seems natural to reject simply because they conflict with narratives which appear to be essential to the framework. None the less, it is reasonable to suppose that North Israel might possess traditions of Saul which differed from those in 1 and 2 Samuel, where the North Israelite king is placed in a somewhat unfavourable light.

Proceeding further, we cannot fail to notice that Gen. iv 26 points to a body of thought which, in dating the worship of Yahweh in the time. of Enosh, is quite distinct from the 'canonical' perspective according to which the name Yahweh was first made known to Israel by Moses. This body of thought belongs to a circle which evidently has had some share in the literary growth of our Old Testament. Moreover, the Cainite genealogy, like some other fragments preserved in Genesis, belongs to a perspective of the history of man, in which there was no Deluge. It would be futile to guess how such a history ran, but it will be seen that we have to recognize groups of traditions or 'histories' very different from the canonical framework. A more striking feature is the growing recognition of traditions in Genesis of a permanent settlement (see J. T. S. xii p. 467 sq.) ; that is to say, the sojourn in Egypt, and the Exodus, the profoundest event in Israelite national history, found no place among the traditions of some circle or circles of whose literature some fragments have been allowed to survive. Other illustrations could be cited, but perhaps enough has been said to shew that there is room for a more thorough investigation of the fragmentary, isolated, or conflicting data which in some conspicuous cases presuppose forms of tradition and thought quite distinct from those upon which many of our conceptions of Israel are based. It is often feared that literary analysis has been carried too far, that the alleged complexity is too extravagant and incredible; the truth rather seems to be that biblical criticism has not yet reached that stage where the intricacies can be properly handled. It seems highly probable that we should recognize both a literary and a historical compositeness, and this is not unreasonable when we consider the varied elements which made up Israel in, let us say, the age of D and P. Literary criticism, since the work of Wellhausen, has recognized that there were different views of the religious. past of Israel; conservative writers justly perceive that religion and history are inextricably interwoven; the stage has yet to be reached where the significance of compositeness and of variant forms of tradition and thought can be thoroughly investigated and more consistently and adequately explained.

It may be objected that this is not to reconstruct the developement of Israelite history and religion. The reply is twofold: the patient and laborious work of Pentateuchal analysis in the past seemed perhaps equally unlikely to throw the light upon the Old Testament that it

actually succeeded in throwing, and anything which tends to bring out the full significance of the Old Testament must inevitably be valuable for the internal history of Palestine and hence for the history of man. Besides, in any endeavour to reconstruct, we have to remember that the old Jewish historians themselves have given us their history, and that criticism has shewn that the material they used has been subordinated to their aim. The Old Testament may accordingly be likened to some Palestinian house built, as is often the case, with stone from mediaeval and ancient ruins. Stones of Byzantine, Roman, and earlier date, and may-be the fragment of an inscribed slab, would tell their tale of methods of building, forms of culture, and their changes. But the material has been deliberately utilized for a house in accordance with the builder's skill and needs. The criticisms of a European architect accustomed to modern improvements would be, from one point of view, entirely irrelevant, owing to his particular point of view, knowledge, and mode of life. From another point of view, this house would continue to gain in interest as more was learned of its history, contents, and surroundings. It still remains a house, whether the material came from a ruined Byzantine church, a Roman villa, or an older gateway.

These one could not reconstruct, though it might ultimately be found that the church must have a house, the villa a bath, and the gateway a wall. Is it not so with the Old Testament? The more we know of the structure of the composite writings the more difficult the task of replacing the Gesamtbild, the result of deliberate and careful labour, by another based upon a selection of the material. Finally, we must not forget that the deficiencies which have been found in the Old Testament (whether due to structure or material) are intelligible-and explicable-now that our attitude has changed (e. g. as regards Gen. ixi), and it may well be the case that our anxiety to recover the facts of history and the genuine utterances of a prophet is an equally imperfect attitude which is leading up to yet another stage where the value of the Old Testament will be brought immediately home to the great mass of people. That Isaiah was inspired to write the sixty-six chapters which pass under his name is a view which can no longer be held. Literary criticism, whether 'moderate' or 'extreme', holds out intricate analyses ascribing these chapters to a considerable number of writers. Is it not a great gain to our knowledge of the developement of mankind to replace a single inspired writer by many men of different dates who heard within them the voice of God, and uttered their messages in the thought and phraseology of their times?

STANLEY A. Cook.

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH; AN ACCOUNT OF A RECENT CONTROVERSY.

ADOLF HARNACK. Entstehung und Entwickelung der Kirchenverfassung und des Kirchenrechts in den zwei ersten Jahrhunderten. (J. C. Hinrichs'sche Buchhandlung, Leipzig, 1910.)

The Constitution and Law of the Church in the first two centuries, by ADOLF HARNACK, translated by F. L. POGSON, M.A., edited by H. D. A. MAJOR, M.A., Vice-Principal of Ripon Clergy College (being vol. xxxi of the Crown Theological Library). (Williams & Norgate, London, 1910.)

WHAT is the Catholic Church, and where did it come from? The book that is named at the head of this notice is a contribution by Dr Harnack to the discussion of this ancient, but living, problem. How difficult a question it is to answer in any way that is likely to find acceptance all students of theology know well. The difficulty seems to arise from the particular combination of imagination and fact that must needs find a place in the conception of a thing which claims to be heavenly, supernatural, and yet at the same time enters into the affairs of men in the most concrete way possible. There are two easy paths to a solution and they both arrive at their goal by the same method, by dichotomizing these two elements of imagination and fact. Those who take the one say that the Church is a definite self-contained collection of people, known to everybody by certain signs and common rites; those who take the other say that it is the company of those whom God has chosen, whose number and whose names are known to Him alone. This method, though apparently simple, is extremely difficult to sustain in practice. For the believers in the visibility of the Church may constantly be found passing over almost insensibly into the other point of view, and vice versa. Dr Harnack's book is an extremely important one for all who are interested in this problem. It marks a stage in the discussion, and we may be very grateful that it has been made accessible in English. It is translated partly by the late Mr F. L. Pogson, who did such good work in this way, and partly by Mr Major. The translation is very well done, and in this respect the volume compares favourably with many of the larger volumes in the Theological Translation Library. It is right, however, to protest against the meaningless expression centre round' (p. 18). The work consists of four sections. (1) Rise and developement of the Organization and Law of the Church in the first two centuries; (2) Primitive Christianity and Catholicism; (3) The fundamental Confession of the Church (the Trinitarian formula); (4) History of the use of the word Gospel in the early Church, followed by a detached note on the meaning of 'Word', 'Word of God', 'Word

(Words) of Christ' in the N. T. Of these the first two occupy considerably more than two-thirds of the book. The first section is an enlarged reissue of the article 'Verfassung, kirchliche usw.', in volume xx of Hauck-Herzog's Realencyclopädie für Theologie und Kirche (3. Auflage). This article appeared in 1908. In 1909 the Proceedings of the Königlich-Sächsische Gesellschaft für Wissenschaften (Philol.Histor. Classe, Bd. 27, H. 3) contained an article by the veteran scholar Rudolf Sohm called 'Wesen und Ursprung des Katholizismus', which was really a strong attack on Harnack's position, while recognizing the great value of his work. In this article Sohm reaffirms, though in a slightly modified form, the view he gave to the world in the first volume of his Kirchenrecht (1892), and takes up once more the problem raised at the beginning of this notice, 'for the appearance of the Catholic Church in the course of the second century is the most important occurrence in the whole of Church History.' To it is due not only Catholicism, but also the Reformation, since this is a reaction against the Catholic principle. But the explanation of its appearance still awaits demonstration. Two facts are clear. (1) Primitive Christianity was not Catholic. This has been shewn by Protestant theologians. (2) Yet Catholicism is a continuation of primitive Christianity, and one which, while it encounters opposition, yet establishes itself with all the ease of a natural develope

ment.

And so there must have been in primitive Christianity the seed from which Catholicism has sprung. What is it?

The answer of Albrecht Ritschl in Die Entstehung der altkatholischen Kirche (2. Aufl. 1857), developed with great insight and learning by Harnack, holds the field in Protestant circles. Sohm's version of this view is that Gentile Christianity ('Heidenchristentum ') is the source. It was its theological dogmatic character, which was fundamentally incapable of grasping the true nature of the Gospel, as it was seen and preached by Paul not exactly alone, but certainly in a way far in advance of that of the other Apostles. The spiritualized Old Testament was seized upon by the Hellenic element, and so the Glad News was turned into a New Law, and Faith into a Teaching. The Hellenization of the Gospel is Catholicism. On this theory the great fact is that the idea of the New Birth and of Justification by Faith was left on one side. Everything else is result, such as the settling of the true faith through the Apostolic teaching power of the Bishops, and the relaxing of moral demands through the priestly power of the keys. It was not the developement of organization, but Hellenizing transformation of the Gospel, that was the strength of Catholicism. Readers of Harnack will recognize him in this picture, but it will not be surprising if they feel there is an element of caricature. Sohm goes on:-Intellectualism and Moralism are elements in Catholicism, but they are not Catholicism.

For Orthodoxy and 'Aufklärung' have played their part in Protestantism as well. Again, in Puritanism great importance was ascribed to the Old Testament, another Catholic' tendency. The truth is that the distinctive mark of Catholicism is to be found in the practical, not in the theological sphere; it is the Infallible Church, i.e. Kirchenrecht', whereas the basal idea of Protestantism is freedom. (This one feels bound to point out is not the case with the original Protestants, Luther or Calvin, who, being leaders of a religious movement, naturally appealed to authority.) Sohm's quarrel with Harnack is that although in the third edition of the Dogmengeschichte he recognizes his main point, when he says (p. 304 n. 1) the whole essence of Catholicism is to be found in the deification of tradition, yet he has left the rest of his treatment as it stood. Moreover, the prevailing teaching has remained unaffected, cf. v. Schubert's otherwise admirable Grundzüge (1909); and Harnack is still unregenerate, witness his article in Hinneberg's Kultur der Gegenwart (1906), and the still more recent article in the Realencyclopädie (the one here under review). Sohm proceeds to expound his own view as to the true nature of Catholicism. He starts from the distinction familiar to Protestant thought between the Church as a legally organized body (Kirche im Rechtssinn') and the Church in the religious sense (Kirche im Sinn des Glaubens'). The one is the product of men, the other the creation of God. It was Luther's discovery that these are to be set sharply over against one another. Calvinism and the 'Aufklärung' between them, however, accustomed the world to the idea, which is now universal, of the Church as a religious society ('Kirchengesellschaft'). The primitive Church is constantly spoken of, as though it shared this view, and stood already at the point of view of the 'Aufklärung', which is absurd. Neither is it true that it was conscious of the opposition between the Church in the religious sense and the Church in the legal sense (Kahl). It knew only the Church in the religious sense. There were no local officials, no locally organized churches, only the Church of Christ. It is always the whole that is present. There are no parts, no communities. The opposition was not clearly seen by Augustine or Wyclif, or anybody indeed before Luther, who discovered it, and proclaimed the invisibility of the Church, no verzweifelte Idee', as Harnack asserts, but the mightiest of all that have appeared in all Church History. It is the foundation of Protestantism. Conversely the essence of Catholicism lies just in this fact, that it does not distinguish between the Church in the religious sense and the Church in the legal sense. The Church of Christ is for it a legal organization ; the life of Christendom with God is ruled by the Catholic Canon Law. There is only one Christianity on the earth, that which is loyally and legitimately the continuation of the Apostolic Church, which is the