Главная > Документ


German Protestant; b. at Sophieahof, near Kiel, Germany, Sept. 26, 1847. He was educated at the universities of Erlangen, Berlin, Leipeic (Ph.D., 1870), and Kiel from 1866 to 1872, and was privat­dooeat at Leipsic in 1874 76, when he accepted s call to the University of Strasburg as associate professor of theology. Four years later he mss promoted to full professor, but is the following year meat to Marburg as professor of Old Testament exegesis. He remained at Marburg, where he



was rector in 1893 94, until 1900, when he went to Berlin as professor of Old Testament exegesis, a chair which he still holds. In theology he is an adherent of the historical school of investigation, and seeks to elucidate the religion of the Old Testa­ment by other Semitic faiths. He has written: Translatitmis trntiquw arabicte dt'(rri Jobi qua: suPer­surtt nustc primum edits (Leipsie, 1870); Eulogies and Alvar, sin Abschniti spaniseher Kirehenge­schichte aus tier Ze6t der Maurenherrschaft (1872); Jtlhve et Moloch, sine de rtrtiane inter ileum Israeli­tarum et Moloehum intercedente (1874); Studien zur semitischen Religitmsgeschichte (2 vole., 1876­1878); Die Geschichte ties alltestamentlichen Priester­thums utttersucht (1889); August Dillmtmn (1895); Eirtleitung in die Bueher ilea Allen Testaments (1901); and Eamun Asklepios (Giessen, 1906).

BAU'ER, BRUNO: A modern Biblical critic, of the most extreme radicalism; b. at Eisenberg (35 m. s. of Halls), in the duchy of Altenburg, Sept. 8, 1809; d. at Rixdorf, near Berlin, Apr. 15, 1882. He was educated in Berlin precisely in Hegel's most brilliant period. He took his place at first in the conservative wing of the Hegelian school, of which his teacher Marheineke was the leader, and reviewed the Leben Jesu of David Friedrich Strauss, who had been his fellow student, unfavor­ably, accusing Strauss of "; entire ignorance of what criticism means."; He undertook also to defend Marheineke's position by issuing (1836 38) the Zcitschrift fur sPeku7atiroe Theologie. In 1838 he published the Kritik tier Geschichte der Off ert­barung (2 vole., Berlin). A year later Altenstein, minister of public worship and instruction, ap­pointed him to a position is the University of Bonn, and his prospects seemed promising. But he was already in a fair way to break with his past, as shortly appeared in his Krilik der evangelischen Gesehichte des Johannes (Bremen, 1840) and Kritik der evtrngetischen Geschichte der Syno;Otiker (3 vole., Leip­aie,1841), which went beyond Strauss, and, adopting the theory of Wilke that Mark is the original gos­pel, derived the whole story, not, with Strauss, from the imagination of the primitive Christian community, but from that of a single mind. This extreme carrying out of Hegelian principles nat­urally aroused wide spread excitement. Eichhorn, who had succeeded Altenstein as minister, put the question to the Prussian universities whether the holder of such views could be allowed to teach. The answers were not unanimous; but Bauer injured his own cause by a still more amazing and reckless onslaught on traditional theology (Theologiache Schamlosigkeiten, in the flallische Jti)trbucher fur deutsche Wissenschaft, Nov., 1841), and was de­prived of his academic post in March, 1842. His literary activity continued incessant. Living on his small estate at Rixdorf, he poured forth a succession of volumes on the history of the eight­eenth and nineteenth centuries between 1843 and 1849. In 1850 he came back to his old field, and in the neat three years had renewed his attack on the gospels and included the Acts and the Pauline epistles, considering even the four admitted by the Tilbingen school as second century Western prod 

ucts. In the place of Christ and Paul, to him Philo, Seneca, and the Gnostics appeared the real creative forces in the evolution of Christian concep­tions. He continued his attempts to prove the connection between Greco Roman philosophy and Christianity in Christus and die Casaren (Berlin, 1877). Here he places the genesis of the Christian religion practically as late as the reign of Marcus Aurelius, sad the original gospel in that of Hadrian, after which "; clever men "; were busy for some forty years in the composition of the Pauline epistles. Only the framework of the new religion was Jewish; its spirit came from further west; Christianity is really "; Stoicism becoming dominant in a Jewish metamorphosis."; Bauer left practically no fol­lowers in Germany for such remarkable theories. His fantastic hypercriticism found a home for a time in Holland with Allard Pierson, Naber, and Loman; and still later it made some attempts to gain a foothold in Switzerland with Steck's assault upon Galatians. (J. HAU88LErrEx.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Holtamann, in Protutantiachs Kirdunzeit­unp, 1882, pp. b40 545; F. C. Baur, Rirehengeachichte ilea neunsehnten Jahrhunderta, Leipsie, 1882; O. PBeiderer, Die Entwiddung der proteatantiachen TheoTopit in Deutachiand sere Karat, pp. 295 297, Freiburg, 1891. On the teaching of Bauer and the Opposition it around consult E. Bauer, Bruno Bauer and seine Gegrur, Berlin, 1842; O. F. Gruppe, Bruno Bauer and die akademiache Lehr/rsihsit, ib. 1842.

BAUER, WALTER FELIX: German Protestant; b. at Kiinigsberg Aug. 8, 1877. From 1895 to 1900 he studied at the universities of Marburg, Berlin, and Strasburg, and since 1903 has been privat docent for church history at the University of Marburg. He has written Mundige and Unmiin­dige bei dem A;OOatel Paulus (Marburg, 1902) and Der Aloostolos der Syrer in der Zeit von der Mitts des roierten JttJtrhunderta bis zur Spaltung der syri,­schen Kirche (Giessen, 1903).

BAUM, baum, HENRY MASON: Protestant Episcopalian; b. at East Schuyler, N. Y., Feb. 24, 1848. He was educated at the Hudson River Institute, Claverack, N. Y., but did not attend a college. He received his theological training at De Lancet' Divinity School, Geneva, N. Y., and was ordained to the priesthood in 1870. He was successively rector of St. Peter's Church, East Bloomfield, N. Y. (I870 71), missionary to Allen's Hill, Victor, Lima, and Honeoye Falls, N. Y. (1871­1872), rector of St. Matthew's Church, Laramie City, Wyo. (1872 73), in charge of St. James's Church, Paulaborough, N. J. (1873 74), rector of St. Mat­thew's Church, Lambertville, N. J. (187rr76), and rector of Trinity Church, Easton, Pa. (1876 80). From 1880 to 1892 he was editor of The Church Review, and in 1901 founded the Records of the Past, which he edited until 1905. He has taken a keen interest in the preservation of the antiquities of the United States, and was the author of the act passed by the Senate in 1904 for the protection of these archeological remains. In that year he also founded the Institute of Historical Research at Washington, and has since been its president. In theology he is a firm believer in the historical accuracy of the Bible. He has written Rights arid Duties of Rectors, Church Wardens, arid Vestrymert ire



the American Church (Philadelphia, 1879) and The Law o f the Church in the United States (New York, 1886).

BAUM, JOHANN WILHELM: Protestant Ger­man theologian; b. at Flonheim (17 m. s.s.w. of Mainz) Dec. 7, 1809; d. at Strasburg Nov. 28, 1878. When he was thirteen years of age, he was sent to Strasburg to the house of his uncle, where he prepared himself for the ministry. Havingcom­pleted his studies, he was made teacher at, the theo­logical seminary at Strasburg in 1835. his posi­tion he resigned in 1844 and accepted the position of vicar of St. Thomas's in that city, whose first preacher he became in 1847. At the close of the Franco Prussian war, the German government appointed him professor in the University of Stras­burg. He belonged to the liberal Protestant party of his country, and made himself known by his writings on the history of the Reformation, as well as that of his own time, including Franz Lambent von Avignon (Strasburg and Paris, 1840); Theodor Beza nach handschriftlichen Quellen darge­stellt (2 vole., Leipaic, 1843 45); Johann Georg Stuber, den Vorganger Oberlins im Steinthale and VorkBmpfer einer neuen Zeit in Strassburg (Stras­burg, 1846); Die Memoiren d'Aubigne's des Huge­notten von ahem Schrott and Tforn (Leipsic, 1854); Capito and Butzer, Strassburgs Reformatoren (Elber­feld, 1860), being the third part of Leben and ausgewdhlte SchrifRen den VBter and Begriinder den reformirten Kirche. Besides these works written in German,_ he published in French Lea tglisco rEformees de rance soul la, croix (Strasburg, 1869); Les MEmoires de P. Carriers lit Corteia (Strasburg, 1871); Le Proeea de Baudichon de la. Maisori Neuve (Geneva, 1873). For a number of years Baum assisted his colleagues Reuss and Cunitz in the edition of Calvin's works published in the Corpus reformatorum.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zur Erinnerunp an J. W. Baum, Roden,. Strasburg, 1878; M. Baum, J. W. Baum, sin proteatanlisches Clmakterbild aua den Blows, Bremen, 1880.


gian and active promoter of free church life;

b. at Haseldorf, near Hamburg, Mar. 25, 1812;

d. at Rostock July 21, 1889. He was educated at

Altona, Kiel, and Berlin, becoming in the last Iialned

place an outspoken adherent of Hengstenberg.

But the study of Dorner during a period of seven

years (18396) spent at Kiel as a teacher con­

vinced him that the traditional orthodox view

of the person of Christ was inadequate to explain

the mystery of redemption; be passed from Heng­

stenberg to Schleiermaoher, with his principle that

Christianity is not a doctrine but a life, and then to

Hofmann, in whose Weissagung and Erfiillung

he saw a theology that could lead him further on

his road. In his treatise Lzturgie and Predigt

(Kiel, 1843) he lays down his programme, to which

as an old man he was still proud of having adhered.

Here he classes as stumbling blocks in the Church's

way a variety of ancient institutions, laws, and

customs, viz.: the misleading notion of a ";•Chris­

tian State";; the use of compulsion in the Church

(as in the case of baptism); the power of civil


rulers within the Church, in allowing which the

Reformers had brought back a Byzantine system;

the diversity of teaching among Protestants; and

the failure to recognize the menace of the Roman

errors. About the same time (1843 44) appeared

his commentary on the Pentateuch, to which

Delitzsch appealed when in 1850 he recommended

his friend to succeed him in the Rostock professor­

ship, but which none the less he sharply criticized

in some points. In the eventful years 1846 50

he was pastor of St. Michael's church at Sleswick,

and was one of the leaders of the clergy of Sleswick­

Holstein in their struggle for the German right

to the duchies. After the battle of Idstedt, he

was obliged to escape from Sleswick with his

family to Holstein, where his call to Rostock found

him. Here he was expected to take part in 'the

upbuilding of the Church of the duchy, which was

under Kliefoth's leadership; but two men more

diametrically opposed in their whole way of looking

at things could scarcely have been found. Baum­

garten frankly expressed his own view of the earliest

history of the Church in his Apostelgeschichte (2

viols., Halls, 1852), and of its modern needs in his

Nachtgesichte Sacharjas (Brunswick, 1854). It

was not difficult to make a collection of heretical

propositions from the writings of a man who cared

so little to express himself in time honored formulas,

and who was wrestling with such modern problems;

and the attempt was soon made. The Grand Duke

dismissed him from the theological commission in

1856; the consistory examined his works, it must

be admitted without strict adherence to constitu­

tional rules or to the principles of fairness, found

a whole series of departures from the received

doctrine, and deprived him of his position. He

declined au invitation to go to India as a missionary,

preferring to remain and carry on the struggle for

a complete reconstruction of the Evangelical Church

in Germany. With this aim he was for thirteen

years a zealous member of the Protestant Union

from 1863 to 1876, but left it when it showed

intolerance in the Heidelberg case. His life grew

more and more lonely, though he could always count

on a few faithful friends, like Studt, Ziegler, and

Pestalozzi. He was a member of the Reichstag

from 1874 to 1881, in which he showed himself a

determined opponent of Stocker and of the Jesuits,

and stood for his principles of religious liberty

and complete separation of Church and State.

He was a man of great natural endowment, fitted

for useful constructive work in theology, if the un­

fortunate circumstances in his career had not forced

him to expend his energy in the combat to which

most of his numerous later writings have reference.


BIBLIOGRAPHY  His autobiography was edited and pub­lished posthumously by K. H. 6tudt, 2 vole., Kiel, 1891.

BAUMGARTEN, OTTO: German Protestant; b. at Munich Jan. 29, 1858. He was educated at the universities of Strasburg, Gottingen, Zurich, and Heidelberg, and from 1882 to 1887 was pastor at Baden Baden and Waldkirch, while from 1888 to 1890 he was chaplain to the orphan asylum at Berlin Rummeleburg. In 1890 he became privet



docent at the University of Berlin, and in the same

year was called to Jena as associate professor of

practical theology, where he remained until 1894,

when he went to Kiel as full professor of the same

subject. He is also university preacher and chap­

lain of the academic sanitarium at the same institu­

tion of learning. He has written: Yolksschule and

Kirche (Leipsie, 1890); Der Seedsorger unserer

Tags (1891); Predigten aus der Gegenwart (Tii­

bingen (1902); Neue Bahnen : Der Religions Unter­

richt vom Standpunkte der modernen Theologie aus

(1903); Predigt Probleme, HauPtfragen der moder­

nen Evangeliuma Verkiindigungen (1903); and Die

Yoraussetzungslosigkeit der protestantischen Theo­

logic (Kiel, 1903).


theologian; b. at Wollxnirsti3dt (8 m. n. of Magde­

burg), Saxony, Mar. 14, 1706; d. at Halls July

4, 1757. He studied at the Halls Orphan Asylum,

of which his father had been first inspector, and

at the University of Halls. He became inspector

of the Halls Latin School in 1726, assistant preacher

to the younger G. A. Franks in 1728, associate on

the theological faculty in 1730, and ordinary pro­

fessor in 1743. He was a good teacher and his

lectures were usually attended by from 300 to 400

hearers. His learning was vast and he was an

industrious writer, publishing voluminous works

on exegesis, hermeneutics, morals, dogmatics, and

history, such as Auszug der Kirchengeschichte (4

vole., Halls, 1743 62); Evangelisehe Glaubenslehre

(3 vole., 1759 60); Geschichte der Religionsparteaen

(1760); Noehricht von merkwurdigen Biichern (12

vole., 1752 57); and the first sixteen volumes in

the Allgemeine Welthistarie (1744 sqq.). By adopt­

ing the formal scheme of the philosophy of Wolff

and applying it to the theological ideas in which

he was educated, Baumgarten came to form a

transition from the Pietism of Spener and Francke

to the modern rationalism. His enthusiastic dis­

ciple, J. S. Semler, who was called from Altdorf

to Halls on his recommendation, edited many of

his works and wrote his biography (Halls, 1758).

(F. B089E.)


RICH OTTO: German theologian; b. at Merseburg

(56 m. s.s.e. of Magdeburg), Prussian Saxony,

July 31, 1788; d. at Jena May 31, 1843. He studied

theology and philology at Leipaic and became i

university preacher there in 1810; in 1812 extraor­

dinary professor of theology at Jena, ordinary

professor, 1817. He gave lectures on all branches

of so called theoretic theology except church his­

tory, especially New Testament exegesis, Biblical

theology, dogmatics, ethics, and history of doctrine.

Gentle and sympathetic, and shrinking from

theological strife, he was misunderstood in his time.

His exegesis was painstaking, free from prejudice,

and acute; as historian of dogma he understood

the origin and development of religious ideas and

doctrines as few others have done; and as system­

atic theologian he was profound and truly evangel­

ical. His principal works were: Einleitung in das

Stadium der Dogmatik (Leipeie, 1820); Lehrbuch

der christlichen Dogmengeschichte (Jena, 1832);

Compendium der christlichen DogmengeschichEe (Leip­

sic, 1840), completed by K. A. Hale (1846); Theolo­

gische Auslegung der johanneiachen Schri ften (2 vole.,

Jena, 1843 45). (F. Bosar.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. C. A. Eichatildt, Memoria L. F. O. Baum 

partanii Crueaii, Jena, 1843; K. A. Haw's preface to his completion of the Kompendium der Dogmanpeachichk, Leipeia, 1846; ADB, ii, 181 aqq.



I. The Period of the History of Dogma. Baur's Early Life sad Activity (§ 1). Baur's Relation to 9chleiermacher and Hegel (§ 2). II. The Period of Biblical Criticism. Hiatorico Critical Study of the New Testament (§ 1). Applied to the Writings of Paul (§ 2). The Fundamental Assumption of the School (¢ 3). Applied to the Gospels U 4). Developed by Schwegler (§ b). III. The Period of Church History. Political Complications (¢ 1). Baur's Works on Church History (§ 2). His Theories and Conclusions (¢ 3). Their Weakness and Decline (¢ 4).

The treatment of both Ferdinand Christian Baur and the Later Tiibingen School in the same article is justified by the fact that the period of distinctive theological and philosophical views which characterized the school in its palmy days really ceased with the death of its founder, or at least lost the former local identification. Con­sidering the Tiibingen School in this strictly limited sense, its history, together with that of Baur him­self, may be divided into three periods that of preparation, or of the history of dogma, before 1835; that of prosperity, or of Biblical criticism, 1835­1848; and that of disintegration, or of church his­tory, after the latter date 

I. The Period of the History of Dogma: Baur was born at Schmiden, near Cannstatt (4 m. n.e. of Stuttgart), June 21, 1792; he died at T(ibingen Dec. 2, 1860. He was the son of a Wurttemberg pastor and was educated first at Blaubeuren and then (1809 14) at Tiibingen. Here, besides fol­lowing the usual thorough course in philology, he was strongly attracted by the study of philosophy. Fichte and Schelling were then at the height of their influence; but that it did not draw the young student away from the standpoint of the older Tiibingen School (q.v.), in which he had been brought up, may be seen from his first published writing, a review of Kaiser's Bibliache Theologie in 1817, which condemned rationalistic

r. Baur's caprice in the treatment of the Early Life Old Testament. After a short em 

end Ac  ployment as tutor in the Tiibingen tivity. seminary during the same year, he was named professor in the lower seminary which had grown out of his old school at Blaubeuren. The nine years of his stay here were active and happy ones. Though his work was mainly philological and historical, he showed his interest in the philosophical and theological movements of the time. The doctrines of Schleiermacher received his attention, and found an echo in his three volume work Symbolik and Mythologic (Stutt­gart, 1824 25). In this book, remarkable for its time, he indicated his future course in the phrase,


« Without philosophy, history seems to me dumb and dead."; The attention it attracted won Baur a place in the theological faculty of TUbingen on its reorganization (1826) after the death of his old teacher Bengal. His impressive and inspiring personality at once drew the young men to him, and his influence in tho faculty was contested only by Dr. Steudel, the solo survivor of the old school body.

The fact that in the course of his further intel­lectual development Baur gradually came into conflict with the theology of Schleier 

s. Baut's masher may be partly explained by

Relation to the difference in the mental conatitu 

$chleier  tions of the two men. There was

masher and no trace in Baur's method of the fusion Hegel. of sentiment and reason which char­acterized the other; only the intel­lectual aide was allowed to be heard. His strong point was his faculty of conceiving historical phenomena objectively, amid the sur­roundings and from the standpoint of  their age. His relation to the philosophy of Hegel is somewhat difficult to determine exactly; but it may be safely asserted that his fundamental views on the essence of religion and the course of history were taken from the Hegelian system. The transi­tion from Schleiermacher to Hegel was a gradual process which took place between 1826 and 1835, in the nine years which have been called the period of preparation. It is probable that at first Baur was unconscious of its extent, and it was sot until he applied the Hegelian principles to the canon that they brought him into sharp conflict with traditional orthodoxy. His Symbodik was logically followed by his works on Manicheaniam and Gnosticism (Tubingen, 1831 and 1832) phe­nomena lying on the border between theology and philosophy, between Christianity and paganism. In his tractate on the opposition between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, in answer to Mishler (Ttibingen, 1834), Hegelian terminology begins to appear distinctly, though the foundation still rests on Schlefermacher. The influence of the Hegelian system on Baur was a very fructi' Ang one. No department of history had suffered more from the leveling tendency of rationalism than the history of dogma. Since Hegel had taught the application of the iron rote of development to the phenomena of the intellectual life ass well as to other phenomena, he pointed the way to a profounder understanding of the beliefs which appeared frequently so hap­hazard and so arbitrary, to a knowledge of laws which prevailed over individual will. Thus, when Baur went on from the philosophy of religion to Christian dogma, and in that to the moat important parts (the Atonement, Tttbingen, 1838, the Trinity and the Incarnation, 1841 43), he became a pioneer of the history of dogma in the modern sense. Even though the Hegelian categories proved a bed of Pro­crustes for Christian dogmas, and though the under­standing of these suffered from the defects of the Hegelian conception of religion, the impulse had none the less been given to a profounder study. More recent historians of dogma have felt them­selves entitled to correct Baur's views, as set forth

in the above mentioned works, in almost every point; but these views had won him, by the end of this first period, a prominent place in the ranks of those who were trying to strike out new lines in the study of Christian history; and when Schleier­mscher's chair at Berlin  was vacant in 1834, the Prussian minister Altenstein thought for a time of appointing $aur to it.

II. The Period of Biblical Criticism: The second period, however, is the one which comes to mind when the Tubingen School is mentioned. Though certain books already named are of later date, the period may be properly begun with 1835, in which year Strauss's Lebm Jesu drew general attention to the questions to which Baur was already inclined to turn. The application to the canon of Scripture of the Hegelian laws of historical development was peculiarly appropriate to the place in which Baur carried on his work, since the distinguishing mark of the older Tubingen School had been a Biblical supernaturalism, for which dogma was nothing more than the teachings of Scripture, arrived at by means of exegesis. He felt himself driven to a consideration of this question by the need of a settlement with the school from which he had sprung and with his own past; by his studies in the history of dogma, since the source of dogma, in the last resort, unless it is a mere collection of irresponsible opinions, is the Bible; and by his investigation of Gnosticism, which could not fail to raise the question of the canon.

In 1835 appeared (at St ~~',gart and TVbingen) Baur'a work on the Pastoral Epistles. According to his own account of this and of his article on the Corinthian parties (TZT,1831), it was his lectures on the Epistle to the Corinthians which first opened up the vista of more far reaching hiatorico critical investigation into the controversies of the apostolic age, and led him to follow out, by means of New Testament and patriotic studies, his independent conception of the plash of heterogeneous elements in the apostolic and aubapoatolic days, their parties and tendencies, their conflicts and com­promises  to demonstrate the growth of a catholic Church as nothing but the result of a previous historical process. Dealing with Schleiermacher'a treatment of I Timothy, he considered z. Historicw the three pastoral epistles from the

Скачать документ

Похожие документы:


    ... RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE Editor in Chirf SAMUELMACAULEYJACKSON, D.D., LL.D. Editor ... SPECIALISTS UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF SAMUELMACAULEYJACKSON, D.D., LL.D. (Editor in ... Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D., and Rev. SamuelMacauleyJackson, M. A. New York: Funk & ...





Другие похожие документы..