was applied to the tongue. After carrying the

iron, generally the hands were bandaged and sealed

by the officials conducting the ordeal, and the band­

ages were removed on the third or a later day and

an inspection of the injuries made. The extent, or

presence or absence, of injury determined the guilt

or innocence of the suspects. According to Indian,

Norse, and Christian legend, sacred relics were sub­

jected to the test by fire and came out unharmed,

thus establishing their genuineness. It is an in­

teresting fact that in Christendom the abbeys were

often the guardians of the iron used, which had often

received episcopal benediction. Altogether unusual

was the test by molten metal which appears only

in Zoroastrian circles (see below).

The tests by water were exceedingly numerous and diverse, this substance naturally lending itself to a variety of forms of use. Thus it was employed cold, after invocation or imprecation was pro­nounced over it by the religious or judicial official; it was given pure as a potion, the im‑

3. Water. precation being supposed to bring evil

on the recipient in case of guilt; or it

was mixed with some substance innocuous in itself

but supposed to work evil in the case of guilt (so in

the Hebrew water of jealousy; see below), just as

when the water was drunk pure as above; or a

poison was added, the idea then being that super­

human powers would protect the innocezt from

harm. Or the suspect was lowered or thrown into

a lake or river, the underlying assumption being

that water as a pure and purifying element rejects

those whom guilt has rendered impure; sometimes

the principle of the counterbalance was employed,

the suspect being enclosed (bound) in one sack and

a stone in another, the two being tied together and

thrown into the water; if the man floated, he was


innocent. By this same test the legitimacy of chil­dren was determined by the Celts and Teutons, those which floated being owned as legitimate. In India self‑immersion is practised while an arrow is shot and retrieved‑a mere test of ability to hold the breath. A legendary form attributes to cold water the power to scald the guilty who dares the test. Far more common was the use of hot water, taking its place with the use of the plowshare and ball described above. The usual method was to deposit some object‑a stone, ring, piece of metal, or the like‑in a caldron of water the ebullition of which kept the object in motion; the suspect was then obliged to plunge his hand and arm into the water and produce the object. In the case of the Ainus the decision rests upon the degree of injury received. In less primitive circumstances the hand is bandaged and sealed and judgment is rendered as in the case of the fire ordeals above. This test is preceded by exorcism or adjuration of the element, the religious conduct of the test being the invariable accompaniment. In India the Brahmins officiate, in Africa the ju‑ju man, in Christendom the bishop, abbot, or priest. In India and elsewhere substi­tutes for hot water are employed, as hot oil or melted butter.

While fire and water, possibly, as the two ele­ments universally employed in ceremonial purifi­cation, are most used, other substances and meth­ods are common. (1) Earth is used, as in India, where a clod is taken from a furrow and put in the subject's mouth, after which he swears

4. Other to his innocence; in the Hebrew rit‑

Ordeals. ual earth or dust is taken from the

floor of the tabernacle; in Africa soil

is taken from a place supposed to be haunted by

spirits; in Australia, in case of a disputed title to

land, earth is taken from the plot under discussion.

(2) The balance is employed in India; the suspect

is first accurately weighed; after an interval he

again sits in the scales, after the adjuration: " Thou,

O Balance, art the mansion of truth; thou wast

anciently contrived by deities: declare the truth,

therefore, O giver of success, and clear me from all

suspicion. If I am guilty, O venerable as my own

mother, then, sink me down; but if innocent, raise

me aloft " (cited by H. C. Lea, Superstition and

Force, p. 295, Philadelphia, 1878). If he rises in the

scales, he is pronounced innocent. In Christianity

this form of ordeal was employed in witch trials, the

Bible being used as the counterbalance in England,

Holland, Hungary, and other countries. (3) As

noted above, in the water ordeal poison is sometimes

mixed with the water. Poison is also employed alone,

the particular substance varying with the environ­

ment, a miracle being worked, it is supposed, to de­

clare innocence. This is especially common in Africa,

particularly in cases of witchcraft, and there the

poison bean is the ordinary means, this being re­

sponsible for probably thousands of deaths yearly.

(4) Quite common is what among Anglo‑Saxons was

called the corsnaed. The people named took a small

piece of bread or cheese consecrated by the usual

ceremonies and administered it to the suspect, the

guilty being supposed unable to swallow it. In

India this took the form of a kind of rice conse‑

crated by invocations to deities, while among the Dravidian tribes salt was used in the same way. It was almost inevitable that in Christianity this should pass over into the use of the host, and there was accompanied by a prayer to God or Christ so to constrict the throat of the guilty, that he should be unable to swallow it. That auto‑suggestion made this effective is certain beyond a doubt. Hil­debrand employed this against Henry IV., who re­fused the test. (5) The use of religious symbols was common, as when in Africa a fetish is taken in the hand and the oath of expurgation taken. Like reasoning caused in Christianity the use of the cross. Here the ordeal might be singular or dual or plural, suspect, or complainant and defend­ant, or these and their witnesses standing with arms outstretched before the cross, the first to lower his arms being adjudged to have lost his cause. Among the Irish the ordeal of the cross and salt are com­bined in the ordeal to which suspected fairy change­lings are subjected, the use of these compelling the return of the abstracted infant. (6) The lot was employed, this being regarded as especially effect­ive in giving scope to the deity's power to make innocence manifest. (7) In Christian nations from the thirteenth century use has been made of the bier‑right. A suspected murderer is brought into the presence of the corpse of a murdered person and made to touch it, the belief being that on con­tact with the guilty person the corpse would bleed afresh. In the late Middle Ages this form was em­ployed especially against Jews who were accused of killing Christian girls. (8) The oatb, either actual or implicit, is in all the preceding usually essential, the person undergoing the ordeal asseverating his innocence in solemn form. In modern Christian lands it is the one ordeal in common use, and is the survival of the compurgatorial ordeal. It is an ap­peal to deity in direct form, and among backward peoples it is still a superstition that perjury will re­sult in an immediate or early visitation of God in physical form. While judicial investigations tend in the mass to run in grooves, ingenuity and unique­ness of personality or singularity of circumstance have ever influenced to expedients not " orthodox " or usual. These can not here be catalogued.

The field of the ordeal is the world. In Africa this institution blooms. Among the Barotse the hot‑water ordeal is used to detect sorcerers, and the peeling of the skin shows guilt. The vicarious test is used‑to fowls are given the poison

g. Among bean, and the death of the fowl proves Primitive the offense (L. Decle, Three Years in peoples. Savage Africa, p. 76, London, 1898), or the lizard fetish is whipped, and the thief or wizard confesses to avoid the anger of the fetish. Or the poison bean is swallowed by the in­dividual accused, and death reveals guilt. Or a feather is plucked from the under side of a fowl's wing and thrust through the suspect's tongue; if the feather bends, innocense is proved (M. H. Kings­ley, West African Studies, pp. 160‑161, 490, Lon­don, 1899). In Madagascar a harmless liquor is drunk and proves poisonous in case of guilt (J. S. C. Dumont d'Urville, Voyage pittoresque autour du monde, i. 181; cf. C. Keller, Madagascar, Mauri.‑


Смотреть полностью

Скачать документ

Похожие документы:

  1. Three hundred years of african-american writing edited and with an introduction by deiidre jviullane anchor books a division of random house inc new york first anchor books edition october 1993

    ... shout; and in a moment were gone, flying, like a flock of crows, over the field, over the fence, and over ... in 1909 Du Bois joined a group of about fifty other prominent black and ... of their churches, and lost support of their bishops and fellow ministers. ...
  2. The Culture of Critique An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements

    ... their downfall, the Jews were always a thorn in the side of the craftsmen and peasants who were ... : The Minister and Cabinet did not trust the average Canadian to respond in ...
  3. A discussion on the beet means of opposing Luther

    ... their original contributions in case of withdrawal, and the records of these contributions were burned. The site of ... of churches. All ministers and churches are equal, no one having any authority over ...
  4. Ways of Russian Theology Fr George Flofovsky

    ... and deposed those bishops in compliance, announcing its actions in the name and ... and in all places he was like the shadow of the apple tree.” Shadow and sign were ... Over Procurator of the Synod and later minister ... vols:, Sergiev Posad, 1909-1912). 59. “ ...
  5. Arts and culture a n introduction to the h umanities

    ... In 1500, there were over two hundred printing presses in Europe; soon there were seven in ... minister of state, and other great mandarins of the court, in ... of a side projection where the chickens had huddled and there were plows and a harrow piled up in ...

Другие похожие документы..