the exile after his death by the nation, and not by himself. On the other hand, princes are commended, and yet suffer grievous calamities. Thus Joash had to pay a heavy tribute, and fell at last through a conspiracy; Amaziah received the praise of being a good king, but was nevertheless taken prisoner, and in the end murdered. Uzziah did what pleased the Lord, and yet at the end of his life was a leper, having to dwell in a separate house. The pious king Josiah feil in a battle with Pharaoh Necho.

Quite otherwise the chronicler. According to his view Divine punishment must strike the sinner himself. He is neither protected by his descent from David, nor is the threatened evil transferred to the nation or to his posterity. He must personally atone for his sins-corresponding altogether to the retributive theory of an Ezekiel or a Jeremiah. The exceptions, here and there, do not escape the eye of the writer. But does he, on their account, alter the facts or find out new ones? This is done only in the rarest cases. Rather he selects from the mass of historical material just such facts as correspond to his theory. He deals with them much less by the help of inventions than by skilful historical combination. The manner of connecting may certainly then be legitimately subjected to historical criticism. Thus Rehoboam is punished by the expedition of Shishak, the Egyptian, who conquered and plundered Jerusalem. Abijah is successful in the war with Israel, not because he is a descendant of David, but because he is pious himself. Jeroboam is punished personally with sudden death. Asa is victorious as long as he is pious; when he allies himself with Syria he has grievous wars, and falls into a painful affliction. Joram also ends his days in a distressing disease; Philistines and Arabians plunder the land. That Amaziah, whom the author of the book of Kings praises so much, has ill-fortune because he worships the gods of the Edomites, and despises the prophets. His manner of treating the history of Uzziah shows this very clearly. The praise of his excellence is, on the whole, undiminished. But why did he become a leper, since of all grievous sicknesses the leprosy was certainly the clearest sign of the Divine anger? The answer to this question was given by the author of the book of Kings. But the chronicler combines with this the correct information that the kings of Israel and Judah ascribed to themselves at all times priestly rights, and agreeably to this frequently enough offered incense in the temple. From his strictly priestly point of view the king is, however, a layman, to whom every priestly action is sacreligious. For this desecration he was punished with leprosy. The unhistorical, more correctly, the anachronistic element, consists in this circumstance, that he transfers the opinion of his own time concerning the exercise of priestly functions to more ancient times. The chronicler

relates of King Manasseh that he had to remain throughout a long period as the prisoner of the Assyrian king in Babylon. At the first glance this looks like an invention, as the book of Kings is entirely silent upon it. He had to be punished for his grievous transgressions, and at the same time the promise to Hezekiah that his sons would be carried to Babylon had to be fulfilled. Nevertheless, the latest historiographer of Israel, who makes use of a very severe, sometimes almost fastidious, criticism of authorities, does not venture to question that captivity. Now, at this day, Assyrian records give evidence that Manasseh was actually forced by Assarhaddon to reside a longer time at Babylon as suretyship for his loyalty as a vassal. That this ended, however, during his life, and that he was permitted to return to Jerusalem, the chronicler accounts for on the ground of his sincere repentance. And, indeed, history informs us of nothing to his disadvantage in the latter part of his reign. The violent death of the pious Josiah is a punishment for his despising the Word of God from the mouth of Pharaoh Necho. (2 Chron. xxv. 22). Thus, even at a time when the historic sense was in its decay, deeply-rooted regard for facts held in check the didactic theory.

The Hebrew historical literature sent forth a last beautiful shoot in those important times, when the nation arose in its ancient strength and shook off the grievous yoke of the Syrian dynasty. The portrayal of these conflicts in the first book of Maccabees vividly reminds one of the books of Samuel; but it soon loses its vigour. The so-called second book of Maccabees, full of beautiful as well as insipid legends, has no place among the historical sources of that great period. As that excellent representation of the Maccabean wars lacks altogether the prophetico-didactic style, it was—we say with Luther-very wrongly separated from the holy writings, and is preserved to us only in a Grecian translation. Those monographical representations, such as the books of Esther, Judith, and Tobit, lean too much to the character of novels to be admitted into a sketch of Hebrew historiography.

We conclude with one of the most remarkable monuments, less of historical literature than of the historical intuition, which proclaims to us the flashing up of a profoundly genial idea, in which the pragmatism of the Hebrew historiography displays its richest and noblest splendour. It is not to be found, however, in the historical part of the book of Daniel, nor in those meagrely-veiled imitations of more special prophecy; but in that great apocalyptic picture (chap. vii.) in which the course of universal history in its main phases is set within one large and ingeniously-constructed frame. The glance of the seer is, indeed, limited to anterior Asia. There he beholds, as one powerful monarchy rises after another, the chosen people oppressed or exiled. But while they

L

themselves gradually vanish, succumbing to the righteous judgment of God, the wonderful people of the Divine election remain. The more severe the oppression the more glorious the new-birth of Israel. From this review of history the seer derives the joyful hope that the people of Judah will also arise from the severe oppression, by which the Syrian power of the Seleucidæ drove, in the first part of the second century, the nation to despair, to a greatness and glory never dreamt of before. But the empirical nation of the Jews is not the object of the universal movement of history. It is the nation of the holy ones, that religious community which proceeded, indeed, from Judah, but which is increased from the Gentile world, the establishment of which the ancient prophets had declared to be the real object of the Divine government of the world. That is the true kingdom of God, free from all national limits, grounded only upon the highest development of the religio-moral idea. Thus universal history unfolds itself in a great drama; all events group themselves around great centres, around those four world-empires-the ripest fruit of the historical intuition of prophecy. I need not proceed further to shew how that idea and this frame-work have furnished the ground plan of an universal history which has ruled the whole of the historical literature of Christianity down to the Reformation, and from which the more modern forms of the collective history of mankind have also been developed the most convincing testimony of the high importance which the Hebrew historical literature may claim.

A

ART. IV.-GERMANY AND THE JESUITS.*

CENTURY ago the Order founded by Loyola had succeeded in making itself so troublesome and distasteful to its own Church, that the Pope of the period, Clement XIV., issued a decree for its dissolution. The nations which had been rent by intestine feuds, fomented by these universal disturbers of the peace, doubtless rejoiced over this great relief from their burdens, and fondly imagined that their descendants, at least, would be relieved from this scourge. But in this they were mistaken. The Jesuits have no such word in their vocabulary as dissolution. Defeat and discomfiture they are used to, for their history has been a most checkered one; but we fear the world will yet see many revolving years, and perhaps ages, before it will be wise enough to afford them no retreat as an arena for their wiles.

They were brought together into their organization for the special purpose of combating the principles of the Reformation, * From the 'American Methodist Quarterly.'

which, at the period of their birth, were making such rapid prógress among all the Catholic nations of Europe; and as long as the antagonism shall exist between the Protestant and the Papist, so long there will be some spot or some cause in which they will be welcome; for the object of their creation was not to assume the pastoral relation in imitation of the great Shepherd, but rather to be the soldiers of the Church, and fight its battles against the inroads of heresy. To this end they assumed the sword rather than the crozier, and made intriguing wiles their daily weapons. They insinuated themselves into the courts of all nations, and, by political intrigues, succeeded in many in gaining so great a foothold that the temporal power, in more than one instance, was in the hands of the Church in reality, while the State waked up, too late, to find that its sceptre was passing from it.

Thus Jesuitism waged its battles in France, Spain, Italy, Germany; in all Europe, in fact, till the combined nations of Catholic. Christendom arose in a body and demanded of the Pontiff the extinction of the Order, which was granted, and executed by the head of the Church in 1773. The Jesuits knew that it was necessary to bend for a time before the storm which they had conjured; so they simply sought retreats where they could carry out one of the objects of their organization, which was that of propagating the religion of their Church by missionary effort, and of obtaining control of all public and private education, with a view of silently rearing up a race that would be under their command. In the line of missions, we need merely point to the labours and the conquests of the Jesuit fathers in all Canada, along the chain of our great lakes, down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico, throughout this latter country, and, indeed, all South America. It may be safely affirmed that all the Catholicism planted in this entire continent in earlier years was the labour of the Jesuit missionaries.

But many of them found retreats in neighbouring lands not under the sway of the Roman pontiff, especially in Prussia and Russia. Frederick-the-Great took a pleasure in being able to do what other sovereigns feared to do. Though Protestant, he cared but little for the precepts of his faith, as may be seen in his admiration of Voltaire, and his intimacy with him; and therefore he seemed to take a pride in opening his doors to the exiled Jesuits, as his father before him had sheltered the fugitive Huguenots. If any other motive than that of pride in the liberty of his country impelled him to this deed, it was the desire to show his power and fearlessness in all combats of principle, for it does not appear that he cherished any love for their peculiar tenets. Suffice it to say, that in this way the Jesuits obtained their foothold in Prussia, and from that day to this have used the advantages accorded to them to further their own special interests, and are now stinging

the bosom that warmed them into life. It is rather an interesting fact, that as the Prussians look back with pride to the martial spirit implanted by Frederick's efforts in the hearts of his people, and whose military glory and achievements have been their pride and their inspiration, so they may attribute to his indifference in the matter of religious principles the growth in their midst of that power with which their armies and their statesmen are engaged in almost deadly struggle.

The French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, with all their bitter teachings and experience to the various nations of the Continent, gave the Jesuits an enviable and much-prized opportunity to work for their own restoration; and as, at the fall of Napoleon, the world was willing to submit to any action that partook of a conservative character, and to give the Church the power rather than to the State; so, thus, in the heyday of conservative reaction, the Pope, who had received so many indignities at the hands of the French conquerors, was willing to embrace and restore any agents who might aid in re-establishing the power of the afflicted Church. Thus the Jesuits were restored to favour with the Holy See, and entered on a new career in the bosom of the Church. As a logical sequence, one might have expected their withdrawal from Prussia, but they were far from surrendering the Protestant ground so fortunately gained. As teachers in the schools and higher institutions, as preceptors in the families of the nobles and princes, they had gradually gained great vantage-ground, and made very fair progress in introducing the Catholic Church into Prussia. This they had done under the shield of protection to all religious faiths, which had been learned from Frederick; and thus the Catholic Church was fairly installed in Prussia, and finally enjoyed the protection and pecuniary support of the State, according to the ratio of numbers.

The sovereigns of Prussia all regarded the Catholic Church as a fair claimant for their care, and especially when the Catholic Rhine provinces were annexed to the ancient Prussian realm of the House of Brandenburg. The Jesuits were therefore allowed to pursue their way unmolested, although they were not formally recognized by the State until about 1855, and but little concern was expressed that they could be of any harm. Occasionally in their so-called missions, which are their revival seasons, they were censured for carrying their work into the midst of Protestant communities, and holding them in the open air so as to become offensively prominent to the Protestant people. But beyond some little friction of this nature they met with no obstacles, and they were virtually protected by the Government with as much care as was accorded to the regular State Church. They took advantage of these unusual opportunities in a Protestant land to extend their power,