A guide to the study of the Christian religion

Front matter

A GUIDE TO THE STUDY OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION

THE UNIVERSITY OP CHICAGO PRESS CHICAGO. ILLINOIS

Bgente THE BAKER & TAYLOR COMPANY

Preface

That Christianity is today passing through one of the most significant transformations in its history is a fact apparent on every hand. The present generation has come into full consciousness of the new world which has arisen as a result of the discoveries and inventions of the past century or more. New social and industrial conditions, new acquaintance with the non- Christian world of today, a more thoroughgoing knowledge of the vast stretches of human history, and a new science with its promise of a hitherto undreamed-of mastery of the forces of the universe, have led to a new appreciation of the task of the Christian church.

Thus the divinity school today is attempting to organize the education of ministers of the gospel and of religious teachers and missionaries with reference to many situations and problems which formerly did not exist. The history of Christianity can no longer be studied in isolation from the total history of which it is a part. The study of the Bible must be undertaken with a full understanding of all that is involved in the processes of historical criticism. Systematic theology must consider religious beliefs in relation to the modern scientific and philosophical ideals which are regnant. The department of practical theology must deal with the bewildering needs occasioned by the shifting habits of people in modern industrial and spiritual life. An entirely new realm of theological training has been organized in order to prepare men to understand the social problems which are so intimately related to the rehgious life.

Aside from discussions of the ^'higher criticism" there has been almost no literature from which one could learn how a modern divinity school is attempting to meet the demands

VI PREFACE

of our age. There has been no work in English on theological encyclopedia for twenty years. Such treatises as Crooks and Hunt, Theological Encyclopaedia and Methodology (New York: Phillips and Hunt, 1884); Cave, Introduction to Theology and Its Literature (Edinburgh: Clark, 1886, 2d ed., 1896); and Schaff, Theological Propaedeutic (New York: Scribner, 1893), were all excellent works in their day. But because some of the most important phases of modern theological education have been organized since these appeared they cannot furnish the information needed here, nor can they indicate the literature which has appeared during the past twenty years. The warm welcome which was accorded to Wernle's EinfUhrung in das theologische Studium (Tubingen: Mohr, 1908, 2d ed., 191 1) suggested to the editor the desirabiHty of a volume in EngHsh which should deal with the present situation in theological education.

It is much more difficult today to prepare an introduction to the study of theology than it was a generation ago. Formerly it was possible for one broadminded scholar to cover the entire field with reasonable thoroughness. But today specialization has advanced so far that no one man is competent to deal with all the branches of learning tributary to a sound theological education. This is perhaps the main reason why no one has recently attempted to prepare any such survey.

Again, some phases of theological scholarship have lately been passing through a transition period. During much of the past quarter-century men have been conscious of the fact that old methods and ideals must be modified, but they have not always been sure just where the changes would lead. It is only within the past decade that the full impHcations of the historical method have begun to be realized with clearness. Until scholars came to feel at home in the use of this method they were not in a position to formulate constructive principles of theological study based on it.

PREFACE Vll

The present volume has been prepared in recognition of the situation above indicated. In order to do justice to the specialized character of scholarship, a group of men has been asked to co-operate, each contributing an exposition of the problenis and the methods of study in the field in which he himself is competent to speak.

There has, of course, been no attempt to secure absolute uniformity of views. The only common presuppositions of the various portions are the acceptance of the historical method and the belief that the interpretation of Christianity must be in accord with the rightful tests of scientific truthfulness and actual vitality in the modern world. If certain diversities of opinion appear, the volume will only reflect the spirit of freedom which prevails in theological scholarship today as well as in other fields of research. It is a hopeful sign, however, that the historical method, with all its freedom, yet induces a typical attitude and spirit, so that a course of study dominated by this point of view will attain a consistency which may form the basis for positive convictions concerning Christianity and for fruitful constructive work in the church of Jesus Christ.

This volume is intended to be a guide to the study of the Christian religion for Protestants. It does not attempt to take the place of actual study or to furnish a brief compendium of information. It is prepared primarily to aid students to understand the meaning of the various aspects of education for the Christian ministry. But it will be perhaps of even greater value to pastors who wish to keep in sympathetic touch with the latest scholarship, but who find it difficult to obtain in convenient form the requisite information. Brief bibliographies are appended to each section, noting especially valuable works as an aid to those who wish to undertake an intelHgent study of any particular topic. They are not intended to be exhaustive, but merely to start the student or interested reader on his quest.

viii PREFACE

It is the hope of the editor and of the contributors that the volume may help toward the understanding of the fruitful and inspiring work which is being done in the realm of theological scholarship today, and may stimulate those who are interested in the progress of theological education and in the thorough preparation of ministers of the gospel to a cordial co-operation in the great task before us.

Contents

CHAPTER PAGE

I. Preparation in College for the Study of Theology i By William Herbert Perry Faunce, President of Brown University

II. The Historical Study of Religion 19

Introduction to Philosophy §

Logic I

II. THE HISTORICAL STUDY OF RELIGION

By SHAILER MATHEWS

Professor of Historical and Comparative Theology, and Dean of the

Divinity School, University of Chicago

A. The Historical Method in General. — ^The first step in the historical method. — The materials for historical study. — ^The study of literary material. — Textual or lower criticism. — Historico-hterary or higher criticism. — ^The discovery of genetic relations of facts. — The

study of the history of religion 21-30

B. The Evolution of Religion. — (i) What is meant by the evolution of religion ? — The nature of religion. — The common element in differing religions. — Theories concerning the origin of rehgion. — The nature of religious activity. — (2) The evolution of the personal interpretation of environment. — Primitive religions. — Tribal religion. — Monarchical religion. — The higher development of monarchical rehgion . 30-46

C. The Development of Religious Doctrines. — Mythology, philosophy, and theology. — Mythology as a means of interpreting religion. — ^The relation between theology and philosophy . . . 46-51

D. The Development of Christian Doctrine. — The creative social mind. — The creative social minds which have made occidental history. — The contribution of the Semitic social mind to Christian theology. — Some non-political ele'ments in New Testament thought. — ^The hellenistic social mind. — Latin orthodoxy as determined by imperialism. — Feudalism and Christian theology. — The nationalistic social mind and theology. — The age of revolutions and theology. —

The modern social mind 51-71

E. Why Theology Has Not Developed Parallel with the Presuppositions of Social Experience. — The influence of philosophy. — ^The retarding influence of doctrinal orthodoxy. — The constructive task of theology 71-79

II. THE HISTORICAL STUDY OF RELIGION A. THE HISTORICAL METHOD IN GENERAL

The study of history is much more than the reading of books about history. The genuine historian seeks, by the use of all the material at his disposal, so to reproduce the past as to make it not only vivid, but also a means of interpreting the present. History, unlike biography, is essentially a social study. It is concerned with social groups rather than with individual men and women. It is by no means indifferent to individuals, but regards them as contributors to the action of the group of which they are members. Biography, on the other hand, is centrally interested in the individual as related to social activities.

The fact that history is essentially a social study makes possible a certain stability of method. Group action is by no means so indeterminate as the actions of individuals. It is possible, by statistics, for instance, to organize pretty clearly the general tendencies of groups of men, although it is quite impossible to determine just what the. action of the component individuals may be. While the historian must be careful not to mistake philosophical generalizations for history, it is none the less possible for him to reach certain general conclusions as to the movement that constitutes the evolution of civilization. These generalizations may be of real advantage in the interpretation of that particular point of the stream of human life to which he himself belongs.

I. THE FIRST STEP IN THE HISTORICAL METHOD

The first step in a historical method is the gathering of materials. These materials may be of varied sorts and are by no means limited to written sources. In fact, nothing could be more misleading than to conceive of history as essentially a matter of books. Since it deals with life, it must shape up its estimates of any period of the past through a scientific examination of all available products of that life.

The materials for historical study may be classified (although the groups are not absolutely exclusive) as :

a) Survivals. — Here would belong the actual non-material survivals, such as living practices, customs, social attitudes, and institutions which have extended over to the present from the past. Further, such matters as language, music, dances, are often of the utmost importance as embodying in themselves elements which were the germs of a more developed civilization.

h) Monuments. — The second group of material may be roughly called the monuments, although the word is somewhat unfortunate. Here belong the actual material survivals of the past, such as manuscripts, papyri, pottery, and inscriptions (not their contents), buildings, coins, monuments, statuary, and all the material products of a period- With such materials the archaeologist and antiquarian are primarily concerned. These material remains of the past are of immense value, not only because they furnish the contents in such sources as inscriptions and manuscripts, but because in themselves they perpetuate information regarding the artistic and mechanical and general cultural developments of the past. No one, for example, could ever get a fair conception of the civilization of Egypt without the pyramids, nor could one accurately picture Greek life were it not for the great wealth of its statuary. The historical value of museums is therefore great. In them the student of history finds his imagination stimulated by the actual products of past activities.

c) Unwritten sources. — The third source of history may be said to be the unwritten sources not intended to be historical, like traditions, sagas, anecdotes, songs, legends, myths, and whatever else is carried along from tongue to tongue. In the course of time this material may be reduced to writing, but it is of distinctly different character from that of deliberately intentional records. Here again the student of history is enabled to come directly to the life of the group he is studying and to share, as it were, the creative impulses in a way which no description makes possible. Folk-lore and sagas, for instance, lose much of their charm and original significance when reduced to the printed page.

d) Written sources. — The fourth type of material is written. Such material is by no means limited to what would be called intentionally historical writings, like annals, chronicles, genealogies, biographies, and memoirs, but comprises also non-narrative sources, including acts of governments, and the contents of ''monuments" already mentioned. In the very nature of the case this written historical material is of outstanding importance for the historian and furnishes the largest mass of his sources. It is particularly in the study of these written sources that the historical method has made its most noteworthy advances in recent years.

Literature. — The best work on historical method is Bernheim, Lehrbuch der historischen Methode, (Leipzig: Duncker, 1889, 2d ed., 1894). In English such a work as J. M. Vincent, Historical Research: An Outline of Theory and Practice (New York: Holt, 191 1), or Langlois and Seignobos, Introduction to the Study of History (New York: Holt, 1898), is excellent.

2. THE STUDY OF LITERARY MATERIAL

The method of investigating this written material is called criticism, and is of two sorts, in accordance with its purpose and material.

a) Textual or lower criticism. — This is the determination of the original, or, if that be impossible, the oldest obtainable text of a document, whether narrative or record. Its method is the systematic comparison of various texts. Textual criticism has become a highly developed science in itself, and the results of different critics tend to a consensus of opinion. When we recall that there are several thousand variant manuscripts in whole or in part of the New Testament, the necessity of textual criticism is at once apparent.

Textual criticism, however, does not undertake to do more than recover the oldest possible text. In the case of the New Testament no pretense is made by the critics that they can reconstruct any text of a date earlier than the second century. That this second-century text is doubtless close to that of the documents then circulating may very well be conjectured, but no hope is entertained of an absolute recovery of the text of the autograph. Furthermore, textual criticism leaves unanswered many questions concerning the trustworthiness of the record, the text of which may have been approximately recovered. Thus a second step is demanded.

b) Historico-literary or higher criticism. — The methods of this stage of criticism are very similar to those of the textual criticism, but the problems are different. Granting that we have the oldest obtainable text, the question is raised as to the authorship of the document, the possibility of rewriting or other modification of an original source having taken place, the personal equation or ''tendency" of an author or editor, and the integrity or composite character of a source. In the answer to such questions there is, of course, involved the further and more important matter of the trustworthiness of the record.

In all attempts to answer such questions, particularly in the case of records so precious as the books of the Bible, the historical critic should proceed with caution and by no means give way to the temptation to make clever guesses. In the estimate of the historical value of any given document we must proceed by way of testing hypotheses, and such hypotheses should be based upon painstaking study of the data rather than upon suppositions and guesses. In testing any hypothesis the student employing the historical method should be careful to use all monumental evidences at his disposal. In fact, any hypothesis that is essentially uncontrolled by Study of the actual materials of the life of a period as far as they are preserved is to be adopted very cautiously. One of the most serious difficulties in the present study of the history of religion, and of Christianity in particular, is the dogmatic presentation of hypotheses which are- based upon a very narrow range of facts arid are largely colored by the critic's own personal opinions.

It is obvious that in both the lower or textual and the higher or historical criticism the student must be constantly on guard against his own prejudices and preconceptions. Absolute impartiality in our attitudes is probably out of the question, and critical scholarship makes its permanent advance by the mutual testing of various scholars. Their personalities serve to counteract one another, and in the course of time results are reached which are as free from personal bias and as trustworthy as the existing data and human nature permit.

It is much to be regretted that in so many cases the student for the ministry comes to the historical study of the Scriptures without any training in historical method. As a result he is likely, at first, to feel that the foundations of what has been to him helpful religious conviction, inherited or accepted without reflection, are being shaken. Further acquaintance with a genuinely scientific method, however, serves to liberate him from this feeling, and in the study of doctrine, church and Bible alike, he finds himself possessed of facts which are not dependent for their validity upon inheritance or ecclesiastical authority. None the less the transition from one type of study in religion to another should be made in the atmosphere of religion itself. Nothing is more fatal to the spirit of genuine religion than the substitution of scientific method for personal fellowship with God. '^To pray well is to study well" is as true of the historical critic as of the preacher.

Literature. — ^The following are useful for a study of criticism: Zenos, Elements of the Higher Criticism (New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1895); Dods, The Bible, Its Origin and Nature (New York: Scribner, 1905); Bernheim, Lehrbuch der historischen Methode (Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1889, 2nd ed., 1894); Briggs, Introduction to the Study of Holy Scripture (New York: Scribner, 1899).

3. THE DISCOVERY OF GENETIC RELATIONS OE FACTS

The study of sources is only introductory to the more definitely historical methods. Criticism gives material and nothing more. When sources have been properly studied and their worth as historical material has been determined, there begins the work of the historian proper, namely, such an organization of the material thus gained as to produce an accurate description of the total situation under investigation. The difference between the antiquarian and the historian here becomes evident. The antiquarian, as such, is interested in objects rather than in life-processes. The historian will use the results of antiquarian study much as he uses those of lower and higher criticism, but he himself must proceed to show the relations in which these various facts stand. For, in history, relations and particularly the processes of social experience are of supreme importance. To know how a situation came into existence is indispensable to a knowledge of the situation. Equally indispensable is, the power of evaluating historical conditions from the point of view of their outcomes in the genetic process of social evolution.

At this point it is very necessary to distinguish between history and the philosophy of history. Probably no historian is absolutely free from philosophical predilections, and he must be constantly on his guard against the tyranny of preconceived philosophy. Such theories should really come by induction from the facts themselves. It is true, however, that studies in certain fields, particularly in those of statistics, politics, law, and sociology, furnish general conceptions by which the inner relations of historical experience may be tested; but these features are of less importance than those almost subconscious habits of thought which are the expression of the general social mind under whose influences the historian lives. At present this is particularly true because of the conception of process and development which have come into the social sciences from the biological and geological fields.

It is necessary also to know the geographical conditions and economic struggles which have conditioned human efforts.

History is more than its record, for it is the actual living of men and women. It is concrete, a movement full of changes as well as results. It extends far beyond the earliest historical records. Indeed, the actually recorded history of humanity covers an exceedingly small period compared with the hundreds of thousands of years diiring which, we are assured, man has been living upon the planet. Really to understand our present life it is necessary to recall the long struggles of our far-away ancestors. To this end the study of the bones and implements found in various geological strata is as truly of importance as is the study of newspapers. We can best appreciate how far the race has actually developed when we compare our modern world with human affairs as they appear from a study of prehistoric man.

From this point of view we can appreciate the value of the study of primitive peoples. They are, so to speak, the social left-overs, human survivals of stages of civilization which once were the highest known. These primitive peoples are not lacking in ability, and when they come under the influence of a higher civilization, particularly when this is mediated by Christianity, they develop amazingly; but their customs, religions, and social structure enable us again to appreciate the great progress which has been made in human life.

Literature. — On primitive life, Tylor, Primitive Culture, 3d ed. (New York: Holt, 1889), may be well studied. Thomas, Source Book for Social Origins (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1909), is of great value. Keane, Man, Past and Present (Cambridge: University Press, 1899), is a good handbook but somewhat too certain at points. Sumner, Folkways (Boston: Ginn & Co., 1907), is valuable for its discussion of primitive social control. Osborn, The Men of the Old Stone Age (New York: Scribner, 191 5) is a valuable compendium of our knowledge of earliest races. On the general trend of history, see Mathews, The Spiritual Interpretation of History (Harvard University Press, 1916).

4. THE STUDY OF THE HISTORY OF RELIGION

It is from this point of view that men are now learning to study the history of religion. The same methods which are applied to tracing the development of any other human interest are now being applied with very interesting results to the development of religion. Such a study involves a knowledge of anthropology and a careful investigation of the lives, manners, and customs of primitive peoples; yet such a knowledge is by no means all that the history of religion involves. As Farnell, Evolution of Religion, well argues, we need to know not only origins but processes of development.

Fortunately, we possess the records of a religion which has thus developed from the very simplest type of social customs. The Bible is a record of the religious experience of the Hebrews from the dawn of their historical records to the very highest ideal type of life to be found in Jesus. It is only recently, however, that this wonderful collection of historical material has been treated in a historical way. Theologians have used the Bible to find proof -texts; preachers have allegorized it to get religious inspiration and the truth which they wish to preach; fanatics have found in it all sorts of ammunition for attacking their opponents; but the sober and reverent study of its passages by the use of literary and historical methods which have proved themselves effective in other fields of similar research was for centuries neglected.

The application of these methods to the study of the Bible has served to enable us, first of all, to appreciate the worth and the character of the documents of the Bible itself; but, more important, it has enabled us, in the second place, to trace the development of the Hebrew religion as the Hebrew people progressed and made their way through the various strata of social experience. In the start they had not even a tribal organization. Gradually the tribes emerged, confederated, fell apart, and out from a section of them emerged a nation. This nation m turn suffered the experiences of little nations situated between mighty military powers, and the Jewish people ceased to be a nation, but spread over the world as immigrants, bearing the hope of a glorious kingdom which God would later establish for them.

Then came Christianity — a religion which emerged from Judaism, but perpetuated no ethnic traits, retaining only the religious and ethical ideals. These it presented as embodied and completed in the life of Jesus Christ — a life which the world has always regarded as supreme.

Fully to appreciate this development of our own religion it is advisable for the student to become acquainted with the development of other religions. Students of comparative religion have in the past been less interested in the development of religions than in contrasting various systems and discovering their common elements and their differences. The study of the history of religion is somewhat different from this, and as yet has confined itself pretty largely to the study of primitive peoples. There are indications, however, that on the basis of such anthropological and scientific investigations there will be built a more complete presentation of religion in its more developed forms (see section B).

Literature. — Good introductions to the study of comparative religion are those by Jevons, An Introduction to the History of Religion (London: Methuen, 1896), and Menzies, History of Religion (New York: Scribner, 1895). Pfleiderer, Religion und Religionen (Munich: Lehmann, 1906; EngHsh translation, Religion and Historic Faiths [New York: Huebsch, 1907]) > gives a compact general study.

Efforts have been made in this connection to show how Christianity has emerged from earHer religious movements. Particularly by the religions geschichtliche school has the endeavor been made to trace the ideas of the New Testament to earlier religions, especially those of Egypt, Syria, Persia, and Assyria. Such procedure has brought to light many interesting facts, but as yet it is marked by more ingenuity than solid reasoning. An extreme development is to be seen in authors like Drews {The Christ Myth), who have denied the historicity of Jesus and have made him a personification of religious ideals.

Literature. — For a study of the primitive religions as a phase of this new movement students may be referred to King, The Development of Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1910); Farnell, Evolution of Religion (New York: Putnam, 1905) ; Durkheim, Les formes elementaires de la vie religieuse (Paris: Alcan, 191 2; English translation, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life [New York: Macmillan, 19 15]); Ames, The Psychology of Religious Experience (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 19 10). The most elaborate work is Frazer, Golden Bough (London: Macmillan, 1911-15). The position of those who deny the historicity of Jesus can be found well criticized in Case, The Historicity of Jesus (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 191 2).

B. THE EVOLUTION OF RELIGION I. WHAT IS MEANT BY THE EVOLUTION OF RELIGION?^

The use of the term ''evolution " in connection with reUgion is subject to at least two objections. On the one side are those who insist that religion is the gift of God, and therefore has no historical development. And, on the other hand, the biologist may object to the use of the term in any such general sense as a student of social science must adopt.

To the first critic it may be replied that, when he asserts or implies that religion has not developed like other elements in human experience, the facts are against him. Whatever

^ In the following discussion I have used freely, with the consent of the editors, materials of papers pubUshed by myself in the American Journal of Theology, the American Jonrnal of Sociology, and the Constructive Quarterly.

may have been its origin, religion exhibits phenomena akin to those observable in social institutions to which the term ''evolution" may legitimately be applied. The old distinction of the Deists between natural and revealed religion has been outgrown, not so much because it did not involve large elements of truth, but because as a final answer to the problems set by the history of Christianity it failed to take into account those psychological and sociological factors with which the modern student is particularly concerned. All religions are phases of religion.

To the other class of critics it must be replied that if biologists ever had a monopoly on the term ''evolution" their exclusive rights have long since expired. The conception given to the word by the Origin of Species and general biological usage is a particular phase of a view of the world as old as reflective thought. The service which biology has rendered the social sciences at this point has largely been confined to the region of method, vocabularies, and analogies. If these analogies have too often been overemphasized and made to do yeoman service in the name of some non-biological science, they have none the less made it possible to realize that whatever precise definition may be given to the term "evolution" there is a large measure of similarity between certain processes in social history and certain others in the building up of cellular organisms. Outside of the strictly biological sciences the word must be used in a large sense, but it is not identical with mere change or growth. It is possible to trace religion, as one of the functional expressions of life itself, through increasingly compHcated and more highly differentiated activities and institutions, as that life, both of individuals and of societies, seeks to adjust itself more effectively to its environment. The result of such vital activity is to produce, as it were, species of religions, between which, as, for example, between Brahmanism and Mohammedanism, there is only a generic likeness.

2. THE NATURE OF RELIGION

a) Religion not an abstraction. — There have been times in which men have endeavored to arrive at the conception of rehgion by abstracting from Christianity its characteristic elements. Other attempts have been made to extend this process of abstraction to all religions, and thus to discover that which is, so to speak, a generic concept. The difficulty with such search after a bit of scholastic realism is evident. Generic religion never existed apart from religions, and religions never existed except as interests and institutions of real people. There is imperative need that all students of the subject, and especially theologians, should emancipate themselves from scholastic abstractions and frankly recognize that religion is not a thing in itself, possessed of independent, abstract, or metaphysical existence, but is a name for one phase of concrete life. It is only from a strictly social point of view that either religion or religions will in any measure be properly understood. We know only people who worship in various ways and with various conceptions of what or whom they worship.