Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadMcClintock Biblical Encyclopedia: Apologists
Subjects in this Topic:
SEE APOLOGY.
Apology ( ἀðïëïãßá , a defense), a discourse, or argument, in defense of some person or doctrine that has been attacked or misrepresented. The use of this term, as applied to religious truth, is to be carefully distinguished from its application in ordinary conversation, in which it generally means an excuse made for some person or thing which deserves censure. Hence, those who are unacquainted with the derivation of the word have ignorantly argued that the existence of apologies for Christianity implies the weakness of the claims of Christianity itself. In the early church, the defences of Christianity presented to heathen emperors by the Christian writers were called Apologies, and the writers themselves are styled Apologists. The same name was afterward given to defenses of Christianity against paran writers and other opponents, and the science of defending Christianity is called Apologetics (q.v.). In this article we propose to give a brief history of the apologies or defenses of Christianity from the beginning until the present time. Christianity has had to contend against four classes of opponents — Jews, Pagans, Mohammedans, and Rationalists. These four heads would form a convenient division of the history, if treated according to the parties opposing Christianity; but it will be more convenient here to follow the chronological order, making three periods — the Early Age, the Middle Age, the Modern Age.
I. The Early Age (down to the sixth century). — The Jews, from their affinity to the new religion, seem to have opposed it most bitterly in the beginning. The grounds of their unbelief are stated in the N.T. itself, and are the same now, in substance, as then. The apostles argue apologetically with the Jews when they undertake to show by the prophecies and types of the O.T. that Jesus was Messiah. Later writers in this age are, Justin Martyr (dialogue with Trypho, the Jew) and Origen (against Celsus, who personates a Jewish opponent). The Judaizing teachers in the church had also to be met and answered. SEE EBIONITES. Rationalism also soon appeared in the spiritualistic theories of the Gnostics. SEE GNOSTICISM. The pagan attacks, though often borrowing Jewish objections, were founded on the pagan view of God and the world, both as religion and philosophy. They anticipate many of the modern forms of infidelity. “Substantially the same objections are urged by the skeptical mind from age to age, and substantially the same replies are made. Infidelity is the same over and over again — reappearing in new forms, it is true, so that it seems to the time and the church like a new thing under the sun, yet ever remaining identical with itself, it makes very much the same statements, and elicits very much the same replies” (Shedd, History of Doctrines, 1:104). When Christianity first appeared, it was thoroughly antagonistic to the pagan public opinion of the times. The first formal attack in the shape of books appeared in the second century, beginning with Celsus (q.v.), who attacked the whole idea of the supernatural, whether in Judaism or in Christianity. Lucian of Samosata († about 200) attacked Christianity with the shafts of wit and ridicule. He was followed by the Neo-platonists (q.v.), Porphyry (q.v.), and Hierocles (q.v.). The leading arguments against Christianity in the first three centuries, with the replies to them by the Christian apologists, are thus summed up by Dr. Schaff:
1. Against CHRIST: his illegitimate birth; his association with poor, unlettered fishermen, and rude publicans; his form of a servant, and his ignominious death. But the opposition to him gradually ceased; while Celsus called him a downright impostor, the Syncretists and Neo-platonists were disposed to regard him as at least a distinguished sage.
2. Against CHRISTIANITY: its novelty; its barbarian origin; its want of a national basis; the alleged absurdity of some of its facts and doctrines, particularly of regeneration and the resurrection; contradictions between the Old .and New Testaments, among the Gospels, and between Paul and Peter; the demand for a blind, irrational faith.
3. Against the CHRISTIANS: atheism, or hatred of the gods; the worship of a crucified malefactor; poverty, and want of culture and standing; desire of innovation; division and sectarianism; want of patriotism; gloomy seriousness; superstition and fanaticism; and sometimes even unnatural crimes, like those related in the pagan mythology of OEdipus and his mother Jocaste (concubitus (Edipodei), and of Thyestes and Atreus (epule Thyestee). Perhaps some Gnostic sects ran into scandalous excesses; but as against the Christians in general, this last charge was so clearly unfounded that it is not noticed even by Celsus and Lucian. The senseless accusation that they worshipped an ass's head may have arisen, as Tertullian already intimates, from a story of Tacitus respecting some Jews who were once directed by a wild ass to fresh water, and thus relieved from the torture of thirst; and it is worth mentioning only to show how passionate and blind was the opposition with which Christianity in this period of persecution had to contend. “The apologetic literature began to appear under the reign of Hadrian, and continued to grow until the end of the fourth century. Most of the church teachers took part in. this labor of their day. The first apologies, by Quadratus, Aristides, and Aristo, addressed to the Emperor Hadrian (about A.D. 130), and the similar works of Melito of Sardis, Claudius Apollinaris of Hierapolis, and Miltiades, who lived under Marcus Aurelius, are either entirely lost, or preserved only in fragments.
But the valuable apologetical works of the Greek philosopher and martyr, Justin (166), we possess. After him come, in the Greek Church, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, and Hermias, in the last half of the second century, and Origen, the ablest of all, in the first half of the third. The most important Latin apologists are Tertullian (about 220), Minucius Felix (between 220 and 230; according to some, between 161 and 180), and the elder Arnobius (q.v.) (about 300), all of North Africa. Here at once appears a characteristic difference between the Greek and the Latin minds. The Greek apologies are more learned and philosophical; the Latin more practical and juridical in their matter and style. The former labor to prove the truth of Christianity, and its adaptedness to the intellectual wants of man; the latter plead for its legal right to exist, and exhibit mainly its moral excellency and salutary effect upon society. The Latin also are, in general, more rigidly opposed to heathenism, while the Greek recognize in the Grecian philosophy a certain affinity to the Christian reIigion. The apologies are addressed in some cases to the emperors (Hadrian; Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius) and the provincial governors, in others to the intelligent public. Their first object was to soften the temper of the authorities and people toward Christianity and its professors by refuting the false charges against them. It may be doubted whether they ever reached the hands of the emperors; at all events the persecution continued.
Conversion commonly proceeds from the heart and will, and not from the understanding and from knowledge. No doubt, however, these writings contributed to dissipate prejudice among honest and susceptible heathens, and to induce more favorable views of the new religion. Yet the, chief service of this literature was to strengthen believers and advance theological knowledge. It brought the church to a deeper and clearer sense of the peculiar nature of the Christian religion, and prepared her thenceforth to vindicate it before the tribunal of reason and philosophy. The apologists did not confine themselves to the defensive, but carried the war aggressively into the territory of Judaism and heathenism” (Methodist Quarterly Review, Oct. 1858, art. 8). Clemens Alexandrinus († 220) is also classed among the apologists (Stromata; Cohortatio). He admits the value of heathen philosophy as a preparation for Christianity, and asserts that Christianity fully satisfies the legitimate demands of the human intellect. Here belong also, in part, at least, Eusebius († 370) of Caesarea's ðñïðáñáó÷åõή and ἀðüäåéîéò åὐáããåëéêή , Athanasius's ëüãïò êáôὰ ῾Åëëήíùí and ðåñὶ ôῆò ἐíáíèñùðήóåùò ôïῦ ëüãïõ ; and Cyril († 444) of Alexandria's ten books against Julian, in which he gives, as a reason for the late appearance of Christianity, that the progress of revelation had to be parallel with the cultivation of mankind. Augustine's († 480) De civitate Dei is a great, attempt to consider Christianity as realizing the idea of a divine plan and order for the world, as containing the immanent idea of the world and its history (Smith's Hagenbach, § 117). Augustine showed the relations of reason and faith, philosophy and religion, with a skill that has never been surpassed (Shedd, Hist. of Doctrines, 1:162 sq.). The Commonitorium of Vincentius Lirinensis († 4-50) is also, in part, apologetic. On this period, besides the works already cited, see Reeves, The Apologies of Justin. Tertullian, Minucius Felix, and Vincentius, with Preliminary Discourses (London, 1709, 2 vols. 8vo); Semisch, Life of Justin Martyr, transl. by Ryland (Edinb. 1843, 18mo); Woodham, Tertulliani Liber Apologeticus, with Essay on the early Apologists (Camb. 1843, 8vo); Freppel, Les Apologistes Chretiens du me Siecle (Paris, 1861, 2 vols. 8vo); Houtteville, La Religion prouvee par des Faits (Paris, 1722); one part of which, translated, is, A Critical and Historical Discourse on the Method of the Authors for and against Christianity (Lond. 1739, 8vo); Bolton, The Evidences of Christianity in the Writings of the Apologists down to Augustine (New York, 1854, 8vo); Kaye, Ecclesiastical History illustrated from Tertullian (Camb. 3d edit. 1845, 8vo); Kaye, Justin Martyr (Lond. 1836, 8vo); Kaye, Clement of Alexandria (1835, 8vo); Lardner, Works (vol. 2); Farrar, Crit. Hist. of Free Thought (note 49); Pressense, Histoire des Trois Premiers Siecles de l'Eglise (vols. 1 and 2); Otto, Corpus Apolrgetarum christianorum seaculi secundi, vol. 1-8, containing the works of Justin, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus (Jena, 1847 - 61); and other works named under APOLOGETICS SEE APOLOGETICS .
II. The Middle Age (seventh century to the Reformation). — In this period we find little to note for the first four centuries. In the Dark Ages, the public mind and thought were nominally Christian, or, at least, were not sufficiently educated to admit of doubts that might create a demand for apologetical works. The external conflict now was only with Judaism and Mohammedanism. Against the Jews, Agobard († 840) wrote his treatise De Insolentia Judacorum; at a later period Gislebert, or Gilbert, of Westminster († 1117), wrote Disp. Judei cum Christiano de fide Christiana, in Anselmi Opera; Abelard († 1142), Dialogus inter Philos. Judeum et Christianum (Rheinwald, Anecdota, Berlin, 1835, t. i). Against the Mohammedans, Euthymius Zigabenus († 1118), Panoplia (in Sylburgii Saracenicis, Heidelb. 1595); Richardi Confutatio (1210, edited by Bibliander); Raimund Martini († 1286), Pugio Fidei; Peter of Clugny, Adv. Nefand. Sectam Sarazenorum (Maartene, Monumenta, 9). See Hagenbach, Hist. of Doctrines, § 144; Farrar, Critical History of Free Thought, p. 387 sq. In the ninth century, Scotus Erigena († 875) treated of the relations of revelation and philosophy in his De Divesione Naturae (ed. by Gale, 1681, Oxford, and again in 1838, Munster); but the seeds of Pantheism lay in his teaching. The strife between Nominalism and Realism in the 11th century led to a more thorough discussion of fundamental principles as to the, relations between faith and reason, and between God and nature; and the orthodox theologians, especially Anselm of Canterbury († 1109), asserted as a fundamental axiom the precept of St. Augustine, non qucero inteiligere, ut credam, sed credo, ut intelligam. Aquinas's De veritateafidei contra Gentiles was directed against the Jews and Mohammedans. Abelard, having given to reason a greater share in his arguments, and gone so far as to point out the contradictions contained in the fathers, was persecuted by the church, although he did not, in principle, differ from the scholastics. As to the grounds of Christianity, he distinguished between credere, intelligere, and cognoscere; “through doubt we come to inquiry, by inquiry to truth;” in this anticipating Descartes. Bernard of Clairvaux held that Abelard's rationalism was in contradiction not only with faith, but also with reason. The newly-learned system of Aristotle began, in the Middle Age, to be applied to the sciences, and among them to theology. Alexander de Hales († 1245) was the first to give regular theological prolegomena, in which he considered the question whether theology can properly be called a science, and how it is contained in the Bible; he ascribed to it experimental, not speculative certainty. The same line was followed by Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, and Duns Scotus. The latter recognizes eight grounds of certainty: pronunciatio prophetica, scripturarum concordia, auctoritas scribentium, diligentia recipientium, rationabilitas contentorum, irrationabilitas singulorum errorum, ecclesiae stabilitas, and miraculorum claritas. Among the later scholastics we find Durand de St. Pourcain († 1336); Gerson, who wrote against the Hussites his Propositiones de sensu literali S. Scr. et de causis errantium; Raymond de Sabunde († 1434), who, in his Liber creaturarum seu theologia naturalis, and Viola animac (often reprinted, as, for instance, at Lyons, 1648, 8vo), asserted that the love of God is the highest knowledge. The controversy with the Moslems produced in the 14th century John Cantacuzenus († 1375), Orationes et assertiones profide Christiana contra Saracenos et Alcoranum (ed. Rob. Gualter, Basil, 1543, fol.). In the Western Church more important works appeared, such as Nicholas de Cusa's Cribratio Alcorani, in which he sought to prove the divinity of Christ by the Koran itself, and Zelus Christi contra Judceos, Saracenos, et Infideles, written about 1450 by the Spaniard Petrus de Cavalleria. About the same time appeared a system of Christian philosophy due to the thought of the Middle Age, and which we find already foreshadowed in Anselm and Hugo de St. Victor. Its principal object was to establish the relation and differences between faith and reason, as well as to reconcile them. In the first rank of these, so to say, philosophical apologies, we find the De Christiana religione et fidei pietate (Paris, 1641) of Marsilius Ficinus († 1499), in which the same views originally advanced by Thomas Aquinas in De veritate Catholicae fidei contra Gentiles are easily recognized. To the same class belong the Triumphus crucis seu de veritate religionis Christianae of Savonarola (t 1498), and the Solatium itineris mei of the same author. A sentence we find in his works may be considered as the distinguishing principle of that whole school of philosophical apologists: gratia praesupponit naturam (Pelt, Theologische Encyklopädie, § 65).
3. From the Reformation to the Present Time. The era of modern speculation followed the discovery of printing, the revival of letters, and the Reformation. Europe was filled with a spirit of restless inquiry. The Romish corruptions of Christianity led many to doubt Christianity itself. Leo X, himself a skeptic, fortified the pride of letters and of freethinking. Cultivated men seemed likely, on the one hand, to go back to classical paganism, or, on the other, to fall into philosophical pantheism. In the early times of the Reformation the difficulties in the church itself engrossed the attention of the Christian writers. But soon after apologetics received a new impulse from the spirit of free inquiry which became so general. The fundamental questions of Christianity were again examined. This is the time when appeared the clear and comprehensive De veritate Religionis Christianae (1543) of the Spaniard Ludovicus Vives († 1540). Among the Protestants, the evidence derived from the Testimonium Sp. Sancti internum led to a new class of arguments, which we find in Philippe de Mornay du Plessis's Traite de la verite de la Religion Chretienne (1567, 1651; and a Latin trans. by Breithaupt, Jena, 1698, 4to), and Hugo Grotius's De veritate Rellgionas Christianae (1627, etc.; last edit. Amsterdam, 1831). Among Roman Catholic apologists we notice Melchior Canus († 1560), whose Loci Theologici is more a work on theological logic than dogmatics; it enumerates the different grounds of evidence recognized by his church. The differences between the Lutheran and Reformed Churches led also to apologetic as well as controversial works. Among these, one of the earliest and most important is the
ÄéÜóêåøéò
de fundamentali dissensu Doctrince Lutheranae et Calvinianae (Viteb. 1626, etc.; best edit. 1663). In the Romish Church the differences between the Jansenists and the Molinists, and afterward the Jesuits, led Blaise Pascal to write his Pensees, which, although unfinished, is one of the ablest and most complete apologetic works of any time.
In the 17th century arose the so-called deism of England, under the leadership of Herbert of Cherbury († 1648) and Hobbes († 1649), contemporaneously with Descartes on the Continent. Spinoza followed with his destructive criticism and with his pantheistic philosophy. These were followed by crowds of less important deists, freethinkers, etc. The grounds, both of attack and defense, were now very different from those of the early ages. Then the advocates of Christianity had to defend it against pagan attacks, and, in turn, to show the absurdity and wickedness of polytheism; now, on the other hand, the deistic unbelievers not only professed to believe in one God, but also sought to show that no special revelation is necessary to man, but that he can learn both God and duty from the light of nature. The English deism passed over into France and Germany, and, coming in aid of the movement in philosophy and criticism led by Descartes and Spinoza, gave origin there to the movement which finally culminated in the so-called Rationalism, Naturalism, and Positivism (see these three heads; SEE DEISM). We shall briefly sketch the history of apologies in this period, first, on the Continent of Europe, leaving the English and American apologists to the close of this article.1. German. — In Germany the Wolfian philosophy prepared the way for the English deism, which soon took root. The first open infidelity of the period we find in such writers as J. C. Dippel († 1734), author of Democritus Christianus, and J. C. Edelmann († 1767), who rejected all revealed religion to attach himself exclusively to conscience. Between these two extremes appeared Leibnitz, whose attempt at a reconciliation between philosophy and Christianity, by making reason the judge between them, had prepared the way for the Wolfian school. Among the German apologists of that period we find Lilienthal (Die gute Sache d. gittl. Offenbarung, 1772-82), Koppen (Die Bibel als ein Werk d. gottl. Weisheit, 1787, 1837), A. F. W. Sack (Vertheidigter Glaube d. Christen, 1773, 2 vols.), Nosselt (Vertheidigung d. christl. Religion, 4th edit. 1774), Jerusalem, of Wolfenbuittel (Betracht. 1. d. Wahrheiten d. chr. Relig. 1776), G. Less (D. Religion, etc., 2d ed. 1786, 2 vols.), and J. G. Tollner († 1774). But the most important of all the German apologists of that time was Friederich Kleuker, who defended Christianity as the scheme of man's salvation, while the contemporary theologians chiefly defended the doctrines and morals of the Gospel. His principal works are, Wahrheit u. gittl. Ursprung d. Christenthums (Riga, 1787-94); Untersuch. d. Grundef. d. Echtheit u. Glaubwiird. d. schrifil. Urkunden d. Christenthums (Hamb. 1797-1800), and Versuch i,. d. Sohn Gottes unter d. Menschen (2d ed. 1795). In the German Roman Catholic Church we find the Wolfian B. Stattler (1771), P. Opfermann (1779), Beda Mayr (1781), and S. von Storchenau, author of the Philosophie der Religion (1772-89). The German theologians, however, allowed themselves to be led into a sort of Biblical deism, which was opposed by Storr, and especially by J. C. Lavater († 1801), who considered faith as the result of the inward feeling of the power of the Gospel, not to be attained by learned demonstrations. The further development of theology in Germany led to the strife between Rationalism and Supranaturalism, and thus apologetics were merged into/polemics, in which the fundamental questions of the Christian faith were freely discussed. This is the time of Reinhard's Gestandnisse, and Rohr's anonymous Briefe ui. d. Rationalismus (Aix-la-Chapelle, 1813, 1818); on the other side we find Steudel's Haltbarkeit d. Glaubens (Stuttg. 1814), Zollich's Briefe u. d. Supranaturalismus (1821), Sartorius's Religion ausserhalb d. Grenzen d. Vernunft (Marb. 1822), and similar works by Tittmann (1816). The attempts at conciliation of Kahler, of Konigsberg (1818), Klein (1819), Schott (1826), etc., proved unavailing. The number of works published on both sides increased daily. Most of them are, however, forgotten now, and the only ones which have retained any importance are C. L. Nitzsch's De Revelatione religionis externa eademnque publica (1808), and De discrimine revel. Imperatorice et Didacticae (1830), in which he separates religion and revelation, and attempts to give a complete theory of the latter, blending, to use C. J. Nitzsch's expression, “formal supranaturalism with material rationalism.”
In the school of Tubingen a new apologetic method, which we may call scientific, arose under the influence of Storr and of his followers. Its great defect, perhaps, is that it makes a science of faith. Among the principal works in that line we find Peter Erasmus Muller's Kristelig Apobogetik (Kopenh. 1810), G. S. Francke's Entwurf einer Apolog. der christlich. Religion (Altona, 1817). Next to these must be placed the articles of Heubner, of Wittenberg, in Ersch und Gruber's Allg. Encyklopadie (4, 451-461), K.W. Stein's Apologetik d. Christenthums als Wissenschaft dargestellt (Leipz. 1824); and in the Roman Catholic Church, the apologetic works of Stephen Wiest, of Ingolstadt, Patricius Zimmer, F. Brenner's Fundamnentirung d. katholischen speculativen Theologie (Regens. 1837), and, mere recently, the works of Klee (q.v.). Conceived in a different spirit, but fully as ingenious and methodical, are K. F. Brescius's, of Berlin, Apologien (1804), G. J. Planck's Ueber d. Behandlung, etc., d. historischen Beweisesf. d. Gottlichceit d. Christenthumas (Gott. 1821), and especially K. H. Stirm's Apologie d. Christenthums (1836). In most of the writers named, dogmatic teaching is combined with apologetical. This is still more true of the apologetical works of Schleiermacher and his school (see Schleiermacher, Darstellung d. Theol. Stud. § 40-44), and of the works of Staudenmaier and Sebastian von Drey, Apologetik als wissenschaftl. Nachweisung d. Gottlichkeit d. Christenthumns, etc. (3 vols., Mainz, 1838-47). Other German theologians considered apologetics as a scientific exposition of the fundamental principles of Christianity. Among them we find Steundel, in his Grundzuige einer Apologetik (Tiubing. 1830); Heinrich Schmid, of Heidelberg, in the Oppositionsschr. f. Theol. u. Philos. 2:2 (Jena, 1829, p. 55 sq.); Tholuck, Palmer, etc. Most of the introductory works to the study of dogmatics may be considered as apologetic. Such are Daub's Vorlesungen i. d. Prolegomena z. Dogmatik (1839), Baumgarten-Crusius's u. Religion, Offenbarung u. Christenthum (1820), F. Fischer, of Basle's, Religion, Offenbarung, etc. (Tibing. 1828), Twesten, Vorl. u. d. Dogm. (1826,1838), Staudenmaier's Katholicismus u. d. Neuschellingsche Schule (Freiburg, Zeitsch. f. Theol. 1842, v). Klee also commences his Katholische Dogmatik with a Generuldogmatik, which is a regular demonstratio Christiana. Strauss himself prefaces his Dogmatik by the "formale Grundbegriffe d. christl. Glaubenslehre."
The life of Jesus by Dr. F. Strauss (1835), who declared the Biblical account of the life of Jesus a myth, and, in his “Christian Doctrine in its Historic Development,” attacked even the belief in the personality of God and the immortality of the human soul, called forth a large number of apologetic works, which, more than had been done before, urged the absolute purity and sinlessness of the character of Jesus, and the fact that his personality is unique and without parallel in history, as the strongest argument to be used by the Christian apologist. The celebrated work of Ullmann (Sundlosigkeit Jesu, Hamburg, 1833) took this ground, and stands at the head of a large class of apologetic literature. In 1863 Renan's Vie de Jesus appeared in France, followed, in Germany, by a new work from Strauss on the same subject, by Schenkel's Characterbild Jesu, and by Schleiermacher's posthumous "Leben Jesu" (Berlin, 1864). — A vast apologetic literature on this subject sprang up in France, Germany, and England, for the literature of which, SEE JESUS. L. Feuerbach, in his work on the “Essence of Christianity” (Wesen des Christenthums, 1841), went even beyond Strauss, to the extreme limit of nihilism. He rejected religion itself as a dream and an illusion, from which, when man awakes, he finds only himself. He became the founder of a new school of materialism, which showed an extraordinary literary productivity, and gained considerable influence. SEE MATERIALISM. Among the most important apologies of Christianity against this school belong the Letters on Materialism from Fabri (Briefe fiber den Materialismus), and the works of Bohner. An “Apology of Christianity from the stand-point of national psychology” was written by R. T. Grau (Semiten und Indogermanen in ihrer Befiihigung zur Religion und Wissenschaft. Eine Apologie des Christenthums vom Standpunkte der Vilkerpsychologie (Stuttgart, 1864, 8vo) for the purpose of refuting the objections made by Renan, Strauss, and others, to the universal character of the Christian religion on account of its Semitic origin. As Strauss, Renan, Feuerbach, and many other modern opponents denied the possibility of miracles, and made this their chief argument against the truth of supranatural Christianity, a considerable number of works was called forth in defense of miracles, all of which are intended to be more or less apologies of Christianity. See the most important works of this class under MIRACLES SEE MIRACLES .
One of the ablest German apologetic works of modern times is Auberlen's Gottliche Offenbarung (Basil. vol. 1, 1861; vol. 2, 1864), which, unfortunately, was left incomplete by the death of the author in 1864. SEE AUBERLEN. Among the recent works which are more popular than scientific, none has produced a more profound sensation than Guizot's Meditations sur l'Essence de la Religion Chretienne (Paris, 1864; translated into English, German, and most of the European languages). Guizot undertakes an apology of those fundamental doctrines of Christianity which are common to both evangelical Protestants and Roman Catholics, and he treats, in succession, of creation, revelation, inspiration, the essence of God, the person and the work of Christ, and he particularly dwells on the belief in inspiration. Luthardt's Apologetische Vortrage (Lips. 1864) are ten lectures, held at Leipsic, to show the fundamental difference between the two views of the world (Weltanschauung) which now dispute with each other the control of modern society, and the ability of Christianity alone to furnish a satisfactory solution of the problem of human life with all its mysteries. Similar is a posthumous work by Thom. Wizenmann (died 1787, q.v.). Zur Philosophie und Geschichte der Qffenbarung (Basil. 1864). The author was a contemporary of Kant, Jacoby, Hermann, Hamann, and Lavater, by all of whom he was highly esteemed. Auberlen, who published the above edition, called attention to his importance as an apologist in the Jahrbucherftir deutsche Theologie for 1864. Other apologetic works recently published in Germany are Gess and Riggenbach's Apologetische Beitrage (Basil. 1863); a collection of ten lectures by Auberlen, Gess, Preiswerk, Riggenbach, Stahelin, Stockmeyer, under the title Zur Verantwortungq des christlichen Glaubens (Basil. 1861, 8vo); Vosen (Romans Cath.), Das Christenthum und die Einsprache seiner Gegner (Freiburg, 1864, 8vo); Hettinger (Romans Cathol.), Apologie des Christenthuns (vol. 1, Freiburg, 1863, 8vo); Hillen (Romans Cathol.), Apologie des Christenthums (Warendorf, 1863); Zezschwitz, Zur Apologie des Christenthums nach Geschichte und Lehre (Leips. 1866, 8vo). A new monthly, entitled Beweis des Glaubens, devoted entirely to apologetics, was commenced in 1865 at Gitersloh. It has the services of Andreae, Zockler, and Grau, the two latter of whom are authors of apologetical works mentioned above.
2. French. — At the head of modern French apologists, of course, stands Pascal (q.v.); Huet's Demonstratio Evangelica (2d ed. 1680) followed; also Houtteville, mentioned above (1722). Among the Roman Catholics, Fenelon, Lettres sur la Religion (1718); Le Vassor (1718); Lamy (1715); D'Aguesseau († 1751); among Protestants, Abbadie (q.v. f 1727); Jacquelot († 1708); in answer to the French encyclopaedists especially, Abbe Guene, the author of Moise venge (1769); Bergier, in his Traite historique et Dogmatique de la vraie Religion (Paris, 2d ed. 1780, 12 vols.; Bamblerg, 1813, 12 vols.). F. A. Chateaubriand also sought to prove the heavenly origin of Christianity in his Genie du Christianisme (Paris, 1802; often reprinted and translated), and in his Les Martyrs. The deficiencies of French apologetics are sharply noted by Chassay, Introduction aux Demonstrations Evangeliques (Migne, Paris, 1858, 8vo). The Romanist reactionary school, headed by de Maistre (1753-1821), mingles apologetics with defense of Romanism, and of the absolute authority of the church (see Morell, History of Modern Philosophy, chap. 6, § 2). A school of ultra Rationalists has lately sprung up in France, of which Colani and Reville are types. SEE RATIONALISM. The Evangelical school, on the other hand, has produced able advocates of Christianity in Vinet (q.v.); Pressense (see the Revue Chretienne, passim), and Astie, Les Deux Theologies (Geneva, 1863). Among modern French apologists we notice the Roman Catholics R. de la Mennais († 1854) and Frayssinous († 1841). They, however, like de Maistre, so identify Christianity with Roman Catholicism that their works are available only for those of their own church. In the Reformed Church, E. Diodati, of Geneva, addresses his Essai sur le Christiansmne especially to the will. For the numerous writers in answer to Renan, see the bibliography under JESUS.
The Abbe Migne has published a vast collection of the Christian apologists in 18 vols., with an introductory volume, and a concluding volume on the present state of apologetic science and of skepticism, making 20 vols. in all. We deem it worth while to give the whole title of this great work, which is a repository of apologies: DEMONSTRATIONS Evangeliques de Tertullien, Origene, Eusebe, S. Augustin, Montaigne, Bacon, Grotius, Descartes, Richelieu, Arnauld, de Choiseul du Plessis-Praslin, Pascal, Pelisson, Nicole, Boyle, Bossuet, Bourdaloue, Locke, Lami, Burnet, Malebranche, Lesley, Leibnitz, la Bruyere, Fdnelon, Huet, Clarke, Duguet, Stanhope, Bayle, Leclerc, du Pin, Jacquelot, Tillotson, de Haller, Sherlock, le Moine, Pope, Leland, Racine, Massillon, Ditton, Derham, d'Aguesseau, de Polignac, Saurin, Buffier, Warburton, Tournemine, Bentley, Littleton, Seed, Fabricius, Addison, de Bernis, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Para du Phanjas, Stanislas I, Turgot, Stattler, West, Beauzee, Bergier, Gerdil, Thomas, Bonnet, de Crillon, Euler, Delamarre, Caraccioli, Jennings, Duhamel, S. Liguori, Butler, Bullet,Vauvenargues, Guenard, Blair, de Pompignan, de Luc, Porteus, Gerard, Diessbach, Jacques, Lamourette, Laharpe, le Coz, Duvoisin, de la Luzerne, Schmitt, Poynter, Moore, Silvio Pellico, Lingard, Brunati, Manzoni, Paley, Perrone, Lambruschini, Dorleans, Campien, Fr. Perennes, Wiseman, Buckland, Marcel de Serres, Keith, Chalmers, Dupin aine, Gregoire XVI, Cattet, Milner, Sabatier, Bolgeni, Morris, Chassay, Lombroso et Consoni; contenant les apologies de 117 auteurs, repandus dans 180 vol.; traduites pour la plupart des diverses langues dans lasquelles avaient ete ecrites; reproduites Int4gralement, non par extraits. Ouvrage egalement necessaire a ceux qui ne croient pas, A ceux qui doutent et a ceux qui croient; avec INTRODUCTION aux Demonstrations evang.liques, et Conclusion du meme ouvrage (20 vols. imp. 8vo, Paris). It is proper to say that the word integralement in this title is not correct, as passages in the Protestant writers which impugn Romanism are often omitted. 3. English and American. — The English Deists of the 17th century, Herbert, Hobbes, and Blount, were answered by numerous writers; the literature is given in Leland, Deistical Writers (1754, 8vo), and in Lechler, Geschichte des englischen Deismus. SEE DEISM. Richard Baxter was probably the earliest original writer on Evidences in the English language. His first publication on the subject was The Unreasonableness of Infidelity (1655, 8vo; Works, vol. 20); followed by The Reasons of the Christian Religion (1667, 4to; Works, 20 and 21); More Reasons (1667, in answer to Herbert; Works, 21). In these books Baxter shows his usual acuteness, and anticipates many of the arguments of later writers. Farrar (Critical Hist. of Free Thought), strangely enough, omits Baxter from his list of writers given in note 49, from which the following statement is chiefly taken. Locke († 1704) wrote The Reasonableness of Christianity (Works, vol. 1); Waterland, Reply to Tindal; Boyle (1626-1691) not only wrote himself on the evidences, but founded the Boyle Lectures, SEE BOYLE, a series which was mainly composed of works written by men of real ability, and contains several treatises of value. Among the series may be named those of Bentley (1692); Kidder (1694); Bishop Williams (1695); Gastrell (1697); Dean Stanhope (1701); Dr. Clarke (1704-5); Derham (1711); Ibbot (1713); Gurdon (1721); Berriman (17;0); Worthington (1766); Owen (1769). Other series of lectures in defense of Christianity followed, both in England and on the Continent, viz., the Moyer Lecture (1719); the Leyden (1753); the Warburton (1772); the Basle (1775); the Bampton (1780); the Hague (1785); the Haarlem: (1786); the Hulsean (1820); the Congregational (1833). See each of these heads. The Lowell Lecture (Boston) has similar objects. Among separate treatises of this period, Leslie (t 1722), Short Method with the Deists; Jenkins, Reasonableness of Christianity (1721); Foster, Usefulness and Truth of Christianity, against Tindal; Sherlock, Trial of the Witnesses, against Woolston; Lyttelton, on St. Paul's Conversion; Conybeare, Defence of Revelation (1732); Warburton, Divine Legation of Moses; Addison, Evidences (1730); Skelton, Deism Revealed (Works, vol. 4), may be mentioned.
The great work of Bishop Butler, The Analogy of Religion, etc., was the recapitulation and condensation of all the arguments that had been previously used, but possessed the largeness of treatment and originality of combination of a mind which had not so much borrowed the thoughts of others as been educated by them. Balguy's Discourses (3d ed., 1790, 2 vols.), and his Tracts, Moral and Theological (1734, 8vo), are very valuable. In the latter half of the century, the historical rather than the moral evidences were developed. First, the religion of nature was proved. at this point the Deist halted, the Christian advanced further. The chasm between it and revealed religion was bridged at first by probability; next by Butler's argument from analogy, put as a dilemma to silence those who objected to revelation, but capable of being used as a direct argument to lead the mind to revelation; thirdly, by the historic method, which asserted that miracles attested a revelation, even without other evidence. The argument in all cases, however, whether philosophical or historical, was an appeal to reason — either evidence of probability or of fact — and was in no case an appeal to the authority of the church. Accordingly, the probability of revelation having been shown, and the attacks on its moral character parried, the question became, in a great degree, historical, and resolved itself into an examination either of the external evidence arising from early testimonies, which could be gathered to corroborate the facts and to vindicate the honesty of the writers, or of the internal critical evidence of undesigned coincidences in their writings.
The first of these occupied the attention of Lardner (1684-1768). His Credibility was published 1727-57; the Collection of Ancient Jewish and Heathen Testimonies, 1764-67. The second and third branches occupied the attention of Paley, the one in the Evidences, the other in the Horce Paulince. Paley's argument has been extended to the Gospels and other parts of Scripture by Blunt, Undesigned Coincidences, etc. (3d edit. 1850; compare also his Essay on Paley, reprinted from the Quarterly Rev. Oct. 1828). Before the close of the century the real danger from Deism had passed, and the natural demand for evidences had therefore, in a great degree, ceased. Consequently, the works which appeared were generally a recapitulation or summary of the whole arguments, often neat and judicious (as is seen at a later time in Van Mildert, Boyle Lectures, vol. 2, 1805; and in Chalmers, Works, vols. 1-4), or in developments of particular subjects, as in Watson's Apology, in reply to Gibbon and Paine, or in Graves on the Pentateuch (1807).
It is only in recent years that a species of eclecticism, rather than positive unbelief, has arisen in England, which is not the legitimate successor of the old deism, but of the speculative thought of the Continent; and only within recent years that writers on evidences have directed their attention to it. In the Bampton Lectures (q.v.), which, as one of the classes of annually recurring volumes of evidences, is supposed to keep pace with contemporary forms of doubt, and may therefore be taken as one means of measuring dates in the corresponding history of unbelief, it is not until about 1852 that the writers showed an acquaintance with these forms of doubt.. The first course which touched upon them was that of Mr. Riddle (1852), on the Natural History of Infidelity; and the first (specially directed to them was that of Dr. Thomson, On the Atoning Work of Christ (1853, 8vo); which was followed by Mansel, On the Limits of Religious Thought (1858), and by Rawlinson, Hist. Evidences of the Truth of the Scripture Records stated anew (1859). It is impossible to cite all the books of Evidences, popular and scientific, published in England and America. But among the most important, besides those already mentioned, are Erskine On Internal Evidence (1821); Buchanan, Modern Atheism (Boston, 1859, 12mo); Sheppard, Divine Origin of Christianity (Land. 1829); Young, The Christ of History (N. Y. 1856); Rogers, Reason and Faith; Eclipse of Faith; Greysmon Letters; Defence of Eclipse of Faith; Taylor, Restoration of Belief (Camb. 1855); Aids to Faith (in reply to Essays and Reviews, London, 1861, 8vo); Replies to Essays and Reviews (N. Y. 1862, 8vo); Wharton, Theism and the Mod. Scept. Theories (Philad. 1859, 12mo); Dove, Logic of the Christian Faith (Edinb. 1856); Morgan, Christianity and Modern Infidelity (Lond. 1854, 12mo); Pearson, On Infdelity (Prize Essay, Relig. Tract Soc.); Wardlaw, On Miracles (N. Y. 1853, 12mo); Wilson, Evidences (Boston, 1833, 2 vols. 12mo); Dewar, Evidences of Revelation (Lond. 1854, 12mo); Shuttleworth, Consistency of Revelation with itself and with Reason (N. Y. 1832, 18mo); Reinhard, Plan of the Founder of Christianity (transl., Bost. 1831); Lect. on Evidences at the Univ. of Virginia (N. Y. 8vo, 1852); Alexander, Evidences (Presb. Board, 12mo); Hopkins, Lect. before the Lowell Instit. (Boston, 1846, 8vo, an admirable book); Alexander, Christ and Christianity (N. Y. 1854, 12mo); Peabody, Christianity the Relig. of Nature (Lowell Lect., Boston, 1863, 8vo); Faber, Difficulties of Infidelity (N.Y. 8vo); Schaff, The Person of Christ the Miracle of History (N.Y. 1865, 12mo); Sumner, Evidences (1824, 8vo); Norton, Genuineness of the Gospels (Boston, 1855, 8vo); Garbett, The Divine Plan of Revelation (Boyle Lecture, Lond. 1864, 8vo).
Of writings against the Jews since the Reformation we note, Hoornbeck, Pro convincend. Judaeis (1655, 4to); Limborch, Amica Collatio cum erudto Judaeo (1687, 4to); Leslie, Short Method with the Jews; Kidder, Demonstrations of the Messiah (1726, fol.); McCaul, The Old Paths (1837); ibid., Warburton Lectures (1846). Against the Mohammedans, besides Grotius, De Veritate, see Prideaux, Nature of Imposture in the Life of Mohammed (8vo); Lee, Tracts on Christianity and Mohammedanism, by Martyn (1824, 8vo); White, Bampton Lect. (1784, 8vo); Muir, Life of Mohammed (1858). For the literature of the Strauss and Renan controversy, see JESUS. For the Colenso controversy in England, and that caused by the “Essays and Reviews,” SEE RATIONALISM (English). SEE APOLOGETICS; SEE ATHEISM; SEE EVIDENCES; SEE DEISM; SEE INFIDELITY; SEE PANTHEISM. — Christ. Remembrancer, 40:327, and 41:149; London Quar. Rev. (Oct. 1854); American Theol. Rev. (1861, p. 438); North British Rev. 15:331; Hagenbach (Smith), History of Doctrines, § 28, 116, 157, 238, 294, 276; Shedd, History of Doctrines, bk. 2; Pelt, Theolog. Encyklopadie, p. 378 sq.; Fabricius, Syllabus Scriptt. qui pro veritate Relig. Christ. scripserunt (1725, 4to); Ritter, Geschichte d. chisstl. Philosophie, vol. 2; Tholuck, Vermischte Schriften, 1:149-376; Bickersteth, Christi. in Student, p.469 sq. (where a pretty full list of books is given); Walch, Bibliotheca Theologica, ch. 5 (a copious list up to time of publication, 1757); Kahnis, History of German Protestantism (transl., Edinb. 1856); Bartholmess, Scepticisme Theologique (1852); Morell, Hist. of Philosophy, ch. 5; Hurst, Hist. of Rationalism (N. Y. 1865, 8vo); Fisher, The Supernat. Origin of Christianity (N. Y. 1865, 8vo); Meth. Quar. Rev. (April, 1853, p. 70, 312; July, 1862, p. 357, 446); Bibliotheca Sacra (July, 1865, p. 334); Gass, Protest. Dogmatik, vol. 3; Warren, Systematische Theologie, Einleitung, p. 17-22; Hagenbach, Encyklopadie and Methodologie, § 81; Nast, Introduc. to Comm. on NV. T. ch. 4; Walker, Philosophy of the Plan of Salvation (N. Y. often reprinted); Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural. A complete history of apologetical and polemical theology is preparing by Werner (Romans Catholic; vols. 1- 4, Schaffhausen, 1861-1866).