BIBLIOGRAPHY: 8. Bochart, Hierozoicore, IL, iv. 1, 3 vole., Leipaie, 1793‑98; J. L. Burekhardt, Notes on the Bedouins and Wahabia, London, 1830; H. B. Tristram, Natural Hiat. of the Bible, pp. 306 eqq., ib. 1880; A. Munro, The Locust Plague and its Suppression, ib. 1900; DB, iii. 130131; EB, iii, 2807‑10; JE, viii. 147; and the commentaries on Leviticus at xi. 22, and on Joel, particularly that by Driver, in the Cambridge Bible, containing an excursus on locusts and giving the literature.
LODENSTEIN, lo'den‑stain, JODOCUS VAN: Reformed preacher and ascetic; b. at Delft Feb. 6, 1620; d. at Utrecht Aug. 6, 1677. He studied theology at Utrecht under Voetius, Schotanus and De Meets, and in 1642 went to Franeker in order to devote himself to the study of Oriental languages under the direction of Coccejus. In 1644 he became preacher at Zoetermeer near Delft, in 1650 at Sluis in Flanders, and in 1653 at Utrecht, where he labored until his death. He was the originator of a reformation of life and morals in the Netherlands, and was thus for the Dutch and German Reformed Church what Spener soon after became in the German Evangelical‑Lutheran Church, and by the same analogy he was followed by a party of " Lodensteinians," who kept aloof from the external life of the Church without formally separating themselves, unlike the adherents of Labadie, who were outspoken dissenters. He was a reformer of practical life, not of doctrine. The Netherlands were at that time exceedingly prosperous, and the popular mind seemed to be entirely absorbed by secular pursuits. Lodenstein, however, made a wide‑spread impression by his preaching, by his writings, and by his spiritual songs. Of his sermons many were published and often reprinted in various collections, such as Geestelyke Opwekker (Amsterdam, 1701); Vervalle Christendom (Utrecht, 1711); Heerlijkheid van sere wear Christelijk leven (Amsterdam, 1711); Boetpredikatien over Jerem. xlv (Utrecht, 1779). Of his important ascetic works must be mentioned especially Weegschale der onvolmaacktheden (Utrecht, 1664) and Beaehouvn;rtge van Zion (ib. 1674‑76). A collection of his spiritual songs is in Uytapanningen en artdere Gedigten (ib. 1676). (S. D. vur VEEN.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: P. I. Prooat, Jadocua van Lodenatein, Amsterdam, 1880; M. Goebel, Geachichte des christlichen Lebens in der rhe%niach‑weetfadiachen evaupeliachen Kirche, ii. 180‑180, Coblenta, 1852; H. L. J. Heppe, Geschichti des Pietiamua and der Myatik in der reformirtea Kirehe, Isyden, 1879; A. Ritschl, Geachichte des Pietiamue, i. 152 eqq., Bonn, 1880.
9 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Locust
LOEBE, 1$b'e, AUGUST JULIUS: German Lu
theran; b, at Altenburg (24 m. s. of Leipsic) Jan.
8, 1805; d. at Rasepbas (a suburb of Altenburg)
Mar. 27, 1900. He was educated at the gymna
sium of his native city and at the universities of
Jena (1825‑27; Ph.D., 1831) and Leipsic (1827
1828), after which he conducted a private school in
Altenburg until 1839. Becoming deeply inter
ested in Gothic, he determined on the first critical
edition of the translation of Ulfilas (q.v.) in col
laboration with Hans Conon von der Gabelentz;
and for this purpose he visited Upsala in 1834 to
inspect the famous Codex Argenteua, and in the
following year went to Wolfenbiittel with Von der
Gabelentz to study the Codex Carolinas of Ulfilas.
The edition, which appeared under the title Ul
filas: Veteris et Novi Teatamenti veraionis Gothicce
jragmenta qute supersunt (3 vole., Leipaic and AI
tenburg, 1836‑46), was accompanied by Lobe's
Beitr6ge zur Textberichtigung used Erklarung des
Skeireires (Altenburg, 1839) and supplemented by
the collaborators' Nachschrift zu der Auagabe des
Ulfilaa (Leipsic, 1860).
In 1839 Lobe became pastor at Rasephas, where
the remainder of his life was to be spent. Here he
contributed largely to Pierer's Universal‑Lexikore,
and practically edited the fourth and fifth editions
of the work (1857‑64; 1867‑72), as well as the
three additional year‑books incorporated in the
same encyclopedia (1865‑73). He also did most
of the work on the edition planned by Preuss of
the Loci, theologici of Johann Gerhard (9 vole.,
Berlin and Leipaic, 1863‑$5). His third field of
activity was the local and ecclesiastical history of
Altenburg, represented by his Geschichtliche Be
sehret'bung der Residenzatadt Altenburg and ihrer
Umgebung (Altenburg, 1841), and the completion,
in collaboration with his eldest son, Ernst Conon
LtSbe, of Saehse's Altenburger Kirehengalleri.e (3 vole.,
LOEHR, lo'e, JOHANN KONRAD WILHELM:
Lutheran theologian and philanthropist; b. in
Furth (5 m. n.w. of Nuremberg) Feb. 21, 1808;
d. at Neuendettelsau (12 m. s. of Nuremberg) Jan.
2, 1872. Descended from a pious middle‑class
family, he went from the gymnasium of Nurem
berg to the University of Erlangen in 1826 to study
theology. First the Reformed, then powerfully
and inflexibly the Lutheran, view influenced him.
In 1828 he spent a term at the University of Ber
lin, attracted not so much by the lectures of the
professors as by the sermons of the famous preach
ers. In 1831 he became vicar at Kirchenlamitz
where he drew large congregations by his original
and fervent preaching. But the civil and ecclesi
astical authorities on the charge of mysticism re
moved him after two years and he became assistant
pastor of St. Giles in Nuremberg. Here his gift of
preaching was fully developed. Like a prophet of
old, Lobe denounced sin without fear, and thus set
the magistracy of the city against him. He had,
however, the support of the Church authorities.
In 1837 he finally settled as preacher at Neuendet
telsau, an inconsiderable and unattractive place,
which after many a struggle he transformed into
a busy Christian colony. From 1848 to 1852 the idea of leaving the Bavarian State Church frequently took hold of him, and his relations with its authorities became very strained. The reason for his dissatisfaction did not lie so much in actual conditions, but in the fact that L6he measured these conditions by his ideal standards. It was the conflict between the ideal and the real that agitated him; he tried to identify the communion of saints with its visible organism. He planned originally not a reformation, but an entirely new formation of the Church. He addressed a petition signed by 330 people to the General Synod in which he demanded the withdrawal of secular supremacy over the Protestant Church, complete purification of confession, and the strictest adherence to the symbols of the Church. Although the synod tried to meet his demands as far as possible, L6he was not satisfied and was several times actually on the point of secession; but his historical feeling and love for the traditions of the Church deterred him from the execution of his plan. As a strictly orthodox Lutheran, he was chiefly offended by the free intercourse between the Lutherans and the Reformed, and especially by their common celebration of the Lord's Supper, which threatened to eliminate the differences in doctrine, although no actual union existed. A proposition was made to suspend Lohe, but many voted against this measure, which, on account of his numerous following, would have led to an actual split within the Church of Bavaria. But these disagreeable conditions were changed when in 1852 the leadership of the consistory was entrusted to Harless, whose attitude toward L6he was less hostile, and who effected a definite but peaceable separation between the Lutherans and Reformed. In his great work on the Church (Drei Bucher von der Kirche, 1845) L6he propounds the strictest Lutheran orthodoxy. Impurity of doctrine is for him as bad as immoral conduct, and Lutheran doctrines are complete and perfect, in no need of development. But his zeal for orthodoxy was at times so excessive that it brought him dangerously near to Roman Catholicism, as for instance in his doctrine of ~ a visible Church and his ideas of church government, the efficacy of works, self‑denial, and celibacy. But he was so firmly rooted in the doctrine of justification that it is impossible to speak of a conscious inclinar tion toward the Roman Catholic Church.
The personality of L6he moat, however, be judged in its entirety. He was not only a man of pure, although sometimes one‑aided, orthodoxy, but a creative power in the field of charitable work. From 1840 he was active in edui;ating spiritual workers for the German emigrants to America. He founded the Missouri Synod in union with the emigrant Lutherans of Saxony, the Franconian colonies in Michigan, and at a later time the Iowa Synod. Neuendettelsau possesses two stately buildings devoted to the education of missionaries for North America and Australia. In 1849 L6he founded the Lutheran Society of Home Missions, and in 1853 an institution of deaconeases which was dedicated in the following year, the eighteenth in order of foundation, but the third or
NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 10
fourth in numbers of all Germany. Around this center there grew up with wonderful rapidity a number of institutions, such as asylums for idiots, a Magdalen asylum, hospitals for men and women, s chapel, industrial schools, etc. In 1865 a branch of the institution of deaconeases was founded at Polsingen near Oettingen, consisting of a department for male idiots, a district hospital, a reformatory, and an asylum for infants.
The characteristic trait in LBhe's personality was a healthy combination of orthodoxy with originality of thinking. Sin and grace, justification and sanctification, were the central points of his theology. As a preacher, he was among the greatest of the century. Originality of conception, vivid imagination, and prophetic fervor, were his chief characteristics in the pulpit. Lohe also made a profound study of liturgies and laid down his views in Agende fur christliche Gemeinden (1848). He awakened everywhere the sense for liturgical order. But he was perhaps even greater as a pastor than as a preacher. Ldhe was a man of striking appearance. His head was large, his forehead high; his mouth made the impression of great decision of character; his voice was powerful, and his eye bright and searching. He wrote not less than sixty works growing out of the experiences of his spiritual office and serving practical purposes. His earlier writings originated from his opposition to the State Church, Unsere kirchliche Lage (Niirdlingen, 1850); Aphorismen fiber die netdestamentlichen Aemter and ihr Verhaltnisa zur Gemeinde (Nuremberg, 1849); Kirche and Amt, rtette Aphorismen (Erlangen, 1851); Die bayerisehe Generalsynnde vom Friihjahr 18.¢9 and das lutheriaehe Bekenntnis (Nuremberg, 1849). Of a permanent value are Drei Biicher von der Kirche (Stuttgart, 1845); Rosenmonate heiliger Frauen (1860); Der evangeliache Geiatliche (2 vole., 1852‑58); Sieben Predigten (Nuremberg, 1836); Prediglen fiber das Vaterunser (1837); Sieben Vortrage fiber die Worte am Kreuze (Stuttgart, 1859); Erinnerungen aua der Reformationageachiehte von Franker (Nuremberg, 1847); Haus‑, Schul‑ and Kirchenbueh fur Christen lutherischen Bekenntnisaea (Stuttgart, 1845); Samenkorner (Nordlingen, 1844). (A. HAUCK.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Deinaer, W. L6hee Leben; 3 vole., 3d ed., Giitereloh, 1901; H. Back, Die inhere Mission in Bayern, pp. 18 eqq., Hamburg, 1880; K. Eiohner, Withetm Ltihe, sire Le6ensbild, Nuremberg, 1907.
LOEHR, 18r, MA%: German Protestant; b. at Stettin Apr. 30, 1864. He was educated at the universities of KSnigsberg and GSttingen (Ph.D., 1889), was member of the royal Domstift at Berlin (1889‑90), and then became privat‑docent for OldTestament exegesis at the University of KtSnigsberg. Since 1892 he has been associate professor of the same subject at the University of Breslau. He was engaged at the German Archeological Institute in Jerusalem in 1963‑04, and has edited the Syriac annotations of Bar Hebr:eue on the Pauline epistles (Giittingen, 1889) and written Die Klagelieder des Jeremias erkhirt (for W. Nowaek's Handkommentar zum Allen Testament; 1894); Der Miasionagedanke im Alter Testaments (Freiburg, 1896); Geschichte des Volhes Israel (Strasburg,
1900); Untersuchungen zum Buche Amos ‑(Giessen, 1901); Babel and die biblische Urgeschichte (Breslau, 1902); Seelenkampfe and Glaubensnote vor zwei Tauaend Jahren (Halls, 1904); Der vulgararabische Dialekt von Jerusalem (Giessen, 1905); Alttestamentliche Religionsgeachvehte (Leipsie, 1906); and Die Stellung des Weibea zu Jahwe‑Religion and ‑Kult (1908). He likewise prepared the third edition of O. 'Thenius' Kommentar zu den Biichern Samuelis (Leipaic, 1898).
LOEft, Ion, JOHANN MICHAEL VON: German statesman and author; b. at Frankfort‑on‑theMain Dec. 21, 1694; d. at Lingen (38 m. w.n.w. of Oanabriick), Hanover, July 26, 1776. He began the study of law at Marburg in 1711, but removed to Halls in 1712, and finally settled at Frankfort in 1723. As a prolific, open‑minded writer, he attracted considerable attention in the literary world, and gained the notice of Frederick the Great, who, in 1753, conferred on him the offices of Prussian privy councilor and administrative president of the County of Lingen and Tecklenburg, which he held until his death.
His copious writings, of historical, esthetic, lit
erary, political, ethical, and religious range, were
published under the title Gesammelte kleine Schrif
ten (ed. J. E. Schneider, 4 vole., Frankfort, 1749
1752). His standpoint is essentially that of the
Enlightenment (q.v.), except that with him con
fessional indifferentism is still associated with a
warm and genuine ethical religious interest. His
aim of working in the cause of church union and a
comprehensive type of Christianity expressed itself
in his first work, the pseudonymous Evangeliacher
Friedenslampel, reach Art der ersten Kirche ertt
warfen (Frankfurt, 1724). He made a German
translation of F6nelon's spiritual writings; while
his personal association with Zinzendorf resulted
in Der verniinftige Gottesdienst reach der leichteyt
Lehrart des Heilartdes (Frankfurt, 1738 and often).
The work which made Loon's name best known,,
yet brought upon him the moat numerous and ve
hement attacks, was Die einzige wahre Religion
(Frankfort, 1750). In the first half he shows this
to consist solely in faith in God through Christ,
and in a correspondingly devout and virtuous life
according to the eternal law of love. The second
part treats of the ideal union in the outward de
tails of Christian life. This remarkable book com
bines liberalizing thoughts with the principles of
the Roman Catholic hierarchy, and blends rational
istic and pietistic ideas into its dream of one universal
Christian Church. Coral. MIRBT.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. C. $trodtmann, Daa neue petehrte Europa, ii. 520‑570, x. 428‑439, wolfenbiittel, 1753‑58; J. A.
Trinius, Freydenker Lexikon, pp. 545‑575; F. G. Meueel,
Lesikon der . . 1760‑18fN! veratorbenen teutaehen 3chriftsteller, viii. 324‑329, Leipaie, 1808; E. Hoyden, in Arehiro
fur Frankfurts Geschiehte and Kunst, iii (1885), 534‑582.
LOESER, lffn'er, gASPAR: German reformer and poet; b. at Markt Erlbach, near Baireuth, 1493; d. at N6rdlingen (39 in. n.w. of Augsburg) Jan. 6, 1546: He received his early education in the monastery of Heilsbronn, and in 1508 entered the University of Erfurt; while in 1520 he was assistant ptiest at Nesselbach, combining this office
11 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Loehe
with pastoral functions at the Cistercian monastery
of Birkenfeld (near Neuatadt‑on‑the‑Aisch). There
is reason to believe that he was already cautiously
active in the cause of the Reformation, and the two
conservative imitations of Luther's baptismal
ordinal‑Ordnwng der Tau,$' nach tuirtzburgischer
Rubricken von wont zu wort verleutacht
der Tauff nach bambergiseher Rubricken van wort zu
(both subsequent to 1523)‑are
very plausibly ascribed to him. In 1524 the Mar
grave Frederick of Brandenburg transferred him
to Hof, as his representative in the incumbency of
St. Michael's. His Evangelical attitude, however,
caused his speedy removal, and after.preaching for
a short time in the Franciscan church, he was ob
liged to leave Brandenburg and went to Witten
berg, where he matriculated at the university in
1526. After a brief visit to Markt Erlbach in Jan.,
1527, and a short incumbency in Oelsnitz, the so
cession of Margrave George permitted him to re
turn to Hof late in 1527 or early in.1528. Here he
introduced Evangelical worship and also prepared
an agenda, a hymnal, and a catechism for his con
gregation, the first‑named forming the basis of the
Naumburg agenda of Nikolaus Medler (1537‑38)
and Widmann's agenda of 1592.
LtSner was. equally independent as a hymnolo
gist; and in 1527 twenty‑six of his compositions were
printed anonymously under the title Gantz news
geystliche teiitache Hymn= vnd geaang; while as late
as 1561 hymns written by him, but hitherto un
published, were still printed, so that their entire
number, amounts to something more than thirty
seven. In like manner his Vntsrricht des glaubena
oder Christlicher kinderzucht in LXXII. Fragen vnd
Antwortt verfast (Nuremberg, 1529) is an independent
work, despite its indebtedness to Althamer'a cate
chism and the earlier catechetical writings of Luther.
Ldner took an active part in the preparation of
the Brandenburg‑Nuremberg agenda, but in May,
1531, his position became intolerable through the
opposition which he had aroused, intensified by
his attacks on the papacy, and in July he was ex
pelled from Hof and retired to Oelanitz. There,
after a brief period of poverty with his wife and
children, he resumed his pastorate through Me
lanchthon's influence, and there he published, un
der the title GeistLiche geaang, aus heiliger Schrift
mit vleis zu aamen gebracht, Vnd auffs new zu gerickt
(Wittenberg, 1538), a collection of twenty of his
hymns, three of them new. In 1539 he preached
in Leipaic, but failed to secure the call he desired
and contemplated retiring from pastoral work, de
clining a call to Oschatz. In 1542, however, he
became preacher at the Naumburg cathedral, al
though the opposition of the canons gave him little
scope for activity. In Jan., 1544, he became pas
tor of St. George's, NSrdlingen, where he remained
until his death, and where, as first superintendent,
he organized ecclesiastical affairs as he would;
sometimes with an excess of zeal, and prepared a
new agenda, catechism, and hymnal. The ;agenda
is essentially the same as the one he had prepared
for Hof, while the catechism, despite its depend
ence on Luther's Enchiridion, is noteworthy for its
division into six conversations with 128 questions
and answers, its abundant meditations, and its seven original catechismal hymns. The hymnal, moreover, is of liturgical interest in its distribution of the hymns according to individual services and the seasons of the Christian year.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: His Briefburh is in Baib6pe tur bayeriachen Kirchengeschichte, ad. T. Kolde, vole. i.‑iii.. Erlangen, 1895‑97. Other sources are the letters of Melanohthon in CR, v.‑vi. passim, and of Luther in De Wette's ed. of Luther's letters, vole. iv, v.; V. L. von 8eckendorf, Commmtariua a%ticaa . do Lutheraniamo, i. 241, iii. 188, 219, 221, Leipeio, 1892. Modern treatment of the subject will be found in G. W. A. Fikenacher, GeleArtea Fflreb snturn Baireut, v. 305‑318, Nuremberg, 1803; P. Waokernagel, Dae deuteehe Kirchenl4td, i. 388 aqq., 392, 4D8409, 421‑422, iii. 818‑8A3, Leipeic, 1882 eqq.; G. Kawerau, in ZKW, x (1889), 487 eqq„ big‑525; F. Cobra, in Monuments Germanise ymdaAogica, xxii. 483‑480, Berlin, 1901; C. Geyer, Aua der Reformationepeachichte Ntirdlingene, pp. 18‑23, Nordlingen, 1901; ADB, xix. 152 eqq.
LOESCHE, lOah'e, GEORG EARL DAVID: Austrian Lutheran; b. at Berlin Aug. 22, 1885. He was educated at the universities of Berlin, Bonn, and Tiibingen (Ph.D., Jena, 1880; lie. theol., Berlin, 1883), was preacher to the German church in Florence, Italy (1880‑8b), and privat‑docent for church history at the University of Berlin in 18851887. In 1887 he accepted a call to the Evangelical Protestant faculty at Vienna as associate professor of the same subject, and in 1889 became full professor. He is a privy councilor, president of the examining board for Evangelical theological candidates in Austria, and vice‑president of the Austrian branch of the Gustav‑Adolf‑Verein and of the Gesellschaft fur die Geachichte des Protestantismua in OeaterTeich. In theology he is an adherent of the " modern " school. In addition to his work as editor of the Jahrbuch der Gesellschaft fur die Geachichte des Protestantis7nus in Oesterreich, he has edited Johann Matheaius' AuagewBhlte Werke (4 vole., Prague, 1896‑1904) and Gustav Frank's Die Theologie des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (Leipaie, 1905), and has written Florenxer Predigten (Halls, 1884); Ernst Moritz Arndt, der deutache Reichsherold (Goths, 1884); Bellarmins Lehre vom Papst and deren actuelle Bedeutung (Halls, 1885); Analecta Lutherans. et Melanchthoniana (Goths, 1892); Johann Matheaius, sin Lebena‑ and Sittenbild aus der Reformationazeit (2 vole., 1895); and Geachichle des Protestantismus in Oesterreich (Leipsie, 1902).
LOESCHER, lAah'er, VALENTIN ERNST: German Lutheran; b. at Sondershausen Dec. 29, 1673; d. at Dresden Dec. 12, 1749. At the University of Wittenberg, where his father was professor of theology, he gave his attention mainly to philology and history, but out of respect to his father's wish he selected a theological subject for his master's dissertation, in which he opposed the Pietistic. position. Subsequent study at Jena aroused his interest in church history. During travels undertaken at this time he formed the acquaintance of a number of influential anti‑Pietistic theologians. In 1696 he began to lecture at Wittenberg on the origin of Deism and Pietism. After serving as superintendent at Jiiterbog (1698‑1701) and Delitzsch (1701‑07) and professor of theology at Wittenberg (1707‑09), he became pastor of the Kreuzkirche and superintendent in Dresden. Here
oeaoher~ogoe THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 12
he remained the rest 9f his life. His practical duties here turned his attention more particularly to the needs of the Church. His orthodoxy did not prevent him from admitting the truth of the claims of the Pietists concerning the prevailing perfunotorinees of religious life, which he ascribed to the negligence of orthodox pastors. He at once took earnest measures to encourage a deeper spiritual life in the Church. He had already begun the publication of his Unachuldige Nochriehteyt Von alien and neuen theologiachen Sachen (Wittenberg and Leipaic, 1701 eqq.), the first theological periodical. The comprehensive scope and able management of the magazine gave it great importance. Through it Ltlscher became the leader of the orthodox party, as opposed to the Pietistic and naturalistic factions in the Lutheran Church, and the representative of scientific Lutheran theology.
In opposition to the proposal that Pietism should be considered the best means of promoting the union of the Lutheran and the Reformed Churches (advocated at the time by the Prussian Government), Ldacher published several works, including Ausfiihrliche Xialorea motuurn zurischen dent Evartgelisch‑Lutheriachen and Reformierlen (3 parts, Frankfort, 1707‑‑08). In the course of a controversy with the Pietist Joachim Lange, LtSscher defended orthodoxy in his Prenotionea et notionea theologicce (Wittenberg, 1708). However, his most comprehensive criticism of Pietism appeared in his magazine under the title Timotheua Verinua, in which work he held that the Pietists had a false conception of the relation between piety and religion and that their zeal for piety placed them in opposition to the doctrine of justification by faith. The work inspired a bitter reply from his Pietistic opponents, which called forth from Lbscher his greatest work, Vollstdndiger Tirnatheua Yerinus (2 parts, Wittenberg, 1718‑22). In this he discusses the origin and rapid development of Pietism and elaborates upon its evils. Nevertheless he was unable to check the advance of Pietism or even to pass a true judgment upon the real significance of the movement. The importance of Lbscher'a part in the Pietistic controversy wen not fully recognized anti! the return to Evangelical doctrine in the nineteenth century.
LSscher took an active part also in the controversy which at that time was being waged against the Roman Catholic Church in Dresden and contributed a number of studies to that cause, notably his Vollatdndige Reformations‑Akta and Doeurnenta (3 vo1s., Leipaic, 1720‑29). He also opposed Wolff's system of philosophy, claiming that " philosophical indifferentism " portended a revolution in
Christianity. (Gitoxo Mtrlraa.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. von Engelhardt, V. E. Ldseher each aeinem Lebsn and Wirken, Stuttgart, 1856; G. W. GStte,
Dos jetst lebsnde.pe7ehrk Europa, ii. 189‑233, Brunswick,
1738; J. J. Mower, Bsitrap zu einem Lexicon luthaiecker
and reJorrnierter 2^Moiopen, pp. 116‑X39. Zfilliehsu, 1740; T. CrVger, Ldren Laaeher's, Dresden, 1751; G. Kramer, Aupwt HArstann Praucks, ii. 72‑84, 272‑319, 343, Halls, 1882; F. Blanakmeister, in Bsibaps sur sachsixAen %irchenpesckiehk, viii. 330‑344, Leipsie. 1893: idem, BBchaieehe Hire7unpemeAiehk, pp. 224‑254. 282‑286, 304331, Dresden, 1899; ADD, xia. 109‑213.
LOGIA JESU. Bee Aciasr>is.
I. Content of tits Term. II. Source of the Term.
III. Significance of the Term.
On the influence which the doctrine of the Logos exerted on the general Chriatological development of the early Church see CHRIBTOLOGY; and cf. TRINIxy. This article will deal with the origin and signification of the term in Biblical literature, especially in the writings of John.
I. Content of the Term: The prologue of the Fourth Gospel sets forth the nature and work of Jesus primarily from the standpoint of the apparition of the Logos. The evangelist lays down first the essential nature of the Logos in relation to God; the world, and humanity, characterized by primeval existence before all worlds‑an existence "with God" in the manner of personal relation (pros ton theon, cf. Matt. aiii. 56; II Cor. v. 8) and participation in the divine nature. All creation is by him; without him is no life or light of truth and salvation. Next comes his relation to the Baptist, who was born in time, a human prophetic messenger with the mission to bear witness to the Light, while the Logos is the mediator of a marvelous new fife to all who receive him. Then comes the statement that the Word became flesh, revealing the glory of an only‑begotten Son, full of grace and truth. This revelation can be made only by the Son, who has dwelt from all eternity in the bosom of the Father. After this the prologue returns to its starting‑point, emphasizing the personal intercourse with God face to face as the incomparable privilege of the Logos conferred upon Jesus Christ, the only‑begotten Son. Thus the conception originally laid down has gained in clearness not only by the exact definition of attributes, but by the identification of the person to whom the function of the Logos, the making known of God, is assigned.
The term Logos, then, denotes neither here nor anywhere else in the writings of John the " reason," but always the " Word," who is with God and comes into the world with the function of making known the thoughts and purposes of God. The Word is not an abstract revelation made to the world, but something greater, transcending the earthly sphere and belonging to that of the divine life. More exactly, the Word is a person communicating with God as with one of the same nature, then assuming a fleshly form and proclaiming, without lose of his supernatural being or unequaled closeness to God, that which he has seen of the Father and the Father's counsels. The personal nature of the Logos would not of itself follow from the identification with Jesus Christ, which might mean simply the assumption of a personality and a universal function, but it follows inevitably from verses 1 and 3 and the use made of the thought in verse 18. This is confirmed by other Johannine passages: in I John i. 1, the "Word of life," like the " life " which is afterward taken as equivalent, is the personal bearer of this life, first in the supernatural and then in the natural sphere; and still more obviously in Rev. xix. 13 the rider on the white horse, the triumphant executor of the divine judgments, is conceived as a person. It is safe,
then, to say that in all the Johannine writings the Logos is conceived as a personal revelation of God for salvation or for judgment, a person who has an existence of his own with the Father before and after the duration of this world, as well as an existence here in time and in the flesh. Between the eternal and the temporal being of the Logos it is clear from the whole trend of the prologue that the difference is only one of manner sad not of essence.
II. Source of the Term: To the question whence the author derived the term several different answers have been given: (1) It is simple enough to Hofmann, who asserts that the primitive Christian community designated as " the word of God " the Evangelical message. The author of the Fourth Gospel would thus associate himself only so far with this conception as to allow him to emphasize the personal content of the message. But more than one phrase in the prologue quite obviously precludes the acceptance of this view. (2) Others, especially Weiss, find the source of the term in the Old‑Testament expressions concerning the Word of God. There is this much in favor of such a view, that the prologue plainly refers to the account of creation in Genesis, and that in the Psalms and prophets a poetical personification of the word of God as a creative and saving power sent forth into the world occurs not infrequently; but in these cases the spirituality and omnipotence of God are the fundamental thoughts, and the proclamation of his unconditioned unity leaves no place for a personal principle besides himself as the mediator of his activity in the world. Moreover, wherever on purely Hebraic soil in later times the idea of a creative intermediate cause appears, it is connected with the name not of the Word but of Wisdom (Prow, viii. 22‑31; Ecclua sxiv.), just as where the Word occurs (as in Wisdom ix. 1, xvi. 12, aviii. 15) the influence of Greek, especially Stoic, thought is discernible. The Johannine doctrine of the Logos may have taken up the Old‑Testament notion of the word of God as operative in the world, but this can not be its sole source. (3) Still less can it be shown to have come from the use made of " Word of Yahweh " (dibra dayay, mey»zra dayay) in Palestinian theology. The meymra is used as an abstract term to conceal the name and spiritualize the idea of God; it is thus employed instead of " God " where his operation in history is spoken of or where the context contains anthropomorphic expressions. There is no hint of a concrete hypostasis of the Godhead or of a being mediate between him and the world. (4) The derivation of the Johannine doctrine from the Alexandrian religious philosophy, and especially from Philo, was taken up in the eighteenth century and accepted in the nineteenth by Liicke, De Wette, and the school of F. C. Baur. Philo, interested alike in the tradition of his people and the contemporary pagan culture, found in the Logos a means of reconciling the transcendence of the Jewish conception of God with the immanence taught in the philosophy of his day. A pupil of Heraclitus, familiar with the Platonic doctrine of ideas, and still more strongly influenced by the Stoic doctrine of the Logos as the active, rational, teleological principle which
forms the passive matter, he attempts to connect these really pantheistic views with the Jewish conception of God, and thus gives the Logos an intermediate place between God and the world; his Logos is at once the world immanent in the divine thought and God operative in the world, a nuaitta in every sense‑‑ooamological, moral, and religious. Stoic elements are most prominent in his idea, but there is room also for the Mosaic creative word and the later Jewish developments which add religious weight to the purely cosmological idea. But the religious motives and convictions in the two writers are, as might be shown by a detailed examination, too radically distinct to justify the theory of a definite borrowing from one by the other‑though this only proves that the term Logos receives in the Gospel an entirely new direction when the historic redeeming work of Christ becomes its essential content, and not that there is not a considerable range over which the two are in harmony. If to these points are added a number of others throughout the Fourth Gospel which go to show that the author was well acquainted with Hellenic Judaism, either in the Philonic or some other popular form, the derivation to some extent of the Logos‑idea from that source acquires a considerable degree of probability. But this by no means justifies an attempt to deduce the portrait of Christ in the Evangelical story from philosophic speculation, nor to confine the influence of the Logos‑idea to the prologue, as Harnack has sought to do. The truth of the Johannine combination of an abstract idea with history is shown by the manner in which the eternal, inexhaustible personality of Christ not only permits but actually requires it.
III. Significance of the Term: In determining this it is necessary to read into it nothing from Philo or from the later church doctrine, but to confine oneself strictly to the account given by the evangelist. Its significance for him lies altogether in the religious department, giving him the answer to the questions " Who is God? How may I come to him and to participation in his life and light? " The cosmological interest is for him wholly subordinate; his use of the term serves only to place the whole human race on an equality with the favored people of Israel. The Logos, by whom the world was made, was made flesh for the world; but the mission which he is to perform in this universal field is the soteriological one of revealing God and thereby bringing grace and truth. When John identifies the person of Jesus Christ with the Logos, his purpose is to express in a universal way, comprehensible without as well as within the limits of Israel, that Jesus is set over the world, in union with God as the eternal mediator of his creative and redeeming will, and that therefore he is in his historical appearance the absolute and universal self‑revelation of the Godhead, the exclusive conveyer of salvation. He does not so much as touch the metaphysical problems which from Justin onward make the Logos‑idea a fertile source of questionings. Of the later theology on the subject it has been truly said that it subordinates the moral interpretation of the plan of salvation to the logical, and that it leads either to deistic or to pan‑