샤프-헤르초크 종교백과

CRYPT: An architectural term most frequently used to denote a subterranean story or division of a church. The word was early applied to the sub- terranean cemeteries of the Christians, the so-called catacombs, or, more properly, single passages and galleries of them in which martyrs or saints were buried. As it became customary to erect churches above the catacombs, just over the grave of a martyr, and with an opening under the altar which allowed the worshipers to look down into the grave, into the crypt, it was natural that afterward the name " crypt " should be transferred to similar excavations under the choir of the basilicas and churches of the Romanesque style, which sometimes were so extensive as to form whole subterranean churches, and often were used as places of inter- ment for bishops. With the Romanesque style the crypts disappeared. Bibliography: H. D. M. Spence, WhiU Rob€ of ChurdiM, pp. 77-00. New York, 1000. CRYPTO-CALVmiSTS: The term applied to those Germans who secretly held or were accused of holding the Calvinistic doctrine of the Eucharist. See Philippibtb. CUDWORTHy RALPH: The most celebrated of the school of seventeenth century philosophers known as the " Cambridge Flatonists " (q.v.); b. at Aller, in Somersetshire (12 m. s.w. of Wells), 1617; d. at Cambridge June 26, 1688. He entered Emmanuel College, Cambridge, in 1632, and, after taking his M.A. degree in 1639, became fellow and tutor of the college. In 1642 he entered the lists against the Catholic party with his first published work, A Diecoitrae concerning the True Nature of the Lord's Supper, which he considers Life. to be that of a " feast upon a sacri- fice," analogous to the feasts which followed the legal sacrifices among the Jews; not itself eacrificium, but, in Tertullian's language, par^ tidpatio eacrifwii. Soon after he published The Union of Christ and the Church ; in a Shadow, in which he attempted to vindicate what he thought Protestants had too much lost sight of, the higher meaning of marriage. Young as he was, he had already mastered all the main sources of philosophy, medieval as well as classical, and quotes freely from the Neoplatonists and Cabalists, as well as from such modem Platonists as Vives and Pico deUa Mirandola (q. v .) . In 1 644 he was appointed master of Clare Hall by the Parliamentary visitors, and a year later was made regius professor of Hebrew, a posi- tion which his knowledge of Jewish Uterature and antiquities made congenial to him. It seems that he thought of leaving Cambridge in 1651, but the election to the mastership of Christ's College in 1654 settled him there anew. In spite of his close relations with the Commonwealth government, he was undisturbed at the Restoration, and was even presented in 1662 to the rectory of Ashwell in Here- fordshire by Sheldon, archbishop of Canterbury, and made a prebendary of Gloucester in 1678. Academic and philosophic labors occupied the remainder of his life. Alarmed by the tendencies of the irreligious and deistic writers of the time, especially Hobbes, he essayed to meet them by a counter-philosophy which should go to the depth of himian thought and belief. The most impor- tant part of what in his conception was intended to constitute one great whole was The True In- tellectual System of the Universe, finished in 1671 but not published until 1678. Its full importance was not recognized imtil after its author's death; Le Clerc published extracts from it in 1703, and attracted to it the attention of Continental thinkers; in 1706 an abridged edition was published in London by Wise; and in 1733 Mosheim brought out a Latin version with valuable notes of his own, reproduced in the London edition of 1845. In this great trea- tise Cudworth combated the atheistic hypothesis. He planned to set forth, against Philo- various forms of fatalism which ap- sophical peared to him inconsistent with the System, true order of the imiverse, three great principles which should sum up relig- ious and moral truth. These were (1) the reality of a supreme divine intelligence and a spiritual world, against the atomistic materialism of Democ- ritus and Epicurus; (2) the eternal reality of moral ideas against the medieval Nominalists and their successors; and (3) the reality of moral free- dom and responsibility in man against all panthe- istic naturalism and stoicism. Of these the InUt- lecttud System deals formally with the first only. To the later parts belong the Treatise on Eternal and Immutable Morality, posthumously published by Bishop Chandler in 1731, and the Treatise on Free Will, ed. Allen, 1838, as well as some two thousand folio pages of manuscript still lying in the British Museum. Though inferior in originality and clearness to Descartes and Hobbes, the writers with whose views his are most strongly contrasted, he went to the root of his side of the questions imder discussion. As a philosopher he was not a pure Platonist; in metaphysics, indeed, he fol- lowed Plato and the Neoplatonists, but in natural philosophy the ' Atomists, and in that of .religion Lord Herbert of Cherbury. His theological stand- point was determined partly by his philosophy, partly by the circumstances of his time. He as- serted the necessity of revealed religion, but saw in philosophy a divine illumination. Averse from partisan strife, he held a middle course between the rigid High-churchmanship of the school of Laud and Independent fanaticism, combining the recognition, with the former, of the rightfulness of an ecclesiastical constitution and an order of wor- ship, and with the latter of the necessity of inner light and an unswerving devotion to ethical ideals. Bibliographt: The principal authority is the piefaee to the ed. of Cudworth'a Works, Jena, 1733, for which the materials were furnished probably by Thomas Baker. The best treatment of Cudworth'a system is in J. Mar- tineau, Typet of Ethical Theory^ ii. 396-424, London, 1885. Consult: J. Tulloch, Rational Theotoffif . . . tn England in 2?th Cent., ii. 103-293, Edinburgh. 1872; C. E. Lowrey, The Philoeophy of Ralph Cudtoorth, New York, 1884; W. R. Scott, Introduction to Cvdworth'9 TreaHm . . . , London, 1891 (contains a life and an apology): DNB, xii. 271-272; also the works cited under Cambridoe Platonists. Culdeea 820 CULDEES. See Celtic Church in Britain AND Ireland, III., 2, { 4.

CULM, BISHOPRIC OF: A bishopric in West Prussia, originally the southernmost in the terri- tory of the Teutonic Order. It was constituted in 1243 by the legate of Innocent IV., Bishop William of Modena, and included the lands between the rivers Weichsel, Ossa, and Drewenz. The bishop's seat was originally Culmsee (85 m. s. of Danzig) and is now Pelplin (50 m. farther north). The first bishop was the Dominican Heidenreich (1245- 1263), who encouraged colonization and, strongly supported by the Teutonic Order, built many churches. The bishop was the temporal as well as the spiritual ruler, but exercised his judicial and legislative rights through an appointed sheriff, who was also the military leader in case of need. As in the three other Prussian bishoprics founded during the supremacy of the Teutonic Order, the bishops recognized a certain not strictly feudal suzerainty in its heads, whose decisions were either taken in consultation with them or accepted by them on promulgation. Annual visitations (known as synodi laicales) were held by the bishop or his dep- uties; diocesan synods are known to have been held in 1438 and 1481; and provincial s3mods met in 1427 at Elbing and 1428 at Riga, under the metro- politan jurisdiction of which latter see Culm was placed by Alexander IV. in 1255. By the Peace of Thorn in 1466 Culm, with a part of Prussia, came under Polish rule, and the bishopric, henceforth a secular one, was to be subjected to the archbishop of Gnesen — ^though the last provision was not con- firmed by the pope, and it was only after the see of Riga had perished in the Reformation that Bishop Peter. Kostka (1577) sought union with Gnesen. The Reformation had been presaged in the fifteenth century by considerable Hussite and Wyclifite activity; and in the sixteenth, in spite of secular repressive measures, the Protestants rapidly in- creased in numbers, and won religious liberty in Thorn from King Sigismund in 1558. Most of the diocese came under Prussian rule at the first par- tition of Poland in 1772 (Thorn not until the second in 1793), and the estates of the bishop, chapter, and monasteries were confiscated by the State, which undertook to pay over half the net annual revenues. The Protestant faith, which had been kept down under the Polish government, now spread once more under the Prussian crown, which has had posses- sion of the district except when (1807-15) it formed a part of the duchy of Warsaw. Bibliography: Urkundenbueh de» BiM^ma Culm, ed. C. P. Woelky. Danxig. 1884>87; F. Schuls, GetchidUt der Stadt und dea Kreiaea Kuim, Danxig, 1876-77.

CULVERWEL, NATHANAEL: An English phil- osophical writer, belonging to the school known as the '* Cambridge Platonists " (q.v.); b. about 1615; d. not later than 1651. He became a pensioner of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, in 1633, B.A., 1636, and M.A., 1640, and was elected to a fellowship in 1642. His chief work, the Discourse of the Light of Nature, was published with several smaller treatises in 1652 (new ed., Edinburgh, 1857). It seems to have been suggested by the De veritate of his contempo- rary Lord Herbert of Cherfoury (see Deism, I., § 1), with whose views on epistemology he coincides to a remarkable degree, though controverting his at- tack upon Christianity from the side of reason. For grandeur and harmony of conception, as well as for rare insight and the spiritual rapture which is almost the only trace of the Calvinism in which he was apparently brought up, the book is one of the most striking productions of the Cambridge school. Its main theme is the use of reason and the special nobility of its function in the search after truth; a second part was projected, to deal with the con- ciliation of faith and reason, against the Socinians and other opponents of the Gospel of Christ. Bibliography: E. T. Campacnao, The Cambridoa Piaio- ni»U, SeUi^iona from the Writinge of ... N. Culvertoel. Oxford. 1001; J. Tullooh, RaHonal TheoUfgy . . . in Eno- land in 17th Cent, ii. 410-426, Edinburgh, 1872; DNB, joi. 288-280. CUMBERLAND PRESBYTERIAN CHT7RCH. See Prebbtterians. CTJMMIAlf (CUMEAIfy CUMnVEy CUIMIlfE): The name of several Irish monks, of whom the best known is Cuimine Ailbhe (" Cummian the Fair "), seventh abbot of lona, 657-669. He wrote a life of St. Colimiba, which forms the basis of the third book of Adamnan's life of Coliunba as well as of some chapters in the preceding books. Colgan and others think that he was also the author of a letter on the Easter controversy addressed in 634 to Seghine, fifth abbot of lona, while lianigan and others think it impossible that an ardent advocate of the Roman Easter, like the author of this letter, can have been made abbot of lona in the seventh century, and ascribe the letter to another of the same name. By whomever written, it is an able document; it shows familiarity with the Scriptures and the writings of the Fathers, quotes the decrees of councils, and displays mathematical powers of no mean order. The writer feels the insignificance of his land among the great nations of the world, and, referring to the stubbornness of his country- men, ironically exclaims: " Rome is wrong; Jeru- salem is wrong; Antioch is wrong; all the world is wrong; only the Irish and Britons know what is right." He had himself followed the old custom till about 630, and changed only after careful and thorough study lasting a whole year. Certain writings known as the ExcarpsuB, the Pcmitentiale Remense, and the Capttula jtidiciorum, published by Wasserschleben and Schmits in their works on the ancient penitential discipline, are traditionally ascribed to " Cummian,'* but nothing is known as to the identity of the author. The most probable date for the composition of the works is the first half of the eighth century. The Excarpsus circulated throughout the Prankish king- dom and in Italy, and was used in later penitentiid books as well as collections of canons before Gratian. Bibliography: The life of Golumba ia in ASM, i. 342-340. and in De Smedt and De Backer, Acta eanetorum Hiber- nice, pp. 845-870, Edinburgh, 1888; the letter in Uasher, Veterum epiatolarum Hibemioarum ajfUoge, Dublin, 1632. Worke, iv. 432-444, whence it ia copied in MPL, Ixxxvii 060-078; for the other works named consult: F. W. H. Wasserschleben, Bueeordnunoen, 72, 460 sqq., Halle. 1851; U. J. Schmits, BuaetHicher und Btuadietiplin^ 602 821 Oald Con: nlnffham 0qq.. Mains, 1883. For life of Cummian oonsult: J. Colgan. Acta mneiorum Hibemia, Louvain, 1645. 408-411; Lanigan, Bed. HiaL, ii. 395-402. CUMMmS, GEORGE DAVID: Bishop and one of the organizers of the Reformed Episcopal Church; b. near Smyrna, Kent County, Del., Dec. 11, 1822; d. at Lutherville, near Baltimore, June 26, 1876. He was graduated at Dickinson College, Carlisle, Pa., 1841; served as a Methodist preacher for two years, but changed to the Protestant Episcopal Church and was ordained deacon in 1845. He be- came assistant minister at Christ Church, Baltimore, 1846; rector of Christ Church, Norfolk, Va., 1847; of St. James's, Richmond, 1853; of Trinity, Wash- ington, 1855; of St. Peter's, Baltimore, 1858; of Trinity, Chicago, 1863. In 1866 he was consecrated assistant bishop of Kentucky. He was a leader of the "Evangelical" or " Low-church " party of his communion, and favored a revision of the prayei^ book. In 1873 he attended the meeting of the Evangelical Alliance in New York and officiated at a joint communion service held there. For this act he was sharply criticized, and, as a result, a month later formally withdrew from the Episcopal Church, declaring that he could no longer counte- nance by his presence the ritualistic practises of certain churches of his diocese, that he had lost all hope of rectification of abuses by the Church, and that he must take his place where he could give open expression of Christian brotherhood without alienating those of his own household of faith. Conferences with others whose position or views were similar to his own followed, and the result was the organization in Dec., 1873, of the Reformed Episcopal Church (q.v.), of which he became senior bishop. Bibuographt: Mrs. G. D. CummiiiB, Memoir of O. D. Cumimina, New York. 1878. CUITEIFORM INSCRIPTIONS. See Inscrip- tions, II. CUNIBERT, ca^ni'^bftr"': Bishop of Cologne; d. about 660. He was educated in the cathedral school of Treves and became archdeacon in that city. He received the bishopric of Cologne before 626, probably by royal appointment. In 626 or 627 he took part in the Synod of Clichy and in the Synod of Reims under Sonnatius (627-630). After the retirement of Amulf of Metz (629 or 630) he became very influential in politics at the court of the Merovingian kings Clothaire II., Dagobert I., and especially Sigebert III. (632-656), who was not yet of age. He was active in spiritual and secular affairs, for instance, in the division of the public treasury (638), in founding monasteries like those of Cougnon, Stablo, and Maknedy (642-650), in different donations and acquisitions of the Church of Cologne, also in the missionary activities among the Frisians. After the death of King Sigebert III. Chinibert seems to have retired to his bishopric, but in 660 he probably reassumed his political position under King Childeric II. He must have died soon afterward. Later he was honored as saint. (A. Hauck.) Bibliography: Rettberg, KD, i. 206, 535. ii. 602; Fried- ricli. KD, ii. 295; Uftuek. KD, i. 377-378. III.— 21

CUNITZ, AUGUST EDUARD: Alsatian Protes- tant; b. at Strasburg Aug. 29, 1812; d. there June 16, 1886. After completing his theological educa- tion in his native city, he visited Gottingen, Berlin, and Paris, and in 1837 entered the Protestant Sem- inary as privat-docent. In 1864 he became pro- fessor of New Testament exegesis, and eight years later was transferred to the newly established Uni- versity of Strasburg. His work was devoted for the most part to church history, and especially to the period of the Reformation. He collaborated with G. Baum and E. Reuss in editing the com- plete works of Calvin (59 vols., Brunswick, 1863- 1900), and wrote the historical commentary for the first ten volumes, which contain the Reformer's correspondence He also completed the edition of the Histoire ecclésiastique des églises r^formdes au royaume de France, begun by Baum and attributed to Beza (3 vols., Paris, 1883-89). From 1847 to 1855 he and Reuss edited the Strassburger Beir trdge zu den theologischen Wissenschaften. He also wrote De Nicolai decreto de eledione pontificum Romanorum (Strasburg, 1837); Considiraiions his- toriquee 9UT le d^veloppement du droit eccUsiastique protestant en France (1840); Historiache Daretellung der Kirchenzucht unter den Protestanten (1843); Ueber die AnUebeJugnisee der Konsittarien in den protestantischen Kirchen Frardcreiche (1847); and Bin kathariaches Rihiale (Jena, 1852). (A. ERICHSONt.)

CUNNINGHAM, JOHN: Church of Scotland; b. at Paisley, Renfrewshire, May 9, 1819; d. at St. Andrews Sept. 1, 1893. He studied at Glasgow (1836-40), and Edinburgh (1840-45), was ordained in 1845 to the ministry of Crieff, Perthshire, and in 1886 was appointed principal of St. Mary's College, St. Andrews. He was one of the first Scotch Presbyterians to introduce instrumental music into his church, and also manifested his liberal views in other ways. In 1886 he was chosen moderator of the general assembly of the Church of Scotland. He wrote The Church History of Scot- land from the Commencement of the Christian Era to the Present Century (2 vols., Edinburgh, 1859); The Quakers from their Origin till the Present Time (London, 1868); A New Theory of Knowing and Being Known, with Some Speculations on the Border- Land of Psychology and Physiology (Edinburgh, 1874); Episcopacy, Presbytery, and Puritanism in Scotland, 1672 to 1660 A.D, (St. Giles' lectures; 1881); and The Growth of the Church in the Organi- tation and Institutions (Croall lectures; London, 1886).

CUNNINGHAM, WILLIAM: 1. Scotch theolo- gian; b. at Hamilton (10 m. s.e. of Glasgow), Lanarkshire, Oct. 2, 1805; d. in Edinburgh Dec. 14, 1861. He studied at Edinburgh; was licensed in 1828; settled as minister in Greenock in 1830; was translated to Trinity College Church, Edinburgh, in 1834; appointed professor in the New College in 1843, and principal in 1847. He threw himself with great energy into the strife in the Church of Scotland, which began to become earnest about the time of his settlement in Edinburgh. Both his ecclesiastical learning and his debating power found Curia 322 a splendid field, as the strife advanced, in conflict with such learned men as Lord Medwyn and Sir William Hamilton. When appointed professor he was requested by the General Assembly to go to America and learn the methods of study pursued there, and this led to many warm friendships. In theology Dr. Cunningham was a thorough Cal- vinist. His works (chiefly posthumous) were: Historical Theology (2 vols., Edinburgh, 1862); The Reformers and the Theology of the Reformation (1862); Discussions on Church Principles (1863); Sermons from 1828 to 1860 (1872); Lectures on Subjects Connected with Natural Theology (London, 1878). Biblxoobapbt: R. Rainy and J. Mackensie, Life of W, CunninffKam, Edinburgh, 1871; DNB, xii. 321-323. 2. Church of England; b. at Edinburgh Dec. 29, 1849. He studied at Edinburgh (M.A., 1870), and Gonville and Caius and Trinity Colleges, Cam- bridge (B.A., 1873), was ordered deacon in 1873, and ordained priest in 1874. He was curate of Homingsea, Cambridgeshire, 1873-74, a licensed preacher in the diocese of Chester 1875-79, and curate of St. Mary the Great, Cambridge, 1879-93, as well as chaplain of Trinity College 1880-91. He was elected a fellow and lecturer of Trinity College in 1887, and vicar of St. Mary the Great, Cambridge, and has also been rural dean of Cambridge since 1894 and honorary canon of Ely and honorary fel- low of Gonville and Caius Colleges, Cambridge, since 1896. He was likewise proctor of the diocese of £3y from 1891 to 1906, and Lady Margaret preacher to the University of Cambridge in 1905, while academically he bias been Hulsean lecturer in 1885, professor of economic science in King's College, London, 1891-97, and lecturer in economic history in Harvard University in 1899. In theology he was at first a Presbyterian, but became dissatisfied with that system both for ecclesiastical and theo- logical reasons, and is now a decided High-church- man. He has written The Epistle of St. Barnabas (London, 1877); St. Austin and his Place in the History of English Thought (1886); and The Gospel of Work (1902). CUNNINGHAM LECTURES: A lectureship on a foundation created by a bequest of £2,000 by Dr. W. Binny Webster to perpetuate the memory of the Rev William Cunningham (q.v.). They are delivered annually in Edinburgh, the appoint- ment to the lectureship is made for not less than two nor more than three years, the incumbent is by preference a professor or minister of the Free Church of Scotland, and each series must consist of not less than six lectures The first series was delivered in 1864 by Robert A. Candlish on the subject The Fatherhood of God (London, 1866). The subjects thus far discussed have all been concerned with Christian history and doctrine or with the Bible. A full list of the lecturers and their subjects may be found in L. H. Jordan, Comparative Religion, pp. 666-667, New York, 1905.

CURATE: A name applied primarily to a parish priest, as having the care (cure) of souls. In the strict canonical use of the term, it designates the holder of a beneficium curatum (see Benefice), who is thus directly charged with the cure of souls. Priests who are merely confessors are not properly designated as curati, since their function is limited to the administration of the sacrament of penance. On the other hand, the chaplains of institutions may be so called when they are bound to assist the parish priest in the discharge of his pastoral duties. In modern English usage (though the strict ancient meaning occurs in the rubrics of the prayer-book) the name curate is commonly applied to unbene- ficed clergy who assist the rector or vicar of a parish; " perpetual curate," however, was until recently the legal title of a priest who had sole charge of a district not organized as a regular parish (see Chaplain). (£. Friedberg.)

CURCI, CARLO MARIA: Italian Jesuit; b. at Naples Sept. 4, 1809; d. at Careggi (3 m. n. of Florence) June 9, 1891. He was educated at Naples and Rome among the Jesuits, and entered the order Sept. 14, 1826. In its defense he wrote his Fatti ed argomenti (Naples, 1845), directed against the attacks of the Prolegomeni of Vincenzo Gioberti, and in 1850 he founded at Naples and edited for three years the Civiltà Cattolica, a religious and political review, which soon became the organ of the Jesuits and the Vatican. In 1870 he defended the temporal power of the pope, but in the preface to his Lezione essegetiche e morali aopra i quattro Evangeli (5 vols., Florence, 1874-76) he urged the pope to become reconciled with the kingdom of Italy. Emphasizing the same idea in a letter addressed to Pius IX. and in his book II modemo dissidio tra la chiesa e V Italia (1877), he was ex- pelled from his order and was not readmitted until a few days before his death. In 1879 he submitted a general declaration of obedience to the Church, but in 1881 he again advocated his former views in his La nuova Italia ed i vecci zelanti (1881). This work, as well as the still bolder // VoHcano regio, tarlo superstite della chiesa cattolica (1883), was put upon the Index, and the author was suspended from all ecclesiastical functions; but after the publica- tion of his Lo Scandalo del vaticano regio (1884) he was forced to recant. His chief works, in addition to those already mentioned, are as follows: La ques- tions romana neWassemblea francese (Paris, 1849); La demagogia iialiana ed il papa-re (Naples, 1849); La natura e la grazia (2 vols., Rome, 1865); // Libro di Tobia esposto in lezioni (1877); II Nuovo Testamento volgarizzato ed esposto in note essegetiche e morali (3 vols., Naples, 1879-^); II Salterio volgarizzalo dall*Ebreo ed esposto in note essegetiche e morali (Turin, 1883); and Di un socialismo cris- tiano nella questione operaia e nel conserto sehaggio degli modemi stati civili (Rome, 1885). Bibliography: The first portion of his Memoria, •xtendix^ to 1849, was published at Florence in 1891; F. H. ReuMh. Der Index der verbotenen BUdher, pp. ii., 858, 862, 1137. 1166. Bonn. 1885.

CURETON, WILLIAM: Semitic scholar; b. at Westbury (11 m. w. of Shrewsbury), Shropshire, 1808; d. in London June 17, 1864. He studied at Christ Church, Oxford (B.A., 1831; M.A., 1833; B.D. and D.D., 1858; D.D., hon., Halle); was curate of Oddington, Oxfordshire, chaplain of Christ Church, chaplain in ordinary to the queen 323 GNinninffhAin Our la (1847), canon of Westminster and rector of St. Margaret's (1849). He was sublibrarian at the Bodleian Library from 1834 to 1837, when he be- came assistant keeper of manuscripts at the British Museum. Up to this time he had devoted himself particularly to Arabic, but the receipt of many new Syriac manuscripts from the monastery of St. Mary Deipara, not far from Cairo, turned his attention to Syriac. In the collection he discovered certain copies of the letters of Ignatius, and published The Ancient Syriac Version of the EpisUes of St. Ignatius to St. Polycarp, the Ephesians, and the Romans, with extracts from the epistles collected from various writers (text, transl., and notes, London, 1845), maintaining that here was the original and genuine text; this view being attacked (see Ignatius of Antioch), he published Vindir cicB Ignatiance (1846); and, in 1849, the Corpus IgruUianum, a complete collection of the Ignatian Epistles in Syriac, Greek, and Latin. Another dis- covery, and that by which his name is best known, was that of the '' Curetonian Gospels,'' a fragmen- tary Syriac version, unlike the Peshito, and, in Cureton's opinion, representing the original of Matthew more closely, published (text and transl.) in The Remains of a very Ancient Recension of the Four Gospels in Syriac hitherto unknown in Europe (1858). Other Syriac works were: The Festal Let- ters of Athanasius (1848; Eng. transl., by Heniy Burgess, in Pusey's Library of the Fathers, 1854); The Third Part of the Ecclesiastical History of John, Bishop of Ephesus (1853; transl. by Payne Smith, 1860); Spicilegium Syriacum, containing Remains of Bardesan, Meliton, Ambrose, and Mara bar Sera- pion (text, transl., and notes, 1855); Eusebius*s History of the Martyrs in Palestine (text and transl., 1861). He also published Fragments of the Iliad from a Syriac Palimpsest (1851). Ancient Syriac Documents relative to the Earliest Establishment of Christianity in Edessa and the Neighboring Coun- tries appeared posthumously, edited by W. Wright (1864). In Arabic he published the text of Shah- rastani's " Mohammedan Sects " (2 vols., London, 1842-46); the commentary on Lamentations of Tanchum ben Joseph of Jerusalem (1843); the Pillar of the Creed of the Sunnites by al-Nasafi (1843); and the catalogue of Arabic manuscripts in the British Museum (1846).

CURRIER, CHARLES WARREN : Roman Cath- olic; b. at St. Thomas, Danish West Indies, Mar. 22, 1857. He studied at the Redemptorist College, Roermond, Holland (1871-74), and the Redemp- torist College, Wittem, Holland (1874-80). He was a foreign missionary in Surinam, Dutch Guiana, 1880-81, and a missionary in the United States 1881-92 and 1897-1900, holding various parishes in the interval. From 1900 to 1905 he was rector of St. Mary's, Washington, D. C, and in 1905-06 was connected with the Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions, Washington. He has written Carmel in America (Baltimore, 1890); History of Religious Orders (New York, 1894); Dimitrioe and Irene, or The Conquest of Constantinople (1894); Church and Saints (New York, 1897); The Rose of Alhama (1898); Mission Memories (Baltimore, 1898); The Divinity of CkrUt (1898); and The Mass (1899).

CURTIS, EDWARD LEWIS: Presbyterian; b. at Ann Arbor, Mich., Oct. 13, 1853. He studied at Yale College (B.A., 1874) and Union Theological Seminary (1879), and spent two years in Germany, chiefly at Berlin; was instructor of Old Testament literature in McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, 1881-84, professor of the same, 1884-91, when he went to Yale Divinity School in the same capacity.

CURTIS, WILLIAM ALEXANDER: Church of Scotland; b. at Thurso (65 m. n. of Elgin), Caith- nesshire, Scotland, Mar. 17, 1876. He studied in Edinburgh (M.A., 1897; B.D., 1901), and in Heidel- berg, Leipsic, and Oxford in 1901-03. Since the latter year he has been professor of systematic theol- ogy at the University of Aberdeen. In 1903 he be- came a member of the Church of Scotland and General Assembly's committee on the education of ministers and on probationers, and in 1906 was made a member of the same body's committee on the Formula of Subscription to the Confession of Faith. In theology he is an Evangelical Protestant of liberal ssrmpathies, and has written Religion^ Yesterday, To-day, To-morrow (Edinburgh, 1903).

CURTISS, SAMUEL IVES: Congregationalist; b. at Union, Conn., Feb. 5, 1844; d. in London, Eng., Sept. 22, 1904. He was graduated at Am- herst College 1867, and at Union Theological Sem- inary, New York, 1870. The years 1872-78 he spent in Germany, studying at Bonn and Leipsie and serving as pastor of the American Chapel in Leipsic, 1874-78. In 1878 he became professor of Biblical literature in Chicago (Congregational) Theo- logical Seminary, and in 1879 became professor of Old Testament literature and interpretation. He translated several works from the German and wrote The LevitiaU Priests (Edinburgh, 1877); IngersoU and Moses (Chicago, 1879); From De- litzsch: a Memorial TribuU (Edinburgh, 1891); and Primitive Semitic Religion To-day (New York, 1902). CURTIUS (KORTE, KORTHEIM, KORTMAHN ),

CURTIUS, VALENTIN: Reformer in Rostock and Lubeck; b. at Lebus (5 m. n. of Frankfort-on-the-Oder) Jan. 6, 1493; d. at Lubeck Nov. 27, 1567. He studied first at Lubeck, matriculated in theology at Rostock, 1512, and soon entered the Minorite monastery of St. Catherine, where he became reader. Won for the Reformation through Joachim Sluter, he became minister at the Church of the Holy Spirit in 1528, and in 1531 at St. Mary's. In opposition to Sluter, he favored the retention of some Latin hymns. On account of his opposition to the people's party led by Dr. Johann Oldendorp, he was obliged to leave Rostock in 1534. Where he went first is uncertain, but for many years, first as deacon, after 1545 (7) as chief pastor, he was sta- tioned at St. Peter's in Ldbeck, then the center of orthodox Lutherdom in North Germany. He was city superintendent there from 1554 until his death. Curtius took a prominent place in the confes- sional contentions after Luther's death. While still ofiiciating as pastor he interpellated Melanchthon concerning the Liber Augustanus (Melanchthon 's answer of July 21, 1548, in CR, vii. 75 sqq.); he par- ticipated in the conference of the Labeck ministry against Lorenz Mdrsken; in 1551 he charged Me- lanchthon with novelty in doctrine (answer, CR, vii. 756 sqq.); in 1553 he signed the Sententia of the ministry against Georg Major in favor of Flacius; in 1554 as the first act of his superin tendency be expelled the Belgic-French Calvinists under John a Lasko, whom Maiy Tudor had driven from London. Curtius led the ministry in the Osiandrian and Oypto-Calvinistic controversies, and often was its representative in conventions and disputations, as at Kosswig and Wittenberg (1557), M5Un (1558), Brunswick (Feb., 1561), and LOneburg (July, 1561). He was the author of the short but important Formula consensus de doctrina evangelii et admini- stroHone sacramentorum (the so-called Ltlbeck For- mula of Feb., 1560, considered authoritative till 1685; in C. H. Starcke, LObeckische Kirchen-Historief pp. 196-197, Hamburg, 1724), and the comprehen- sive Protestatio contra synodum Tridentinam (in Starcke, pp. 208-243), occasioned by the pope's in- vitation of Labeck to the council, Apr. 22, 1561; it attempts to prove the council unlawful on 827 Currier Onaa seven gronndfl! (1) because called by the pope and not by the emperor; (2) because the pope, rejected by the Lutherans as their enemy, could not be their judge; (3) because it should be held in Germany; (4) because the pope is himself a party to the case; (5) because the laity is excluded; (6) because the object is to crush the Evangelicals, not to find truth; (7) because its norm is papal laws, not the Bible. Curtius's entire libraiy was des- troyed by fire and some of his writings may have perished at that time. (FERDINAin) COHRS.) BIBLIOGRAPHY: Q. J. Flanek, BfUgUhung . . . unaena pro' Utlaniiaeh^n Lehrbtgriff; ri. 67 sqq., 2S5 sqq., Leipsic, 1800; H. Heppe, Oeaehiehte dst dmUaeh^ ProteMtantiBmua, i. 123 sqq., Marburg, 1862.

CUST, ROBERT NEEDHAM: Church of Eng- land layman; b. at Cockayne Hatley (42 m. n. of London), Bedfordshire, England, Feb. 24, 1821. He studied at Eton, Trinity College, Cambridge, the East India Company's College at Haileybury, and the College of Fort William, Calcutta, gradu- ating from the last-named institution in 1844. He was present at the battles of Mukdi, Firuzshah, and Sobraon in 1845-46, and at the close of the Sikh campaign was placed in charge of a new province in the Punjab. There he filled in succession every office in the judicial and revenue departments, and was rapidly promoted until 1867, when he resigned and returned to England, after having been a mem- ber of the Viceroy's Legislative Council and Home Secretary to the Government of India in 1864-65. Since his resumption of residence in England he has devoted himself to scientific research, philan- thropy, and magisterial and municipal duties, de- clining reappointments in India. He is member and officer in many scientific, philanthropic, and religious societies and a prolific writer; of his many books special mention may be made of the follow- ing : Drajt Bill of Codes Regulating Rights in Land and Land-Revenue Procedure in Northern India (London, 1870); Modem Languages of the East Indies (1878); Pictures of Indian Life (1881); Modem Languages of Africa (2 vols., 1883); Poems of Many Years and Many Places (2 vols., 1887-97); Three Lists of Bible Translations Actually Accomplished (1890); Africa Rediviva (1891); Essay on the Prevailing Method of the Evangelization of the Non-Christian World (1894); Common Features Which Appear in AU Forms of Religious Belief (1895); The Gospel- Message (1896); Memoirs of Past Years of a Sep- tuagenarian (Hertford, 1899); (Ecumenical List of Translations of the Holy Scriptures to 1900 (Lon- don, 1900); and Linguistic and Oriental Essays (7 vols., 1880-1904).

CUTHBERT, SAINT: Bishop of Lindisfarne; d. on Farne Island (2 m. from Bamborough, Northum- berland) Mar. 20, 687. He was of Scotch origin, probably from the neighborhood of Dunbar. While still a boy, employed as a shepherd, he thought that he saw one night the soul of Aidan carried to heaven by angels, and thereupon went to the monastery of Old Melrose and became a monk (651). His fame for piety, diligence, and obedi- ence was soon great. When Alchfrid, king of Deira, founded a new monastery at Ripon C^th- bert became its prcepositus hospitum or entertainer of guests. Alchfrid, however, adopted Roman usages, and in 661 the Scottish monks returned to Melrose, where Cuthbert was made prior. He spent much time among the people, ministering to their spiritual needs. After the Synod of Whit- by (q.v.) he seems to have accepted the Roman customs, for his old abbot, Eata, then at Lindi»- fame, called him to introduce them there. It was an ungracious task, but Cuthbert disarmed oppo- sition by his loving nature and patience. In 676 he adopted the solitary life and retired to a cave. After a time he settled on one of the Fame Islands, south of Lindisfame, and gave himself more and more to austerities. At first he would receive visitors and wash their feet, but later he confined himself to his cell and opened the window only to give his blessing. After nine years he was pre- vailed upon to return to Lindisfame as bishop and was consecrated at York by Archbishop Theodore and six bishops. Mar. 26, 685, but after Christmas, 686, he returned to his cell. Cuthbert's fame after his death steadily grew and be became the most popular saint of North England. Numerous mir- acles were attributed to hkn and to his remains. He was buried at Lindisfame. In 875 the Danes took the monastery and the monks fled, carrying with them Cuthbert's body, in obedience to his dying injunction. After seven years' wandering it found a resting-place at Chester-le-Street until 995, Cnyler Oyprion 830 when another Danish invasion led to its removal to Ripon. Then the saint intimated, as was be- lieved, that he wished to remain in Durham. A new stone church was built, the predecessor of the present grand cathedral, and there the body has remained since 999, not, however, without being several times disturbed in succeeding centures. Bibliography: The writingB which have been attributed to Cuthbert do not now exist and there ie little reason to believe that they ever did. Two Uvea by Bede |aie in MPL, xdv. 675-696, 729-770, and in Stevenflon'e Beda opera hutoriea mifwra, pp. 1-137, 269-317, London, 1841. Several lives and other tracts may be found in the pub- lications of the Surtees Society of Durham, i., viii., li., Izxxrii., 1836-91. Consult also Bede, HiaL ecd., iv. 2&- 32. Consult: R. Hegge, The Legend of St, CuOtbert, Lon- don, 1663, reprinted, Sunderland, 1816, Durham, 1828; J. Raine, St Cuthbert, with an Account of the StaU in v>hich hie Remaine toere found upon (hs opening of hie tomb in Durham Cathedral in 1887, Durham, 1828; C. Eyre, The Uietory of St Cuthbert London. 1849; F. L. Catoheside, Life of St CuOtbert, London, 1879; A. C. Fryer, Cuth- berht of Lindiefame, Edinburgh, 1880; E. Consitt, Life of St Cuihbert, London, 1887; J. B. Lightfoot, Leadere of the Northern Church, London, 1890; W. Bright. Chap- tere of Early Englieh Church Hietory, pp. 214-216, 239- 240. 300-306, 372-388, Oxford, 1897; DCS, i. 724-729; DNB, xu. 369-362.

CUYLER, THEODORE LEDYARD: Presbyte- rian; b. at Aurora, N. Y., Jan. 10, 1822; d. in Brooklyn, N. Y., Feb. 26, 1909. He studied at Mendham, N. J., Princeton College (B.A., 1841), and Princeton Theological Seminary (1846), and was stated supply at Burlington, N. J. (1846-49), pastor of the Third Presbyterian Church, Trenton, N. J. (1849-53), Market Street Reformed (Dutch) Church, New York City (1853-60), and the Lafay- ette Avenue Presbyterian Church, Brooklyn (1860- 1890). In 1890 he resigned to become a min- ister at large. He was particularly active in temperance and philanthropic work. In theo- logical position he was a moderate Calvinist. He made a large number of contributions to re- ligious periodicals, many . of which have been gathered up into volumes. Of his separate pub- lications may be mentioned Pointed Papers for the Christian Life (New York, 1878); From the Nile to Norway (1881); Newly Enlisted, or, Talks to Young Converts (1889); How to be a Pastor (1891); Recollections of a Long Life (1902); Our Christmas- Tides (1904).

CYPRIAN, ERNST SALOMON: One of the few learned defenders of orthodox Lutheranism in the middle of the eighteenth century; b. at Ostheim (5 m. 8.W. of ABchaifenburg), Franconia, Sept. 22, 1673; d. in Gotha 1746. He studied at Leipsic and at Jena; in 1698 followed his friend Andreas Schmidt to Helmstedt; became professor extraor- dinary of philosophy 1699; in 17(X) went as di- rector to the Gymruuium academicum at Coburg; Frederick II. of Gotha called him in 1713 into tbs upper conaiBtory, and Frederick III. appointed him its vice-president in 1735. While at Helmstedt he wrote against Arnold's Kircken- und Ketzer- histarie, and in 1719 against Romanists who be- gan encroachments after the peace of Ryswick and Rastatt. But his chief exertion was in opposition to the movement toward union between Reformed and Lutherans by Frederick William I. of Prussia. He wrote three pamphlets, Abgedrunffener Unter-^ richt, etc. (1722), AtUhenlieche RechlferHgung, etc (1722), and Das Urtheil engliecher Theologen von der Synode tu Dortrecht und ikrer Lekre (1723), which by their rich historical illustrations give considei^ able information about the whole question. (Georo MCller.) Bibliography: J. M. 8chr5ckh. La»enebeedure%bunoen he- mhnUer Oeiehrten, II. iii. 377. Leipsic. 1767; G. Frmnk. Oeethiehte der proieetanOeehen TUt^ogie, u. 287, ib. 1865: ADB, iv. 667-669.

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA : Archbishop of Alexan- dria; d. there June 27, 444. His early life is known only from notices in Socrates and a few elsewhere. He was a nephew of the archbishop Theophilus, whom he accompanied in 403 to Constantinople to attend the synod Ad Quercum (seeCHBTsosTOM, § 4). When the uncle died, Oct. 15, 412, Life and Cyril succeeded him in his see. The Character, government was not pleased with this choice. It feared, not without reason, that the new bishop would show too much inde- pendence; and, indeed, on every occasion Cyril proved that he was master in Alexandria. He closed the churches of the Novatians, expelled the Jews from the city in spite of the opposition of the prefect Orestes, and when soon afterward Nitrian monks insulted the prefect in the open street, he praised their leader as a martyr. He did not order the murder of Hypatia (q.v.), but his lector and the parabolani, who were guilty of it, were well aware that the female philosopher was an eyesore to the archbishop. His restless, vio- lent conduct, which excited the masses, seems to have hurt him at the court. Theodosius II. as well as Pulcheria listened to him rather than to the pre- fect. For the rest of the archbishop's life, which is closely connected with the dogmatic controversies of the times, see Nestorius. From the veiy be- ginning Cyril opposed Nestorius. It was the cli- max in his life when the emperor confirmed the deposition of his opponent which he had decreed at the Synod in Ephesus in 431, whereas he re- tained his office, though the Syrian bishops had declared him also deposed. His administration shows the Alexandrian bishops at the height of their power and influence, from which they were thrown by the pretentious but short-sighted and incapable Dioscurus (see Euttchianism; Monopht- srrEs). Among the Greeks Cyril is commemorated on June 9, among the Latins on Jan. 28. Leo XIII. promoted him in 1883 to the rank of doctor ecclesia. In general Cyril's literary activity was in the dogmatic and exegetical field. In his homilies and epistles dogmatic subjects are often touched upon. As an apologist Cyril became famous by his refu- tation of the attack of the emperor Julian upon Christianity, in thirty books, of which only the first ten are extant entire, eleven to twenty in fragments. The dogmatico-polemical literaiy ac- tivity of the archbishop was veiy comprehensive. At the head stand the writings on the Literary doctrine of the Trinity composed be- Activities. fore the Christological controversy. The controversy itself caused a large number of treatises against Nestorianism. The results of the exegetical labor of the patriarch are contained in the seventeen books '' On Worship in Spirit and in Truth," in the thirteen books of " Ele- gant Expositions " on the Pentateuch, as well as in numerous commentaries on the Old and New Testaments. The typico-allegorical interpretation, characteristic of the Alexandrian school in opposi- tion to the Antiochian school, is veiy prominent in Cyril's exegesis. The most important work in that direction is the comprehensive commentary on the Gospel of John. Aa regards his teaching, Cyril not unjustly bears the title of " Seal of the Fathers," as the one who finally fixed the true doctrine of the Trinity. Great as is his glory in that direction, the question has ' often been raised whether his Christology does not contain traces of a relationship with Apollinarian- ism, which he himself opposed from conviction (see Apollinarib of Laodicea). At any rate, his Chris- tology approaches very near the limit which separates orthodoxy from Monophysitism. It rests on the suppositions of the older Alexandrians (Athana- sius) and the Cappadocians by which they knew Oyril of ▲lezandrla Oyril Ijuoar 384 themselves in agreement with Apollinaris against every theoiy that denied the substantial unity of the incarnate Redeemer with the sec- Significance ond person of the Trinity. Looking for at the personality of the Redeemer, Doctrine, the energetic assertion of the imity of the person resulted from it in- deed, but also a reckless neglect of the individual man in him. The God-Logos remained, with the hiunan nature which he has assumed, the same one inseparable subject which he was before. The " physical union " is " not confounded," though both natures are to be distinguished " in theory alone." The attacks to which this view was ex- posed on both sides Cyril could only meet by giv- ing to the idea of '' nature " a meaning which dis- regards everything individual. In this way alone does the assertion become explicable that before the incarnation two natures existed, the divine and the human, but after the incarnation only one, the definite divine-human nature, or, as Cyril ex- pressed it in the words of the creed regarded by him as Athanasian, but in reality composed by the hated Apollinaris, " one nature of God the Logos made flesh." The nature is here only thought of as '' conunon." Christ is no man like Paul and Peter; he is the author of a new humanity. Never^ theless, Cyril makes all dependent on the Redeemer's assuming the perfect human nature. But Cyril's assertions do not help ^ver the contradiction that this Redeemer in spite of his "rational soul" had no free will, but was " inflexible in mind." They are, indeed, not intended for that, because by his use of the idea of nature Cyril did not need to take exception to the "perfect man," like Apollinaris. He could speak the easier in favor of a mutual com- munication of the properties of the divine and hu- man nature in the Redeemer (communicoHo idio- mo/um), and thus avoid the danger of a fusion at least for his belief. The " in two natures " of the Chalcedonian formula of 451 found no support in Cyril's Christology. But his Christology overcame that formula, for the Byzantine theologians who had to interpret it did so by explaining the doc- trine of the two natures according to Cyril's teach- ing of one nature (see Leontiub of Bys^antium; MONOPHYSITES). G. KRt^OER. Bibliography: The Opera of Cyril, ed. J. Aubert, appeared in 7 vob., Paris, 1638. new ed., 1737, reproduced in MPO, IxviiL-lzxviL An edition of the fragments of the com- mentary on Luke from the Syriao by R. P. Smith was iomied Oxford, 1859. Eng. transl., 2 vols., 1850, and of the same from another MS., by W. Wright, London, 1874; P. E. Pusey edited the commentary on the twelve minor prophets, 2 vols., Oxford, 1868, a selection of the theo- logical works, 2 vols., ib. 1875-77, transl. of the com- mentary on St. John, ib. 1838, and a text and transl. of the Thne EpiMtlea, ib. 1872. The commentary on John in Eng. transl. was published anonymously, 2 vols., Lon- don, 1874-85. On the life of Cyril consult: ASB, Jan., ii. 843-854; Abb« Rambouillet, Le Pape Pilage /., S. CyrilU . . . e< IHnfaUibUiU, Paris, 1870; A. Largent, in Aevuc de9 queetionM hiaioriquea^ xii (1872). 5-70; J. Ko- pallik, Cyriilua von Alexandrien, Mains, 1881; A. Rohr- mann. Die Chrieiologie dee heiliaen CyriU von Alexandrien, Heidelberg. 1902; E. Weigl. Die HeiUUhre dea heiligen Cyrill von Aleioandrien, Mains. 1905; Schaff, Chrietian Churdi, iii. 942-949. Bibliographies are found in 8. F. W. Hoffmann, BUiUooraphieAee Lexikon, i. 484-494, Leipsie, 1838; U. Cheraiier, Repertoire dee eourcee fcutort^uct, pp. 533-534, 2688, Pauis, 1877-«8.

CYRIL OF JERUSALEM : A distinguished theo- logian of the early Church; d. 386. Little is known of his life before he became bishop; the assignment of the year 315 for his birth rests on mere conjec- ture. He seems to have been ordained deacon by Bishop Macarius of Jerusalem about 335, and priest some ten years later by Maximus. Naturally in- clined to peace and conciliation, he Life and took at first a rather moderate posi- Character, tion, distinctly averse from Arianism, but (like not a few of his undoubted- ly orthodox contemporaries) by no means eager to accept the uncompromising term homoousios. Separating from his metropolitan, Acacius of Csesarea (q.v.), a partisan of Arius, Cyril took the side of the Eusebians, the " right wing " of the post-Nicene conciliation party, and thus got into difficulties with his superior, which were increased by Acacius's jealousy of the importance assigned to Cyril's see by the Coimcil of Nicsa. A council held under Acacius's influence in 358 deposed C3rnl and forced him to retire to Tarsus. On the other hand, the conciliatory Council of Seleucia in the following year, at which Cyril was present, deposed Acacius. In 360 the process was reversed through the metropolitan's court influence, and Cyril suf- fered another year's exile from Jerusalem, until Julian's accession allowed him to return. The Anan emperor Valens banished him once more in 367, after which he remained undisturbed until his death, his jurisdiction being expressly confirmed by the Second Council of Nicsea (381), at which he was present. Though his theology was at first somewhat in- definite in phraseology, he undoubtedly gave a thorough adhesion to the Nicene orthodoxy. Even if he does* avoid the debatable term homoousios, he expresses its sense in many passages, which ex- clude equally Patripassianism, Sabellianism, and the Arian formula " There was a time when the Son was not." In other points he takes the ordinary ground of the Eastern Fathers, as in the emphasis he lays on the freedom of the will, the atUexousion, and his imperfect realization of the Theological factor so much more strongly brought Position, out in the West — sin. To him sin is the consequence of freedom, not a natural condition. The body is not the cause, but the instrument of sin. The remedy for it is repent- ance, on which he insists. Like many of the Eastern Fathers, he has an essentially moralistic conception of Christianity. His doctrine of the Res- urrection is not quite so realistic as that of other Fathers; but his conception of the Church is de- cidedly empirical — ^the existing catholic Church form is the true one, intended by Christ, the com- pletion of the Church of the Old Testament. His doctrine on the Eucharist is noteworthy. If he sometimes seems to approach the symbolical view, at other times he comes very close to a strong realistic doctrine. The bread and wine are not mere elements, but the body and blood of Christ. His famous twenty-three catechetical lectures (Gk. Katech^eis), which he delivered while still a presbyter in 347 or 348, contain instructions on the principal topics of Christian faith and practise, 336 Oyril of Alexandria Oyril Luoar in rather a popular than a scientific manner, full of a warm pastoral love and care for the catechu- mens to whom they were delivered. Each lecture is based upon a text of Scripture, and there is an abundance of Scriptural quotation throughout. After a general introduction, eighteen Catechet- lectures follow for the campeterUes, and ical Lee- the remaining five are addressed to tares. the newly baptized, in preparation for the reception of the conmiunion. Parallel with the exposition of the creed as it was then received in the church of Jerusalem are vigor- ous polemics against pagan, Jewish, and heretical errors. They are of great importance for the light which they throw on the method of instruction usual in that age, as well as upon the liturgical practises of the period, of which they give the full- est account extant. (T. FORSTERf-) Bxblxoobafht: The Opera of Cyril were edited by A. A. Toutt^, Paris. 1720. in MPO, xxxiii.. and by G. C. Reiflchl and J. Rupp. 2 vols.. Munich. 1848-60. A tran»- lation of selected works is in NPNF, 2d series, vii. 1- 183, with valuable introduction. The " Catechetical Lec- tures " were translated for the Library of the Fathers, Ox- ford, 1838. Five Ledtwrea on the Myateriea, in Greek and Eng. and Lat. and Eng., ed. H. de Romestin. appeared, Oxford, 1887. Sources for a life are in Socrates, Hiet. ecd.. ii. 28, 40; Sozomen. H%$L eeel., iv. 25 (both in NPNF, 2d series, vol. ii.). Consult: ASB, March, ii. 625-633; G. Delacroix, 8. CjfriUe de J&ruaalem, «a rie el set auvrea^ Paris, 1865; J. Mader, Der heilige CyriUue , . . in eeinem Leben und eeinen Sdvriftent Einsiedeln, 1891; Sohaff, Chruiian Church, ill. 923-1)25.

D: The symbol employed to designate the Deu- teronomic school of writers whose work, according to the critical school, is found not only in Deuter- onomy, but in the historical books from Judges to II Kings, except Ruth. See Hebrew Language AND Literature, II., § 4.

DABNEY, ROBERT LEWIS : American Presby- terian (Southern); b. in Louisa County, Va., Mar. 5, 1820; d. at Austin, Tex., Jan. 3, 1898. He studied at Hampden-Sidney College, Va., and the University of Virginia (M.A., 1842), and was grad- uated at Union Theological Seminaiy, Hampden- Sidney, Va., in 1846. He was then a missionary in Louisa County, Va., 1846-47, and pastor at Tinlding Spring, Va., 1847-53, being also head master of a classical school for a portion of this time. From 1853 to 1859 he was professor of ecclesiastical hi»- toiy and polity and from 1859 to 1869 adjunct pro- fessor of Bsrstematic theology in Union llieological Seminary, Va. He then became fuU professor of the latter subject and held this position until 1883, when he was appointed professor of mental and moral philosophy in the University of Texas. In 1894 failing health compelled him to retire from active life, although he still lectured occasionally. He was copastor of the Hampden-Sidney College Church 1858-74, also serving Hampden-Sidney College in a professorial capacity on occasions of vacancies in its faculty. During the vacation of 1861 he was chaplain of the Virginia troops in the Confederate army, and in the following year was chief of staff to " Stonewall " Jackson in the bril- liant Valley Campaign. While at the University of Texas he practically founded and maintained the Austin School of Theology, and in 1870 was moderator of the General Assembly of the Presby- terian Church, South. In theology he was a con- servative. He wrote Memoir of Rev. Dr. Francis S. Sampson (Richmond, 1855), whose commentary on Hebrews he likewise edited (New York, 1857); Life of General Thomae J, Jackaon (1866); Defense of Virginia and the SoiUh (1867); Trealiae on Sacred Rhetoric (Richmond, 1870); Theology, Dogmatic and Polemic (1871); Sensualietic Philosophy of the Nineteenth Century Examined (New York, 1875); Practical Philosophy (Mexico, Mo., 1896); and the posthumous Penal Character of the Atonement of Christ Discussed in the Light of Recent Popular Heresies (Richmond, 1898). A nimiber of his shorter essays have been edited by C. R. Vaughan under the title Disctissions (vols. i.-iii., Richmond, 1890-92; vol. iv., Mexico, Mo., 1897). BxBUoaEAPHT: T. C. Jobnaon. Lt/e and Lttten of Robert Lewis Datmey, Richmond, 1903.

DACH, SIMON: German religious poet; b. at Memel (72 m. n.e. of Konigsberg) July 29, 1605; d. at KOnigsberg Apr. 15, 1659. He studied at Memel, KOnigsberg, Wittenberg, and Magdeburg, attaining proficiency in the use of the classic lan- guages, the cultivation of which in poetic form constituted his most grateful occupation through life. Returning to KOnigsberg, he matriculated at the university, where he devoted himself to the- ology and philosophy, and in 1633 was attached to the Cathedral school, of which he became asso- ciate rector in 1636. In 1639 he became professor of poetry in the university. Dach was the most gifted member of a group of Prussian theologians, scientists, and poets com- monly known as the KOnigsberg School, and com- prising, among others, Robert Robertin, Michael and Andreas Adersbach, Christof Caldenbach, 341 Johann Baptist Faber, Christof Wilkow, Erasmus Landenberg, Michael Behm, and Georg Mylius. Throughout the poetical works of this group, relig- ious or secular, runs the constant theme of the mutable and transitory nature of life, expressed in verse which shows more or less skill, yet reveals, especially in its numerous pastorals and songs of friendship, little sincerity or poetic fire. Dach alone rises above the level of his age to a height where he stands comparable with Gerhardt. His secular poems were written to order under the stress of pressing poverty, and show all the faults of this class of composition. A striking exception, how- ever, is the song Anke van T?uirau written in Platt- deutsch. It has become a popular folk-song. In his religious poems, however, Dach finds his true sphere. Sincerity of emotion, a simple fulness of faith and confidence in the justice of providence in the midst of a world of turmoil and uncertainty characterize them; in expression, melody, and deftness of rhythm and rime they are not un- worthy of comparison with the productions of a higher age. That a surprisingly small number of his sacred songs have been retained in the Evan- gelical hymnals is due partly to the fact that, as poems written for specisJ occasions, they reveal the quiet spirit of meditation rather than the sonorous swing of the hymn. His collected poems were pub- lished by Oesterley at Stuttgart in 1877. (H. Jacoby.) Bibliography: H. Stiehler, Simon Dadi, KOnigsbeis. 1806; C. V. Wintorfeld, D^r €vanotUa(k9 Kirdiiangtming, vol. ii., Leipsie, 184&; Q. Q. Genrinus, (TefcAuAte der deutecA^n Diektung, vol. iii., Leipole, 1872; K. Qoedeke and J. Tittmann. D€viUd%» Diehitr dea aubetuaknten Jahrhun- dmrU, ib. 1870; Julian, HymnolooVf PP. 276-277. D'ACHERT, JEAN LUC. See Achert, Jkan Luc d'.

DAGON: A deity of the Philistines, perhaps the principal god of that people. He had temples at Gaza (Judges xvi. 21 sqq.) and Ashdod (1 Sam. v. 1-2; I Maoc. x. 82-85, xi. 4). The location of the temple mentioned in I Chron. x. 10 is not given. Indications are found in place-names, pointing to the worship of a deity with this name over a wider territory than that occupied by the Philistines. Thus a Beth-dagon is mentioned Josh. xv. 41, which IB possibly the modem Beit-Dejan (6 m. s.e. of Joppa) ; there is a place of the same name 7 m. e. of Nablus and another near Jericho. The inscription of Eshmunaiar of Sidon speaks of Dor and Joppa toa 842 M aeats of the worship of Dagon. A seventh cen- tury Phenician seal is known on which is an in- scription read Baal- Dagon; and this is corroborated by the testimony of Philo Byblios to the effect that Dagon was worshiped elsewhere than in Phenicia and that he was worshiped by other Semites to the East. This is confirmed by the fact that a king of Isin (see Babylonia, VI., 3, § 4) is named Ishmc- Dagan, while that of the Amama Tablets is by a Dagan-takala — the name of the deity entering as an element in both names. The meaning of the word and the form of Dagon 's image are cognate questions still under discussion. Some see in the word a diminutive of affection formed from the Semitic dag, ** fish " (cf. ahimahon, " little sun "), and affirm that the form was that of a fish with the head and hands of a man. To this theory the statement in I Sam. v. 4, " only Dagon (i.e., the fishy stump) was left to him," is made tributary, and the explanation is given that after the human head and hands were broken off, only the fish-like form was left. With this agree the reports from the Greek age of the worship on the Philistine coajst of a deity half fish and half man. Philo Byblios derives the name from a Semitic root dagarif ** grain/' and makes of the god a deity of agriculture (Zeu8 arotrioa). With this fits in well the ear of grain on the Phenician seal mentioned above, though the argument is not strongly cogent. Both of these derivations seem to have warrant in early Semitic, if not in Sumerian worship, as in the case of E& (see Babylonia, VII., 2, § 3)» a deity derived from the water, and of the Oannes or Oda- kon of Berosus, who was pictured as part man, part fish. A Babylonian god Dagon was known, and the Arabic dagn, ** fruitful rain," suggests a connection with agriculture. Sayce, Delitzsch, and Schradcr agree in finding a pre-Semitic origin for the deity. In Greco-Roman times a goddess Derceto (Atar- gatis) was known, also connected with agriculture, who may have been the consort of Dagon but is not to be confounded with him. Nothing is known of the form of the cult except that the worshipers avoided stepping on the thresh- old of the temple — ^a custom which has its parallels elsewhere. Possibly, though not certainly, allusion is made to this in Zeph. i. 9. Geo. W. Gilmore. Bibuograpbt: A. H. Sayoe. Higher CrUieiMm and the Mon- umenU, pp. 325-327, London. 1804; F. Delitssoh, Wo lag doe Paaradieef Leipnc. 1881; Q. F. Moore, CommetUary on Judgee, pp. 358-359; Schrader, KAT, p. 358; P. Jensen. Koemtdooie der Babylonier, pp. 449-456, Strasburg, 1890. Earlier material is found in: J. Selden, De dU Stfria, ii.. ehap. iii., London, 1617; F. C. Movers, Die Ph6nixier, i. 143-144, 590, Bonn, 1841; P. Schols. ObUendienet und Zavbenceeen, pp. 238-244, Regensburg, 1877. Consult also: Dfi, i. 544; EB, i. 983-985; Menant, in RHR, xi (1885). 295-301.

DALE, JAMES WILKINSON: American Pres- byterian; b. at Cantwell's Bridge (Odessa), New Castle County, Del, Oct. 16, 1812; d. at Media, Pa., Apr. 19, 1881. He was graduated at the Uni- versity of Pennsylvania, 1831; studied theology at Andover, 1832-33, at Princeton, 1833--34, and was graduated at Andover, 1835; he also studied medi- cine (M.D., University of Pennsylvania, 1838) with a view to more efficient service as a missionary in India, but financial difficulties of the American Board prevented his departure; he was agent of the American Bible Society for Pennsylvania, 1838- 1845; pastor at Ridley and Middletown, Pa., 1845- 1866, at Media, 1866-71, at Wayne, 1871-76. He issued many sermons and labored zealously in be- 343 Dftffon Dalton half of total abstinence. His reputation was made, however, by his elaborate works on baptism, viz.- Classic Baptism (Philadelphia, 1867); Judaic Bap- tism (1869); Johannic Baptism (ISri); Christie and Patristic Baptism (1874). A condensed statement of his views, which were in favor of pedobaptism and sprinkling, may be fomid in The Cup and the Cross (1872). BiBUOORAnnr: J. Roberts, Memorial of Jatnea Wilkimon Dale, Philadelphia, 1886.

DALE, ROBERT WILLIAM: Congregationalist; b. at London Dec. 1, 1829; d. at Birmingham Mar. 13, 1895. He studied at Spring Hill College, Bir- mingham (M.A., University of London, 1853), and was associate pastor of Carr's Lane Congregational Church, Birmingham, 1853-59, after which he was sole pastor until his death. In 1869 he was chair- man of the Congregational Union of England and Wales and in 1877 was Lyman Beecher lecturer at Yale. In 1885 he was appointed by the crown a member of a conmiittee for investigating the work- ing of the English system of elementary education. He was likewise a governor of King Edward VI. 's School, Birmingham, and in theology was liberal and an advocate of conditional inmiortality. His publications embrace Life and Letters of the Rev, John AngeU James (London, 1861); The Jewish Temple and the Christian Church (1865); Christ and the Controversies of Christendom (1869); The Holy Spirit in Relation to the Work of the Ministry ^ the Worship, and the Work of the Church (1869); The Ten Commandments (1871); Protestantism^ its Ultv- maU Principle (1874); The Atonement (1875), a book which has had a remarkable reception; Nine Lectures on Preaching (Lyman Beecher lectures; 1877); Impressions of America (New York, 1878); The Evangelical Revival^ and Other Sermons (Lon- don, 1880); Epistle to the Ephesians, its Doctrine and Ethics (1882); The Laws of Christ for Common Life (1884); Manual of Congregational Principles (1884); Impressions of Australia (1889); The Old Evangelicalism and the New (1889); The Living Christ and the Four Gospels (1890); Fellowship with Christ and Other Discourses (1891); Christian Doc- trine (1894); Christ and the Future Life (1895); The Epistle of James and Other Discourses (1895); and Essays and Addresses (1899). He likewise edited The English Hymn-Book (Birmingham, 1875). Bibuoorafht; A. W. W. Dale (his 1011), lAfe of R. W. Dale of Birmingham^ London, 1898.

DALMAN, GUSTAF HERMANN: German Lu- theran; b. at Niesky (11 m. n.n.w. of Gorlitz), Silesia, June 9, 1855. He studied at the Moravian school in his native town and the Moravian theo- logical seminary at Gnadenfeld, where he was pro- fessor of Old Testament exegesis and practical theology 1881-^. In 1887 he left the Moravians for the Lutherans, studied at Leipsic (Ph.D., 1887), and until 1902 was professor and later director of the Institutum Delitzschianum at Leipsic. He was privat-docent 1891-96 and since 1896 has been associate professor of Old Testament exegesis in Leipsic. Since 1902 he has been on furlough in Palestine as president of the German Evangelical Archeological Institute, and was also appointed honorary Swedish consul for Palestine and Da- mascus in 1903. In theology he '* belongs to no party of any description, and tries to unite Evan- gelical Christian faith with scientific progress.*' Of his numerous publications may be mentioned: Studien zur biblischen Theologie (2 parts, Berlin, 1889-97); Jesaja 63, das Prophetenwort vom Sithnr leiden des Heilsmittlers (Leipsic, 1890); Kurzge- fasstes Handbuch der Mission unter Israel (Berlin, 1893); Grammatik des judisch-palOstinischen Ara- mdisch (Leipsic, 1894); Eben Ezer, Gedenkbuch der Familie Julius Marx (1897); Aramdisch-neuhe- brdisches Wortertmch zu Targum, Talmud und Mid- rasch (2 parts, Frankfort, 1897-1901); Christentum und Judentum (Leipsic, 1898; Eng. transl., Chris- tianity and Judaism, by G. H. Box, Oxford, 1901); Die Worte Jesu mil besonderer BerOcksictUigung des nachkanonischen jOdischen SchrifUums und der ara- mdischen Sprache, i. (Leipsic, 1898; Eng. transl.. The Words of Jesus Considered in Light of Post- Biblical Jewish Writings and the Aramaic Language, by D. M. Kay, Edinbui^h, 1902); and Paldstinischer LHwan (Leipsic, 1901). He edited the monthly Berith Am from 1893 to 1902 and the annual report of the Deutsches Evangelisches Institut fur Alter- tumswissenschaft des heiligen Landes since 1905. DALIIATIC. See Vestments and Insignia, Ecclesiastical. DALTON, HERMANlff: German Reformed; b. at Offenbach (4 m. s.e. of Frankfort) Aug. 20, 1833. He studied at Marburg, Berlin, and Heidel- berg 1853-56, and was pastor of the German Re- formed church in St. Petersburg 1858-59. In the latter year he retired from active life, and has since resided in Berlin. In 1868 he was created a con- sistorial councilor, and in 1876 founded the Evan- gelical city mission in St. Petersbui^. His wri- tings include: Nathanael, apologetische Vortrdge iiber eimige Punkte des Christentums (St. Peters- burg, 1861); Geschichte der reformierten Kirche in Russland (Gotha, 1865); Immanuel, der HeideU berger Katechismus als Bekenntnis- und Erbauungs- buch (Wiesbaden, 1870); Reisebilder aus dem Orient (St. Petersburg, 1871); Johannes Gossner, ein Ld)enabild aus der Kirche des neumehnten Jahr- hunderts (1874); Johannes von Muralt, eine Pdda- gogenr und PastorengestaU der Schweiz und Russ* lands aus der ersten Halfte des neumehnten Jahrhunderts (Wiesbaden, 1876); Johannes a Lasco, Beitrag zur Reformationsgeschichte Polens, Deutsch- lands und Englands (Gotha, 1881; Eng. transl. by M. J. Evans, London, 1886); Reisebilder aus Grie- chenland und Kleinasien (Bremen, 1884); Ferien- reise eines evangelischen Predigers (1886); Beitrdge zur Geschichte der evangelischen Kirche in Russland (4 vols., Gotha and Berlin, 1887-1905); Die evange- lische Kirche in Russland (Leipsic, 1890); Offenes Sendschreiben an den Oberprokureur dies russi- schen Synods, Herrn Wirklichen Geheimrat Kon- stantin Pobedonosieff (1890; Eng. transl.. On Re- ligious Liberty in Russia, Open letter, 1890), Am/ Missionspfaden in Japan (Bremen, 1895); Indische Reisehriefe (GOtersloh, 1899); Aus dem Leben einer evangelischen Gemeinde (1901); Daniel Ernst Jalh Damaaoenns Damianiia 344 ZtrntH (Berlin, 1903); and Lebefuerinnerungen (2 vols., 1906-07).

DAMASCUS: Perhaps the oldest city in Syria. Its name appears in the principal early tongues of the region (Heb. Dammesk^ Darmeae^, and Dumn me8ek; Egyptian Timaslfu, Saranuuilfu; Assyr. DimashJfi and Dimashlfa; Arab. Dimashkf Dimislp eUSkam^ or elrSham). It lies east of Mt. Hermon in 33® 32' n. lat., 36'' 18' e. long., 133 m. n.n.e. of Je- rusalem and about 60 m. e. of the Mediterranean, at an altitude of 2,260 feet, at the western end of the exceedingly fertile plain of the Ghuta (a hollow sheltered by hiUs and watered by the Barada and the Awaj), along the principal branch of the Barada C* Abana," II Kings v. 12; Gk. Chryaarrhoaa). It is about a mile in length from east to west and half a mile from north to south, with a suburb of con- tinuous buildings on the south nearly a mile in ex- tent, thus presenting in contour the shape of a mal- let with its handle. Its site is nearly level, it is walled, only the foundations of most of the wall being ancient, and it gives entrance by seven gates. Its location on a plain unusually rich in its products of fruits in many varieties, of grains and other prod- ucts useful in the arts and manufactures, and its situation on great trade routes have combined not only to prolong its life, but to cause its speedy re- covery from the many disasters which have befallen it in the course of history. It has been famed at different times for its wines, its wool products (Ezek. xxvii. 18), its silk (Amos iii. 12, R. V. margin; cf. the ** damask " of commerce), and its '' Damascus blades." Besides a part of the wall for which an early date is claimed, there is no ancient structure. It is likely that the Onuniad Mosque is situated on the site of the old Church of St. John, which took its name from the fact that it was supposed to be the repository of the head of John the Baptist. The conjecture has been offered that this was on the site of an early temple. The history of the city has been very varied. It is first mentioned in connection with Abraham, Gen. xiv. 5, xv. 2. In the fifteenth century b.c. it figures as one of the conquests of Thothmes III., and at the same time its name is found in the Amar- na Tablets, while in the thirteenth it is dainied as z part of the territory of Rameses III. According' II Sam. viii. 3 sqq. (cf. I Chron. xviii. 5 sqq.) it ws5 included in the realm of David, but must have been lost to the Hebrews soon after, according to I "Kins-. xi. 23-25. It appears later to have become tL*. head of the Syrian confederacy which opposed for so long the westward march of the As83rrian empire (see Assyria, VI., 3, §§ 7 sqq.), and the power wLic'i was centered there was almost continuously anta^cr- nistic to the Hebrew kingdoms. A Rezon son of Eliadah appears to have made himself king in Xise time of Solomon. A king named Ben-hadad helped Asa against Baasha (I Kings xv. 16-21), and the same king or one of the same name defeated Omri and established a trading station in Samaria (I Kings XX. 34), while a son had to yield under defeat the same privilege to Ahab in Damascus. In a later campaign against the same power Ahab met his death (I Kings xxii.). In the yesLrs 854, 850, and 847 the forces of Damascus under a Ben-hadad were defeated by Shalmaneser II., yet the city seems to have recovered and, under a king whose name w£l> also Ben-hadad, besieged Samaria (II Kings ^i- vii.)- The throne was soon after seized by Hazael (II Kings viii. 15), who defeated Jehoram (II Kin^s viii. 28-29), and was defeated by Shalnuuieser 11. in 843 and 840. Yet the same speedy recovery v^o often shown by the city enabled its king to regain territory from Israel east of the Jordan and even to threaten Judah (II Kings xii. 17-18) and to con- tinue hostile operations against Jehoahaz and Je- hoash (II Kings xiii. 3, 25). In 803 a king of Damascus whose name is given in the inscriptioTis as Mari was assailed by Ramman-nirari III., and Israel seized the opportunity to recover territory east of the Jordan (II Kings xiv. 28). In 773 the battering of the Assyrians was renewed, in 740 the ruler Rezin paid tribute to Tiglath-Pileser III. (cf. II Kings XV. 19 sqq., xvi. 7 sqq.), who took the city in 733, killed Rezin, deported the inhabitants, and introduced Assyrian colonists. In 732 Ahab visited the city to pay homage to the Assyrian overlord. In 713 Damascus was again found in an anti- Assyrian league and was again crushed in the defeat at Karkar. Under the Persians the city was made a seat of provincial government. When the region came under the sway of Alexander he issued coins from the city; but after his empire was divided Damascus was compelled to yield the chief place in importance to Antioch, though it was often a second* ary capital. In 85 b.c. it fell into the hands of Aretas the Nabatsean. It was occupied in 65 by the Romans, and seems to have been ruled by an ethnarch for another Aretas in the time of Paul (II Cor. xi. 32). According to the testimony of coins, between 34 and 62 a.d. the city was not under Roman control. Christianity seems to have made an early entrance into the dty, most likely through Jewish converts (Acts ix. 1 sqq.), and in Christian history the place is famous as the place where or near which Paul was converted. A bishopric was erected there, the incimibent of which took rank after the patriarch of Antioch. In 635 a.d. it be- came the residence of Mu'awiya, the first Ommiad calif. During the crusades it was frequently the 346 RELIGIOUS ENCVCLOPEDIA DamascenuB Damianus object of attack, was captured by the Mongols in 1260, plundered by the Tatars in 1300, and taken by the Turks under Selim in 1516, since which date it has been the capital of a Turkish province, ex- cept for the period 1832-41, when it was under Egyptian control. The present population is not accurately known, estimates varying from 160,000 to 180,000, of whom about 100,000 are Moham- medans, about 5,000 Jews, 22,000 Orthodox Greeks, and the rest are distributed among the Christian sects. See Aram, Arameans, §§ 9-10. Geo. W. Gilmore. Bibuoorapbt: J. L. Porter, Five Years in Damaaeue, Lon- don. 1855; W. K. Kelly, Sjfria and the Holy Land, chaps. XT.-xvi.. ib. 1844; P. Schaff. Throui^ Bible Lande, pp. 361 aqq., New York, 1878; Mrs. Madntoah, Danuueue and its PeopU, London, 1882; M. F. von Oppenheim, Vom Mittel- meer turn pertieehen Odf, i. 49-86, Berlin, 1899; Schflrer, Oeaehiehte, iii. 117 sqq. et paaeim; Eng. tnuud., passim.

DAMASUS: The name of two popes. Damasus I. : Pope 366-384. He was bom in 305, probably in Rome, the son of a priest of the Church of St. Laurence. After the death of Liberius, he was elected bishop by a part of the Church, while another faction chose the deacon Ursinus. Damasus could secure recognition only after a conflict marked by bloodshed, which lasted two years on account of the uncertain attitude of Valentinian I.; and even after the suppression of the disturbances the party of Ursinus maintained their opposition, to the point of schism. During these troubles clerics had been summoned before secular judges, and torture had even been used. On complaint being made, Valen- tinian issued a rescript, the substance of which is known from Ambrose (Epist.f xxi. 2); it is summed up in the phrase " that priests should judge priests." Rade thinks that the emperor meant to declare a fundamental division between secular and eccle- siastical jurisdiction; but this is too much to infer from the words. It was only an express recog- nition of the disciplinaiy power of bishops and councils, as it had been previously recognized in practise, and limited to questions of faith, morals, and contests over ecclesiastical offices. The appeal of the Roman council of 378 or 379 to Gratian was, in view of the occasion, an attempt to secure not extension, but recognition of the disciplinary power of the Roman See, which was practically nullified as long as imperial officials declined to en- force the sentence of ecclesiastical tribunals. This the council asked that they should be instructed to do, and Gratian agreed. There appears nothing in all this to support the contention of Rade and Langen that the Western bishops at least were sub- ject to the tribunal of the pope; and the imperial decrees mentioned above can scarcely be cited as triumphs of the policy of Damasus. In fact, he does not seem to have known how to use either these or the famous edict of Theodosius (Feb. 27, 380), or the third canon of the Council of Constantinople in 381, as means to the elevation of Rome's eccle- siastical position — which, indeed, was actually damaged by his conduct in the Antioch contro- versy (see Meletiub of Antioch), and did not again make progress until the pontificate of Siri- cius. In dogmatic confficts Damasus remained steadfast in the traditional Roman policy. He op- posed the Arians, and took strong measures against the Luciferians. It was during his pontificate that the understanding was reached between the Old and Young Nioene parties in the East; but he rather hindered the rapprochement than helped it, taking the side of the strict old orthodox party in the schism of Antioch. Basil of Csesarea tried in vain to get him to acknowledge Meletius. A Roman synod of 382 renounced communion with Flavian. The measures taken by Damasus against Arianism in Italy were not very successful. Ap- parently as early as 369 he had condemned Auxen- tius of Milan at a council of Italian bishops, but the sentence was not executed by the secular authori- ties; Auxentius remained bishop until his death, and only in the election of Ambrose to succeed him did orthodoxy come into power. He was more successful in his repeated pronouncements against Apollinarianism, which was condemned in Roman councils of (probably) 377 and 381. Damasus was not lacking in learning, and did a good work by setting on foot a revision of the Latin Bible. He wrote a (lost) treatise on virginity and a nimiber of metrical inscriptions for the catacombs, on which he bestowed intelligent care. He died Dec. 11, 384. (A. Hauck.) Bibuoobaprt: The Opera of Damaaufl are in MPL, xiii., and hiB EpigrainnuUaf ed. M. Ihm, were publiBhed, Leip- 810, 1895. Consult: Liber pontificalia ed. Duchesne, i. 212, Paris, 1886, and ed. Monunsen in MOH, OetL pont. Rom., i. 82-84; Jaff«, Regetta, i. 37; M. Rade, Damaeue, Bieehof von Rom, Freiburg, 1882; Hefele, Coneilienoeediiehte, vols. i.-ii.: Bower, Popee, i. 83-107; Milman, Latin Chria- Hanitu, i. 108-110. Consult also B. HOlscher, De Da- maei hymnie, MUnster, 1868. Damasus IL (Poppo): Pope 1047-48. After the premature death of Clement II., Popp>o, bishop of Brixen, was nominated to succeed hhn by Henry III. at Christmas, 1047. He was conducted to Rome in the following summer, consecrated July 17, and died Aug. 9. (A. Hauck.) Biblioobapht: Jaff^, Reoeela, i. 528; J. Lancen, Oetchiehle der rOmiedten Kirche . , , bie Oregor VIL, Bonn, 1892; Hauok, KD, iii. 593; Bower, Popee, ii. 343; Milman. Latin ChrieHanity, iii. 239. DAMIAK, SAINT. See Cobmas and Damian, Saintb. DAMIAin, PIETRO. See Pbtsr Damian, Saint.

DAMIANUS: Jacobite patriarch of Alexandria; b. in Syria July, 678; d. June 12, 605. He succeeded Peter IV. as patriarch of Alexandria in 578 under circumstances which were probably of a turbulent character. Controversies between the Jacobites and Paulites (the latter the adherents of Bishop Paul the Black of Antioch, d. probably 685) ensued and passed over into Egypt. On a journey in Syria and to Constantinople Damianiis endeav- ored to frustrate peace negotiations which had al- ready commenced. The Jacobite patriarch Peter of Aiitioch was consecrated by him in Alexandria (680 or 681), and later a controversy arose between the two which is known as a phase of the tritheistic controversy (see Trttheibm); Damianus defended a position similar to that of Sabellianism (q.v.). On two Coptic ostraca a writing of Damianus is Banoers Daniel THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOa 846 mentioned with the title K&rugmata (cf. Crum, Coptic Ostraca, London, 1902, no. 18, p. 7). G. KrOqer. Bxbuoorapht: The souroes are: John of Ephesus, Hut, ecd., iii. 4, 33, 38, 41-45. 60, Syriac and En«. transl. by W. Cureton, London, 1853; Timotheus, De recepHont hcere- Heorum, in MPO, Ixxxvi.; Sophronius, EpUlola adSergium, in MPO, Ixxxvii.; and Sevenu, in J. B. Asseman, Bihlio- theca orierUalis, ii. 70 aqq., Rome, 1721. Gonsult: J. P. N.Land, Joanne; BiMchof von Epkeaua, pp. 136-139, Ley- den, 1856; C. W. F. Walch, Hi$torie der Ketxereien, viii 687, Leipsic, 1778; A. von Quteohmid, Kleine Schriften, ii. 498-499, ib. 1890. DAMIEN, FATHER. See Venster, Joseph db. DANCERS (DANSATORES, CHORIZAFTES) : A Bet of wild enthusiasts in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, whose peculiarities offered one of those strange mixtures of physical, spiritual, and moral elements to be found in the popular life of the Middle Ages. They made their appear- ance at Aachen in the sununer of 1374, coming from southern Germany, and then spread east- ward to Cologne, southward to Metz, and westward into Hainault. Their membership was numbered by thousands, of both sexes, and almost exclu- sively from the lower classes. They danced madly through the streets and in and out of the churches for hours at a time, until they were completely exhausted. They paid no attention to the amazed spectators, their minds being taken up with the contemplation of the most fantastic visions. Some- times they imagined that they were wading in a stream of blood, to get out of which they leaped wildly in the air; others saw heaven opened and Christ upon his throne. The morbid mental con- dition which undoubtedly underlay these actions took the form of the popular notions of the day. It is probable that in many cases it was only simu- lated, and that lazy rascals joined and imitated the Dancers to get a share in the gifts which were freely bestowed upon them; and these excited mobs offered a natural breeding-groimd for im- morality of all kinds. The clergy and the people at large, however, sought no natural psychological explanation of the phenomena, but regarded the dancers as demoniacs; the priests attempted to help them by exorcism, while the populace was inclined to attribute their misfortune to imworthy priests, whose baptism had not sufficient validity to expel the demons. The dancers in their delirium invoked St. John Baptist, which may be connected with the fact that the outbreak occurred while the old popular celebration of his festival at midsununer, with its many excesses, was still observed. A simi- lar epidemic occurred at Strasburg in 1418. Here it was customary to invoke St. Vitus for the cure of the malady, on account of the old tradition which has led to the application of the name " St. Vitus's dance " to the disease technically known as chorea. (A. Hatjck.) Bxbuoorapht: J. F. C. Hecker, Die groMen Volkakrank- hHUn dM MiUOaUerM, ed. A. Hinch, pp. 143-193, Berlin, 1866, Ens. transl. of earher edition, pp. 81-138. London. 1846 (where the authorities are given and reference made to similar phenomena elsewhere); Bncydopctdia Bri- tanniea, xxiii. 60, s.v. " Tarantism "; P. Fr^d^rioq. Corpu% doeumentorum inquiaWonU Neerlandiea, i 231 sqq., Ghent. 1889; idem, De eeeten dee geeeelaare en der daneere in de Nederlanden, Brussels, 1897.

DANCING: Dancing as a religious observance occupied an important place in the ceremonies of all ancient religions. It is connected with sacred pro- cessions (as in the Babylonian and Egyptian festivals) and with community rites at the altar, the sacred tree, or the sacred stone (cf., e.g., the account of such dances which comes from Cyprus, M. H. Ohne- falsch-Richter, Kypros, die Btbd und Homer, Ber- lin, 1893, Eng. transl., London, 1893, plates IxxxiiL 6, cxxvii. 4, etc.). In the Mohammedan festival at Mecca the march around the Kaaba still re- mains the culminating point of the celebration. The Old Testament reports that at the great Baal sacrifice on Mt. Carmel the priests went "limp- ing" around the altar (I Kings xviii. 26, R. V. margin), and mention is made also of dancing around the golden calf (Ex. xxxii. 19). Sacred processions fell into disuse in the worship of Yah- weh after the ark was transferred to Solomon's Temple; but the bringing of the ark into the Temple (I Kings viii. 1 sqq.) and its conveyance to Zion (II Sam. vi. 5) were accomplished in the man- ner usual in sacred processions. David and all Israel danced before the ark. Processions and dances without the ark formed an important part of festal celebrations (cf. the description of such a procession in Ps. Ixviii. 25), at triumphal festivals (Ex. XV. 20; Judges xi. 34), and at the annual festival at Shiloh (Judges xxi. 21). Indeed, the whole celebration takes its name from them, the Hebrew ^fugg signifies the festival procession or dance. This remained true till the latest period of Jewish history. For the Psalmist the dance around the altar was part of the proper praise of God (Ps. cxlix. 3, cl. 4). On the evening of the feast of atonement the celebration was closed by dances of the maidens of Jerusalem in the vine- yards (Taanit iv. 8). A peculiarity of the feast of tabernacles was the processions of those carrying branches of citron and palm around the altar of burnt offering, and even more especially the torch- dances of the most prominent men on the night between the first and second days of the festival. Naturally, dancing also formed a part of the secu- lar festivals (Jer. xxxi. 4, 13; Matt. xi. 17; Luke vii. 32, xv. 25), and at the banquets of the nobles dancing women could not have been lacking (cf . the Egyptian customs), although they are men- tioned nowhere in the Old Testament (but note the dance of the daughter of Herodias, Matt. ziv. 6). I. Benzinoer. Bxblioorapht: John Spenoer, in B. Ugolinus, Tkeeaurve anUguiiatum eacrarutnt zzzii. 1133, 34 vols., Venioe. 1744- 1760; R. Voes, Der Tone und eeineGeeehidUe, Berlin, 1868; F. Delitssch, Irie, pp. 189-206, London, 1880; W. Smith, Dictionary of Greek and Roman AnH^itiee, ii. 602-504* ib. 1801; H. B. Tristram. Eaelem Cueiome, pp. 207-210, ib. 1804; Mrs. L. Grove, Dancing, ib. 1806; H. Emmanuel, La Danee greeque antique^ d'aprie lee mommmenie mfwrie, Paris, 1876; DB, i. 540-661; SB, i. 008-1001; JB, iv. 424-426. DANEAU, da"n6' (DAlffNiEUS), LAMBERT: French Protestant; b. at Beaugency-sur-Loire (15 m. S.W. of Orleans) ISSQ; d. at Castres (80 ra. w. of Montpellier) Nov. 11, 1596. He was of Roman Catholic family, began the study of law at Orleans, went to Paris in 1547, and returned to 347 Banoers Daniel Orleans in 1552, where he studied four years with Anne du Bourg and obtained the degree of doclor in tUroque jure 1559. For a long time he was inclined toward Protestantism, and the death of his master, Du Bourg, decided him to go to Geneva in 1560, where he made the acquaintance of Calvin and adhered to the Reformed Church. In 1561 he became pastor at Gien, where he remained till St. Bartholomew's day. From 1574 he was pro- fessor at Geneva and in 1581 was granted citizen- ship. The same year he was called to the Univer- sity of Leyden and became minister of the Walloon Church there. But when he tried to organize it on the Genevan model he met with much difhculty and had to leave Leyden the following year. For a year he was professor and preacher in Ghent, then at Orthez, and at Lescar (1591). In 1593 he was called to Castres. Daneau was one of the most celebrated theologians of the sixteenth century; he belonged to the extreme Calvinist party, and wrote many works on philosophy, jurisprudence, and theology, including Methodus Sacra Scrip- tuTCB in piUdicU turn coficianibus utUiter, atque in- teUigenter tractandw (Geneva, 1 570); Lea Sorciere, dup- logue trha utUe et niceaaaire pour ce temps (1574); Brihve remontrance sur lea jeux de aort (1574); Traits dea danaea auquel eat amplement riaolua la queation, d aavoir a'il eat permia aux Chrdiena de danaer (1579); TraiU de Veatal honneate dea Chrea- tiena en leur accouatrement (1580); Orationia Do- miniccB explicaiio (1582); Apologia aeu vera et orthodoxa orihodoxcrum Patrum aententia, defenaio ac interpretatio de adoratione camia domini noatri Jeau Chriaii (1583). G. Bonet-Maury. Biblioorapht: P. de F^ce, Lambert Daneau, Pazio, 1882; Nio^ron, M&moire; xzvii. 21-36; £. and E. Haac. La France proteetante, ed. H. L. Bordier, vol. v., Paria, 1886.

DANZ, JOHANN TRAUGOTT LEBERECHT: Church historian; b. at Weimar May 31, 1769; d. at Jena May 15, 1851. He was educated at Weimar, Jena, and GOttingen, and became teacher at the gymnasium and normal school in his native city. Through the influence of Herder he went to Jena in 1798 as rector of the mu- nicipal school. He became privat-docent at Jena in 1804, assistant professor of theology in 1810, full professor in 1812, and retired in 1837. His theological tendency was that of a Bibli- cal rationalist, and he postulated that both the rationalist and the supematuralist could prac- tise the true religion of Christ. Like Herder, he was characterized by breadth of learning and by skilful presentment of the most diverse themes. His most important theological book was his Lehr- buch der chrvitHchen Kirchengeschichte (2 vols., Jena, 1818-26), of which he made compendiums in his Kungefaatte Ztuammentidlung der christlithen KirchenguchiehU (1824) and in his Kirchengaekvchi' liehe TabeOe (1838). He also prepared an edition of the BiUioiheca patruiica of Johann Georg Walch (1834), with which his own Initia dodrince patristica (1839) was closely connected, and he dedicated to Pope Gregory XVI. his edition of the Libri sifm- Mici eodesia Romano-Calholie<B (Weimar, 1836). He likewise wrote an Eneykiopddie und Methodo- logis der theologiachen Wiasenachaften (1832) and an Univer8dlwdrierbuch der iheologiachen LiUeratttr (Leipsic, 1843), having already summarized prac- tical theology in his Grundriu der Wieaenachaften dee geietlichen Berufe (Jena, 1824). He was, more- over, the author of a curious Vereuch einer allge- meinen Geechichie der menechliehen Nahrungemittd (Leipsic, 1806) and a philological work entitled AfUilexilogue (Jena, 1842). (G. FRANKf.) Bibliography: AwnaUe aeademim Jenenme, ed. H. C. A. Eichstadios, pp. 18 sqq.. Jena, 1823; Neuer Nekroloo der Deuteehen, 1851. i. 874-382.

DARBY, JOHN NELSON: The most prominent among the founders of the Plymouth Brethren, whence they are sometimes (especially on the con- tinent of Europe) called " Darbyites " (see Plym- outh Brethren); b. in London Nov. 18, 1800; d. at Bournemouth Apr. 29, 1882. He was grad- uated at Trinity College, Dublin, in 1819 and was called to the Irish bar about 1825; but soon gave up the law, took orders, and served a curacy in Wicklow until, in 1827, doubts as to the Scriptural authority for church establishments led him to leave the Church altogether and meet with a little 867 Dante company of like-minded persons in Dublin. In 1830 he visited Paris, Cambridge, and Oxford, and then went to Plymouth, where an assembly of Brethren was shortly formed, and the town soon lent its name to the movement. James L. Harris, perpetual curate of Plymstock, resigned his living to unite with them and, in 1834, started the Ckria- tian WUne88, their first periodical. Darby became an assiduous writer, and published his Parochial Arrangement Destructive of Order in the Church in the first voliune of the Wiineea, and his Apoetaxy of the Successive Dispensations (afterward published in French as Apostasie de V^conomie actueUe) in the same paper in 1836. Dissensions among the Breth- ren had already begun, and Darby was accused of departmg from their original principles. Between 1838 and 1840 Darby worked in Swit- sserland. In the autumn of 1839 an influential member of the congregation at Lausanne invited him thither to oppose Methodism. In March, 1840, he came, and obtained a hearing by discourses and a tract, De la doctrine des Wesleyens & Vigard de la perfection. His lectures on prophecy made a great impression, and he soon gathered young men round him at Lausanne, with whom he studied the Scrip- tures. The fruit of these conferences was his Etudes sur la Parole, a work which appeared in English as Synopsis of the Books of the B^le (5 vols., London, 1857-67). Many congregations were formed in Cantons Vaud, Geneva, and Bern. Cer- tain of his followers started a periodical, Le T^ jnoignage des disciples de la Parole. When, by Jesuit intrigues, a revolution broke out in Canton Vaud (Feb., 1845), the Darbyites in some parts of Switzerland suffered persecution, and Darby's own life was in jeopardy. He returned to England the same year, but his heart seems ever to have turned toward Switzerland and France. Thenceforth he took a more active lead among the English Brethren, with the result that they became split into two parties, the Darbyites or exclusives and the Bethesda or open brethren. In 1853 he visited Elberfeld and again in 1854, when he trans- lated the New Testament into German. He was also in Germany in 1869, when he took part in a translation of the Old Testament into German. He visited Canada and the United States in 1859, 1864-65, 1866-68, 1870, 1872-73, and 1874. About 1871 he went to Italy, and in 1875 to New Zealand. He visited abo the West Indies. Between 1878 and 1880 he was much occupied with a transla- tion of the Old Testament into French, in connection with which he sojourned long at Pau. He had already made a French translation of the New Testament in 1859. Darby was a most voluminous writer on a wide range of subjects — doctrinal and controversial, devotional and practical, apologetic, metaphysical, on points of scholarship, etc. His CoUeded Wri- tings (incomplete) have been published by W. Kelly in thirty-two volumes (London, 1867-^83). They include Irrationalism of Infidelity (1853), a reply to Newman; Remarks on Puseyism (1854); The Suf' ferings of Christ (1858) and The Righteousness of God (1859), two works which produced much con- troversy; Analysis of Newman*s Apologia (1866); FamUiar Conversations on Romanism, written be- tween 1870 and 1880; Meditations on the AcU of the Apostles, composed in Italian; Letters on the Revised New Testament (1881), in which he criticised the revisers principally in respect to the aorist tense, a subject he had previously discussed in the preface to an English translation of the New Testa- ment (2d ed., 1872). He was a hynm-writer and edited the hynmal in general use among the Breth- ren. A volume of his Spiritual Songs was pub- lished in London in 1883, and three volumes of his lettera in 1886-89. BiBLXOORArar: W. B. Neatby. HM. of the Plymouih Bnlh- rcn, London, 1901 (brat on both Darby and the Plym- outh Brethren); F. Estteule, Le Plynumthimne d'autnfoi§ el le Dar&yieme d'aujourd'hui, PariB, 1858; W. H. Dorman, The Ctoee of $8 Yean of Aeeodatum with J. N. Darby, London, 1866; Stokee, in CofUemporary Review^ Oet., 1885, pp. 637^552; S. W. Duffield, Bnglieh Hymns, pp. 403-405. New York. 1886; Julian. Hymnology, pp. 279- 280; DNB, ziv. 43-44; and the literature under Pltm- OUTH BaCTHBBf .

DARGAN, EDWIN CHARLES: American Baptist; b. at Springville, Darlington County, S. C, Nov. 17, 1852. He was educated at Furman University, Greenville, S. C. (M.A., 1873), and at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, then at Greenville, S. C, now at Louisville, Ky. (full graduate, 1877). He has been pastor of Baptist churches in Roanoke County, Va. (1877-81), of the First Baptist Church, Petersburg, Va. (1881-87), the Baptist Church at Dixon, Cal. (1887-^88), the Citadel Square Baptist Church, Charleston, S. C. (1888-92), professor of homiletics in the Southern Baptist Theological Sem- inary (1892-1907), and, since June, 1907, pastor of the First Baptist Church, Macon, Ga. He has also been a member of various boards and other organi- zations of his denomination. He is '* Evangelical and conservative in general theological views " and " Calvinistic in type of theology." His principal works are: Ecclesiology (Louisville, 1897; revised ed., 1905); A History of Preaching, from A,D. 70 to 1672 (New York, 1905); The Doctrines of Our Dariofl Daaffli«rty 358 Faiih (Nashville, 1905); and Society, Kingdom, and Church (Philadelphia, 1907). He also published a commentary on Colossians (Philadelphia, 1890), and edited J. A. Brodus's Prepanaion and Delivery of Sermons (New York, 1898).

DARLINGTON, JAMES HENRY : Protestant Epis- copal bishop of Harrisburg, Pa.; b. at Brooklyn, N. Y., June 9, 1866. He studied at the University of the City of New York (B.A., 1877) and Prince- ton Theological Seminary (1880). He was licensed by the Presbyteiy of Newark 1879; but was or- dered deacon and ordained priest in 1882 in the Protestant Episcopal Church, and from 1883 to 1905 was rector of Christ Church, Bedford Avenue, Brooklyn, as well as archdeacon of Brooklyn in 1896-98. In 1905 he was consecrated bishop of Harrisburg. He was lecturer in New York Uni- versity in 1902-03. He has written Pastor and People (Brooklyn, 1902), and has edited The Hymnal of the Church (New York, 1900).

DAUB, KARL: German theologian; b. at Cas- sel Mar. 20, 1765; d. at Heidelberg Nov. 22, 1836. He studied in his native city and at Marburg, where he became privat-docent in 1791, lecturing on phi- lology, philosophy, and theology. Suspected of Kantianism in theology, he was transferred in 1794 to a school at Hanau as professor of philosophy, but in the following year was called to Heidelberg as professor of theology. His position was pri- marily Kantian, and in this spirit he wrote his Lehrbuch der Katechetik (Heidelberg, 1801), insist- ing on an ethical basis of religion, a sharp distinc- tion between legalistic religion and the religion of reason, an emphasis on the practical import of the Bible, and a rejection of the supernatural. Yet even in this book there are traces of dissatisfaction with the Kantian position, and in the Heidelberger Sttuiien, which he edited in collaboration with Georg Friedrich Creuzer after 1805, he acknowl- edged his conversion to the principles of Schelling. He now regarded religion as purely objective, and assuming distinct forms according to racial and individual characteristics. Christianity is a folk- religion, represented on the side of cult by Roman Catholicism, and on the side of doctrine by Protes- tantism; any unification of these two elements into a single Church would lead, in his opinion, to the destruction of the German nation. This change of view is fully developed in his Theologumena (1806) and Einleitung in daa Studium der Dogmatik (1810). Rejecting both supematuralism and rationalism, he assumed a speculative basis, implying by this term that the concept of God must form the foun- dation, while religion is the revelation of God in the soul of man, and attains perfection only in Christianity. Since, from his premises, Daub could assume no origin of the world from God as separate from the divinity, he was obliged to define the universe as having only the appearance of being. Creation was construed, in Platonic fashion, as the fall, and the Atonement was, accordingly, the recon- ciliation of the world to God, a process which was metaphysical rather than ethical. In his inter- pretation of the historic Christ Daub regarded the definitions of the Bible and the Church concerning the personality and deeds of Christ as symbolic statements of the general cosmical and meta- physical process, while, on the other hand, the personality and deeds of Jesus of Nazareth were taken as historical and were regarded as the perfec- tion of the concept of incarnation and atonement. The weak point of Daub's system was his ignore ing of the problem of evil, and he was thus led to still another stage of development, which was rep- resented in Judas hcharioth, oder Betrachtungen iiber das Bose im VerhdUnisa zum Guten (2 parts, 1816-18), which, in a sense, forms the direct antithesis of his former views. The historical, hitherto practically ignored, now received full rec- ognition, and he became obsessed with the con- cept of evil as a positive factor of destruction to such an extent that he approximated Gnostic dual- ism. The necessity of reconciling his theory of evil with the tenets of speculative philosophy obliged him to advance the hypothesis that evil is an actual, though false, " miracle," which is op- posed by the fivefold positive " miracle " of the primal good in God, his ideational realization in the creation and order of the world, and finally the restoration of good in a world estranged from God through his incarnation and the absolute sinlessness of Christ, the Son of God. With all its eccentricities, this book was the ablest work of its author. The final position of Daub was strongly Hegelian, and the result of Hegelian speculation and orthodox theology was, in his case, the reincarnation of a medieval scholastic. A long period of literaiy quiescence followed, until the publication of his Dogmatiache Theologie jeiziger Zeit (1833), in which he pitilessly revealed the weaknesses of the theology of the time. Extravagantly blamed and as extrav- agantly praised, the work is marred by the same lack of historic sense and impartiality which de- tract from the value of his other works. A far more pleasant impression is gained from his Theo- logische und philoaophische Vorlesungen, edited after his death by T. W. Dittenberger and P. C. Marheinecke (7 vols., Berlin, 1838-44), although even these are not altogether free from his charac- teristic faults. (M. A. LANDERERf.) Biblioobapht: G. Rosenkrani, Erinneruno€n an Daub, Berlin, 1837; K. P. Fiacher, Vertuch nner CharakUri§iik (F. von Baaderg) Tkeo9ophie und ihrea VerhOUmBBeB tu dtn Syttemen DavJm, Erlangen. 1866.

DAVENPORT, CHRISTOPHER: English Ro- man Catholic; b. in Coventry, Warwickshire, 1598; d. in London May 31, 1680. At the age of fifteen, with his elder brother, John (q.v.), he entered Mer- ton College, Oxford; influenced by a Roman priest, he went to Douai (1615) and Ypres (1617), and joined the Franciscans; he took degrees in divinity at Salamanca. Under the name of Franciscus a Sancta Clara he went to England as a missionary and became chaplain to Queen Henrietta Maria. He devoted himself with some success to the attempt to reconcile the churches of England and Rome and lived on terms of cordial intimacy with many of the Anglican clergy during the reign of Charles I. The civil war caused him to leave England, but only for a short time; he was not molested during the Commonwealth, and at the Restoration was restored to court favor and his position as chaplain to the queen. He was a learned man, of winning manners, and liberal in his views. His chief work was a ParaphraMica expositio articiUorum confes- sionis AnglicancF (printed first separately and then as an appendix to a volume called Detis, natura, gratia, Lyons, 1634; reprinted with translation, 1865), intended to show that the English articles and Roman doctrine are not essentially antagonist tic. A two-volume edition of his works appeared at Douai, 1665-67. Bibliography: A. k Wood, Afhenm Oxonienaea, ed. P. BliflB, vol. iii.. 4 vols.. London, 1813-20; J. Oillow, BibHo- ffraphical DicHonary of Bngli^ CatKoliea, ii. 24r-28, Lon- don (1886): DNB, ziv. 106-100.

DAVENPORT, JOHN: One of the founders and first minister of the New Haven colony; b. at Coventry, Warwickshire, England, 1597 (baptised Apr. 9); d. in Boston Mar., 1670 (the day of the month is variously given as the 11th, 13th, 15th, and 16th). He was graduated from the University of Oxford (B.A., 1615; M.A. and B.D., 1625); was chaplain at Hilton Castle (12 m. n.e. of Durham) for about six months, 1615-16; went to London, where he became curate of St. Lawrence Jewry, 1619, and vicar of St. Stephen's, Coleman street, 1624. He won great regard by his faithfulness to duty in 1625, when the city was devastated by the plague. In 1626 he joined in a scheme to purchase impropriations (church prop- erty in the hands of laymen) and use the profits to maintain ministers in various parts of the kingdom, and was one of twelve feoffees (trustees) entrusted with the care of the funds raised for the purpose. The plan was considered by Laud and others a movement in the interest of non-conformity, suit was brought against the feoffees, and in Feb., 1633, the association was dissolved as illegal and the im- propriations which had been purchased were con- fiscated. In 1629 Davenport helped to obtain the charter for the Massachusetts Bay colony, gave £50 toward the expense, and his name was first on the committee to draw up instructions for the colonists. He took alarm when Laud (who had long been sus- picious of him) was appointed archbishop in 1633, and late in the year went to Holland, where he became copastor with John Paget of the English church in Amsterdam. He did not approve of the baptism of children whose parents were not church- members, controversy arose between the two pas- tors on the subject, and after less than six months Davenport gave up preaching in public, but con- tinued to hold meetings in his house. He returned to England about the beginning of 1637, decided to follow the advice of John Cotton and others to go to New England, and landed in Boston June 26. He was well received there, but in Apr., 1638, went to Quinnipiac (New Haven), as minister of the new colony. He approved of the provision in its con- stitution, which was settled in Jime, 1639, limiting the franchise and eligibility to office to church- members, and was one of the " seven pillars of state " who were charged with the government. In 1642 he declined an invitation to attend the Westminster Assembly, and in 1661 helped to shelter the regicides Whalley and Goffe. The New Haven colony was absorbed in Connecticut in Jan., 1665, contrary to his wishes; and dissatisfac- tion with his position after the event induced him to accept a call from the First Church in Boston in September. He was a leader of the opposition to the Half- Way Covenant, and this caused a split in 361 Dant David the church when he was installed in Dec., 16C8, and the fonnation of the Old South Church. He wrote comparatively little. Of most interest are The SairU*8 Anchor-hold in AU Storms and Tern- peals (London, 1661) and The Power of Congrega- tional Churches Asserted and Vindicated (1672). Biblxoorapht: F. B. Dexter, in the Paptf of the New Haven Colony Hieiarical Society, ii (1877), 204-238; Ck>t- ton Mather, Magnolia, bk. iii., vol. i., chap, iv., pp. 821- 331. Hartford, 1865; B. Brook. lAvee of the Puritana, ui. 446-451, London, 1813; DNB, ziv. 110-111.

DAVID OF AUGSBURG: Franciscan mystic; b. at Augsburg about 1215; d. there Nov. 19, 1272. Of the life of David very little is known. He was master of the novices in the Franciscan settlement at Regensburg founded in 1226, and after 1243 probably also in Augsburg. Either alone or in company with his famous pupil and friend, Berthold of Regensburg (q.v.), he went about preaching and wrote his treatises for the novices. It is difficult to state which these treatises were, since the Epistola fratris David and the introduc- tion prefixed to the Augsburg edition of 1596 are wanting in other manuscripts, and all tractates for the novices are found also among the works of Bonaventura. Indeed, the very first of these treatises, De exterioris hominis reformatione, is among Bona- ventura's writings with the title De institutione novitiorum, and also, in a more original form, among the works of Bernard of Clairvaux, with the title Opusculum in hcee verba ; ad quid veniati t It is therefore debatable how much in this tract- ate really belongs to David. The second and third treatises, De interioris hominis reformatiane and De 8€ptem processibus religionis belong undoubtedly to David, though they are also printed among Bonaventura's works with the title De pro/ectu religiosorum. To David also belongs the fourth book found in manuscript and extant in Bona- ventura's works as De institutione novitiorum. To the treatises for novices belong also the two German tractates Die sieben Vorregeln der Tugend and Spiegel der Tugend, whereas the other German treatises ascribed by Pfeiffer to David are un- doubtedly spurious. The two German treatises are pearls of German prose; the Latin tractates are verbose. On account of these writings Preger called David a mystic. There is no doubt that he was mystic in tendency, but in the main this tend- ency is shown only in two larger sections of the Interioris hominis reformatio (ix.-xv.) and the Septem processus (xxxv.-xli.). David is too sober to be a true mystic; with him the principal things are the practical injunctions in which he refers to the pattern of Christ, especially to meekness, hu- mility, and love. For a time David successfully serv^ the Inquisition. The fruit of his experience appears in the treatise De inquisUione hcareticorum. Here he shows himself a child of his time. The heretics are foxes and wolves, who are neither to be refuted nor opposed with spiritual weapons, but are to be annihilated, and in such a hunt hunger, tor- ture, lies, and treachery are allowed. In the last decade of his life he composed an ** Exposition of the Rules of the Order of the Minorites,'' in which he tried to mediate between the clerical body and the community, but actually came to the point of view of the conmiunity. It is to be regretted that his sermons which John Trithemius had seen are lost. His characteristic was a sober conmion sense which was averse to everything untrue and exag- gerated. His importance lies mainly in his activity as preacher and in his silent work of educating the rising generation of monks, of whom Berthold of Regensburg was the most prominent. E. Lempp. Bibuooba,pht: The De inquiaiHone, ed. W. Preger, ap- peared in AMA, ziv. 2 (1870). 181-235. Consult: F. Pfeiffer. Deutaehe MyeHker dee 14- JakrhunderU, vol. i.. Leipeio, 1845; W. Preger, OeeekieKU der deuteehen My- Hk, i. 268 sqq., ib. 1874; E. Lempp, in ZKO, xix (1808). ISsqq. DAVID, CHRISTIAll. See Unity of thk Brxtb- REN. DAVID OF DINAHT or DINAN : Pantheistic philosopher; supposed to have been bom either at Dinant (on the Meuse, 15 m. s. of Namur), Belgium, or at Dinan (14 m. s. of St. Malo) in Brittany; d. after 1215. He is said to have enjoyed the favor of Pope Innooent IIL (1198-1216) because of his subtle dialectics. At the provincial council of 1210 held at Paris, which condemned Amalric of Bena (q.v.), the Quatemuli of David was also or- dered to be burned, and in 1215 the reading of ex- tracts from David's work was prohibited in the University of Paris. David fled from France, and the further events of his life are unknown. Albertus Magnus finds the basis of David's teaching in the identity of everything real in the absolute. David distinguished three kinds of things, corporeal, spiritual, and divine substances. For each of the three kinds he assumed a general, indivisible prin- ciple; for the corporeal, a primitive " stuff "; for the spiritual, the» spirit; for divine things: Grod. Be- tween these three principles no distinction can exist; each can be conceived of only as an undifferentiated entity, and the three must accordingly be identical. The details of his system and sources of his pan- theistic teaching can not be ascertained with cer- tainty. At all events, he is not dependent on Amalric of Bena, but was rather influenced by Aristotelian writings and Jewish and Moorish comment on them. Some thoughts of Giordano Bruno and Spinoza show a relationship to the pantheistic system of David's. Hsrman Hauft. Bibliography: J. H. KrOnlein, De . . . Davidie de Di- nanio dodrina, Gieeeen, 1847; W. Preger, GeeehiehU der deuteehen MyeHk, i. 184-101, Leipaio. 1874; Mhnoiree de Vaeadimie dee inecriptiane et bellea lettree, xxvi 2 (1870), 467-408 (by G. Jourdain); B. Haurteu, MSmaire eur la vraie eource dee erreure atlribuSee h David de Dinan, in Mhnoiree de Vacad&mie, ut sup., xzix. 2 (1870), 310- 330; O. Bardenhewer, Die peeudoarietotdieehe Sdirift aber doe reine Gute, pp. 212 sqq., Freiburg, 1882; J. E. Erdmann, GeeehiehU der Philoeophie, i. 352, Berlin, 1806, Eng. transl., London, 1808; F. UeberwQg, GeeehiehU der Philoeophie, pp. 206-212, Berlin, 1808, Eng. tranal., L 388-402, New York, 1874; Neander. Christian Church, iv. 445-448. DAVID JORISZOON. See JoBis.

DAVID, SAINT: The patron saint of Wales. All that is known of him is that he died about 601, that he was bishop of Menevia (St. David's) in southwest Wales, and that he presided at two synods of the Welsh Church, the later of the two being held in 569 (cf. Haddan and Stubbe, Councils, i. 116-118). His legendary and fictitious history makes him metropolitan archbishop of Wales, con- secrated at Jerusalem, ascribes to him numerous foundations, and says that he extirpated Pelagian- Davidis Davidson 364 ism in Wales at the synods already referred to; it is well decked out with miracles, visions, and the like. He was popular in both Wales and Ireland, where many churches were dedicated to him. His day is Mar. 1. Bibliography: W. J. Rees. Lives of the Cambro-British Saints, pp. 102-144, 40^-448. Llandovery. 1803; DCB, i. 791-798; DNB, adv. 118-116. DAVIDIS, FRANCISCUS. Services as a Reformer (f 1). Adoption of Unitarianism (f 2). Theology (f 3). Controversies (f 4). Influence (f 5). Franciscus Davidis (Ferencz David), a Unitarian of Transylvania, was bom at Klausenburg (Kolossvar; 72 m. n.n.w. of Hermannstadt), Hungary, 1510 (?); d. at Deva (37 m. 8.w. of Karlsburg) Nov. 15, 1579. He was probably of Saxon descent. Franciscus, the episcopal vicar of Weissenburg, enabled him to study theology at Wittenberg. From 1551 to 1552 he was rector of a school in Bistritz. Later he accepted the Lutheran faith and was called to Petersdorf (Peterfalva) as first Evan- z. Services gelical preacher. In 1555 he became as a rector in Klausenburg, in 1556 also Reformer, superintendent of the Evangelical Hun- garian Church in Transylvania. He soon became the champion of the Reformation in his country, following Melanchthon and com- bating Calvinism. The state assembly of Thoren- burg in 1558 permitted only the Lutheran and the Catholic religion, but the controversies continued without interruption, especially on the doctrine of the Lord's Supper, and the Calvinistic party headed by Peter Melius (q.v.) gained many adherents among the nobility. Davidis himself, anxious to maintain and increase his influence, turned toward Calvinism. From the discord of confessions resulted a separation of nationalities, the Saxons under their superintendent Matthias Hebler remaining faithful to Lutheranism, and the Hungarians under Melius and Davidis accepting Calvinism; after 1564 both parties were l^ally acknowledged. Davidis became Calvinistic superintendent, and soon afterward court preacher of the sovereign John Sigismund Zdpolya. At this time an irresistible current of Unitarian doctrines from Italy Switzerland, and especially from Poland, made itn way into Transylvania, and the controversies turned from the Lord's Supper to the doctrine of the Trinity and the person of Christ. Davidis, again following the current a. Adoption of the time, accepted the new doctrine of tJnitari- and was chiefly influential in intro- anism. ducing Unitarianism at the court, and at the University of Klausenburg. In 1566 he attacked the doctrine of the Trinity in a disputation with Peter Kto>lyi, rector of the uni- versity in Klausenburg. A number of conventions were held, treatises were written, and the contro- versies assumed greater and greater dimensions, Davidis and Melius becoming the most passionate opponents. Davidis and Georgius Blandrata (q.v. ), court phjrsician of the prinoe,[sucoeeded in winning the majority of the nobility over to Unitarianism; and in 1567 the prince placed at their disposal a printing-press at Weissenburg. The state assemblj held at Thorenburg in 1568 granted entire freer dom in matters of religion, and in the same year & great disputation was held at Weisaenbuiig witli Peter Melius and Peter Kdrolyi on the one side and Davidis and Blandrata on the other. The contro- vexsies were continued at synods and in treatises. In 1568 the Unitarian Chureh was constituted in- dependently with Davidis as bishop. Its adhei^ ents were almost exclusively of the Hungarian an<l Ciech population, with Klausenburg and Wetssen- burg as their strongholds. The fundamental thoughts of Davidis's doctrine were that the Reformation must be placed upon a broader basis, and the ceremonies and articles of faith must be reduced to the simplicity of apostdic times. The main obstacle to such a reform is the scholastic doctrine of the Trinity, a product of Greek philosophy, and the source of all idolatry in the Church. There is no triune God, but 3. Thmlogy. only one God, the Father and Creator of the universe; to him alone divinity in the full sense is to be ascribed. Christ waa bom of Maiy in a supernatural manner. The Son of God exists eternally in the divine decree; but in reality he is not bom from eternity, but has origi- nated only with the incarnation of Christ, llw Holy Spirit is not the third person of the Trinity, but the power that emanates from the Father and is communicated to us through the Son for our sanctification. Davidis spread his doctrines abroad in Latin and Hungarian writings, in catechisms, sermons, and Latin distichs. But the predomi- nance of Unitarianism in Transylvania was of but short duration. Ziipolya, the reigning prince, died in 1571, and his successor, Stephen B&thory, a Roman Catholic, called the Jesuits into the country. Most of the Unitarians took the part of Caspar B4kes, a pretender, and were involved in his utter defeat in 1575. Bdthory immediately removed all Unitarians from the court, and their publica- tions were subjected to a severe censorship; all innovations in religion were threatened with ex- communication and punishment by the sovereign. Davidis, however, received important aid from Unitarians of foreign countries who sought refuge in Transylvania, as, for instance, Johann Sommer of Saxony, and Jacob Palieologus, an exile from Poland. Bdthory succeeded in vnnning some of the Unitarians, especially Blandrata, over to his political cause. A separation from his wife in- jured Davidis's authority, and the liberties of the Unitarians were more and more restricted. To make matters worse, Davidis's position became so radical that he rejected the worship of Christ altogether. A controversy then ensued between him and Blandrata, who, belonging to the more moderate party, invoked the aid of 4. Contro- Faustus Socinus. The latter came in versiea. person from Basel Davidis expressed his views in four theses De non is- vocando Jesu Ckristo in precibua socris. He held a synod with his adherents at Thorenburg, where be decreed the NonrodoraHo. Thereupm Blandrata and Socinus effected his suspension from oflSoe 365 BaTidflon and imprisonment until a general synod should request him to revoke his heresy. In June of the same year a disputation took place at a synod in Thorenburg; and in July Davidis was tried at Weissenburg in the presence of the sovereign, con- demned as innovator and blasphemer, and thrown into prison for life at the mountain-fortress of Deva. His party did not disappear. Although Blan- drata succeeded for the moment in winning the Unitarian divines over to an adorantistic confession of faith and in reintroducing the ceremonies of baptism and the Lord's Supper, there 5. Influence, separated themselves from these New Unitarians the adherents of Davidis as Old Unitarians or Davidists or Non-ador antes, and from the latter again there originated the sect of the Sabbatharians, thus completing the circle from Catholicism through Lutheranism, Calvinism, Unitarianism, Non-adorantism to a sect in which Christianity closely approached Judaism. Davidis 's literary works were occasioned by his controvei^ sies, the most important being De falsa et vera unius Dei Patris, Filii et Spiritus Sancti, cognitione libri duo (Weissenburg, 1567) and Refviatio scripti G, Majoris (1669). The latter treatise was occasioned by his controversy on the Trinity with G. Major of Wittenberg. Davidis also wrote in Hungarian " On the Divinity of the One God-father and His Blessed Holy Son Jesus Christ " (1571). K. HOLL. Bibliography: Th« best monograph, unfortunately only in Hungarian, Ib Elek Jakob, David Ferenes Emléke, 2 volt.. BudapMt, 1879. Consult: F. C. Baur, Die ehrut^ licKe Lthn von dtr Dreieiniokeilt iii. 144 sqq., TQbingen, 1843; O. Fock, Der Socinianiemue, Kiel. 1847; P. Bod. Hist, Hungarorum ecd.^ ed. L. W. E. Rauwenhoff and J. J. Prini. i. 397-457. Leyden. 1888 (history of Unita- rianism in Hungary); J. H. Allen. HiML of UniiarianM, pp. 60-68. 10&-112, New York, 1894. On the communion controversy: K. Landsteiner. /. Paldologiu, Vienna. 1873. A statement of Davidis's principles is in Opera J. Ptdcto- logi, Basel. 1681. Consult KL. iii 1421-23; ADB, ir. 787.

DAVIDISTS: Followers of David Joris. See JORIS.' DAVIDS, THOMAS WILLIAM RHYS: English student of comparative religion and Buddhist scholar; b. at Colchester (51 m. n.n.e. of London), Essex, May 12, 1843. He studied at Breslau (Ph.D., 1865), and entered the Ceylon Civil Service in 1866. In 1877 he became a barrister at the Middle Temple, London, and in 1883 was appointed pro- fessor of Pali and Buddhistic literature at Univer- sity College, London. Since 1904 he has also been professor of comparative religion at Victoria Uni- versity, Manchester. In 1882 he founded the Pali Text Society, of which he has since been president, also editing its Journal and other publications. He was Hibbert lecturer in 1881, and has been secre- tary and librarian of the Royal Asiatic Society since 1887. He has written, edited, or translated: Ancient Coins and Measures of Ceylon (London, 1877); Buddhism (1878); Buddhist Birth-Stories, i. (1880); Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion as Illustrated by Some Points in the History of Buddhism (Hibbert lectures; 1881); Buddhist Suttas, in SBE, xi. (Oxford, 1881); Vinaya Texts, ib. xiii., xvii., xx. (in collaboration with H. Olden- berg; 1881-85); The Questions of King Milinda, ib. xxxv. (1890); Buddhism, Its History and Litera- ture (New York, 1896); Dialogues of the Buddha (London, 1899); and Buddhist India (1902). He is also the editor of the Sacred Books of the Bud- dhists, for which he edited Dialogues of the Buddha (London, 1899) and the Digha-Nikaya (1899), while to the Journal of the Pali Text Society he contributed an edition of the Sumangala Vilasini in collaboration with J. E. Carpenter (London, 1886).

DAVIDSON, ANDREW BRUCE: United Free Church of Scotland; b. on the farm of Kirkhill, parish of Ellon (15 m. n. of Aberdeen), Aberdeen- shire, 1831 (probably Dec., although the exact date is uncertain); d. at Edinburgh Jan. 26, 1902. He studied at Marischal College, Aberdeen (M.A., 1849), taught in the Free Church school of Ellon until 1852, and was graduated at New College, the divinity hall of the Free Church, Edinburgh, in 1856. He filled several pulpits temporarily, but never held a charge. In 1858 he was appointed assistant to John Duncan, professor of Hebrew in New College, and in 1863 became full professor of Oriental hm- guages and Duncan's colleague. After the latter's death in 1870 Davidson was sole professor until 1900, when he was senior colleague. He was an admirable Biblical scholar and critic, and a famous teacher. He was a member of the Old Testament Company of Revisers. He preached occasionally and with great acceptance, but reluctantly and preferably in obscure places. His literary work was relatively small in amount, but superior in quality. In addition to editing for The Cambridge Bible for Schools the. volumes on Job (Cambridge, 1884), Ezekiel (1892), and Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah (1896), as well as Isaiah for The Temple Bible (London, 1902), he wrote: Outlines of Hebrew Accentuation, Prose and Poetical (London, 1861); A Commentary on Job (Edinburgh, 1862), which covers only the first third of the book; In- troductory Hebrew Grammar (1874; 17th ed., 1902); The Epistle to the Hebrews with Introduction and Notes (1882); and Hebrew Syntax (1894; 3d ed., 1905). After Davidson's death his colleague, J. A. Patterson, issued his Biblical and Literary Essays (1902); Old Testament Prophecy (1902); and two volumes of sermons, The Called of God (1902; with a biographical introduction by A. T. Innes) and Waiting upon God (1903); while Princi- pal S. D. F. Salmond edited his Theology of the Old Testament (1904).

DAVIDSON, RANDALL THOMAS: Archbishop of Canterbury and primate of all England; b. at Edinburgh Apr. 7, 1848. He studied at Trinity Col- lege, Oxford (B.A., 1871), was curate of Dartford, Kent, 1874-77, and chaplain and private secretary to the archbishops of Canterbury Tait (1877-82) and Benson (1882-83). He was dean of Windsor( 1883-91), became bishop of Rochester 1891, was translated to the see of Winchester 1895, and consecrated archbishop of Canterbury 1903. He was domestic chaplain to the Queen 1883-91, and clerk of the closet to the Queen 1891-1901, and to the King 1901-03, a prelate of the Order of the Garter 1895- 1903, while in 1904 he was created a Grand Com- Day 366 mander of the Victorian Order. He has written Life of Archbishop Tait (2 vols., London, 1891; in collaboration with W. Beecham) and The Christian Opportunity (1904), and has edited The Lambeth Conferences of 1867, 1878, and 1888 (London, 1889).

DAVIDSON, SAMUEL: English Congregation- alist; b. at Kellswater (4 m. s. of Ballymena), County Antrim, Ireland, Sept. 23, 1807; d. at London Apr. 1, 1898. He was graduated at the Royal Academical Institution, Belfast, in 1832. Three years later he was appointed professor of Biblical criticism at Belfast to the General Synod of Ulster, and retained this position until 1841, when he became a Congregationalist. In 1842 he was appointed professor of Biblical literature and ecclesiastical history in the Lancashire Independent College, Manchester. He resigned in 1857, on account of opposition to his views of inspiration, and in 1862 was elected Scripture examiner in London University, and removed to London. He was a member of the Old Testament Revision Committee. His theology was rationalistic. In addition to translations he wrote: Sacred Herme- neutics (Edinburgh, 1843); Ecclesiastical Polity of the New Testament (London, 1848); Treatise on Biblical Criticism (2 vols., Edinburgh, 1852); The Hebrew Text of the Old Testament Revised from Critical Sources (London, 1855); The Text of the Old Testament Considered, with a Treatise on Sacred Interpretation, and a Brief Introduction to the Old Testament Books and the Apocrypha (1856; vol. ii. of the tenth edition of T. H. Home's Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures); An Introduction to the Old Testament, Critical, Historical, and Theological (3 vols., 1862- 1863); An Introduction to the New Testament (2 vols., 1868); On a Fresh Revision of the English Old Tes- tament (1873); The Canon of the Bible (1876); and The Doctrine of Last Things Contained in the New Testament, Compared with the Notions of the Jews and the Statements of the Church Creeds (1882). Bibliography: Autobiography and Diary, with selection of letters, edited by his daughter, Miss A. J. Davidson, Edin- burgh, 1890.

DAVIES, JOHN LLEWELYN: Church of Eng- land; b. at Chichester Jan. 26, 1826. He studied at Trinity College, Cambridge (B.A., 1848; M.A., 1851), where he was fellow 1851^9. He was curate of St. Anne's, Limehouse, 1851-52, vicar of St. Mark's, Whitechapel, 1852-56, and rector of Christ Church, St. Marylebone, 1856-89, and rural dean 1882-88. Since 1888 he has been vicar of Kirkby- Lonsdale, Westmorelandshire. He was honorary chaplain to Queen Victoria 1876-81, chaplain in or- dinary 1881-1901, and is an honorary chaplain to King Edward VII., while he has been principal of Queen's College for Ladies, London, one of the founders of the Workingmen's College, London, and chairman of the committee of the New Hos- pital for Women. He was select preacher at Oxford in 1881, Hulsean lecturer at Cambridge in 1890, and Lady Margaret preacher at the same university ten years later. In theology he is a follower of F. D. Maurice. Among his numerous publications may be mentioned: Morality According to the Sacra- ment of the Lord's Supper (London, 1865); Epistles of St, Paul (1866); The Gospel and Modern Life (1869); Homilies, Ancient and Modem (2 vols. 1884); Social Questions from the Point of View of Christian Theology (1885); and Workingmen's College, 1854-1904 (1904).

DAVIES, SAMUEL: Presbyterian; b. near Summit Ridge, New Castle County, Del., Nov. 3, 1724; d. in Princeton, N. J., Feb. 4, 1761. He studied at Samuel Blair's School at Fagg's Manor (Londonderry), Chester County, Pa.; was ordained in 1747 and sent to Hanover County, Va., where his position was difficult and delicate owing to opposition on the part of the authorities to di'*- senters. In 1753-54 he was in England, with Gilbert Tennent, soliciting funds for the College of New Jersey (Princeton), and while there secured a royal declaration that the Act of Toleration ex- tended to Virginia. Returning to America, he or- ganized the first presbytery in Virginia in 1755. In 1759 he succeeded Jonathan Edwards as pn>st- dent of Princeton. He was an eloquent preacher, admired in England as well as in America. Bibliography: His sermons were printed in five volumes. London. 1767-71; the best Am. edition. 3 voU.. Nev York. 1846, has an essay on his life and times by Albert Barnes, and a separate Memoir was published at Bos- ton in 1832. Consult also E. H. Gillett. History of the Presbyterian Church, ohape. vii., viii., Philadelphia, 1864.

DAVIES, THOMAS WITTON: English Baptist; b. at Nantyglo (16 m. n.w. of Newport), Mon- mouthshire, Feb. 28, 1851. He studied at the Baptist colleges at Pontypool and Regent's Park. University College and Manchester College, London (B.A., London University, 1879), and the univer- sities of Berlin, Leipsic (Ph.D., 1898), and Stras- burg. He was minister of the High Street Baptist Church, Merthyr-Tydfil (1879-81); professor of Hebrew, classics, and mathematics in the Baptist college at Haverfordwest (1881-91); principal and professor of theology in the Midland Baptist College, Nottingham (1891-98); and lecturer in Arabic and Syriac at University College, Nottingham (1896-98). Since 1898 he has been professor of Semitic languages in the University College of North Wales, Bangor, and was also professor of Old Testament literature in the Baptist College, Ban- gor, 1898-1906. In doctrinal theology he is in the main Evangelical, and in criticism is an adherent of the Graf-Wellhausen school. He has written: Oriental Studies in Great Britain (Woking, 1892); Magic, Divination, and Demonology Among the Hebrews and Their Neighbours (London, 1897): The Scriptures of the Old Testament (in Welsh. Wrexham, 1900); Heinrich Ewald, Orientalist and Theologian, 1803-1903: A Centenary Appreciation (London, 1903); and Psalms 73-160 with Introduc- tion and Commentary (in The Century Bible, 1906).

DAVIS, JOHN D.: Presbyterian; b. at Pitts- burg, Pa., Mar. 5, 1854. He studied at the College of New Jersey (B.A., 1879), the University of Bonn (1879-80), Princeton Theological Seminary (1880- 1883), and the University of Leipsic (1884-86). He has been instructor in Hebrew in Princeton Theo- logical Seminary (1883^4 and 1886-88), and pro- fessor of Hebrew and cognate languages (1888-9*2), of Semitic philology and Old Testament history 367 Davidson Day (1892-1900), and Oriental and Old Testament lit- erature (since 1900), in the same institution. In theology he is Calvinistic, and in Old Testament criticism is a conservative. He has written Genesis and Semitic Tradition (New York, 1894) and A Dictionary of the BibU (Philadelphia, 1898). DAVISON, WILLIAM THEOPHILUS: English Wesleyan; b. at Bath, Somersetshire, Oct. 6, 1846. He was graduated at London University in 1869, held various pastorates 1868-81, was for ten years professor of Biblical literature in Richmond College, Surrey, was professor of theology in Handsworth College, Birmingham, until 1904, and in 1905 re- turned in a similar capacity to Richmond College. He is a member of the faculty of theology in Lon- don University, and in 1901 was president of the Wesleyan Methodist Conference. He has written: Praises of Israel (London, 1893); Wisdom Litera- ture of the Old Testament (1895); The Lord's Supper (1896); Strength for the Way (1902); and Psalms in The Century Bible (1903).

DAWSON, SIR JOHN WILLIAM: Canadian Presbyterian layman; b. at Pictou, N. S., Oct. 13, 1820; d. at Montreal Nov. 19, 1899. He studied at the College of Pictou and the University of Edinburgh (B.A., 1846). In 1850 he was appointed superintendent of education in Nova Scotia, and three years later was made professor of geology and principal of McGill College and University, Mon- treal, holding this position until he retired as pro- fessor emeritus in 1893. He was the first president of the Royal Society of Canada in 1883, of the American Association in 1884, of the British Associa- tion in 1886, and of the American Geological So- ciety in 1893. He was made a Companion of the Order of St. Michael and St. George in 1882, and two years later was knighted. In theology his position was conservative. He wrote more than twenty books, of which those of special theological interest are: The Bible and Science (London, 1875); The Origin of the World According to Revelation and Science (1877); Facts and Fancies in Modem Science : Studies of the Relation of Science to Prev- alent Speculations and Religious Belief (Philadel- phia, 1882); Egypt and Syria, Their Physical Fea- tures in Relation to Bible History (London, 1886); Modem Science in Bible Lands (1888); Modem Ideas of Evolution as Related to Revelation and Science (New York, 1890); and Eden Lost and Won : Studies of the Early History and Final Destiny of Man as Taught in Nature and Revelation (London, 1896).

DAWSON, WILLIAM JAMES: English Con- gregationalist; b. at Towchester (45 m. n.e. of Oxford) Nov. 21, 1854. He studied at Didbury College, Manchester, and entered the Wesleyan ministry in 1875. He held pastorates at Wesley's Chapel, City Road, London, and at Glasgow and Southport until 1892, when he became a Congre- gatiozialist and was appointed minister of High- bury Quadrant Church, London, resigning this position in 1905 to become an evangelist. He has lectured widely on literary and historical topics, and in 1891 was a delegate to the Methodist Ecu- menical Conference at Washington, D. C. He has written: Arvalan (London, 1878); A Vision of Souls (poems; 1884); Quest and Vision : Essays on Life and Literature (1886); The Threshold of Manhood (1889); The Makers of Modem Poetry (1890); The Redemption of Edward Strahan : A Social Story (1891); The Church of To-morrow (1892); Poems and Lyrics (1893); The Making of Manhood (1894); The Comrade-Christ (sermonsf 1894); London Idylls (1895); The Story of Hannah (1896); The House of Dreams (1897); Through Lattice Windows (1897); The Endless Choice and Other Sermons (1897); Table Talk with Young Men (1898); Judith Boldero : A Tragic Romance (1898); Makers of Modem Prose (1899); Savonarola : A Drama (1900); The Doctor Speaks : Episodes in the Experiences of John Selkirk, M.D. (1900); The Man Christ Jesus (1901); The Quest of the Simple Life (1903); The Reproach of Christ and Other Sermons (1903); The Evangelistic Note (1905); Makers of English Fiction (1905); and The For- gotten Secret (1906).

DAY, THE HEBREW: The civil day was reck- oned by the Hebrews from sunset to sunset, so that the day began at that time both on ordinary occa- sions and on Sabbaths and feasts. In this matter the Hebrews were in accord with the Athenians, and the Greeks in general, as well as with the Ger mans; and this mode of reckoning goes well with the habits under a cult of the moon (see Moon, Semitic Conceptions of). Yet according to De- litzsch and Dillmann (in their commentaries on Genesis i. 5), the reckoning indicated in Gen. i. 5 sqq. is not to be taken as from evening to evening, but after the Babylonian fashion, from morning to morning. Excepting only the seventh day, the days of the week had no proper names, that system of designation which gave the days the names of the sun, moon, and planets being rejected because of heathen associations. For the divisions of the day, besides the ordinary terms of dawn, morning, midday, and evening, there were in use such expressions as ** the heat of the day " (Gen. xviii. 1), " the height of the day," or " the perfect day " (Prov. iv. 18), and " the cool of the evening " (Gen. iii. 8). The reckoning by hours does not appear in the Old Testament until the book of Daniel, when the word used is Aramaic. In the New Testament the reckoning by hours is customary, the first hour is sunrise and the sixth is midday (cf. Matt. xx. 1 sqq.), though it is de- batable whether the Gospel of John does not follow the Roman civil mode by reckoning the hours from midnight (cf. John xix. 14 and xviii. 28 with Matt, xxvii. 45; Mark xv. 26, 33; Luke xxiii. 44). The hour, dependent upon the sun and the seasons, varies in the latitude of Palestine from forty-nine to seventy-one minutes in length. A sun-dial (doubtless an obelisk with stefw), which marked the hours as the shadow passed, was used by Heze- kiah (II Kings xx. 9-10). The night was divided by the Hebrews into three watches (Lam. ii. 19; Judges vii. 19; Ex. xiv. 24). In New Testament times the Roman division of the night into four watches was employed (Mark xiii. 35), though the Talmudists retained the earlier division into three watches. (C. von Obslu.) Day of the liord Deacon 368 Bduoomapbt: C. L. Ideler, Bandbudi dtr , , . Chrono- loffis, L 80 aqq., Berlin, 1825; C. Wieseler. Chronologv- 9€h§ Synopm der vier Evangelien, pp. 410 sqq., Hamburg, 1848, Eog. tnuiBl., 0«mbridge. 1877; Bensinser, ArchAo- logie^ pp. 202-203: Nowack, Archiioloffie, i. 214-215; DB, i. 573; BB, i. 1035-38. DAT OF THE LORD (Heb. Yam Yahweh, "Day of Yahweh ") : A complex prophetic concept brought into connection with Hebrew Messianism and later iised with eschatological significance. The full expression " day of the Lord *' is not always used, the terms " the day," " that day," " the day of trouble/' " the great and terrible day," " that time," and other like phrases being interchange- able with it. Indeed, the word " day " itself, in Hebrew as in Arabic, often had a sinister content and was equivalent to '' day of battle " (cf. Isa. ix. 4). The idea undergoes so great development in the histoiy of Messianism that no general de- scription of it applies to any one period. Its fun- damental and abiding characteristic is that it is the time of the manifestation of Yahweh as savior of (the actual or the ideal) Israel by the punish- ment of his enemies, when his benign purposes for that people will be accomplished. In its physical aspects it is a day of terrifying phenomena, all nature partaking of the awe inspired by the pres- ence of the Creator and showing that awe in heaven by the darkening or falling of the heavenly bodies and on earth by quakes and cataclysms and by the unbounded terror of the nations. The idea seems to have originated in the popular mind as a national- istic ideal, founded not in ethics but in the crude religious ideas concerning the effect of the covenant by which Yahweh was conceived as bound to help his people simply because they were his people and served him alone. This day had from the very beginning and always retained two sides (cf. Mai. iv. 1-2), judgment (of Israel's and therefore of Yahweh's enemies, later of the wicked) and redemption (of Israel, later of the righteous). It was taken into the circle of prophetic ideas by Amos, who lifted it out of the nationalistic and unethical by the startling an- nouncement that the day involved not (as the peo- ple assumed) the punishment of Israel's enemies, but of Israel itself because of its offenses against a righteous God. Sinners were the enemies of Yah- weh and not the Gentiles as Gentiles, and on them the troubles of the day would fall. With this rep- resentation Hosea agreed, and Isaiah and Micah applied the same reasoning to Judah. In these cases the precedent, ever faithfully followed, was set of stating the purpose of the day to be the estab- lishment of a righteous people. While the ethical element thus introduced remained dominant, it was frequently united with the nationalistic element, so that while the judgment was to discriminate be- tween Israel and its enemies, it did so on the as- sumption that Israel was righteous while the enemy was wicked. The exact form which the concep- tion took fluctuated according to the external con- ditions and the view of the individual prophet. Thus in Nahum and Habakkuk, dealing with times when Israel was oppressed, the view-point is na- tional and the judgment is to be against the (wicked) Assyrians and in favor of (righteous) Israel. In Zephaniah an advance is made, and the day of the Lord becomes a world-judgment; but this is a corollary of the conception of Yahweh as not merely God of Israel, but God of the whole earth (i. 8-13, ii. 1-6, iii. 8). In the later prophets this is accom- plished by an assembling of the peoples (Isa. xlv. 20; Zech. xii. 3; Joel iii. 2), when judgment is meted upon them. In Jeremiah the day is once more primarily against Judah, though other na- tions are involved (i. 18, xxv. 15-24; xxv. 27-33 is a later interpolation). Already in Jeremiah the idea is becoming denationalized and individualizcni, the cause of judgment being not collective or na- tional, but individual, and in Ezekiel this is fully accomplished. The Messianic kingdom was to be introduced by this day, and a regenerate Israel was to survive. According to the exilic prophets, the day inaugurated the Messianic kingdom, but the guilt was largely individual. Haggai (chaps, ii.- iii.) and Zechariah (i. 15, ii.) returned again to the nationalistic ideal, but their position was reversed by Malachi. Up to this point the judgment was conceived as taking place and the kingdom being established on the earth, and this kingdom was earthly in character. This was changed in Isa. Ixv.-lxvi. (before 400 B.C.), where a new heaven and a new earth is introduced — a fruitful suggestion for further development. Joel (c. 350 B.C.) exhibits the day in all its terror (ii. 30-31), but returns to the nationalistic view-point (iii. 1-2, 9-21), and the same idea prevails in Zech. xii.-xiv. (of about the same date as Joel). In Isa. xix. (c. 300) a univer- salism of worship of Yahweh (which is merely illus- trated by mention of Egj'pt, Assyria, and Israel) is ushered in by " that day." In Daniel (166-165) the result of the coming of the day is the overthrow of the world-kingdoms, the establishment of the kingdom of the Messiah, in which will share the righteous dead of Israel, raised from the grave. Here first appears the resurrection of the individ- ual, Ezekiel's resurrection (chap, xxxvii.) being national. In the earlier Pseudepigrapha (q.v.) a great development takes place, in part through the doctrine that Sheol (see Hades) is a place of punish- ment for the wicked, heaven appearing by contrast as the abode of the blessed (foreshadowed in the Old Testament in Ps. xlix. 15, bcxiii. 24). The resurrection is generalized, the wicked being raised for final condemnation, the righteous for partici- pation in the new kingdom. Complete transcen- dentalizing does not take place, since sometimes the new Jerusalem is localized on earth, at other times it is a heavenly city. In these earlier books ** the day " ushers in the Messianic kingdom. In the later Pseudepigrapha the earthly Messianic rule is only the temporary prelude to the real kingdom of God, and " the day " with the final judgment comes at its close. While the representation varies in different books, development takes place on the whole along these lines. In the Gospels the day is implicit, and is involved [in the parusia (Mark viii. 38 and parallels) which is to be heralded by the same cataclysmic phenomena as accom- pany the day of Yahweh in the Old Testament (Mark xiii. 7-8, 24-27). In Paul the " day of Yahweh " has become the " day of our Lord 869 Day of the Lord Deacon Jesus Christ " (I Cor. i. 8). See Eschatology; and Hades. Geo. W. Gilmore. Bibliography: The best book is R. H. Charles, Critical Hist, of the Doctrine of a Future Life, pp. 85 sqq. et pAS- flim, London, 1890. Consult further the literature on O. T. theology and Messianic prophecy. e.g.. H. Schults, O. T, Theology, ii. 356 sqq., Edinbursh. 1892; C. A. Briggs, Meeaianic* Prophecy, pp. 487-490 et passim. New York, 1898; idem, Messiah of the Gospels, pp. 309 sqq., ib. 1894; P. Vols, Jiidieche Eschatologie von Daniel hie Akiba, Tabingen. 1903; A. B. Davidson, Theology of ike O. T., pp. 374 sqq.. ib. 1904; DB, i. 574, 434 sq0., 440, iii. 377, ir. 771; EB, ii. 1348 sqq.

DAY, CHARLES ORRIN : Congregationalist; b. at Catskill, N. Y., Nov. 8, 1851. He was graduated at Yale in 1872, and Andover Theological Seminary in 1877. He was a city missionary at Montreal 1877-78, and pastor at Williamsburg, Mass., until 1884. He then spent a year in postgraduate study at the Yale Divinity School, after which he was pastor at Brattleboro, Vt., until 1898, when he became chaplain of the First Vermont regiment at Chickamauga during the Spanish-American war. From 1898 to 1901 he was secretary of the Congre- gational Educational Society, and since the latter year has been president of Andover Theological Seminary and Bartlet professor of homiletics and practical theology.

DAY, JEREMIAH : Congregationalist, ninth pres- ident of Yale College; b. in New Preston, Conn., Aug. 3, 1773; d. in New Haven Aug. 22, 1867. He was graduated at Yale 1795, and the same year succeeded Timothy Dwight (q.v.) as principal of the Greenfield Academy; was tutor at Williams 1796-98, at Yale 1798-1801; was elected professor of mathematics and natural philosophy at Yale 1801; succeeded Timothy Dwight as president in 1817; resigned in 1846. Besides a series of mathe- matical text-books, he wrote An Inquiry Respecting the Self-determining Power of the Will, a refutation of Cousin (New Haven, 1838), and An Examination of President Edwards on the Will, a conciliatory and apologetic defense of Edwards (1841). Bibliography: A memorial address by President T. D. Woolsey is in The New Englander, xxvi (1867). 692-724. DAYANAND, da^ya-ntod', SARASWATI, sfl^rOs- wQ'ti: Hindu reformer and founder of the Arya Samaj (see India, III., 3); b. of Shivite Brahmanic parentage at Mori, a town in the n.w. of Kathiawar, in 1827; d. at Ajmere Oct. 30, 1883. He early be- gan the orthodox course of study, and by the time he had reached fourteen years of age had committed to memory a Sanskrit dramatic work, a Sanskrit vocabulary, the whole of the Yajur-Veda, and part of other Vedas. He very early felt the inconsist- ency between the religious ideas of the Vedas and those connected with the worship of Shiva, and he reluctantly yielded to his father's insistence upon performance of the idolatrous rites of Shiva. On one occasion, when thus taking part in this worship, the ceremonies having continued long into the night, his father and others fell asleep. While watching the idol the boy saw a mouse take away an offering that had been made to it. Suddenly the inconsistency of worshiping God in the form of a Btone so overpowered him that he left the temple, and ntrer again worshiped an idol. Death in his 111—24 family led him into deep thought of the meaning of life, and he determined to break away from ex- ternal form and find the true path through the efforts of the soul. His parents, thinking the boy too meditative, determined on his marriage. The preparations were nearly completed when he silently left his home by night, and never returned from his wanderings in search of some one who could guide him to the truth. At last, in Nov., 1860, he found a welcome at Mathura, with a religious teacher named Swami Virjananda Saraswati. With this profound scholar of the Vedas, who had been blind from infancy, Dayanand stucfied the Vedas for four years. At the conclusion of his education Virjananda sent him forth to spread the enlighten- ment gained from the Vedas. In obedience he traveled over India, visiting especially places of pilgrimage where he denounced idolatry and the superstitions of Hinduism. In 1872 he visited Cfjcutta and met Devendranath Tagore (see Ta- GORE, Devendranath) and Keshav Chandra Sen (see Sen, Keshav Chandra), leaders in the Brahma Samaj movement (see India, III., 1), with whom he had long and earnest conversations. In 1874 he arrived in Bombay, and after some months of effective labor organized the Arya Samaj, Apr. 10, 1875, extending it in 1877 in the course of a lecture tour in the Punjab. In 1883 he visited the Maharaja of Jodhpur. There he was greatly disturbed by the revelry and dissipation that marked the court life, and like John the Baptist rebuked the Maharaja to his face, as a consequence of which he was poisoned by a woman whom he had offended by his rebuke. Dayanand Saraswati taught the inspiration of the Vedas as the pure fountain of all true knowledge. He looked upon the forms of popular Hinduism as the result of ignorance through a falling away from the teachings of those books. He taught the pei^ sonality of God as the sole object of worship. God and the soul are related as pervader and pervaded. The eternal and distinct substances are God, soul, and matter; salvation is the state of emancipation from birth to death. He denounced the system of caste and the worship of idols. Justin E. Abbott. Bibliography: Three of Dayanand's works have been traiw- lated: The Ocean of Mercy, Lahore, 1880; The Five Great Duties of Dayanand Saraswati, Ajmere, 1897, and A Hand-hook of the Arya Samaj, Arya Tract Society, 1006. Consult: Arjan Singh, Dayanand SaraevoaH, Lahore, 1001; Bawa Chhajju Singh, The Life and Teachinge of Swam Dayanand SaraeuKUi, ib.; and literature under India. DEACON. I. In the New Testament. Origin of the Diaoonate (I 1). Duties in New Testament Time (| 2). II. In the Ronuui Catholic Church. Change in Position after the Apostolic Age (f 1). Duties in the Later Church (ft 2). III. In the Protestant Churches. IV. The Modern Associations of Deacons in Germany. Johann Hinrich Wichem (| 1). Extension of Wichem's Work. Conditions of Admis- sion (ft 2). Training (ft 3). Organisation. Wide Extent of the Work (ft 4). I. In the New Testament: The term "deacon" (Gk. diakonos, "servant, attendant, minister," Lat. diaconus; also Gk. diakdn, Lat. diacones [pi J Deaoon 370 in Cyprian and synodical decrees) in its generic sense is used of all ministers of the Gospel as serv- ants of God or Christ (I Thess. iii. 2; I Cor. iii. 5; II Cor. vL 4, xL 23; Col. i. 7, iv. 7; I Tim. iv. 6), also of magistrates (Rom. xiii. 4). In a technical sense it denotes the second and lower class of con- gregational officers, the other class being the pres- byter-bishops. Deacons first appear in the sixth chapter of Acts (under the name of the " seven "), and afterward repeatedly (as Phil. i. 1; I Tim. iii. 2, 8, 12). The word diakonta, " ministry," is also used frequently of the apostles (Rom. xi. 13) and others. Like the presbyterate (see Presbtter), the Christian diaconate had a precedent in the Jewish synagogue, which usually employed three officers for the care of the poor (cf. Lightfoot, Horce He- braiccB, ad Acta, vi. 3). Vitringa and some others wrongly derive it from the i<iz2an (Gk. hypiretes, Luke iv. 20; John vii. 32), who was merely a sexton or beadle. As related in Acts vi. 1-6, the office grew out of a special emergency in the congregation of Jerusalem, in consequence of the complaint of the Hellenists, or Greek Jews, against the Hebrews, or Palestinian Jews, that their widows were neglected in the daily ministration (Gk. diakonia) at the common love-feasts (Agapse). Hence the apostles, who had hitherto themselves attended X. Origin to this duty, instructed the congrega- of theDiac- tion to elect from their midst seven onate. brethren, and ordained them by prayer and the laying on of hands. The diaconate, therefore, like the presbytero- episcopate, grew out of the apostolic office, which at first embraced all the functions and duties of the ministry — the ministry (diakonia) of tables and of the word (Acts vi. 2, 4). Christ chose apostles only, and left them to divide their labor imder the guidance of his Spirit, with proper regard to times and circumstances, and to found such additional offices in the Church as were useful and necessary. The " seven " elected on this occasion were not extraordinary commissioners or superintendents (Stanley, Plumptre, W. L. Alexander, McGiffert, pp. 78-79, Friedberg, p. 13, Sohm, and others), but deacons in the primitive sense of the term; for although they are not called " deacons " in the Acts (which never uses this word), their office is expressly described as one of '' ministry " (dia- konia) or " serving at the tables." Exegetical tra- dition is almost unanimously in favor of this view, and many of the best commentators sustain it (as Meyer, Alford, Hackett, Lange-Lechler, Jacobson, Howson and Spence, Stokes in the Expositor's Bible, on Acts vi. 3; also, very emphatically, Light- foot, Philippiana, pp. 185 sqq.). • In the ancient Church the number seven was considered binding; and at Rome, for example, sua late as the middle of the third century, there were only seven deacons, though the presbyters numbered forty-six (Eusebiiis, Hist, ecd., vi. 43; Hamack, TU, ii., pp. 92, 97. The number seven was given up in Rome under Honorius II. [1124-30] and eighteen deacons were then ap- pointed, to twelve of whom was given the care of the poor, while six served as papal assistants at the altar. Sixtus V. in ISSH finally fixed the number of cardinal deacons at fourteen). There is indeed a difference between the apostolic and the eccle- siastical deacons, which is acknowledged by Chiys- ostom, (Ecumenius, and others; but the latter were universally regarded as the Intimate suc- cessors of the former — as much so as the presby- ters were the successors of the presbyter-bishois of the New Testament — ^notwithatanding the changes in their duties and relations. The deacons in the Apostolic Age are closely associated with the presbyter-bishops and always are subordinate to them. This close association and subordination are maintained in the subapostolic age and later. The diaconate waa instituted first for the care of the poor and the sick. But this care was spiritual as well as temporal, and implied instruction and consolation as well as bodily relief. Paul counts helps and ministrations (Gk. atUilepseis) among the spiritual gifts (I Cor. xii. 28). Hence 2. Duties in the appointment of such men for the New Testa- office of deacons as were of stnHig ment Time, faith and exemplary piety (Acts vi. 3; I Tim. iii. 8 sqq.). The moral quali- fications prescribed by Paul are essentially the same as those for the bishop (presbyter). Hence the transition from the diaconate to the presbyterate was easy and natural. Stephen preached, and prepared the way for Paul's ministry of the Gen- tiles; and Philip, another of the seven deacons ot Jerusalem, subsequently labored as an Evangelist (Acts viii. 5-40, xxi. 8). But they did this in the exercise of a special gift of preaching, which in the Apostolic Age was not confined to any pai^ ticular office. The patristic interpreters under- stand the passage in I Tim. iii. 13 of promotion from the office of deacon to that of presbyter; but '' the good standing " which is gained by those who " have served well as deacons " refers to the honor rather than to the promotion. The liberty of the Apostolic Church should not be confounded with the fixed ecclesiastical order of a later age. n. In the Roman Catholic Church: After the departure of the apostles, during the mysterious period between 70 and 150 a.d., where information is so scant, that change in the ecclesiastical organi- zation must have taken place which is found pretty generally established toward the close of the second century. The Didache knows only two classes of officers for the local churches, bishops and deacons; they were to be elected by the con- I. Change gregations, and are to receive honor in Position ** together with the prophets and after the teachers " (xv. 1-2). Ignatius men- Apostolic tions deacons as a necessary part of Age. the governing body of the local churcJi. With him the bishops are raised above their fellow presbyters, and later they were regarded as successors of the apostles; the presbyters, at first simply pastors and teachers, were clothcii with sacerdotal dignity (" priests "), which in tlte New Testament appears as the common property of all Christians; and the deacons became Levites, subject to the priests. They are often compared to the Levites of the Old Testament. These thrpe officers constituted the three clerical orders (orrfine* majorea or hierarchici) in distinction from the laity. 371 Baaoon An act of ordination marked the entrance. No one could become a bishop without passing first through the two lower orders; but in some cases a distinguished layman, as C^prian or Ambrose, was elected bishop by the voice of the people, and hurried through the three ordinations. The sub- deacon was later associated with the deacon and was declared a member of the " major orders " by Innocent III. (1198-1216; cf. Friedberg, Kirchen- recht, p. 150; see Orders, Holy). In fact, the Roman Catholic Church and the canon law have never formally decided whether the episcopate is a distinct order or not. The Council of Trent did not decide the question, although it speaks of the hierarchy of bishops, priests, and deacons (Schafif, Creeds, ii. 186-187). The schoolmen, in- cluding Peter Lombard {SerU,, IV.xxiv. 9), Hugo of St. Victor (De scuramentis, II. ii. 5), Thomas Aquinas (SuppletnerUum, xxxvii. 2, ed. Migne, iv. 1056), and Bonaventiu^ {Breviloquium, vi. 12, ed. Peltier, vii. 327), say again and again that the episcopate is not a distinct order, but an office or function. They regarded the presbyters, deacons, and subdeacons as constituting the three major orders. The pre- vailing view to-day in the Roman Catholic Church, if not the universal one (so Hergenr5ther, Lehrhuch des kaiholischen Kirchenrechts, pp. 208-209, Frei- burg, 1888), is that the episcopate is a distinct order and that the subdeaconate is not. The deacons continued to be the almoners of the charitable fimds of the congregation. Jerome calls them " ministers of the tables, and of widows." They had to find out and to visit the aged, the widows, the sick and afflicted, the confessors in prison, and to administer relief to them under the direction of the bishop. But in the course of time this primary function became secondary, or passed out of sight, as the sick and the poor were gath- ered together into hospitals and alms- 2. Duties in houses, the orphans into orphan the Later asylums, and as each of these insti- Church. tutions was managed by an appropriate officer. Another duty became the prominent one — viz., to assist in public worship, especially at baptism and the holy communion. Justin MartjT (Ayol., Ixv.; ANF, i. 185) says the deacons distributed the bread and wine at the Eucharist after they were blessed by the presiding officer, and also carried them to the sick. They arranged the altar, presented the offerings of the people, read the Gospel, gave the signal for the departure of the unbelievers and catechumens, re- cited some prayers, and distributed the consecra- ted cup (in the absence of the priest, the bread also), but were forbidden to offer the sacrifice. Preaching Is occasionally mentioned among their privileges, after the examples of Stephen and Philip, but very rarely in the West. Hilary the Deacon (Pseudo- Ambrose), in his commentary on Eph. iv. 11, says that originally all the faithful preached and bap- tized, but that in his day the deacons did not preach. In some cases they were forbidden, in others author- ized to preach. The Poniificale Rofnanum, how- e\er, defines their duties and privileges with the words " it is the duty of a deacon to minister at the altar, to baptize, and to preach." They stood near the bishops and presbyters, who were seated on theur thrones in the church, and they were deputies and advisers of the bishops and often sent on confidential missions. This intimacy gave them an advantage and roused the jealousy of the presbyters. The Apostolic Constitutions (ii. 44; ANF, vii. 416) calls the deacon " the bishop's ear and eye and mouth and heart and soul, tluit the bishop may not be distracted with many cares." The archdeacon (q.v.) occupied a position little inferior to that of the bishop and hence he is called "the bishop's eye." He transacted the greater part of the business of the diocese. The canonical age for the deacon's order was set in 385 by Siricius, bishop of Rome, at thirty and later it was twenty- five, according to Num. viii. 24; the Council of Trent reduced it to twenty-three (Sess. xxiii. 12). nL In the Protestant Churches: In the Church of England and the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States deacons form one of the three sacred orders, as in the Greek and Roman churches. The canons require the age of twenty-three years before ordination. Deacons are permitted to per- form any of the divine offices except pronouncing the formula of absolution and consecrating the elements of the Lord's Supper. In practise the diaconate is merely a stepping-stone to the priest- hood. So the deacons are what in other churches are called candidates for the ministry or licen- tiates. The archdeacon in England is a priest and a permanent officer next after the bishop, with a part of the episcopal power and jurisdiction: he is ez officio examiner of candidates for holy orders, and has a seat in convocation. The institution dates from Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, the first prehkte who appointed an archdeacon in his diocese (1075). In the Lutheran Church "diaconus" is merely a title, inherited from the Roman Church, of assist- ant clergymen and chaplains of subordinate rank. They are often called second or third preacher or pastor. Luther desired the restoration of the apostolic deacons for the care of the poor and the church property {Works, ed. Walch, xiii. 2464). In the last century the name, like the feminine form, " deaconess," was applied in Germany to members of certain fraternities, organized and trained for general Christian service (see IV., below, and the article Deaconess, III.). In the Reformed churches the apostoUc diaconate was revived, as far as circumstances would permit, with different degrees of success. In the Refoi^ mation of the Church of Hesse (1526) it was pre- scribed that each pastor (epUcopus) should have at least three deacons as assistants in the care of the poor. The Church of Basel in 1529 made a similar provision. Calvin regards the diaconate as one of the indispensable offices of the Church, and the care of the poor (cura pauperum) as their proper duty (" Institutes," bk. iv., chaps. 3, 9). The Re- formed confessions acknowledge this office {Conf. Gallicana, art. xxix.; Conf. Helgica, art. xxx. and xxxi.). In the Dutch and German Reformed churches the deacons are *'to collect and to dls- tril)ute the alms and other contributions for the relief of the poor, or the necessities of the congregar Peftoon 372 tion, and to provide for the support of the ministry of the Gospel." The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America teaches, in its form of government (chap, vi.): " The Scriptures clearly point out deacons as distinct officers in the church, whose business it is to take care of the poor, and to distribute among them the collections which may be raised for tbeir use. To them, also, may be properly committed the management of the tem- poral affairs of the church." ^n accordance with this principle, deacons are a normal part of the ma- chinery of the local churches and receive ordina- tion, though they are not members of the church session (the govemiog body of the local church; see Prebbtterians). The Reformed Presbyterian Church has held (1878) that the office is open to women, and in several presbyteries they have been ordained to this service.] In the Congregatiomd or Independent churches the deacons are vexy important officers, and take the place of the lay elders in the Presbyterian churches. At first the Piigrim Fathers of New England elected ruling elders; but the custom went into disuse, and their duties were divided between the pastor and the deacons. Cf. H. M. Dexter, CongregationaUtm of the Last Three Hundred Yean, Boston, 1876, pp. 131 sqq. In the Methodist Episcopal Church the deacons constitute an order in the ministry, as in the Episco- pal Church, but without the jfwre divino theory of apostolical succession. They are elected by the annual conference, and ordained by the bishop. Their duties are, " (1) To administer baptism, and to solemnise matrimony; (2) To assist the elder in administering the Lord's Supper; (3) To do all the duties of a traveling preacher." Traveling deacons must exercise their office for two years before they are eligible to the office of elder. Local deacons are eligible to the office of elder after preaching four years. (Phiup ScHAFFf) D. S. Schaff. IV. The Modem Associations of Deacons in Ger- many: Like the similar deaconesses' organizations (see Dbaconsss, III.), these fraternities for Chris- tian service are an outgrowth of the movement within the Protestant Church of Germany usually known as the " Innere Mission " (see Inners Mis- sion). But this work, however much it might be regarded as incumbent on all, can not be so well done by untrained volimteers as by professional workers who devote their whole lives to it and receive the requisite special education. It was the '' Innere Mission " which for the first time among German Protestants clearly perceived this truth and undertook to train such workers. The epoch- making dates are 1833, when the Rauhes Haua was founded for male workers, and 1836, when the first home for deaconesses was established at Kaisers- werth. The Rauhee Haue, at Horn near Hamburg, was established by Johaim Hinrich Wichem (q.v.) as a rescue-home for neglected children. The original foundation speedily expanded into a community, where the children dwelt in " families " or groups, each group constituting a unit for the purposes of moral, intellectual, suod manual training. The " housefather " associated with himself in the administration of the work a number of assistants : and, as the work expanded and the number of institutions increased, the necessity I. Johann arose of a normal training for the Hinrich instructors. The Rauhes Haue became Wichem. therefore a seminary for the trainiBg of workers in the field of the " Innere Mission," its early candidates coming almost ex- clusively from the humbler classes and compriaiztg men whose simple piety and (Christian spirit of self-sacrifice and devotion to duty qualified them admirably for this service. Wichem gave the name of " Brethren " to his first aasodates. In the execution of his wider plans he came into con- ffict with the authorities of the Rauhes Haus who regarded with mistrust the departure from the original idea of an institution for children, and be was finally allowed to proceed with his plans for a brotherhood only on condition that he should assiune the financial risks of the venture. His devoted labors brought their reward; means were soon obtained for the establishment and main- tenance of the fraternity which Wichem sought to organise on the model of the medieval Brothers of the Common Life so far as that was possible under modem conditions. He did not attempt to revive the office of deacon as it existed in the primi- tive Church, and only reluctantly did he assent to the use of the term " deacon," which to him con- noted a person officially set apart by the Church, while " brother " bore a more secular and inde- pendent signification. Wichem supplied the model upon which all later institutions of a similar nature have been founded, which differ from the original only in the general use of the name deacon, and in the wider scope of work which the necessities of other times produced. By the side of those institutions whose field em- braced every phase of Christian charity, others arose devoted to particular branches of work. Thus in southwestern Germany there are institutions for the training of teachers for the poor, dating from the period of predominantly educational interest which saw the rise of the " Iimere Mission." Fur- ther, there are associations for lav a. Bxten- preaching and others whose special sion of field lies among the German Ftotes- Wichem's tants scattered in Catholic countries Work. Con- (see Diaspora). The inner organi- ditions of sation is practically the same every- Admission. where, consisting of a clerical chief executive who exercises control over the educational and administrative work, and a curalorium or committee of trustees in whom the property of the institution is vested. Common also are the conditions for admission, of whicb a summary of the regulations prevailing in the Rauhes Haus may serve as an illustration. Ap- plicants must be of unblemished reputation, and masters of some trade or profession upon which in case of emergency they may fall back; admission for the purpose of acquiring a trade or profession is not tolerated. Candidates must be between the ages of twenty and thirty, unmarried, and must have completed their term of military service. They must be prepared to yield absolute obedience 373 I>»ecMi to the head of the house, submit to all tasks im- posed upon them, and look upon their office not as a temporary calling, but as their mission in life. The course of training lasts three years, with an extension to five or six for those handi- capped by a lack of the requisite educational qual- ifications, or preparing themselves for positions of responsibility in the service of the " Innere Mis- sion." Candidates are not allowed to determine beforehand to which branch of the work they will devote themselves, and must be ready to pursue their work for a part of the time in affiliated in- stitutions. The documents that must accompany applications for admission are comprehensive and deal minutely with the facts of the applicant's life and his moral and spiritual history, including the testimony of phsrsicians, pastors, and parents or guardians. The greater number of candidates for admission are from the artisan and peasant The chief aim of the training to which candi- dates are subjected is the formation of steadfast Christian character, and in this respect the rela- tions of the head of the house toward his associates and assistants are among the most decisive factors. The standard of intellectual acquirements set up is approximately that of the elementary school teacher or lower government official. In addition, how- ever, there is the special knowledge of the main principles of pedagogy and of the history of edu- cation, studied chiefly in the form of biography, together with a mastery of catechetical methods. The specialization of function must 3. Training, also be kept in view so that the needs of the future colporteur, instructor for the feeble-minded, or elementary teacher may be provided for. The problem presented is by no means a simple one, in that it involves the training of students possessing the education of the child with the experience of the youth or the fuU-grown man. Practical work is carried on side by side with theory, and every house of deacons stands in close connection with one or more relief institutions — rescue-homes, hospitals, asylimis for the feeble- minded, homes for epileptics, etc. An important element is the religious life of the brotherhoods. Some satisfy their needs by attendance at the churches of the community of which they form a part, while others possess chapels of their own. The training of a brother once completed, he is detailed to outside duty, his graduation and dis- missal being marked by a solemn service. The regulations of the Rauhea HauSf which may be taken again as typical, provide that on the acceptance by a brother of an office to which he \b reconunended by the head of the house he is pledged to render conscientious service and not to abandon his post without seeking the advice of the head of the house; failure to do so will exclude him from further ap- pointment. A brother who abandons the service of the " Innere Mission " ceases thereby to be a member of the fraternity. From the foregoing it is apparent that the brotherhoods possess their spiri- tual center in the deacons' houses. The truth is briefly expressed in the following sunmiary from the regulations of the Rauhes Haua : " The breth- ren of the Rauhea Haua are gathered in fraternal communion about the Rauhea Haua as a center, and their aim is to oome to the aid of the commu- nity by devoting themselves to the welfare of those who have been estranged from the Church and its teachings. In belief and practise they live within the bounds of the Evangelical Church, to whose ordinances they submit themselves." While the problem of the cooperation and com- munication is not a serious one with the minor fraternities, it is a weighty one in the case of the Rauhea Haua^ whose branches are found in all parts of Germany. Here conferences em- 4* Organi- bracing the oi:ganizations of the vari- zation. ous provinces are held eveiy year, in Wide Extent addition to which special conferences of the Work, and general conventions are held from time to time at the Rauhea Haua. With regard to their spheres of activity, every house has its special field. At the Rauhea Haua special emphasis was laid in the beginning upon rescue work; Duisburg devoted itself primarily to the care of the sick; the summoning of Wichem to Berlin led to the rapid rise of mission work in the prisons. From many deacons' houses members have been called to positions as colonial and home missionaries, superintendents of labor colonies, heads of other houses, etc. A complete list of in- stitutions wherein the members of the brotherhoods have been active would include rescue-homes, or- phan asylums, homes for destitute children, work- houses, hospitals, asylums for the feeble-minded, the insane, and the epileptic, industrial schools, appren- tices' lodging-houses, city and harbor missions, penal institutions, and institutes for the cure of alcoholism. (Thbodor ScHlraR.) BIBLIOGRAPHY: I. J. B. Loghtfoot, Comm/tntary on PhUip- pianM, pp. 170 sqq., London, 1878; £. Hatch, OrganiMO' Hon cf Ote Barly Chriatian Church, pp. 26 sqq., Oxford. 1888 (the preceding are the two authoritative dieeoMionfl); R. Sohm. KirAanneht, Leipde, 1802; F. J. A. Hort, ChriaUan Beekna, London, 1807; A. C. McQiffert, Apo9- tolie Ao*, pp. 76-77. 667 sqq.. New York. 1807; T. M. Lindsay, Church and Am Minittry in tfte Early C&nturie§, pp. 164-lfi6. 104-105. London, 1002; W. Lowrie, Ths Church and ite OrgamMaiion, pp. 370-383, ib. 1006; Sohaff. ChrUHan Church, L 60 eqq.; A. Hamack, in TU, ii. 6, pp. 57-103. 1886; DB, L 574t-67B; SB, I 1038^10; and the various treatises on the Didaehe (q.v.). U. and lU. J. N. Seidl. Dsr Dtoamof indarkaihoU$eh§n Kirehe, Regensbuig. 1884; A. J. Binterim, DmikwOrdio- Amten. L 335-386. Mains, 1826; J. C. W. August!, Denk- tffflriwlwiten, zL 104 sqq., Leipeic. 1830; Bingham, Ori- ffinn, book ii.. chap. 20; DCA, i. 526-533; KL, iiL 1660- 1674; and for modem practise, the Book of DitdpUnt of the various denominations. IV. Important sources of knowledge are the Monata- aehrift fikr Diakonio und In/term MtBoion, and Monaiaochrift fUr Innen Miuion; also AkionaiQcke aua dor Vorwaiiuno doa evangdiad^en Oberkirdtanraiha, toIs. iii.-iv.. Berlin, 1856-57 (contain accounts of Fliedner. Widiem, Jakobi, and others prominent in the moYemant). Consult: P. Schaff. Oarmany, ita UnivaraiHaa, Thaology and RaUgion, chap, xxzviii.. Philadelphia. 1857; J. Wichem, Daa Rauha Haua und dia ArMtafaldar dar BrQdar daa Rauhan Hauaaa, 18S9-8S, Hamburg, 1883; idem, /. H, Wieham und dia BrUdaraehaft daa Bankan Hauaaa, ib. 1802; Q. Uhlhom. Dia ehriatUeka LUbaaOkMgkaU, iiL 847 sqq., 365 sqq., Stuttgaft, 188a Baaoon^sa 874 I. In the Apostolic Ace. II. In the Patristic Ace. Deaoonenes and Widows (| 1). Age (I 2). Duties (§ 3). Ordination (§ 4). III. In the Protestant Churebes. 1. The Earlier Period. 2. The Nineteenth Century. I. In the Apostolic Age: The function dates from the earliest period of the Church, though the technical term in the feminine form, '* deaconess " (Gk. (fiakonissa; Lat. diaconissa, diacona), does not occur till a later period. Phoebe was a deaconess in the church of Genchrea, the masculine form, diakonoSj being applied to her (Rom. xvi. 1; transl. "servant" in Eng. versions).' The women whose names are given in Rom. xvi. 12 were probably of the same class. It is not probable that there was a distinct order of deaconesses in the Apostolic Church in the modem sense. Nevertheless, Paul's mode of referring to Phcebe implies that she was recognized at Cenchrea and by himself as having a special work and authority. It is possible that deaconesses are referred to in I Tim. iii. 11. If so, they were distinguished from the " widows " (I Tim. V. 3-16), who were not to be enrolled in that class till they had reached sixty years of age. From the earliest times the need must have been felt of a special class of women who should devote them- selves to Christian service at times of baptism, visit the parts of the houses set aside for females, and perform other duties. While Phcebe is the only person in the New Testament distinctly called a deaconess, there are indications, as in the case of Dorcas (Acts ix. 36) and other cases, that woman's service was held in high esteem by the Church and had a distinctive character. n. In the Patristic Age: The earliest reference in the subapostolic age to women functionaries in the Chureh is by the younger Pliny in his letter (x. 96) to Trajan about 110 a.d. He speaks of " young women who are called ministra "; that is, " deaconesses." The notices in the I. Deacon- literature of the second and third cen- esses and turies are very rare before the Apos- WidowB. tolic Constitutions, which contain fre- quent references to both the widows and deaconesses and directions for their work and induction into office. When the ApostoUc Consti- tutions were written the widows and deaconesses were distinct bodies (ii. 26; ANF^ vii. 410), and the widows occupied a position inferior to the dea- conesses and are enjoined to be in subjection to them (iii. 7). Different rules are given for the con- secration of each (vii. 19, 25). On the one hand, it is not clear that in the second century this dis- tinction was maintained. On the other hand, it is clear that in the fourth century the order of widows was abandoned, while the order and term of dea- conesses remained. The Council of Nicsea (325) speaks only of '' deaconesses." The Council of Origins (533) speaks of the " widows who are called deaconesses." In the literature of the second century, with the exception of the passage in Pliny, there is no ref- DEACONESS. a. Germany. Origin. Theodor Fliedner ( § 1 ). The Kaiserswerth Institute (12). Other Institutions (§ 3). b. England. Sisterhoods (| 1). Deaoonesses in the Church of England (| 2). Wesleyan Deaooneaaes (| 3). c. Sootland. d. America. The Lutherans (| 1). The Protestant EpiaeopalChurdt (§2). The Methodista (| 3). Other Denominations (| 4). erenoe to the deaconess by name and no distinct reference to any class but the widows. When Tertuilian, at the beginning of the third century. speaks of " virgins " and distinguishes them from the "widows" (Z)e virginibus vdandia, ix.; De monogamia, xi. ; etc.) he does not seem to have in mind a class of functionaries in the Church. Ignatius in his letter to Symma (xiii. ; cf . Light- foot, ii. 322 sqq.) speaks of ** virgins who are called widows," and Polycarp in his letter to the Philip- pians (iv.; Lightfoot, ii. 912) calls ''the prudent widows " the altar of God. This expression, which is also used in the Apostolic Constitutions (ii. 26^ was interpreted to mean that the women devoted themselves to prayer and holy thoughts. Polycarp is speaking of widows in their official relation, as he mentions them before deacons and priests. At the beginning of the third century the institution of widows seems to have been widely prevalent Clement (Ham., xi. 36, Recogniiiones, xv.) ani Tertuilian refer to them repeatedly. Lucia n in his ** Death of Peregrinus " also speaks of aged widow> who ministered to Peregrinus in prison, bringing orphans with them. But a change took place and in the middle of the third century the " widows '* at Rome were simply a class of poor women de^ pendent upon the support of the Church (EusebiiLs. HUt. eccl., VI. xliii. 11). While the order of widows was given up in the West, it continued to flourish in the East. But they can not be followed beyond the time of com- position of the Apostolic Constitutions. The tenn ** widow " seems to have been dropped. On the other hand, the deaconess comes into prominence and Lb mentioned in the conciliar decisions of the E^t and the West and in the legislation of Justinian (Novella, vi. 6, cxxiii. 30; cf. G. Pfannmaller. Dit kirchliche GeseUgdmng Jtistinians, Berlin, 1902, pp. 72 sqq.). In the West, Ambrose, commenting upon I Tim. iii. 11, declared that women were forbidden to hold office in the Chureh, and Jerome in com- menting upon Rom. xvi. 1 and I Tim. iii. 11 (the quotations are given by Uhlhom, p. 408) speaks of women functionaries as still existing in the East and gives the impression that they had ceased to exist in the West. However, there seem to hsLve been deaconesses in Gaul as late as the sixth cen- tury, as attested by the Second Council of Ori^ns in 533. An inscription at Ticinum, dated 539, bears the name of the *' deaconess (diaamissa) Theodora " (Uhlhorn, p. 409). Deaconesses continued in the Eastern Chureh down to the eighth century. The terms " deaconess " and " archdeaconess " were used as designations of the officers in convents and they are still foimd in the twelfth century at Con- stantinople aiding in the communion. The reason why the orders of widows and deacon- 376 Deaoonesft I fell into desuetude is in part the abuses of the Montanists, who allowed women to preach, while Montanus himself went about with two women, a thing which gave much scandal. Some of the here- tics, following Simon Magus, were mixed up with prophetesses who were supposed to be subjects of revelation and taught contrary to the teaching of Paul. Other reasons were the moral dangers be- setting such women. Rules were required dis- tinctly forbidding clerics of the lower orders to visit widows and deaconesses without special per- mission from the bishop or priest and then not without an attendant (Synod of Hippo, 393; cf. Hefcle, ConcUiengeachichte, ii. 68). Still other rea- sons were the growth of monastic houses for nuns which offered a safe refuge as well as a distinct religious and clerical calling for women, and the cessation of the need of female ministries after adult baptism gave way to infant baptism. The age at which women might enter the class of widows was reduced from sixty {Apostolic Con- stitviionSf iii. 1). Tertullian {De virginibtia vdan- diSf ix.) tells of a virgin who had been admitted into the order of widowhood at the age of twenty, but speaks of it as a notorious irregularity. The Theodosian code of 390 (cf. Hefele, ut sup., ii. 519) required obedience to the Pauline rule re- quiring the age of sixty. As for the 2. Age. deaconesses, the Council of Chalcedon (451; canon xv.; cf. Hefele, ut sup.) allowed their consecration at the age of forty, but only after probation. The Justinian code {NovellcB, cxxiii. 13) likewise prescribed the age of forty. In case a deaconess married, both she and her husband were to be anathematized. Ac- cording to the Justinian code, if she married or allowed herself to be seduced, she became liable to the death penalty and the man suffered death by the sword (PfannmUller, ut sup., p. 72). Olympias (d. 420), the deaconess of Constantinople praised by Chrysostom and to whom he addressed seven- teen letters, became a widow at eighteen and seems to have immediately entered upon diaconal func- tions. The statement of the Apostolic Constitutions (iii. 15) is regulative of the functions of these women: '' A deaconess is to be ordained for the ministra- tions toward women." She is called the assistant or minister of the deacon (viii. 28). She was to be sent to do certain services for which it was distinctly ordered that the deacon should not be sent (iii. 15). At baptism she assisted the presbyter '* for the sake of decency '* (viii. 28). The bishop was in- structed to anoint only the head of a 3. Duties, woman and the anointing of the other parts was left to the deaconess (iii. 15). A change, however, took place and this cus- tom was deliberately set aside. The Synod of Dovin in Armenia (527; Hefele, ut sup., p. 718) forbade the ministry of deaconesses at baptism. The prohibition probably grew out of the unwill- ingness to allow to women even the appearance of performing clerical services. Tertullian (De bap- itsmo, xvii.) allowed laymen to baptize, but ex- pressly forbade women both to baptize and to teach. The Apostolic Constitutions (iii. 9; also Origen, Homily on Isa. vi.) state expressly that deaconesses were not to serve at the altar, and for- bid them to teach and baptize or in any wise per- form the functions of the priest. Another duty of the deaconess was to stand at the entrance to the church through which the women passed to their own place in the auditorium to greet those that entered, to show them seats, and to preserve order (Apostolic ConstitiUionSf ii. 57). Roman Catholic scholars in interpreting the pa- tristic statements on the induction of the deaconess into office deny that there was any rite of ordina- tion. This interpretation has plainly in its favor the nineteenth canon of the Council of Nicsea (Hefele, ut sup., i. 427), which distinctly states that *^ the deaconesses are without any imposition of hands and are to be ranked with the laity." The Synod of Laodicea, a generation or two later, which speaks of presbutidea and prokathSmenai, that is, female presbytids (not presbyters; cf. Epipha- nius, Ixxix.) and overseers, seems to deny them official position in the Church, but the meaning of the passage is vague (cf. Hefele, i. 757). On the other hand, there are plain statements that a rite of ordination was performed. There was an im- position of hands (Epiphanius, ut sup.), and such imposition was made by the hands of 4. Ordina- the bishop and in the presence of the tion. presbytery, the deacons, and those already belonging to the order of dea- conesses (Apostolic Constitutions, viii. 19). The code of Justinian treats of their ordination (cf. Pfannmiiller, ut sup., p. 72). The form of prayer used on such occasions is given in the Apostolic Constitutions (viii. 20). The S3mod of Orange in 441 (canon xxvi. ; Hefele, ii. 295) forbade the further ordination of women and allowed them only the consecration imparted to the laity. By the Synod of Epao in 317 (Hefele, ii. 684) such ordination was forbidden in all Bui^imdy. Similarly the Second Synod of Orleans in 533 (Hefele, ii. 758) denied to women " on account of the weakness of their sex " the diaconal benediction. This would seem to have been of the same nature as ordination to the diaconate. During the Middle Ages the heretical sects ordained deaconesses (cf. Dollinger, i. 186, 203, and elsewhere). ni. In the Protestant Churches. — 1. The Earlier Period: The Reformers made no provision for the official recognition of women as functionaries in the Church. Among the rare notices of deaconesses are those in connection with the Church of Wesel from 1575 to 1610 and the Puritan church of Am- sterdam. One of the first acts of the Church of Wesel was to decide to employ women. After long delay the S3mod of Middelburg in 1581 pro- nounced against the proposition '' on account of various inconveniences which might arise out of it, but in times of pestilence and other sicknesses where any service is retiuired among sick women which would be indelicate to deacons they ought to attend to this through their wives or others whose services it may be proper to engage." The con- clusions drawn up by Thomas Cartwright (q.v.) and Walter Travers as the result of several confessions of Puritan ministers in 1575 contained a clause Deaooness 376 " touching deacons of both sorts, namely men and women." Both were to 'be chosen by the congre- gation and " to be received into their office with the general prayers of the whole Church '' (cf. D. Neal, History of the Puritans, i., New York, 1855, p. 140). In Gov. Bradford's Dialogue it is stated that there was one deaconess " who visited the sick, relieved the poor, and sat in a convenient place in the congregation, with a little birchen rod in her hand, and kept little children in great awe from dis- turbing the congregation. She did filsquently visit the sick and weak, especially women, and if there were poor she would gather relief for them of those that were able, or acquaint the deacons, and she was obeyed as a mother in Israel and an officer of Christ " (A. Young, Chronicles of the PHqrim Fathers, Boston, 1841, pp. 445-446). Early American Con- gregationalism recognized the office and ordered the " ancient widows (where they may be had) to min- ister in the Church, in giving attendance to the sick, and to give succor unto them, and others in the like necessities " {Cambridge Platform, 1648, vii. 7). This theory was not put in practise (cf. W. Walker, History of the Congregational Churches in the United States, New York, 1894, p. 230). The Mennonites of Holland seem to have had the cus- tom of appointing deaconesses to serve among the sick and poor and do other Christian and charitable work. 2. The irineteeiitli Oentury: No more important feature characterizes the recent history of Protes- tantism than the development of woman's public activity in the Church. Woman's work among women and for women in the various missionary organizations and in other bodies is in the direct line of the diaconal work of Phoebe and other female '' helpers " of the early Church. Some of the Protestant bodies have given official recog- nition to the vocation of the congregational dea4X)ness in one form or another, without, how- ever, sanctioning an order of deaconesses in the sense that the order of deacons is sanctioned. It is difficult to make a sharp distinction when an ecclesiastical body commends training-schools for deaconesses and yet denies their election and setting apart to th^ir office by the individual con- gregation. a. (Germany: The oiganization and official training of women for Christian work in the Prot- estant Churches were developed in the early half of the nineteenth century, and found their first embodiment in the institution of deaconesses founded by Pastor Theodor Fliedner (q.v.), which has been the model for similar organizations throughout the Protestant world. This institu- tion was founded in 1836 at Kaiserswerth on the llhine, near Dtlsseldorf. Fliedner was not moved in the first instance by the pious idea 1. Orlffin. of reviving the apostolic order of Theodor female helpers, although he believed Fliedner. Jt to have been in existence in primi- tive times. He was animated by practical considerations to meet a pressing need of his day, the proper care of the sick and the training of neglected children. A feeling existed in certain pious German circles that the Church needed an order of trained women, similar to the sisterhoods of the Roman Catholic Church. This feeliii*; found expression in a pamphlet published by Pastor Kl6nne of Bislich near Wesel in 1820, entitled " The Revival of the Deaconesses of the Ancient Church in our Ladies Societies." In 1835 the pious Coimt Adalbert von der Recke-Volmerstein b^:an the publication of a periodical " Deaconesses, or Life and Labors of the Handmaids of the Church in Teaching and Training and in Nursing the Sick.' It was Fliedner, however, who gave practical em- bodiment to this feeling. Before 1836, on his visits to Holland in 1823 and 1832, he was struck with the employment of deaconesses among the Men- nonites. They were appointed by the official boards of the churches and did their work without remimeration. In his description of his experiences in Holland he wrote: '' This praiseworthy early Christian institution of deaconesses should be revived by other Protestant conununions." He was also sMnck, on his visit in Ehigland in 1832, with the contrast between the fine architecture of the hospital buildings and the incompetency of the attendants within. Impressed by the need of trained women, after these visits he prepared a con- stitution for ** the Order of Deaconesses for the Rhenish Provinces," which was signed in the house of Count Stolberg at Dtlsseldorf, 1836. In October of the same year the first deaconess, Gertnid Rei- chard, entered the Institute. Two years later it sent the first deaconesses to the city hospital of Elber- feld. The Institute has grown to large proportions. It educates three kinds of deaconesses. The first class devote themselves to the care of the sick, the poor, and the fallen in Magdalen asylums. The second dedicate themselves to teaching; the third class aid ministers in parish-work. The fiuida- mental conditions of admission are 2, The Christian character and a strong con- Kaisers- stitution. Other rules are that candi- werth In- dates mtist be of suitable age, must be ■***^*«' unmarried or widows, and must con- secrate themselves for five years to the office. Candidates are accepted on probation for a year. The Kaiserswerth deaconesses take no vows, wear no crucifixes, and are distinguished by a simple and distinctive, but not necessarily uni- form, dress. The internal organization of the houses comprises as a rule a cleigyman as rector and chaplain, assisted by a woman superior, of whom the former exercises general administrative control, while the more intimate details of domestic economy are in the hands of the sister superior. In a few institutions the influence of Roman Catholic models may be discerned in that the clergyman acts only in the capacity of spiritual adviser to the sisterhood. The Kaiserswerth institutions lay stress upon their form of organization. The time of training lasts from two to six years according to the attainments of the women on entering the Institute and according to their aptness. The instruction includes a thorough cotu^e of train- ing in Biblical knowledge. At the close of the term of preparation the deaconesses are conse- crated by a fitting ritual and with the layidg on 377 Deaoonesa of hands, and promise obedience and fidelity in I lieir work.* The Kaiserswerth Institute supplies not only many hospitals, orphanages, and other establish- ments in Germany with deaconesses, but has under its control hospitals in foreign lands, e.g., in Jeru- salem (founded 1851), Constantinople 3. Other (1852), Smyrna (1853), Alexandria IxiBtlta- (1857), Florence (1860), Cairo, etc. In tions. 1861 , at the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Kaiserswerth Institute, the number of daughter institutions in Germany, Austria, Bohe- mia, Hungary, Holland, France, England, Scandi- ^More detailed information is given in the article Dia- kantnr- und DiakoniuMmihikuBer by Theodor Sch&fer in the Hauck-Heriog RB as follows: The conditions for admission are the same to the minu- test degree for all establishments, and an extract from those of the house at Altona may serve as an example. The future deaconess must be of unblemished reputation, and ia required to offer evidence of the facts of her life and her relations to family, employers, and all others under whose authority or influence she may have come. Sound health is a requirement, but it is recognised that women of slight phsrsical constitution have shown themselves capable of excellent service in charitable work. Eighteen and thirty- six are set as the age-limits, but the rule may be waived in exceptional cases. Candidates are supposed to possess a common school education, and it is desirable that they shall have had some experience in housework. The docu- naents to be submitted in applying for admission comprise a short autobiography of some minuteness, evidence of per- mission granted by parents or guardians, a testimonial of moral character supplied by the applicant's pastor, medical, baptismal, and confirmation certificates. Statistics have shown that the great bulk of candidates come from the peasant and artisan classes and the class of small officials, but large numbers, too, are the children of clergymen, pro- fessors and teachers, merchants, and landed proprietors. Successful applicants are retained conditionally for a few weeks, after which they enter upon a year of actual pro- bation. During this year the neophyte is brought to a thorough understanding of the conditions confronting her in her future calling, the chief object being to discern the existence of inclination and adaptability for the work. In most houses the hospital is the first and most important school of practise. Parallel with practise in the hospital runs theoretical instruction under the direction of the head physician. Where necessary, instruction is given also in elemeatary subjects. The religious side is not neglected; in many institutions a few hours are devoted every week to religious instruction in which as many of the younger sisters as can be spared from their daily work participate. Under the head of religious instruction is included instruc- tion in the theory and history of charitable work, while the religious factor proper is supplied by a study of Bible his- tory and geography, ohivch history, the eateehism, and the liturgy. After the completion of the probationary year the can- didate is admitted to the novitiate, and after a further training, ranging from two to six years, there follows the dedication. In this the deaconess promises obedienoe. faith- fulness, and devotion in her chosen calling and to remain in it so long as it shall please the Lord to allow her. This is not a vow such as is taken in the Roman Catholic orders. From the day of her dedication the neophyte has full rights of membership in the sisterhood. She has become the daughter of the house which is to be her actual home through life, her guide, and her provider in sickness and in old age. Long before her dedication, the future deaconess may be despatched on service to any post which the authorities of her house may select; and such service is in fact a part of her preparation. She is never assigned to any permanent position, but is subject to whatever arrangements the sis- terhood may make for her services. Marriage is not al- lowed for practical reasons purely. The list of institutions wherein the deaconesses have been active includes hospitals, poorhouses, orphan asylums, elementary schools, industrial schools, rescue-homes, homes for fallen women, and prisons. navia, Italy, and the United States was twenty- seven. Among the earlier ones were the home in Paris (1841), St. Loup near Lausanne (1841), Stras- burg (1842), Dresden and Utrecht (1844), Bern, and Bethany in Berlin (1845), Stockhohn (1849), Riehen near Basel (1852), Stuttgart (1854), St. Petersburg (1859), Copenhagen (1863). In 1904 there were in Germany forty-six institutions con- nected with the Kaiserswerth mother house. The yearly expenditiu*e of the mother house averages 700,000 marks. A triennial conference of homes has been instituted. Many institutions have be- come members of the association which are not the direct daughters of the Fliedner mother house, for example the Milwaukee Lutheran Deaconesses' home. In 1905 the conference included seventy- five institutions with 14,501 deaconesses. Independent deaconesses' institutions have also been founded in different cities of Germany which have adopted the Kaiserswerth idea, e.g., the Eliza- beth hospital and Deaconesses' home in Berlin founded by Gossner in 1840; Sarepta in Bielefeld (1869), where the eminent philanthropist Friedrich von Bodelschwingh assumed the superintendency in 1872; in Neuendettelsau by the philanthropist Wilhehn L6he (1854); Stuttgart (1865); Altona (1867); etc. The Moravians established one at Niesky in 1842. The Methodists of Germany agi- tated the matter in the sixties and in 1876 opened their first house at Frankfort and then in Berlin (1883), Hamburg (1886), Magdeburg, Munich, Vienna, Strasburg, Zurich, and other cities. They also have a home in Gothenburg, Sweden, founded 1900. The Evangelical Association in Germany has homes at Berlin (1887), Hambuiig (1888), Stras- burg (1889), Elberfeld (1890), Stuttgart (1896), and Carlsnihe (1900). The German Baptists have the deaconesses' home, Bethel, in Berlin (1887). &. Bnffland: The influence of Kaiserswerth upon the Protestant Churches of England and Scot- land resulted in a general discussion of the subject of deaconesses and in the establishment of deacon- esses' institutions. With Elizabeth Fiy and Flor- ence Nightingale (qq.v.) the permanent efforts at organization may be said to have begun, and they came under the immediate influence of Pastor Fliedner and the Kaiserswerth work. Miss Night- ingale went through a thorough coiu^e of training at Kaiserswerth before taking charge of the female sanitarium in London, and Mrs. Fry, after a visit to the German town, established the first English institution for the training of nurses in London in 1840. In 1846 Fliedner brought fotir deaconesses to the German hospital in London. A new development was furnished in the sister- hoods established within the pale of the Anglican Church. These were due in some measure to the Anglo-Catholic movement led by Pusey and the Tractarians, and it is not improbable that with the high reverence which this party had for Roman Catholic institutions they would have 1. Sister- established sisterhoods even if the hoods, deaconess movement had not gone be- fore. The first Protestant sisterhood was established or consecrated by Dr. Pusey in 1847 in Park Village near London. The same year DaaoonesB 378 Priscilla Lydia Sellon oi^ganized the Sisterhood of Mercy at Devonport, binding herself with three other ladies to an association for the relief of the sufferings of the poor. They adopted a uniform dress, the use of the cross, etc. They founded at Devonport a house of destitute children, a *' House of Peace " for older girls, and an industrial school. Miss Sellon was addressed as mother superior. Since then many sisterhoods with various names have been founded in the Church of England, e.g., the Sisterhcxxl of St. John the Baptist at Clewer, founded in 1849, which devoted itself more espe- cially to the reformation of fallen women. The difference between the sisterhoods of the Church of England and the order of deaconesses consists in this, that the sisterhood leans in its organization to the convent as its model. The sisters take vows, live strictly in commimities, acknowledge a mother superior, and often find refuge in the sisterhood for the sake of pious devotion more than for philan- thropic activity. The deaconess idea as carried out at Kaiserswerth was formally commended by Dr. Tait, then bishop of London, in his charge May 2, 1850. From 1858 to 1871 woman's work was the subject of animated discussion in the convocation of Canterbury. In 1861 Bishop Tait invested Elizabeth Catherine Ferard (d. 1883) with the office of deaconess, and it was generally regarded as a revival of the apos- tolic office. Miss Ferard had been trained at Kaiserswerth and with the aid of Dean Champneys and others opened the deaconesses' institution of North London, a diocesan institution founded on the Kaiserswerth model. In 1871 rules were laid down for diocesan deaconesses' homes 2. Deacon- j^^j g^^ jjy the archbishop of Can- InTthB terbuiy and eighteen bishops. The Ohuroh of ^^P^^cipl® sets forth ''that adeacon- Bnffland. ess is a woman set apart by the bishop under that title for service in the Church. She is at liberty to resign her commission as deaconess or may be deprived of it by the bishop." She was to be an auxiliary to the pastorate, and not a conventual. Dean How- son contended for this idea and he saw it prevail. The institution was taken up as a dioc- esan matter and in 1904 there were deaconesses' homes in the dioceses of Canterbury, Chester, Ely, London, Salisbury, Winchester, lituidaff, Exeter, and Rochester. There are also deaconesses' insti- tutions in Lichfield, Durham, and Worcester. The Mildmay institutions with the deaconesses' home as the center were due to the zeal and organiang power of William Pennefather, an English clergy- man. The beginning was made at Bamet in 1860, and the institutions moved to Mildmay in 1864. The deaconesses' department has three branches, medical work, parish work, and foreign mission work. The Institution has stations in Malta, Jamaica, and Hebron. While the Mildmay in- stitutions were founded by Anglicans, they are not intended to be strictly denominational. The only mother house in England belonging to the Kaisers- werth group is Tottenham, North London, founded in 1877 by Dr. Michael Laseron, a converted Jew, and his wife, and aided by Samuel Morley with a gift of £7,000. Dr. Laseron was very successful in training deaconesses. The institution supplies a number of hospitals, including one in Sierra Leone. The Wesleyans of England have been active in promoting the work of the deaconess. In 1888 the Rev. Hugh Price Hughes (q.v.) formed an organiza- tion called " The Sisters of the People " with a home near the British Museum, named Catherine House after his wife; in 1891 it was removed to larger quarters in Viceroy Street. The sisters do all kinds of mission work, visit the 8. Wesley- poor, conduct midnight missions, teach aaDea- in kindergartens, etc. The Wesleyan conesses. Deaconesses' Institution was founded m 1890 by the Rev. T. B. Stevenson, and has two training-schools, Newbum House, London, N. E., and Calvert House, at Leicester. The deaconesses are stationed in all parts of Eng> land and are employed chiefly in parish woi^. The institution has stations in New ZeieJand, South Africa, and Ceylon. There are three departments of work contemplated by the training : the teaching and care of children, nursing the sick, and home and foreign mission work. The training includes Bibli- cal and medical instruction, and lasts a year. The Institution was formally adopted by the Wesleyan Conference in 1902. The following extract from an official report gives an idea of the Wesleyan conception of the deaconess and her work: What ia a Wesleyan deaooneas? One who bekmgs Co the Order ao-oalled, governed by the Council, and eano- tioned by the Wesleyan Methodist Chureh. But her work is not sectarian, and she may by arrangement serve other than Methodist churches. . . . The work of the dea- coness is anything that the cause of Christ and the poor de- mand. She is nurse, teacher, visitor, even preacher when necessary. She is a helper in sorrow and a rescuer from all sin. Her work varies in every locality. c, Sootlaad: Fliedner visited Scotland in 1846 and met Chalmers. In 1886 the Church of Scot- land took the matter of deaconesses' work seriously in hand, and in 1887 the Assembly commended the establishment of deaconesses' training-schools and more esi)ecially the Edinburgh House, a home for deaconesses established the same year. Dr. Archi- bald H. Charteris was the most influential person in bringing about this consummation. St. Ninian's Hospital is connected with the home. The first deaconess was installed in office Dec. 9, 1888. The work is incorporated in the constitution of the Established Church, which not only commended the training of deaconesses , but established rules for their admission, garb, etc. d. America: Practically all denominations in the United States have adopted in one form or another the si)ecial training of women for Christian work. Some have made the work of the deaconess a part of their constitution, or have officially recog^ nized the deaconess as a local church official or functionary appointed by the local church. The fathers of the deaconess movement in the United States were the Rev. W. A. Passavant and the Rev. W. A. Muhlenberg (qq.v.), the former a Lutheran, the latter an Episcopalian of Lutheran birth. The Lutheran Church first recognized the Kaiserswerth movement. At the age of twenty-four Dr. Passa- vant was sent as a delegate to the meeting in Lon- 879 DMMonMa don in 1846 which resulted m the foundation of the Evangelical Alliance, and he afterward visited Kai- eerswerth. In his annual report of Jan. 1, 1847, Fliedner said, *' We have been urgently 1. The requested to send deaconesses from liiitheranB. here to North America." In 1849 he accompanied four deaconesses to Pitts- burg, where they were stationed in a hospital already opened by Dr. Passavant and dedicated July 17, 1849, Fliedner being present. On May 28, 1850, the first American deaconess, Katherine Louisa Marthens, trained under Dr. Passavant, was consecrated (cf. Sp&th, p. 25). Dr. Passavant was not successful in building up a permanent deaconesses' home in Pittsburg, and the enterprise was given up because women did not come forward for the work and for other reasons. The Passavant hospital in Pittsburg still employs deaconesses, as do the affiliated institutions for epileptics in Roches- ter, N. Y., and for orphans at Zelienople, Pa. The hospital at Jacksonville, 111., formerly em- ployed them. The Mary J. Drexel Home in Phila- delphia, opened in 1888, is a Lutheran institution and occupies the finest building consecrated to deaconesses' work in America. It was founded by Dr. Lankenau as a memorial to his wife, and asso- ciated with the German Lutheran hospital of Philadelphia, of which Dr. Lankenau wsa treas- urer. This deaconesses' home was started in 1884. In 1894 it was brought into organic relation with the Lutheran Church and joined the group of the Kaiserswerth institutions. The deaconesses labor in kindergartens and hospitals and in parish work. The Milwaukee Deaconesses' Home was established in 1891, Dr. Passavant having founded a hospital in that city in 1863, of which his son, the Rev. R. W. Passavant, was made director in 1900, but lived less than a year to administer the office. There are other Lutheran deaconesses' homes connected with the various branches of American Lutheranism: — in Baltimore (founded 1895), Omaha (Swedish, 1887), Brooklyn (founded by Mrs. Boers, wife of the Norwegian consul, 1883), Minneapolis (Noi^ wegian, 1888), Chicago (1900), Buffalo, and St. Paul. In most cases, if not in all, these institutions were organized with the aid of one or more deacon- esses from Germany or Scandinavia. In 1905 the Mary J. Drexel, Milwaukee, and Omaha houses had respectively 47, 19, and 22 deaconesses, and 25, 13, and 15 probationers. The sixth annual conference of the ** Evangelical Lutheran Deaconesses' Mother- houses in the United States " wsa held in Milwaukee in 1905. The Protestant Episcopal Church followed the Lutherans in the deaconesses' work in America. In 1843 Rev.W. A. Muhlenberg, then rector of the Church of the Holy Communion, New York city, organized a sisterhood, which, however, was not formally consti- tuted till 1852, when a house was erected adjoining the church. A dispensary was started and developed into St. Luke's Hospital. The second organiza- tion was the Sisterhood of the Good Shepherd in Baltimore, formed into a community in 1863, but its history dates back to 1855, when, with the ap- proval of the bishop of the diocese, the Rev. Horace Stringfellow of St. Andrew's Church inaugurated the movement. A sister superior stands at the head of the community. The Sisterhood of St. Mary in New York was founded in 1865, five sisters being consecrated to their work Feb. 8. The ^' ^y ^^^ bishop of the diocese in St. Protestant Michael's Church. The sisters take Bpiscopal vows and none but members of the Church. Protestant Episcopal Church are admit- ted to these bodies. The Sisterhood of St. Mary is probably the most influential in the Episcopal Church. It carries on an extensive work in New York and beyond. The Sisterhood of St. John was established in Washington in 1867. The Sisterhood of St. John the Baptist (New York, 1881) is a branch of the similar body in England. The Sisterhood of All Saints was transferred from London to Baltimore in 1891, and the Sisterhood of St. Margaret from East Grinstead, Eng., in 1873 to Boston. The Sisterhood of the Holy Childhood of Jesus was established by the Rev. C. C. Grafton in Providence, R. I., in 1882. The Protestant Episcopal Church has not officially approved the sisterhoods, but it has given approval to the dea- conesses' organizations and the office of deaconess. In 1864 a diocesan deaconesses' institution was formed in Mobile, Ala. On Feb. 11, 1872, Bishop Littlejohn of Long Island consecrated six to the office of deaconess in St. Mary's Church, Brooklyn. The General Convention of the Episcopal Church had before it for a number of years the subject of woman's work and the question of reviving the primitive order of deaconess. In 1889 action was taken by the Triennial Convention and a " Training School for Deaconesses " was opened by Bishop Potter in New York in 1890 and placed under the jurisdiction of the Rev. W. R. Huntington and Grace Church. It provides a course of training covering two years. Matriculants must be of the age of eighteen. After the course they are at liberty to labor under the direction of a bishop or to join an association of deaconesses or a sisterhood. Similar institutions have been begun in Phila- delphia and in Toronto, Canada. The deaconess idea has also found incorporation in the English colonies imder the chai^ of the Anglican episco- pate (cf. Golder, pp. 464 sqq.). The Methodists of the United States have done more than any other American denomination to utilize the movement started by Pastor Fliedner and to modify it according to their needs. By action of the General Conference in 1888, due espe- cially to Rev. J. M. Thobum, afterward bishop of India, the deaconess is recognized as an official of the Church (cf. Wheeler, pp. 269 sqq.). She takes no vows; " her duties are to minister to the poor, visit the sick, pray with the dying, care for the orphan, seek the wandering, comfort the sorrowing, save the sinning, and, relinquishing wholly other pursuits, to devote herself in a general way to such forma of Christian labor as may be suited to her abilities." Each annual conference through a board, composed partly of women, exercises over- sight over the work and issues diaconal certificates to women properly accredited. In 1900 the Gen- eral Conference perfected the law of the Church on this subject. Tlie bishops are now a general dea* Death 380 coneaNB' bocird, having general Bupervision over all deaconesBes' work throughout the Church. One of its duties is to authorise new dea- 8. The oonesses' homes. The committee of Uethodists. the annual conferences is continued as established by the conference of 1888. Deaconesses are licensed and conse- crated to their office after two years of continuous probationary service and an examination. They must be twenty-three years of age and unmarried. The work of the deaconess is thus an integral part of the discipline of the Methodist Church. There is also in the Methodist Church " The Deaconesses' Bureau of the Woman's Home Missionary Soci- ety " and " The Methodist Deaconesses' Society/' with headquarters in Chicago. The "Chicago Training School for City Home and Foreign Mis- sions " was established as early as 1885 by Mrs. Lucy Rider Meyer. In 1890 the first deaconesses' home, under that distinctive name, was opened in Detroit by Mrs. Jane Bancroft Robinson, who was instrumental in opening similar homes in Phila- delphia, Baltimore, Buffalo, Pittsburg, Los Ange- les, and other cities. The "Elizabeth Gamble Deaconesses' Home and Christ's Hospital" was founded in 1888 in Cincinnati The " Lucy Webb Hayes Deaconesses' Home and National Training School" was founded in Washington in 1889 and has associated with it the Sibley Hospital (1894). The same year a training-school was founded in New York. One of the largest houses in the Method- ist Episcopal Church and in the United States is the " Rebecca Deaconesses' Home and Asbury Hospitsl" in Minneapolis, founded in 1891. At the present time there are over one hundred deacon- esses' homes and training-schools in the United States under the care of the Methodist Church. It has also deaconesses' homes in Madras, Calcutta, Lucknow, and other cities of India. In 1902 the value of their properties was 12,402,000. The German Reformed Church has a home in Cleveland, founded 1892. The Evangelical Asso- ciation has one in St. Louis (1890). The German Methodists have homes in Cincinnati (Bethesda, 1891), St. Paul (the " Elizabeth Haas Deaconess Home," 1891), Chicago (the "German Deacon- esses' Institute," 1892), Louisville (1895), Kansas City (1897), and elsewhere. The United Brethren incorporated the deaconess office and idea into their discipline in 1891. The Congregationalists of Illi- nois secured a charter for " the American Congre- gational Deaconesses' Association " in 4. Other 1901 and established a training-school Denoxnina- in Chicago. The first organization in tions. the Baptist Church was the " Baptist Deaconesses' Society of the City of New York," organized 1895. The first deaconess was ordained after a full course of study in 1897. The deaconesses wear a special garb and are called sisters. The Christian Church under the lead of Rev. A. M. Harvuot established a " Training School for Pastoral Helpers " in Cincinnati in 1899, now removed to Des Moines and connected with Drake University. The Presbyterian Church, North, in 1899 refused to recognize the special office of the congregational deaconess, but several churches have elected and set apart deaconesses by a special f c»m of consecration. In accordance with action of the Cieneral Assembly in 1892, which commended the establishment of institutions and training homes for the instruction of godly women duly recom- mended by sessions and presbyteries for practical Christian work, a training-school for deaconeises was opened in connection with the First Presby- terian Church of Baltimore in 1903. The Presby- terian Church, South, in 1879 provided for the recog- nition of godly women in church work by the sessions, and in 1906 the synod of the United Presbyte- rian Church sanctioned congregational deaconesses Lastly, a class of interdenominational deaconesses' homes may be mentioned, such as the " €rerman Deaconesses' Home " in Cincinnati founded in l&SS; the "Protestant Deaconesses' Home" in Indian- apolis (1894); and the "German Deaconesses' Home " in Buffalo (1895). For a further presenta- tion of the work of women in the Church see the article Woman's Work. D. S. Schaff. Bibliography: On I. and II.: Bingham, OH^tfies. books i.. ii., IT.; L. Thoznaasin, VetuM ei nova ecdenm diadpUna. I. iii., chaps. 47-50, Pmria, 1728; A. J. C. Pankowski. D0 diaconiaaiB eommmUalio, BesenabuiiE, 1866; T. Zahc. Iffnatiua von Antioehien, pp. 580-587. Gotha, 1873; G. Uhlhom, Die ekriaaidu LubeaOi/liigkeii, 3 Tola., Stntteart, 1881-Oa vol. i. In dtr alien Kirehe, 1881, Eng. tran^l, ChneUan Charity in the Early Church, New York, 18». rot u. Im MiUelaler, 1884, vol. iii. SeU der Rfsfarmatum, 1890; J. B. Lightfoot, Apoetolic Faihere, iL 322-324, 913 ■qq., London, 1885; J. J. I. DdUinger. BeUrOae *vr Set- tenifeeekidUe dee MiUelaUere, Munich. 1890; the OomxneD- taries on Romans, especially Lange's, New York, 1869, and by Sanday and Headlam, in IwternaUonal CriHoal Camr fiMntary, New York, 1895; works on the Apostolic Age. such as Schaff, ChriMlian Church, L 499. cf . iiL 25IK262;

DCA, L 532-635. III.: The classical work on Deaconesses in the modern Church is T. SchAfer, Geschichte der weiblichen Diakonie, 3 vols.. Stuttgart. 1887-94. Consult: Florence NightL**- gsle, The Institution of Deaconesses, London, 1851; Mrs. Jameson, Sisters of Charity, ib. 1855; P. Schaff, Germany. He Universities, Theology and Religion, chap. xutviiL. Philadelphia. 1857; J. S. Howson, Deaconesses, London. 1862; idem, 7*^ Diaconate of Women in Ae Anglican Churdi, ib. 1S86; J. M. Ludlow, Woman'e Work in the Church, ib. 1865; H. C. Potter. Sisterhoods and Dea- eoneeaee. New York, 1873; A. Spftth, Phoebe the Deaconess, Philadelphia, 1886; H. Wheeler. Deaconesses Ancient and Modem, New York. 1889; Jane M. Bancroft. i>aa- eoneeeee in Europe, ib. 1889; L. R. Meyer, Deaconesses, ib. 1889; H. J. Cooke. Mildmay, the Firet Deaeoneee In- etiiutum, London, 1892; J. M. Thobum, The Deaconess and Her Vocation, New York. 1893; G. M. Maynard, Pictures of Mildmay, London. 1895; C. Robinaon, Th» Ministry of Deaconesses, ib. 1898; C. Colder, HieL ef Ms Deaeoneee Movement in the Christian Church, New York, 1903; Q. H. Gerberding. Life and Letters of W. A. Paeeavant, Greenville, Pa., 1906; Livinia L. Dock sod Mary A. Nutting. A Hietory of Nursing, 2 vols.. New York and London, 1908; the Reports of the Conferences of tbe Evangelical Lutheran Mother-houses in the United States A concise review of the modem movement is given in tbe Addresses, Reports, Statements . . . of the National Covt- cil of Congregational Churches of the United Statee, 1907, pp. 292-308. Boston, 1907. DEAD SEA. See Palestine.

DEAN: A word which comes from the Latin decanus, originally a military term, designating the leader of a decana or body of ten soldiers. It early acquired the general meaning of overseer of a small number of inferiors, and was used in households for the overseers of slaves, subsequently in Con- stantinople for police officials. In ecclesiastical 381 Deaconess Death usage there are: (1) Monastic deans, whose authority extended over ten novices (Augustine, De moribus ecclesiae, i. 31). (2) Deans (also called archpres- byters) appointed by a bishop to visit and oversee Ek part of his diocese, having supervision of the official and private conduct of the priests, pre- siding (from the ninth century on) at their dis- trict conventions, etc. A dean of this sort was dependent upon the archdeacon (Friedberg, Kir- chenrecht, 188-189; see Archdeacon and Arch- priest). (3) Deans of cathedrals are recognized cathedral officers as early as the eighth century. In the Church of England the dean is the next ecclesiastic to the bishop. Deaneries of the " old foundation " (those older than the Reformation) are elective; those of the " new foundation " (created by Henry VIII.) are appointed by the crown. The jurisdiction of the dean is supreme in his cathedral in all matters except those which affect doctrine. The deans of Westminster and Windsor are independent of all superior ecclesias- tical authority. (4) The rural deans of England are clergymen appointed by the bishop '' to execute the bishop's processes and inspect the lives and manners of the clergy and people within their jurisdiction " (Phillimore, Ecclesiastical Law). ** The dean and chapter " is the name given in England to the body electing a bishop. (5) In the Lutheran Churches the title dean is for the most part synonymous with superintendent (q.v.), but sometimes signifies a subordinate official. In the Reformed Churches a dean is an overseer of clcr^ or the head of a classis in France. The oldest cardinal is usually the dean of the Sacred College, presides in the consistory in the pope's absence, confers upon a newly elected pope the orders he may not have received, and presides at the pope's coronation. D. S. Schaff. Diblioorapbt: J. G. Hofmmnn, De deeania et deeanittia^ Wittenberg, 1739; P. Baldauf. Dm . . . Deeanatamt, 6 vols.. Oras. 1836; P. Hergenrdther, Rtimitchea Kirchen^ rechl, Freiburg. 1905: KL, iii. 1430-32; DCA, L 637- 539; BinghAm, Oriffinea, booka i., iv., v., yi., viii. DEATH. Various Representations ({ 1). Three Kinds of Death Mentioned in Scripture (f 2). The Origin of Death ({3). The Abolition of Death ({ 4). The Condition of Death (f 5). Among the Greeks, TharuUoa, or death, was represented as a god, and the twin-brother of sleep (Hesiod and Homer). They en- I. Various deavored to exclude all that is revolting Represen- from the idea. The representation of tations. it, however, at a later period, under the figure of a priest in sable garments, cutting the hair from the heads of the dying to offer it to the gods of the underworld, betrays the natural dread of death common to the race. The Romans brought forward prominently the awful features, describing death as a pitiless divinity, pale, and haggard of aspect, furnished with black winjrs, etc. The mythologies of northern nations fin sented him under the figures of a fowler spread- I'.'.z Ills net, or a reaper with sickle in hand, or a skeleton. In the Scriptures also death is person- ified, and described as intelligent (Job xxviii. 22), as sitting on a pale horse (Rev. vi. 8), or cast with hell into the lake of fire (Rev. xx. 14). Scripture expresses a universal sentiment of mankind when it calls death the king of ^terrors (Job xviii. 14), and an occasion of siiffering and fear (Ps. iv. 4; Heb. ii. 15). But it also speaks of it as a release from pain (Job iiL 17), the passage to a better life (II Cor. V. 4), as '' being gathered to one's people " (Gen. XXV. 8), a taking-down of the pilgrim's tem- porary tent (II Cor. v. 1), a sleeping with the fathers (I Kings ii. 10), or with Christ (I Cor. xv. 18; I Thess. iv. 13-15), a departure (Phil. i. 23; II Tim. iv. 6), a dissolution of the earthly house (II Cor. V. 1), and a rest (Rev. xiv. 13). There are three kinds of death mentioned in the Scriptures — physical death, spiritual death, and the second or eternal death. Physical death is the dissolution of the body into its component parts. The spirit takes its flight (Eccles. xii. 2, Three 7), and the body passes back into the KlndB of dust from which it was taken (Gen. Death Men- iii. 19; Eccles. iii. 20). The time of tioned in this dissolution is known to God only Scripture. (Ps. xxxi. 15; Matt. xxv. 13). It must be regarded as a benignity for the righteous man (Nuol xxiii. 10; Rom. vii. 24), but as a dread calamity to the impenitent, whom it ushers to his own place (Acts i. 25), and for all as " the night in which no man can work " (John ix. 4). Spiritual death is a state of sin and darkness, in which man is alienated from God, the fountain of life and light (I John i. 5), and consequently destitute of true spiritual life. The whole world, at the coming of Christ, was sitting in the shadow of this death (Luke i. 79). All men, without excep- tion, are dead in trespasses and sins (Eph. ii. 1, 5; Col. ii. 13; cf. Luke xv. 32). Our Lord became subject unto the death of the body, but was always in communion with the Father, and free from sin. The entrance upon a life of faith is called arising from the dead (Eph. v. 14), or becoming alive unto God (Rom. vi. 11). Spiritual death is not a stag- nant condition, but a progressive state, the heart becoming more hardened, the eyes more blind (John xii. 49; Rom. i. 21), the conscience seared as with a hot iron (I Tim. iv. 2), and the pleasure in lust and hatred of God increased (Rom. i. 26-31). The second or eternal death (Rev. IL 11; xx. 6, 14; xxi. 8) signifies the final loss of the power and op- portunity to repent and turn to God. The per- sonality is not destroyed; but God's image is wholly defaced, and heavenly blessedness forfeited. This terrible doom of the second death is described under the figure of an exclusion from what is good (Rev. xxii. 15; cf. Matt. xxv. 30), and of a lake burning with fire and brimstone, into which the finally impenitent are cast (Rev. xx. 14, xxi. 8). Those who overcome (Rev. iL 11), and are partakers of the " first resurrection " (regeneration, cf. Eph. V. 14, etc.), shall in no wise be hurt of it (Rev. xx. 6). The same idea is expressed by the words "per- ishing" (John iii. 15), " eternal punishment" (Matt. xxv. 46), " destruction" (Phil. iii. 19), " everlasting destruction " (II Theas. i. 9), and " corruption " (Gal. vL 8). Deoaloirue 382 Sin and death are indiasolubly associated in the Old and New Testaments. Death is not merely the natural fruit of sin (Jas. L 15), but 3* The its just punishment or wages (Gen. ii. Origin of 17; Rom. vi. 23), and expression of Death, the divine wrath (Ps. xc. 7-10; Rom. ii. 5-8). We are subject to it because we are subject to the law of sin, and in virtue of our union with Adam (Rom. v. 17; I Cor. xv. 22). It has been denied by Pelagius and the Socinians that physical death was included in this penalty. The body is regarded as having been mortal before the fall. This view is in contradiction to what seems to be the plain meaning of the words, " In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die '' (i.e., begin to die, or become mortal — Gen. ii. 17), when read in the light of the curse in Gen. iii. 19, ** Unto dust thou shalt return." Although our first parents did not actually return to dust the very day they Binned, nevertheless, the principle of death then began to work in them (Augustine, De pecccUorum meritia, i. 21). Christ has abolished death (II Tim. i. 10). This has been accomplished by the defeat of him who had the power of death (Heb. ii. 14), 4. The and the spoliation of the kingdom of Abolition darkness (Eph. iv. 8; Col. ii. 15). of Death. Christ could not be holden of death (Acts ii. 24), and triumphantly rose from the grave. The dead were raised by his word of power (Mark v. 41; Luke vii. 15; John xi. 44). He quickens with new spiritual life whom he will (John V. 21 ; Eph. ii. 5), so that moral death has no more dominion over us (Rom. vi. 9). He that belie veth is *' passed from death unto life '' (John V. 24). The death of the body becomes, for those thus spiritually revived, a sleep (I Thess. iv. 14) and a rest from labor (Rev. xiv. 13), from which they shall be raised to an estate of eternal blessed- ness (II Cor. XV. 21, 22; 1 Thess. iv. 13-16). The sea then (Rev. xx. 13), aa well aa all earthly graves, shall give up their dead. And so effective is this quickening power of Christ that they who are raised by him can nevermore die (Luke xx. 36); and so perfect is the life in heaven that there is no death there (Rev. xxi. 4). The states following the moment when the bodily organs cease to perform their functions are treated in other articles (see Gehenna; Hades; 5. The Heaven; Purgatory; Resurrection Condition of the Dead; etc.). The body of of Death. Jesus saw no corruption. It is a pi- ous belief held in the Roman Catholic Church that this was true also of the body of Mary. The belief was stated at an early period, and in its most popular form comes through Juvenal, bishop of Jenisalem, who told it to the emperor Marcian at Chaicedon, 451. Whether the soul sleeps at the death of the body until the general resurrec- tion was answered negatively by Calvin in his tract Psychopannychia (written at Orleans 1534 against some of the Anabaptists who held to that opinion). John XX 11. denied the doctrine of Uie immediate beatific vision of the blessed dead. His successor declared this view heresy. The West- minster Shorter Catechism (question xxxvii.) states the doctrine that the bodies of the dead rest in their graves till the resurrection, but that their souls do immediately pass into glory. This was the view of the Reformers. D. S. Schaff. Bibliography: For the Biblical side: F. Delitzsch, Sy*' tern dtT InbliMckin Pav^^oloQie, Leipaio, 1861, £ns. traitsL, Edinburgh, 1865; J. T. Beck, Umri»$ der kiUimehen See- lenlekre, 8tutt«art, 1871; H. Schults, AUieaiawunllicht Theoloifie^ 2 vols., GAttingen, 1896, Ens. transL, Los- don, 1892; W. Bey»chlaff. NetUeaiamenaUhe Tkeoioffie, 2 vols.. Halle, 1895, Eng. tranal.. Edinbursh, 1896. On the general aspect consult: F. Splittgerfoer. Tod^ Fori- Uben und Aufentehung. Halle, 1869; J. J. G. Wilkinmc Orioin» and lamiea of Lif€ and Deaths ib. 1885; A. Scbb- penhauer, Ueber den Tod und eein Verhnilnin gur Uk- aontorbarkeit, Leipsic. 1886; J. G. BeUett. The Doad in Ckrut, London, 1887; A. Sabatier, Bamii mtr la vie etia mart, Paris, 1892; H. M. Alden, A Study of Death, Loo- don, 1895; L. Bordeau. L« ProbUmo de la mart. Fans. 1900; C. du Prel. Der Tod, daa Jeneeite, Jensi, 1901. For the literary treatment consult: P. Bomstein, Der Tod »• der modemen LAUeratur^ Leipsic, 1900.

DEATH, DANCE OF: A famous subject of art, especially in the fifteenth century. Death, in the figure of a skeleton, is depicted in the company of representatives of every class of society. The fell enemy is represented in the most various attitudes; now harshly tugging at the victim, and now gently leading him; now walking arm in arm, and now beating him. An hour-glass is usually found some- where in the pictures. The Dance of Death was painted on the walls and windows of churches, on house-fronts, in illuminated books, and on bridges. Among the oldest representations are those of Mio- den (1383), Dijon (1436), and Basel (1441); the principal ones are those of Basel, Bern, and Erfurt. The subject was also frequently represented in England, as at Croydon, Salisbury Cathedral, Stratford-on-Avon, and elsewhere. Moral and descriptive verses were frequently printed below the pictures, and usually closed with such a sen- tence as, " Death awaits all." Hans Holbein is the only painter of fame associated with these curious works of art, who, however, never went farther than to make sketches. These were engraved on wood by Luetzelburger, and appeared at Lyons (1538). As might be expected, they were charac- terized by humor and poetic imagination. The Dance of Death was also represented on the stage; at least two cases are well attested, one before Philip the Good of Burgundy at Bruges in 1449 (called a certain jeu, histoire et moralite sur le fait de la danse macabre), and one at Besancon in 1453. D. S. Schaff. Bibliography: A very full list of books is given under " Dance of Death " in the British Museum Catalogue. Consult: G. Peignot, Recherdtee eur lee Daneee dee Mortg, Paris, 1826; F. Douoe. The Dance of Deatk, London, 1833; G. Kastner, Lee Daneee dee MorU, Paris. 1852; Danoe of Death by Bane Bolbein, with introductory Sok by A. Dobeon, London, 1872; W. Sulmmann, Die Tote*- tAnee dee MiUdaJUer; Nordlingen, 1892: [J. J. Bertlueri La plue Aneienne Danee Macabre au KlingenAal b Bale. Pftris, 1896: A. Gdtte, Bolbeine Totentane und eeine Vor- bilder, StrasburK. 1897; E. K. Ghambera. The Medi<rvei Stage, 2 vols.. Oxford. 1903; W. Combe, The EngUA Dance of Death; from the Deeigne of T. Ra/miaMAeon h$ the author of " Doctor Syntax," new ed., 2 voU.. New Yori. 1903. DEBORAH, deb'o-ra or d^bo'rd C'Bee"): Tbe name of two women of the Bible. 383 Death Deoaloffua 1 . The nurse of Rebekah who accompanied her from Mesopotamia to Canaan when she married Isaac. 2. Prophetess and Judge: She belonged to one of the uorthem tribes and was the wife of a cer- tain Lappidoth. While the Canaanites occupied the open country, she acted as prophetess and judge on Mount Ephraim. When for twenty years the country had been oppressed by the enemy Deborah proclaimed a war of liberation. She ordered Barak of Kedesh in Naphtali with 10,000 men from the tribes of Zebulon and Naphtali, who, according to Judges V. were joined by others, to encamp on Mount Tabor and to attack the hostile general who was about to gather his forces in the valley of Kishon. Barak consented only when Deborah de- clared her readiness to go with him; she predicted, however, that on account of this timidity, he would yield the prize of victoiy to a woman. Of the sub- sequent battle there are two independent records, each distinguished by peculiar details, which supplement each other: the prosaic narrative in Judiges iv. and Deborah's song of victory, chap. v. From the two it appears that, by the attack of the Israelitic infantry, the army of the enemy was completely beaten at Taanach and Megiddo. A thunder-storm threw the Canaanitic chariots into confusion, and the violent downpour caused the overflow of the river Kishon, which became the grave of the heavily equipped, disorderly mass (Ps. Ixxxiii. 9). This may have happened in the narrow pass of Haritieh. Sisera fled on foot over the northern mountain, and came to the tent of Jael, who belonged to a branch of the Kenites tent- ing near Kedesh in Naphtali (cf. Josh. xix. 37). The unhappy general arrived exhausted and found a hospitable reception in the tent of Jael, but also a disgraceful death at the hand of his hostess. Thus, in accordance with the utterance of the seer, Jael anticipated the pursuing Barak. The assertion of Wellhausen that the prose narrative in chap. iv. is only a version of the song is refuted by the fact that the narrative mentions many details wanting in the song, and makes no use of many things peculiar to the latter. The contradictions which some have thought they discovered between chaps, iv. and v. are doubtful. The i)06ition of Jabin, "king of Canaan," at Hazor in the narrative might give rise to objection, since no reference is made to him in the song, whereas Sisera, his general (according to iv. 2), seems in the song to have the household of a prince. On this account many suppose that Jabin did not originally belong to the narrative, but was incorporated from Josh. xi. 1. But the song (v. 19) speaks of kings of Canaan who took part in the battle, and it is conceivable that the king of Hazor was their head, whereas another of these " kings," Sisera, commanded in the field. Other alleged con- tradictions between chaps, iv. and v. are of no importance. The song of triumph which Deborah sang after this decisive victory bears so much the stamp of originality that the critics almost unani- mously recognize in it an authentic testimony, language and style are peculiar and ancient. The narrative betrays the cutting wit as well as the holy seriousness which was peculiar to the new nation. Alongside of the stormy savageness of the time, there appears in Deborah a tender, genuinely female sense, which comes out in the singer and the " moth- er in Israel." For the critical treatment of the history of Israel this ancient song is of great im- portance. C. VON Orelli. Biblioqrapht: Of the highest import&noe is G. F. Moore, Commentary on JtuigeB, New York, 1895. Consult: O. A. Cooke. Hi»t. and Song of Deborah, London, 1892; H. Winckler, AUorientali$cKe Forachungen, ii. 192, iii. 291, Leipsic, 1894; K. Budde, Actea du dixihne congrk» d'orien- talUtes, ii (1896). 20 sqq.; J. Marquart, Fundamente israeli- Hacher und jUdiacKer OeachicJUe, pp. 1-10, Odttinfsen. 1896; D. H. MtUler, Aetea du dixihne congr^M d'orientaliatea, iv (1898). 261 sqq.; DB. i. 678-679; EB, i. 1047-48; JB, iv. 490. DECALOGUE. Names and Character ({ 1). Divisions and Original Form ({ 2). Variations in Expressions ($3). Mosaic Origin (( 4). The decalogue is the fimdamental moral law of Jews and Christians. The words which, according to Ex. XX. 1; Deut. iv. 12, 13, v. 4, 19-23, God spoke at Sinai to the assembled Israelites, given Ex. XX. 2-17 and, in slightly dififerent form, Deut. v. 6-78, are called the decalogue. These, according to the plain statement of Deut. iv. 13, v. 19, ix. 10, 11, X. 4, and the implication of z. Names Ex. xxiv. 12, xxxL 18, and other and Char- passages, God had written upon the acter. two tables of stone which became part of the contents of the ark of the covenant. The name generally given to this code is " the ten commandments "; the Old Testament calls them the " ten words" (Ex. xxxiv. 28; Deut. iv. 13, X. 4; cf. Ex. xxiv. 3), because they pos- sessed a preeminent excellence, spoken as they were to the people by their God. They alone were written on the two tables, which received the name " tables of the covenant,'' while the box in which they were deposited was called the ** ark of the covenant," since they were the " witness ** of the covenant (see Covenant) made on Mount Sinai. The deca- logue is an independent and complete code, express- ing the relations existing between the Creator and created man. The mass of laws which make up the codes of Israel may be considered the unfolding of the ethical-religious idea expressed in the ten words. The prohibition to worship other gods and to make images have a place only in antiquity,- and the commandment concerning Sabbath-observ- ance steps outside the purely ethical sphere and demands a cult which in Deuteronomy is applied to Israel. Again the ten commandments have reference to external acts only, the prohibitions outnumber the precepts, the threats and promises are limited to this life;. nevertheless, the form is such as to be able to receive the whole content of the New Testament concepts of the divine will. As the Christian sees in the Yahweh of the Old Testament the God who in Jesus revealed himself as Father, so he finds stated in the decalogue the fact that God is the only good to be desired, that the material must be kept apart from the spiritual, and that there is a Sabbath after life's week of toil and travail. While it is the people as a whole who are addressed by the code, the commands come also to the individual; so Christiaiifl, to whom this tribal law haa become the law of humanity, refer it to eveiy individual within the range of its voice. About the division of the decalogue churches differ: the Jews count Exod. xx. 2 as the first commandment, 3-6 as the second, and 17 is con- sequently the tenth; the Greek and Reformed churches make 3 the finst, 4-6 the second, and 17 the tenth; the Roman and Lutheran churches see in 3-6 one commandment and in 17 two conmiand- ments. The oldest witness favors the second view, held by JosepKus and Philo, and this is undoubtedly the correct one; there is no reason for seeing in 17 two commandments, moreover, the text forbids division; verse 2, though a highly important state- ment, is not a commandment, and a. Divisions 4-5 may well on internal grounds be and Orig- taken as independent of verse 3. The inalFonn. Samaritans have after Exod. xx. 17 and Deut. v. 18 another command- ment, borrowed from Deut. xxvii. 2-7 and xi. 30, and wrongly affirm that the Jews have only nine commandments. The .decalogue is divided in Exo- dus generally into nine, and in Deuteronomy al- ways into ten sections. While the division into nine sections is certainly as old as the other, it has no necessaiy connection with that into ten " words." It is noteworthy that the prohibition to covet is nowhere divided into two verses. That there were two tables is witnessed by all the sources except' E. It may be surmised that each contained five " words," and putting the fifth (Ex. xx. 12) on the first table gives excellent balance, the first table containing the commandments of piety, the second those of probity. Less attractive is. the arrange- ment of Augustine and Calvin, who place the fifth conunandment on the second table as enjoining performance of duties toward fellow men. The dif- ference in length in the commandments is remark- able; and since this seems due to the addition of explanations, threats, or promises, the conviction is forced that originally the decalogue contained ten short sentences about as follows, which alone the designation " ten words " truly fits: (1) Thou shalt have no other gods besides me, (2) Thou shalt not make unto thee any image, (3) Thou shalt not take the name of Yahweh thy God in vain, (4) Re- member the Sabbath day to keep it holy, (5) Honor thy father and thy mother, (6) Thou shalt not kill, (7) Thou shalt not commit adultery, (8) Thou shalt not steal, (9) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor, (10) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house. In this form the decalogue may easily have been written on two stone tables. Among the additions certain expressions occur frequently, or only, in Deuteronomy, but this does not involve that these additions have been imported into Exodus from Deuteronomy. For, to the additions which the two statements have in com- mon, Deuteronomy has others which 3. Varia- mark it as the younger, and has be- tions in Ez- sides a different vocabulaiy in the pressions. fourth, ninth, and tenth command- ments. Changes arc evidently not wil- ful; they are due rather to the fact that at the time of the Deuteronomist the text was still fluctuating. In common with other peoples of antiquity, Israel cared veiy little for verbal correctness, and thus it need not cause surprise that they did not end these discrepancies by consulting the original tables, since they were difficult of access. Notable in this con- nection is the conmiandment concerning Sabbath- observance. E bases it on the creation week, D on the exodus from Egypt; it is difficult to belie^-e that D would have dropped the former, had it stoo J in his copy. However, the conclusion that the refer- ence to creation was incorporated into the decalosrue later is by no means certain; while the common view now is that it is a postexiLic enlargement on the basis of GetL iL l-4a, the expressions in the decalogue do not agree with those in Genesis (cf. W. Lotz, Qu<BStiane8dehi8U)r%a8abbati, Leipsic, 1883, 94-100). The Mosaic origin of the decalogue, at least in the shorter form, is admitted by Delitzsch, Dillmann, Lemme, Kdnig, Kittel, Driver, and others. But Ndldeke as early as 1869 declared that view extreme- ly doubtful, and Utely Wellhausen, Stade, Comill have rejected it, while Smend and H. Schulz have lost faith in it. The main argument has always been that the prohibition to nrn^lHng 4. Mosaic images could not date back to Moses, Origin, since the worship of Yahweh under the form of images persisted in the northern kingdom, and in Judah was found at least until Solomon. But it is pure assumption that, while the image-worship existed, it was not dis- pleasing. As far as is known, the true champions of the Yahweh-religion always stood for imageless worship, and where the ark stood, at Shiloh and at Jerusalem, there was no image (on the ephod, I Sam. xxi. 9; see Ephod). But that the mere existence of the prohibition would make image- worship impossible and would cause Jeroboam to refrain from introducing calf-worship no one would affirm who considers what even to-day is possible in the Christian Church. The other argument against the Mosaic origin is that the fourth com- mandment presupposes settlement in Canaan. While the Sabbath rest has less meaning when applied to nomads than when related to agricul- tural conditions, it must not be forgotten that Israel at Moses's time was not wholly nomadic. Again, it is urged that the mode of thou^t is that of the prophets, and is not met in preprophet-ic time. But it is not certain that the prophets in- vented the ethical standard; and, inasmuch as their teachings in complicated and developed form far surpass what in the decalogue is given in the most simple and fundamental precepts, the latter can not be the mere precipitate of the former. It is the narrative of E in which the decalogue in Exodus is found. That the writings of P contained it is denied by no one, though the doubtful opinion IB advanced by Wellhausen, jQlicher, Budde, and others, that J had a different Sinaitic decalogue, namely Ex. xxxiv. 14-26. But while it is pos- sible on good grounds to have the conviction that the decalogue as an inheritance of the Mosaic time has stood in all Pentateuch sources, others, such bs Meissner, Steuernagel, and Staerk, on religious- historical and philological grounds have denied that even £ contained it. (W. Lotz.} 386 DECALOGUE Declaration of Indulgence Bibliography: The subjeet is treated in most of the crit- ical worka on the history of Israel and the introduction to the O. T. Consult: A. Kuenen, Origin and CompoH- iion of the Hexateueh, London. 1886; R. Kittel. Oe^chichU der Hebmer, 2 vols.. Gotha. 1888-92. Eng. transl., Lon- don. 1805-96; B. B&ntsch. Dae Bundeabueh, Halle, 1892; H. Schults. AUlealamenaiche Theologie, 2 vols.. Gdt- tingen. 1896, Eng. transl.. London, 1892; E. K6nig. Ein- Uituno in daa A. T., Bonn, 1893; A. Dillmann, Atttesto- menUichi Theologie, Leipeic. 1895; W. H. Green, Higher Criliciem of the Pentateuch, New York, 1895; C. A. Briggs, Higher Criticiem of the Pentateuch, pp. 242 sqq., New York, 1897; C. H. Comill, Einleitung in da* A. T., TQ- bingen, 1905, Eng. transl.. Lond.. 1907; H. L. Strack, Ein- leitung in da* A. T., Munich. 1898; C. Caverno, The Ten Word*. Boston. 1899; R. Smend. AUteatamenUiche Re- ligionege9chichte, Freiburg, 1899; J. Wellhausen. Compo- eition de* Hexaieuche, Berlin. 1899; J. £. Carpenter and G. Harford-Battersby. The Hexateuch, 2 vols.. London, 1900; S. A. Cook, in The Guardian, Dec. 17, 1902 (on a new papyrus with early text); DB, i. 580-582; EB, i. 1049-51; JE, iv. 492-498. Earlier homiletical litera- ture is given in J. F. Hurst. Literature of Theology^ pp. 149. 164. 392. 528. New York. 1896. Consult also L. Lemme, Die religiontgeadiichUiche Bedtutung de* DekOf lege, Breslau. 1880. DECIUS, di'shi-TTs, CAIUS MESSIUS QUINTUS

DECIUS, CAIUS MESSIUS QUINTUS TRAJANUS: Roman emperor 249-251; b. near Sirmium about 200, of a Roman or Romanized family; d. in the marshes of Dobrudja, Rumania, in the summer or autumn of 251. He began his career in the army, became governor of Dacia and Moesia under Philippus Arabs, and was placed in command of the forces sent to crush the Gothic invasion. Discouraged by its defeats, the Danubian army proclaimed him Augustus in 249, and his victory at Verona, in which the emperor Philippus fell, won him the throne in the same year. Decius was essentially a soldier, also eager to revive and strengthen the moral and religious forces which still existed, but he lacked political insight, and was unable to secure permanent results during his brief reign. A new inroad of the Goths soon re- called him from Italy and Rome to the Danubian countries, where he fell after a series of disastrous battles. In the course of his turbulent reign Decius began a persecution of the Christians, which endangered the Church more than any which had preceded it. The religious policy of Philippus, who had favored the Christians, may have made the new emperor regard them as his opponents, but a stronger motive was his personal anti-Christian bias, based on his adher- ence to the ancient faith, and directed primarily against the clergy. It is also probable that the censor Valerian, who later became emperor, and was in high favor with Decius, was active in this persecution, and as chief civil magistrate was required to carry it through. It is with justice, therefore, that Christian tradition combines the name of the emperor with that of his chief officer. It is even possible that Valerian was the real leader. The repression, which seems to have begun about the end of 249, and which lasted, at least in part, un- til Decius fell, was premeditated from the very first, while the uniformity of its execution is shown by the reports from North Africa, Rome, Egypt, and Asia Minor. All, without exception, were com- manded to offer sacrifice. In case of refusal, how- over, further proceedings were left to the discretion of the judge, and the penalties which were inflicted III.— 25 ranged from light punishment to death, sometimes in such cruel forms as starvation, burning, and stoning. The only uniformity observed was the desire to kill the chief clergy, and many bishops, as at Rome, Antioch, and Jerusalem, suffered mar- tyrdom, while others saved themselves by flight. The attitude of the laity was, on the whole, a feeble one. Origen was tortured, and the general picture of devastation is described by the Roman presbyters with the words (Cyprian, EpisL, xxx. 5): "Look upon almost the whole world devastated, and ob- serve that the remains and the ruins of the fallen are lying about on every side." These conditions gave rise to the difficult problem of the attitude of the Church toward the lapsed, among whom the so-called Itbellatici now appeared for the first time in the history of the persecution of the Christians (see Lapsed); yet beside those who wavered the Church could also point to many courageous, stead- fast souls. In view of its destructive effect the Decian perse- cution has always been regarded as one of extraor- dinaiy severity. Nevertheless, this persecution was not general in scope, although it was intended to be so. In many places the imperial edicts were disregarded, and in others executed only formally. The turbulent political conditions of the period forbade strenuous and uniform action, and the Decian persecution was, consequently, merely transitory. Victor Schultze. Bibliography: The sources are. from the Roman side, Prosopographia imperii romani saec. i.-iii., part ii., ed. H. Dessau, p. 368, Berlin, 1897; from the Christian side. Cyprian. De lapsis, Eng. transl.. in ANF, v. 437-447; and Eusebius. Hist. eccl., vi. 40-42. Eng. transl.. in NPNF, 2d series, i. 281-286. Consult: L. S. le N. de Tillemont. Mimoire* . . . ecdfeiaetique*, iii. 2, pp. 123 sqq.. Brus- sels, 1696; E. G. Hardy, Chrittianitv and the Rotnan Government, London, 1894; H. Schiller, GeschidUe der rOmiechen Kaiaereeit, i. 2, pp. 804 sqq., Gotha, 1883: J. A. F. Gre«:s. The Decian PeraecuHon, Edinburgh, 1897; L. Pullan, Church of the Father*, pp. 156 sqq.. New York, 1905; Neander. ChrieHan Church, i. 130-136; Schaff. Chrietian Churdi, ii. 60-63; Gibbon, Decline and Fall, ii. 113-114. DECIUS, inKOLAUS: According to P. J. Reiit- meyer — Kirchengeschichte der Stadt Braunschweig (5 vols., Brunswick, 1707-15), iii. 19 — translator or adapter of the Gloria in excelsisj the Sanctu8f and the Agnus into Low German verse; d. Mar. 21, 1641 (?). About 1519 he was provost in Stetei^ burg, near Wolfenbtittel ; after his conversion to Lutheranism, 1522, teacher in Brunswick; and fi- nally preacher in Stettin. Attempts to identify him with a Nicolaus a Curia who was preacher in Stettin about 1523 and with others are not con- vincing. (Ferdinand Cohrs.) DECLARATION OF mDULGBNCE: An act of Charles II. of England, whereby he suspended all penal laws against both Roman Catholics and dis- senters. Mar. 15, 1672. A royal proclamation of the same king, issued ten years earlier, promising modification of the severity of the Act of Uniform- ity (q.v.), is sometimes called the First Declaration of Indulgence. The king's motive in both cases was believed to be a desire to favor Roman Catho- lics and revive the royal prerogative of dispensing with the execution of laws, and opposition arose even among Protestant dissenters. Strong antago- nism developed in parliament, the legality of the king's action was questioned, and the declaration was recalled Mar. 8, 1673. Another declaration of indulgence was issued by James II., Apr. 4, 1687, granting full religious liberty to all his subjects. The same opposition developed, and the king failed to obtain parliamentary sanction even from a packed parliament. The king reissued the dec- laration Apr. 22, 1688, and ordered all clergy to read the declaration in their pulpits. But the order was generally disobeyed and called forth a protest written by Archbishop Sancroft (q.v.) and signed by himself and six other bishops, for which they were committed to the Tower (June 8) ; they were acquitted by jury when brought to trial at the end of the month. On the same day the invitation was despatched to William of Orange to become king of England. Bibliography: The Declaration of James II. is reproduced in Gee and Hardy, Documents, pp. 641-644. Consult: T. B. Howell. Complete Collection of State Trials, vol. 3di., London. 1809-28; O. D'Oyly, Life of William San- croft, ib. 1840; W. H. Hutton, The English Church, 1626- 1711, pp. 184-227. ib. 1903; Robinson. European History, iL 266-259.

DECREE, DECRETAL: In the canonical sense the latter is an authoritative rescript of a pope in reply to some question. The original name was decretale constitutum or decretalis epistola; after- ward decretalis. A decree is a papal ordinance enacted with the advice of the cardinals, but not as response to an inquiry. DECRETUM GRATIANI See Canon Law. DEFENDER OF THE FAITH (Dejensor fidei): A title borne by English sovereigns. It was first conferred by Leo X. on Henry VIII., as a reward for his Assertio septem sacramentorum in the bull Ei supernae dispositionis (Oct. 11 » 1521), and confirmed by Clement VII. on Mar. 5, 1523. After the breach with Rome it was recognized by Parliament in " An Act for the Ratification of the King's Majesty *s Stile," 35 Henr. VIII. (A. Hauck.) DEFENDER OF THE MARRIAGE-TIE (Defensor matrimonii): An official in every diocese in the Roman Catholic Church deputed, according to the bull Dei miseratione of Benedict XIV. (Nov. 3, 1741), to prevent by all proper means the dissolu- tion of the marriage-tie where proceedings to that end have been begun. The office was instituted m America by the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore in 1884. DEFILEMENT AND PURIFICATION, CEREMONIAL. 1. Defilement. Impurity not Simply Physical 1. The Region of Polluting Exist- («2). to Death (ft 2). enoee. But Religious-Ethical-Aesthetic ({ 3). II Purification. Animals (f 1). 3. Antiquity and Development of the 1 Women in Childbirth (f 2). Idea in Israel. Women in Childbirth (f 1). Leprosy (§ 3). Evidence in the Prophetic Writings Bodily Secretions (( 4). («1). Death (S 5). 4. Ethnic Analogies. Dead Things (f 4). Booty (J 6). 6. Origin of the Old Testament Do<>- Booty (f 6). 2. The Character of this Impurity. trine of Uncleannesa. 2 Underlying Conceptions. The Hebrew fame (§ 1). Unsatisfactory Explanations (§1). III 1. Ani- L Defilement: In order to define what Old Testament purification covers, it is necessary first to describe what is there declared to defile or make impure. 1. The Region of Polluting Existences : Certain animals polluted if they were eaten (see Dietary Laws of the Hebrews). Unclean animals might be brought to God neither as free-will offerings (Gen. viii. 20) nor as first- lings (Num. xviii. 15) nor as tithes (Lev. xxvii. 32), but contact with living unclean animals is not forbidden. In the case of women in childbirth (Lev. xii.) the cause of uncleanness is not the fact of giving birth, but the condition resulting which resembles that of the menses. The duration of the unclean- ness is seven or fourteen days followed by thirty-three or sixty-six days, ac- cording as the child is male or fe- male, during the whole of which period (forty or eighty days) the woman is barred from approach to things holy. The period of seven or fourteen days involves a completer or more '* contagious ** impurity than that of the remaining thirty-three or sixty-six days. The manner of purification of person and clothing by washing is as in the menses (cf. Lev. xv. 11, 16-18, 21, 27). 2. Wom- en in Child- birth. Leprosy (not always the real leprosy; cf. P. Haupt, Babylonian Elements of the Levitic Ritual, 3 Leoroav PP* ^^^^» ^^^^' during its contin- op y- uaji^^ defiled the person or thing with which it came into contact. " House-leproey " de- filed any who entered the house pronounced leprous by the priest. Certain secretions of the human body (Lev. xv.), such as unhealthy secretions from the male organ (vv. 1-12), defiled by contact with the person afflicted. The case in w. 16-18 is peculiar; noc- turnal enussions polluted things 4. Bodily ^hi^jj ^i^gy touched (verse 17); the man who had the emission polluted persons whom he touched, e.g., the wife by his side. Lev. xix. 20 reprehends the lying together of persons of different stations in life (a freeman and a bondmaiden). In the earlier in- stance (Lev. XV. 18) sexual intercourse is not in- volved by the phrase " lie with " (cf. Lev. xv. 24 with XX. 18; in the former passage the phrase cairies only the meaning " being in the same bed," while the latter passage makes sexual intercourse under the circumstances named a capital offense). The section Lev. xv. 16-18 deals with involuntary emission and does not involve defilement through sexual intercourse. This (correct) interpretation was the view of the Masoretes and of Luther (the Seore- tiona. 387 Decree Defilement and Purifloation latter translates ** the woman near whom such a one lies "); but another view, that verse 18 made sexual intercourse a defilement became conunon among the Jews. The Old Testament makes the sexual act only relatively polluting; for example, before performing a religious act or touching a sacred object (cf. Ex. xix. 15; I Sam. xxi. 5-6; I Cor. vii. 5), just as drinking of wine was not absolutely and always forbidden to the priests, but only when sacred functions were to be performed. A woman's menses (Lev. xix. 19-24) rendered her unclean for seven days, anything that she touched till the eve- ning, and the husband who occupied the bed with her while she was in that condition for seven days. Any other issue of the kind carried the same dis- ability. Death rendered unclean. The dead body of unclean beasts made him that touched them un- clean for one day (Lev. xi. 8, 24-25, 28). Lev. xi. 29-38 names eight varieties of creeping animals the dead bodies of which defiled things and persons, except fountains, cisterns, and seed, ' ** ■ unless the last were soaking in water. These animals were generally found near human habitations. The body of a clean beast which had died, i.e., was not slaughtered in the legal way, defiled for the day him that touched or ate it (Lev. xi. 39-40; cf. Ex. xxii. 31; Lev. xxii. 8). A corpse rendered unclean for seven days him who touched it, defiled the tent and any who en- tered it, as well as any uncovered vessel which was in the tent (Num. xix. 11-14). Contact with a corpse in the open, with a human bone or a grave, defiled for seven days ; and whoever engaged in the purification of such a defiled person was himself unclean till the evening (Num. xix. 7-8, 10, 21-22). Booty taken from Gentiles rendered unclean for seven days (Num. xxxL 23-24). This impurity of ^^ booty differed from that of heathen ^' lands (Amos vii. 17), which was rather unholiness and did not render unclean the Hebrew who dwelt there. 2, The Oharaoter of this Imparity: This depends on the meaning of the Heb. to'"^* ** unclean," which is connected with the ideas " submerged," " besmirched," " concentrated," hence " dark," "gloomy." The usage involves both external impurity and that of the spirit (Is, H b * ^' ^' ^^^' ^^^"^^^' ^'f Num. V. 13; Lev. ^jj^*^ xviii. 19). The actions described in these passages are " abominations," as was the Mbloch cult. The word is used of inmiorality and irreligion, and takes in both express abominations and such unsanctity as that of a heathen land (cf. II Kings v. 17-19) and its population. The synonyms of fame, give various consonant meanings, such as " degraded," '' soiled," " smirched," applicable in both the physical and the moral spheres, just as the antonym Ifodheah refers to both physical and moral states. Considerations which decide the character of uncleanness are the following. Impurity was not simply physical, since the usual sources of the evil did not belong to the region of this impurity. Yet defilement of a bed might be wrought by a corpse or by excrement, and ablutions were a partial means to holiness. The ultimate thought was relation to the deity. In the case of childbirth the distinction ^ _. between absolute and relative impurity purity ^^^ based on the flow of blood, and not Simply^ the menses stoppage of the flow Physical. ^P^^ f^*^ restored purity so far as the basis was physical. Even then im- purity had for Israelite a moral-religious signifi- cance, since for the reestablishment of purity a religious rite was performed (e.g., Lev. xii. 6-8). That a spring or cistern or seed for sowing was not contaminated by a dead unclean beast proceeded from the thought that the spring and the seed renewed themselves, while the body of water in the cistern was relatively large. Against the merely physical character of uncleanness can be alleged the fact that through eating of creeping things the soul was thought to be defiled (Lev. xi. 43), and the fact that the impurity of a woman is regarded as more absolute than that of a man. This appears in the doubling of the period of impurity after the birth of a girl as compared with that following the birth of a boy, and in the circumstance that issue from a woman defiles for seven days, from a man only one (Lev. xv. 18, 24). Yet washing or asper- sion with water and searing with fire point to the external character of the impurity. On the other hand, the Old Testament teaches that animals and things inanimate suffer under man's culpability. Impurity had then the significance of a religious- ethical abnormality. But this was not all, since it was not always mere psychological immorality. Impurity is sometimes called baseness 8. But or sin, which, however, did not com- Beliff- municate itself as contagion nor was BtMeal- *^ Purged exactly through sacrifice. Bethetio. ^^ ^ noteworthy that the person who came into contact with the sin-offering of the Day of Atonement was not called unclean (Lev. xvi. 24, 26, 28), as was he who touched the ashes which purified from contact with the dead (Num. xix. 7, 8, 10). If then impurity has an ethical-religious character, it has also an external character as a secondary factor. It is best to gather these qualities in one phrase, and to speak of impurity as religious-ethical-esthetic. 8. Antiqnity and Development of the Idea in Israel: From those prophetical writings the date of which is certain the following is gathered, those passages where unclean is taken in a mere religio- ethic£d sense, and as not inunediately belonging here, being put in brackets: [Amos: unclean is the land outside of Palestine (vii. 17).] Hosea: Israel shall eat unclean things in Assyria (ix. 3-4); [Israel is defiled on account of irreligion and im- morality (3).] [Micah: uncleanness (i.e., abomina- tion) causes destruction (ii. 13). Isaiah: the Israel of the time of salvation will defile his former idols (xxx. 22).] Jeremiah: the houses of Jerusalem shall be defiled as the place of Tophet (xix. 13). This defilement was brought about by Josiah (II Kings xxiii. 10), since he defiled the high places in the cities of Judah, not by physical defilement (as II Kings x. 27), but as, in the case of the altar at Bethel (II Kings xxiii. 15-16), by bones out of the sepulchers. [Israel has polluted himself by idolatiy (Jer. ii. 23), and his land (ii. 7, vii. 30, xxxii. 34). Lamentations: polluted with blood (iv. 14-15).] In Ezekiel are parallels to I. 1: food baked with dung of man is imclean 1. Bvi- (jy 12-13); the menstruating woman ^the ^ mentioned (xxii. 10); the defiled Prophetic ^^^ ^ compared to her uncleanness Wrltinffs. (^<^3«vi. 17); that which dieth of itself, or is torn in pieces, is imclean (iv. 14)]; Yahweh's house is defiled by bones out of the sepul- chers (ix. 7, xliii. 7); priests may defile themselves only in the case of the death of father, mother, son, daughter, brother, or unmarried sister (xliv. 25); [the sanctuary and Jerusalem are defiled by idols (v. 11, xiv. 11, xxii. 3, 15, and often); ancient Jerusalem is defiled by blood (xxiv. 9, 11); imclean- ness and apostasy together (xxxix. 24); the neigh- bor's wife is defiled by adultery (xviii. 6, 11, 15, xxii. 11); God pronounces Israel unclean because of sin (xj(. 26); but will cleanse Israel (xxxvi. 25, 29, xxxvii. 23); finally the soul becomes polluted by uncleanness (iv. 14)]. Ezekiel laments over the priests who made no difference between the unclean and the clean (xxii 26), and makes it a special duty of the priests to teach this difference (xliv. 23). Deutero-Isaiah: The uncircumcised and unclean shall come no more into Jerusalem (Isa. lii. 1); '' touch no unclean thing " (11); the unclean shall not be in the land in the Messianic time (xxxv. 8). Haggai: A dead body defiles (ii. 13). Since the oldest literary monuments of Israel contain essen- tially the same laws of imcleanness as are contained in Lev. xi.-xv., Num. xix., there can be no question that Israel's views concerning purifications are, for the most part, very old. 4. Ethnic Analoffiee: Among the Aryans the impurities described in the Hindu Manu-shastra have an esthetic, not a religious-esthetic, character. Greeks and Romans used lustrations after contact with the dead (Vergil, ^neidf vi. 229), and reckoned hair, wool, and nail-parings as impurities. Spiegel, Justi, and Tiele regard Persian conceptions as dif- fering in starting-point and area from the Hebrews', though Hitzig ascribes to Persian thought a con- siderable influence upon Old Testament religion. That Babylonians made a distinction between clean and unclean is proved, and on specified days cer- tain kinds of meat were unlawful. Regulations existed also concerning contact with the dead and resulting disability, also concerning sexual relations. The Sabeans and Arameans, according to Chwolson, prohibited as food the flesh of the camel and of animals which had incisors in both jaws, also of swine, dog, and ass, except in the yearly swine- sacrifice. They refused also doves, birds of prey, and certain vegetables. Those afflicted with cer- tain diseases were considered unclean. Emission and the menses received attention from them, and contact with a corpse necessitated purification. Ftayer was forbidden those in an impure state. Among the northern Mand««n» distinctions were made as to clean and unclean animals, the woman who had given birth to a child was isolated, con- tagious diseases were defiling, and the results of nocturnal emissions and the menses were similar to those among the Hebrews. Of the Syrians Lucian reports (De dea Syria, liv.) that swine were neither eaten nor sacrific^. Fish they eschewed, since Derceto had the form of a fish, and doves, because Semiramis had been transformed into a dove. Uncleanness for a day resulted from the breach of some of these tab(X)6. Phenicians also had distinctions as to kinds of animalw fit for food, but in respect to birds their distinctions were not those of the Hebrews. In the mystic sacrifice they offered men, dogs, and swine (Smith, ReLofSem., 220k 221). In northwestern Arabian inscriptions direc- tions with respect to sexual relations, contact with a corpse and a menstruating woman are found. Egyptians feared to eat doves, ascribed unclean- ness to certain plants, and in general had the dis- tinction between clean and unclean. The result of this inquiry is, therefore, that, while the Hebrews inherited a stock of notions upon the sub- ject, comparison shows that in their religion tbey de- veloped these notions along lines of their own choosing. 5. Origin of the Old Testament Doctrine of TTn- oleanneee: The idea of the Old Testament is that in the specified objects actual uncleanness inheres, but not that the result is absolute and neces- sary psychological irreligiousness and immorality. T^'hile symbolical interpretations have from time to time been offered (e.g., Barnabas, Epistle, x.; Philo, De agricuUura Nocb, xxv.-xxxi.; Clement of Alexandria, Pcedagogus, iii. ; Kurtz, Op/erkuUus, pp. 7-8, Mitau, 1862), such an interpretation is not indicated in the Old Testament and is not consistently applicable. The view has been ad- vanced that the object was to protect the dwelling of God from approach by a man in a i' t^ta^ condition unbecoming a worshiper, or Bzpla^ that Israel was by the laws concein- nations. ^ purity separated and differentiated from other peoples. But these replies simply put the question a stage farther back. The explanation has been given that the regulations arose from fear of contagion, from disgust or natural abhorrence or instinctive revulsion. But these ex* planations do not cover all the facts, particulariy the omissions (for example, of a contagious disease like the plague). Physiological motives are in- sufficient. Riehm and Schlottmann have brought the subject into relation with sin; but the rela- tionship of sin to uncleanness is a late notion, coming out in Ezekiel. As Giesebrecht remarks (GrundzUge deriaraditischenGeachichte, p. Ill, Leip- sic, 1903), "the conceptions clean and undean have nothing inmiediately to do with the ethical." Others have brought in the two factors of final being, birth and death, procreation and corrup- tion, origin and end, with the idea that the ethkral opposition to absolute holiness inherent in these relegates them to the sphere of the 8. The sinful and impure (e.g., G. F. Oehler, Principal AUteatamenaiche Thedogie, %\ 123-124, th **SL TQbingen. 1873-74). But this theory latl^^ is met by the objection that the new- ship to ^"^ ^^^^^ ^^ never regarded by the Death. Hebrews as unclean. The principal idea in the Old Testament conception of uncleanness was the relation to death appar- ent in the given phenomena. The oppositioD 889 Defilement and Purlfloation in Child- birth. between the holy living God and the death which results from a sickness is thoroughgoing, and in in- sensate and finite things that corruption was con- sidered inherent which is the opposite of God. In particular it may be remarked that since the disgust at blood, the seat of the life, was an old inheritance, it follows that those animals were not regarded as fit for food which devoured other animals in their blood; and a similar line of reasoning applies to the unclean birds of prey or carrion. The loss of blood at childbirth seemingly puts the mother into connection with death-phenomena — the issue of the vital fluid. The delimitation of the areas of cleanness and uncleanness through the action of instinctive repulsion and disgust reveals the basis of uncleanness in a religious-ethical-esthetic rela- tionship. An unpleasant odor (like that of the camel) or repugnant habits or appearance may have helped to put some animals in the class of un- clean. The derivation of the Old Testament pres- entations about imdean beasts from religious- historical, demonistic, and totemistic origins, which derivation is approved by Stade, Benzinger, Frey, and Matthes, simply refers the matter to an earlier stage. XL Purification. — 1. The Bemoval of XTnolean- nees : For imdean beasts there is no purification. The woman in childbirth. — For seven or fourteen days respectively (i.e., after the birth 1. Women ^f 3^ jj^y qj. ^ gj^i) i\^q woman is as thoroughly unclean as in the time of her menstruation; and, after washing herself and her clothes, she is clean from positive impurity, but not from negative impurity (i.e., keeping aloof from holy things and from the sanctuary), which can be removed only by presenting a lamb one year old as a burnt-offer- ing, and a young pigeon or turtle-dove as a sin-offer- ing; but, if she be poor, a pigeon or a turtle-dove suffices for the burnt-offering also (Lev. vii. 6-8). In cases of leprosy, he who has shown a doubt- ful symptom of leprosy on his body has only to wash his garments; garments affected with leprosy must be burned; garments or stuffs which showed only doubtful signs of leprosy are to a. l-eprosy. ^ cashed (Lev. xiu. 6, 34, 62, 64, 66, 67-68). At the purification of the leper, one of the two clean Uve birds is to be kill^ over a vessel containing spring water; the other is to be dipped in the mixed blood and water, together with cedar-wood, hyssop, and a crimson thread or band. The fluid is then sprinkled upon the con- valescent seven times, and the living bird is allowed to fly away. The convalescent then washes his garments, shaves his hair, and bathes, as he is to do again on the seventh day. Of the blood of the lamb killed as trespass-offering the priest sprinkles upon the top of his right ear, upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot; then some of the oil is sprinkled seven times toward the holy place. Next the ewe-lamb is pre- sented as a sin-offering, and the second he-lamb as a burnt-offering, accompanied by the usual blood- less oblation of the flour. In case of poverty, for the sin-offering and burnt-offering two turtle-doves or two young pigeons are accepted (Lev. xiv. 4-32). A leprous house is to be broken down, and he who slept or ate in it must wash his garments. But, if the house is declared clean, its purification is effected as described above (Lev. xiv. 4-7, 46-63). A man with a discharge, after recovering is to wash his garments, and bathe in running water; he presents two turtle-doves or two young pigeons, one for a sin-offering and the other for a burnt- offering. Persons defiled directly or indirectly by such a person have only to wash their garments, and bathe their bodies. Earthen vessels touched by the patient must be broken; wooden ones rinsed with water. Nocturnal acci- *™ie- (jgj^^ render the persons unclean till **^*' the evening, when they must bathe, while all stained garments require washing (Lev. XV. 6-18). For the menstruating woman no puri- fication is indicated; but the persons indirectly defiled by her must wash garments and person (Lev. XV. 21-22). Since, however, the irregular issue of blood on the part of the woman is r^arded only as temporary, different from the regular issue, having the same defiling qualifications, it may be taken for granted that the lawgiver intended the same purificatory laws for the menstruating woman as for the one afflicted with an irregular issue of blood (Lev. xv. 25-28, 2^-30). Whoever carries the carcass of unclean animals must wash his garments; the objects upon which a carcass accidentally falls, such as utensils of wood, garments, or skins, require cleansing by being left in water till the evening; earthen vessels, ovens, and stoves must be broken. Carrying the carcass of a clean animal requires washing of garments (Lev. XL 25, 28, 32, 33, 35, 40). Defilement from a corpse requires a red heifer Thinffs without spot, and upon which never came yoke. The ashes of the burned heifer are put into running water, which be- comes the water of abomination, i.e., the water appointed for the purification of uncleanness (in this sense the word may niddaht Num. xix. 9, is to be taken). With this water, those who have become defiled directly or indirectly for a dead person, as well as the house of the dead and its vessels, are to be sprinkled, by means of hyssop, on the third and seventh day after the defilement; and on the seventh day the person shall purify himself, and wash his dothes. The latter must also be done by him who prepares, keeps, and uses the ashes. The officiating priest, as well as the man who burned the red heifer, have, besides, to bathe their flesh in water (Num. xix. 1-8, 10, 12-13, 17-21). The Nazirite who became defiled by a sudden death was to shave his head on the seventh day, offer two doves or young pigeons, one as a sin-offering, the other as a burnt-offering, and a lamb as a trespass-offering, and lose the time passed in Naziritic separation before his defilement (Num. vi. 9-12). Of the booty taken from heathen nations every thing that may abide the fire is to go through it, BAAtv *^^ must be purified with the water ^' of separation; all that abideth not the fire is to go through the water; and a per- son touching such booty must wash his clothes on the seventh day (Num. xxxi. 23). X>efil«ment and Purliloation 390 2. XTnderlyiiiff Oonoeptions: The destruction of unclean things, in whatever form or manner, needs no explanation. Going through fire is easily under- stood, since fire is often mentioned as a purifying means (Ps. xii. 6). That water should be used for removing the ethico-enthetic impurity is a matter of course; and it is possible that " living " water is meant, even where it is not expressly stated. The sin and burnt sacrifices required of the woman after childbirth, the leper, the man having a running issue, and the woman having an issue of blood, have their usual signification. In the purifica- tion of the leper all materials and actions show the great step which the person to be purified took from the awful nearness of death to the gladsome communion of untroubled life. In removing the impurity caused by the touch of a dead person the red color of the cow, as symbol of the soiure of life, being in the blood, must be considered. As a yoke had never come upon her, she was the emblem of virgin energy. Cedar-wood, crimson thread, and hyssop, which were also used, represent emblems of incorruptibility, medicine against im- purity, and symbol of life. nL Postcanonical Development: When, in the time of Ezra, Israel undertook to observe even the Uws concerning clean and unclean according to the Pentateuch, the scribes assumed clearly to define, not only the laws in the canon, but also inferences deduced from them. These rules and regulations are found in the treatises JJuUin, Niddah, Tebul Yarn, OhalU, *Abodah Zarah Oi. 6), Mikwa*oif Yadayim (see Talmud). Evi- dent among the restrictions were those against entering the house of a Gentile (cf. John xviii. 28; Acts X. 28), which resulted in defilement like that caused by contact with the dead, accounted for on the supposition of the burial of abortions in the house. The idea of a heathen land's conveying a like impurity finds support in Amos vii. 17, cf. Num. xxxL 23. Water was used, as well as fire, in' purifications; but the hand-washing, of which much appears in the New Testament, is not an Old Testament phenomenon. But not all Israelites took part in these rigorous purificatory efforts. Religious indifference led to laxness (Tobit i. 10-1 1 ), while overscrupulo\2sness led to the formation of special societies, the most rigorous of which was that of the Chasidim (q.v.). That the Old Testament ideas of impurities and purifications existed before and after the time of Christ is seen from I Mace. i. 62-63; II Mace. vi. 18, vii. 1-2, xi. 31; Tacitus, Hist., v. 4-6. The sixth part of the Mishnah (compiled about 180 A.D.) shows a development of the Old Testament purificatory laws. But partly in consequence of the declarations of Christ — ^though he did not abolish the ideas of his times concerning clean and unclean (Matt. viii. 4; Luke xvii. 14) when deal- ing with unconverted persons — concerning the spirituality of the Old Testament religion and morals (Matt. v. 17, 21 sqq., vii. 12, xL 30, ziL 8, XV. 11); partly in consequence of the work of the Holy Spirit, who reminded the dis- ciples of the new spiritual foundation of the Chris- tian religion (John xiv. 26), and showed to Peter in a vision that the difference of food has lost it£ authority in the Christian eon of salvatiozi (Acts X. 15), Jewish Christians were at a very early period converted to eat with Gentile ChiistiaDs, by receiving Christ as the new living lawgiver (Gal. ii. 12-20). The departure of this Jewish- Christian part of the first Christians from Jerusalem, and the destruction of the temple, became, at least to the less rigorous among them, a guide to r^^ard the lex eeremonialis of the Old Testament (cf . Heb. ix. 1) as perfected, Le., spiritualized, in ChrisH tianity. The Church of Christ knows, it is true, that death is the wages of sin (Rom. vL 23), and groans to be relieved from the body of this death (vii. 24); but she does not regard the death of the body as the evil most to be avoided, but the spiritual and everlasting death (Matt. viii. 22; Luke ix. 60). " Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God." See for ethnic paral- lels COMPARATIVB RbUGION, VI.,1,C. _ _ £. KOnio. Bibliography: From the oompantive side the beet three books mn: J. Q. Fraser, OoUUn Bough, especially L 323- 325. ii. 204-233. 304-309, London, 1900; E. B. Tyior. PrimiHv Culture, espedaUy ii. 26-27, 431-133. ib. 1S91; F. B. Jevotts, IfUrodueHon to tho HiUory of R^igion, pp. 67-58, 75-78, 102, 116-127, ib. 1806. For the Semitie world consult: Smith, RoL. of jSem., 122. 324 sqq.. 447- 448; idem, Kintkip, ebap. viii., 304-311 et passim; D. Nielsen, Die ottorabiscAs MondrtUgion, pp. 204-206. StrasbuiVt 1004; M. J. Lagrange, 6tudeo our lea reiiffion* ahnitiquM, pp. 140 sqq., 161, 237. 305 sqq.. Paris, 1906. For other regions consult: F. G. Movers, Die Pk6niuier, 2 Tola., Bonn, 1841-66; D. A. Chwolson, Die Soabier, i. 146 sqq.. St. Fetersbofg, 1856; L. Krehl, Rotigion der vorielamiedisn Archer, pp. 30-34, Leipsic, 1863; F. Spiegel, Eraniediie AUertumekunde, iL 144-145, ib. 1873: F. Justi. OeediiehUe dee dUen Pereiene, pp. 144-145. ib. 1870; P. E. Lucius, Der Beeeniemua, Strasburg, 1881; E. Westermarok, Hvetory of Human Marriaoe, chaps. xiT.-xv.. London, 1804; A. Wiedemann, Die Toien und ihre Reiche im Olauben der aUen Aeovpier, pp. 25 sqq.. Leipsic. 1900; Wellhausen, Heidentum, pp. 113 sqq. On the custom of the Hebrews consult: H. Ewald. AUertOmer dee Voikee lerad, pp. 192 sqq., Gdttingen. 1866. Eng. transl.. pp. 142 sqq.. Boston. 1876; W. Bau- dissin. Studien eur eemiHedum RHioionaffeeekidUe, ii. 20 sqq., 00 sqq., Leipsic. 1878 (important discussion); Ben> singer, ArdtOologie, { 72; Nowack, ArckAolooie, ii. 287 sqq.; J. Frey, Tod, Seelenolaube und SeelerdtuU im aUen lerael, pp. 127. 137 sqq.. Leipsic, 1808; Matthes. in TkT, 1899. pp. 293 sqq.; V. Zapletal, Totemiemue und die Urrelioion leraele, pp. 81 sqq., Freiburg, 1901; W. Bous- set, Relioion dee Judentume, pp. 202 sqq., Berlin, 1903; K. Marti. Geeehickte der itraeUHechen Religion, Stuttgart. 1903; the commentaries on EZxodus. Leviticus, and Deu- teronomy; and the works on O. T. theology. DEFINITOR: An official of religious orders who, according to the reformed constitutions of the Middle Ages, stood at the head of a district {defi.- niiio). The orders consisted of congregations, which were divided into definitiones, each including a oe> tain number of monasteries. The heads of the houses were subject to the definitor, the latter to the provincial, and the provincial to the general.

DEGRADATION: A severe penalty inflicted upon delinquent clerics by the ancient ecclesiasti- cal discipline (see Jurisdiction, Ecclesiastical). By the end of the twelfth century the doctrine of the indelible character of holy orders had been generally accepted; and in connection with it and with the struggle of the Church for clerical im- munities the earlier penalty of deposition was divided into what was now called deposition (the 391 Defilttment and Puiifioatlon I>6inn removal of a cleric from his office and benefice with the prohibition of the exercise of his orders) and degradation, which, in addition, withdrew from him all the privileges of the clerical state. The degradatio verbalis involved the pronouncement of the former penalties, and was performed by the bishop with the assent of the chapter in the case of the minor orders, of three bishops in that of deacons, and of six bishops, mitered abbots, or other digni- taries in that of priests. The solemn degradatio actualis went further and involved the observance of special formalities — ^the stripping of the culprit of his vestments, the shaving of the head to oblit- erate the tonsure, and the scraping of the thumbs and fingers as if to remove the unction bestowed at ordination. These ceremonies were supposed to take place in the presence of the secular authority, to whose jurisdiction the delinquent, as now no more than a mere layman, was then handed over. DE HAERETICO COMBURENDO: A writ for the burning of heretics by the secular power after they had been condemned by the ecclesiastical power. It was issued in England under Henry IV. in 1401; expanded under Henry V. in 1415; re- pealed in the twenty-fifth year of Henry VIII. (1534), and again in the first year of Edward VI. (1547); revived in the first year of Mary (1553); repealed in the first year of Elizabeth (1559), and finally in the twenty-ninth year of Charles II. ( 1678). In its original form it was directed against the Lollards, and was the earliest step taken by Parliament in their suppression, but was afterward used against Protestants in general. It solemnly adjures them to abstain entirely from preaching or otherwise circulating their " new doctrines and wicked, heretical, and erroneous opinions "; orders them to give up the books which advocate the same; threatens them with imprisonment for disobedience if they refuse; and on their condemnation by the ecclesiastical authorities lays it upon the secular authorities to burn them. Bibliography: The full text of the writ is given in Gee and Hardy, Documents, pp. 133-137. Consult: J. Gairdner, The English Church in the 16. Century, pp. 146, 231, 249. 346, 362. London. 1903; J. H. Oyerton, The Churdi in England, L 300, 418. ii. 19. ib. 1897. DEISM. I. England. Shaftesbury, Bfandeville, Lord Herbert of Cher- Dodwell. Bolingbroke bury (I 1). (I 8). Hobbes and Others (| 2). Hume's Influence (| 9). Charles Blount (f 3). II. France. John Locke (f 4). Voltaire (f 1). Toland, Collins, and The Encyclopedists ($2). Others (f 6). Holbach and the Ideo- Matthew Tindal (| 6). logical School (f 3). Morgan. Annet. and Mid- Rousseau (f 4). I (I 7). The term " Deism " properly denotes a belief in deity that is rational and universal, in contrast to Atheism and Pantheism (qq.v.), on the one hand, and to uncritical Theism (q.v.), on the other. Deism, which originated in England, represented an effort to find a standard of religious truth by which the conflicting claims of individual creeds and the pretensions of supernatural revelation might be tested, and which should harmonise with the metaphysical results of the new sciences. It is in this sense that " natural religion " and the term ** natural " itself are so intimately bound up with the history of Deism (see Natural The- oloot). Since the habit was to regard religion as a system of metaphysics, the desired standard of truth was sought in a metaphysics that should be universally cognizable and whose validity might be tested by the facts of experience. The develop- ment of Deism in consequence is closely bound up with the development of sensualism and mech- anism, and with the struggle between the a priori philosophy and empiricism, as well as with the development of the theory of morals which at the same time had succeeded in emancipating itself from the sway of theology and sought to lay its foundations upon epistemology and psychology (see Ethics). Since the entire conception of natural religion is nothing but a restatement of the Stoic lex naturoB (see Natural Law), Deism may be taken as the point of departure for the employment of the epistemological and psychological methods in the philosophy of religion. At the same time, in the attempt to decide between the conflicting claims of particular revelations. Deism made its chief problem the study of the historical connection between natural religion and revelation, and became a philosophy of the history of religion in which the relation of elemental truth, as detei^ mined by the mind, to Christian revelation and to pagan truth was fixed on purely rational lines. Criticism of historic Christianity and the recog- nition of the relative truth contained in other creeds led to the abandonment of the system of the philosophy of history at first adopted and made way for the modem principles of the philosophy of religion. As a contributoiy force, with Puritan radicalism, to the opposition with which the Anglican Church was confronted, Deism was naturally at odds with respectable conservatism in the State, the Church, and the world of literature and learning. Not till Hume and Gibbon took them up did the problems of Deism attain full scientific treatment in lasting and really literary form. Far more profound was the influence it exercised on French literature. The real tendency of Deism is best expressed in the name '' freethinkers," which its advocates adopted; by their opponents they were designated as Naturalists on account of their opposition to supernatural revelation. L England: The beginnings of Deism appear in the seventeenth centuiy. Its main principles are to be found in the writings of Lord Herbert of Cherbury (d. 1648), one of the most original thinkers of his century, who devoted the calm evening of a life spent in a military and diplomatic career to a search for a st-andard and a guide in the conflicts of creeds and systems. He was a friend of Grotius, Casaubon, and Gassendi, and during a long sojourn in France made himself acquainted 1. Lord Yiiih. the thought of Montaigne, of Herbert Bodin, and especially of Charron. His Oh^bury. ^^^^ ^^' ^* VeritaU (Paris, 1624); DereligioneOentiliumerTorunuiueapud eo8 causia (London, 1645); and two minor treatises, De causis errorum and De religume laicL The first work advances a theory of knowledge based upon the recognition of innate universal characteristics on the object perceived, and rigidly opposed to knowledge supernatural in its origin and deter- minable only by strife and conflict. The second work lays down the common marks by which relig- ious truth is recognixed. These are a belief in the existence of the Deity, the obligation to reverence such a power, the identification of worship with practical morality, the obligation to repent of sin and to abandon it, and, finally, divine recompense in this world and the next. These five essentials (the so-called "Five Articles" of the English Deists) constitute the nucleus of all religions and of Christianity in its primitive, uncorrupted form. The variations between positive religions are ex- plained as due partly to the allegorization of nature, partly to self-deception, the workings of imagina- tion, and priestly guile. Herbert's influence disappeared in the storms of the Puritan Revolution, and Deism found the most important impetus supplied to its progress in eccle- siastical circles. The learning of the Renaissance had served to incline the clergy of the Establish- ment to a moderate rational theology, and in the conflict between Puritans and Anglicans, and be- tween Roman Catholics and Protestants, it be- came common to invoke Reason as arbiter. Later Deists could appeal to the arguments of leading theologians, as well as to those of the Cambridge Platonists (q.v.), who, in their conflict against the sensualism of Hobbes, exalted the authority of moral intuitions. The Revolution served to inten- sify the growing feeling against what was arbitrary in religion, and emphasized the demand for sub- jective independence in the field of reason and the need of unity in the realm of practical morality. Antagonism to theological supematuralism stands out as the most conspicuous characteristic in the system of Hobbes (d. 1679; see Hobbes, Thomas), inspired by the teachings of the new mathematical and natural sciences. The different religions are explained as the product of human fear inter- fi H bbA P*^^"*? natural phenomena in anthro- aAd * pomorphic form, or, in their higher Others. Aspects, as the outcome of reflection on causal relation in the universe. Miracles and revelations are in themselves improb- able, and may be most easily explained as the im- aginings of the ignorant. Positive religion is the creation of the State, and the sovereign justly possesses unconditional power to enforce its pre- scriptions, for only in this way can religious strife be avoided. Between religion thus naturally ex- plained and a prophetic and Christian revelation Hobbes, nevertheless, attempted to mediate; he mentions as the means that might lead to such a reconciliation the rational interpretation of mir- acles, the differentiation between the inner moral Bense of Scripture and mere figurative expression, and the historical criticisms of Biblical sources. The entire apparatus of Rationalism is here to be found, limited only in its application. Further, Spinoza's Tractatus theologica'politicua (1670) and Bayle's Dictionnaire (1695-97) were effective in shaping the character of Deism. Of no small im- portance, also, was the rise of a literature of com- parative religion and the publication of ethno- graphical studies and works of travel. China, Arabia, Egypt, Persia, India, savage nations even, were brought within the horizon of religious inves- tigation. Philosophy, beginning with Locke's theory of knowledge^ and natural science, with Newton's theory of gravitation, contributed to the opposi- tion with which dogma was confronted. Yet their attitude was not one of hostility to religion, which they sought rather to utilize for the purpose of establishing the desired imiversal standard of truth. Newton and Boyle succeeded in reconciling the creed of the Church with their mechanical meta- physics; and this union remained characteristic of England, so that even men like Priestley and Hartley did not shrink from supporting their materialistic theories by theological arguments. We have here the blending of a sensualistic epistemology, a mechanical-teleological metaphysics, a historical criticism, and an aprioristic ethics whose product in the shape of natural religion was destined first to undermine Christianity, then to compete with it, and finally to supplant it. These various tendencies could not show them- selves fully under the ecclesiastical restraint of the Restoration, yet they appear clearly enough in the writings of Charles Blount (d. 1693), usually « ^^ - placed second to Herbert in the lists Bloant. °^ Deists. like his predecessor, Blount dwells on the conflict between rival religions, and finds a standard of adjustment in a fusion of Herbert's theory of universal char^ acteristics with Hobbes's prescription by the State. Like Hobbes and Spinoza, he touches serious prob- lems of Biblical criticism at this early date. Free- dom from prejudice is his boast; he asserts the supernatural character of Christianity on the basis of its miracles, after he has already rendered them dubious by parallels with non-Christian miracles. His works were: Anima mundi (London, 1679), Great is Diana of the Ephesians (1680), and The Two First Books of Philostratus concerning the Life of ApolUmius Tyaneus, published in English with notes (1680). The Revolution of 1688, the establishment of the freedom of the press in 1694, the political favor that was bestowed on the new tendencies in theology, in opposition to the stricter Anglican- ism which was tainted with Stuart partizanship, were conditions favor- able to the development of the seed that had already been planted. Parallel with the liberalization of orthodox dogma, there ran a more radical development aiming at the attainment of a standard for the testing of the contents of reve- lation. Of surpassing importance in this direction was the influence and work of John Locke (d. 1704), who, in the field of theology, found his starting- point, like most prominent thinkers of the age, in the conflict of systems, doctrines, and practises. Out of his reflections on the data of experience he developed a mechanical-teleological metaphysics and an empirical-utilitarian ethics, the latter agree- ing with the old idea of lex naturoe in that ethical experience merely confirms the connection estab- 4. John I«ooke. 3d3 DeUm lished by a teleological government of the universe between certain acts and their consequences. In Bpit« of his supematuralist tendencies, Locke nev- ertheless maintained, in his Letters on Toleration (168d-92), that only rational demonstration, and not compulsion or mere assertion, can establish the validity of revelation. In the Essay concerning Human Understanding (1690) he had investigated the conception of revelation from the epistemolog- ical standpoint, and laid down the criteria by which the true revelation is to be distinguished from other doctrines which claim such authority. Strict proof of the formal character of revelation must be adduced; the tradition which communicates it to us must be fully accredited by both external and internal evidence; and its content must be shown to correspond with rational metaphysics and ethics. Revelation is revelation; but, after it is once given, it may be shown a posteriori to be rational, i.e., capable of being deduced from the premises of our reason. Only where this is possible is there a pre- sumption in favor of the purely mysterious parts of revelation. Where these criteria are disregarded the way is open to the excesses of sects and priest- hoods by which religion, the differentia of reasoning man, has often made him appear less rational than the beasts. Locke advances therefore the remark- able conception of a revelation that reveals only the reasonable and the universally cognizable. The practical consequences of the thesis are deduced in his Reasonableness of Christianity as Delivered in the Scriptures (1695), which aims at the termination of religious strife through the recovery of the truths of primitive, rational Christianity. From the Gospels and the Acts, as distinguished from the Epistles, he elicits as the fundamental Christian verities the doctrine of the Messiahship of Jesus and that of the kingdom of God. Inseparably connected with these are the recognition of Jesus as ruler of this kingdom, forgiveness of sins, and subjection to the moral law of the kingdom. This law is identical with the ethical portion of the law of Moses, which in its turn corresponds to the lex natures or rationis. The Gospel is but the divine sunmiary and expo- sition of the law of nature, and it is the advantage of Christianity over pagan creeds and philosophies that it offers this law of nature intelligibly, with divine authority, and free from merely ceremonial sacerdotalism. To do this it requires the aid of a supernatural revelation, whose message is attain- able through reason also, but only in an imperfect way. Deducing the full consequences of Locke's theory, John Toland (q.v.; d. 1722), in his Christianity not Mysterious (1696), maintained that ^^n^ii"**' the content of revdation must neither * contradict nor transcend the dictates of reason. Revelation is not the ba- sis of truth, but only a " means of in- formation " by which man may arrive at knowl- edge, the sanction for which must be found in reason. Primitive Christianity knew nothing of mystery, whose sources are Judaic and Greek, and the original Christian use of the word mysterium conveyed no idea of that which transcended reason. The basis is thus laid for the critical study of early Others. Christianity. Further problems of Biblical criti- cism and the distinction between the diverse parties in primitive Christianity are advanced in Toland's Amyntor (1699) and Nazarenus ; or Jewish, Gen- tile and Mahometan Christianity (1718). In like manner, Anthony Collins (q.v.; d. 1729), in his Discourse of Freethinking (1713), developed the consequences of Locke's propositions. Revela- tion depends for its sanction upon its agreement with reason, and what is contrary to reason is not revelation. Practical morality is independent of dogma, which, on the contrary, has been the cause of much evil in the history of the world. Christ and the Apostles, the prototypes of the freethinkers, never made use of supernatural authority, but con- fined themselves to simple, rational demonstration. Collins's work elicited numerous replies; but none really made answer to his main thesis. After re- maining silent for eleven years, Collins renewed the contest with a contribution on prophecy and mir- acles. Setting out from Locke's proposition that revelation was truth sanctioned by reason, he found it a simple step to reject prophecy and miracles as non-«ssential characteristics of religion, amounting at most to mere didactic devices. The mathematician William Whiston (q.v.; d. 1752) gave a new im- pulse to the controversy by the publication of The True Text (1722), in which the lack of real con- cordance between the New Testament interpreta- tion of Old Testament prophecies is pointed out, and the prevailing allegorical method of reconciling such differences sununarily rejected. The present form of the Old Testament is characterized as a forgery perpetrated by the Jews, and an attempt is made by Whiston to restore the original text. Collins, in his Discourse on the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion (1724), agreed with Whiston as to the discrepancies between the two Testaments, but defended the allegorical method of interpre- tation. Thomas Woolston (q.v.; d. 1733) came to the support of Collins in this controversy over the Biblical prophecies; and when his opponents shifted their appeal from the prophecies to the miraculous acts of Jesus he applied his destructive allegorical method to those aJso, in his Discourses on the Miracles of our Saviour (1727-30). Matthew Tindal (q.v.; d. 1733), in his dialogue Christianity as Old as the Creation, or the Gospel a Republication of the Religion of Nature (1730), pro- duced the standard text-book of Deism. Proceed- ing from Locke's proposition of the identity of the truths of revelation with those of lr?*f" reason, he adduces a new array of Tindal. ftiiS^unents in support of that position. The goodness of God, the vast extent of the earth, the long duration of human life on earth render it improbable that only to Jews and Christians was vouchsafed the favor of perceiving truth. We now have brought in the classic ex- ample of the three hundred million Chinese who surely could not all be excluded from the truth, and Confucianism begins to be extolled against much that is repugnant and harsh in the Mosaic law. Christianity, to be the truth, must find itc substance in all religions; it must be an old as creation. The doctrines of the fall and of original .Deifliii 394 sin can not stand, since it is irrational to believe in the exclusion from the truth of the vast majority of himianity. Tindal's position is orthodox to the extent that Judaism and Christianity are acknowl- edged as revelations, though revelations only of the lex natwrcB, which is identified with natural religion, the prinutive, uncorrupted faith, consisting in " the practise of morality in obedience to the will of God." An echo of the teachings of Tindal is found in Thomas Chubb (q.v.; d. 1747), whose True Gos- pel of Jesus Christ (1738) attempts to prove that what Jesus sought to teach his followers was but natural morality, or the law of nature. Thomas Morgan (q.v.; d. 1743) continued Tin- daPs argument on its historical side in The Moral PhUoBopfier (17S7-A0), displajringmuch ''* J^'J?'^' originality in tracing the development ^^ • of heathen religions, as well as of Mlddleton. Judaism and Christianity. Abandon- ing the old method of deriving specific religions from priestly deception, he explains their rise through the gradual supplanting of the one (}od of the law of nature by a crowd of divinities connected with definite natural phenomena. The legislation of Moses, under Egyptian influences, imposed a rigid and nationally restricted form upon the lex fuUtarcBf and the Jewish ritual and ceremonial is in essence a purely political institution. Full revelation of the law of nature came with Christ, who gave to the world in concentrated form the truth that had already been revealed to Confucius, Zoroaster, Socrates, and Plato. The protagonist of this divinely revealed truth after Christ was Paul, who, in his form of expression, indeed, was com- pelled to make concessions to the influence of Judaism, and in whom, therefore, much is to be taken figuratively. Peter, on the other hand, and the author of the Apocalypse misunderstood the import of the revelation of Christ and corrupted it in the spirit of Messianic Judaism. Persecution forced the two tendencies into union in the Catholic Church, and the Reformation has only partially succeeded in separating them. Morgan's argu- ment results, therefore, in the rejection of the formerly assumed identity between the law of Moses and the lex naturoB, and the restriction of the latter, in the fulness of revelation, to Christianity. His conclusions were denied by William Warburton (q.v.) in The Divine Legation of Moaes (1738-41). When the Christian apologists substituted for the argument from miracles the argument from pei^ sonal witness and the credibility of Biblical evi- dence, Peter Annet (d. 1769), in hb Resurrection of Jesus (1744), assailed the validity of such evidence, and first advanced the hypothesis of the illusory death of Jesus, suggesting also that possibly Paul should be regarded as the founder of a new religion. In Supernaiurals Examined (1747) Annet roundly denies the possibility of miracles. Conyers Middle- ton (q.v.; d. 1750) in his later writings sought to bridge over the gulf between sacred and profane history, and to test them equally by the same method. His Inquiry into the Miraculous Powers (1748) demonstrates that the belief in miracles is common to primitive Christianity and heathen creeds, and that it developed to great proportions in the later life of the Church, so that one is there confronted with an endless succession of miracles to which belongs the same degree of credibility that the apologists attributed to the miracles of the Bible. Though special reference to the New Testa- ment was omitted, Middleton propounded a ques- tion to answer which no serious attempt was made when he asked why credence should be granted to one faith that is denied to another. The Deistic controversy died out in England about the middle of the eighteenth century. The Deistic literature had exhausted its stock of materials, while its tenets had never obtained a strong hold on the people. The cold, inflexible, rational supematunJ- ism of Paley (q.v.; d. 1805) was considered as the final settlement of these long conflicts. From the beginning, however, there had been a class of critics, representatives of the old Renaissance spirit, and inimical, therefore, to the Stoic and Christian eth- ics, who had only partially shared the views of the Deists, and in some ways had advanced to a po- sition far beyond them. Shaftesbury (q.v.; d. 1713), in opposition to the utilitarian and supematuralist ethics of Locke and Clarke, developed the concep- tion of a strictly autonomous moral code having its basis in a moral instinct in man whose 8. Shaftes- ©^1 jg to bring individual and society .^'"J* to harmonious self-perfection. Ber- . ^^*®" nard MandeviDe (1733) adopted the Dodweil Epicureanism of Hobbes and Gassendi, Bolinff- studied moral problems in the skep- broke. ^^'^ spirit of Montaigne and La Rochefoucauld, gave the preference to Bayle over the Deists, and developed empir- icism into a sort of Agnosticism. He criticised the prevailing morality as a mere conventional lie. Christianity — ^which the Deists had wished, while reforming, to maintain — ^he declared im- possible, not only as a religion, but as a system of morality. His Free Thought on Religion (1720) has caused him to be included in the ranks of the Deists; but his real position is brought out in the Fable of the Bees (1714). Henry Dodweil (q.v.; d. 1711), in Christianity not Founded on Argument (1742), attempted to demonstrate the invalidity of the rationalistic basis for Christian truth con- structed by the Deists, from the very nature of the religious impulse, which, being opposed to rational argumentation, calls for the support of tradition and mystery, and finds fascination in the attitude of credo quia absurdum. The only proof proceeds from a mystic inner enlightenment; logical dem- onstrations like those of Clarke or the Boyle lec- tures are only destructive of religion. Bolingbroke (d. 1751) voices the French influence in a capricious and dilettante manner. Despising all religions as the product of enthusiasm, fraud, and superstition, he nevertheless concedes to real Christianity the possession of moral and rational truth; an advo- cate of freedom of thought, he supports an estab- lished church in the interest of the State and of public morals {Letters on the Study and Use of His- tory, 1752; Essays, 1753). Far greater is the influence of David Hume (q.v.; d. 1776), who summarized the Deistic criticism and raised it to the level of modem scientific method 395 Deiam by emancipating it from the conception of a deity conceived through the reason and by abandoning its characteristic interpretation of his- ®- ^2™*'* ^^y- ^® separates Locke's theory of "^ knowledge from its connection with a scheme of mechanical teleology, and confines the human mind within the realm of sense perception. Beginning then with the crudest factors of experience and not with a religious and ethical norm, he traces the development of systems of religion, ethics, and philosophy in an ascending course through the ages. He thus overthrew the I>eistic philosophy of religion while he developed their critical method to the extent of making it the starting-point for the English positivist phi- losophy of religion. Distinguishing between the metaphysical problem of the idea of God and the historical problem of the rise of religions, he denied the possibility of attaining a knowledge of deity through the reason, and explained religion as ari- sing from the misconception or arbitrary misintei^ pretation of experience {Dtalogttea Concerning Nat- ural Religion, written in 1751, but not published till 1779; Natural History of Religion, 1767). Against the justification of religion by other means than rational Hume directs his celebrated critique of miracles, in which to the possibility of miraculous occurrences he opposes the possibility of error on the part of the observer or historian. Human ex- perience, affected by ignorance, fancy, and the imaginings of fear and hope, explains sufficiently the growth of religion. Hume's contemporaries failed to recognize the portentous transformation which he had effected in the character of Deism. The Scottish " common-sense school "saved for a time the old natural theology and the theological argument from miracles to revelation; but in reality Hume's skeptical method, continued by Hamilton and united to French Positivism by Mill and Browne, became, in connection with modem ethnology and anthropology, the basis of a psy- chological philosophy of religion in which the data of outward experience are the main factors (Evo- lutionism, Positivism, Agnosticism — Tylor, Spencer, Lubbock, Andrew Lang, etc.). In so far as Hume's influence prevailed among his contemporaries, it may be said to have amalgamated with that of Voltaire; the " infidels," as they were now called, were Voltairians. Most prominent among them was Gibbon (d. 1794), whose Decline and Fall offers the first dignified pragmatic treatment of the rise of Christianity. The fundamental principles of Deism became tinged in the nineteenth century with skepticism, pessimism, or pantheism, but the con- ceptions of natural religion retained largely their old character. EL France: With other Ehiglish influences De- ism entered France, where, however, only its mate- rialistic and revolutionary phases were seized upon, to the exclusion of that religiosity which had never been lost in England. French Deism stood out- side of theology. The English writers who came to exercise the greatest influence were Hobbes, Locke, Shaftesbury, Pope, Bolingbroke, and Hume. Of the true Deists only Collins, the most critical and the least theological, became prominent. Voltaire (q.v.; d. 1778) embraced the concep- tion of natural religion with ardor, and entered 1 V itaiTA "^^ ^ polemic against intolerance in ^ ' Church and State as well as against the philosophy of the Church and the prevail- ing religious Cartesianism {Easai sur lea mcmra et Veaprii dea naiiona, 1754-58; Dictionnaire phUo- aophique, 1764). He derived his natural phi- losophy from Newton and Clarke, his theory of knowledge and his ideas on toleration from Locke, the main principles of his ethics from Shaftesbury, his critical method and the conception of natural religion from the Deists. All phenomena are ex- plained historically by the interaction between man and his environment, and all things are gov- erned by God acting only in accordance with natural laws. Natural morality and religion are not entirely innate ideas, but rather simple and uni- versally prevalent conditions standing in need of development and following a course that leads through errors arising from ignorance and fear to an ultimate standard truth which is characterized as the " fruit of the cultivated reason." Deism is thereby emptied of all religious content and re- stricted to the field of morals and rational meta- physics. All that is essentially characteristic of human nature is the same everywhere; all that depends on custom varies. The chief influences for changes in the human mind are climate, gov- ernment, religion, and in opposition to these one should seek to arrive at the underlying, undiversi- fied unity. " Dogma leads to fanaticism and strife; morality everywhere inspires harmony." The rise of positive religions may be studied psychologically in children and savages. Fear and ignorance of the law of nature are the primary causes; the parallel growth of social groups and the need of authority cooperate. In China alone natural religion has escaped this pernicious development. India be- came the home of theological speculation, and influ- enced the religions of the West, of which the most important was Judaism as the parent of Christi- anity and Mohammedanism. Moses was a shrewd politician; the prophets were enthusiasts like the dervishes, or else epileptics; Jesus was a visionary like the founder of the Quakers, and his religion received life only through its union with Platonism. Voltaire's conception of the evolution of history entered deep into European thought. By the side of the party of the juate milieu and of '' good sense," of which Voltaire is the most prom- inent representative, there arose a school which carried the doctrines of mechanism and sensualism to their furthest consequences and *! ^^® evolved a philosophy of materialism. oIomT They removed from Deism the great diata. factor of natural religion, retaining only its critical method aa applied to the history of religion. The head of this school was Denis Diderot (q.v.; d. 1784), and its great organ of expression was the EncydopMie (see Enctclopedists). The state censorship, however, compelled the projectors to call to their aid a num- ber of contributors of conservative views and to bring their skeptical method to the task of defend- ing the compromise between reason and revelation. Deism DeUtzsoh d9e In this spirit the main religious topics were treated, but by a subtle infusion of the spirit of Bayle and the expedient of cross-references from these articles to topics which might be handled with greater freedom, Diderot succeeded in supplying the de- sired corrective. It was the circle of Holbach (q.v.; d. 1789) that dared to apply the most extreme consequences of materialism to religious questions. Helv^tius (q.v.; d. 1771) prepared the way with his De V esprit (1758), in which he expounded a material- istic psychology and ethics. Their moral theories, deriving though they did from Hobbes and Hume, lost all connection with the position of Deism, which became for them a mere armory of weapons for the destruction of all religion with its consequences, intolerance and moral corruption. Holbach is un- doubtedly the author of the Systbme de la nature, which appeared in 1770 as the work of Mirabaud. The Systhne is not original in ascribing the begin- nings of religion to human hope and fear and to ignorance of the laws of nature. Fraud, ambition, and unhealthy enthusiasm have made use of it as a means of political and social influence and have succeeded in crystallizing its primitive emotions into positive creeds, within which animistic tend- encies have been developed and subtilized into syst-ems of metaphysics and theology — ^the sources of irrational intolerance. Christianity *• ^J^^^J^ w but Galilean doctrines translated and the ^^^^ Platonic metaphysics, and its loffioia ^beology *o *be present day hovers Sohool. l>etween the extremest anthropomor- phism and the most abstract specu- lation. The natural religion of the Deists dif- fers from the concrete religions only in that it proceeds not from fear and ignorance but from an optimistic interpretation of life; however, in at- tempting to prove by natural science the good- ness of God and man and the adaptation of the world to the purpose of creation, it is but a half- matured critical method vainly endeavoring to reconcile the old irrationalism with the spirit of the new sciences. It is guilty of clinging to the naive view which regards the world as anthro- pocentric instead of recognizing the existence of laws to which man is indifTerent — ^the purely causal, not teleological force of matter. Further, the whole scheme of identifying morality with religion — ^the psychological support of the Deistic position — is repudiated by Holbach, who defines morality as based solely on the natural law of self-preservation and self-perpetuation. Step by step Deism is thus stripped of its connection with revelation, with metaphysics, and finally with morality, and nothing is retained but its method of interpreting religion and its criticism of the facts of Christianity. From Holbach and his circle, and from the cognate group of the Encyclopedists, proceeded the so-called ideological school, who held the main problem of philosophy to be the analysis of the mental con- ceptions aroused by sensations from the material world ((^ndorcet, Siey^s, Naigeon, Garat, Volney, Dupuis, Saint-Lambert, Laplace, Cabanis, De Tracy, J. B. Say, Benjamin Constant, Bichat, Lamarck, Saint-Simon, Thurot, Stendhal). Out of this 4. Bous- school, in turn, developed the positivism of Comto. J. J. Rousseau (q.v.; d. 1778) gave quite a dif- ferent tendency to Deism. Accepting in the main the sensualism of Locke and the metaphysics of Clarke and Newton, he maintains after the manner of Shaftesbxury and Diderot a belief in inborn moral instincts which he distinguishes as " sentiments " from mere acquired ideas; he is true to the position of Deism in connecting this moral " sentiment " with a belief in God, and he protests against the separation between the two which the skepticism of Diderot had brought about. He was influenced by Richard- son, as well as by Locke. " Sentiment " becomes the basis of a metaphysical system built up out of the data of experience under the influence of the Deistic philosophy, but redeemed from formalism by constant reference to sentimentality and emotion as the primary sources of religion. The nature of religion is not dogmatic but moralistic, practical, emotional. Rousseau, therefore, finds the essence of religion, not (like Voltaire) in the cultivated intellect, but in the naive and disinterested undei^ standing of the uncultured. Conscious, rational progress in civilization, no less than supematuralism in Church and State, is an outcome of the fall, when the will chose intellectual progress in preference to simple felicity. With Rousseau natiutd religion takes on a new meaning; " nature " is no longer universality or rationality in the cosmic order, in contrast to special supernatural and positive phe- nomena, but primitive simplicity and sincerity, in contrast to artificiality and studied reflection. In his scheme of the rise of religions he sets out from the common standpoint of the discrepancies and contradictions prevailing among historic creeds. Yet positive religion to him is not so much the product of ignorance and fear as the corruption of the original instinct through the selfishness of man, who has erected rigid creeds that he might arrogate to himself unwarranted privilege or escape the obligations of natural morality. Something of the true religion is to be found in every faith, and of all creeds Christianity has retained the greatest meas- ure of the original truth, and the purest morality. So sublime and yet so simple does Rousseau find the Gospel that he can scarcely believe it the work of men. Its irrational elements he attributes to misconception on the part of the followers of Christ and especially of Paul, who had no personal intei^ course with him. It was natural that between the advocate of such views and the party of the ma- terialists strife should arise, and in fact Rousseau's religious influence in France was slight. On the rising German idealism, however, he exercised a mighty influence. (E. Troeltbch.) Bxblioorapht: On the preparation for Deimn in the Avf- kldrung (" enlightenment ") consult: H. Henke, Oe- •chickte der chriaUichen Kirdie, vols, iv.-vi., Brunswick, 1804; K. Erdmann, Die AufklOrung, Hambuis. 1845; H. von Busche, Die freie relioi^ee AufkUkrung, Darmstadt, 1846; F. C. Schlosser, Oeedwhte dee 18. JakrhunderU, 7 vols., Heidelberg, 1853-57; E. Henke, Neuere Kirehen- geechuMe, vol. ii., Halle, 1878; O. Pfleiderer, Reiigume' PhUoeophie, Berlin, 1896, Eng. transl., PhUoeophy of Re- lioion, 4 vols, London, 1886-88. Books which treat of Deism in general are: J. F. Hurst, Hietory of R€Uionaliem, New York, 1902; L. Noack, Die 397 Deism Delitzfloh Freidenker in der Religion^ 3 vols., Bern, 1853-65; A. S. Farrar, CriHcal Hiatory of Free ThaugfU^ Lectures iv.- viii., London, 1863; C. J. Abbey and J. H. Overton, Bno- Church in the 18th Century, chap, iv., London, 1878 (" an admirable summary "); J. H. Overton and F. Relton, The Enolith Church {ITlJhlSOO), chaiM. iii.-iv., London, 1006. On Engliah Deiam the claoaio ia J. Leland, DeitHoal IFrOert, 5th (best) ed. with Appendix by W. L. Brown, continuation by C. R. Edmonds, London, 1837. Con- sult: J. Hunt, Religioue Thought in England, vols. ii.-iii., London, 1870; J. Cairns, Unbelief in the 18th Century, ib. 1881; L. Stephen, UieL of Eng. Thought in the 18th Cen- tury, ib. 1881; £. Sayous, Lee DHetea anglaie, Paris, 1882; W. Arthur, God triUumt Religion; Deiem and Sir Jatnea Stephen, ib. 1887; W. E. H. Leoky, Hiet. of . . . Ration^ aliem in Europe, 2 vols., ib. 1800. On Deism in France consult: C. Bartholmtes, Hietoire critique dee doetrinee rdigieueee modemee, StrasburKt 1855; H. Taine. Lee PhUoeophee franqaie du 19. eiicle, ib. 1867; F. Ravaisson, La Philoeophie franqaiee au 19. eiicle, ib. 1868; F. Picavet, Lee IdMoguee, ib. 1801; J. Texte, RouaeeoM et lee originee du eoetnopolitieme littSraire, ib. 1805. On the German phase consult: K. R. Hagenbaoh, Oer- man Rattonaliem, Edinburgh, 1865; G. C. B. Ptknjer, Oe- ediichte der durieUiehen Religionephiloeophie, 2 vols., Brunswick, 1880-^, Eng. transl., Edinburgh, 1887; F. A. Lange, Gesc&kAte dee Materialiemue, Leipsic 1887, Eng. trans!., 3 vols., London, 1877-^1. DEISSMAIT, dais'mOn, GUSTAV ADOLF: Ger- man Lutheran; b. at Langenscheid-an-der-Lahn, Nasaau, Nov. 7, 1866. He studied at Tubingen (1885-88) and Berlin (1888), and the theological seminaries at Herbom (1889-00) and Marburg (1891-92). He became privat-docent at Marburg 1892; tutor in the Herbom theological eeminary 1895; professor of New Testament exegesis at Heidelberg, 1897, and at Berlin, 1908. In 1906 he made an archeological tour of Asia Minor and Greece. His publications include a translation of IV Maccabees in E. Kautzsch's -Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen dea Alien TestamenU (TQbingen, 1900); Die neuUstameniliche Formel ''in Christo Jesu " (Marburg, 1892); Johann Kepler und die Bibel: Bin Bevtrag zur Oeschichte der AutarUot (1894); BUbelstvdien : Beitrdge, zumeist aue den Papyri und Inechrifien, zur Geechichte der Sprache, dee SchrifUums, und der Religion dea hellenietiechen Judentums und des Urchrietentuma (1895; Eng. transl. by A. Griere, Edinburgh, 1901); Neue Bibeletudien: SprachgeschichUiche Beitrdge, tumeist aua den Papyri und Inschriften, zur Erkldrung dea Neuen Teatamenia (1897); Brief e einea Herbomer Claaaicua aua den Jakren 1606 und 1606 (Herbom, 1898); Die apraMiche Erforachung der griechir achen Bibel, ihr gegenwdrtiger Stand und ikre Auf" gaben (Giessen, 1898); Bin Original-Dokument aua der diokletianiachen Ckriatenverfolgung : Papyrua 713 dea Briiiah Muaeum (TObingen, 1902; Eng. transl., " The Epistle of Psenosirls," London, 1902); Evangelium und Urckriatentum : Daa Neue Teator ment im Lichie der hiaioriachen Forachung (Munich, 1905); Die Septuaginta-Papyri und andere aUchriat- liche Texte der Heidelberger Papyrua-Sammlung (Heidelberg, 1905); and New Light an the New Tea- iament, from Recorda of the Grceco-Roman Periodf Tranal. from the Author'a MS. by R. M. Strachan, Edinburgh, 1907.

DELANY, WILLIAM: Irish Roman Catholic and president of University College, Dublin; b. at Leighlinbridge (12 m. n.e. of Kilkenny), County Carlow, Ireland, June 4, 1835. He was educated at Carlow College (1851-53), Maynooth College (1853-56), and the Gregorian University, Rome (1865-68), and entered the Society of Jesus in 1856, being ordained priest at Rome in 1866. He was professor in Clongowes-Wood College 1858-60 and in St. Stanislaus's College, Tullamore, 1860-65. In 1868-70 he was vice-president of the latter in- stitution and its rector 1870-80; rector of St. Igna- tius's College, Dublin, 1881-83; president of Uni- versity College, Dublin, 1883-88, and since 1897. He was on the staff of the Gardiner Street Jesuit Church, Dublin, 1888-97. He has written Lec- turea on Christian Reunion (Dublin, 1896) and Iriah Univeraity Education (1904). DELITZSCH, delich, FRANZ: Lutheran; b. at Leipsic Feb. 23, 1813; d. there Mar. 4, 1890. He came of Hebrew parentage; studied at Leipsic, and became privat-docent 1842; was called as ordinary professor to Rostock 1846; thence to Erlangcn 1850; and back to Leipsic in 1867. In early life he was an adherent of the theology represented by Hofmann of Erlangen, but his Biblical criticism was freer than Hofmann's hyperconservative posi- tion would allow. He was as rich in spirit as in learning, though his theology was not free from theosophic influences, as is shown by his Syatem der bibliachen Paychologie (Leipsic, 1855; Eng. transl. Edinburgh, 1867). He especially distin- guished himself as an exegete. At Rostock he wrote De Habacuci propheta vita (Leipsic, 1842), but his exegetical activity really commenced at Erlangen, where he prepared independently and in con- nection with Keil some of the best commentaries on the Old Testament which had been produced in Germany. These were soon translated into Eng- lish and published at Edinburgh (Job, Ps., Prov., Cant., Ecd., Isa.). In their earlier editions they show the influence of Hofmann, but his " Commen- tary on Hebrews " (Leipsic, 1857; Eng. transl., 2 vols., Edinburgh, 1870) was written in defense of the old Protestant doctrine of atonement, as op- posed to Hofmann's position. In spite of his con- fessional attitude, Delitzsch opposed the idea " of fencing theology off with the letter of the Formula of Concord," and when his colleague Kahnis was attacked, he published a defense of him (1863). He published in 1869 his Syatem der chriatlichen Apologetik, which was followed by a Hebrew translation of the New Testament (1877; 11th ed. 1890), and, in connection with S. Baer, an edi- tion of the Old Testament text, except Exodus- Deuteronomy (Leipsic, 1861-97). The effect caused by the investigations of Well- hausen on his followers induced Delitzsch con- scientiously to examine his own position with re- gard to the critical questions raised, and to give up whatever was not tenable. He published in Lu- thardt's Zeitachrift, 1880 and 1882, a series of articles on the Pentateuch which prepared the way for the fifth edition of his Genesis (1887), which he justly regarded as a new work. In the Introduction he made it clear that his position in relation to Old- Testament problems was in the main what it had Demon 3&S beetii and tliat th<? Bible, as the literature of a divine revelation, can not be j>ennitted to be charged with a lack of veracity or to be robbed of Its hifltoric basis. In the fourth edition of his laaiflh (Leipsic, 1SS9, dedicated to Driver and CfSfOyne of Oxford; Eng. transL, 1890), and in his M§wiani9che Weis^agrmgen (Leipsie, 1890; Eng, tranBl.f Edinburgh* 1S91), the preface of which is dated five days before his deaths a modification of his views also appeared. For those who took of- fense at his concession to the modern critical school he wrote Der tieje Graben ztviachen alter und n^der- ner Theologie, Bin B^kenrUniaa (Leipsie, 1888; 2d ed,| 1890). Besides the works already mentioned, he wrote: Zur OeschichU der jQdischen PocMe (Leipsie, 1836); Wisscnschaft, Kunfitf Judcntum (Grimma, 1838); Anekdota zur Gc&chickte der mitiel- alUfUchen Scholastik unter Juden und Mostemen (Leipfiic, 1841); Philemon oder das Buck von der FreundscMft in ChriMo (Dresden, 1842); Wer sind die MyHiker t (Leipsie, 1842); Das Sakrament des wahren Leibes und Blutes Jesu Christi (Dreeden, 1844; 7thed., 1886); Die biUisch-prophaitche Tkeo- logie (Leipsie, 1845); SynthijltT ad psalmos Uliut- trando isagngkfp (1846); Vier Bucher.von der Kirchs (Dresden, 1847); Vom Hame QoUea oder der Kirehe (18491; Kompiutensische VarianUn turn atUeUament- lirhen Tejrie ( Leipaic, 1878) ; Fortgesctzte Studien zur Bnistehungsge^chichte der komplutensischen Poly- gloUe (1886); Iris. Farhenstutiien und Blumemducke (1888). He took a lively interest in the conversion of the Jew8» for whose benefit he translated the New Testament into Hebrew, and pul>lished works like /«!« nnd Hillel (Erlangen, 1,%7; 3d ed., 1871) and Handwerkerleben zur Zeit Jesu (Erlangen, 1S6S; 3d ed,, 1878; Eng. transl., New York, 1883). He also defended them against anti-Semitic attacks and wrote Ermfte Fragcn an die Gebildrien jiidischer Religion (Leipsie, 1888; 2d ed., 181)0), and Sind die Juden mirklich das auserwuhlte Volk f (Leipsie, 1889) against Jewish pretensions and invectives. In 1886 he founded at Leipsie a seminary in which candidates of theology are prepared for missionary work among the Jews, and which in memory of him 18 now called Instilutum Judaicvm DelUzschianum. Bi»LioaaA?HT: B. I. CutUm, F. DeliincK Ixmdon, 1891; H. V. HUpmcht, in Old TeMtam«nt Studint, vi. 209 sqq.; T. K. Cheyu*, in Aeademu, xxxvii (ISflOX 1«. and .4^- naum, ISOO, i. 308; W. Baudinsin, Id ExpoHtm; 1890, pp, 465 iiqq.i A. K5hl«r. in Neukirchliche Zeitschrift. i. 234 «qq. DELITZSCH, FRIEDRICH German Assyriolo- giat; b. at Erlangen Sept. 3, 1850 He studied at Leipsic, where he became associate professor of Semitic languages and Assyriology in 1877. In 1893 he was called to Breslau as full professor of the same subjects, and since 1899 has held a similar position in Berlin, in addition to being director of I he Asiatic section in the Royal Museum. He has written As^yrische Lesestucke (Leipsie, 1876); Wo /";7 das Parodies f (1881); The Hebrew Language viewed in the Light of Assyrian Research (London, IH83); Die Sprache der Koss&er (Leipsie, 1884); mata: (18S0; Eng. transl by A- R. S, Kemwjy, London, 1889); GtsckkfUe BabyUmkm md Amf riens iCalw, 1891); BeitrOge zur Erdzifjemn/i wi Erkl&rung der kappadakUckm KtHschrifUafdn (Lap- sic, 1893); Die Enlstehung des dUaim Sdf^t^ systems oder der Ursprung der KeiUckriltieirhn (1896); Das Buck Hiob neu ubersetd tmtf er: {19U2); B<^i und Bibel (2 parts, im Eng, transl by C. H, W. Johns, London, !:> which was based on lectures delivered befort Emperor of Germany and roused vehement o[ sition in certain conservative circles; Die fra' nf«rA^ Chronik (1906); and Mehr Licht (1907). collaborates with Paul Haupt in editing tht si/riologische Bibliothek (Leipsie, 1881 sqq,} Beiir&ge zur Assyriologii wid semUis^ Sft wissensehaft (1889 sqq.)*

DELLA VOLPE, FRANCESCO SALESIO: ' Cardinal; b, at Ravenna, Italy, Dec, 24, 1844 studied at the seminary of Bertinovo, thr no Pio, Rome, and the Pontificia Acca i Nobili Ecclesiastici, At the age of thirty k came a privy chamberlain of Pope Pius IX , five years later was appointed secretary gregation of Indulgences* He became Camera in 1880 and Majordomo in 1892 created cardinal in petto in 1S99, alth ^ appointment was not publicly announced until 1901, when he received the title of cardinal priest of Santa Maria in Aquiro. Since 1003 he has been prefect of the Congregation of the Propaganda, DELUGE See Noah, DEMAREST. WILLIAM HENRY STEELE: R^ formed (Dutch); b. at Hudson, N, Y,, May p. 1863, He studied at Rutgers College iBX, 1^ and was graduated at the New Brunswick Theo- logical Seminary in 1 8S8. In the same year he was ordained to the ministry, and held pastorates »l Walden, N. Y. (1888^7), and Catskill, NJ^ (1897-1901 ). From 1901 to 1906 he ww ?«»«?' of ecclesiastical history and church government New Brunswick Theological Seminary, and w m was elected president of Rutgers College, ^m already been acting president in !9()5-im. mm written History of the Church &I Walden {^^0!^ Ifm); Outline of Church Government {"Se^^^ wick, N. J., 1903); and Otdline oj Chmk Um (1904).

DE MENT, BYRON HOOVER: Baptist; b. at Silver Spring., Tenn., May 17. 1863. He grad- uated at the University of Nashville in IW "« studied at the University of Virginia ^^^^^ and Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. "'^ ville, Ky. (181)6-1900). He was professor of Greek and Latin in Doyle College. Doyle, T^eJ^.]^ and from 1893 to 1896 wii8 pastor at ^^^l^ In I9(>0-03 he was pastor of the Twenty-second. Walnut Street Baptist Church, Louisville, n^y^ of the First Baptist Church, Waco, Tex., i^ In 1903-1)! he v^-m profesaor of Hebrew^^^ tical theology in Baylor U">v^?^y;,Ji!tJfjiofll 399 Delitzsch Demon DEMETRIUS OF ALEXANDRIA. See Origen, ^•' * ^' DEMON, DEMONISM. Background of Demonology (§1). Nature of Demons (§ 2). The Se'irim and Shedhim (| 3). Other Hebrew Demonic Conceptions (§ 4). The Greek daimon (diminutive, daimanion), the original of the English " demon/' did not connote necessarily the idea of evil. It was rather neutral, and might even be used as a synonym of theoSf " god "; it was also generally employed to desig- nate a tutelary genius (Lat. lar, lemur, genius), and came to be applied to any departed soul. In the Septuagint of the Old Testament, in the New Tes- tament, and in Christian usage the connotation is sinister and always involves an evil X. Back- spirit. The origin of the idea of de- ground of mons lies far back in the empirical Demon- dualism of man's animistic concept ology. tions, according to which all nature is peopled with spirits which are believed constantly to affect or control human acts and des- tiny (see CoMPARATivB Religion, VI., 1, a, § 4). Man's efforts may turn out to his satisfaction or to his disappointment, and he attributes the re- sults to the assistance or hindrance of spirits whom he regards as good or bad according as they seem to assist or to thwart his efforts. This primitive bipartition of the spirit-world into good spirits (which may become angels) and bad (which be- come demons) persists through many stages of un- folding In civilLEation and in religion, and remains as a belief even in the period of enlightenment. Traces of animistic belief have not been wholly eradicated from the Old Testament; cf., e.g., the serpent of Gen. iii. which has speech, mentality, and evil purpose, and also the anointing by Jacob of the stone to which he attributed his wonderful dream (Gen. xxviii. 18). The narrative in Num. xxii. 22-34 presupposes a belief in the vocal power of animals, though the impression given by the narration is rather that of miraculous impartation of speech to an otherwise mute animal. The en- tire religious provenience out of which the Hebrew religion sprang is full of demonism (see Assyria, VII., § 8; Babylonia, VII., 1, §§ 4-6). The Baby- lonian religion divided its spirits into good and bad. These were again classified and grouped, and to the classes and groups names were given, though in general the individual demons did not receive names. This is in accordance with the general law that only in the more developed stages do the spirits become so individualized as to be named. This appears in the Hebrew representation, where in the earlier writings individual spirits are merely referred without individualization to classes (cf. the unnamed " evil spirit " which tormented Saul, I Sam. xvi. 14-15, and the " evil spirit " which by divine commission came between Abimelech and the Shechemites, Judges ix. 23), while Satan, not at first as devil, but as one belonging to God's com- pany, or at least admitted to his presence (Job i. 6 sqq.; Zech. iii. 1 sqq.), Azazel, and Asmodeus (see below) emerge as personal spirits possessing names only in the late (postexilic) literature. A wealth of demonic conceptions quite equal to the Babylonian is foimd also in the Arabic religion, according to which demons swarm in the regions of air, earth, and water, lying in wait for the imwaiy. The magic and incantations of Arabic folk-lore are hardly less prominent and numerous than those of Babylonia, and where these exist belief in demon- ology is sure to be found (see Divination; and Magic). The characteristics of the demons in the Semitic sphere are like those of demons among other peo- ples. These beings, whose power is greatest dur- ing the hours of darkness, are responsible for ills of the flesh, of the mentality, and of the spiritual life. They cause disease, aberration of mind, and per- verseness toward the gods; they con- 2. Nature trol the atmosphere and bring storms; of Demons, by their mastery of the waters they bring floods and destruction; they enter the bodies of human beings, are especially dangerous to women and children, and at the crit- ical periods of life are alert to work them harm. They may be warded off by attention to the proper ritual, by the use of drugs and herbs, and by the potency of incantations and charms (the later Jews regarded the ehema, " Hear, O Israel," of Deut. vi. 4 as a protection). Yet they may be welcomed by the individual and become so at home in his person that he becomes virtually one of their num- ber. In accordance with their perverse nature, the demons have their dwelling-places jn spots shimned by mortals — ^in the deserts, among ruins and in cities which have been destroyed by the enemy, among graves, in miasmatic morasses, and in like places. The demonology of the Old Testament and the New exhibits many of these traces. Yet it is to be observed that not even in its monotheism does the religion of Israel show a loftier elevation above the faiths of the surroimding peoples than in its demonology. The most numerous traces appear in the period of depression when national disaster had enforced contact with the pregnant demonism of Babylonians, Persians, and the in- vading Arabs. As a matter of course, the nature of demons is ever vaguely treated, and the exact no- tions about them are difficult to determine. De- mons were regarded as not of flesh and blood (cf. Eph. vi. 12), yet they ate and drank, reproduced their kind, and might be woimded and killed. They were pictured with the passions and even the lusts of mankind (cf. Tobit vi. 14). They were above the laws of nature, and could transform themselves into various shapes, even into those of angels of light (cf. II Cor. xi. 14). In Judaism they were regarded as especially the opponents of the Messiah (see Demoniac). Their origin is seldom accounted for in popular belief. They come down as elemental spirits in the common belief of the people, and their number is added to as the souls of the departed become regarded as malignant. When an angeloiogy develops, the angels are re- garded as falling from their high estate and adding to the number of the demons. So in the earlier stages of the Hebrew religion demons are not ac- counted for; but in late Jewish works, especially in the Book of Enoch (see Pbeudepiorapha), the de- mons are largely derived from the episode narrated in Gen. vi. 1-4 or from the conceptions of the fall of the angels who thereby became demons. In the same region demonology developed pari passu with angelology, and a demonarchy with Satan and archdemons at the head were opposed to the hierarchy of God and the archangels and angels which left its traces in all Western and some East- ern literatures. The word daimon was introduced into the Bib- lical sphere through the Septuagint as a translation of the two Hebrew words «o*tr (pi. seHrim) and shedk (pi. shedhim; cf. Assyr. shedUj 3. The like the Gk. daimon j originally a word Hebrew of neutral signification, found also in Se'irim and Phenician inscriptions, and possibly Shedhim. etymologically connected with Shad- dai, one of the patriarchal names for God, e.g., Gen. xvii. 1, R. V., margin, and also with the Arabic sa*id, sayyid, *' lord "). The former oc- curs Lev. xvii. 7 (A. V. " devils," R. V. " he-goats," margin " satyrs "); Isa. xiii. 21, xxxiv. 14 (A. V. and R. V. "satyrs," R. V. margin "he-goats"); and II Chron. xi. 15 (A. V. " devils," R. V. " he- goats," margin " satyrs "). Shedh (shedhim) oc- curs in Deut. xxxii. 17 and Ps. cvi. 37 (A. V. " devils," R. V. " demons "). In Isa. xiii. 21, re- garded as exilic or later, the reference is to the desolate site of Babylon where repulsive creatures and dancing seHrim are to abide. The conception is evidently that of hairy goat-like creatures, not unlike the satyr or Pan of Greek myth; some va- rieties of the Arabic jinn are also represented as having somewhat of the same form (WcUhausen, HeiderUum, pp. 151-152). This representation is in fuU accord with that of Isa. xxxiv. 14, also exilic or postexilic, in which the sa'tr cries " to his fel- low " in Edom, which has become a waste inhabited by wolves and by the night monster (Heb. lilUh, R. V. " night-hag," see below). Further, light is cast on the subject by the passage Lev. xvii. 7, which forbids sacrifice to the seHrimf here men- tioned as the objects of worship. This worship may have been simply avertive, after the primitive fashion of bringing offerings to beings whose ill will it was desired to avoid. It is significant that the purpose of the entire passage is to proscribe sacri- fice in " the open field " — i.e., apart from the dwell- ing-place— which may mean the desert, the assumed home of evil spirits. Similar in purport is Deut. xxxii. 17, where the fathers are said to have sacri- ficed to shedhim f and Ps. cvi. 37, in which case sons and daughters were the offerings presented. It is questionable whether these two cases are mere invidious comparison of false gods to demons (W. von Baudissin, in Hauck-Herzog, RE, vi. 4), since this comparison is not met again for several cen- turies, possibly not till apostolic times. The entire provenience of the passages and the ideas con- nected are best suited by the supposition that offer- ings of an avertive character are here referred to, and that not the heathen deities, but actual demons were conceived as objects of worship. The possible renascence of totemistic practises (probably under the influence of Arabic immigration) suggested by E^zek. viii. 10 and Isa. ixvi. 17 is in favor of this conclusion. Mention of lUUh (Isa. xxxiv. 14, A. V. " screech- owl," margin and R. V. " night monster," R. V. margin " Lilith ") has already been made. There can be no doubt of the Babylonian origin of thi.^ w^ord. The god of Nippur was known as £ln-lil " lord of spirits " (see Babylonia, VII., 2, § 2), and the Assyrian lUu, liltdu had the signification " sprites." The Semitic liUUu, " night," may be compared, and the fem. Lilith is named in the cunei- form inscriptions as an attendant c: 4. Other Nam tar, the deity of plagues (ia.«e Hebrew Babylonia, VII., 2, § 8). In late nh- Demonic binic literature lilin means female de- Conceptions, mons, and Lilith herself bears no slight part in legend and was conceived a» living in the desert w^hence she emerged to moke her attacks. A kindred conception is that of Prov. XXX. 15 (Heb. 'alukah, A. V. " horaeleech," R. V. margin " vampire," described as having daughters ever crying " give, give "), to which what is at least a parallel, if not a cognate conception, is found in the Arabic *aluk. The circumstances of the reference suit much better the conception of a demon than that of a horseleech, especially the circumstance of the insatiable daughters. AzxLzt-i (Lev. xvi. 8 sqq.) is the name of a demon wh(>^« home is in the desert, whose character and aims are opposed to those of Yahweh. The name has ni>t yet yielded to investigations on the side of Hebrew philology, and is unique as being the one element of this character entering into the ritual of the Hebrews. Asmodeus, mentioned in Tobit, is either derived from Persian sources or is a literary imita- tion of a Persian conception. Hey lei (Isa. xiv. 12!. the '* day star, fallen from heaven," is interest inc as an early instance of what, especially in pspui- epigraphic literature, became a dominant conceji- tion, that of fallen angels. The Septuagint tran>- lates by daimonia the elUim of Ps. xcv. 5 (A. V. and R. V. " idols," R. V. margin " things of naught "), probably rendering aright the concep- tion of the author of this late psalm. It is not im- probable that behind the ** pestilence " and '* de- struction " of Ps. xci. 6 are animistic conceptions of mischief-working demons, and that they are not mere personifications. A belief closely akin to that in demons is referred to in the 06^, " familiar spirit," of I Sam. xxviii. 7 sqq. In direct line with this and connecting the belief of the early Hebrews with that of surrounding nations are the teraphim (q.v.), the best explanation of which relates them to ancestral spirits that are sought among the graves (cf. Isa. Ixv. 4; cf. Deut. xxvi. 14; Ps. cvi. 28). Etymologically connected with teraphim is the word rephaim, ** giants," and this again con- nects the Hebrews with the beliefs of other peoples who speak of earlier inhabitants of their land as still remaining, though in the shape of elves, dwaifss and fairies. In the Assyrian tongue the words viukku and ukimmu designated both a class of de^ mons and also the spirits of the dead, and they are compared with zaJkHfUy " wind," recalling the " spirits " mentioned above as unclassified (cf. Heb. rtuxi^). The idea which underlies that of re- phaim is unsubstantiality, and ruhim becomes a late Jewish word for demons. The Hebrew popu- 401 Demon Demoniao lar belief in demons is attested further by the many injunctions against sorcery which appear in the legislative and prophetic utterances. In ethnic custom one of the universally employed means of averting the harmful action of demons is the use of the magic word or act. The fact that the peo- ple needed this admonition so constantly speaks more strongly for the abiding belief in demons than the few specific references which are found. For the New Testament doctrine and for later Jewish belief in demons see Demoniac, §§ 1-4. Geo. W. Gilmore. Bibljoorapht: A. Kohut, Anoeloloffie und DUmonologie in ihrer AbfUtnffUfkeit vom ParaUmut, in Ahhandlungen fUr die Kunde dea Morgenlaiidea, iv., 1866; W. Baudissin, Studien zwr Mmt<i«cA«n Ae2H7u>n«0e«cA«cftte, i. 110-146, Leipdo, 1876; P. Seholtc, OdtMendienat und Zaubenveaen, pp. 133-137, Regenaburg, 1877; J. T. de Viaser, De Dae- monologie van het O. T., pp. 80-83, Utrecht, 1880; H. Schults. O. T. Theology, Loildon, 1892; R. Stube. Jit- diachrbabyloniache ZauberUxU, Halle, 1895; W. R. New- bold. Demon Poeaeaeion and Allied Themea, in New World, Sept.. 1897; £. Stave, Ueber den Einfluaa dea Paraiamua auf daa Judentum, pp. 235-280, Haarlem. 1898; Smith, Rel. of Sem., pp. 119-120; DB, i. 590-594; EB, i. 1069- 1074; JE, iv. 514-521. On LiUth consult: J. A. Eiisen- menger, Entdeckiea JtuHenhan, ii. 41^3 sqq., Frankfort, 1700; W. GeaeniuB. Jeaaia, i. 916-920. Leipsic, 1821. On ethnic demonology cozuult: F. Lenormant, La Magie chez lea CKakUena, Paris, 1874; J. Wellhausen, Heiden- tum, pp. 151 sqq.; J. L. Nevins, Demon Poaaeaaion and AUied Themea, New York, 1895; £. B. Tylor, PrimUive CiUtiire, London, 1903. Consult also the literature under Demoniac. DEMONIAC. Jewish and New Testament Demonology (I 1). New Testament Ideas Concerning Demoniacs (§ 2). S3rmptoms of Possession (f 3). Exorcism by Jesus (f 4). Exorcism in the Early Church (§ 5). Exorcism by Jews (16). Modem Explanations (§ 7). A demoniac is one supposed to be possessed by a demon or evil spirit or by several demons. The name '' demon " originated in Greek mythology and was introduced into the Bible and Christianity through the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew seHrim and shedhim (see the article Demon for the Old Testament demonology). In postexilic Juda- ism demonology gained ground, either through for- eign influence or by a recrudescence of primitive Semitic or Israelitic folk-lore. The New Testa- ment reflects the current beliefs of its time. The demonic powers are represented as spirits, not flesh and blood (Eph. vi. 12); they can assume any form, even appearing as angels of light (II Cor. xi. 14); they dwell in ruins (Rev. xviii. 2), in tombs (Mark v. 1 sqq.), and especially in the desert (Matt. iv. 1 sqq., xii. 43). In the Talmud their generic name is mcLzzikin ("injurers")- They lead men to sin (Enoch Ixix. 4, 6), and return more readily to the sinner than to the righteous X. Jewish (Testament of Naphtali 8); yet it and New is possible to resist the devil (Eph. Testament vi. 12; James iv. 7; I Pet. v. 8), Demon- and even to stop the way of the ology. evil spirits by opposing them (Matt. xii. 43 sqq.). One who transgresses the commandments falls an easy victim to the demons (Debarim rabb<ih 4), although he is protected by the recitation of the Shema, or by III.— 26 the strict observance of other commandments {Berako 5»; Peniia 1870. The devil and his hosts are the special foes of the Messianic kingdom (Rev. xii. 10). The mission of Jesus was the con- quest of the " strong man " (Matt. xii. 29), al- though, according to Luke xxii. 3, I Cor. ii. 8, he apparently fell a victim to the evil one; yet, as he had expressed the conviction that he had cast out the kingdom of Satan by the spirit of God (Matt. xii. 26, 28), he inspired his disciples and all early Christianity with the consciousness of victory over the demons (Luke x. 17 sqq.). They, on the other hand, recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Mark i. 24, and frequently). According to Rev. xii., which is confirmed by allusions in the Pauline writings, the devil, having been cast down from heaven, is come to earth to work evil during the little time which still remained to him, and must be resisted con- tinually, although he can win no real victory. The Pauline concept of the " rudiments of the world " (Col. ii. 20; cf. ii. 16; Rom. viii. 38; Eph. vi. 12) refers not only to the sovereigns of the Jews and the Gentiles (Gal. iii. 19; iv. 1-4, 8-«; Enoch Ixxxix. 59--60), but also to the gods of the nations and of idolatrous Israel (Deut. xxxii. 17; Ps. xcv. 5, cvi. 37). This comparison of the pagan deities to shedhim recurs in postexilic Judaism (Enoch xix. 1; Rev. ix. 20), in the writings of Paul, and throughout ecclesiastical antiquity. Though Paul denied the existence of idols (I Cor. viii. 4 sqq.), declaring them dead (I Thess. i. 9) and no gods by nature (Gal. iv. 8), he expressly stated that the sacrifices offered to pagan deities were really given to devils (I Cor. x. 19 sqq.; cf. Justin, i. 5, 10, 12, 23, ii. 1, 12, 13; Tatian, Oratio ad Grcscos ; Ter- tullian, Apol., xxii., xxiii., et passim ; Origen, Conr tra Celsum). The principal source for the Biblical view of demoniacs is the historical books of the New Testa- ment. According to the general concept of the various passages, the demon enters into man as a second personality (Luke viii. 30), dwelling in him as in a house (Matt. xii. 44; Luke xi. 24), so that evil spirits dread to be banished into 2. New Tes- the abyss (Luke viii. 31), or (Mark v. tament 10) to be expelled from a lajid they Ideas Con- love, preferring to inhabit the bodies ceming of swine. The demon tortures man Demoniacs. (Matt. xv. 22), driving him whither he would not go (Luke viii. 29). The demoniac is often so thoroughly possessed by the evil spirit that he lives insepulchers and other lonely places, a danger to passers-by (Matt. viii. 28) and unable to be boimd by even the strongest fetters (Mark v. 3-6); he even speaks as though he were himself the demon, using the plural when possessed by many evil spirits (Matt. viii. 29; Mark i. 24, v. 9; Luke iv. 34, viii. 28). The manifestations of demoniac possession are extremely varied. The boy at the foot of the Mount of Transfiguration (Mark ix. 14-27) is represented as seized with convulsions, writhing on the ground, and foaming at the mouth. At the first attack the boy wallowed dumb upon the ground, nor did he cry out until the demon had been expelled, al- though the account of Luke (ix. 39) states that DamonUo Dempster 402 the child Bcreamed at every attack, and that the evil spirit " bruising him, hardly departeth from him." Both Mark and Luke record symp- 3. Symp- toms of epilepsy; the account in Mat- toms of thew not only omits all these details, Poeseisioa. but especially characterizes the disease as lunacy (xvii. 15), thus giving a pref- erable explanation of the falling of the boy into fire and water, which has no specific cause in Mark, and is altogether lacking in Luke. The passage in Matthew is the more interesting since in iv. 24 he distinguishes ''those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatic, and those that had the palsy." The demoniac met by Jesus in the synagogue at Capernaum (Mark i. 23-28) does not exhibit the characteristic foam of epilepsy, but shows symptoms of epileptic hysteria, especially as Luke iv. 35 notes that the fit did him no harm. It is evident, from a summary of the cases in Mat- thew and Mark, that such attacks were regarded as demoniac in origin, and to the same agency are ascribed the superhuman strength, the self- injury, the dwelling among tombs, the threatening gestures, and the nakedness of the demoniac of Gadara (Mark v. 2-6; Luke viii. 27-29). Other complaints of a less serious nature, however, are also referred to the agency of demons, such as dumbness (Matt. ix. 32; Luke xi. 14), or blindness and dumbness (Matt. xii. 22), although no mention is made of the expulsion of demons in the accounts of the healing of the dumb and the blind in Matt, ix. 27-31; Mark vii. 32, 37, viu. 22-26, x. 46-52. In like manner, Luke iv. 40-41 (cf. vi. 17-18, vii. 21) regards the curing of demoniacs as a special phase of healing, and in Acts viii. 7 demoniacs are dis- tinguished from the paralytic and the lame. On the other hand, the woman bowed with " a spirit of infirmity eighteen years " was " bound by Satan " (Luke xiv. 11-16), and the fever of Peter's mother-in-law seems to have been believed to be demoniac (Luke iv. 38-39). The healings at Capernaum (Matt. viii. 16) were in the main exor- cisms of demons, and these formed a large part of the activity both of Jesus (Mark i. 39) and of the Twelve (Mark iii. 14-15, vi. 7, 13; Matt. x. 8). The gloom and asceticism of John the Baptist gained him the reputation of a demoniac (Matt. xi. 18; Luke vii. 33), and this chaige was brought against Jesus himself (Matt. ix. 34, xii. 24; Mark iii. 22, 30; Luke xi. 15; John vii. 20, viii. 48, x. 20). Nor was it an easy matter to distinguish between spirits of evU and spirits of God (Matt. xxiv. 11, 24; I John iv. 1-3), so that the " discerning of spirits " was regarded as a special grace (I Cor. xii. 10, xiv. 29). Even a storm (Mark iv. 37-41; cf. Rev. viL 1; Enoch Ix. 11 sqq.; Jubilees ii.) was considered the work of demons. It is surprising, on the other hand, that moral defects and delin- quencies are seldom represented as demoniac either by popular belief or by Jesus himself. Neither Matt. xi. 18; John vii. 20, viii. 48, 52, nor Luke xi. 24-26 admits ot such an interpretation, the only passages really entering into consideration being Luke xxH. 3, 31 and the account of the temptation, where, however, Satan is rather the avowed oppo- nent of all Messianic work than the principle of evil. In the exordsma of Jesus the defnoninfw are agitated at his i^proach (Marie L 23, iii 11, v. 6, ix. 20), while the evil spirits, recognizing him as the Son of God, implore him not to torment them before their time (Matt. viii. 29). Such recognition, although rebuked by Jesus (Mark L 4. Exor- 25, iii. 12), receives its explanation cism' by in the supernatural power of per- Jesns. oeption possessed by Uie evil spirits, since by means of his Spirit God wrought through Jesus all his miracles, wonders, and signs. The rebuke of Jesus is sufficient in most cases to exorcise evil spirits (Matt. viiL 16: Mark i. 25, ix. 25), even at a distance (Mark viL 29, 30). The successful exorcism of the demon is recognised by the quiet and repose of the patient (Mark v. 15, viL 30), or by a loud cry from the person possessed (Mark i. 26), while the transfer d the demon from the man of Gadara to the swine ia Mark v. 2-13 finds its probable explanation in the fright of the animals at the final paroxysm of the maniac. The historicity of Jesus' successful treatment of demoniacs is admitted in principle even by adherents of the critical school. Elxor^ cisms were the order of the day and were expected from a Messianic prophet, and the chief proof for their historicity lies in statements of Jesus whidi represent their importance for himself and \a» activity as the Messiah (Matt, xi 5; Luke vii. 22). It becomes clear from Matt. xii. 25-32 and Luke xi. 17-23 that Jesus believed not only in the exist- ence of demons (cf. Matt. xii. 43-45; Luke xi. 24- 26), but, like his contemporaries, in exorcism (Matt, xii. 27; Luke xi. 19). The expulsion of demons implied the debilitation and the destruction of the " kingdom of Satan '* (Matt. xii. 26; Luke xi. 1$\ thus representing victories over the principle of evil in the dawn of the Messianic age (cf. Assump- tion of Moses X.). It is clear, from the allusion to the " strong man " in Matt. xii. 29, and Luke xi 21-22, that Jesus deduced his victory over the demons from his previous conquest of Satan, their lord, in his temptation (cf. Luke x. 18-20). The accounts of the (iospels receive their full ex- planation, however, only in the light of the histoiy of religion, which shows that the belief in demoniac possession was not restricted to the time of Jesus or to his surroimdings. Elxorcism 5. Exor- continued to be practised in the eariy cism in the Christian Church (Acts v. 16, viii. 7). Early Of particular interest is the account Church, of the '' spirit of divination," in Acts xvi. 16-18. The narrative in Acts xix. 13-19, on the other hand, contains no exorcism in the strict sense of the term, but merely shows the | power of the name of Jesus over those possessed with demons (cf. Mark ix. 38-39; Luke ix. 49'. Jesus himself admitted the success of other exorcUt^ and sanctioned them as helping to destroy the kio^ dom of Satan, so that the failure of the Jewuh exorcists (Acts xix. 13-16) is an exception to the general rule. Although the epistles contain no direct statements concerning demoniacs and exor cisms, such beliefs must be attributed to Paul when he mentions among charismata the ability to dis- cern between spirits (I Cor. xii. 10). The coc- viction that '' the Son of God was manifefited that he might destroy the works of the devil " (I John iii. 8) continued active in the early Church. Thus Irenseus (11. xlix. 3) asserts that certain exorcisms " mightily and truly expel demons " ; while Ter- tullian put the belief in the form of a challenge (Apol.f xxiii.; of. De corona, xi; De idolis, xi.; Minucius Felix, xxvii.; Origen, Contra Celswn, vii. 4, viU. 68, etc.). While in the earliest period many Christians expelled evil spirits, exorcists are definitely mentioned as special officials of the . Church as early as Cyprian (Episi., xvi.; cf. the tenth canon of the Council of Antioch and the twenty-sixth of the Apostolic Constitutions), i [The energumens (Gk. energoumenoi, " worked upon," "influenced," i.e., by an evil spirit) con- stituted a special class. They were not permitted to enter the church if they were violent, but were commanded to stand in the porch, so that they could hear the singing and prayers; and with them might be found lepers and persons of offensive lives (cf. the seventeenth canon of the Synod of Ancjrra, 314; Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, i. 236- 237); after the prayers they came in to receive the blessing of the bishop. If they were quiet, they were allowed in the church, yet separated from the catechumens, and listened to the sermon. They were also called cheimazomenoi (" storm-tossed *'). The exorcists daily brought them food, laid their hands upon them, and prayed for them. After their recovery they kept a twenty to forty days' fast, then partook of the sacrament; a particular prayer was made for them by the priest, and their names were entered upon the church-records, with especial mention of their recovery.] The belief in demoniac possession and the power of exorcism has continued in the Church down to modem times, j See Benediction; Sacramentaijb. This phenomenon loses its singularity in view of its ethnic distribution. In the Old Testament a special instance is the evil spirit which troubled Saul after the spirit of God had departed from him, mentioned by Josephus {Ant,, VI. viii. 2, xi. 2) as a case of demoniac possession, and the lying spirit of I Kings xxii. 20-23. The cases of Judges ix. 23; II Kings xix. 7; Isa. xxix. 10 are more doubtful, but the underlying concept is clearly that of pos- session by evil spirits. Josephus expressed a firm belief in possession. According to him, in a case which he observed, the exorcist held 6. Exor- to the patient's nose a ring containing dsm by under its seal one of the roots which Jews. Solomon had endowed with healing power, thus drawing the demon from the nostrils of the person possessed. The patient then fell down, and the exorcist conjured the demon not to return, commemorating Solomon, and pro- nouncing the incantations which he had composed. Jewish exorcists are mentioned by Jesus (Matt. xii. 27) as well as in Acts xix.' 13-20, while Origen {Contra Celsum, I. xxviii., xxxviii.) declared exor- cism an art which the Jews had learned from the Egyptians. Lucian {Philopaeudea, xviL) describes exorcists in terms which resemble those of the New Testament, mentioning particularly a Palestinian and an Arab conjurer. Especially famous were the exorcisms of ApoUonius of lyana (q.v.), al- though there is no foundation for Baur's view that tl^y were imitations of the Gospel narratives. Strong evidence for the wide-spread extent of the ancient belief in demoniac possession are the counlr less incantations still preserved, and the mass of magic papyri recently discovered. A distinct category is formed by the " Ephesian letters," a mixture of foreign and unintelligible names, in- cluding many Hebrew words and even verses from the Bible. In these formulas the Hebrew name of God and the name of Jesus recur with great fre- quency, both being r^arded as especially potent. In spite of the progress of modem thought and of the natural sciences, the primitive conception of all these things as supernatural has by no means been eliminated. In the Roman Catholic and orthodox Protestant churches it finds a strong support in the Scriptural narratives and in the general supernatural standpoint from 7. Modem which their exposition is approached. Explana- The natural view of these phenomena tions. was first taken by the rationalist school, especially by Semler, and is to- day fully recognized in historical theology. Theo- logians are now willing to adimt their need of infor- mation on the underlying psychological facts at the hands of specialists, especially the medical men who in recent years have made careful study of phenomena of this class. The labors of Charcot, Richer, Snell, and others have led to a prevalence of the view that cases of so-called possession are usually to be regarded as acute hysteria, and the cures, the accomplishment of which is still possible, as the work of suggestion. This would have been all the more likely to operate effectively in the early days of Christianity, when powerful religious excitement and extreme submissiveness of faith would have offered the most favorable conditions for its exercise. (Johannes Weiss.) Bibliography: On Biblical presentations consult: F. C. Conybeare. in JQR, 180(V-07T W. Baudissin, Skidim^ part 1, Leipsic, 1876; G. Hafner, Dis D&moni»€hM det N. T„ Frankfort. 1894; H. Laehr. Dis DAmoniBchm dea N. T., Leipoio, 1804; R. Stube, JUdudirbabyloniadis Zauber- Uxte, Halle, 1895; W. M. Alexander. Demoniac Pottea^ Hon in the New Teetament, Edinburgh, 1002; DB, i. 590-504; 811-813; EB, i. 1060-74, ii. 1451-53; JB, v. 305-306. On the relationship of Christ to the subject consult: F. Nippold, Die pei/chiairiacKe UeiUhOtiokeU Jeeu, Bern. 1880; idem, Engele- und Satanaidee Jeeu, ib. 1801; Schwartskopff, in Zeitachrift fitr Theologie und Ktrcke, 1807. For beliefs and practises of the Middle Ages of. Scha£F. ChriaUan Church, v. 1, pp. 878 sqq. On ethnic belief consult, besides the literature under Comparative Rkligion: A. Hamack, Afediainiaehea aua der alien Ktrchengeachichie, in TU, viii. 4 (1802), 111 sqq.; J. L. Nevius, Demon Poaaeaaion, Chicago, 1805 (Chinese phenomena); W. R. Newbold, Demon Poaaeaaion, in New World, 1807, pp. 400 sqq.; W. M. Townnend. Solan and Demona, Cincinnati, 1002. The medical side may be consulted in J. M. (Charcot, Lea Maladiea du ayathne ner- veux, 3 vols., Paris, 1886-87. Consult J. M. Charcot and P. Richer, Lea Dhnoniaquea dana Vart, Paris, 1887.

DEMPSTER, THOMAS: Scotch scholar; b. (according to his own not altogether trustworthy account) at Gliftbog, near Muiresk (32 m. n.w. oi Aberdeen), Aberdeenshire, Aug. 23, 1579; d. at Bologna Sept. 6, 1625. He led an adventurous life as student at Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, at Paris, Denio Denmark 404 Louvain, Rome, and Douai; and as teacher at Tournai, Paris, Toulouse, Nlmes, Pisa, and Bologna. He possessed a remarkable memory, and accumu- lated a great store of learning; was impetuous, contentious, and ill-mannered, and his personal character is not free from reproach. The best known of his writings (all in barbarous Latin) is the Historia ecclesiastica gentis Scotorum (Bologna, 1627; ed. David Irving for the Bannatyne Club, 2 vols., Edinburgh, 1829), a biographical dictionary of Scotchmen, remarkable for its fictions rather than its facts. He wrote also upon Roman an- tiquities, Etruria, etc., and edited and annotated Benedetto Accolti's De heOo a Christianis (xmtra barbaroB getto (Florence, 1623). DENIO, FRANCIS BRIGHAM : Congregational- ist; b. at Enosburg, Vt., May 4, 1848. He was graduated at Middlebury College, Middlebury, Vt., in 1871 and Andover Theological Seminary in 1879, and was ordained in 1881. He was instructor in New Testament Greek in Bangor Theological Sem- inary 1879-82, and has been professor of Old Tes- tament language and literature since 1882. His theological position is moderate. His has written Outlines of Old Testament Theology (Bangor, Me., 1897) and Supreme Leader; Study of the Nature and Work of the Holy Spirit (Boston, 1900). DENIS (DIONYSIUS), SAINT: First bishop of Paris and patron saint of France; d. a martyr at Paris either under Valerian (253-260) or Maximian (285-905). He is said to have gone to Gaul about 250, established himself on the island in the Seine now known as La CiU in Paris, and, with miracles attesting the divine favor, to have built a church there and ordered the church life. Persecution broke out, Denis was arrested with Rusticus, a priest, and Eleutherius, a deacon, and after cruel tortures the three were beheaded. They were buried where they fell on the heights of Montmartre (Afons martyrum according to tradition, though the original name was more Mkely Mons Martie). The place became a great resort of pilgrims, and won- ders were wrought there. Thence in the seventh century the relics were transferred to the famous Abbey of St. Denis founded by Dagobert I. In the first half of the ninth century Hilduin, abbot of St. Denis (q.v.), at the request of Louis the Pious, wrote a life of the saint (MPL, cvi. 23-50); and here, for the first time, St. Denis is identified with Dionysius the Areopagite. All the great ac- tivity which the Abbey of St. Denis developed in the field of French history from the ninth to the fourteenth century is centered in the idea that Dionysius the Areopagite (q.v.) is the patron saint of France. Abelard (q.v.) had his doubts; and it was not until the middle of the seventeenth cen- tury that Launoy (De Areopagilicie HilduinXf Paris, 1641, and De ducbua Dumyeixe, Paris, 1640) and Sirmond (Diesertatio in qua osienditur discrimen Dionyeii Parisieneis et Dionyeii Areopagita, Paris, 1641) succeeded in exploding the audacious hy- pothesis. The shrine of St. Denis grew immensely rich, and the abbey became a storehouse packed with valuable historical memorials (cf. M. F^libien, Histaire de I'Abbaye de Saint Denya, Paris, 1706). During the Revolution it was plundered (Nov. 12. 1793) by a mob led by one of its own priests; and its relics, jewelry, etc, were carried on six cart^ into the Convention, where they disappeared Denis is one of the Fourteen Helpers in Need (q.v). His day is Oct. 9. Bibucmskapht: The early docamenta are printed in ASB, Oct., iv. 925-051; also, in part. ed. B. KmBcfa. MGH. AueL ant, W.. part 2 (1885). 101-106. Consult: J. £. Damw. S. Denya VAr^opaaUe, Paris. 1863; EL Taxlkr, ApottoUU de 8. Dem datu let Gauiee e» tSO, Amiezi.^ 1868; F. ArbeUot. Etudea nw 1m originea dirHiama de la OauU, part 1. Funa, 1881; A. Vidieu, S. Demya r.4r/.> pcvitef Pauifl. 1884 (richly illustrated, but not hisioricalj. DEmSOH, GEORGE AHTHOHT: Chureh of England; b. at Ossington (6 m. n. of Newark), Nottinghamshire, Dec. 11, 1805; d. at East BreDt (14 m. w. of Wells), Scmierset, Mar. 21, 1896. He studied at Christ Church, Oxford (B.A., 1826), sad was ordered deacon and ordained priest in 18.32. Until 1838 he was curate to the bishop of Oxford, and then resigned his fellowship and became vicar of Broad winsor, Dorset, and so renudned until 184-5. when he became vicar of East Brent, and also exam- ining chaplain to the bishop of Bath and Wells, who in 1851 made him archdeacon of Taunton. In the- ology he was a High-churchman, and from 1S54 to 1858 was unsuccenfuUy prosecuted for maintaic- ing the doctrine of the Real Presence. From 18.39 to 1870 he was prominent as a Church champion in the school controversy between the Church of England and the civil power, which resulted in the Elementary Education Act, the final and decisi^-e victory of the civil power. He wrote Proceeding$ against the Archdeaocm of Taunton (London, 1S54): Defenceo/the Archdeacon of Taunton (1856); Church Rate a National Trust (1861); Notes cf my Li/V. 1806-78 (1878); and Mr. Gladstone (1885). He also translated Hadrianus Saravia On the Holy Eucharist (1855). DEHK (DEirCK)y HAHS: Anabaptist; b. at Heybach (Habach; 30 m. s.w. of Munich) c. 1495: d. at Basel Nov., 1527. He studied at Ingolstadt, and in 1520 is found at Augsbuiig among the Hu- manists. Thence as a Protestant he went to Ba^. was proof-reader and befriended by CEoolampadius, who secured for him the rectorship of St. Sebaldus' school in Nuremberg in the autiunn of 1523. There he mingled with those who were dissatisfied with the dominant theology, and on the charge of her- esy he was expelled from the city Jan. 21, 1525l Thenceforth he was a wanderer. He allied himself with the Anabaptists and his learning made him s valuable acquisition. He was expelled from Aiigs- burg in Oct., and from Strasburg in Dec., 1526. from Worms in Aug., 1527. He is heard from as a leader of the Anabaptists in Augsburg, Nuremberg, and Ulm in 1527; but, weary of continued persecu- tion and his enforced wanderings, he went to Basel in the fall of that year, threw himself upon the pro- tection of (Ecolampadfus, who again befriended bim and tried in vain to convert him to the established Protestant theology. The plague soon after r^ leased him from his troubles. By the Anabaptists he was highly honored; and even his detractors conceded his ability, personal high character, and scholarship. His translation of the prophetical 405 Denio X>«iuiuurk books of the Old Testament with L. Haetzer (Worms, L527) is still esteemed. His tracts are now ex- tremely rare (cf. Mennoniiische BldUer^ xxx. 56). One is in the British Museum, Was geredi ««i/n, das die Schriffl sagt, GoU (hue und mache guts und bdaes (1526). His principal works were reprinted in Geisiliches Blumengdrtlein (Amsterdam, 1680); his Von der vxihren Lithe was republished by the Men- nonite publishing house, Elkhart, Ind. Bibliography: L. Keller, Ein Apo9tel der WiedertAufer, Leipsic, 1882 (best); cf. idem* Die Reformation und die aUeren Reformparteien, ib. 1885; idem, J. von Staupite und die AnfUnoe der Reformation, ib. 18i38. Consult also: Q. E. Roehrich, La Vie . . . de , . , Jean Denek, Stras- burg, 1853; C. Beard. The Reformation of the ISth CenL, London, 1886; A. Baur, Zwinolie Theoloffie, iL 175 sqq., Halle, 1889; H. LQdemann, Reformation und TAufertum, pp. 53 sqq., Bern, 1896; A. H. Newman, Hiet, of Anlin PedobapOem, pp. 163, 242 sqq., Philadelphia. 1897.

DENMARK: A kingdom of northwestern Europe. The country proper covers an area of 15,289 square miles, with a population (1906) of 2,588,919. The Danish colonies comprise Iceland (q.v.)> part of Greenland, the Faroe islands, and the islands of St. Thomas, St. Croix, and St. Jan in the Caribbean Sea. Since 1863 the Lutheran faith has been the established religion of Denmark, and the only one receiving the support of the State. The king must belong to this Church. Other denominations, how- ever, are allowed full religious liberty, with no dis- abilities whatever. The census of 1901 shows the following distribution of the population according to creeds: Lutherans, 2,436,084; Roman Catholics, 5,373; Greek Catholics, 106; and Jews, 3,476. There are, besides, a small number each of Re- formed, Protestant Episcopalians, Methodists, Catholic Apostolics (Irvingites), Baptists, and Mormons. The ecclesiastical divisions of Denmark com- prise seven stiftery or bishoprics, as follows: (1) Zealand, (2) Funen (with the neighboring islands of Aero, Langeland, etc.), (3) Laaland and Falster, (4) Aalborg, (5) Viborg, (6) Aarhus, and (7) Ribe. Iceland constitutes a separate stift. The bishops, like the rest of the clergy, are appointed by the king; and upon them it devolves to ordain minis- ters and to inspect churches and schools. Under the Ministry of Public Instruction and Ecclesias- tical Affairs the bishops constitute the highest eccle- siastical authority, officiating in some cases inde- pendently, in other cases in association with the secular head of the stift (the stiftsanUmand, or gov- ernor). Each stift is divided into provstier (" pro- vostries ''), Zealand having 18, Funen Ecclesias- 11, Laaland and Falster 4, Aalborg tical Divi- 10, Viborg 9, Aarhus 13, and Ribe 8: sion of total 73. Each provsti is superin- Country. tended by a provost, who officiates as preacher also. He has to look after all ecclesiastical affairs within his precinct, and, together with the local amtmand and a member appointed by the School Commission, he super- vises the parochial schools of his provostry (the eighteen secular divisions of Denmark are called amis — '* counties " — each amt being governed by an amimand). The amts within each stift are again ruled by a sti/tsanUmand, Each provostry is divi- ded into sognekald, the total number of which is about 1,070, each comprising one or two (rarely more) sogns, or parishes. Sognekalds of ordinary dimensions have each a minister who preaches al- ternately in the different parish churches. Large sognekalds, however, may have two officiating clergymen. The minister is also a school commis- sioner. The parish is thus the unit in the ecclesi- astical oi*gani2ation of Denmark. By royal resolu- tion of 1883- an ecclesiastical council was established, and the clergymen who are members of this body frequently assemble to discuss religious matters and questions pertaining to the affairs of the Chureh. The minister of each parish is, as already stated, a member of the school committee, and in this way the Church exereises a direct supervision over the parochial schools, of which there are nearly 3,000. The religious instruction given in the communal schools is based either upon Luther's smaller catechism or upon Balslev's version of the same. The Danish clergy receive their education at the University of Copenhagen, which has a theological faculty consisting of five ordinary professors. The curriculum includes Old and New Tes- Education- tament exegesis, dogmatics, ethics, al Institu- and church history. There is also a tions. theological seminary, in which two resident clergymen lecture on hom- iletics and catechetics, while a member of the jurid- ical faculty expoimds canon law. The Icelandic clergymen are mostly educated at the theological seminary in Reikiavik, although many frequent the University of Copenhagen. Several stipends are awarded by the Danish State for the promotion of theological studies. While it was originally compulsory upon a Danish resident to frequent the chureh in his own parish, and to pay tithes and feast-offerings to the local clergyman, important laws modifying these obliga- tions were enacted on Apr. 4, 1855, and Mar. 25, 1872. By the former legislation every citisen was granted the right to identify himself with any chureh according to his own choice, being obliged only to notify the local provost of the desired change. He would thenceforth have to pay to the minister of his home parish only the stipulated levies on real estate, produce, etc., while the feast-o£fering8 were to go to the clergyman of his choice. The law of 1872 extended this grant so that a dtisen may now have his chureh ceremonies (baptisms, funerals, weddings) conducted by an outside clergy- man in the church of his own parish, provided, of course, that the church is not occupied for other purposes. A Danish Society for the Inner Mission was founded in 1853, and has exerted a highly meri- torious influence among the lower Inner classes. Its activity received special Mission, impetus when Wilhelm Beck, minister of the parish of Oerslev on Zealand, became its head. Under his leadership the society was completely reorganized, and has since main- tained a staff of about 120 missionaries, who con- duct religious meetings especially for young men and women. The society has upward of 250 Danmark D&rviah 406 meeting-houaes and a valuable free library. The Izmer Mission is not merely an activity, but a religious trend; and if it should come to a breach between this society and the established Church, a sect would be created which might well be com- pared with the English Methodists. A local So- ciety for the Inner Mission in Copenhagen (founded by the Rev. Mr. Frimodt in 1865) has a beauti- ful prayer-house, the Bethesda, where popular meetings are regularly held. The p^rty founded by N. F. S. Grundtvig (q.v.) has been especially active in establishing the so-called FotkehGjakoUr ("people's high schools ")> which have won great and well-deserved recognition as educational mediums. The Danish Society for Foreign Missions was foimded in 1821. It has stations among the Tamils in India (established 1864; ten mission- aries), in Dagusan and Port Arthur, China (1892; five missionaries), and in Syria (three missionaries). In western Greenland Christianity is so firmly established that one may speak of a Greenlandic Church there; but in the eastern parts the Danish State had no missionary until 1894, when a station was established at Angmagsalik. Among other societies the following may be mentioned: Danish Bible Society (founded 1814); the Society for Missions among Seamen (stations in Hamburg, London, Hull, and Newcastle); and the Society for Danish-American Missions, which supplies the Danish congregations of North America with preachers. (F. Nieusen.) Bibliography: F. Nielsen, Statskirke og Frikirke, Copen- hagen, 1883; H. G. Saabye, Om Sekteme % Danmark, ib. 1884; H. L. B. P. Koch and H. F. RArdam, Danmarks Kirk^Uttorie, 1617-1848, 2 vols., ib. 1889; T. J. A. Elm- quifli, Kirken og dena hMioe HandHnger, Odense, 1892; £. A. F. Jensen, Die HawpMrCmunoen dea rdigidaen Lebena ... in D&nemark, Gutersloh, 1805; T. Loegstnip, Nordi- tkg Miamonaerer, Copenhagen, 1807; F. 8. O. A. Nygard, KriMUnUv i Danmark . . . 1741-1840, ib. 1807; A. V. C. Kjdlhede. Haandbog for den danake Folkekirke, ib. 1800; Shidier og Aktatykker vedkommende de danake Oaliftera Hiatorie, ib. 1800; A. T. Jdrgenaen, Den danake FoUee- kirkea BekendeUeaakrifter, ib. 1000.

DENNEY, JAMES: United Free Church of Scot- land; b. at Paisley Feb. 5, 1856. He was grad- uated at Glasgow University (M.A., 1879) and Free Church College, Glasgow (B.D., 1883). He was minister of East Free Church, Broughty Ferry, Fifeshire, from 1886 to 1897, and since 1897 has been professor of New Testament language, litera- ture, and theology in the United Free Church Col- lege, Glasgow. He has edited for The Expositor's Bible Thessalonians (London, 1892) and II Corin- thians (1894), and Romans for The Expositor's Greek Testament (1900). He has also written Studies in Theology (London, 1895); Ooapel Quea- tiona and Anawera (1896); The Death of Christ (1902); and The Atonement and the Modem Mind (1903); and has collaborated in Questions of Faith; Lectures on the Creed (1904).

DENNIS, JAMES SHEPARD: Presbyterian; b. at Newark, N. J., Dec. 15, 1842. He studied at Princeton (B.A., 1863), the Harvard Law School (1863-64), and Princeton Theological Seminary (B.D., 1867), and went as a missionary to Syria in 1868, studied at Sidon till 1872, and then made a brief visit to the United States. From 1873 to 1891 he was principal and professor of systematic theology at the Theological Seminary at Beirut. He returned definitely to the United States in 1891, and has since devoted himself to the promotion of foreign missionary work by the preparation of missionary literature and lecturing. He was Students' Lec- turer on missions at Princeton in 1893 and 1896, and in 1900 was chairman of the committee on statistics of the Ecumenical Conference on Foreign Missions in New York City. He is a member of the Presbyterian Board of Foreign Missions. He is the author of Arabic theological treatises on the evi- dences of Christianity, on the science of Biblical interpretation, and on systematic theology, chiefly based on the works of Charles and Archibald Alexander Hodge. In English he has written Foreign Missions after a Century (Chicago and New York, 1893); Christian Missions and Social Prog- ress\s vols., 1897-1906); Centennial Survey of For- eign Missions (1902); and New Horoscope of Mis- sions (1908).

DENS, PETER: Roman Catholic; b. at Boom (8 m. s. of Antwerp), Belgium, Sept. 12, 1690; d. at Mechlin, as archpriest of St. Rombold's cathedral. Feb. 15, 1775. He was the author of a Theologia moralis et dogmatica, which was often reprinted (e.g., 8 vols., Dublin, 1832), and much used as a text- book in Roman Catholic seminaries. Various books of extracts from this work exposing its alleged er- rors and immoralities have appeared from anony- mous compilers (Dublin, 1836, 1851; Philadelphia, 1847; Boston, 1855). The best known of such pub- lications is by J. F. Berg, Synopsis of the Theology of Peter Dens (Philadelphia, 1840; 4th ed., 1869).

DENUNCIATION: Properly, a making known, especially by public proclamation; hence, some- times used of the publication of banns of marriage; commonly the word signifies in church usage a complaint before authority to initiate action by the latter. The denunciatio evangelica is the course recommended in Matt, xviii. 15-17, and is approved by the Church where applicable. When it fails the denunciatio judicialis follows and brings the case before the ecclesiastical courts; its form and pro- cedure are regulated by the canon law (cf. book v., title 1 , and commentators) . The denunciatio canonica is the obligatory announcement of obstacles to a proposed promotion, ordination, or marriage. See Jurisdiction, Ecclesiastical.

DEPOSITION: A severe penalty inflicted upon delinquent clerics by the ancient ecclesiastical dis- cipline (see Jurisdiction, Ecclesiastical), orig- inally equivalent in practise to Degradation (q.v.), but now denoting the deprivation of the delin- quent's office and benefice with the prohibition of the exercise of his orders. Unlike degradation, it may be removed, restoring the penitent offender to the exercise of his functions by a mere act of juris- diction, without reordination. It does not remove the general clerical privileges of the delinquent nor absolve him from general clerical obligations; and the canon law assumes that he will be confined for the purpose of amendment in a monastery or house of correction. In the Protestant Churches generally, in accordance with their view of the nature of orders, the only sentence of this kind is the deprivation of a specific office. In the Church of England '' deprivation " is the term commonly used whether for the taking away of a benefice (depri- vation a beneficio) or the withdrawal of the right to exercise clerical functions (deprivation ab officio). In the American Episcopal Church the term '' depo- sition *' is used for the latter; it is pronounced by the bishop to whom the cleric is subject, and may be at his own request, for causes not affecting his moral character, or after trial for certain grave offenses. DEPRIVATION. See Degradation; Deposi- tion.

DEPUTATUS: The title of an office in the Greek and Roman Catholic Churches. According to Codinus, the third in the ninth pentad of of- ficials of the megali ekkUna was termed depotatoa, while the other lists name several depotatoi in ad- dition to the one official of this name, who was the first and drew double pay. The first depotatos ac- companied the bishop on the street to make room for him, and in the service the depotatoi escorted him to the pulpit and to the Holy Table, bearing the mantles and the candles. The depotatos was allowed to marry a second time, since he was ineligible for any higher order. It is doubtful whether this office still exists, since Chrysanthos (about 1700) seems to depend for his statements on books rather than on actual usage. In the Roman Catholic Church deputati act in certain districts as the administrators of the regi- unculcBf or subdivisions of large deaneries. They are usually subject to the dean and often act as his representatives, but occasionally they receive their orders immediately from the bishop, in which case the dean becomes merely first among his peers. (Philipp Meyer.)

DE PUY, WILLIAM HARRISON: Methodist; b. at Penn Yan, N. Y., Oct. 31, 1821; d. at Canaan, Conn., Sept. 4, 1901. He was educated at Genesee College, Union University, and Mount Union Col- lege, and was professor of mathematics and natural philosophy in Genesee Wesleyan Seminary 1851- 1855. He was associate editor of The Christian Advocate 1865-84, and editor of The Methodist Year Book 1866-89. He also edited The People's Cyclopedia of Universal Knowledge (3 vols.. New York, 1882) ; The People's Atlas of the World (1886) ; and University of Literature (1896), and wrote Threescore Years and Beyond: or. Experiences of the Aged (New York, 1872); Home and Health and Home Economics (1880); and The Methodist Cen- tennial Year Book, 1784-1884. (1884). DERESER, de-r6'ser, THADDAEUS ANTON: German Roman Catholic; b. at Fahr, in Franconia, Feb. 9, 1757; d. at Breslau July 16, 1827. He studied at WQrzbuig and Heidelberg, became priest at Mains (1780), and was made professor of Oriental languages and Biblical interpretation at Bonn in 1783. He moved to Strasbui^ in 1791, returned to Heidelberg in 1797, and went to Freiburg in 1807. In 1810 he was made priest at Carlsruhe, but was dismissed the following year because of a funeral sermon over the Grand Duke of Baden. He then became professor and head of the episcopal inary at Lucerne, but was removed in 1814, and in 1815 became professor in Breslau. He belonged to the liberal wing of his Church, and his Commentatio biblica in effata Christi: Tu es Petrus (Bonn, 1789) was put on the Index. He wrote Biblical commen- taries, continued the Bible translation begun by Brentano (see Bible Versions, B, VII., § 5), and published a Hebrew grammar (Freiburg, 1812), a German breviary, and a prayer-book. DE ROSSI, GIOVANNI BALLISTA. See Rossi. DERVISH. Origins and Objects of the Institution (§ 1). Charaoter and Membership of the Orders (§ 2). Number and Insignia of the Orders (§ 3). Namee and Exercises of the Orders (| 4). A dervish is a member of one of the orders which in Mohammedanism have some correspondence to the monasticism of Buddhism and Christianity. The name is Persian, but its derivation is disputed. The first syllable -means " door,'' and the last is taken to mean either "sill" or "to beg." The sense derived in either case is " to be destitute " or " to be dependent (upon God)." The Arabic /oihr, " poor," " ascetic," is the equivalent in general use. The word is often popularly misused to mean the tribes still in a nomadicstate; it is also misapplied to beggars, jugglers, and to impostors. The existence of the orders is due to the union of two general characteristics of religion, the ascetic and the mystic. Their formation was stimulated in early times by the example of the X. Origins Christian monastics who were nu- and Objects merous in the lands conquered by the of the In- Moslems. They began by gathering stitution. about an individual whose mode of hfe had gained him repute for piety; a shelter was built for winter quarters, and devel- oped into a monastery. The continuance of the institution is decided by several considerations, such as the prestige, religious and political, which the orders enjoy, a sincere devotional spirit which the exercises satisfy, the food for vanity furnished the individual members by a reputation for sanc- tity, and by the value placed upon the ecstatic con- dition sometimes induced by the exercises. The theology is usually mystical and pantheistic, and therefore heretical, and the orders are sometimes considered a protest against the scholasticism of orthodox Islam. Mohammedan monasticism, however, differs much from Christian. The vows are relative, not absolute. They do not usually involve celibacy or poverty, obedience to the sheikh, or head of the house, being the essence of the vow. Even this may be retracted, and the dervish may withdraw from the order. The members are 2. Charac- not required to reside at the monas- ter and tery. Full membership involves a Member- novitiate which may run from a year ship of the to four or five years, varying with the Orders, assumed fitness of the candidate. During his novitiate the candidate is under instruction, and learns the rules and ritual of the order. Very many do not pass beyond the l>ervlsh Deacartes 408 novitiate. Most of the orders have what corre- sponds to a lay membership. Certain of the orders are in favor with certain professions or trades. Thus the fishermen of Egypt are nearly all mem- bers of the Kadariyah, and join in the religious processions, carrying colored fish-nets as banners. With some of the most prominent of the orders it is common for influential classes to become associated, doubtless that they may share in the prestige of those orders. Theoretically there is no distinction of rank within the orders except that of sheikh and members and novitiates. Practically indi- viduals are differentiated; those supposed to be miraculously endowed are called walls: the begging friars go by the name of fakirs. The office of sheikh is in some orders hereditary; thus the rule of the Mawlawiyah has remained for neariy eight centuries in the family of the founder. The number of orders is usually given as thirty- six, but this number is rather ideal than founded upon actual count. Some of the orders are divided into sects, and these are confounded with the orders. Each sect has its distinguishing insignia of cap or turban, girdle, cloak, rosary, and banner, its own color and method of wearing it. Some- 3. Number times the orders are distinguished and Insig- simply by the number of gores in the nia of the cap. Theoretically the orders trace Orders, their origin to Ali, except three which claim to go back to Abu Bekr, and thence to Mohammed. The time of actual forma- tion is unknown, but there is great probability that the first monastery was founded at Damascus about 772. The bloom of Mohammedan monasticism is to be placed in the twelfth to the fourteenth cen- tury, when most of the orders now in existence were founded. But the formation of orders has gone on continuously, one of the most influential being that of the Sanussites founded by Mohammed ibn Ali al-Sanussi in 1837, which has spread throughout the Mohammedan world, with heioxlquarterB in the desert between Egypt and Tripoli. A number of these orders are noted both inside and outside the circle of Mohanmiedanism. The Mawlawiyah (founded by Jalal al-Din al-Rumi c. 1290) are known to travelers as the whirling or dancing dervishes from that part of their exercises which consists of the ** mystic dance," a spinning movement continued often till unconsciousness or ecstasy supervenes. It is the order most popular among the Turks, many of the upper classes of whom are affiliated with it, and is the best endowed of all the orders. The Rufaiyah 4. Names (founded by Ahmad al-Rufa'a c. 1190) and Ezer- are the '* howling dervishes," espe- cises of the cially popular in Egypt, a part of Orders, whose exercise consists of a chant or shout which generally consists of the Mohammedan formula " There is no God but Allah," sung while a swinging motion of the body is main- tained. This exercise is also often continued till exhaustion and catalepsy result. The Kalan- dariyah (the '* Calendars " of the Arabian Nights, founded c. 1350) are the wandering dervishes, really bound by a vow of poverty. The Naksh- bendiyah (founded c. 1360) are influential, and their exercise is mainly that of contemplative de- votion upon the names of Allah and the precepts of the order. The Baktashiyah (founded c. 1380 j are celebrated because of the connection with them of the Janizaries. It is a military order, corre- sponding somewhat with the crusading Knights of the Temple or of St. John. The Kadiriyah (founded c. 1160), the Badawiyah (c. 1280). and the Ahmadiyah are most numerous in Egypt. The exercises, varying with each order, are in- tended to be devotional. Some of them are repul- sive in their effects and methods, and include self- mutilation with broken glass or sharp instruments, handling and even eating of serpents and scorpions. That they often produce a cataleptic condition makes them the more highly esteemed, since that condition is regarded as one of communion with higher powers, from which enlarged capacities and increased sanctity are supposed to result. Geo. W. Gilmore. Biblioorapht: J. P. Brown, The Dervuhea, PhilAdelphia, 1868 (contains much material, but undigested); D. Ohs- Bon, Tableau g6n6ral de Vempire Ottoman, vol. iL, Paris. 1700 (gives a list of thirty-two orders with the dates of their founding, but is unreliable); J. Malcolm, HiH. of Perna, London. 1829; £. W. Lane. Modem EgypHans, 2 vols., ib. 1871; T. P. Hughes, DicHonanf of lOam, ' articles Faqir, Zikr, ib. 1885; M. Ansiaux, Lea Con- fririea mueulmanea, Paris, 1801; O. Deport and X. Cop- polani. Lea ConfrSriea relioieuaea mttaulmanea, ib. 1897; Pfere Petit, Confririea mtmUmanea, ib. 1899; S. M. Zwemer, Arabia, the Cradle of lalam. New York. 1900. DESCARTES, d^'cdrt', RElfE. As Student and Soldier (§1). Seclusion in Holland (f 2). Publications. Controversies (f 3). Death in Stockholm. Works Proscribed (| 4). His Skepticism. The Self and God (f 5). His Dualism. Ethics (§ 6). Estimate of His Work (§ 7). Ren^ Descartes (Renalua Carteaius), French phi- losopher and mathematician, was bom at La Haye (106 m. s.w. of Orleans) Mar. 31, 1596; d. at Stock- holm, Sweden, Feb. 1 1 , 1650. From 1604 to 1612 he attended the College of Jesuits at La I. As Stu- Fldche, which had just been estab- dent and lished (1604) by Henry IV., and in Soldier. 1610 he was one of the twenty-four gentilahommea sent forth from that institution to receive the heart of the murdered king. From 1613 to 1617 he resided in Paris, devoting himself chiefly to the study of mathe- matics. The next four years he spent as a volun- teer, serving successively under Prince Maurice of Nassau, Maximilian of Bavaria, and Count Bouc- quoi. After a further period of travel and study he settled in Paris in 1625. He was now recognized as one of the leading mathematicians of the day. Late in 1628, after having taken part in the siege of La Rochelle, he left Paris and settled in Amster- dam the following spring. For the a. Seclusion next twenty years he lived almost ex- in clusively in Holland, developing and Holland, defending his philosophical theories, carrying on scientific investigations, and writing the works that have made him famous. His interests were varied, and in his correspondence not even phonetic spelling escapes his attention. During this period his place of abode, which he changed more than twenty times, was a secret known only to a few friends, particu- larly Marin Mersenne, his Paris correspondent. Descartes claimed that he was only seeking the quiet and seclusion necessary for study, but he was probably hiding from the Roman Catholic Church. Professedly an orthodox Catholic, he did not wish to offend the Church with a theory of matter out of harmony with the doctrine of transubstantiation, or with his equally objectionable theory of the earth's motion. Indeed, he was long deterred from publishing his work by the experience of Galileo (q.v.). In Holland Descartes had made enthusiastic disciples; and under the leadership of Henri Reneri, and his successor at the University of Utrecht, Henri Le Roy (Regius), the new phi- 3. Publica- losophy was triumphant. However, tions. Con- soon after the publication of the troveraies. Discaura de la miihode (Leyden, 1637) he began to experience opposition; and on the appearance of his Meditationes de prima philoaophia (Paris, 164 1), which was followed by his Principia philoaophia (Amsterdam, 1644), he found himself the center of the most bitter theo- logical controversies. He was attacked by Protes- tants and Catholics alike. Gisbertus Voetius (q.v.), who had become rector of the University of Utrecht in 1641, led the Calvinist opposition. He stopped the teaching of Descartes's doctrine, induced the city magistrates to take action against Descartes, and all but succeeded in having his works burned by the public hangman. Descartes finally had to appeal to the Prince of Orange to end the persecu- tion to which he was being subjected by the Voetians. In a measure he escaped these troubles by two visits to France, where, in 1644, he conciliated his old teacher, Father Bourdin, who had led the Jesuit opposition against him, and in 1647 received a pension of 3,000 livres from the ("rench king. On the occasion of his last visit to France (1648), the lukewarm reception accorded him at the court, due to the disorders of the time, 4. Death in caused him to abandon the intention Stockholm, he had formed of settling in Paris, Works and in Sept., 1649, on the invitation of Proflcribed. Queen Christina of Sweden, he set out for Stockholm to teach his philosophy to that eccentric sovereign. Less than four months after his arrival in Stockholm he succumbed to pneumonia. He died in the Roman Catholic faith and was buried in the Catholic cemetery in Stock- holm. In 1667 his remains were reinterred with imposing ceremonies in St. Genevieve du Mont (the modem Panthdon), Paris, though the funeral ora- tion prepared for the occasion was suppressed by the court. In 1819 his remains were removed to St. Germain-des-Pr^, where they now rest. Despite the efforts of Descartes during his lifetime, and those of his friends after his death, to convince the Church of his orthodoxy, his works were placed on the Index at Rome in 1663, and in 1671 the teaching of Cartesianism at the University of Paris was prohibited by royal order. However, Cai^ tesianism, which had now become an intellectual fad, remained the only philosophy of the day and continued to be taught in numerous private acad- emies in Paris, and also in the Dutch universities. The philosophical views of Descartes will be found in the three works mentioned above. In reflecting over his scholastic studies at La Fldche, he came to the conclusion that all 5. His Skep- generally accepted knowledge is open ticism. The to doubt. From this sweeping in- Self and dictment he reserved morals and God. religion; but it was inevitable that, once enunciated, skepticism, as a method, would be extended to these fields. Both Father Bourdin and Voetius foresaw this. Thus, rejecting all supposed knowledge, Descartes set about to build up a philosophical system de novo. He begins by establishing the reality of the self. In questioning the truth of everything he finds at least one fact that he can not doubt; viz., the very fact of doubting itself. This doubt, of course, is a form of thought; but before there can be any thought there must be a subject that thinks. Hence, his famous coffito, ergo aum, a modification of Augus- tine's fdUoTf ergo aum. From the reality of the self he then develops his proof of the existence of God. Ainong other innate ideas he finds the idea God, a perfect being, omniscient, omnipotent, in- finite. Since an effect can not be greater than its cause, we ourselves, as finite beings, could not have produced this idea. In fact, only a perfect being could have produced it; but, since existence is an attribute of a perfect being, this being must neces- sarily exist — a form of Anselm's ontological argu- ment, which was demolished by Kant (q.v.). In searching for the groimd of the certainty of his knowledge regarding his own existence and that of God, Descartes finds that it lies in the clearness and distinctness of the idea. He then lays down the obscure and highly questionable rule that whatever is perceived clearly and distinctly must be true. Since he has already demonstrated that there is a God, God's veracity (another attribute of pei^ fection) becomes the guaranty of our knowledge. Hobbes was the first to point out that this argu- ment moves in a circle. In addition to an infinite substance, or God, Descartes, retaining the dualism of the schoolmen, finds in existence two created substances, mind (tea cogitana) and matter (res extenad). These are abso- lutely heterogeneous and not further 6. His reducible the one into the other. Dualism. While the essence of the one is think- Ethics, ing, the only quality of the other is extension, such supposed qualities as color, odor, etc., being merely subjective. The dif- ficulty in conceiving of any causal relation between these two incompatible kinds of being does not seem to have presented itself to Descartes. Since in the case of man there is apparently such a relation there must be some point of contact between the spatial body and the non-spatial soul. This point Descartes locates in the pineal gland. The body itself he regards as an automatic mechanism, so far as the functions of digestion, circulation, and the affections of love, hate, etc., are concerned; though the immaterial soul, which God has fused into the body, directs all conscious movements. Descartes Deaoent of Ohrist into Hell 410 AnimalB he regards as soulless, mechanical automata which are moved by vital springs after the analogy of a watch. He denies that death is due to the de- parture of the soul from the body, holding, on the contrary, that the soul departs because the machine that we call the body has run down. In conformity to this mechanical view of animal life, Descartes and his followers practised vivisection freely, inter- preting the cries of their victims as the creakings of breaking machinery. For Descartes the whole sensible world was a mechanism whose essential qualities were extension and mobility. Given these, he was ready to reconstruct a priori, and with mathe- matical exactness, the whole universe. The idea of necessity was so strong in him that in an un- guarded moment he even identified God with the order of nature. He did not attempt a systematic treatment of ethics; but when he touches the sub- ject, in his letters to Queen Christina and Princess Elizabeth and in Les Passiona de Vdme (Paris, 1649), he follows Greek rather than Christian ideals. He counsels humility from practical considerations, and usually interprets mond obligation in a eude- monistic sense. Descartes is properly called the father of modem philosophy, for it was through him that the sway of scholasticism was finally broken 7. Estimate and a new method and content given of His to philosophy. He stands at the head Work. of the modem rationalistic develop- ment, both in philosophy and the- ology; and in his insistence on the importance of experiment he rivals Bacon as one of the founders of English empiricism. The rationalistic school that he established was practically dominant till the time of Kant; and, indeed, most speculation since Des- cartes has been an attempt to overcome the intel- lectual difficulties of his extreme dualism. If mind and matter are absolutely opposed to each other, how can they react on each other ? This was the problem of Descartes' successors. Geulincx and Malebranche solved it with the theory of occa- sional causes (occasionalism), Leibnitz with his preestablished harmony, Spinoza with his unica substantia, or pantheism, others with materialism. Kant showed that the spatial, as well as the tem- poral, aspect of our experience is only a form of sense-perception. His German successors then took the further step to absolute idealism. In the history of mathematics Descartes is fa- mous as the founder of analytic geometry. He also systematized the. use of exponents, and gave new significance to negative quantities. He was the first to hit upon the undulatory theory of light, afterward developed by his pupil Christian Huy- ghens; and in his view that the world was evolved from a chaotic state by vortical motions he antici- pated the nebular hypothesis of Kant and Laplace. The most important Latin and French editions of Descartes's works are. Opera omnia (8 vols., Am- sterdam, 1670-83; 9 vols., 1692-1701); (Euvres (13 vols., Paris, 1724-29; ed. Victor Cousin, 11 vols., 1824-26). The best English translations of the philosophical works are: The Method, Medita- tions, and Selections from the Principles of Des- cartes, by J. Veitch (London and Edinburgh; 1850- 1853; new ed.. New York, 1899); The Philosophy of Descartes in Extracts from his WrUings, by H. A- P. Torrey (New York, 1892). A monumental edition of his works is now in preparation under the aus- pices of the French Academy (10 vols., Paris, 1897 sqq.). See Matbriaubm, § 5; and Elizabeth, Albertine. Hubert Evans. Bxbuooiupht: On the life conflult: A. Baillet, La Vit da M. De» CartM, 2 voIb., Paru, 1091; A. Pi^voet, (Euvm . , . de De$oarte9t pricidSee d'une notice eur «a vie, ib. 1866; J. Millet. Deaeartee, 2 vols., ib. 1867-70; W. Enut. Deeeartee, Leipa, 1860; G. J. Jeannel, Dteeartee et la prin- eecM Palatine, Paria. 1860; J. P. Mahaflfy. DeaearUe, Edinburgh, 1881; K. Fischer. OeedtidUe der neueren Phi- loeophie, vol. 1. Heidelbers. 1807. Eng. transl.. New York. 1887; Elisabeth S. Haldane. Deecartee, London, 1005 On his philosophy consult: V. Cousin, in the (Evvrea of Descartes, i. 1-80, Paris, 1824; J. B. Bordas-DemouliD, Le CarUaianiame, 2 vols., ib. 1843; F. X. Schmid, Reni Deaeartea und aeina Reform der Philoaophie, N6rdlincen, 1850; F. Bouillier, HiaL de la philoaophie eartiaienne. Paris. 1868; C. Waddington, Deaeartea at le apiritualiame, ib. 1868; W. Cunningham, The Influence of Deaeartea on Metaphyaical Speculation in England, London, 1876; F. Bowen, Modem Philoaophy, pp. 22-37, New York, 1877; R. A. Meincke. Deaeartea' Beweiae vom Daaein Ootta, Heidelberg, 1883; A. Barthel, Deaeartea* Leben und MHa- fhyaik, Erlangen, 1886; G. Monchamp, HiaL du oartena- nieme en Beloique, iBruasels. |1887; E. Oaird, Eaaaue on Literature and Philoaophy, Glasgow, 1802; G. F. Hertling. Deaeartea* Besiehung aur Scholaatik, Munich, 1899; J. Iverach. Deaeartea, Sjnnoaa, the New PhUoaopky, Edin- bui^h, 1004. DESCENT OF CHRIST INTO HELL. New Testament Data (i 1). The Older Church Doctrine (( 2). The Protestant Doctrine (§ 3). Conclusion (§ 4). The sentence " He descended into hell " (Lat. descendU ad infema or ad inferos), ezpreasing a christological fact following the death and burial of JesuSf is found in the Apostles' Creed and the Athanasian Creed, but is lacking in the Niceno- Constantinopolitan Creed and the Old Roman Symbol. Its fifst official statement, as far as a date can be assigned, was formulated in 359 and 360 at synods at Sirmium in Pannonia, Nice in Thrace, and Constantinople, held under homoiou- sian influence. A few decades later it formed, according to the testimony of Rufinus {ExposiHo sjfmboli Aquileiensis, xviii.), a part of the confession of the Church of Aquileia (see Aquileian Crsed). But it was taught much earlier by the most various writers of the Church. The older assertion that it was received into the confession to combat the Apollinarian heresy has long been refuted. It is simply the crystallization of an old unassailed Christian tradition. The New Testament tells only that the soul of Jesus was for a time subject to the realm of the dead like that of any other man. According to Acts ii. 27, 31, the characteristic feature is not that he descended into Hades, but that be X. New Tes- soon returned from it by his resurrec- tament tion. Paul also assumes probably, in Data. Rom. x. 7, Christ's real presence in the intermediate place of the deceased since he speaks of the '' deep " (Gk. abyssos) in con- nection with the awakening of Christ. In Luke xxiii. 43 Christ assures the thief on the cross that he shall be with him in paradise, thus adding, Ill D«aoent of Christ into HUl according to the meaning of the word paradeiaos in the current usage of the Jews, a further testimony that the soul of Jesus was in the reahn of the dead, more particularly in that part of it which was des- tined for the just. But it must be observed that in these passages a descent into hell is not expressly taught, but is presupposed as something which naturally follows death. Concerning the activity of Christ in Hades, the First Epistle of Peter (iii. 18 sqq. and iv. 6) has oc- casioned great dispute. According as the " spirits '' (Gk. pTieumata) have been understood to be the souls of deceased men or real spirits (i.e., fallen angels), and according as Christ, who descended to them, has been thought of as incarnate or pre- existing, this passage has been interpreted in four different ways: (1) Christ preached after his death to the departed souls of the unbelieving contem- poraries of Noah. Origen, Bengel, KOnig, Gtlder, XTsteri, and others assumed that the purpose of Christ's preaching in Hades was of a redeeming nature, while since Flacius and Calovius many Lutheran interpreters and dogmaticians have looked upon it as a damnatory manifestation of judgment against the rejected, in the evident effort to adopt the text of the Bible to the churchly con- ception of the descent as a triumph of Christ over the power of Satan. (2) Following Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Beza, and many Reformed theolo- gians after him, especially A. Schweizer, interpreted the passage as a sermon of Christ before his incar- nation, which proceeded either from the mouth of Noah, the " preacher of righteousness " (II Pet. ii. 5), or coincides with the " long suffering of God " expressed in iii. 20. (3) Spitta tried to solve the problem by assuming that the Messiah before his incarnation, in the time before the flood, preached to the fallen angels, who, according to Gen. vi. 1 sqq., Enoch vi.-viii., united with the daughters of men and corrupted mankind. His words, accord- ing to Spitta, were identical with the announcement of punishment with which Enoch was entrusted according to the book bearing his name (xii. seq.), since in pre-Christian Judaism the representations of Enoch and the Messiah were frequently confused. (4) F. C. Baur shares the view of Spitta that Christ announced condemnation to the fallen angels, but not until after his awakening from the death on the cross. The fruit of the innocent suffering of Christ consists in the victory over these corrupting beings by which man is brought to God (I Pet. iii. 18). It may, however, be proved from history that the passage I Pet. iiL 18 sqq. has not formed the basis for the development of the church a. The doctrine of the saving activity of Older Christ in Hades. Among early Chris- Church tian writers it is cited only by Origen, Doctrine, and, in very incidental manner, by Hilary of Poitiers, while other Old and New Testament passages are brought forward in great number. It is evident from Matt, xxvii. 62- 53 that, in consequence of the death of Jesus and his descent into Hades which followed as a natural consequence, many departed saints were delivered from the bonds of death. There was a general belief in the old Church that the salvation accom- plished by Christ was made available for the prophets and the pious men of the Old Testament in the time between Christ's death and his resurrection. Since the soul of Jesus with its inseparable divinity appeared in Hades, Satan was deprived of the sover- eignty which he had exercised hitherto in an un- limited way in the nether world. There was a dif- ference between the Occidentals and Orientals in regard to the question to whom the announcement of salvation referred. The Occidental Church con- fined it strictly to the patriarchs, prophets, and other believers of the Old Testament, while in the Oriental Church a more universalistic tendency made itself felt. The scholastics of the Middle Ages emphasized again and again that the salva- tion which Christ brought to Hades referred simply to the limbii8 patrum, and not to any persons who had died without faith or to the limbua infarUium, According to the Catechiamua Romanua, the soul of Christ descended into Hades whDe his body lay in the grave, not because he was subject to the law of man, as the older Church taught, but of his own will, in order to conquer the demons. The Protestants rejected, with purgatory, also the IAmh%L8 (q.v.), and retained only two conditions after death; hence originated the tendency to identify Hades with hell; i.e., the place or condi- 3. The Prot- tion of condenmation. The Lutheran estant Church adopted the thought of Lu- Doctrine. ther, contained in his Torgau ser- mon (1533), according to which Christ in his whole personality, God and man, body and soul, really and truly descended into the hell of the damned and conquered the devil. The Formula of Concord stood on the same ground. Christ descended on the early morning of the resurrection, just before his appearance as the risen one on the earth. The interval between the crucifixion and the descent he had spent in paradise. The descent of Christ is considered the first stage in his exalta- tion (see Jesus Christ, Twofold State of), since then for the first time he made an unlimited use of his divine idiamata by triumphing over the power of Satan. The Reformed theologians regarded the descent into hell as a figurative expression for the unutter- able sufferings of Christ's human soul, which he endured in the last moments of his vicarious dying (Calvin,'* Institutes," bk. ii., chap, xvi., §§ 8-21). It was a part of his humiliation, not, as in the Lutheran view, the first stage of his exalted state. Beside this view, others have been held concerning the meaning of the clause. It was only another way of saying that Christ was buried (Beza, Drusius, and others) or denoted the state of death regarded as an ignominious one for the Prince of Life (Pisca- tor, Arminius, and others). It was only in the period of the Enlightenment that the text in I Peter iii. attracted new attention in an exegetical respect. It was held that it im- plied a sermon of glad tidings to persons who had died without salvation. The rationalists looked upon it as well as upon the descent into Hades as a passing Jewish conception, while dogmaticians like De Wette, Marheineke, and Hase diflcovered in it as in a myth a permanent Christian idea. peaoent of Ohrist into Hell 4U PresuppoBing the actuality of an intermediate state, a great number of theologians have pro- claimed this sermon of salvation on the part of Christ as an essential factor by means of which the universality of Christianity is realized. But in recent times the descent into Hades is treated with great reservation, if not entirely passed over. In looking back upon the doctrine of the descent, we find that from the standpoint of the New Testa- ment, as well as from that of the his- 4. Condu- tory of dogma, two distinct features Bton. stand in the foreground — ^the sojourn of Christ in Hades and the triumph over the powers of hell. The sentence of the Apos- tles' Creed, descendU ad inferos, relates primarily only to the former. If it is desired to connect a certain activity with Christ's sojourn, one may be- lieve with the old Church that he carried life and salvation to the believers in Hades. But in so far as Hades, from which the patriarchs were to be delivered, was under the dominion of Satan, the prince of darkness was to be conquered, and this idea came to the foreground, since the interest in the fate of the patriarchs and pious men of pre- Christian times gradually dinoinished and the expression inferi became in the course of time in popular as well bs theological representation the place of the danmed and evil spirits. Finally, in- asmuch as the assumption of a sermon of salvation to all deceased persons in the intermediate state is based upon the very questionable interpretation of a single Bible text and can hardly be harmonized with other passages (II Cor. v. 10; Gal. vi. 8; Rom. ii. 6; etc.), it is unjustly considered indispensable for the maintenance of the principle of divine justice and love; for the belief that God gives all men somehow an opportimity to obtain full sal- vation in Christ is independent of the definite way in which some think it is realized. (M. Lauterburo.) Biblioobapht: J. A. Dietelmayer, Hiaioria doomatioa d€ deacetiMu ChriMH ad infero; Nurembeng, 1741; E. QQder, lAhre von der ErBcheinung ChriaH urUer den Todten^ Bern, 1852; A. Schweiaer. Hinaboefahren cur HdUe, aU Mj/Aut, Zurich. 1868; C. Hodge. TKeoloov, ii. 616-621, New York, 1871; F. Huidekoper. The Belief of <Ae Fim Three Cen- turiee Concerning ChrieVe Mieeion to the Underworld, ib. 1876; E. H. Plumptre. The Spiritt in Prieon, ib. 1885; C. H. H. Wright. Biblioal Eeeay: SL Peler'e Spiriie in Priaon, Edinburgh, 1886; J. M. Ueteri, Hinabaefahren tuT HdUe, Zurich, 1886; F. Spitta, ChriaH Predigt an die Oeiater, Gdttingen, 1800; Briney, in ChriaHan Qtutrterly Review, 1897; C. Bnistow, La Deaeente du Chriet aux en- fera, Paria. 1897; A. G. MoGiflFert, The Apoatlea' creed, pp. 193 aqq., 1902; SchaflF. Creeda, i. 14-23; the commen- taries on I Pet. iii. 19-22 and W, 6; RufinuB, Commen- tariua in Stfinbolufn Apoatolorum, Later text with notes by C. Whitaker, 3d ed., London, 1906; and the Uteratuie under Apostles' Creed. DESERT, CHURCH OF THE. See Caiosards; Court, Antoinb; Huouenotb; Rabaut, Paul. DES MARETS, dd m(l"T^' (MARESIUS), SAMUEL : Representative of the Reformed polemic ortho- doxy; b. at Oisemont (75 m. n.zi.w. of Paris), Picardy, Aug. 9, 1699; d. at Groningen May 18, 1673. He studied in Paris, in Saumur under Gomarus, and in Geneva at the time of the Synod of Dort. He was ordained in 1620, and preached at Laon until a controversy with Roman Catholic missionaries, which led to an attack on his L (1624), forced him to leave. He became p- fessor at S^dan (1625), pastor at Maestricht ili^ pastor and professor at Bois-ie-Duc (1636), s at Groningen (1643), where he won a reputatL: that led to calls to Saumur, Marburg, Lausanur, and Leyden. He wrote more than one hur-dn*. works, including a Systhema theologice (Groningf^ 1645; 4th and best ed., 1673, with an append.- giving a list of his writings), worked out in scholari fashion, which was much used as a text-book. Be: his literary activity was chiefly polemical — against Roman Catholics, Socinians, Arminians, Amyrali- ism as represented by Dallsus, Chiliasm, etc. (S. D. VAN Veen] DESSERVANT. See Chaplain. DEJSUBAS, d6"8Q"ba'. See Matal, Mathjet.

DETERMINISM: The common name for all theories of the human will which represent it & absolutely determined by motives which lie es- tirely outside of it, thereby reducing its free»:ic- to a mere delusion. There is a dogmatic det«^ mimsm, which, in order to glorify the majesty -il God, excludes all other causality from hunas action but God himself (Luther, De servo arbitn.' and there is a philosophical determinism, wfaic: explains all human actions as results of surrouoti- ing cireumstances (La Mettrie; many modem s> called ''social reformers")- There is a fatalisti. determinism, which places God himself in the gn.i of an iron necessity (the ancient idea of NemesU Islam); and there is a pantheistic determinisLi, which makes even the faintest gleam of hum^ freedom vanish into the darkness of a natuni process (the Hindus, Stoicism, Spinoza). One d the most interesting forms under which determinL^m has appeared in theology is that which it reoeivK from Schleiermacher and his school. See Will DEUSDEDIT, d6''us-d^dit: The name of three men who figure in church history. 1. Pope 615-^18. He was a Roman, chosen pope after the death of Boniface IV., 615, and consecrated Oct. 19. He died Nov. 8, 618. Noth- ing is known of his activity; miracles and spurious decretals are attributed to him, and he is honored as a saint on Nov. 8. Biblioorapht: Liber pontifieaUa, ed. Dueheaxie, i.. pp.oelvi. 319. Paris, 1886; ed. Mommaen. in MOH, GeaL po< Rom., i. 166-167, Berlin. 1808. 2. Sixth archbishop of Canterbury and the fiist of English origin; d. at Canterbury July 14, 6W. He was a West Saxon whose native name vis Frithona, and succeeded Honorius as archbishop after an interval of a jrear and a half, being coo- secrated by Ithamar, bishop of Rochester, Mar. 26, 655. The insignificance of Canterbury in his tiioe is shown by the fact that he consecrated only ooe English bishop (Damian, successor of Ithaoiar at Rochester); all others were consecrated abroad or by Celtic bishops. He was not present at the Synod of Whitby, and no mention is made of any one to represent him there. After his death tk see remained vacant for some time. kl3 a«oent of Christ into Hell Sibliographt: The Vita by Qoialin is given in part in A SB, July. iv. 48-50. Conault: Bede. Uiat. ecd., iii. 20. 20. iv. 1; Haddan and Stubbs. C<mneilM, iii. 09-113; DNB, xiv. 422. 3. Cardinal; d. about 1099. Of his earlier life t is related merely that he was once a monk la Todi. At the Roman November synod of 1078 he :>clonged to the clerics in the circle of Gregory VII. who agreed with Berengar of Tours. He is i^aid to have been in Spain as legate of this pope; he was certainly in Germany, perhaps in the same [•apacity. It was probably also under Gregory VII. that he became a cardinal. The significance of Deusdedit lies primarily in his literary achieve- ments on behalf of the Gregorian party. His lAber canonum, doubtless suggested by Gregory VII., was completed in 1087 (ed. P. Martinucci, Venice, 1869, and recently republished with de- tailed investigations by V. W. von Glanvell, Die KanonensamnUung des KardinaU Deusdedit, Pader- bom, 1905). Deusdedit participated in the pub- lic questions of his time by composing in 1097 the Libellus contra invasores el symaniacos (MGH, Libelli de liU, ii., 1892, 300 ff.), important for its treatment of simony, investiture, and the value of sacraments administered by simoniac priests. Probably he is the author also of the so-called Didatus papa Gregarii VIL (Gregarii VIL Reg., II. 55a). [Mann, Popes, i. 304, calls him ** the b^t of the "eleventh-century canonists."] Carl Mirbt. Bxbuoorapht: W. von Gieeebreeht. MUndisner Hi§ioriMcKes Jahrbuch, 1866; E. Sackur, Neuet Ardtiv iUr die Alten d€uUehe OeaehicKtakunde, xvi.. xviii.; C. Mirbt. Die Pu6- liziatik im ZeUaUer Oreoore VII., Leipeic. 1894; W. Mar- tens. Oreifor VIL, ib. 1894; G. Buschbell. Die profeeeionee fidei der P&pete, MOnster. 1896. DEUTERONOMY. See Hexateuch. DEUTSCH, doich, SAMUEL MARTIN: German Protestant; b. at Warsaw, Poland, Feb. 19, 1837. lie studied at Erlangen and Rostock (Ph.D., 1S57), and, after being for many years instructor in a gymnasium in Berlin, was appointed in 1885 associate professor of church history in the imiver- sity of the same city. He has written Die Lehre des Ambrosius von Sunde und SUndentilgung (Ber- lin, 1867); Drei Akienstucke zur Geschichte des Donaiismus (1875); Der Synode von Sens {ttJ^l) und die Verurteilung Ahdlards (1880); and Peter Aba lard, ein kritischer Theolog des zwol/ien Jahr- hunderts (Leipsic, 1883). He edited K. R. Hagen- harh's Leit/aden zum Religionsunterricht from the 8i\th to the ninth edition (Leipsic, 1881-1905).

DEUTSCHMANN, JOHANN: Lutheran theo- logian; b. at Juterbogk (27 m. s. of Potsdam) Aug. 10, 1625; d. at Wittenberg Aug. 12, 1706. In 1657 he became extraordinary professor, and in 1662 ordinary professor at Wittenberg. During the syncretistic and pietistic controversies he rep- resented the extreme orthodox Lutheranism; and opposed especially the younger Calixtus and the theology of the pietists. Against Spener, the leader of the pietists, he charged no less than 263 heresies. Being the son-in-law of the orthodox professor Calovius, he used the weak man as a blind tool in his hand. To his scientific fancies belonged the development of the so-called TKeo- logia paradisiaca, i.e., that Adam, the patriarchs, and the whole Old Testament agreed with the Augsburg Confession and Formulas of Concord. To prove this, he published an Antiquisstma theo- logia positiva primi theologi Adami, a Symbolum apostolicum Adami; and Der ehrisUutherischen Kirche Prediger — Bei4M und Beichtstuhl von dem grossen JehovorElohim im Paradiese gestiftet, Paul Tschackert. Bibliography: M. RanflFt, Leben der diureOeheieehen OoU' teegelehrten, i. 243, Leipdo, 1742; ADB, v. 93.

DEVAY, MATYAS BIRO : Hungarian Reformer; b. about 1500 at Deva (140 m. n.e. of Bel- grade), Transylvania; d. perhaps 1545 in Debreczin. Where he received his earlier education is un- known; some Hungarian authors call him a pu- pil of Grynffius at Ofen. Hungarian students of Transylvania at this time usually visited the Uni- versity of Cracow, and D^vay with his fellow Re- former Kilmincsehi is matriculated there for the winter semester of 1523. On his return from Cra- cow two years later, he joined a monastic order, and is found in 1527 a zealous Roman Catholic priest, on the estate of Stephan Tomory. By this time the Reformation had made great progress in Hungary. D^vay was won over and went to Wit- tenberg to arm himself for its defense and propa- gation, and studied at the university for a year and a half, during which time he had free board and lodging with Luther. Returning well recom- mended by the great Reformers, he appears in the spring of 1531 in Ofen-Buda as minister of its Hungarian congregation, spreading the Reforma- tion. He then wrote his De sanctorum dormitione, against the invocation of the saints, and fifty-two propositions in defense of the Reformation. As Hungary had no printing-press, the- tracts circu- lated only in manuscript, and their contents are known only through his polemic works published later in other countries. Before the end of the same year he was called to Kaschau (Kassa) as preacher. Here his zeal for the Reformation aroused the wrath of the Roman clergy, and Thomas Szalahilzy, bishop of Erlau, arrested him on higher orders, Nov. 6, 1531. Though the citizens re- sisted his arrest, he was imprisoned, first in Likava, then in Presburg, finally in Vienna. Here he suffered much, and was several times examined before the bitterest enemy of the Reformation, Bishop Faber. Released, he went again to Ofen, then under Ferdinand's rival John Zdpolya, but his zeal led him into captivity, 1534-35. From Ofen he went under the protection of Count N4- dasdy, a rich Hungarian magnate and an open and active Reformer, to Sarvar, where he used the count's splendid library in the composition of his Latin polemic treatises. Gregory Szegedy, pro- vincial of the Franciscans in Himgary, a chief persecutor of Protestants, finally fulfilled his threat and replied to D^vay's tracts, already men- tioned, under the title CenaurcB Fratris Gregarii Zegedini, O. F., in propositiones erroneas Matthice D&vay . . . (Vienna, 1535). D^vay at once set himself to reply and toward the end of 1536 went to Germany to see to the publication of bis BSg' lom&snt 414 rejoinder. In the spring he was at Wittenberg, enjojring the friendship of Melanchthon. Before fall hls^book was published in Nuremberg, with the title D%9putalio de statu in quo aint beatorum animcd post banc vUam, ante tUHmi fudicii diem. Item de proBcipuie articulis ChristiancB dodrincBf and an in- troduction perhaps by Melanchthon or Grynisus. Returning soon after to Hungary, he joined Count Thomas NiUiasdy and John Sylvester (Erddsi) in the endeavor to strengthen the Reformation by means of schools and a national literature. He wrote his Orthographia Ungarica (the first book printed in Hungary in the Hungarian language), in which he incorporated the fundamentals of Prot- estantism and the children's prayers from Luther's Shorter Catechism. During this time D^vay wrote a '* Handbook of Religion " in Hungarian (2d fac- simile ed., Budapest, 1897). Meanwhile the Turk had invaded Hungary in aid of Ferdinand's rival, whose party was hostile to the Reformation. D^vay and his comrades were forced to flee, and are found in Dec, 1541, in Wittenberg. D^vay took the op- portunity of visiting Switzerland, and became a decided adherent to the Swiss doctrines, which at first surprised and later angered Luther. After about a year and a half he returned to Hungary and labored for a while in Miskolcz in Upper Hun- gary, then in Debreczin. (K. Rbv^bz.) Bibuooiupht: Q. Bauhofer. {Tmc^msM* der evangeliadtgn Kirche in Ungarn, Berlin, 1854; F. Balogh, QMchichU der ungariBch-proteetanHadien Kirdis^ Debreoiin, 1882; P. Bod. HUt. Hungarorum eoel.^ ed. Rauwenhoff, 3 vols., Leyden. 188(MK).

DEVELOPMENT, THEOLOGICAL AND HIS- TORICAL: The Evangelical Protestant theory maintains that Christianity objectively considered is perfect in Christ and the New Testament, but that its understanding and application is gradual, and progressing from age to age. The rationalistic theory holds that Christianity itself is imperfect, and will ultimately be superseded by philosophy or a humanitarian religion, or that reason will take the place of the Bible as a rule of faith and action. The theory advocated by Cardinal Newman, in his Development of Christian Doctrine (London, 1845), written just before he went over to Rome, but never indorsed by the Roman Catholic Church, is that the New Testament contained the germs of certain doctrines, i.e., those distinctive to the Roman and Greek Catholic Churches, which, under divine care, have been developed into their present shape. The reply to Newman's position is that, while de- scent from earlier formulas may be traced for many later doctrines, it does not follow that the develop- ment was always along legitimate lines. The Prot- estant criticism of Roman Catholic development is that the latter is often in a direction contrary to the spirit of the Gospel. See Doctrines, History OF. Biblioobapht: Philip Schaff. What %m CKurA Hiatoryf A Vindication of the Idea of Hietorical Development^ Phila- delphia, 1846; W. A. Butler, LeUere on the Development ol ChrMan Doctrine xn Reply to Mr. Newman'e Eaaay, Dublin. 1850; O. Pfleiderer. Philosophy of Reltgion, 4 vols., London, 1886-88; A. V G. Allen. Continuiiy of Chrie- Han Thouifht, Boston. 1887; J. Kaftan, Truth of the Chriehan Reltgion, 2 vols., Edinbuzsb, 1894; J. Orr, Proffreea of Dogma, New York, 1901. DEVtt. I. The Old Testament III. The Church ToM^iixv. Teaohinc. The Fathers (§1). II. The New Testament The Middle Agei Teaohinc. (i 2). Namee and Description Popular Notions (§3-. (i 1). Luther (§ 4). The BeUef of Jesus (( 2). Modem Views (15). L The Old Testament Teaching: The Old Testa- ment does not contain the fully developed doctrinf of Satan (Heb. Satan, " adversary ") found in tfar New Testament. It does not portray him as ar the head of a kingdom, ruling over kindred nature and an apostate from the family of God. The be- lief in evil spirits is distinctly alluded to (see Df- mon). In the older books God is described as tb^ source from which come influences noxious to nun (Ex. viii. Bqq.f xii. 29); but there are not wanting references to evil spirits as evil agencies (I Sam. xvi 14; I Kings xxii. 20 sqq.). In this connection the parallel statements of II Sam. xxiv. 1 and I Chrtm xxi. 1 should be compared; it will be found that the same event is attributed in the first passage to God as its author, and in the second to Satan (cf. Luke xii. 5 and Heb. ii. 14). The term ** Satan " is used in the general sense of adversary (Ps. cix. 6 etc.), but more particu- larly also as the spirit of evil, who comes into col- lision with the plans of God, and plots the hurt c^ man. It is not definitely stated in the account of the fall that the serpent who tempted Eve was the devil, or his agent. The first identification of the two is in the Book of Wisdom (ii. 23-24; cf. II Cor. xi. 3; Rev. xii. 9), and it is taken for granted in the expression ** that old serpent called the devil " (Rev. xii. 9; cf. John viii. 44). This inference is justified by the words which the serpent used, and agrees with the portrait of the devil as the tempter. Lev. xvi. 8 has been thougltt 4e contain a reference i^ Satan (see Azazel; Demon). In the Book of Job he is brought out as a distinct personality. He presents himself before Yahweh with the sods of God (i. 6), and, after questioning the motives of the patriarch, secures permission to tempt and torment him, but not to kill him (i. 12). In ZecL iii. 1 he is portrayed as standing at the side d Joshua the high priest to '* resist " him (A. V ; A. V. marg. and R. V., " to be his adversary **). In the Book of Enoch and the Hebrew Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha the doctrine of the personality of the devil is developed and grotesque features are introduced. n. The New Testament Teachmg: The New Testament is full of allusions to the personality and agency of the devil (Gk. diaboloe, " calunmiator ^')- He bears the titles of " tempter " (I Thess. iii. 5). the " wicked " or " evil one " (Matt. xiii. 19 etc; cf. vi. 13), " Beelaebub " and " prince of devils " (Gk. daimones; Matt. xii. 24), '* the prince of this world" (John xii. 31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11), "the god of this world " (II Cor. iv. 4). I. Names " prince of the power of the air " and De- (Eph. ii. 2), the '' dragon," and the scription. ''serpent" (Rev. xii. 9, xx. 2). He has a kingdom (Matt. xii. 26), which is hostile to the kingdom of Christ (Acts xxvi. 18), and dominates a realm of demons (Matt. iz. 34). 415 X>evttIopiii«it Created one of the angels, be became an apos- tate (John viii. 44), and fell from heaven (Luke X. 18; Jude 6). He is the indefatigable adversary of the kingdom of good, but will ultimately be overthrown, and cast into everlasting fire (Matt. XXV. 41). No hope is set forth in the Scriptures of his redemption. He endeavored to seduce Christ himself (Matt. iv. 1), worked among the apostles (John xiii. 2), and worketh in the children of dis- obedience (Eph. ii. 2). Conversion is the passage and deliverance from his kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light (Col. i. 13). He is restlessly sowing seeds of error and doubt in the Church (Matt. xiii. 39), blinding the eyes of them that be- lieve not (II Cor. iv. 4), goes about as a roaring lion (I Pet. V. 8), and has the power of death (Heb. ii. 14). Christ has given a more definite description of him (John viii. 44) as a " murderer and liar." His chief characteristics are power and craft. He is as a '' strong man " (Matt. xii. 29), and his subtlety (cf. Gen. iii. 1) is exhibited in treacherous snares (II Tim. ii. 26), wiles (Eph. vi. 11), and devices (II Cor. ii. 11), and the delusive shift of transforming himself into an angel of light (II Cor. xi. 14). The Book of Revelation is a sub- lime drama in which Satan is one of the chief figures. It was to undo the desolation, and destroy the works of Satan that the Son of God was mani- fested (I John iii. 8). It has been attempted to make him out to be a mere personification of evil, and to show that evil exists only as it is found in the human heart. Schleiermacher thinks that Jesus accommodated himself to the ideas and language that then prevailed in Judea, but did not himself regard Satan as a real and living per- son. Objection is made to this view that, if he were not a distinct personality, Christ 2. The would hardly use so strong language Belief of in speaking of him and would not bid Jesns. the disciples beware of his craft and power. In the exposition of the par- able of the tares Christ makes the didactic state- ment that the enemy who sowed them was the devil. Another view adopted by advocates of a humanitarian christology is that Jesus shared the ignorance of his age in ascribing certain maladies to demoniac influence and asserting the personality of the devil. A remark of Bernard Weiss is here apposite (Die Religion dea Neuen Testaments, p. 121, Stuttgart, 1903): '' The deeper thesenseof sin is the more confidently is the supernatural power of sin, by which man is deceived and dominated, ascribed to a superhimian adversary of God, for Bin can not be traced back to God. The Scrip- tures and Jesus take this fact for granted and give it the weight of their authority." m. The Church Teaching: The Fathers agreed in representing Satan as an apostate angel. Ac- cording to Origen the fallen angels, who sinned less grievously, are of most subtle constitution. The stars belong to them. The devil and the demons, who sinned most grievously, inhabit the air (F. Loofs, LeUfaden zum Siudium der Dogmengeschichle, p. 127, Halle, 1893). At last even the devil will return to God and thus the ** restoration of all things " (Gk. apokaiastasis pantOn, Acts iii. 21; see Apocatastasis) be accomplished. The fall, how- ever, may be repeated again in the 1. The course of the eons. In the develop- Fathers. nlent of the doctrine of the atonement (q.v.) from Irenseus on (cf. Schaff, Christian Church, ii. 585 sqq.) the satisfaction of Christ was regarded as a payment made not to God, but to the devil, who through the disobedi- ence of our first parents acquired a right to us. Origen says sinful man is the devil's property (Loofs, p. 129). John of Damascus expressly re- jected this theory (Loofs, p. 186). The. second part of his system of theology devotes much space to the devil, and is in this respect a precursor of the medieval systems. In the West Augustine repre- sented Christ's work as a redemption from the devil rather than as a reconciliation to God (Loofs, p. 220), but he gave the impulse to the later doctrine enunciated by Anselm. He pronounced the pagan gods demons (De civitate Dei, v. 12, xviii. 18). Like the good angels, the bad spirits have bodies and by God's permission have power to stir up storms and blast harvests, and they cohabit with men and women. They have no power to create new substances, but they have power to accelerate the growth of seeds and germs, and the development of potencies hidden to men, but known to their own shrewd senses. Gregory the Great (d. 604) went even to greater lengths than Augustine in giving experiences of demonic and diabolic influ- ence. Hamack (Dogmengeschichte, iii. 235) has called him the ** Doctor of angels and the devU." The popular belief in the devil and his inomediate influence in antagonizing holy aspirations and practises had a copious illustration in the weird experiences of the hermits of the Thebaid and Chalcis. St. Anthony and other ascetics thought they had frequent encounters with him, and their cells were often turned into pandemonium by the shrieks and howls of the demons whom they im- agined Satan called forth to torment them in their lonely solitude (cf. Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 147 sqq.; Charles Kingsley, The Hermits^ London, 1868). In the Middle Ages the devil and demonology were among the subjects which received most elaborate treatment. The leading schoolmen de- vote long sections filled, with Scriptural quotation and argumentative reasoning to show the origin, the mode of existence, and the influence of the devil and the evil spirits. To these disquisitions of the study are added the popular stories which fill the pages of some of the most interesting tale- writers of all times. To schoolmen and compilers must be added another class of writers, 2. The men of liberal culture like Walter Mapes Middle and John of Salisbury and £tienne de Ages. Bourbon of France (ed. A. Lecoy de la Marche, Paris, 1877). Mapes treats Ceres, Bacchus, Pan, the satyrs, and the fauns and dryads as fallen spirits, and represents the devil as himself bearing witness to the truth of this view {De nugis curialium, ed. T. Wright, ii. 14, London, 1850). John of Salisbury has no doubt about the fell alliance of demons with men and women and D9TU Devotion 416 their power over the weather {Polycraiicus, chaps. viiL-xiii.). According to the medieval theology the devil is at the head of a realm of demons divided into prelacies and demonarchies. Pride was the cause of Lucifer's fall. The reg:ion where the devil was cast down is the tenebrous air, where, in pits of darkness, he and his followers are reserved till the day of filnal judgment, and not till then will their full degree of torment be meted out to them (Peter Lombard, ii. 6). Albertus Magnus, of all the schoolmen, speaks with most precision upon the locality. There are three zones or interstices in the air, and it is the middle sone which is inhabited by the devil and his angels (" Sentences," II. vi. 5, ed. Borgnet, xxvii. 152). There the tempests are bred and the hail and the snow are generated. There the demons start the clouds on fell missions and send forth the thunders and other natural terrors to frighten and hurt men. For until the time of their final torment they have power to trouble men (Thomas Aquinas, Summa, I. Ixiv. 4; Peter Lombard, II. vii. 6). As for their mental power, the devil and his angels are more acute than men, and their long experience enables them to foretell the future. Albertus Magnus says they are far more shrewd in watching the stars and pre- dicting future events than are the astronomers. The miracles they perform are for the most part legerdemain and juggleries by which they deceive and outwit. • But, as Thomas Aquinas asserts {Summa, I. cxiv. 4), quoting Augustine, they have also supernatural power and cause sickness and death, blast the crops, produce all sorts of freaks upon the progeny of men, and make women sterile. About 1250 the witchcraft craze began to sweep through Europe. From the time when Gregory IX. issued his bull on the subject in 1233 the pun- ishment for such Satanic influence and heresy went side by side, for heresy also was considered the work of the devil (see Inquisition). Thomas Aquinas gave full doctrinal statement to the popu- lar view, declaring that all practisers of witchcraft and sorcery were in league with the devil, and ad- vocated the penalty of death. From that time pope after pope issued orders not to spare those who were under the direct agency of the devil (see WrrCHCRAFT). The popular writers of the Middle Ages, Csesarius of Heisterbach {Dialogus), Thomas Cantimpra- tensis {Bonum universale de apibus), and Jacobus de Voragine in his " Golden Legend," are full of the most marvelous postures and feats of the evil one and his minions. They* saw them with their eyes. Usually they were clad in black. Some- times they had the face of a woman and were veiled. The devil himself appeared 3. Popular in meetings of witches and other per- Notions. sons as a great black tom-cat but also as a dog, a Moor, and in other shapes. Sometimes the demons had the forms of children with faces of iron. In convents the devil was a frequent visitor. Sometimes poor monks lost their minds through the devil's influence. Sometimes he imparted to them an unusual gift of preaching. The most gruesome of all these tales are those which represent the devil as tormenting the nak«d soul after death and driving his sharp claws into it (Csesarius of Heisterbach, i. 32, v. 10, etc.\ These stories were fully believed, and all these ex- periences are in accord with the principles laii down by the great schoolmen, Peter Lombard, Bonaventura, Thomas Aquinas, and Albertiii Magnus. The schoolmen, following Anselin (wh> wrote a special treatise, De casu diaboli) in his Cur deu8 homOf set aside the old view that Christ's death and sufferings were a payment made to Satan. Thomas Aquinas {Summa, III. xl\'iii. 3) says, "Christ offered his blood, which is the price of our redemption, not to the devil, but to God." The Reformation brought only partial relief from these harrowing medieval notions. In Prot- estant lands persecution went on for those who were supposed to be under the special influence of Satan. Luther threw his inkstand at the dexil, and on one occasion when he was awakened by a noise from sleep he finally composed himself by saying, ** 1 heard one walking on tltt 4. Luther, floor above my head, but, as I knew it to be only the devil, I went quietly to sleep." He said, ** Let a Christian know this, that he is sitting in the midst of devils, and that the devil is closer to him than his coat or shirt or even his very skin." Nevertheless, in the domain of theology Luther made an advance when he de- nied to the devil all right to us and power over us C' Recht und Macht "). Christ's death was not a payment to him, but to the wrath of God (cf. R. Seeberg, Lehrbuck der Dagmengeachtchte, u., Leip- sic, 1898, p. 252). In more modem times there have been theo- logians who have denied wholly the personality <rf the devil; for example, the German rationalists, beginning with the eighteenth century. Even Schleiermacher combated the view of a personal Satan (see above, II., § 2). Later theologians Uke Martensen, Nitzsch, Twesten, Julius Midler, Dor- ner, and others hold firmly to his personality. Martensen says he was "Christ's younger brother, and became God's adversary because he was not content to be second, but wanted to be first; be- cause he was unwilling to bear the light of another, and wanted to be the light itself." Jakob Bdhme says: '' Lucifer envied the Son his glory; his own beauty deceived him, and he wanted to place him- self on the throne of the Son." An attempt has even been made to fix the date of his apKistasy. Lange thought it occurred on one of the days of the creative week; while Kurtz and others held that the formless and void chaos of the worid (Gen. i. 2) was the result of Satan's fall. Whatever may be said of these theories, evangelical 5. Modem theologians agree in three points: (1) Views. The possibility of Satan's apostasy is as conceivable as the fall of man; (2) The inveterate hostility of Satan to the kingdom of Christ makes the denial of eternal punishment on the ground of the divine compassion untenable; (3) In proportion as the Christian consciousness of sin is deep does the belief in the personal agency of Satan prevail. In the New Testament the apos- tles feel that they are participants in the struggle 417 DevU DoTotion between the kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of Satan, and this conviction draws forth the vivid exhortations to fight manfully and with the armor of God, and to resist by prayer and vigilance. It xxiay be said with Domer that the conviction of a great struggle going on between the two kingdoms of darkness and light, a struggle in which we all may take part, is adapted to produce an earnest conception of evil, and develop watchfulness and tension of the moral energies. D. S. Schaff. Biblxoorapht: Lista of literature (very partial) are found in M. Osbom, Die TeufeUlUeraiur dea xvi. JahrhunderU, Berlin, 1893; Btbliotheca diabolica: A SeUetion of Booka rtUUing to ths DevU, New York, 1874. On Biblical ideas consult the works on Biblical the- ology, particularly: H. Schults. O. T. Theology, London, 1892; A. B. Davidson. Thoologv of O. T., pp. 300-355, Edinburgh, 1904; W. Beysohlag. N. T. TKoolooy, Edin- burgh. 1896; DB. iv. 407-412; EB, iv. 429&-4300; JS, ». 68-71. On the Christian conception the works on dogmatics, eopeoialiy those by J. P. Lange. ii. 669 sqq.. Heidelberg. 1852; H. L. Martensen, pp. 213-231, Copenhagen, 1850, Eng. transl.. Edinbuigh, 1865; J. J. van Oostersee, ii. 413-422. Utrecht. 1872. Eng. transl.. New York. 1874; J. A. Dorner, ii. 188-217. Berlin. 1881. Eng. transl.. Edinbuigh, 1880-82. Also Hamaclc. Dogma, passim, con- sult Index. Special treatment in: R. Gilpin, Demonologia •aero, London, 1877; A. D. White. Warfare of Science and Religion, 2 vols.. New York. 1898; J. Hansen. Zau' berglaube, Inquieition und Hexenproeeee im MiUdaUer, Munich. 1900; idem, QtuiUBn und Unterauchungen dee Hexenwahne und Hexenverfolgung, Leipsic. 1901; Graf von Hoensbroech. Dae Papettum in eeiner kuUureUen Wirkeamkeii, i. 207-380. ib. 1901. On the general subject: G. RoskoflF. Oeediiehte dee TeufeU, L 175-186. Leipsic. 1869; M. D. Conway, De- monology and Devil-lore, London. 1871; F. T. Hall. Pedi- gree of the Devil, ib. 1883; E. H. Jewett. Diabolotogy'' The Pereon and Kingdom of Satan, New York. 1890; P. Cams, Hist. of the Devil, Chicago. 1900 (disappointing); Faivre. La PereonaliU du StUan, Montauban, 1900; and the works cited under Deicon; and DciiONiAC.

DEVOLUTION, LAW OF : A law which provides for the filling of ecclesiastical offices in an extraor- dinaxy manner when those whose duty it is to fill a vacancy fail illegally to observe the proper time or violate the canonical rules. The earlier canon law knows of no devolution right. It arose with the development of a time limit for the filling of vacancies in ecclesiastical offices. At the Lateran council held under Alexander III. in 1179 (capitula 3, 8) it was enacted that all lower livings shall be filled within six months from the time they be- came vacant, and in case either the bishop or chapter are negligent, the one must act for the other; in case both are negligent, the metropoli- tan must fill the vacancy. Innocent III. extended this law at the Lateran Council of 1215, and in the collections of decretals and by doctrine and prac- tise the institution was further developed. The present law of the Roman Catholic Church is this: In case the authority having the right of collation illegally fails to fill a vacancy within the prescribed time, or culpably transfers the office to an un- worthy person, or violates the rules to be observed on such occasions, the next ecclesiastical superior has the collation ipso jure, he can resign his privi- lege and allow an appointment by another in due order; but in case he makes use of his right, the same rules apply to him as to the original collator, the difference being only in the person making the appointment. E. Sehling. III.— 27

DEVOTION: The response of man to God's revelation of himself. The impression of his real- ity is so strong upon us that we gaze in awestruck silence upon his incomparable majesty; and de- votion is based on this conviction. Its object, the living and eternal God, is beyond and above this world; and hence this spirit has a tendency to shun the world, which may easily be exaggerated. We can not escape from the world, which is the product of our own living consciousness. When man tries, as in what is called mysticism, to grasp the idea of God without relation to this world, he attempts the impossible. This transcendental God can only be found of men when he draws near to them by revealing himself to them; and their devotion to him can only be their willingness to listen when he speaks. God reveals himself in the world about us, to each man in the mode of his own existence, and thus to each in a different way. Knowledge of God is a personal conviction to be gained by each soul for itself. This will not re- move us from the world, or free us from the claims of environment. We are rather to find in the latter the source of the strength which is to enable us to realize the invisible and prepare us for the life beyond. It has been said, as a reproach against religion, that it is much easier to be " devout " than to live a moral life. But this reproach is based upon a false conception of devotion, which is wholly dif- ferent from mere idle dreaming or emotional en- thusiasm. Devotion, while it brings with it the most entrancing delight, is a call to the greatest exertion of spiritual energy. The way to it is through the conscience. A man must know what he is to do and be. This condition once fulfilled, all about him perceive a power from above in him. He is conscious himself of the force of the right. His moments of realization testify for him to the presence of an invisible agent, and lead his thoughts to God. To abide in the God who has thus revealed him- self to us, in what for us are such undeniable facts, is devotion. The words in which others who stand in his presence tell of what they have real- ized are valuable means to it; they may kindle the fire — ^but they are not the flame itself. And so likewise the purpose of devotion is not fulfilled until it is tramdated into activity. It means the decision of the will in favor of good: and this brings light and order into man's ideas of his actual existence, of the significance of his individual position in the world. The realization of duty forces action. Where devotion does not issue in the activity proper to one's vocation the emo- tions felt fail of their effect. This is the case with some forms of Roman Catholic piety, in which de- votion grows not out of a revelation made to the individual, but of the contemplation of traditional conceptions; in which intercourse with one's fel- lows and labor in the world are considered an in- terruption of intercourse with God. The Church is bound to proclaim that for the individual the divine revelation consists of the facts which he himself recognizes as indubitable parts of his own existence , such revelation does not necessarily # Be Wette Dickinaon 418 come to him in the first place as facts formally orthodox. If it is given to us to see as such facts the person and office of Jesus Christ; then and then only may we become Christians and find in the devotion of Christians the beginning of a life of blessedness. (W. Herrmann.) DE WETTE. See Wette, Wilhelm Martin Leberecht de.

DE WITT, JOHN: The name of two American clergymen. 1. Reformed (Dutch); b. at Albany, N. Y., Nov. 29, 1821; d. at Irvington, N. Y., Oct. 19, 1906. He was educated at Rutgers College (B.A., 1838) and the New Brunswick Theological Seminary, from which he was graduated in 1842. He was then pastor successively at Ridgeway, Mich. (1842-44), Ghent, N. Y. (1844-49), Canajoharie, N. Y. (1849-60), and Millstone, N. J. (1850-63). From 1863 to 1884 he was professor of Oriental lit- erature at Rutgers College, and from the latter year until his retirement in 1892 was professor of Hellen- istic Greek and New Testament exegesis in the same institution. He was one of the American Old Testa- ment Revision Company from its foundation, and wrote The Sure Foundation, and how to build on it (New York, 1848) and The Praise Songs of Israel, a new Rendering of the Book of Psalms (1884). 2. Presbyterian; b. at Harrisburg, Pa., Oct. 10, 1842. He studied at Princeton (B.A., 1861), studied law for a year, and then theology at Princeton and Union seminaries, graduating in 1865. He held pas- torates at Irvington-on-Hudson, N. Y. (1865-69), Central Congregational Church, Boston (1869-76), and Tenth Presbyterian Church, Philadelphia (1876- 1882); was professor of church history in Lane Theo- logical Seminary, Cincinnati, O. (1882-88); professor of Christian apologetics at McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago (1888-92), and since 1892 has been professor of church history in Princeton The- ological Seminary. In theology he adheres to the Reformed confessions. He has written: Sermons on the Christian Life (New York, 1885); What is Inspiration f (1893); and History of Princeton University (in Princeton Sesquicentennial Volume, 1896).

DEXTER, HENRY MARTYN: American Con- gregationalist; b. at Plympton, Mass., Aug. 13, 1821; d. at New Bedford, Mass., Nov. 13, 1890. He was of both Pilgrim and Puritan descent. He entered Brown University in 1836, but went to Yale in 1838, and was graduated there in 1840. After teaching a year in Rochester, Mass., he was graduated at Andover Theological Seminary in 1844. He was ordained first pastor of the Frank- lin St. Congregational Church, Manchester, N. H., Nov. 6, 1844, and was pastor of the Pine St. Church (now Berkeley Temple), Boston, 1849-67. He joined the staff of the Congregationalist in 1851, and was editor-in-chief, excepting during 1866, from 1856 until his death. In 1854 he drew up the memorable antislavery Nebraska Protest to Congress against the Missouri Compromise. In 1858 he was one of the founders of the Congrega- tional Quarterly, In 1880 he was moderator of the National Congregational Council at Oberlin and, later, one of its Creed Commission. In 1884, with Dr. G. E. Day, he represented the American Ho:i^ Missionaxy Society to the Independent ChurrL-j of Norway and Sweden, and in 18S9 he was j:- vited to preach the opening sermon before the fir^: International Congregational Council, at Loiti>i in 1890, but died before the appointed date arrival Dr. Dexter wrote many articles and voliuc« and was an expert on Congregationalism azti American Colonial history. His chief books are: Congregationalism : What it is. Whence it is. Ho.: it Works, Why it is better than any other form 'i Church Government, and its Consequent Dtma^^i (Boston, 1865); and The Congregationalism of the Last Three Hundred Years as Seen in its Literature (New York, 1880), the latter embodying his Soutb- worth Lectures at Andover in 1877 and contai-j- ing a valuable bibliography of 7,200 titles. He traveled extensively and made special studi--: abroad of the Pilgrim movement. His unfinishel manuscript on this subject was edited and rewrii- ten by his son Morton Dexter, and published as The England and Holland of the Pilgrims (BosUsl 1905). Morton Dexter. Bibliography: A sketch of Dr. Dexter's life is in the Pr*- ceedinffs of the Maasaohusette Historical Society for 1^1. consult also W. Walker. Bitt. of CongnotUional Chxa-dm, pp. 386-388, New York, 1894.

DEXTER, MORTON: Congregationalist; b. at Manchester, N. H., July 12, 1846. He was grad- uated at Yale in 1867 and Andover TheologicJ Seminary in 1870. He was pastor of Union Con- gregational Church, Taunton, Mass., from 1873 ;o 1878, and was then associate editor of the Cong-" gationalist, Boston, until 1901. He was secretarj and treasurer of the committee of the Congrega- tional National Council which erected and devii- cated the memorial tablet to John Robinson oc St. Peter's Cathedral, Leyden, Holland, in 1891. and he was a delegate to the first International Congregational Council held at London in t^^ same year, and to the second at Boston eight years later. In theology he may be described as a Broa>i- church evangelical. He has written The Story oj the Pilgrims (Boston, 1894) and The England and Holland of the Pilgrims (1905). DIACONICON, dai'lordl"]a-c©n'i-cen: A Greek word which denotes the semicircular extension on the southern side of the bima in the Greek churches, corresponding to one on the north side which is known as prothesis. It is the place occupied by the deacons, and is used also for the custody of various things used in divine service. This use of the term was definitely established at least as early as the end of the Middle Ages. The word is abo applied to a selection from the great Eucholo- gion of the Greek Church which contains all the liturgical functions of deacons (officially called Hierodiafymikon), and to certain prayers in the Greek liturgy recited by the deacon. (Philipp Meyer.)

DIALOGUS DE RECTA IN DEUM FIDE: A dialogue directed against the errors of the Mar- cionites, Bardesanites, and Valentinians. From the use of the name Adamantius for the speaker who maintains the orthodox position, it has passed under his name — a proof that the real author was unknown. The fact that Origen bore this name led Basil and Gregory of Nyssa to attribute the dialogue to him, and this view was wide-spread in the Middle Ages; but on both internal and ex- ternal evidence it is untenable. The work was composed (according to i. 21) in a time of perse- cution; but the text was altered later (probably between 330 and 337) to suit changed circum- stances. In the first of the five parts the discus- sion turns on the theory proposed by the Mar- cionite Megethius of three principles — the good God, the demiurge, and the evil principle. Mege- thius attempts in a large number of antitheses to show a distinction between the Old Testament Creator and the good God of the New. These the author probably took from an anti-Marcionite treatise, probably that used by Irenaeus and Ter- tuUian and identified with good reason with a lost treatise of Theophilus of Antioch. For the sec- ond dialogue, in which the Marcionite Marcus de- velops his extreme theory of a good God and an evil demiurge, the author had probably looked into Marcion's New Testament. In the third part, the Bardesanite Maximus brings up the questions of the origin of evil, the incarnation of the Word, and the resurrection of the body. For the first of these, which extends through the third and fourth dialogues, considerable parts are taken literally from the dialogue of Methodius of Olym- pus (q.v.) on the freedom of the will, unless both Methodius and this author borrowed alike from a treatise on matter purporting to have been writ- ten by Maximus. The fifth dialogue deals with the resurrection, and here again borrows from the Aglaophon of Methodius. The work was probably written in Syria, most likely at Antioch. It dis- plays no great literary art. (Erwin Preuschen.) Bibliography: The editio prinoeps, by J. R. Wetstein, Basel, 1674, ia also in G. E. LommatBsch, Orioenit . . . Opem, xn. 254 aqq., Berlin. 1844, and MPO, x. The latest ed. is by Van de S. Bakhuyaen, Berlin, 1001. The Lat. transl. by Rufinus is edited by C. P. Gaspari, Kir- ehenhi»tori8dte Anecdota^ pp. 1 sqq., cf. pp. iii.-v., Chris- tiania. 1883. Consult: T. Zahn, in ZKQ, ix (1888). pp. 193-239; idem, G^tchichU det neuUstamentlidten Kanons, II. ii. 409-426. Leipdc, 1891; KrOger, HUtory, PP. 245- 247; DCB, i. 39-41. DIASPORA (Gk. ''a scattering, dispersion "): A term used in the New Testament and other lit- erature about the beginning of the Christian era to denote the Jews living outside of Palestine after the Captivity (see Israel); also applied to the Christians as the spiritual Israel among those of other faiths (Jas. i. 1; I Pet. i. 1; cf. Schtirer, Ge- schichte, Eng. transl., II. ii. 31). The Moravians used the word to signify their friends living apart from them and in spiritual union with them, but not officially and constitutionally belonging to them. In modem German usage the term sig- nifies any people living scattere<i among those of another faith, and more particularly a Protestant minority in a Roman Catholic region. Special conferences have been instituted to in- crease the efficiency of the Diaspora pastor; e.g., the Conference of Rhenish Prussia, founded in 1858; the Conference of Posen, 1860; that of the Middle Rhine, 1868; of Westphalia, 1871; and of Upper Swabia, 1882. See Gotteskabten, Lu- theribcher; and Gustav-Adglf-Verein. (Theodor SchXfbr.) DIATESSARON, doi"[or di'^Ja-tes'a-ren. See Tatian; and Harmony of the Gobpei^. DIAZ, JUAN. See Spain, The Reformation in. DIB£LIUS,di-b6'li-us, FRANZ WILHELM: Gcr^ man Lutheran; b. at Prenzlau (58 m. n.e. of Ber- lin) Jan. 6, 1847. He studied in Berlin, was as- sistant pastor at the Berlin cathedral and inspector of the institute for the training of canons 1871-74, and pastor of the Annenkirche, Dresden, 1874-84. Since 1884 he has been city superintendent and first pastor of the Kreuzkirche in Dresden, and is also a councilor of the high consistory. His wri- tings include: Gottfried Arnold (Berlin, 1873); Die Einfuhrung der Reformation in Dresden (Dresden, 1889); Die Kreuzkirche in Dresden (1900); and Vom keiligen Kreuz (1903). He has edited Beiirdge zur sdchsischen Kirchengeschichte since 1882.

DICK, THOMAS: Scotch Secession Church; b. at Dundee Nov. 24, 1774; d. at Broughty Ferry (5 m. e. of Dundee) July 29, 1857. He studied at Edinburgh, and preached as a probationer for two years (1803-05); taught school for twenty years at Methven and Perth, and after 1827 devoted himself entirely to literature. He wrote a number of scientific, philosophical, and religious works in popular style, which had a large sale. Perhaps the best known were: The Christian Philosopher , or the Connection of Science and Philosophy with Re- ligion (London, 1823); The Philosophy of a Future State (1828); Celestial Scenery, or the Wonders oj the Heavens Displayed (1838); The Sidereal Heavens (1840); The Solar System (1840); and The Practical Astronomer (1846).

DICKEY, SAMUEL: Presbyterian; b. at Ox- ford, Pa., Nov. 27, 1872. He studied at Prince- ton (B.A., 1894), Princeton Theological Seminary (1897), and the universities of Berlin, Marburg, Erlangen (1897-99), Athens (1901), and Jena (1904). He was professor of classical and Hel- lenistic Greek at Lincoln University, Pa., 1899- 1903. Since 1903 he has been adjunct professor of New Testament literature and exegesis at Mc- Cormick Theological Seminary, Chicago.

DICKINSON, JONATHAN: Presbyterian; b. at Hatfield, Mass., Apr. 22, 1688; d. at Elizabeth, N. J., Oct. 7, 1747. He was graduated at Yale in 1700, and in 1709 settled at Elizabeth (then called Elizabethtown). He covered an extensive field as preacher, serving regularly six or seven congregations. He was a man of general culture and read and practised medicine, in addition to his pastoral work. As a scholar and wise leader he was not excelled in the American Presbyterian Church in his time, and his name stands out in the early Presbyterian history of the middle colo- nies much as that of Jonathan Edwards does in New England. A strong Calvinist, be opposed a tigid subscription to the Westminster standards as a test of ordination. He was prominent in the adoption of the so-called Adopting Act of 1729 passed by the Synod of Phfladelphia. It declined to make a literal subscription to the Westminster standards a condition of ordination, as the Pres- bytery of New Castle had asked should be done, and demanded that the candidate accept and ap- prove of them " as being in all essential and neces- sary articles good forms of sound words and sys- tems of Christian doctrine.'* In case he had any scruples he had a right to state them, and the synod or presbytery was to judge whether they concerned ** articles not essential and necessary in doctrine, worship, and government." In the course of the discussion, Dickinson wrote in a letter that he re- garded it " as the most glorious contradiction to subscribe chap. xx. of the Confession which caUs ' God alone the Lord of Conscience ' and then impose the rest of the chapters." He took a prom- inent part in the measures which led to the for- mation of the synod of New York (1745), the second synod of the Presbyterian Church in the United States. David Brainerd and Indian misskms found in him a warm friend. He also took a deep interest in education, and was the most promi- nent among the founders of the College of New Jer^ sey (Princeton University). Under his counsel a charter was received for the institution in Oct., 1746. His election as the first president was an- nounced Apr. 27, 1747, and in Ifay the college was opened in his house. He died the following au- timm. He took the side of the Tennents and Ed- wards in favoring the evangelistic movement led by WhitefiekL Mr. Dickinson's defense of the Five Points of Calvinism in his True Scripture Doctrine concern- ing some Important Pointa of Christian Faith, par- ticuiarly Eternal Election, Original Sin, Orace in Conversion, Justification by Faith, and the Saints' Preservation, represented and applied in five die- courses (Philadelphia, 1741; Elizabethtown, 1793) is one of the soundest expositions of Calvinism which America has produced. His other works are Four Sermons on the Reasonableness of Chris- tianity (Boston, 1732); A Display of Ood's Special Grace (1742); Familiar Letters upon Subjects in Religion (1745); Vindication of God*a Saving Free Orace (1748). A complete edition of his Sermons and Tracts appeared at Edinburgh, 1793. D. S. SCHAFF. BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. B. Sprague, AnnaU of the Amsriean Pulpit, iii. 14-18, New York, 1868; the historiee of the Praebyterian Chureh by C. Hodge. Pbilmdelphia. 1830- 1840; E. H. Gillett, ib. 1873; J. H. Patton. ib. 1887; R. E. Thompeonu ib. 1806. Abo J. Madean. HiiL of «^ Cot- leffe of New Jerwey, Philadelphia, 1877; John De Witt, in iiemcrial Book of the SetquieerUemnal CtUbratUm of At Founding of the CoUsoe of New Jereey'pp, 348-362, New York. 1808. DICKSON (DICK), DAVID: Scotch commen- tator; b. in Glasgow about 1583; d. 1663. He studied at Glasgow and taught philosophy there till 1618, when he was ordained minister of Irvine, Ayrshire; was deprived in 1622 for testifying against the Five Articles of Perth, but was per- mitted to return the next year; became professor of divinity at Glasgow 1640, in Edinburgh 1650; was ejected in 1662 for refusing to take the oath of supremacy. He was moderator of the General Assembly at Edinbuigh in 1639. His conmieih taries include Explications upon the Psalms 3 vols., London, 1653-55), an Exposition of Matthev (1651), an Explanation of H^rews (Aberdeen, 1635), and an Exposition of all the epistles (Latin, Glasgow, 1645; English, London, 1659). He also published Therapeutica sacra, seu de curandis casi- hue eonsdentuB circa regenerationem per fadeniir, divinorum applicationem (London, 1656; Eng. transl., 1695) and True Christian Lave (Edinbuifrh, 1655), a collection of short poems " to be sung with any of the common tunes of the Psalms," which includes the familiar O mother dear, Jerusalem. Bibliography: Hia life by R. Wodrow waa prefixed to Truth*9 Victory over Error, Glaegow, 1752, and was re- printed by the Wodrow Society in Seieet Bioffrapkisa, ToL iL. E<^burEh, 1847; a Tohime of bia SeLeet Prae- Heal WriHnoe also contains a life by T. Thompaon. Edia- buDih. 1845; DNB, zv. 41-42; Julian, Hymmoioffy, 203. 58a

DICKSON, WILLIAM PURDIE: CSiurch of Scot- land; b. at Pettinain (26 m. s.e. of Glasgow) Oct. 22, 1823; d. at Glasgow Mar. 9, 1901. He studied at St. Andrews (M.A., 1851), and after being minister of the parish of Csmeron, Fife (1851-63), was professor of Biblical criticism (1863-73) and of divinity in the University of Glasgow. He was convener of the Education (Committee of the Church of Scotland from 1874, and in that capacity had charge of the training colleges in Edinbui^, Glasgow, and Aberdeen, while after 1866 he was curator of the University of Glasgow library and superintended the prepa- ration of the catalogue. He wrote SL Paul's Use of the Terms Flesh and Spirit (Baird lecture for 1883; Gbisgow, 1883) and translated T. Momm- sen's History of Rome (4 vols., London, 1862-66) and six volumes of H. A. W. Meyer's Commentary on the New Testament and revised the translation often (Edinbuii^, 1873-80). DIDACHE, doi'dak-t or d!dak-«. I. Contenta and Arrange- Tbe Author not aa ment. Ebionite (( 1). II. Title. Addreea. and Pa^ Was He a Jewish Chris- port, tianr (i 2). III. Transmission and Integ- VII. Time and Flaee of rity. Composition. IV. Language and Voeabu- limits 70-160 ▲.d. Unr. (S 1). V. Souroes. Not Befora 130 a^. BibUeal Writings (MX (S 2). Barnabas (( 2). VIII. History of tbe Doco- Hermas and Jewish ment. Writings (§ 3). IX. The Witnesses. VI. The Author's Stand- X. Importance of the point. Work. In a manuscript (written in 1056 by a notaiy, named Leon), discovered by Bryennios (q.v.) in the Jerusalem (Convent at Constantinople, from which he edited in 1875 the complete epistles of Clement, there is found between the epistles of Clement and Ignatius a work of the sise of the epistle to tbe Galatians entitled Didache ton dodeka Apostolon^ which the discoverer published in 1883, showing at the same time that the work belongs to the first half of the second century and is identical with the " Teaching of the Apostles," which Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, Athanasius, and other Fathers knew. L Contents and Arrangement: The woric is di- vided into two, or perhaps three parts. The first contaiiiB precepts of Christian morality, and brief instructions for the specific ecclesiastical acts which gave Christian character to the Church (i -x.); the second, directions for churchly intercourse and life (xi.-xv.); the closing chapter (xvi.) is an exhorta- tion to be ready for the coming of the Lord. The first part, again, contains, i.-vi., under the form of a description of the " Two Ways," the way of life and the way of death, the laws of Christian moral- ity; while vii. deals with baptism; viii. with fast- ing and daily prayer; and ix.-x, with eucharistic prayers. In regard to specific points: baptism should be preceded by fasting; the Lord's Prayer, given in the words of Matthew with slight altera- tions and with the doxology, should be said three times every day. The Lord's Supper should be partaken of only by the baptized; and the " proph- ets " were at liberty to use, instead of the eucha- ristic prayers given, such thanksgiving as they would. The second part lays down rules for the treatment of the teachers of the Divine Word and of the peripatetic brethren, and gives distinguish- ing tests of their character (xi.-xlii.), and also the usages each congregation should observe (xiv.-xv.). n. Title, Address, and Purport: The manuscript has two titles: " Teaching of the Twelve Apos- tles " and " Teaching of the Lord through the Twelve Apostles to the Gentiles." By " the Gen- tiles " were meant the Christians who had come from heathenism, just as the epistle " to the He- brews " was addressed to Christians who had come from Judaism. The document, consequently, is not addressed to catechumens — ^for it is not adapted to lead persons to Christianity, but to those al- ready Christians, that they might learn from it how to conduct their lives upon Gospel principles, and what they were to impress on the newly won brethren [cf. Schaff's edition, pp. 16 sqq. The docu- ment is commonly quoted and referred to simply as the "Didache," which means the "Teach- ing"]. m. Transmission and Integrity: The present text has comparatively few errors, yet the appear- ance of the document in later recensions has raised suspicions whether it is so free from interpolations as it seems to be. Suspicions are caused only through derived works cited in patristic sources. IV. Language and Vocabulary: The idiom is Hellenistic, more exactly the idiom of the Septua- gint of the poetical books and of the Old Testa- ment Apocrypha. There are numerous Hebra- isms, but the Greek is better than that of Hermas. The style is simple, popular, and concise, while being somewhat rhythmical and liturgical. The document contains 2,190 words (about 10,700 let- ters), and 552 different words. Of these 504 are found also in the New Testament; 38 of the re- maining 48, in the Septuagint, Barnabas, or other older Greek writers (cf.^haff, ut sup., pp. 95-113). V. Sources: There is no known primitive Chris- tian writing which, with originality in arrangement and form, so combines dependence upon older writings. The author avows his dependence, for he seeks merely to set forth the teaching of the Lord through the twelve apostles, and finds no room for his own ideas. There are eight express quotations: two (xiv. 3, xvi. 7) are from the Old Testament (Mai. i. 11, 14; Zech. xiv. 5); five from the Gospels, introduced by certain formulas (viii. 2, ix. 5, xi. 3, XV. 3, 4), and one (i. 6) from some unknown " Sacred Scripture." The Old Testament is, moreover, frequently drawn upon X. Biblical in the first five chapters, the decalogue Writings, and the Wisdom literature (Prov., Eccles., Tobit) being used. The Old Testament alone is " Sacred Scripture "; of a New Testament Canon there is no trace. The author in the five cited passages does not draw from the written Gospel alone; throughout he weaves into his writing references and longer or shorter cita- tions, twenty-three in all, from what he calls " the Gospel," which he presupposes his readers know. Seventeen of the twenty-three citations must be referred to Matthew; but other citations are plainly combinations of the text of Matthew and Luke, strikingly like the text of Tatian's DiaUssaron. In the citations there is no trace of John's Gospel; but the eucharistic service is conceived on the lines of John vi. and xvii., without, however, directly borrowing anything. The Pauline Epistles are not cited, yet traces of acquaintance with them appear. More important are certain resemblances to Jude and II Peter. There is no trace of ac- quaintance with the Pastoral Epistles. The much-disputed question, as to the relation of the '* Teaching " to the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas, is thus to be answered: it is in the highest degree probable that Barnabas is prior to the " Teaching "; i. 1-2, ii. 2-7, iii. 7- vi. 2 of the " Teaching " agree substantially, if not verbally, with Barnabas xviii.-xx.; but the order of the phrases is different, and while that in Barnabas is confused, that in the " Teaching " 2. Barnabas, is clear. In the description of the " Two Ways," the " Teaching " offers further (a) in L 2-5 a series of evangelical sayings: (b) in i. 6 a fragment from an unknown other wri- ting; (c) in iii. 1-6 a section imitated from the Old Testament proverbial literature; (d) in ii. 2- 3, 5, 6, iii. 8, iv. 2, 8, 14 a series of additions to the sections common to it and to Barnabas. Bar- nabas, on the other hand, offers in the chapters in question only a couple of phrases (xix. 2, 3, 8), an unintelligible sentence (xix. 4), and some further words in xix. 10. Further, xvi. 1, 3-8 of the *' Teaching " are confessedly a compilation of evangelical passages and Zech. xiv. 5, together with a tradition concerning Antichrist. Verse 2, however, is not so derived, but has in Barnabas IV. X. 9 an almost verbally exact parallel. Now, were Barnabas later, he would have appropriated the only verse in this passage of the '* Teaching " which is peculiar. Hence it is probable that, since all the other verses of xvi. are borrowed, this verse (xvi. 2) is also borrowed. Moreover (and this appears still more decisive of the priority of Barnabas), the author of Barnabas is convinced that the last times have already come (iv. 3, 9); the author of the " Teaching," on the other hand, does not so hold. The decision therefore must be that the " Teaching " as it now is given in the Con- IMdaohe 422 atantiDopolitan manuscript is secondary to Barna- bas, and is either dependent upon it or upon ma- terials already used by Barnabas; and the possi- bUity is excluded that Barnabas copied from the " Teaching " as it exists in the Constantinopolitan manuscript. [The priority of Barnabas is advo- cated also by BiyennioSy Hilgenfeld, and Krawutzky in KL, whereas the priority of the Didache is strongly advocated by Zahn, Funk, Langen, Farrar, nearly all English and American writers on the subject. A third opinion is held by lightfoot, Holtzmann, Massebieau, Lipsius, Warfield, Mc- Giffert, that both Barnabas and the writer of the Didache drew from a common source which is lost.] The relation between the ** Teaching " and Hennas is more uncertain. There are only two parallels, " Teaching," i. 5; cf. Mand,, ii. 4--6, and the very doubtful one " Teaching," v. ; cf. Mand., viii. 4-5. That the " Teaching " had Hennas as a source may not be safely affirmed in view of the variations in these passages in different recen- sions; but the opposite is certainly excluded. [Schaff holds that the Didache is older than the Shepherd of Hermas; for in its brief 3. Hermas parallel sections Hermas is likewise and an enlargement of the simpler state- Jewish ments of the Didache ; Schaff, pp. 121 Writings, sqq.] lately, American, English, and French scholars have brought forward numerous paraUels to i.-v. from PhUo, Pseudo- Phokylides, the Sibylline books, and from the Tal- mud and Midrash. If, from these chapters, i. 3-6 be omitted, the remainder has almost nothing specifically Christian about it, and the little it has can be shown by the use of other original doc- uments to be additions. Therefore it is an ex- tremely probable conjecture that the " Two Ways " is a Jewish production, intended for proselytes, de- rived from the decalogue and an amplification of its commands, which along with the Old Testament has come over into the Christian Church. VL The Author's Standpoint: This much-dis- cussed point is not settled. The ** Teaching " has been regarded as a Jewish anti-Pauline Christian (Sabatier), as Jewish Christian, but not Ebionitic (Schaff), as anti-Pauline and Sadducean, heretical and anti-Christian (Churton), as Ebionitic, semi- Ebionitic, or anti-Ebionitic (of. Krawutzky, XL, iii., 1869 sqq.), as Hellenistic-Christian, as anti- Montanistic and anti-Gnostic (Bryennios), as Mon- tanistic (Hilgenfeld and Bonet-Mauiy), etc. To refute these different views is not necessary, but it is necessary to oppose the notion that the author of the " Teaching " was a Jewish Christian who be- longed to a circle detached from Gentile Christians, and attached in some way to the Jews as a nation. The facts are these: The author main- I. The tains silence upon circumcision and all Author other Jewish rites; in the two places not an where he mentions them he calls the Ebionite. Jews " hjrpocrites "; not a word is said of observing the Mosaic law; in the long eschatological section (xvi.), derived from Matthew, the passages referring to Jerusalem, the Jewish people, and the Temple are wanting, nor is there any mention of a glorious kingdom in Pales- tine, although the author presupposes a visible kingdom of Christ, as his belief in a double resur- rection proves (cf. G. v. Lechler, Aposlolisches und nachapoetolisches ZeitaUer, p. 592, Carlsruhe, 1885) ; Matthew and Luke, or a recension of them, and not the Gospel of the Hebrews, was used, perhaps also the Pauline Epistles; Jesiis is not called the Son, but the God, of David; the book passed over into the use of the Catholic Church. These considerations exonerate the author from Ebionism. But some as- sert the Jewish-Christian but not anti-Pauline char- acter of the author. Schaff (pp. 125 sqq.) has col- lected arguments as follows: only the Twelve, but not the Apostle Paul are named; but in this respect the author does not differ from many ordinary Christian authors before the closing of the New Testament Canon. The style and phraseology are Hebraistic; but that is not remarkable in view of the Jewish origin of Christianity and the use of the Old Testament in the Septuagint. The author calls the prophets " high priests," but this was the rule among GentUe Christians. He demands the first-fruits for the prophets; but so do Paul and the Gentile (IHiristian Church of the earliest times, especially after Justin's day. He warns against fasting with the Jews on Monday and Thursday, enjoins fasts on Wednesday and Friday, and names Friday paraakeiaf " preparation." But even if the author had set the fasts upon the Jewish fast- days, this would have been no more a ogn of Jew- ish Christianity than was the practise of the Quar- todecimans. The author's discussion of the week in a religious sense explains the use of the Jewish names for the days, and he is entirely silent re- specting the Sabbath. The injunction three times daily to repeat the Lord's Prayer is plainly adopted from Jewish custom. Besides what has been said above, it should be remarked that it 2. Was He is not known what hours for prayer a Jewish were in the author's mind, and that, Christian? even if he had enjoined the Jewish hours, that would not tiave been spe- cifically Jewish-Christian. The author conceives of Christianity substantially as the highest moral- ity ; he is a moralist in the better sense of the word, like James and Matthew. Consequently he must have been a Jewish Christian. To answer this ar- gument would take too much space. The author does not attack the Jewish religion, as does Barna- bas; but as a rule he attacks nobody. He not only lays stress upon the (Jewish-Christian) prohibition of meat offered to idob, but sets forth the observ- ance of the Jewish dietary laws as the summit of Christian perfection. The prohibition of eating meat offered to idols was universal in the congr^a- tions in the empire from the end of the first cen- tury (cf. C. T. Keim, Atis dem Urchristenthum, pp. 88 sqq., Zurich, 1878); and, as for the second point, no one ever made such a claim, for by brosiSf " food " (vi. 3), is most certainly meant, not the Jewish dietary . regulation, but an ascetic restriction in the use of meat, as SchQrer abo maintains. The view-point of the author is that of common Gentile Christianity. His standpoint is very close to that of the author of the second epistle of (Element; he is not a Jewish Christian, 428 Didaohe not; a follower of Paul, but a universalist, knowing no distinction between peoples; in his prayers ac- Icnowledging God, the creator of all things and ITcLther of all men, who provides them with food cknd drink; he acknowledges Jesus, the son of God, t'he God of David, the vine of David, and the Lord ^^Ho spoke by the prophets, and he awaits his com- in^; he also acknowledges the Holy Ghost, who l\a.8 prepared those whom God called. He believes izi. the Old Testament and in the Gospel; he ac- knowledges baptism and the Lord's Supper as im- portant acts; one becomes a Christian by baptism a.nd remains a Christian by partaking of the eucha- ristic celebration. Vn. Time and Place of Composition: It has been placed in every decade from 50.a.d^ to 190 A..r>., and even as late as the fourth century. Gen- erally the three generations 70-100, 100-130, 130- 160 A.D. are the most favored. Internal evidence eaji not decide the time, because the " Teaching " is avowedly a compilation, and some of its sources are very old. External evidence proves that it must be before 165 a.d., for Clement of Alexandria knew it as ** Scripture." A number of negative facts taken together show that it is earlier than 160 A.D.; it shows no traces of a New Testament Canon or of the authority of the Pauline Epistles; or of a regula fidei or of regular doctrinal instruc- tion; or of a monarchical episcopate — prophets were the chief teachers and were not yet I. Limits superseded by bishops; or of an or- 70-160 A.D. dered church service, like that to which Justin testifies; or of a regular administrator of baptism, while it gives the con- gregation authority to depose bbhops and deacons; or of symbolical ceremonies accompanying bap- tism; or of a yearly Easter festival; or of prohibi- tion of blood and things strangled; or of Monta- nism and the characterization of heretics. Other marks seem to fit better into the time 80-120 a.d. than 120-160 A.D., e.g., its treatment of apostles, prophets, and teachers. But care must be taken not to give definite dates to documents of primi- tive Christianity, for not all the steps are known of the development of Christianity during the em- pire till Catholic Christianity in most of the prov- inces, and in no province is the development fully known. Having set the limits for the " Teaching " between 70 and 160 a.d., the question may be asked whether there is anything to prove that it must have been written after some Christian gen- erations had passed. With the greatest probabil- ity an affirmative answer may be given, as follows: Apostles and prophets no longer occupy their primitive unapproachable position, hence the strongest conservative measures are enjoined; re- spect for the prophets is declining, hence the ex- orbitant demand on the church and the severest menaces; mistrust of the "old prophets,'' who be- long to a past generation. These are not the Old Testament but older Christian prophets; the pres- ent text shows in the " Two Ways " of i. certain diminution of evangeh'cal demands, and in the ap- pendix to the same, in vi., a contrast between a higher and a lower Christian morality; the injunc- tions about first-fruits, fixed prayers, and fasts, which in a Gentile Christian land is the indication of a later time; the injunction that since bi^ops and deacons minister to the congregations " the ministry of the prophets and teachers," therefore despise them not, can not apply to the 2. Not primitive state of things; the regu- Before lation of fasting before baptism, and 120 A.D. permission to pour; the eschatological closing section has not the glo:^ which the prayers transmitted to the author have, and lacks the description of the glorious kingdom of Christ upon the earth. These observations are strengthened by noticing the author's use of Mat- thew, and perhaps also Luke, in a comparatively late form; and the relation of the " Teaching " to Barnabas, which probably belongs to Hadrianio time (before Bar Kokba). All these considerations show that the writing can not with certainty be set earlier than 120 a.d. or earlier than 100 a.d. with any probability, but that the probable limits are 120 and 160 a.d., and within these limits the earlier dates are in most cases freer from difficulty than the later. Taken all in all, the '' time of Hadrian " has the most probability in its favor. The place of composition was probably Egypt, as the exter- nal testimonies and the source seem to prove. The arguments for Syria, derived from mention of the bread " upon the hills " (ix. 4), and from the adop- tion of the ''Teaching" with the ''Apostolic^ Constitutions," are not decisive; for the mention occurs in a prayer most probably copied by the author, and the Syrian forger had the library of Eusebius at his command. VIII. History of the Document: A book called " The Two Ways" was composed by Jews in the first century or perhaps earlier for the instruction of prose- lytes. It comprised what is found in the " Teach- ing," i. 1-3, ii. 2-v. 2, which passed over into the Christian Church, and was used as an address at baptism. The author of the Epistle of Barnabas incorporated this writing into his, without, how- ever, knowing it as a " teaching of the Apostles." Another unknown Christian made the Jewish in- struction a " teaching of the (twelve) apostles," and added vii.-xvi. This edition is now lost. The present one, the Didache of the Constantinopolitan manuscript, contains, in order to give evangelical coloring to the Jewish original, chap. i. 3-ii. 1, by which the tone of the " Two Ways " was wholly changed. This passage being an interpolation, the original form of the Christian " Teaching " may be put considerably earlier than the present recension. IX. The Witnesses: Before Clement of Alex- andria no direct use of the " Teaching " can be proved. On the other hand, Clement employs it in several places, and in one {Stromata^ i. 20 = " Teaching," iii. 6) calls it " Scripture," counting it among the holy writings. Evidences of its use have been found inOrigen (Horn, vi. in lib. Jud. ; De principiiSf iii. 2, 7), who also called it " Holy Scrip- ture," but the quotation may have been taken from the Epistle of Barnabas. Eusebius (Hist, ecd., III. XX v.) is the first to mention the book byname, ''the so-called Teachings t>f the Apostles," and puts it among the anHlegomena. Athanasius (Epitstola festalis, xxxix., of the year 367) mentions the Didaohe Bidyxnus 424 "Teaching, so called, of the Apostles" among the books which are not canonical but useful for the instruction of catechumens. Rufinus repeats this statement of Athanasius (Comment, in Symb. AposL, xxxvi.-xxxviii.), but in place of " Teaching, so called, of the Apostles," he puts " The Two Ways," or " The Juc^ent of Peter," or "According to Peter," for the " Teaching of the Apostles.'' Jerome {De vir.iU.,i.) likewise mentions "Peter's Judgment" among five apocryphal books ascribed to that Apostle. The last mention of the " Teaching of the Apostles," so far as present knowledge goes, was made in the ninth century by Nicephorus, who speaks of such a book as among the Apocrypha of the New Testament, and as consisting of 200 lines. The manuscript discovered by Bryennios numbers 203 lines. X. Importance of the Work : From vii. to the end each section of the " Teaching " is a source of the first rank for the points it covers, baptism, fasts, prayers, the eucharist, apostles, prophets, teachers, Sunday, the episcopate and diaconate. But its greatest importance lies in the fact that it affords so much better an understanding of the organization of the earliest Christian churches, where the interest of early Christianity lay, and how it became in literary matters the heir of Judaism. (Adolf Harnagk.) Bibuoorapht: The literature on the Didache has become enormotiB. A list down to 1887 is given in ANF, Index vol., pp. 83-86; down to 1888 in P. Schaff, The Teaching of Vie Twelve ApoeUee, pp. 306-320. 3d ed.. New York. 1890; and by B&mner. in lAterariseker Handiveiaer fUr doe katholiache DeuUchiand, zxvii (1888). 393-398. 425- 430; and to 1900 by A. Ehrhard. Die altebrieaiehe Lit- teratur und ihre Erforeehung, i. 37-68. Freibung. 1900. The editio prinoepe is by P. Bryennios, Constantinople. 1883; the best edition, at least in Eng., is by Schaff, ut sup., giving Greek text. Eng. transl., introduction, and discussions. Other good editions are by A. Hamaok. Leipsio. 1884; R. D. Hitchcock and F. Brown, New York, 1885; P. Sabatier, Paris, 1885; H. D. M. Spenoe. Lon- don. 1885; F. X. Funk. Tfibingen, 1887; J. R. Harris, Baltimore. 1887; J. B. Lightfoot, in Apoetolic FatKere, London. 1893; J. Schlecht, Freiburg. 1900. Most of the forgoing contain translations in the tongue of the editor, besides notes, introduction, and discussions. Eng. transl. exists also in ANF, viii. 377-382. and in G. C. Allen. The Teaching of the Twelve Apoetlea, London, 1903. Many of the most important discussions are in periodicals, espe- cially those of 1884-87. Discussions of especial worth are: J. R. Harris, The Teaching of the ApoatUa and the Sibylline Booke, Cambridge. 1885; A. Hamack. Die Apoetellehre und die jQdiachen beiden Wege, Leipsio, 1886; C. Taylor. The Teaching of the IB Apoatlee wiVi lUuetrar tione from the Talmud, Cambridge, 1886; B. B. War field, in BiblioiKeca Sacra, 1886. pp. 100-161; J. Heron. The Church of the Sub-Apoetolic Age . . . in ffie Light of ths Teaching of the le Apoetlea, London, 1888; G. Wohlen- berg. Die Lehre der IB Apoetel in ihrem VerhAliniea zum neuiestamentlichen Schrifttum, Erlangen, 1888; P. Batif- fol, in Studia patrietioa, ii. 117-160, Paris. 1890; G. Salmon, Introduction to . . . N. T., pp. 551-566, London, 1892; DCS, iv. 806-815; C. H. Hole, The Didache, London, 1894; L. E. Iselin, in TU, xiu. 1, 1895; J. Schlecht, Die Lehre der IB Apoetel xn der Liturgie, Frei- burg, 1901 ; T. Schermann. Eine Elfapoetelmoral, Munich, 1903; KrOger. Hietory, pp. 63-67. DIDASCALIA. See Apostolic CoNBTrruTioNs AND Canons. DIDEROT, did"rO', DEIOS: The most promi- nent of the Encyclopedists (q.v.); b. at Langres (150 m. s.e. of Paris) in Champagne Oct. 5, 1713, d. at Paris July 31, 1784. He was educated by the Jesuits, and, refusing to enter one of the leameiJ professions, was turned adrift by his father and came to Paris, where he lived from hand to mouth for a time. Gradually, however, he became recog- nized as one of the most powerful writers of thp day. His first independent work was the Essai 8ur le m^rUe et la vertu (1745). As one of the edi- tors of the Dictionnaire de midecine (6 vols., Paris, 1746), he gained valuable experience in encyclo- pedic system. His Pensdes philosophiques (The Hague, 1746), in which he attacked both atheism and the received Christianity, was burned by order of the Parliament of Paris. In the circle of the leaders of the ** Enlightenment" Diderot's name be- came known especially by his Lettre sur les ax^euglci (liondon, 1749), which supported Locke's theory of knowledge. He attacked the conventional morality of the day, with the resiilt (to which pos- sibly an allusion to the mistress of a minister con- tributed) that he was imprisoned at Vincennes for three months. He was released by the influence of Voltaire's friend Mme. du ChAtelet, and thence- forth was in close relation with the leaders of revo- lutionary thought. He had made very little pe- cuniary profit out of the EncycUyp^die, and Grimm appealed on his behalf to Catherine of Russia, who in 1765 bought his libraiy, allowing him the use of the books as long as he lived, and assigning him a yearly salary which a little later she paid him for fifty years in advance. In 1773 she summoned him to St. Petersburg with Grimm to converse with him in person. On his return he lived until his death in a house provided by her, in com- parative retirement but in unceasing labor on the undertakings of his party, writing (accord- ing to Grimm) two-thirds of Raynal's famous Hittoire philosophique, and contributing some of the most rhetorical pages to Helv^tius's De Tes- prU and Holbach's Systhne de la nature, Systhne social, and Morale univeraelle. His numerous wri- tings include the most varied forms of literary effort, from inept licentious tales and comedies which pointed away from the stiff classical style of the French drama and strongly influenced Leesing, to the most daring ethical and metaph}*^ ical speculations. like his famous contemporary Samuel Johnson, he is said to have been more effective as a talker than as a writer; and his mental qualifications were rather those of a stimu- lating force than of a reasoned philosopher. His own position gradually changed from theism to deism, then to materialism, and finally rested in a pantheistic sensualism (see Deism, II., § 2). In Sainte-Beuve's phrase, he was " the first great writer who belonged wholly and undividedly to modem democratic society," and his attacks on the political system of France were among the most potent causes of the Revolution. BiBLiooRAPHr: (Euvrea compUtea, 20 vols., Paria, 1875-77; (Euvrea ehoiaiea, 1884; A. ColliiKnon, Diderot, ca vie, am ceuvrea, aa correapondance, Paris, 1895; J. A. Naigeon. Mhnoirea . . . tur . . . Denia Diderot, ib. 1821; E. Sal- verte. £loge de Diderot, ib. 1847; £. Beraot. ^tudea sur Diderot, ib. 1855; L. Asseline. Diderot, ib. 1866; P. Du* prat. Lea EnegelopMiatea, Brussels, 1866; K. Rosenkrant. Diderofa LAen und Werke, Leipsic. 1866; J. Morley. Diderot and the Bncydopadiata, 2 vols., London. 1879: E. Scherer, Diderot, itude, Paris, 1880; F. Picavet, Lea Idiv- 4^6 JMdache Didymus logues, ib. 1891; L Ducros, Diderot, Vhomme et Vicrivain, ib. 1894; J. Reinach. Diderot, ib. 1894; M. Touraeux. Diderot et Cathenne II., ib. 1899; KL, iii. 1704-13. DIDON, dS"d6h', HENRI: Dominican; b. at Touvet (16 m. n.e. of Grenoble) Mar. 17, 1840; d. at Toulouse Mar. 13, 1900. In 1856 he entered the Dominican Order, and in 1861 went to Rome to complete his education. He was professor of theology in various Dominican monasteries, and in 1866 was Lenten preacher in London. In 1868-69 he was stationed at Nancy. He took part in the conferences at Marseilles in 1871-76, but his views favoring divorce resulted in his con- finement for a year and a half in the convent of Corbara, Corsica. From 1890 until his death he was the director of the College Albert-le-Grand in Arcueil. He was famous for his pulpit eloquence. His writings include L*Enseignement supirieur et lea universiiiscatholiquee (Paris, 1876); La Science sane Dieu (1878; Eng. transl. by R, Corder, London, 1882); IndiaeolvbiliU et divorce (1880); Lee AUe- mande (1884; Eng. transl. by R. L. de Beaufort, London, 1884); Vie de J^sue-Ckrist (2 vok., 1891; Eng. transl., London, 1891); La Fai en la diviniti de Jistia-Chriet (1894; Eng. transl., London, 1894); Deitx probUmee religieux : Confirences de Nancy, 1868-69 (1896); UilducaHon pr^senU (1898); and the posthumous Lettrea d MUe, Th, V, (1900) and Letiree d un ami (1902). BiBXJoaRAPHT: Roib^re, Un Maine modeme, Pwia, 1900; A. de Coulanges, Le Ptre Didon^ ib. 1900; P. Qaffre, Le Ph-e Didon, ib. 1902; J. de Romano, Henri Didan, ib. 1903; and St. Raynaud, L« Pire Didon, ea vie et eon auvre, ib. 1904.

DIDYMUS, THE BLIND, OF ALEXANDRIA: One of the last teachers and masters of the Alex- andrian catechetical school (see Alexandria, School of) and one of the most learned men of his time; b. probably 313; d. probably 398 (Palla- dius. Hist, Latu., iv.; Jerome, De vir, ill,, cix.). He lost his sight when a child, but his excellent mem- ory and great gifts enabled him to obtain much secular and religious learning (Rufinus, Hist, eccl., ii. 7). For more than fifty years he labored in the catechetical school, and among his pupils were Jerome and Rufinus. Thoroughly orthodox on the trinitarian question, he had the misfortune of being suspected of Origenism. That he was con- demned by the Fifth General Council (Second Con- stantinople, 553) for heresy is indeed not proved (cf. Hefele, ii. 859 sqq.; Eng. transl., iv. 294 sqq.), but the sixth and seventh councils (Third Constanti- nople and Second Nicsea, 680 and 787) rejected his supposed heresies. Of his dogmatic and exe- getical writings the following are extant either wholly or in part, in the original or in translation: (1) " On the Trinity," 3 books composed in 379 or later; (2) a " Book on the Holy Spirit," extant in Jerome's translation (printed among Jerome's works, MPL, xxiii. 101-154), considered one of the best works of the ancient Church on the sub- ject; (3) " Against the Manicheans," incomplete in the original, a refutation of Manicheism on logical and metaphysical grounds; (4) exegetical works, fragments of expositions of Genesis, Exo- dus, Samuel, Kings, Psalms, John, Acts, II Corin- thians, and an exposition of the Catholic epistles extant in the translation of Epiphanius Scholasticus (q.v.). The genuineness of this translation has been questioned by E. Klostermann {TU, new series, xiii. 2, Leipsic, 1905) on the basis of the Greek fragments printed by J. A. Cramer in Ca- tencB in epiatolas caiholicae (Oxford, 1840). Of the lost writings the most noteworthy is the ''Notes on Origen's 'Principles.'" Didymus was probably also the author of the last two books of the work against Eunomius ascribed to Basil the Great (cf. F. X. Funk, Kirchengeschichtliche Abhandlungenf ii., Paderborn, 1899, 291-329). Recently K. HoU (ZKG, XXV., 1904, 380-398) has claimed for Didymus the treatise Advereua Arium et Sabellium, ascribed to Gregory of Nyssa (in MPG, xlv. 1281 sqq.). G. Krueger. Bibliography: The works of Didymus are in MPQ, xxzix. Consult : J. A. Mingarelli, De Didymi commentariia, Bologna, 1709, reprinted MPG, xxxix. 139-216; H. £. F. Guericke, De 9chola qua Alexandria floruit, i. 02-^7, ii. 83-^, 332-378, Halle, 1824-25; Q. C. F. Luecke, QuaeHonee ae vindicia Didymiana, Qcttingen, 1829-32; O. Bardenhewer, Patrologie, pp. 290-293, Freibuig, 1804; T. Leipoldt, Didymue der Blinde von Alexandria, Leipsic, 1905; DCB, i. 827-829.

DIDYMUS, GABRIEL: German Reformer; b. at Annaberg (in Saxony, 18 m. s. of Chemnitz) c. 1487; d. at Torgau (in Prussian Saxony, 70 m. s.s.w. of Berlin) May 1, 1558. His family name was Zwilling, translated Didymus. According to a doubtful tradition he studied first at Prague, but from the year 1502 pursued his studies at Witten- berg, where he joined the Augustinians. When in 1512 he matriculated in the University he had already joined the order and was an associate of Luther in the monastery. On gaining his bache- lor's degree, Oct. 14, 1516, he was sent by Luther to Erfurt to continue his studies there (T. Kolde, J oh, V, StaupUz und die deutsche Augustinerhmr ffregation, Gotha, 1879, p. 267; Luther's letter to Joh. Long, Mar. 1, 1517, De Wette, Luthere Brief e, Berlin, 1825-28, i. 52), but the following winter he returned to Wittenberg and took his master's degree Feb. 14, 1518. Nothing more is heard of him until he took the leadership among the inno- vators in the Augustinian monastery in the stormy days of 1521. He entered the pulpit, manifesting a spirit like Carlstadt's; a great sensation was made by his sermon of Oct. 6, in which for hours he inveighed against the worship and sacrifice of the host and the private mass, demanded that the Eucharist be served in both kinds, and declared that he would never read another mass (CR, i. 460; ZKO, iv. 325 sqq.). The "little insignifi- cant one-eyed man " could hold his hearers, who saw in him another Luther; even Melanchthon was fascinated by him (TSK, 1885, 134). His ap- peal was successful, for the next Sunday the mass ceased to exist in the monastery — and the exodus of the monks followed. About Christmas Didy- mus began to preach the Reformation at Witten- berg. He went to Eilenburg, where in layman's garb he preached against the old worship, cele- brated the Lord's Supper in German, putting cup and bread into the hands of the communicants (ZKG, v., 1882, 327). On Friday, Jan. 10, 1522, he preached in Wittenberg against images (ZKG, Dieckholf Dietary I«aws of the Hebrews 426 V. 331 sqq.)) and dared even to denounce from the pulpit Justus Jonas and Amsdorf. He was the associate of Carlstadt, but was also the first to submit to Luther's leadership on the latter's re- turn (Luther's letter to W. Link, Mar. 19, 1522, De Wette, Luthers Briefe, ii 156). Called to Al- tenbui^ on Luther's recommendation Apr. 17, 1522 (De Wette, Luthers Briefe, ii. 183 sqq.), he was compelled to leave, after a few months' use- ful service, on account of the Eilenburg events, when he returned to Dttben. In the spring of 1523 he went to Torgau, where he thenceforth labored, respected and defended by Luther (De Wette, Luthers Brief e, iv. 581; v. 76, 492, 756). In the mean time he had come into conflict with the secular authorities, was deposed in 1549, but continued to live privately in Torgau and remained chaplain to the mother and wife of the Elector Moritz until his death. (T. Kolde.) Bibliography: J. G. Terne, Vermuh twr tufficieTUen Nath- rickt von de» Oabriel Didymut . . . Leben, Leipsic, 1737; C. Knabe, Die Torgauer Viniali4maordnuno von 1629, Torgau, 1881; H. BBigfi, Andnaa Boden»tein von Karl»tadt, 2 voIr.. Leipdc, 1906, ii. 645-549 (reprints the complaint of the AuffUfltinian monkB in Wittenberg againat his ser- mon of Oct. 6, 1621; of. i. 313, and for other references passim. Barge csJls him Zwilling).

DIECKHOFF, AUGUST WILHELM: German Lutheran theologian; b. at Gottingen Feb. 5, 1823; d. at Rostock Sept. 12, 1894. In 1847 he be- came lecturer in the theological faculty in Got- tingen, in 1850 was inaugurated lecturer there; in 1854 became extraordinary professor of systematic and historical theology, in 1860 professor of his- torical theology in Rostock, where he remained until his death. In the years 1860- z. Life and 1864 he edited, with Kliefoth, the Theo- Character. logische Zeitschrift. Beside his aca- demical duties, in the performance of which his lectures on the history of evangelical doctrine during the Reformation left a lasting im- pression, he developed a great literary activity in the interest of a historic presentation of the genesis of the Lutheran doctrinal reform. This began with his De Carolostadio Lutherance de servo arbitrio doctrince contra Echium defensors (Gottingen, 1850). In his first extensive work, on Die Waldenser im MitUlalter (Gdttingen, 1857), he showed that the Evangelicalism of the Waldensian manuscript literature is a forgery of a. Theolog- the seventeenth century and that in ical doctrine they stood on the ground of Writings, medieval Catholicism, and that it was the Lutheran Reformation which first broke radically with the false medieval doc- trinal development. Next appeared vol. i. of his largest work. Die evangelische Abendmahlslekre im ReformationszeitaUer (GOttingen, 1854), a work which unfortunately he never completed; in this he treated of the doctrine as stated by Luther during the years 1517-23, by Carlstadt, Zwingli, (Ecolampadius, and the Swabian Syngramma. The work is of lasting value, for it treats with de- cisive clearness the evolution of Luther's doctrines, setting forth both their merits and their defects. That Dieckhoff did not continue this study is un- doubtedly due to the fact that his interest centered in the beginnings of the Reformation. Then too he was drawn into theological controversies. Against Hofmann he postulated that (1) faith attains certainty only in union with Scripture, (2) the content of the system of theological thought is given in the Word of God. Later he again at- tacked Hofmann and his school. In these other- wise valuable contributions his polemics is at times misleading and his dogmatic position con- fused. The ecclesiastical-political questions of his time he studied with zealous attention. After the Vat- ican Council he published Schrift und Tradition . . . (1870), a clear and convincing refutation of Catholic objections to the evangelical doctrine of Scripture as they appeared in the work of Von Ket- teler, the bishop of Maine, entitled Das aUgemeine Konzil und seine Bedeutung fur unsere Zeit (Mainz, 1869). Then came questions nearer home — school supervision by the state, treated in his StcuU und Kirche (Leipsic, 1872); civil marriage, which he at- tacked in Die kirchliche Trauung (Rostock, 1878) and in Civilehe und kirchliche Trauung (1880). In the last decade of his life he was drawn into the contro- versy raised in Germany by the ultra-Lutheran Missouri-Synod. In 1884, on account of a deci- sion in favor of the Wisconsin-Synod, 3. Ecclesi- he was attacked by the Missourians, astical to whom he replied in Der missouri' Writings, sche PrddesHnaHonismus und die Con- cordienformel (1885) and Zur Lehre von der Bekekrung und die PrddesHnatian (1886). These essays are of lasting importance since they give a clear view not only of Luther's predestina- tionism, but also of the teaching of the almost forgotten Lutheran theologian Laterman. On the other hand, his Inspiration, und Irrthumslosigkeit der heiligen Schrift (Leipsic, 1891), directed against the Missouri extreme, brought him judicial cen- sure. While in all these works he labored in his especial field, tracing the doctrines back to Luther's teaching, he wrote also a number of essays prepar- atory to these subjects. Worthy of mention are Augustine und Luthers Lehre von der Gnade (in TZf i.), Luthers Lehre von der kirchlichen GewaU (Berlin, 1865), and especially Der Ablasstreit (1866), wherein he showed how much Luther and the Reformation profited by the discussion about the sale of indulgences. Finally mention must be made of the work Justin, Augustin, Bemhard und Luther (Leipsic, 1882), developed from lectures in which he traced in masterly fashion the evolution of the Christian conception of the truth. He re- ceived a new inspiration from the rediscovery in 1876 of Luther's " Lectures on the Psalms." Here followed Luthers SteUung tur Kirche vor 1517 (Rostock, 1883) and Luthers Lehre in ihrer ersten Gestalt (1887), the ripest fruit of all his investiga- tion, expounding Luther's conception of " Faith." (K. Schmidt.)

DIEKAMP, FRANZ: Roman Catholic; b. at Geldern (65 m. s.w. of Munster) Nov. 8, 1864. He studied at MUnster, Eichstfttt, and Munich from 1882 to 1887; became chaplain at Camp, 1888; lecturer in the theological seminary at MOnster, 1889; student at Munich, 1896; privat-docent for 127 Dieokhoff IMetary Ijaws of the Hebrews >atrology and the history of dogmatics at Munich, 1898; associate professor, 1902, and full professor, L904. He has written Die GoUesUkre dea heiligen Gregor von Nyssa (Munster, 1896); Hippolytoa von Fheben (1898); and Die origeniatischen StreiHg- 'ceiten im aechsten Jahrhundert und das fiinfte all- femeine Condi (1899), and has edited the Theo- ^ogische Revue since 1902. DIEPElfBROCK, MELCHIOR VON: Cardinal; b. at Bocholt (44 m. w. of Mtlnster) Jan. 6, 1798; d. at the castle of Johannesberg at Jauemig (52 m. n.w. of Troppau) Jan. 20, 1853. In 1810 he was sent to the military academy of Bonn, but was soon expelled for insubordination. Per- meated with the rising spirit of nationalism which inspired the Grermany of the period, he became a lieutenant of militia and later entered a regiment of the line, serving in France and also in garrison- duty. Resigning on the advice of his superiors, he returned to his home, and was there converted by Michael Sailer, who was then professor at Lands- hut. He then studied at Landshut, and in 1819 decided to enter the priesthood, and studied at Mainz, Mtknster, and Regensbui^, where Sailer had been a canon since 1821. On Dec. 27, 1823, Diepenbrock was ordained priest, and then en- tered on his duties as Sailer's secretary, devoting himself especially to the mysticism of the Middle Ages, the result being his Heinrich Sti808 Leben und Schriften (Regensbui^ 1829) and the OeiaUicher Bluthenstrauaa (Sulzbach, 1829). When Sailer was consecrated bishop of Regensburg in 1829, Diepenbrock, after long hesitation, accepted a canonry, and under Bishop Valentine rose to be vicar-general. He soon resigned, however, and in a brief period of retirement prepared a translation from Hendrik Conscience under the title of VIA- misches StUUben (Regensburg, 1845). He was con- secrated prince bishop of Breslau on July 27, 1845. Within a year he found himself obliged to excom- municate all the ** German Catholics " to check the disturbances which this movement caused in the diocese of Breslau, while in the revolution of 1S48 he urged obedience to the government. On the other hand, he firmly advocated the independ- ence of the Church as regards the State, and pro- tested against the oath to support the constitution which was required of the clergy who held official positions. Only the conciliatoiy attitude of the Slate prevented serious controversies. A papal brief of Oct. 24, 1849, appointed him vicar apos- tolic for the Pnissian Army. As prince bishop of Breslau Diepenbrock furthered the cause of mon- asteries, and encouraged Redemptorist and Jesuit missions among the laity. He was created car- dinal by Pius IX. in 1850, and in this capacity be- came involved in a controversy with the Protestant general superintendent of Silesia, who complained of the missionary propaganda of the Roman Cath- olics, only to receive a sharp rebuff from Diepen- brock. (HEmRicH Schmidt.) BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lives are by H. FCrater, Regenflbuis, 1878; J. H. Reinkena, Leipmc. 1881; M. Rdttscher, Frankfort, 1886; B. Boeniseh, Oppeln, 1808; H. Finke, Zur Erin- neruno of> Kardinal MeUhior von Ditpenbroek, liOnster, 1898. DIES IRS. See Thomas op Celano. DIESTEL, dts'tel, LUDWIG: Theologian and church historian; b. at Konigsberg Sept. 28, 1825; d. at Tubingen May 15, 1879. He entered the Uni- versity of Konigsberg in 1844 to prepare himself for the clerical calling, and in Oct., 1847, went to Berlin; in 1848 he migrated to Bonn, where he be- came privat-docent in 1851, and there, during a residence of seven years, lived in intimate friend- ship with Ritschl. He was made extraordinary professor in 1858, and in 1862 went to Greifswald, where he held the chair of Old Testament exegesis. In 1867 he became professor at Jena, and in 1872 at Tubingen. After 1871 he was a member of the Halle committee for the revision of the Luther Bible. DiesteFs work on the Old Testament was that of the theologian rather than of the philolo- gist or textual critic. His fame rests chiefly on his Oeachichte dea Alien Testaments in der chriat- lichen Kirche (Jena, 1869), a valuable storehouse of information on Old Testament exegesis and hermeneutics. The work may be characterised as a history of the study of the Old Testament in the Christian Church rather than as a his- tory of the Bible in itself. Of especial impor- tance is the division of the guiding principles in the correct method of investigation of the Old Testament into national, historical, and religious. Diestel's only independent works, in addition to the one already mentioned, were Der Segen Jar kobs in Oenesia XLIX historiseh erldutert (Bruns- wick, 1853); Ueber die Theokratie Israels (Greifs- wald, 1864); and a revision of the fourth edition of August Knobel's commentary on Isaiah (Leip- sic, 1872). (E. Kautzbgh.) DIETARY LAWS OF THE HEBREWS. Animals Allowed and Prohibited m Food (| 1). Oriffin and Significance of the Distinction (| 2). Contributory Factors (| 3). The Prohibition of Blood (| 4). The Prohibition of Fat (| 5). Two Additional Restrictions (| 6). The Christian Usage and Attitude (I 7). As with the symbolically elaborated religions of antiquity in general, the sacred laws of the Old Testament include prescriptions restricting the choice of meats and rules for preparing the same. Many animals are described as unclean, neither to be sacrificed nor eaten by man, nor to be touched as carcasses; whereas, of those designated as clean for food, not all are allowed in sacri- I. Animals fice (Lev. xi.; Deut. xiv. ^21). Ani- Allowed mals appear to be grouped, in this and Pro- connection, according to the primi- hiblted aa tive Hebrew arrangement, in four or Food. five classes; and in several classes the enumeration of particular species is precluded by the expedient of general marks of distinction. Among quadrupeds, for instance, those are accounted clean which, in the first place, " part the hoof," and, in the second place, chew the cud. There are thus mentioned as edible in Deut. xiv. 4-6, the ox, sheep, goat, hart, gazel, roebuck, and certain species of antelope. On the other hand, those which lack one or both of these distinguishing marks are unclean; such as the camel, rock-badger, hare, swine, together with " whatsoever goeth upon its paws " (Lev. xi. 27). Among aquatic animals, those are edible which have fins and scales; not those, however, which (like the eel) resemble the reptile family and ex- hibit no marked fish type at all. Among birds about nineteen to twenty-one species are prohibited as food; for the most part, birds of prey, such as the eagle, vulture, raven, owl, etc., which feed on carrion and filthy substances; marsh birds and water-fowls also, such as the stork, heron, pelican, and others, are prohibited; likewise the ostrich, or " desert bird." The bat is classed with birds, as the Arabs still class it. There is an additional prescription with reference to "winged creeping things " (insects), which are summarily prohibited with but one general exception (stated only in Lev.); namely, those are permitted as food '' which have legs above their feet, to leap withal"; so that grasshoppers are thus allowed, together with three similar species (Lev. xi. 22). Among the " creeping things " which are unclean according to Lev. xi. 41, 42 special mention is made of the mole, mouse, lizard, and some similar but not cer- tainly definable animals; together with the cha- meleon (Lev. xi. 29-30). It is also observed of these, in Lev. xi. 32-33, that they defile vessels, raiment, etc., as well as food, by contact when dead. Among " creeping things " which are an ''abomination" mention is made (verse 42) of " whatsoever goeth upon the belly "; that is to say, snakes and worms. Mere touching of live " unclean " animals does not defile, but only to eat of them defiles; as is also true of touching or carrying their carcass; while, finally (on the ground adduced below), there is defilement in touching the dead body of clean creatures (see Defilement AND Purification, Ceremonial, L, 1, § 5), and in eating or carrying such creatures when fallen dead without being slaughtered (Lev. xi. 39). The consequences of transgressing these prescrip- tions and the necessary purifications are simple and not unduly oppressive. Whoever touches the carcass of unclean or clean beasts shall be un- clean till evening; whoever carries such dead body, or even eats of it, and this of edible, or clean beasts as well, must furthermore wash his clothes (Lev. xi. 24-25, 28, 31, 39-40). With reference to polluted objects cf. Lev. xi. 32-33. The fact that the distinction between clean and unclean beasts extends as far back as the memories of the Hebrews is attested by the a. Origin Jehovistic passages, wherein the dis- and Signifi- tinction is traced to the deluge cance of the (Gen. vii. 2, viii. 20). The distinction Distinction, was not first introduced by the Mosaic legislation, but was already at hand in popular usage; which, like all tribal customs, had religious authority. Moses simply imparted a more definite l^al form to this usage, and brought it into relation with the worship of Yahweh. The dominating motive herein was not so much mere expediency, well adapted though these prescrip- tions were to exert a wholesome physical effect, as the feeling that a natural imcleanneBs pervaded the prohibited animals, from which the members o: Yahweh's consecrated people should be kept cl^s (cf. Lev. xi. 44-46; Deut. xiv. 2-^). The peojAed the covenant are to keep themselves clean bodSv, out of regard to the God who dwells in their midst, unto whom everything imclean is abhorrent, h the matter of practical determination of what wa^ clean or unclean the law adjusted itself to the sentiment already operative among the peopk*. It took account first of all of the natural aversion among them toward certain kinds of food and d the disgust for certain animals. This factor is more primitive than the superstition attached to it Totemism and taboo have been advanced as hy- potheses to explain the origin of this distinctioo (W. Robertson Smith). But totemism would lead merely to prohibition of some particular animal or animals, but by no means explain the separatioii of the animal world into two classes, of which the greater is accounted unclean. Moreover, the dietaiy regulation of the Israelites is very different from ethnic taboo regulations, whereby certain foods, animals, and fruits, consecrated to some divinity, are forbidden either entirely or at stated times to specified persons or classes. With the Israelites the distinction is easy to understand, because objectively grounded, in the light of the commim human desire for cleanliness (see Defileuent and Purification, Ceremonial, I., 5). Nor was the popular intuition, prompted by sound natural sentiment, unworthy to be adopted by the Mosaic religion, to be more 3. Contrib- definitely regulated and made serv- utoiy iceable to the same. What at first Factors, glance appear to be surprising marks of distinction for the mammals are to be explained as follows: those quadrupeds which, being herbivorous, furnish the cleanest and most savory meat (hence meat appropriate for sacrifice as well, such as beef animals, sheep, etc. ) have also supplied, as cust(xnaiy slaughter animals, the distinguishing marks for discrimination of doubt- ful animals (for example, game). So the real sig- nificance of the distinction is not to be sought in the marks, hut in the qualities, just mentioned, which are associated therewith. Beasts " that zo on their paws,'' however, are carnivorous, hang chiefly beasts of prey and such as live on carrion, for which reasons they are much more liable to be characterized by offensiveness of every description than the standard animals; and they must have seemed especially unclean to the Israelites, to whom it was extremely offensive to swallow carrion, lacerated or strangled flesh, and the like. Neither is the motive to be disregarded that what is edible shall belong to some pronounced species of animal. This becomes apparent in the distinguishing marks of fishes; perhaps also in case of the bat, which, furthermore, makes its haunt in filthy holes; and in case of the ostrich, whose peculiar characteristics are enhanced by its singular mode of life. But Philo and other Jews of an allegorical bent, and after them the Church Fathers, sought some im- mediate moral basis or symbolic significance in all these prescriptions with an all too mystical refine- ment. V20 Dietary Iaws of the Hebrews Essentially different in principle is the prohibi- ion against consuming the blood and the fat of (clean or edible) animals. The blood 4. The Pro- is not unclean in itself; on the con- bibition of trary, it is the precious vital fluid, Blood, which is offered to God as the worthiest portion of the animal creature. life 1 from God and belongs to God. On account of ta intimate relation to life, men shall not swallow he blood, but shall consecrate it to God. By this ery property, too, blood is also the appropriate deans of atonement, can intercede for men, can « offered to God in their place — " For the life f the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to 'ou upon the altar to make atonement for your ouls " (Lev. xviL 11). For this reason care must le observed in the slaying that the blood may scape. Nothing lacerated or smothered is allowed o be eaten, because in that case the blood has not properly escaped. This practise of avoiding to partake of blood is veiy ancient (Gen. ix. 4). It 9 sharply accentuated in various repetitions and tortious of the Law (Lev. iii. 17, viL 26-27, xvii. O, xix. 26; Deut. xii. 16, 23-24, xv. 23; cf. Ezek. :xxiii. 25; I Sam. xiv. 32-33). Even the stranger irho had settled in Canaan was forbidden to eat the »lood (Lev. xvii. 10, 15), whereas in Deut. xiv. 21 he stranger is at least allowed the cattle "that lieth of itself." Whoever transgressed the com- aandment had to undergo the same course of txpiation as in the case of the defilements noted kbove (Lev. xvii. 10, 15), or expect extermination >y the hand of God (Lev. xvii. 16, viL 27). The Jood of sacrificial beasts was brought to the altar; Q other cases it was simply poured on the ground >T covered with " dust." The avoidance of par- aking of blood has become so natural to the Jews hat the practise continues. The proviso that the >lood of animals must properly escape in the laughtering led to a complicated ceremonial, inder rabbinical Judaism, with reference to the laughter (purporting to follow the tradition men- ioned in Deut. xii. 21). The slaying is to be des- patched by a " Schfichter " (Jewish butcher) who horoughly understands the Talmudic regulations cf . the Mishna tract J3uUin and the penal laws Q connection with partiddng of blood, KerUot, K, 5; Jso Maimonides, Yad harHazakaht Hilkot ShehMoh ; }hulhan 'Aruk, Yore De*ah ; and on Jewish butcher- ag, I. Hamburger, ReaUnq^klopddie fUr Bibel und ""almud, iL 1099 sqq.; JE, xi. 253 sqq.). Like the blood, the fat of sacrificial beasts is orbidden to be eaten (Lev. iii. 17. vii. 25). Not the outer fat, which grows united 5. The Pro- with the flesh, is meant, but that hibition deposited about the entrails, and of Fat especially about the kidneys, including in case of sheep the " fat tail " (Lev. ii. 9-10). But, far from being unclean, the fat is, n a certain sense, the " quintessence " of the )ody, and therefore the choicest portion, reserved )y Yahweh for himself. Here, too, the standpoint 9 theocratic, not hygienic or sanitary. Moreover, >euteronomy says naught of this prohibition. There are two additional precepts in respect to ood: (1) Gen. xxxii. 32, which, to be sure, is not a prescriptive rule, but states as a generally recog- nized usage in Israel that the hip sinew {nenm» Uchiadicua) of slaughtered animals 6. Two Ad- was never eaten. (2) The express ditional command not to ** seethe a kid in its Restric- mother's milk " is found in the Book tions. of the Covenant (Ex. xxiii. 19) and repeated Ex. xxxiv. 26 and Deut. xiv. 21. It is not necessary to assume that the intent here was to do away with some heathen sacrificial practise (Maimonides, Roskoff) or some other custom of superstitious intent (magical craft, Stade). It is more probable that this prohibition, like Lev. xxii. 28, Deut. xxii. 6-7 (cf., too, the Sabbath rest for beasts), enjoins a certain sparing of nature even in the animal world. In later times this prohibition was so far amplified by the Tar- gum and rabbinical writers that meat might not be cooked in milk or butter at all; and this led to a punctilious classification of kitchen utensils, and to similar pedantries in vogue among modem orthodox Jews. The original significance of the matter is more correctly recognized by the Samari- tans, who even now procure meat and milk from different districts. In the New Testament the primitive Christian congregation is found for the most part loyal to the traditional precepts of Moses. But the dis- tinction between clean and unclean 7. The animals, like other purificatory pre- Christian scriptions that hedged Israel in, had Usage and to fall away if any closer touch was Attitude, to ensue with the heathen world. The lesson was imparted to Peter (Acts X. 9 sqq.). Such abolition of barrier pre- cepts, indeed, is intrinsically supported by the revelation fulfilled through Christ, which, by removing from the sinner his once burdening ban of uncleanness, purifies and sanctifies the whole creature. In this light the external distinction of clean and unclean loses its proper warrant of being. Especially to be noted is the canon of Matt. XV. 11, 17-20; Mark vii. 15, whereby dietaiy laws are already repealed in principle. In the primitive Christian Church the prohibition against partaking of blood was longest and most strictly maintained in force; and this, indeed, with ref- erence to Gentile Christians as well as Jewish (Acts XV. 20, 29, xxi. 25), not as a distmctively Israelitic prohibition, but one reaching back even to Noah. In Tertullian's time the Church deemed itself still generally bound by that restriction (Tertullian, ApoL, ix.; De monoffamia, v.; De idoUUria, xxiv.; Eusebius, Hist eccl, v. 1). The Greek Church adhered to the same constantly (Second TruUan Council, canon Ixvii.; Suicerus, Thesawrua eccU- siaalicus, i. 113). In principle, however, this pro- hibition was done away with by the word of the Lord, Matt. xv. 11, aa well as through the evangelic liberty proclaimed by the apostles, Paul especially (I Tim. iv. 3-4), as belonging to the " elements of the world " (Gal. iv. 3), which could serve only by way of preparatory instruction to the congregation of the faithful, who are told " all things are yours, and ye are Christ's." C. VON Orelu. ZMnrle 430 Bduoobapht: A. WMner, Die jUdtMchen SjmteoMttM, Bnslau, 1806; J. D. MiehaelU, MommcAm Rechl, W. 126- 126, BMhl. 1777; H. Ewald. Die AUerthUm^ dee Volkee Itnel, pp. 102-212, Odttimcen, 1866, Kng. transL. pp. 144-166, Boston, 1876; W. M. Thomson, The Land and the Book, 3 vols.. New York, 1881^86; H. L. Straek, Dae BltU im Gtauben und Aherglavben, BerUn. 1000; Z>B. u. 27-43; EB, u. 1538 sqq.; JB, v. 431-433; and the literature under Dbiilbicbnt and Pubuication, Cbrb- MONIAL- DIETENBERGERy JOHANITES: German Ro- man Catholic Bible translator; b. at Frankfort- on-the-Main c. 1475; d. at Mainz Sept. 4, 1537. He entered in early life the Dominican order, and in 1510 became prior of the Frankfort monastery. This office he held till 1524. In 1526 he became prior in Coblenz. He was among the theologians chosen to refute the Augsbixrg Confession in 1530. He was also one of the Dominican inquisitors, and as such had a part in the Reuchlin investigation. From 1533 till his death he was professor of the- ology at the University of Mains. He is spoken of by his contemporaries, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, as one of the foremost men of his time, but he has been so much forgotten that the de- tails of his life are not known, and the way in which the outline that is known has been stated is usu- ally erroneous. He was a prolific author. Most nu- merous are his ascetic and polemical writings, but of greater permanent value are his translation of the entire Bible, for which his scholarship in Hebrew and Greek qualified him, but which was fiercely attacked by the Protestants as nothing more than a transcript of Luther's translation, and particulariy his catechism which was one of the earliest of the kind known. The Bible version (Mains, 1534) is of course from the Vulgate. It passed through forty editions. His catechism (Mainz, 1537) was also very popular and received the indorsement of numerous church bodies. Bibliography: H. Wedewer, Jahannee Dietenberger, Frei- burg. 1888; C. Moufang, Die Maimer Katediiamen . . . hie eum Ende dee 18. Jahrhunderte, Mains, 1878. DIETRICH, dt'triH. OF APOLDA: Author of a life of St. Elizabeth of Thuringia and another of St. Dominic. He is undoubtedly identical with Die- trich of Thuringia, but of his life is known only what may be gathered from the prologues to his works — ^that he was bom probably about 1228 in Apolda, and became a Dominican in the monastery at Erfurt in 1247; he most likely died there after 1296. His two biographies are written not with- out skill, and display painstaking search after oral and written sources. The VUa S. EliaabethcB was written 1289 and printed in Canisius, Lectumes anHqtMF, ed. Basnage, iv (Amsterdam, 1725), 116-152; it adds nothing to our knowledge of the saint's life, and the same is true of his Vila S. Dominici (latest ed. by A. Cur6, Paris, 1887). Begun at the request of Munione da Zamorra, general of the order, Dietrich finished it under Nicholas Bocassinus, general 1296-98. He has incorporated oral tradition from Sister Concilia in Rome, and the German provincial Gerard, and has used the older biographies of the saint by Jordanus, Constantine, Humbert, Gerhard of Frachet, and the acts of the canonization. (G. GrOtzmacher.) Bibliography: J. Qu^Stif and J. ^ohard, Scriptoree orf!«j prcedieatorum, i. 413 sqq.. 453 aqq.* Pkrie, 1719 Boerner. in NA, ziii (1888). pp. 472-491 (pp. «l-6: eontain an edition of the Viia). DIETRICH OF NIEHEIM (RIEH): Romsn Cathoiic Reformatory writer at the time of th- great Western schism (see Schism); b. in thedb- cese of Paderbom in Westphalia, probably &'. Nieheim (18 m. e.n.e. of Paderbom) between \Xy^ I and 1348; d. at Maestricht Mar., 1418. A vfry | industrious man, he labored for the removal of tl r | schism and, like Pierre d' Ailly and Gerson in FrsntH , lifted up his voice in Germany in favor of a thorou?!: I reformation of the Church. At the time of iik Council at Constance he was the greatest ecrK ' siastico-political publicist using the German ton^it. All his life he is designated as a cleric of the dio^^ of Paderbom. He was not of noble birth, wis educated outside of his native land, and traveW through Italy. Having studied jurisprudence, l^ obtained a position in the curia. In 1370 he wi< an officer in the papal court at Avignon, and in 1377. as notarins aacri palatii went with the curia to RoiDe. Under Urban VI. he obtained the important aii lucrative offices of abbreviator and scriptor in th'^ chancery. After the outbreak of the schism b 1378 he shared the vicissitudes of Urban VI.. bu*. he obtained rich livings, and under the next pop*:, Boniface IX. (1389-1404), he was appointed to lb episcopal see of Verden on the Aller, in his nativ Lower Saxony. He occupied the sec from IS".*? to 1390, when he had to resign. In 1403 he w^ again in Rome and interested in the newly founded German Hospital dell' Anima. He took no part in the Council at Pisa (1409), as certain business took him to Germany. But he remained in the service of the curia till the flight of John XX III from the Council at Constance in 1415 induced hin to sever his connection with the pope. At the Council of Constance he played officially no vr- portant part, but exercised considerable influence by his writings. It may be taken for granted thai he composed at Constance the passionate hbfi which its first editor entitled Invectiva in dijjT*' gientem . . . Johannem xxitu In this he holds before the pope a fearful list of sins committeii and destroys his moral character irretrievably In his official position Dietrich had the chance (^ observing the doings of the curia from 1377 to 1415, and, as he was well educated and strove to be honest, his records have almost the value d a source. There is at present no agreement conceni- ing the genuineness of the writings attributed to him. The most important may be: (1) Nemus unionis (first printed Basel, 1566, as bk. iv. of the following work), treating of the union of the church; (2) De sdiismaU (Nuremberg, 1536), a history of the schism to 1410; (3) HtsUria de rite Johannis xxiii. (Frankfort, 1420), also a bistoiy of the Council of Constance and Dietrich's daT- book to 1416; (4) PriviUgia et jitra imi>rr:i (Basel, 1566\ a history of the Holy Roman empinp, after the fashion of Dante's political dreams. Ac- cording to Erler, Dietrich did not write the works De neceMttaU reformationia eccUsia, De modis uni- endi ac reformandi eccUsiatn, and Ds difficuUeU 431 Dietenber^r DiiTffle reformationU in concQio univeraali, all of which belong to the time of the' great Western schlBm. Paul T^chackxrt. Bibliography: For a full list of editions of the works of Dietrich and of literature on him consult: Potthast. W§0' toMMT, pp. 1051-66 (indispensable as an aid to special study). The best review of his life and writings is Q. Erler, Dietrich von Nuheinit Leipsic. 1887. Consult further: J. B. Schwab, JoKannea Oenon, WQrsburg. 1858; H. V. Sauerland, Dot Ltben de» Dietrich von Nieheim, Odttingen. 1875: P. Tschackert. Peter von Ailli, Qotha. 1877; A. Frits. Zur QuelUnkritik der Sehriften Dietriche von NUm, Paderbom, 1886; O. Lorens, Deutechlande CfeKhidUaquOUn, ii. 162, 313-323. 371-374. 413-414, Berlin. 1887; H. Finke, Acta concUiiCon9tantimei»t vol. i., Monster, 1806; KL, iii. 1747-40.

DIETRICH, VEIT: German Reformer; b. in Nuremberg Dec. 8, 1506; d. there Mar. 25, 1549. Though only a shoemaker's son, he went in 1522 to the University of Wittenberg, where he soon gained the affection of Melanchthon. Later he came in close touch with Luther, who advised him to forsake medicine for theology; he shared Luther's house and board, and became his aman- uensis and secretary. As such he accompanied Luther to the debate at Marburg in 1529, in the following year he went with Luther to Coburg on the way to the Diet at Augsburg. In 1533 he ap- pears as dean of the faculty of arts in Wittenberg. On Dec. 14, 1535, he became minister at St. Sebald's in Nuremberg, and shortly after married a lady of Nuremberg. He was Melanchthon's lifelong friend, and had his confidence, knew his thoughts, and shared his cares as no other did except Camerarius; while more anti-Roman than Melanchthon, he was his disciple rather than Luther's. He edited and translated into German a number of Luther's and Melanchthon's minor writings; it is charged that he proceeded very arbitrarily in editing, sometimes suppressing Luther's views or changing them com- pletely. Of his own works (which were very numer- ous) the most popular was the Summaria fiber das AUe Testament (Wittenberg, 1541), an attempt to give briefly " what it is most necessary and useful that the young people and the common man should know of each chapter." In 1544, with Melanch- thon's help, he rendered a like service for the New Testament (reprinted by the Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri and Ohio, St. Loub, 1857). (T. KOLDE.) BIBLIOGRAPHY: Q. T. Strobel, Naehrieht von dem Lthen und don Schrifton Veit Diotridie, Nuremberg. 1772; J. Voigt, Brieftoecheel dor horUhmieeten Oelehrton . . . der Refor- mation, pp. 171-216. Kdnigflberg. 1841; H. E. J&oobs. Martin Luther, New York. 1898; J. W. Richard, Philip M^ndUhon, ib. 1808. Very numerous are the references to Dietrich in J. Kfistlin, Martin Luther, Berlin. 1003. DIEU, dy©, LUDOVICUS (LODEWIJK) DE: Dutch Orientalist; b. at Flushing, Holland, Apr. 7, 1590; d. at Leyden Nov. 13, 1642. He studied in Leyden, where, under J. Scaliger, Oriental studies had thriven. The Library of the "Athens of Holland " was rich in Oriental manuscripts, and Thomas Erpenius, who was with Daniel Colonius (van Ceulen) the teacher who most impressed him, saw to it that these treasures were well used. After completing his studies, in 1613 Dieu became pastor at Middelburg, in 1615 he removed to Flush- ing, and in 1617 took charge of the Low German congregation at Leyden, and served also as regent of the Walloon College until his death. He refused a call to the newly founded University of Utrecht, and also many other offers. He was a plain, reliable, and dear-eyed scholar, as a commentator he was highly esteemed, and was always active in the public weaL Because of the character of his studies and of his taste for linguistics he became an exegete, and employed in a new way, in the service of Biblical science, the translations from Oriental languages, especially those from the Syriac, the Arabic, and the Ethiopic, aa well as his knowl- edge of Jewish literature. The study of Tremel- lius's Latm translation of the Syriac New Testament and the use of a translation into Hebrew of a part of the New Testament by Mercerus and Milnster gave his zeal new impetus in the same direction. Further to equip himself he dived into the trans- lations of Oriental literature furnished by his friend Heinsius, librarian in Leyden. The fruits of his labors he gathered partly in writings on linguistics, partly in notes on difficult Biblical passages. The exegetical works completed in this period are collected under the title Critica sacra sive animad- versiones in loca quadam difficiliora Veteris et Novi Testamenti (Amsterdam, 1884), edited with good indexes. In still another field Dieu's scientific work bore good fruit. Through a traveler to the Orient he got possession of some missionary tracts put into Persian by the Jesuit Jerome Xavier, and of a Life of Jesus and a Life of Peter, which were intended to bring to the " Mongols " the true word of God. He acquired a knowledge of Persian in order to examine the missionary methods of the Jesuits, and expressed disgust at the way in which they palmed off legends and falsehoods as truth. He proceeded to edit their works, added a Latin translation and valuable notes, and affixed a Persian grammar, that any one might investigate and see that he, a priest of science, fought with clean weapons. It is a missionary's duty, he taught, to learn the language, so as not to hinder the progress of the Gospel among the heathen. (G. Heinrici.) Bibliography: As an early source consult R. Simon, HiO' toire critique du V. T., pp. 440 sqq., Amsterdam. 1678; idem, Histoire critique des . . . eommentateure du N. T., pp. 787 sqq.; Rotterdam, 1603. Ck>nsult also Niotfron, Mhnovree, xv. 85 sqq.; A. J. van der Aa, Btographieeh Woordenboek der Nederlanden, iv. 53, Haarlem, 1859.

DIGGLE, JOHN WILLIAM: Anglican bishop of Carlisle; b. at Pendleton (a suburb of Manchester) Mar. 2, 1847. He studied at Merton College, Oxford (B.A., 1870), and was ordained priest in 1872. He was curate at Whalley Range, Lancashire (1871- 1872), AU Saints', Liverpool (1872-74), St. John's, Walton, Liverpool (1874-75), and vicar of Mossley Hill, Liverpool (1876-96). He was canon of Car- lisle and archdeacon of Westmorland (1896-1901), and examining chaplain to the bishop of Carlisle (1892-1901). He was rector of St. Martin's, Birmingham, in 1901-04, and archdeacon of Birmingham and rural dean in 1903-05. He was rural dean of Child wall in 1882-96, honorary canon of Liverpool in 1889-96, president of the Liverpool Council of Education in 1891, select preacher to the University of Oxford in 1898, and examining chaplain to the bishop of Worcester in 1902-05. In 1906 he was consecrated bishop of Carlisle. He has edited Bishop James Eraser's University and Parochial Sermons (London, 1887) and Lan- cashire Life (1889); and has written Godliness and Manliness (London, 1886); True Religion (1887); Sermons for Daily Life (1891); Religious Doubt (1895); and Short Studies in Holiness (1900).

DIKE, SAMUEL WARREN: Congregationalist; b. at Thompson, Conn., Feb. 13, 1839. He studied at Williams College (B.A., 1863), Hartford Theo- logical Seminary (1863-^5), and Andover Theo- logical Seminary (B.D., 1866). He was pastor at West Randolph, Vt. (1866-77), and Royalton, Vt. (1879-82), and since 1881 has been corresponding secretary of the National League for the Protection of the Family, which was founded in that year under the name of the Divorce Reform League, largely as the result of his writings. He has lec- tured in many higher institutions of learning, and originated the home department of the Sunday- school. He sympathizes with the use of scientific methods in theology and polity. He is the author of numerous articles on divorce, the family, and country towns. DILLER (DILHERR), MICHAEL: Reformer of Speyer; b., probably in the diocese of Speyer, in the early part of the sixteenth century; d. at Heidelberg 1570. He matriculated at Witten- berg in 1523, and shortly after 1529 was prior of the Augustinian monastery at Speyer, and preached there frequently. Being a pupil of Wittenberg, he preached justification from a strictly evangelical point of view, although he avoided polemics. He soon gained the confidence of the citizens of Speyer, and in 1538 the municipal council, recognizing the necessity of providing for regular evangelical preaching to prevent the people, who neglected the Roman Catholic service, from '* sinking into deprav- ity," requested Diller to hold regular services in his church. In 1540 the bishop became aware of this course, and commanded him to cease immediately, although he was obliged to acquiesce in the refusal of Diller, who was protected by the council. In Jan., 1541, the emperor Charles V. visited Speyer and forbade the council to permit Diller to deliver his sermons, since he ** preached of justification and good works after the new fashion." Diller, who had left the city before the arrival of Charles, pleaded his cause before the council and continued his activity after the emperor's departure. Thus far Diller had mode no changes in the form of the service, but previous to Easter of 1543 he preached against the mass and demanded that the cup be given to the laity. The bishop in vain asked the council to interfere, and it would seem that Diller now actually administered the Holy Sacrament in both kinds. During the emperor's attendance at the Diet of Speyer (Jan.-June, 1544) Diller was absent from the city, but he resumed his activity with fresh ardor after the adjournment of the diet. The councfl, encouraged by the course of events at the diet, not only protected him, but also decided to give him an assistant. The success of the emperor in the Schmalkald War ended Diller's work and evangelical preaching in Speyer. Charles V. again visited the city, azKl Diller was obliged to leave. He went to Basel, and in 1553 accepted a call to Neubur^ as court preacher to the palgrave Ottheinrich. There, in 1554, he cooperated in the introduction of the church-order. When Ottheinrich became elector of the Palatinate in 1556 Diller followed him to Heidelberg, and collaborated with Marbach and Stolo in the preparation of a church-order, Lutheran in type, which was adopted Apr. 4, 1556. He also assisted in the Baden church-order of 1556, took part in the same year in the ecclesiastical visitations in the Upper Palatinate and in the margravate of Baden, and was one of the most influential members of the council appointed to direct the Palatinate Church. The elector Frederick III., who succeeded Ottheinrich in 1559, likewise reposed full confidence in Diller. Throughout the doctrinal controversies of the period he labored for peace. Repelled by Hesshusen and his sympathizers, he sided more and more with the Reformed, especially at the Confer^ ence of Maulbronn in 1564, although henceforth he rarely appeared in public. He does not seem to have engaged in literary activity. Julius Ney. DILLMANN, (CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH) AU-

DILLMANN, (CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH) AUGUST: German Lutheran theologian; b. at II- lingen (17 m. n.w. of Stuttgart), Wurttemberg Apr. 25, 1823; d. in Berlin July 4, 1894. He studied in the seminary at SchOnthal, 1836-40; at Tubingen, 1840-45; was assistant pastor at Sers- helm, WOrttemberg, 1845-46; traveled and studied, especially Ethiopic, at Paris, London, and Oxford, 1846-48; became repetent (Le., tutor for three years) at Tubingen, 1848; privat- docent for Old Testament exegesis in the theological faculty, 1852; professor extraordinary of theology, 1853; professor of Oriental languages in the phil- osophical faculty at Kiel, 1854; professor of theol- ogy at Giessen, 1864; and at Berlin, 1869. He was distinguished for his cultivation of the neg- lected field of Ethiopic language and literature. As a critic he stood in opposition to the tra- ditional treatment of the Old Testament, but was always guided by his perception of the histor- ical principle. He received on this account the thanks of the late Dr. Delitssch on the occasion of an address which was an answer to the latter's treatment of Old Testament theology, and replied in a spirit of warm cordiality and appreciation. His publications embrace Catahgus codieum orientalium MSS. qui in Museo Britannieo asser" vantur. P. III. Codices JElhuypicos amplectens (London, 1847); Catalogue codieum manuscrip' torum Bibliotheca BodleiancB Oxoniensie. P. Vll. Codices /Ethiopici, digessit A, Dillmann (Oxford, 1848); Liber Henoch, JEthiopice (Leipsic, 1851); Das Buck Henoch iiberseUl u. erkl&rt (1853); Das chrisdiche Adambuch des Morgenlandes, aus dtm Aethiopischen Hbersetzt (reprinted from Ewald's Jahrbiicher, 1853); BibUa Veteris Testamenti jEthi- opica, Tomus I. OcUUeuchus. Fasc. 1, Genesin, Exodum, Leviticum (1853). Fasc. 2, Numeros ei Deuteronomium (1854). Fasc. 3, Joeua^ JwHcum et Ruih (1855). Tomus IL Fasc. 1 et 2, Libn Regum (1861 and 1871), vol. v. containing the Apocrypha (1894, but the missing vols. iii. and iv. will not appear); Grammatik der dthiopischen Sprache (1857, 2d ed.. by C. Bezold, 1899; Eng. transl., 1907); Liber JitbilcBorumf ^thiopice (1S59); Lexicon lingucB ^thiopicas (1865); Chrestomathia jEthiopica cum gloasario (1866); Liber Jvbilaorum ( Kiel, 1859); for the Kurzgefasstee exegetiaches Hand- buck he edited Hiob (1869, 1891); Genesis (1882, 1886, 1892, Eng. trunsl., 2 vols., Edinburgh, 1897); Exodus and Leviticus (1880); Numeri, DetUerono- mium und Josua (1886); Jesaia (1890); and pos- thumously, HandbuchderalUestammtlichen Theologie (Leipsic, 1895). He contributed also to Schenkel's Bibel or Lexikon, to Brockhaus' Conversatums* Lexikon, and was associate editor of the JahrbUcher ftir deutscke Theologie, Bibliography: W. Baudiflsin, Augusti Dillmann, Leipsie, 1895; Zur Erinnerung an . . . DiUmann, Stuttgart, 1900. DILTH£Y,WILH£LM: German philosopher; b. at Biebrich (3 m. s. of Wiesbaden) Nov. 10, 1833. He studied at Heidelberg and Berlin, was privat- dooent in Berlin, and was appointed professor of philosophy at Basel in 1866. In 1868 he was called in the same capacity to Kiel, and in 1871 to Breslau. Since 1882 he has been professor of philosophy at Berlin. His writings include Leben SchUnermachers (Berlin, 1870); Einleitung in die Geistesunssenschaften (Leipsic, 1883); and Das ErUbnis und die Dichtung (1906).

DIMOERITES: According to Epiphanius {Hcer., IxxviL), a name given to the followers of Apol- linaris of Laodicea (q.v.), because, according to them, Christ had assumed only two of the three elements of the perfect human form, the soma and the psyche alogos, whereas the divine Logos himself took in him the place of the nous, the psyche logike. G. Krueger.

DINTER, GUSTAV FRIEDRICH: CSerman edu- cator and theologian; b. at Boma (16 m. s.s.e. of Leipsic) Feb. 29, 1760; d. in KOnigsberg May 29, 1831. In 1773 he entered the FUrstenschule at Grimma, in 1779 the University of Leipsic. After serving as tutor he entered the ministry in 1787 as substitute at Kitscher, where his pastoral work, especially his untiring zeal for the education of the youth, made him greatly beloved. His success in training teachers for the lower schools led to his appointment as director of the normal school at Dresden in 1797. Because of ill health he returned to the ministry in 1807 at Gdmitz, where he found- ed a progymnasium, which became famous as a training-school for the practical pursuits of life. He became member of the consistory and board of education in Konigsberg, 1816; professor of the- ology, 1817. His SchuUehrerbibel (9 vols., Neu- Btadt, 1826-30) made a sensation. Starting with Semler's distinction between theology and religion, he sought in the Bible only that which, in his view, immediately belongs to religion; in this sphere, but not in science, the Bible should be the authority. '• To religion belong worthy conceptions of God, of Jesus and his work, of the sacredness of the moral law, of the worth and destiny of man, of the III.-28 love of God even to the erring, of forgiveness of sins, of the help God renders us to be good," ete. Dinter repudiated strongly the charge that this is rationalism, and considered himself orthodox. In his method he was akin to Bahrdt, trying to rein- terpret the language of the Bible in the spirit of his time, and believing that herein he followed Paul and Luther. His autobiography (Neustadt, 1829) gives the best key to his theology; it shows a vigorous, plain, jovial, practical, and sympathetic character. A complete edition of his writings was edited by J. C. B. Wilhelm (43 vols., Neustadt, 1840-51). (Sander.) DIOCLETIAN (Caius Valerius Diocletianus) : Ro- man emperor 284-305; b. near Salona (3 m. n.n.e. of Spalato), Dalmatia, o. 225; d. there Dec. 3, 316. He was probably a slave by birth, but entered the army and rose to high rank, becoming consul and commander of the body-guards. After the death of Numesian he was proclaimed emperor by the legions near Chalcedon on Nov. 17, 284, and the assassination of Carinus in the following year left him sole emperor. He soon appointed his junior comrade Maximian Csesar, and later made him co- regent, assigning him the Western half of the empire. A second division of the empire took place Mar. 1, 793, when two Csesars were created, Caius Galeriua Valerius Maximianus, who married Valeria, Dio- cletian's daughter, and Marcus Flavins Valerius Con- stantius. The reins of government remained in the hands of Diocletian, who was a bom ruler, firmly convinced of the divinity of the imperial dignity. He possessed an interest in higher culture and was filled with a strong passion for building, though his refinement was but superficial and was fre- quently overborne by the savagery of his Illyrian blood. In the lattor part of the third century the Church was flourishing in consequence of its long peace, and many Christians were found in aristocratic society, in influential public positions, in the army, and even in the imperial household. Diocletian's wife, Prisca, and his daughter Valeria The Die- were at least catechumens. Shortly cletian Per- after his accession, however, Diocle- secution. tian left no doubt 88 to his attitude toward Christianity by an anti- Manichean decree issued in Egypt and usually assigned to 287, forbidding all religious innovation under heavy penalty. The purging of the army by weeding out those who refused to sacrifice was the first measure directly planned to render the troops reliable. An ill-timed religious zeal offended the emperor and helped the anti-Christian party, headed by Galerius, who urged him on, despite his hesitation in fear of consequences. In the winter of 302-303 tedious conferences were held at Nicomedia, but it was only after the Milesian Apollo had been consulted that Diocletian yielded, though he in- sisted that no blood be shed. Galerius, however, overcame all his politic considerations and finally molded his religious policy. On Feb. 23, 303, the first edict was issued at Nicomedia. Christian freedmen were to be removed from public offices and were to lose their civic rights, whQe slaves were BiooletUa I>lodoras 434 deprived of the possibility of emancipation. The churches were to be demolished, the Scriptures were to be surrendered and burned, and religious meetings were prohibited. On the same day the destruction of the basilica of Nicomedia was begun and the Scriptures were publicly burned. Before the movement became general, however, a Nico- median official scornfully tore the edict down, and the palace was twice set on fire, the incendiary, according to the Christians, being Galerius, who hoped thus to impel the emperor to more drastic measures. Rebellions broke out in Armenia and Syria, and were naturally laid to the charge of the Christians. That the latter resolved upon active resistance and rebellion lacks justification, al- though it is not impossible that individuals, either secretly or openly, aided the usurpers in the East. The effect, however, could not but be imfavorable upon Diocletian's mind. A second edict was issued, similar to that of Decius, decreeing the imprison- ment of all the clergy. Diocletian's original in- junction forbidding the effusion of blood livas soon forgotten in the general tumult. The multitude of prisoners caused no little trouble, and a new decree enacted that the sacrifice required by the second edict should be exacted by all means. In 304 another edict universalized the decree concerning sacrifice and abolished the distinction between clergy and laity, aiming primarily to detach the latter, who were far inferior to the clei^gy in zeal for the Church. Patient persuasion was also employed, and steadfast refusal led to punishment, torture, and execution. In many cases the decree was only superficially enforced. The leading spirit in all these events was Galerius; Maximian was a minor figure; and Constantius, already in sympathy with the Christians, was as conservative as possible, con- tenting himself with the demolition of buildings. On May 1, 305, Diocletian abdicated and forced Maximian to do the same. Their places were filled by the Augusti, Galerius and Constantius, the new Ceesars being Maximinus Daza, a nephew of Galerius, who received Syria, Palestine, and Egypt, and Severus, an uneducated officer of low birth, who received Italy, Africa, and The End Pannonia. The West remained peace- of the Per- ful, but in the East the persecution secution. was rendered still more severe by the measures of Maximinus. Constantius died July 25, 306, and the army proclaimed his son Constantine Augustus. The ultimate outcome of rebellions and wars was the victory of Constantine at the Milvian Bridge, Oct. 28, 312, and soon after- ward the so-called religious decree of Milan brought peace to the Church in the West (see Constantine THE Great). Meanwhile the situation had changed in the East; circumstances compelled Galerius to cease from persecuting, and toward the end of Apr., 311, he and his coregent issued an edict in which they admitted the inefficiency of their efforts to restore religious uniformity. This was the first decree which officially recognized the Christian religion in the Roman empire, although the vague- ness of the clause, " yet so as that they offend not against good order,'' left a loophole for the State. In the autumn, however, when scarcely six months had elapsed, Maximinus, now being the oldest Augustus, renewed the persecution. Christians were inhumanly mutilated and executed. The customary funeral services in the cemeteries were forbidden, possibly on the pretext that they were a cloak for immorality; religious meetings and the building of churches were prohibited; and dele- gates of the cities petitioned for the exclusion of the Christians. The defeat and death of Maxen- tius, the insignificant but ambitious son of Maxi- mian, who had overthrown Severus, suddenly changed the situation, and the victorious Constan- tine advised Maximinus to cease oppressing the Christians. The result was a circular letter ad- dressed by Maximinus in the latter part of 312, prohibiting the use of violence against Christians. On Apr. 30, 313, Maximinus was defeated in Thrace by licinianus Licinius and forced to retire to Nicomedia. There, where the persecutions had been begun, an edict of toleration was issued on June 13, proclaiming the principle of religious lib- erty with special regard to the Christians. Every invidious distinction which still existed was abolished, and all property, including the confiscated places of assembly, was to be restored at once to the Church as a legal person. Licinius assisted in rebuilding churches, while Maximinus retired beyond the Taurus and issued a new edict emphasizing his later measures. Soon afterward he died, imploring the help of Christ in his agony and despair. All me- morials of him were destroyed by the victor, and his wife and children, together with the wife and daughter of Diocletian and other relatives and adherents of the fallen dynasty, were murdered with shameful barbarity. Thus ended the ten years of the Diocletian persecution. In his retirement Diocletian witnessed all these events, but eveiy effort to induce him to leave Salona for public life was in vain. After a long and painful illness he died, perhaps by his own hand, and was buried in the splendid mausoleum of his palace. The bitter hostility of Christian writers toward him is readily intelligible. He was the cause of the longest and bloodiest Its persecution which the Church ex- Results, perienced, and its continuation by his successors was regarded as his legacy. In a rapid series of edicts of increasing severity this persecution oppressed the congregations and resulted in a refinement of cruelty which surpassed all that had gone before. The effect of the first decree, which interfered so deeply with civic life, was tremendous. The reaction, both contemporary and subsequent, against apostasy produced Dona- tism in Africa and Meletianism in Egypt, besides causing schisms of more or less importance in many other p\suc*^. Flight was not considered apostasy by the Church, and it frequently afforded a means of safety, though there were many who endured torture, imprisonment, reproach, and death. The enthusiasm for martyrdom induced some to antici- pate their trial by a self-chosen death, and women and virgins preferred suicide to dishonor. Self- accusation and violent denunciation of heathenism also took place, while life itself was considered less valuable than the safety of the Scriptures. The clergy of all ranks fell by scores, though the Roman bishop Marcellinus made an ofifering of incense. The rich growth of martyrological literature in prose and poetry and the cult of martyrs, which soon became both wide-spread and important, were but expressions of the feeling with which Christendom looked back upon its ** soldiers of the faith." Victor Schultze. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources most productive are EuaebiuB, Hitt. eed., books viii.-iz.; Lactantius, De mortibuB per- aeciUorum, The best monograph is A. J. Mason, The PeneeuUon of Diocletian, Cambridge, 1876. Consult: T. Bernhardt, Diokletian in eeinem VertuUtniee gu den Chri*' ten, Bonn, 1862; O. Hunsiger, Zur Regierung und Chrie- ienverfolffung . . . S03-S15, Leipsio, 1868; B. Aub^, Hie- toire dee pereieuiione de V^liee, 2 vols., Paris, 1875-78; Q. Uhlhorn, D^ Katnpf dee Ckrietenthume mii dem Heir dewtum, Stuttgart, 1889, Eng. transl.. New York, 1880; V. Schultae, OeechichU dee Untergange dee grieehiechr- rumiechen Heidentume, 2 Yols.. Jena, 1887-02; P. Allard, La PereSatHon de DioeUHen et le triomphe de l'6glieet 2 vols., Paris, 1800; idem, Lee Dtmikree PereSeutione du 5. sOcb. ib. 1897; E. Le Blant, Lee Pereieuleure . . . aux premiere eiicUe, Paris, 1803; O. Seeek, Oeeehiekie dee Untergange der aniiken Welt, vol. i., Berlin, 1807; G. Bois- sier. La Fin du paganieme, 2 vols., ib. 1001; L. Pullan, Chvrdi of the Fathere, chap, xvi., New York, 1006; Nean- der, Chrietian Church, i. 147-156 et passim, ii. passim; Schaff, Chrietian CAureA, ii. 64-74; Gibbon, DecUne and FaU, chape, xiii.-xvi.; DCB, i. 833-836. DIODATI, dl"o-da'ti, GIOVANin: Genevan Re- former; b. at Lucca June 6, 1576; d. at Geneva Oct. 3, 1649. His family was compelled by religious persecution to flee from Italy. He was a rigid Cal vinist, and while still a young man was appointed to teach Hebrew in the Academy of Geneva (1597), and later became professor of dogmatics. As one of the Genevan deputies to the Synod of Dort in 1618, he took part in the compilation of the canons of that body. He translated the Bible into Italian (Geneva, 1607), his version meeting with a success comparable with that of Luther's German render- ing. He also prepared a revision of the French translation which had been made by the pastors and professors of Geneva in 1588, enriching his work by valuable notes and elucidations (Eng. transl., Piou8 Annotations upon the Holy Bible, London, 1643). He translated into French Sarpi's Hietona dd concilio tridentino (1621) and Sir Edwin Sandys's Relation of the StaU of Religion (1626). Diodati was a remarkable preacher and one of the most distinguished defenders of the Reformed Church, while the ambition of his life was the con- version of his native land, and especially the repub- lic of Venice, to his own creed. Euo^NB Choist. BIBLIOGRAPHY: E. de Budd, Vie de Jean Diodati, CScneva, 1860; O. D. J. Schotel, Jean DiodaH, The Hague, 1844; P. Plan, Letiree trouviee, pagee hietoriquee eur un ipieode delaviede Jean Diodati, ib. 1864; Maria Betta, Life of Giovanni Diodati, Genevese Theologian, London, 1905.

DIODORUS: Presbyter in Antioch, after 378 bishop of Tarsus; d. before 394. He was a native of Antioch, one of the most prominent theologians of the school of Antioch (q.v.), and on the dog- matic side its founder. After a general education at Athens he equipped himself as a theologian and orator by studying the writings of, and by personal intercourse with Eusebius of Emesa. His aim was twofold: to attain the fulness of ascetic perfection, and to be a champion of the Church's faith. He strove with all his energy to fulfil the monastic ideal, and the emperor Julian pointed to his wasted body as a proof of the displeasure of the gods. The state of the Church in Antioch called Life and forth all his zeal as a presbyter. Not Literary only had Julian, who made his winter Activity, quarters there after his return from the Persian campaign, restored the temple of Apollo and used all his influence to win the population back to paganism, but most of the heretical sects were strong there. It was the center of Arianism, and the Meletian schism had rent the Church in two. Diodonis was the leading defender of the Nicene faith. Naturally, therefore, his writings, of which the later Syrian Church still knew over sixty, were mainly controversial They were directed against all the principal enemies of the Church, pagan, Jewish, and heretic. Of the philosophers he especially combated Plato, Aris- totle, and Porphyry; among heretics the Man- icheans, Eimomians, and Apollinarians, Sabel- lius, Marcellus, and Photinus. He employed, too, a very practical churchly activity against both pagans and Arians; and his success, while it raised up bitter enemies for him, made his name honored throughout the Eastern Church. Even as a lay- man, under Constantius, when the Arian Leontius occupied the episcopal chair of Antioch, with his friend Flavian, Diodonis had assembled the faithful by night for worship. When the gentle Meletius became bishop in 360 Diodonis supported him vigorously and watched over the welfare of the flock when the bishop was obliged by Arian enmity to flee, and went from house to house strengthening the devotion of the oppressed faithful. In 372 he was forced to join the banished Meletius in Armenia. Here he made friends with Basil the Great, and the orthodoxy of Cappadocia and of Antioch joined hands to insure the triumph of the Nicene faith. Six years later he was consecrated bishop of Tarsus by Meletius (378). In this capacity he took part in the Coimcil of Constantinople (381), and is said to have brought about the choice of Nectarius as patriarch. The council gave him metropolitan jurisdiction over Cilicia. An imperial edict of 381 names him among the bishops who were to de- cide the question of Nioene orthodoxy and conse- quently of membership in the Catholic Church. By a curious turn of fate, he who had been hon- ored as a pillar of the true faith by his contem- poraries fell under suspicion of heresy not forty years after his death, as a result of the Nestorian controversy. In his anxiety to vindicate the sig- nificance of the human element in the person of Christ and in the Scriptures, threatened by an overstrained idealism, in controversy with Apol- iinaris Diodonis had put forth a theory of the relation of the two natures in Christ Theological which seemed to dissolve the one Opinions, divine-human Person into two. Ac- cording to the fragments still pre- served of the works called in question {'* Against the Synusiasts " and '' On the Holy Spirit ")> ^^ apparently distinguished between the Logos and the Son of David, one the Son of God by nature, the other by grace. Mary's son was not the Logoe, but the man begotten of the Holy Spirit. Since the Logos is essentially perfect, what is read in Scripture (Luke ii. 52) of a development in the Savior can only relate to his humanity. The mys- teiy of the Incarnation consists in the assump- tion of a perfect man by the Logos, and the rela- tion of the two natures is that of the indwelling of the Logos in the man Jesus as in a temple. In consequence of this connection, the son of David may be called the Son of God, but only in a derived sense; adoration is due to the humanity of Christ, but only so long as the distinction of nature is borne in mind. The spirit of God dwelt also in the prophets, but only temporarily and in a smaller meastire; in Christ he dwelt permanently and without measiue. This ethic-dynamic view, based on the teaching of Paul of Samosata and Lucian, did not, of course, content Greek piety and ortho- doxy. When partizan zeal drove out Nestorian- ism as heresy the blow could not but react on the Christology of the older Antiochian theologians. Thus Cyril of Alexandria in several treatises demanded the condemnation of Diodorus and Theodore of Mopsuestia; but the whole Syrian Church rose up to vindicate its revered teacher, and an imperial edict put an end to the dangerous business. It was not till 499 that Bishop Flavian of Antioch, hard pressed by the Monophysites, ventured to pronounce an anathema on the writings of Diodorus and Theodore. No such condemnation, however, is found in the acts of the fifth general council (Second Constantinople, 553). But the suspicion of heresy clung to Diodorus, and most of his works perished. The Nestorians alone kept alive the memoiy of the man and the theologian as long as their own existence lasted. He must have been of considerable force in exegesis, following out the grammatico-historical principles of his school in a commentary covering nearly the whole Bible, which was marked by philological learning, inde- pendence of dogmatic prejudice, careful distinction of the Old and New Testament stages of revelation, clearness, and sobriety. Only a few fragments are scattered through the catens; most of what re- mains is in MPO, xxxiii., but needs sifting. Diodorus's mind was not creative, but one that combined extensive learning with strongly marked dialectic individuality. Even his opponents re- spected his zeal for the truth, and his life was with- out reproach. He has a special historical impor- tance from the fact that he trained for the Church more than one of its prominent teachers. In his school were matured the two great Greek Fathers Theodore of Mopsuestia, in whom the theology of Antioch reached its completest form, and John Chrysostom. (A. Harnack.) Bibliography: Sources are Jerome, De vir. ill., chap, cxix.; Chryaofltom, Laua Diodori; Socrates, Hi»L ecd., vi. 3; Sosomen, Hut ecd., viii. 2 (the two last-named in NPNF, 2d series, vol. ii.); and Theodoret, Hi$L ecd., iv. 22-24 (in NPNF, vol. .iu.). Consult: KL, iii. 1765-68; DCB,

DIOGNETUS, EPISTLE TO: An early Christian work, formerly preserved in a manuscript in the Stras- burg Library, where it was included in a collection of the writings of Justin Martyr, with the heading "His [Epistle] to Diognetus." The manuscript perished in the siege of Strasburg in 1870. A late copy of it still exists at Leyden, from which Ste- phanus published it in 1592, and Sylbuiig in 1593. According to Otto, the manuscript belonged to the thirteenth or fourteenth century, and bad a good original, though the copy was somewhat carelessly made. What seems to be a considerable hiatus is observed in the seventh chapter, and the present conclusion is probably not the original one. The letter is addressed to one Diognetus, in answer to his question how Christianity may be distinguished from paganism and Judaism, why it came so late into the world, and whence its dis- ciples draw their courage and contempt of the world. In answer to the first question, the author considers paganism as mere crude idolatry, admitting that the Jews have the advantage of a pure knowledge of God, though their material sacrifices and trivial ceremonial law are as foolish as the heathen system. In the second part he describes the Christian worship and ethics, and in the third explains the late arrival of this revelation by God's will, to let the worid see how helpless mere human powers were to win the heavenly crown. When the measure of their sins was ftdl he revealed himself by the Incarnation of his son, who, though sinless, paid the penalty of sin, so that men, now justified, might trust in the father- ly goodness of God. Hence springs the love which raises Christians so far above worldly rewards or penalties, and the fraternal devotion which makes their life on earth a foretaste of heaven. There is no mention of the letter in any ancient writer, though here and there, as in TertuUian's ApologeticuB, some scholars have thought they saw allusions to passages of it. No one seems to have known of it until the edition of Stephanus, nor does the epistle contain any indications from which a satisfactory conjecture as to its date or authorship can be made. Its attribution to Justin was ori^ inally accepted, but Semisch has demonstrated that it can not be his. The language and literary style are too correct; the attitude of the letter toward both Judaism and paganism is not at aU Justin's; and in its cosmology there is no trace of his favorite thought of the operation of the " spermatic logos " in the non-Christian world. There is less certainty, however, about the date of composition. While Semisch, Bunsen, and others adhered to Justin's period, attempts were made to throw it still farther back, with Ewald into the reign of Hadrian, or with Hefele into that of Trajan, or even into the first century. Hilgenfeld and Keim assign it to the second, and ^hn puts it between 250 and 310. A new stage of the m\t9- tigation opened with the discovery of the " Apol- ogy " of Aristides, to which the letter stands in a secondary or derived relation, though not close enough for Aristides to have been the author, as Krttger thought. This relation helps to clear the ground for a decision as to the date, placing it between that of the " Apology " (from 138 to 161, probably 147) and that of Constantine. Seeberg is probably right when he supposes some time to have elapsed between the two works ; and, on the other hand, the author of the Epistle does not seem to 437 2>iodonifl Dionyaius of Aleyandrto have been through a general persecution. About the beginning of the third century, then, will be a safe date. The importance of the Epistle has been much overestimated in the past. Its rhetorical force and smoothness have possibly helped to evoke this enthusiasm, which, however, has in large measure disappeared; and it contributes scarcely anything to our knowledge of the history of dogma. (G. UHLHORNt.) Bibuoorapht: Good editiona are by C. Otto, Leipde, 1852; O. von *Gebb*rdt and A. Hamaek, Patrum apoBtoH- eorum opera, I. ii. 164-164. Leipaie, 1878; B. L. Gild- eraleeva, in Apology of JuMtin Martyr, pp. 83-04, New York, 1877; F. X. Funk, in Opera patrum apoetoli- corum, i. 310-333, TObingen, 1881. Bag. tranal. may be found in B. Cooper, Free Church of Ancient Chrutendom, London, 1852, and in ANF, i. 25-30. A liat of literature is given in ANF, Index vol., pp. 5-7. Consult: C. G. Semisch, JueHn Martyr, i. 172 sqq., Breslau. 1840, Eng. transl., i. 84-103, Edinburgh. 1832; C. K. J. Bunsen. Hippolytue, i. 138 sqq., Leipsic, 1852, Eng. transl., Lon- don, 1852; G. H. H. Ewald, GeedtidUe dee Volkee lerael, vii. 250 sqq., Gdttingen, 1808; F. Overbeok, Ueber den peettdo-juetinianiecKen Brief an Diognet, Basel, 1872; A. Hilgenfeld, ZWT, xvi (1873), 270-286; T. Keim, in Froteetantiedie Kirdteneeituno, 1873, pp. 285-280, 300- 314; T. Zahn, OOA, 1873, pp. 106-116; H. Kihn, Der Ur- eprung dee Briefe an Diognet, Freiburg, 1882; J. A. Rob- inson, in TS, i. 1 (1801), 05-07; KrOger, Uietory, pp. 135- 137; idem, in ZWT, zxxvii (1804). 206-223; KL, iu. 1774-78; DCS, u. 16^167. DIONYSIUS, dai''o-nish'i-us : Pope 259-268. During the pontificate of Stephen (254-257) he took part in the controversy about heretical bap- tism, with his fellow presbyter Philemon address- ing a letter to Dionysius of Alexandria. Elected bishop on July 22, 259, the edict of toleration of Gallienus soon enabled him to bring the Roman Church into order. He had a share in dogmatic development through his further dealings with his namesake of Alexandria, who had already been in communication with Sixtus IL concerning Sabel- lianism, and had been led by his zeal against this heresy to use expressions which seemed to reduce Christ to the position of a creature. Some Egyptian clergy brought the matter before Dionysius of Rome, who dealt with it in a synod and gave out a dogmatic pronouncement, of which a large section is preserved by Athanasius (" On the Council of Nicsea/' xxvi.). It was no doubt addressed to Egyptian or Libyan bishops, and attacked the Sabellian teaching on one side, while on the other it rebuked anti-Sabellian extremes. At the same time he wrote to his namesake asking him to clear himself of the charges made against him, which resulted in the well-known "Retractations" of Dionysius of Alexandria (q. v.). Dionysius of Rome also wrote a letter of condolence to the Church of Cffisarea in Cappadocia when it was attacked by the Goths about 264, and sent representatives to ransom captive Christians. His name appears with that of Maximus of Alexandria, the successor of Dionysius, at the head of the bishops to whom the last council held in Antioch against Paul of Samo- sata addressed its synodical epistle (Eusebius, Hist eccl, VII. XXX.). (A. Hauck.) Biblioorapht: Liber pontifiealU, ed. Duchesne, i. 157, Paris. 1886, ed. Mommsen, in MOH, GeeL ponL Rom,, i (1808), 36; R. A. Lipaiua, Chronologie der rOmiechen BiechOfe, Kiel, 1860; J. Langen, Geedtiehte der r&mieehen Kireke, pp. 353, Bonn, 1881; Bower, Popee, L 35-37; Blilman, Latin ChrieHanity, i. 01; Neander, CkrieHan Church, i. 606H)10. u. 404; Sohaff, ChrieUan Ckurdi, ii. 570^71. DIONYSIUS OF ALEXANDRIA (called the Great) : Bishop of Alexandria; d. 264. A pupil of Origen, though but little younger than his teacher, he succeeded Heraclas in 231 or 232 as head of the catechetical school of Alexandria, and became bishop in 247 or 248. The Decian persecution soon fell upon him (250). Attempting to escape, he was arrested, but was imexpectedly set at liberty. He next appears writing to Novatian in the hope of restraining him, and his inclination toward mildness in discipline comes out in other letters. He took a similar conciliatory position in the controversy on heretic baptism; his own prin- ciples placed him on the Roman side, but he re- spected the views of his opponents and was un- willing to break off conmiunion with them. In the persecution under Valerian (257) he was banished, first to Kephron in Libya and then to Kolluthion in the Mareotis district, and returned to Alexandria only after the edict of Gallienus (260), to suffer further trials from revolt, plague, and famine, of which he has left a vivid picture (in Eusebius, Hist, eccl,, vii. 22). In the spirit of the Alexan- drian school, he assisted in the overthrow of Mil- lenarianism. In the Trinitarian controversy he endeavored to uphold the Origenistic position as far as possible, but was carried beyond it by the course of the controversy and his own logic. His letters against Sabellianism contained expressions which were thought to decide in a contrary direction, and gave rise to accusations brought against him before Dionysius of Rome, to whom he justified himself in four books, partly explaining away or retracting the expressions complained of, and partly taking refuge in vague language. Before his death he took a decided stand against Paul of Samosata by letter, since his age and infirmity pre- vented him from attending the synod at Antioch. He was the most important of the disciples of Origen, and a worthy representative of the older Alexandrian school, though not enough of an inde- pendent thinker to understand and guide the doc- trinal tendencies of his time. His importance in exegesis, after the manner of Origen, is shown by his short critical comparison of the Gospel and Revelation of John, undertaken with the purpose of demonstrating a diversity of authorship, and con- sidered by some modem writers a still unsurpassed treatment of the question. The most important remains of his literary activity are his letters, which include at least six on the treatment of the Lapsed (q. V.) , at least eight on the schism of Novatian, at least eight on heretic baptism, at least four on Sabellian- ism, a long series of annual Easter letters, and a number to individuals. Only fragments of certain letters are preserved, although Dionysius was the chief source used by Eusebius for the middle of the third century. (A. Harnack.) Biblioobaprt: The FragmenU of Dionyuua are eoUeeted in M. J. Routh. Reliquim Sacra, iii. 219-250, iv. 383-437, Oxford, 1846, and in MPG, x. Also, Lettere and Remaine of Dionyeiue of Alexandria, ed. C. L. Feltoe, Gambridse, 1904. Eng. trand. is in ANF, vi. 81-120 Literature it BionyBina the Areopadta 438 gnren in ANF, Bibliosraphy. pp. 66-68. Sources are: Jerome, De vir. iU„ chap, bdx.; Atbanamus, JOe aententiiM Dionuni; Eiuebius, HiaL eed., vi. 40 aqq. (cf. espe- cially NPNF, 2d series, i. 281, note). Consult: F. Ditt- rich, Di(my9iua der OroBte, Freiburg. 1867; T. Fdrster, De doetrina et 9enlentiiM Dionyni, Berlin. 1866; KrOger, Hittary, pp. 205-215: Hamack, Litteratur, i. 409-427. II. ii. 57-66 et passim; Neander, Chri$Han Church, ▼ols. i.-ii. passim; Schaff. Christian Church, u. 800^803; DCB, L 850-862; KL, iii. 1780-80. DIOHYSiUS THE AREOPAGITE. Writings Ascribed to Dionysius (| 1). Proofs of Lata Origin (f 2). Doctrine of the Soul (f 3). Doctrine of First Person of Trinity (| 4). Doctrine of the Universe (| 5). Doctrine of the Son (f 6). Doctrine of the Church (f 7). DionysiuB the Aieopagite was converted to Christianity by the sermon of Paul at Athens (Acts xvii. 34). According to Eusebius (Hist, eccl., iii. 4, iv. 23) and the Apostolic Constitutions (vii. 46), he was the first bishop of Athens; a later tradition affirms that he suffered martyrdom there. His importance in church history depends upon the ascription to him of a series of remarkable writings in Greek, probably belonging to the fifth or sixth century, entitled " On the Heavenly X. WritingB Hierarchy," " On the Ecclesiastical Ascribed to Hierarchy," " On the Names of God," Dionysius. and " On Mystical Theology," and ten letters, all evidently belonging to the same author. At the conference held in Con- stantinople (533), at the instance of Justinian, between the orthodox and the Severians, the latter quoted, among other ecclesiastical authorities, Dionysius the Areopagite against the Council of Chalcedon; and when the orthodox objected that Athanasius and Cyril certainly would have used such an authority against Nestorius, if he had existed and been known to them, the Severians asserted that Cyril had actually quoted the works of Dionysius in his books against Diodorus of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia, as might be seen from the copies of those books in the libraries of Alexandria. This is the first certain citation of the works supposed to be written by Dionysius, but after that time they are frequently mentioned. Severus himself, Monophysite patriarch of Antioch 512-518, often quotes them, as does Ephraem, orthodox patriarch of Antioch 527-645. Com- mentaries upon them were written by John of Scythopolis about 530, Sergius of Itesaina (d. 536) translated them into Syriac, and Leontius of Byzantium cited Dionysius. In the Western Church Gregory the Great is the first who refers to these writings {Horn., xxxiv.); but when the Byzantine emperor Michael the Stammerer sent a copy of them to Louis the Pious in 827 they soon became better known; and after the invention of Abbot Hilduin, combining Dionysius the Areopa- gite and St. Denis, the patron saint of the Franks, in one person (see Denis, Saint), they became quite celebrated. Johannes Scotus Erigena trans- lated them into Latin at the instance of Charles the Bald, and was himself deeply influenced by them. In the Western Church, among the school- men, the Areopagite became a guide to mysticism and mjrstical theology. Hugo of St. Victor, Albertus Magnus, Dionysius the Carthusian, and others drew their inspiration from him. Corderius has shown how much, for instance, Thomas Aquinas owes to the Areopagite. The Platonists of the Italian Renaissance also appreciated him hi^y, as did other humanists, like John Colet. The development, however, of literary criticism (imder Laurentius Valla., Erasmus, and others) inevitably destroyed, first, the invention of Hilduin (the identification of Dionysius and St. Denis), and, second, the assumption of authorship in apos- tolic times. The internal evidences of a later date, besides the total absence of mention or quotation till the conference of Constantinople (533), were conclusive. The most decisive inter- a. Proofs of nal evidences are: the difTerence be- Late tween the pompous and inflated style Origin, of the writings and the simplicity of the apostolic age; the use of theological terms which were not formed until the fourth cen- tury; references to an elaborately developed church ritual and chiux;h government; allusions to later persons and events, as, for instance, to the martyr- dom of Ignatius and to *' Clement the Philoso- pher " (Clement of Alexandria); and appeals to "ancient traditions." The defense of Roman Catholic theologians and the attempted vindication of the authorship of Dionysius the Areopagite were demolished by Daill^ and Le Nourry. The question then arose. By whom and at what time were these works written? A number of hypotheses were proffered, differing as widely as that of Baumgarten-Crusius, placing the author at Alexandria in the third century, and that of West- cott, placing him at Edessa at the beginning of the sixth century. The general outcome of critical inquiry is that the philosophical, and more espe- cially the mystical, ideas expounded in these books presuppose the later development of Neoplatonism which was due to Procliis; and, as Proclus died 485, the date of the books seems to coincide nearly with the date of their first notice. Dionysius distinguishes between a cataphatic (affirmative or positive) theology, in which truth is presented under the garb of a symbol of history, or of the traditionary teaching of the Church, and an apophatic (negative) theology, which dispenses with such media, in which also the initiated rises by contemplation or in the ecstatic 3. Doctrine state to an immediate view of things of the Soul, divine. He distinguishes a direct movement of the soul, when its knowl- edge is conditioned by the various things outside of it; a spiral movement, when it aspires to penetrate divine knowledge by discursive thinking; and a circular movement, when it guides its imited power to the Deity (" Names of God," iv. 9). Under the influence of deity it surrenders its own thinking and arrives at a condition of Ecstasy (q.v.) and the mys- tic view of God. There is here a strong resemblance to the teachings of Philo and the Neoplatonists. Dionysius believes in the dogma of the Trinity, but his chief interest centers in the Father. The Father is for him the sole source of transcendent divinity; Jesus and the Holy Spirit are the off- 43d Bionyelns the Areopavlte spring, bloom, and transcendent light (" Names of God," ii. 6, 7). The bemg of God per sc, hia real essence, can not be expressed, since it transcends all qualities. The Deity includes every perfection; it is the cause and essence of all being, 4. Doctrine and yet it is above all being; it is of First without quality, yet transcends the Person of highest conception of goodness; with- Trinity. out a name, yet including every name. The highest principle is neither sen- suous nor spiritual, has or is neither representation nor understanding nor reason, is neither One, deity, nor goodness, and yet is neither without essence nor without life, understanding or reason, since the negations also have to be denied. Just as apophatic theology, proceeding from the broad variety of things, by negation ascends to the highest cause and to mystic imity with the unspeakable, so cata- phatio theology proceeds from above and descends to the variety of creatures. Accordingly God be- comes sun, star, fire, water, and all being; as the all-comprehensive cause he is all in all because the cause has anticipated everything in itself. He is all in all, and yet not anything in any one thing. But not everything may be affirmed or denied of him in an equal degree. He is life and goodness in a more pregnant sense than light or star, and such affections as intoxication (Ps. Ixxviii. 65, LXX.) or fits of anger are to be denied of him in a higher degree than the statements that he can be expressed or cognized. But all being has proceeded from the nature of God. All emanation of being has its original ex- emplar in the development of the divine first cause into the h3rpostases of the Trinity; all fatherhood and sonship of godlike spirits and even of human beings proceeds from the original fatherhood and original sonship. The participation of all things in being is at the same time a partici- 5. Doctrine pation in the good and the beautiful of the which is one with true being; the Universe, transcendent good and beautiful is the cause of all goodness and beauty and of all participation in the good and the beautiful ("Names of God," iv. 1 sqq.); but between cause and effect there is not the relation of entire equality. Here DionysiuB shares Proclus's view concerning evil according to which all existing things have no real being, but are only privation, want, diminution of the good, since all being as such is good. If therefore the universe appears on the one hand as the product of the good, it is on the other hand also the product of the differentiating negation which penetrates the unity of the absolute. But this negation does not exist for God because in him all differences are done away with. God knows evil as good, and before him the causes of evil are powers working for the good (" Names of God," iv. 20). Correspondingly, the universe is placed under the view-point of existence in God as first cause; and also, as being finite and separate, under the view- point of striving toward God as the basis and aim of all creatures (" Names of God," i. 5, cf. " Heavenly Hierarehy," iv. 1). These two points of view find their expression especially in the doctrine concern- ing the hierarchy of being. Dionysius assumes descending derivation of the chain of beings, and a mediation for the ascension of all creatures toward unity with God. The highest spiritual beings, the angels, are in the antechamber, so to speak, of the transcendent Trinity, and have from it and in it their existence and likeness to God ('* Names of God," v. 8). They are good and communicate their goodness to those below them.(iv. 1). The hierarchy of angels contains three divisions: (1) seraphim, cherubim, thrones; (2) dominions, powers, forces; (3) principalities, archangels, angeb. The system of the heavenly hierarchy is followed by that of the earthly or rather ecclesiastical hier- archy. Here Dionysius has interwoven with his doctrine conceminc: the hierarchies the idea of redemption as a historical fact. God is salvation and redemption in so far as he not only guards the existing things from falling into nothingness, but also in so far as he redeems that which has departed from the right and suffered a diminution of good- ness by an abuse of freedom of the will (ib. iv. 18). Dionysius looks upon the institutions of the Church as mysteries, " Jesus " is the cause of everything; he is the transcendent cause of the superheavenly beings ('* Heavenly Hierarchy," iv. 4); in regard to his activity in the world, he is the transcendent One, the Logos, the principle of all hierarchy and theurgy. But the influence of Jesus upon the lower spheres is not like that of the angels. He 6. Doctrine became man; he subsisted among us of the Son. perfect and without change C* Names of God," ii. 3). By stepping into earthly reality, the transcendent was not abolished or subjected to any change. The nature of Jesus became really and truly human, and he participated in all human conditions; but in physical conditions lie was superphysical and under the conditions of being he was above being by possessing all hu- man qualities, yet in a transcendent manner. Thus Dionysius depicts him as walking upon the sea because he was not subject to the laws of gravity. It is evident from the above that the incarnation of Jesus was not reduced to a mere semblance; but the divine in Christ assumes such a human real- ity that the human is elevated above itself and deified. The Gospel is the annotmcement that God accord- ing to his goodness has descended to us and makes us like himself by uniting us with himself. Men had departed from true life and surrendered to evil- minded demons. According to secret (oral) tra- dition, Christ has broken the power of the demons over us, not by an act of might, but by a forensic negotiation with the devil, the head of the demons. But every effect of salvation is conditioned for each one by submitting to the sanctions of eccle- siastical hierarchy which, like the heavenly hier- archy, proceeds from the divine Nous as the principle of all hierarchy and divine efficacy, whose aim is love to God and to the divine, knowl- 7. Doctrine edge of being, vision, union, and of the deification. While the sanctions of Church, material spirits secure pure and im- mediate knowledge of God, man needs symbolic veilings. The hierarchy of Old Testa- ment law educated by means of obscure pictures and riddles for the Bpiritual service of God, and found its fulfilment in ecclesiastical hierarchy which stands midway between the heavenly and the legal and is based chiefly upon Scripture and tradition. The apostles were bound to communicate the super- sensuous in sensuous pictures because man needs sensuous mediation. In every hierarchic trans- action there are to be distinguished (1) the holy consecrations, (2) officiants, (3) candidates for con- secration. The consecrating acts are (a) baptism, the symbol of regeneration which consists in cleanin ing and illumination; (b) communion, the symbol of the fact that Jesus unites us in his original divine unity, for illumination leads to union; (c) unction as completing communion. The estate of the officiants consists of three grades: (a) hierarch (i.e., bishop), (b) hiereus (priest-presbyter), (c) liturgist (i.e., deacon); the last performs the purifying acts of the hierarchy, the second the illu- minating acts, and the first the completing acts. In the order of the consecrated there are distin- guished (a) the lowest who imder the supervision of the liturgist are first to be purified; (b) those that are illuminated, Christian laymen, guided by the priests; (c) the therapeutai, i.e., monks who by the hierarchy are guided to perfection and lead a life solely devoted to the One. Dionysius was of decisive importance in the change of the Anatolian Church into a cult of mysteries in that he created its systematic basis. It was he who first expressed coherently those thoughts which afterward shaped the Christianity of that Church, the characteristic features of which were desire for learning and especially participa- tion in the mysteries. (N. Bonwetsch.) Biblioorapht: The editio prinoeps was issued in Florence, 1616; the whole works, with the Scholia of Maximus and PachymeruB are in MPQ, iii.-iY. The " Mystical The- ology," best edition by B. Corderius, with notes, Antwerp, 1634, reissued with enlarged notes, 2 vols., Venice, 1755- 1756. The edition by John Colet of " The Heavenly Hier- archy " and " The Ecd. Hierarchy " with Colet's treatises was reissued and translated by J. H. Lupton, London, 1809; the Worlf were translated by J. Parker, ib. 1897. The fabulous Ada aancH Dionyaii AreopagitcB, with com- mentary, are in ASB, Oct., iv. 696-797. Consult: J. G. V. Engelhardt, De origine tcriptorum ArtopoffUcB, Erlangen, 1823; idem, Z>s origine tcriptorum Dionuaii, ib. 1823; E. von Muralt, BeitrAge tur aUen Litr- teratur, DionyaiuB Areopagita, St. Petersburg, 1844; F. Hipler, Dionuaiua der Areopaifiter, Regensburg, 1861 (an epoch-making work); J. Niemeyer, DionyHua Areopagita, Halle, 1869; J. Fowler, The Worke of Dionyeiue eepecicUly in Reference to Chrietian Art^ London, 1872; J. Dr&seke, in ZWT, 1882. pp. 300 sqq.; G. M. Schneider. Areopagi- fica, Regensburg, 1884 (defends authenticity); A. L. FrotidngYkum^ Stephenbar SudaUi. The Syrian Myaiic and the Book of Hierotheoa, Leyden, 1886; R. Foss, U^ter den Aht Hilduin von St. Denya und Dumyaiiu Areopagita, Berlin, 1886; H. Koch, in TQ, 1895. pp. 353 sqq.; N. Nilles, in ZJC7, 1896; Neander, ChriaHan Church, vols. ii.-iv. passim; Hamack, Dogma, vols, i., iii.-vi. passim, see Index; DCB, i. 841-848 (a noteworthy article); KL, in. 1789-96. DIONTSinS THE CARTHUSIAN (Dionysius van Leeuwen or Leuwis): Monk, ascetic, and theo- logian; b. at Rickel (40 m. e. of Brussels), Limburg, Belgium, 1402 or 1403; d. at Roermonde (45 m. n.w. of Cologne), Limbuig, Holland, Mar. 21, 1471. Before he was twenty-one he obtained the dignity of magister at Cologne, and entered the Carthusian monastery of Roermonde. Complying with the strictest rules of his order or rather surpassin*; them, he continued his studies with indefatigable zeal and was highly honored by his contemporaries. Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, when traveling through Germany as legate took him in 1451 as his com- panion (cf . F. A. Scharpff , Der Kardinal und Bischof Nicolaua von Cusa, p. 176, Mainz, 1843; J. M. Dux, Der deutache Cardinal Nicolaus von Ctuia, iL 2S, Regensburg, 1848). In 1459 Dionysius succeeded in bringing about a reconciliation between Duke Arnold of Gelderland and his rebellious son Add- phus. With great difficulties he founded the Carthusian monastery at Herzogenbusch between 1466 and 1469. The last years of his life he spent at Roermonde. Dionysius is one of the most serious representa- tives of the Reformation of religious and ecclesias- tical conditions in the fifteenth century. Heart and soul a monk, he practised asceticism and foimd his highest enjoyment in the ecstatic state. He was also one of the most learned theologians of his time, had an accurate knowledge of ecclesiastical affairs, and was an author of much versatility and productive- ness. The list of his works {Opera, i., l.-lxx.) shows 187 titles, and the complete edition, it is estimated, will fill thirty volumes without the supplements. But he had no creative mind. His scientific labors are mostly rich collections of what others said before him with criticisms. His style is clear and simple. Of least importance are his voluminous ex^etical works, which comprise the entire Scriptures. Of greater importance is his commentary on Peter Lombard, though here too the collection and criticism of different opinions is the main object. Without being a Thomist, Dionysius often gives preference to Thomas Aquinas, but he often differs from him where he follows Aristotle in favor of Neoplatonic-Dionysian conception, and shows in general an inclination toward mysticism. An independent exhibition of Chris- tian doctrine is contained in the two books De lumine ChristiancB theorias. Other dogmatic and apologetic writings are mentioned by Zackler, 648 sqq. Ethics Dionysius treated not only in a Summa de virtuHbus et vUiis, but also in a series of writings on the different states. What is here treated separately he collects with special reference to its application in preaching, in the two books De reguli8 vita christianorum. The many orations which are extant from him show that he was also actively engaged in preaching. Some of his wri- tings are especially given to the devotion to Mary, in which he is as enthusiastic as Thomas a Kempis and others of his contemporaries. His mysticism produced an extensive commentary on Dionysius Areopagita and Johannes Climacus, besides some independent works, as Inflammatarium divini amoria, De medUatione, and others. Not a few of his writings are devoted to ecclesiastic reformatory efforts, as (besides the lost De de- formatUme et reformaHone ecclestce) De reformatiane daustraliuin ; De audoritate ffeneralium ooncUiorum ; De doctrina echolarium, etc. His reformatory ideas are on the whole the same as those of Gerson, whom he highly esteems. He is far removed from the thought that anything should be changed in the doctrine or general cultus and regulations of the Church, but for outwardly conspicuous defects, like frivolity, religious indifference, immorality in general, neglect of duty, ignorance and worldliness, especially of the priests, he has not only an open eye, but also a just appreciation. From the co- operation of the pope and an ecumenical council he expects the remedy. He assumes that the council in its proper duties, viz., of deciding controversial points of doctrine, of proceeding against a heretical pope or against one who gives too much offense, certainly stands above the latter; on the other hand, he yields to the pope a regular right of supei^ vision over the Church as a whole, and says that in the things " wherein the papal rule and office is supreme the pope stands above a council and above all the Church " (Z)c auct, gen. concil., i. 27). Con- sidering the ecclesiastical position of Dionysius and the character of his writings, it is easy to understand how in the sixteenth century they were appre- ciated as very timely and promotive of a conserva- tive reform in opposition to the Reformation. On this account most of them were published at that time at Cologne by Loer and Blomevenna, and were often reprinted. A complete edition of his works was commenced at Montreuil in 1896 under the title, Dodoria ecstatici Dionysii Cartusiani opera omnia in unum digesta ad fidem editumum Colo- niensium cura et labore monachorum S, Ordinia Car- ttisiensis, 30 vols., 1896-1905, of which all but vols, xxv.-xxvi. have appeared. S. M. Deutsch. Bibliography: The chief aouroe ia the biography by Die- trich von Loer, Cologne, 1530, reprinted with notes in ASB, March, ii. 245-255. Modem lives are by: Welters, Roermonde, 1882; D. A. Mougel, Montreuil, 1896. Con- sult also: W. Moll, Johanne* Brugmann^ i. 70-81, Azn- sterdium, 1854; K. Werner, Die SdioloMtik des epdUren MittelaUen, IV. i. 134-137, 200-262, Vienna, 1887; O. Zdckler, in T8K, Iviii. (1881), 648 sqq.; /CL, iii. 1801-07.

DIONYSIUS OF CORINTH: Greek bishop. He was a contemporary of Soter of Rome (165-173 or 167-175), and was the author of epistles to various congregations. Among these letters Eusebius (Hist. eccl., iv. 23) mentions the following: (1) to the Lacedsemonians, with exhortations to peace and imity; (2) to the Athenians, urging them to hold fast to the faith and to live according to the Gospel; (3) to the Nicomedians, with polemics against the Marcionite heresy; (4) to the congre- gation at Gortyna and the other Cretan churches, with a eulogy of piety and steadfastness; (5) to the congregation of Amastris and the other churches in Pontus; (6) to the Cnossians with admonitions against extreme asceticism; (7) to the Romans, with thanks for gifts and an admonition; (8) to Chrysophora. Four fragments of the epistle to the Romans have been preserved by Eusebius (ii. 21, iv. 23), and their contents bear eloquent testimony to the authority of the Roman Church. The admo- nition mentioned in (7) is identified by Harnack with the second epistle of Clement. G. Krueger. Bibliography: The fragments of Dionysius's works are collected in M. J. Routb, ReliquicB Sacra, i. 175-201, Ox- ford, 1846, and translated in ANF, viii. 765 sqq. For his life consult: Eusebius, HitL ecd., iv. 22 sqq. (in NPNF, 2d series, i. 200 sqq., note 1); B. F. Westoott, HUL of Canon of N. 7., pp. 185-100, London, 1855; [W. R. Cassels], Supernatural Religion, i. 218. 296. ii. 163-171, London, 1874-75; Neander, Chriatian Church, iii. 467, iv. 382; Hamaok, OeeehidUe, i. 235-236, II. i. 313; KrOger. Hietory, pp. 156-157; DCB, i. 849-850; KL, iii. 1798-1800. DIONYSIUS EXIGUUS (" Dionysius the Little " ) : One of the most conspicuous men of the Latin Church in the sixth century; d. in Rome before 544. He was a Scythian by birth, came to Rome toward the end of the fifth century and became a monk there. Later authors call him an abbot. From the description given by his friend Cassiodo- rus ilnatituHoneSf i. 23) he must have been a master in all monastic virtues, as his self-chosen surname indicates. He had also the polish of a man of the world, took great interest in learning, and was a famous teacher. He was in conflict with the popes of his time and was received into the peace of the Church only after his death. Probably he had associations with the " Scythian monks " who in 519 or 520 brought to Rome the so-called theo- paschitic formula (see Thbopabchitbs). His chief importance rests on the fact that by translations he acquainted the West with Greek learning. Both his Greek birth and his position in Rome fitted him for that service. His works are: (1) A col- lection of canons in two recensions, containing the fifty apostolic canons, the canons of Nicsea, Ancyra, Neo^ssarea, Gangra, Antioch, Laodicea, and Constantinople, the twenty-seven canons of Chal- cedon (xxviii.-xxx. are wanting), the twenty-one canons of Sardica, and the decisions of Carthage of 419. The two recensions differ by different positions of the canons of Chalcedon and a more complete version of the acts of Carthage in the second redaction. Cassiodorus testifies to the use of the collection in the Church of Rome. The first recension was edited by C. H. Turner in Ecdence occidentalia monumenta, i. (Oxford, 1899); the second is in MPL, Ixvil. (see Canon Law, II., 3, § 3). (2) A collection of decretals containmg an epistle of Siricius, twenty-one epistles of Innocent I., one by Zozimus, four belonging to the time of Boniface I., three by Celestine I., seven by Leo I., one by Gelasius, and one by Anastasius I. This collection ako was soon made use of by the popes, and is first referred to in 634. (3) The " Eastei^ Table," a continuation of the ninety-five-year Easter-table of Cyril of Alexandria, which ended with 531. Dionysius took up the work in 525, repeated the last nineteen-year cycle of Cyril and added five others from 532. Hereby he introduced into the Latin Church the Alexandrian Easter com- putation, which had been customary in the East since the Coimcil of Nicsea, while the West had till then followed the cycle of Victor, and thus he promoted not a little the unity of the Church. He won popularity by numbering the years not from the era of Diocletian, the impious persecutor of the Christians, but '' from the Incarnation of the Lord." He placed the birth of Christ on Dec. 25, 754 a.u.c., and Mar. 25 of the same year he took as the day of the Incarnation (see Era). His Easter-cycle was soon adopted by Rome, gradually also in other parts of Italy. Toward the end of the sixth century it was used in Gaul, and by the eighth century had come into general use in the British Church. Dionysius also translated letters and writings of Proterius of Alexandria, Proclus of Constantinople, Gregory of Nyssa, Marcellus of Emesa, Cyril of Alexandria, the Vita of Pachomius, and perhaps other works to which he was attracted by learned or ascetic inter- ests. His works are in MPL, Ixvii. H. Achelis. Bibliography: L. Ideler, Handbuch der . , . Chronoloifie, vol. ii.. Berlin, 1826; F. Maaaaeo. OMthichiU der QuelUn und der Litteratur dM kanoniadien Rechta, i. 130 sqq., 422 sqq., Orms, 1870; F. Rflhl, Chronologie, pp. 129 sqq., BerUn, 1897; DCS. i. 863^864 (noteworthy).

DIOSCURUS : Antipope 530. See Boniface II. DIOSCURUS OF ALEXANDRIA. See Eutychianism. DI PIETRO, di pt-«'tr6, ANGELO: Cardinal; b. at Vivaro (near Tivoli), Italy, May 26, 1828. He studied at Rome, became vicar-general of the diocese of Tivoli, and was consecrated titular bishop of Nyssa in 1866 and appointed bishop coadjutor of Ostia and Velletri. In 1877 he was made titular archbishop of Nazianzum and appointed apostolic delegate to the Argentine Republic. He was then internuncio at Rio de Janeiro (1879-82) and nuncio at Munich (1882-87) and Madrid (1887- 1893). He was created cardinal priest of Santi Alessio e Bonifacio in 1893, and shortly afterward was appointed prefect of the Congregation of the Council, while in 1902 he became prefect of the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, and pro- datarius five months later. DIPPEL, JOHAim KONRAD (DemocrUua Ckria- iianus): German Pietist and alchemist; b. at Frankenstein (5 m. s. of Darmstadt) Aug. 10, 1673; d. at the castle of Wittgenstein (24 m. n.w. of Marbuig) Apr. 25, 1734. At the age of sixteen he entered the University of Giessen and there rapidly gained note as an acute and fervid cham- pion of orthodoxy against the rising influence of the Pietists, actuated in his course, however, more by the honor which the orthodox then enjoyed than by conviction. In after-days he ascribed to all adherents of the orthodox system the same in- sincerity of which he had been guilty. In 1693 he took his master's degree and for a time lived as a tutor in the Odenwald, continuing his polemic against the Pietists and hoping for a professorship at Giessen. Meeting with the coldest treatment from the au- thorities there, however, he went to Wittenberg, where his fortunes proved no better. At Stras- burg his views made it impossible for him to es- tablish any connection with the university, but he passed some time there lecturing on astrology and palmistry, preaching frequently in a spirit that showed the growing influence of Pietism, and lead- ing a life which ultimately sent him back to his native place, a fugitive from his creditors. Now openly professing the tenets of Pietism, though with mercenary motives, he preached repeatedly before the court at Darmstadt, and in 1697 pub- lished at Giessen his satirical Orthodoxia orthodoxo- rum. At this time, however, occurred his sincere conversion to Pietism through the instrumentality of Gottfried Arnold (q.v.), whom he met at Gies- sen, and it is a testimonial to his final sincerity that he did not hesitate to sacrifice his chances for a professorship at the univerrity by the publica- tion of the work just mentioned. With characteristic energy he devoted himself to the service of his new faith and, taking the de- struction of orthodoxy as his mission, entered upon a fierce polemic that speedily made him fanaous. In 1698 appeared his Papismus Protesiantium ra- pulans and this was followed in the course of the next two years by no less than fourteen oontrovei^ sial writings in which, with skilful variation, he expounded the same theme of morals versus dog- ma, Christianity versus ecclesiasticism, and ortho- praxy versus orthodoxy. Embracing Arnold's views of church history, Dippel carried them to an extreme, and his pamphlets were naturally more popular than Arnold's heavy tomes. His views subjected him to persecution from the deiigy and even from the mob, by whom his life was threat- ened. In 1702 the Consistory forbade him to pub- lish any writings of a theological nature. After 1704 he lived in Berlin, devoted to researches in alchemy and deluded at one time by the conviction that he had solved the problem of transmutation. The discovery of Prussian blue was the accidental result of his studies. He was driven from Berlin through the machinations of J. F. Mayer, an in- veterate enemy of the Pietists, and fled to K6st- ritz, which the princes of the line of Reuss had made a refuge for adherents of the new movement. Thence he went to Holland, lived for some time near Amsterdam, and after 1711 practised medi- cine at Leyden, bringing into therapeutic use the oil known by his name. His theological interests, however, were not neglected. He wrote the Fatum fatuum (Amsterdam, 1710) in defense of the free- dom of the will against the teachings of the Car- tesians, and in 1714 published at Amsterdam the Alea hem Musebnannici, In the same year he re- moved to Altona, in Sleswick-Holstein, where he lived until 1717 in honored peace. By an impru- dent incursion into politics he aroused the hatred of high officials at court, and in 1719 was con- denmed to perpetual imprisonment. The full rigor of the sentence was not carried out, though for seven years he lived in semiconfinement on the island of Bomholm engaged in the practise of medi- cine. Released in 1726, he went to Sweden, plunged into politics, and was utilized by the nobles as an effective instrument against the hierarchy. He finally became physician to King Frederick 1. In this position he did not neglect to promu]^t« his religious views, which, represented in final form in his Vera demanstraiio evangeUca (Frank- fort, 1729) and making rapid progress in the coun- try, aroused the cleigy and brought about his banishment. Returning to Germany, he took up his residence at Liebenberg, near Godar, and con- tinued his studies in alchemy. Though he ab- stained entirely from theological controversy, the clergy compelled him to flee, and he found rehi^ with the count of Wittgenstein-Berlebuig. His last years were lai^ly taken up by a violent contro- versy with Zinzendorf over the nature of the Atone- ment. (F. BossE.) Biblioorapht: The one book is W. Bender, Johann Kon- rod Dippel, Bonn, 1882. 443 BiosouruB Dlsoiples of Cnurist

DISCRETION, YEAR OF: In ecclesiastical usage, the age at which a change of confession may be made. In countries which legislate on the sub- ject (as the German States) it varies from fourteen to twenty-one.