gion, as it is proved by decisive examples, were really converted. Of this number was Julien, the Protestant minister who publicly renounced religion, but before his death, he returned to the faith of the Bible.

SECTION VI.

History of infidelity in Germany.

The character of infidelity in Germany, and the manner of its developement, is, in a three-fold respect, different from that which it assumed in other countries. In the first place, it was much more consequent; and hence, the German infidels, proceeded more and more to Pantheism, which is the logical result of skeptical speculation.

2. It displayed itself more gradually, and advanced more orderly, step by step, and hence took a deeper hold on the very life of the people. In no country, has infidelity pervaded every department of society, as in some portions of Germany.

3. In other lands, the clergy stood as watchmen and guardians, against the attacks of skepticism; as was the case particularly in Protestant England, where the clergy were found faithful to their trust But Germany saw, what never had been seen before, that those who were appointed to teach and defend the truths of revelation, should step forward to oppose them. On the same grounds, and, in part, with the same tendency, as Lucian and Celsus from among the heathen, attacked Christianity, did many of the German theologians array themselves against the religion of which they were the servants. Most of this class sought, through a regular analysis of the general truths, or ideas of religion, by scientific investigation, to prove the falsity of the doctrines of the Bible. It is clear, that in proportion

as this disposition prevailed among the clergy, must infidelity extend and deepen itself in the hearts of the people. Various circumstances conspired to favour the spread of this skeptical spirit among the German theologians. Of this nature we may notice the following as among the most important :

1. Many circumstances connected with the reign of Frederick the II.—as the residence of so many gay despisers of religion at his court, who extended their influence over most persons of rank in the country; the great liberty of opinion which Frederick admitted, to an extent which had never before been allowed.

2. The extended admiration of French literature, which produced at this period little else than works ridiculing religion. For even those which did not expressly treat of the subject, yet had a tincture of the reigning spirit. We must mention also the love of the English literature, particularly at the close of the last century. Most of the free thinking works were translated into German; and although the refutations of these works were also translated; as translating was the order of the day; yet, as the Chancellor Pfaff of Tubingen remarked, "these refutations were not of such value, as to compensate for the evil."

3. The influence of a literary periodical work, established in Berlin, conducted by Nicolai, which systematically recommended all works written in opposition to religion, and neglected or condemned those in its favour. This work was commenced in 1765, and increased to 118 volumes. The influence of this work, was far greater than any such review could have at present.

4. The influence of the Philosophy of Wolf, out of which the Popular Philosophy arose. Wolf's Philosophy contained a principle which operated fatally, not only against revelation, but against inward piety. It pretended to

be able to demonstrate the truths of revelation, in a mathematical manner upon principles of Reason, which subjected these truths to the spirit of speculation. It made also the broadest distinction between natural and revealed religion. It did not indeed deny the latter, but it accustomed the people to consider them as different; and as the truths of natural religion were represented as so firmly grounded, many were induced to embrace them as sufficient. It operated also against Christianity, by its cold syllogistical method of reasoning, which tended to destroy every thing that was vital, not merely the religion of the heart, but every finer feeling which was not satisfied with dull abstract forms. It was from this system, as before remarked, the Popular Philosophy arose, which undertook to prove on the principles of Reason, the truths of Natural Religion. Without resting satisfied with the views proposed by Wolf, it turns them all to its advantage. To this school, belong Jerusalem, Garve, Reimarus, Eberhardt, Moses Mendelssohn, &c. The worst thing about this system was that it laid claim to the name of Philosophy, when it was in fact, nothing more than a set of arbitrary opinions. Its defenders who were but weak thinkers, stood in breathless amazement, when Kant and others appeared upon the field. Thus Jacobi, in his latter years, said, when the works of Hegel appeared, that he had been able to understand all other philosophical works, but these were too abstruse for him: and Mendelssohn could not understand Jacobi, nor Garve, Mendelssohn.

The opposition among theologians, to the truths of Revelation, was at first by no means decided; as a first step we must regard the influence of some theological writers who were not themselves enemies of these truths, but prepared the way for their rejection, and without intending it, forged weapons for those who should come after them. The occasion of this lay in the degraded state of theology

in the beginning of the 18th century. Such men as Calvin Melancthon, Chytræus and many others, were profoundly learned, and knew how to employ their learning in the service of theology without weakening their faith in the doctrines of the Bible: their erudition enlarged their views, without injuring either their faith or piety. But the situation of theology, especially in the Lutheran church, at the period referred to, was exceedingly low; it consisted in little more, than establishing and illustrating the doctrines of the church; all the main ideas, in the several departments rested upon tradition; the study of theology was a work of memory; few giving themselves the trouble to examine, how far the doctrines they had received from their fathers agreed with the sacred Scriptures. Learning, properly speaking, was not wanting, for such men as Calov and Carpzov among the orthodox, and Rambach and Budeus among the Pietists, may be compared with any of the learned men of the present day, and even excelled them; it was not learning therefore, but a scientific spirit that was wanting. The situation of profane literature was much the same, for here also was wanting an independent self-formed character: what was received was transmitted. about the middle of the preceding century, a new spirit was introduced into this department. In philosophy, Wolf and his disciples excited a new and lively interest, which rapidly spread itself over Germany, and at the same time introduced an entirely different method of treating the subject. In history a new æra was formed by Thomasius, and the various translations of English historical works, increased the interest which he had excited. In Philology a new school was formed by Ernesti, Reiske and others, who adopted a method much superior to that pursued by the philologians of Holland. As all these departments, are more or less connected with Theology, it could not fail, that the impulse should be communicated to it. Several dis

But

tinguished men' appeared at this period, as Baumgarten in Halle, Ernesti in Leipzig, and John David Michalis in Goettingen, who pursued with ardour, the study of profane literature, and endeavoured to effect a connexion between this literature and theology, and to enrich the latter with the results of the former, and this was the first step to neology.

It is an interesting and important question, whether this connexion of profane literature with theology has a necessary tendency to neology. That in the Lutheran church it obviously had this tendency, cannot be denied. And some thing of the same kind may be seen in the Reformed Church, especially among the Arminians. But on the other hand, history shows that this is not necessarily the case, Calvin, Melancthon, Chytræus, and Bucerus were profoundly versed in these studies, without manifesting the least tendency to infidelity. Hence it appears that it depends upon the manner of treating the subject, and the way in which profane and sacred literature are united. There is in theology a two-fold element, the one human, the other supernatural, by the one it is connected with every department of human knowledge, and hence an accurate acquaintance with human science must have a salutary influence upon the study of Theology. On the other hand, there is something supernatural, which is to be found in no human science; and which no human science can either explain or illustrate. If therefore the theologian does not know this, by his own living experience; if he be not connected by faith with the invisible world, with him the study of profane literature and its connexion with theology must prove injurious. If a theologian be without faith and without profane literature, as was the case with many of the orthodox party in the Lutheran church, he will deliver Christianity to his successors as he found it, without understanding it himself but a means of blessing to those