Straussâ•Žs Life of Jesus

THEODORE

 

PARKER

250

STRAUSS

’

S

 

LIFE

 

OF

 

JESUS

251

ars to investigate and explain; but only to repeat and en-

force in an intelligible manner the truths already acquired. 

Baumgarten, indeed, accounted it nothing less than high trea-

son against his discipline, for his scholars to presume to think 

and examine for themselves; and acknowledged him only for 

his genuine discipline, who left his school confi dent, that with 

the weapons of his instructer in his hands, he could resist the 

whole theological world, and overcome it without a violent 

struggle.”* Philosophy was considered as a pest and its pre-

cincts forbidden to all pious souls. Ecclesiastical history was 

in the service of a mystical Pietism; its real province and gen-

uine sources were unknown. Exegetical learning was thought 

unnecessary, and even a foe to genuine piety; the chimeras of 

Buxtorf, half Jewish, half Christian, ruled with despotic sway. 

Langen’s method of salvation was esteemed an oracle in dog-

matic theology, and pietistic and fanatical notions prevailed in 

morals. If a man was not satisfi ed with this, or showed a desire 

for more fundamental theological learning, it was said, “He 

has forsaken his fi rst love and wants to study his Saviour out 

of the world.”†  Such was Germany a hundred years ago. The 

fate of Lawrence Schmid, the “Wertheim Translator” of part 

of the Pentateuch, is a well known sign of the times. A young 

man was accused of Socinianism, and Arianism, because he 

doubted the genuineness of the celebrated passage, 1 John v. 

7, now abandoned by all respectable critics; he was reckoned 

unsound because he openly, or in secret, studied Richard Si-

mon, Grotius, Leclerc, and Wetstein. ‡

Let us now turn to England. Before this time the Deists had

* Eichhorn, Allgemeine Bibliothek, &c.; Leip., 1793. vol. V. pp. 16, 17. 

We have followed the beautiful translation in “The General Repository 

and Review.” Cambridge, 1812. vol. I. p. 65, seq.

† Eichhorn, lc. vol. III, p. 833, seq.

‡ See Semler’s Lebenbeschreibung; Halle, 1781, vol. I. p. 250, seq. et 

passim.

opened their voice; Hobbs, Morgan, Collins, Chubb, Tindal, 

Bolingbroke, had said their say. The civil wars of England, 

in the century before, had awakened the soul of the nation. 

Great men had risen up, and given a progress to the Prot-

estant Reformation, such as it found in no other country of 

the world perhaps, unless it were in Transylvania and Hol-

land. There had been a Taylor, Cudworth, Secker, Tillotson, 

Hoadly, Hare, Lardner, Foster, Whitby, Sykes, Butler, Ben-

son, Watts, — yes, a Newton and a Locke, helping to liberalize 

theology. The works of Montaigne, Malebranche, Bayle, even 

of Spinoza, had readers in England, as well as opponents. 

The English theologians stood far in advance of the Ger-

mans, among whom few great names were to be reckoned af-

ter the Reformation. Take the century that ended in the year 

of Baumgarten’s death, and you have the period of England’s 

greatest glory in science, literature, and theology. The works 

which give character to the nation were written then. Most of 

the English theology, which pays for the reading, was written 

before the middle of the last century; while in Germany, few 

books had been written on that general theme since the six-

teenth century, which are now reprinted or even read. Such 

was England a century ago.

What have the two countries done since? Compare Taylor’s 

Liberty of Prophesying, the writings of Cudworth, Locke, But-

ler, and Tillotson, or Foster, with the writings of the men who 

occupy a similar relative position at this day, — with the gen-

eral tone of the more liberal writers of England, — and what is 

the result? Need it be told? Theology, in the main body of Eng-

lish theologians, has not been stationary. It has gone back. The 

works of Priestley, and others like him, bear little fruit.

Now in Germany, since the death of Baumgarten, there has 

been a great advance. Compare the works of Neander, Bretsch-

neider, De Wette, and F. C. Bauer, with Baumgarten, and

---

THEODORE

 

PARKER

252

STRAUSS

’

S

 

LIFE

 

OF

 

JESUS

253

“the great theologians” of his time, and what a change. New 

land has been won; old errors driven away. It is not in vain, 

that Michaelis, Semler, Eichhorn, Kant, Schelling, Hegel, and 

Schleiermacher, have lived. Men study theology as the English 

once studied it, — as if they were in earnest. New questions 

are raised; old doubts removed; some principles are fi xed; and 

theology studied as a science, in the light of reason. But as an-

other has said, “In the English theology there is somewhat 

dead, and immovable, catholic, external, mechanical; while 

the industrial power of England is active, and goes ahead with 

giant strides, from invention to invention; while the commer-

cial and warlike spirit of the a nation goes storming forth, with 

manly and almost frantic courage, into the remotest distance, 

embracing the globe with its gigantic arms, and in the midst 

of its material concerns, pursues without wearying the inter-

ests of science, too haughty to disturb itself about the truth of 

religions foreign to its concerns; Theology remains, as it were, 

to represent the female element in the mind of the nation, sit-

ting at home, domestic as a snail, in the old-fashioned narrow 

building she has inherited from her fathers, which has been 

patched up a little, here and there, as necessity compelled. 

There she sits, anxiously fearing, in her old-womanly way, lest 

she shall be driven out of doors by the spirit of enlightened Eu-

rope, which sports with heathen religions. In English theology 

a peace has been established between the Understanding and 

Christianity, as between two deadly foes. Theology preserves 

unhurt the objective contents of the Christian Religion; but in 

the dull understanding, it lies like a stone in the stomach.” But 

let us now turn to the work of Mr. Strauss.

It is not our aim to write a polemic against the author of 

the “Life of Jesus,” but to describe his book or “defi ne his posi-

tion,” as the politicians are wont to say. The work in question 

comprises, fi rst, an Introduction, relating to the formation of 

“the Mythical stand-point,” from which the Evangelical his-

tory is to be contemplated; second, the main work itself, which 

is divided into three books, relating respectively to the History 

of the Birth and Childhood of Jesus; his Public Life; his Suffer-

ings, Death, and Resurrection; third, a conclusion of the whole 

book, or the doctrinal signifi cance of the life of Jesus. The work 

forms two closely printed volumes, and comprises about six-

teen hundred pages, thus making a work nearly as large as Mr. 

Hallam’s History of Literature. It is not properly called a Life 

of Jesus; but a better, a more descriptive title would be, A Fun-

damental Criticism on the Four Gospels. In regard to learn-

ing, acuteness, and sagacious conjectures, the work resembles 

Niebuhr’s History of Rome. Like that, it is not a history, but 

a criticism and collection of materials, out of which a conjec-

tural history may be constructed. Mr. Strauss, however, is not 

so original as Niebuhr, (who yet had numerous predecessors, 

though they are rarely noticed,) but is much more orderly and 

methodical. The general manner of treating the subject, and 

arranging the chapters, sections, and parts of the argument, 

indicates consummate dialectical skill; while the style is clear, 

the expression direct, and the author’s openness in referring 

to his sources of information, and stating his conclusions in all 

their simplicity, is candid and exemplary.*

The Introduction to the work is valuable to every student 

of the Scriptures, who has suffi cient sagacity to discern be-

tween the true and the false; to any other it is dangerous, as 

are all strong books to weak heads, very dangerous, from its 

“specious appearances.” It is quite indispensable to a compre-

hension of the main work. We will give a brief abstract of some 

of its most important matters. If a form of religion rest on

* He professes very honestly, that he has no presuppositions. We shall 

touch upon this point.

---